Much is being made of presidential candidate Barack Obama’s comments on ABC’s “This Week” this past Sunday. Asked about his thoughts on affirmative action, Obama mused that his two daughters probably shouldn’t receive affirmative action by the time they apply for college; after all, though they’re black like their parents, they come from an economically privileged background.

Though he came nowhere near to speaking out against affirmative action, Obama placed himself at least somewhere near the mainstream. He’s not among those who foresee affirmative action ‘now and forever.’ If anything, it seems as though Obama sees affirmative action as a policy tool—something to effect remedial measures until any racial or economic disparity has disappeared.

In today’s Washington Post, columnist Eugene Robinson weighs in. Robinson’s piece highlights the distinction within the pro-affirmative action camp, between those who see racial preferences as limited tools (like Obama), and those (like Robinson) who have shifted their rationale to the endless pursuit of “diversity,” whatever that is.

What is most unfortunate about Robinson’s piece is that he seems to play the guilt card against his ideological brethren, implying that because of Obama’s privileged status, he lacks the gravitas to comment on affirmative action for his own children.

Make no mistake, both men are wrong: racial preferences in any form should be inexcusable as a public policy. But Robinson’s rhetoric is unfortunate. Obama, for all of his flaws, is a mainstream, African-American candidate who could shift the liberal mainstream at least a little bit away from affirmative action. I regret that Eugene Robinson has expended an entire column trying to make sure that doesn’t happen.