To answer the first question, It seems so from what Senator Obama isquoted as saying in this article:
"There's no doubt that when it comes to our treatment of Native Americans as well as other persons of color in this country, we've got some very sad and difficult things to account for."
"I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged,"
"I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it's Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds."
Given his own ethnic background and citizenship, would Senator Obama be a recipient or provider of reparations? Although he is of African descent, he is not a descendant of American slaves. He father was Kenyan. If Kenya participated in the slave trade by selling slaves to Westerners, then clearly the Senator should be on the provider end of reparations. However, even if it is the case that Kenya had nothing to do with the slave trade, Senator Obama's lack of American slave heritage should at least mean that he should not take advantage of any preferential treatment programs that were instituted to remedy past injustices against the descendants of American slaves. Of course, he is technically an "African American," and thus could correctly check that box on an application. But is it morally right for him to do that given the intent and purpose of these programs?
So, here's the questions that I think ought to be asked of Senator Obama in light of the above comments:
1. Have you ever benefited from an affirmative action program because of your race?
2. Given the fact that these programs were instituted to remedy past injustices to, and their affects upon, the descendants of American slaves, was it right for you to have taken something (assuming he answered "yes" to the first question) that should have gone to the next qualified applicant that was denied the benefit because it was given to you?