No Such Place as ‘Post-Racial’ America

The author of this article is strongly opposed to the term "post-racial." In fact, he is against a lot of terms having to do with racism. Why? According to the article, "post-racial" is horrible for society because it allows people to live in their own fantasy world where race doesn't matter. The article relies mainly on pathos, because people will most likely get upset by the idea of people ignoring racism and allowing it to continue. The author also uses ethos to some extent, using large words like "obfuscating" to convince the reader he is smart. Thanks to english class, however, I know what these words mean. There is little appeal to logos here, which is perhaps a weakness, but it would be hard to incorporate logos in my opinion. Well, perhaps the author could have included more proof that racism still exists. Personally, I don't think anyone is under that delusion, but the author seems to think people are, so he is sort of contradicting himself in that sense.
I sort of think that the author of this article needs to relax a little. In fact, I have never really heard people say "post-racial," but that doesn't mean people don't use it. Still, I think everyone is aware that racism is still an issue. Maybe they just use this term to refer to a time period, not because they think it is a totally accurate term. I think we deserve to be pleased with our progress. A hundred and fifty years ago, black people were considered property. Now we have a black president. Of course, totally equality is what we really want, but we're definitely making progress. I think what we really need is time for the old way of thinking to die out. Hopefully, in a few generations, the term "post-racial" can be used, without being inaccurate at all.

article: http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/no-such-place-as-post-racial-america/?ref=opinion