The student dropped me off on the corner. I walked up the block a few feet, found the correct house, and started up the driveway. At that moment, a woman was walking her dog in the other direction. She saw all the cars in front of the house, heard the noise coming from the other side of the high wooden fence, and then noted me, an African-American. With all the facts gathered, she made the obvious deduction.

“Is this an Obama fundraiser?”

I smiled. Welcome to the incredible whiteness of being that is Boulder, Colorado.

No, it wasn’t an Obama fundraiser, but a dinner party on the second-to-last day of the Conference on World Affairs, a 60-year-old event that brings together writers, journalists, scientists, entertainers, activists and various other intellectuals for a week-long series of panel discussions on a broad range of topics (I got to talk about torture, punk rock and political humor).

But it was the reactions of the liberal denizens of Boulder that made the trip more eye-opening than I could have anticipated – perhaps more so than a trip through the modern South, despite that region’s far more public travails with race.

As the lady’s response indicated, Barack Obama was much on the minds of Boulder voters. But his message, one of looking beyond race? That’s a different story.

At an early Conference panel, I found myself turning to punk rocker Jello Biafra (of the Dead Kennedys) to chide him for his reference to Supreme Court Justice “Clarence ‘Uncle’ Thomas.” Regardless of how one differed with the justice’s ideologically, I said that sort of racial slap was inappropriate in this setting. After the panel, he asked me if “Uncle Tom” was like the N-word – “OK” for blacks and only blacks to use. “No,” I replied. The N-word has different meanings in different contexts. However, “Uncle Tom” is only an insult, only a slur – directed at someone the speaker has decided is a traitor to the race or ethnic group. Why can’t a black person have a different political philosophy from other blacks without being deemed a “race-traitor” by others? Biafra said that he would have to think about that.

On the last day, Biafra, myself and two other participants were on yet another panel, talking about was third-party candidacies. After we all made our remarks, an older white gentleman stepped to the audience microphone to pose a question to “Mr. George.” He said, “You are a person of color.” I made a mock surprised look and said, “Shhh . . . don’t tell anyone.”

He then said, “You appear to be a smart person.” OK.

“So how could a smart person of color work for” – slight paraphrase here as I wasn’t taking notes – a no-good, slimy, deadbeat, lowlife like “Newt Gingrich.”

As it happens, I did work for the former speaker of the House, but left his office – in 1998!

So, here we are in Obama-loving Boulder and a member of the audience can’t think of anything to ask the one black panelist except who he worked for a decade ago? The question suggested that my ethnicity should somehow direct my employment decisions.

The same week I was in Boulder, Grover Norquist, president of Americans For Tax Reform, openly advocated for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as John McCain’s running mate. The Washington Post quoted Norquist as saying she “would be a great president . . . great vice president.”

Rice brings impressive foreign policy credentials to the table. But what about her views on domestic policy? Where does she stand on abortion? Or affirmative action? In particular, what about her views on Norquist’s main issue – tax cuts? To the extent Rice has delved into domestic issues, she has tended to land on the moderate or liberal side. So, the cynic would be correct to ask why this sudden boosting of Rice? Could it be because of the excitement generated on the Democratic side by a contest between a white woman and a black man?

Norquist’s role is especially curious. Thirteen years ago, he and other conservatives launched a pre-emptive strike on a widely popular moderate black Republican with solid foreign policy credentials who was considering a run for national office: Colin Powell. At the National Press Club, Norquist attacked Powell for not signing the “pledge” not to raise taxes; social conservative activist Gary Bauer called Powell, “[Bill] Clinton with ribbons.” The Leadership Institute’s Morton Blackwell said, “If General Powell were a white general holding these views, they would not consider for a moment supporting him for our party’s nomination.”

Blackwell’s comment, of course, would be echoed in the current campaign by Geraldine Ferraro, who said that Obama wouldn’t be in the position he was were he a white man (or woman). Ferraro found an unlikely ally this month in BET founder Robert Johnson.

And, of course, Bill Clinton – “the first black president,” as he is called – bemoaned on the morning of the Philadelphia primary that the “race card” had been used against him by Obama partisans.

Obama’s narrow front-runner status in the Democratic primary is beguiling many people – not just Democrats – with the notion that American society has managed to get “beyond race.”

After Boulder, I feel exactly the opposite – this political campaign has become about nothing but.

Obama’s Jeremiah Wright speech spoke honestly of the complexities of race in America. Yet, for political purposes, Ferraro and Johnson want America to see Obama’s blackness as the major “credit” for his candidacy – while ignoring the fact that Hillary Clinton is where she is because of who she is married to. Similarly, Norquist embraces the idea of the black female Republican – without caring about much else besides the color of her skin.

America has come a long way in terms of race, but clearly its elites – black, white, liberal and conservative – aren’t as colorblind as they claim. They see race first, rather than accomplishment, and make intellectual, political and tactical judgments accordingly. Black people are seen as symbols rather than as people. In Boulder, a supposed liberal “non-racist” white person couldn’t understand the existence of a “non-typical” black person.

If the intellectually, politically and socially-aware elites remain still stuck dealing with race, isn’t it naive to think that the country at large has reached nirvana?

Robert A. George is a Post opinion writer.