In the 17 March 2008 edition of The New York Times, writer Roger Cohen absurdly celebrated Barack Obama’s inter-racial family background in a column entitled: “Obama’s Brother in China”. In this editorial Cohen approvingly affirms that Barack’s Kenyan father, Obama Sr., produced eight children by four women in his 42 years of life, implying that this is an “achievement” worthy of respect. However, alternative and more accurate characterizations of a man who sires eight children by four different women - leaving most of those children to be raised by their disparate, abandoned mothers and those women’s respective families - are irresponsible and deceptive. What seems just as obvious is that such unscrupulous behavior probably arises from stupidity. Though Cohen wouldn’t state it, Obama’s senior’ reproductive feat strongly suggests it at the very least. Dare we permit ourselves to hope that this particular ignoble trait wasn't part of the genetic inheritance passed along to the ambitious son?

Not having been raised within the African-American community (a fact he consistently elides), Obama has struggled to find a convincing basis upon which to legitimately affiliate himself with it. On reflection it seems his own father’s venality may provide him with a compelling, if surprisingly obvious link. Given the disproportionately high rates of single parent families and out of wed-lock births among African-Americans, it should not surprise anyone that such a background would endear Obama to America’s black community, whose acceptance and political support he has long craved and is now receiving. As Obama’s own story evokes a tawdry episode of ‘The Maury Show’ (who ma' baby daddy be?) better than the supposedly “admirable”, inter-racial and multi-cultural origin Cohen emphasizes, he is an excellent fit; a ready-made honorary "homeboy". (Know wad’m sayin’, “G”?)

Obama’s origins signify a muddled identity conceived in dissolution. That should not necessarily count against him, but neither should his apparently licentious father be celebrated. Yet as most of Obama's support comes from self-deluding fantasists such as Cohen, such a deceptive characterization will very likely be assumed and perpetuated by his campaign. Consistent with the incoherent ethos of contemporary moral relativism, Obama’s glassy-eyed adherents will demand that such a spurious, upbeat spin be employed to turn us away from the ugliest facts about their favorite candidate. Myth may transform even the sorriest mongrel into a “multi-cultural” hero of a man, thusly. (An upper-middle class white upbringing and top flight education would likely improve the odds of such a gambit.)

Cohen praised Obama’s inter-racial background and international family for the unique insights it allegedly confers upon the candidate—desirable characteristics which, he implies, those without family in Kenya and China (or one assumes, the equivalent) cannot possess. Such suppositions amount to a heap of idiotic rubbish but somehow resonate with many Americans. Perhaps that they do so is a key part of Obama’s own duplicitous strategy of seduction? He mentioned some of these very points in his disingenuous speech on race the very next day—a speech designed to deflect America from the fact that he cavorts with a racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, homophobic bigot who happens to also be a Church minister. What a fascinating man this Obama turns out to be… The only thing aroused in me, however, is suspicion.

I am led to conclude that Obama senior’s “success” with the ladies is probably analogous to junior’s recent success with voters: the father was, just as the son is, a charismatic and charming fraud. Before installing the son of an irresolute philanderer in our nation’s highest office, America would indeed do well to wonder—at Cohen’s prompting—what might have been conferred by the candidate’s “multi-cultural” inheritance. It may well be that, like his promiscuous patriarch, Obama lacks the strength of character to live up to his responsibilities should the presidential baby he dreams of fathering be born. Our nation had better figure out if it can live with this man, because he has talked his way to third base and is well on his way to a home-run. As the state primary results have burst nearly all prophylactic barriers to the chance of such an unfortunate political parturition, those of us who deeply distrust him must hope either that the candidate’s disagreeable affiliations and multiple deceptions inhibit conception or prompt an eventual miscarriage, should the worst occur. Our nation cannot afford to be conveyed into the arms of a politician incapable of adequately providing for his dream once delivered. Should a candidate’s origins and family history matter? If so, one side of Obama’s background, at least, should provide us with ample cause for concern.

Why is it that only a few of us see through this subterfuge?

Oh well, after George WWWWWWWWWW, I don’t trust the populous as a whole to make any right decisions.