Obama & The Human Stain: Or How Political Correctness Gave America a Con-Man 



By Kelly O'Connell  Sunday, February 13, 2011 

 image <http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/uploads/kelly021311.jpg> The 
Human Stain, Philip Roth’s seminal novel regarding Political Correctness, 
racism, and the insipid hypocrisy of leftist morality, is a fitting backdrop to 
Barack Obama’s improbable presidency. In the story, Professor Coleman Silk, a 
half-Black Jewish professor, posing as a White man, is taken down by the 
mechanical application of PC rules to an accidental insult he gave to two 

Now, we can introduce the 800-pound donkey in the room. Let’s ask a simple 
question: Could Barack have been elected president without the doctrine known 
as Political Correctness? 


Or is simply to ask the question an unforgivable act of racism? In fact, the 
vast majority of Americans realize no person as inexperienced, untested, wildly 
liberal, or of such questionable past could ever have hoped to be elected 
without some kind of uncanny boost. But what is the result of this presidency 
based on nonsensical ideological doctrine? And what can be done to fight off 
the rise of the unscrupulous, unethical, incompetent and unqualified spore of 
the PC movement? This is the question addressed in this essay.

I. The Human Stain

In brief, the novel The Human Stain depicts a professor who twists ethnicity to 
his advantage, then was ironically tagged a racist when he made an innocent 
remark deemed anti-Black. Here is one writer’s summary 
<http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11734.The_Human_Stain>  of The Human Stain: 

Professor Coleman Silk is driven from his position as Dean of Faculty at a 
small, New England liberal-arts school called Athena College because of a 
remark willfully misconstrued as racist. Coleman, a professor of classics, 
wonders why he has never seen two of his students in class. “Do they exist or 
are they spooks?” he asks his class. The absentees are, of course, black, and a 
decorous mob of the politically correct immediately launches itself at 
Coleman’s throat, despite his honest protests that he had used the word only in 
its primary signification, as a synonym for “ghosts.”

Roth’s tome is well-worth a read. The underlying premise of the story is 
electric—the implicit hypocrisy of Political Correctness against the backdrop 
of sin, ie the human stain, making for powerful, topical drama. Barack is like 
Coleman because both hid their true ethnic roots to gain political advantage. 
For example, Barack is arguably only half Black. He masks his White roots to 
gain leverage on opponents.

We are left with the question in The Human Stain, of whether the ambitious and 
aged Silk could have risen while still sharing his true racial history with his 
colleagues. Even his own family is unaware of his true identity. Likewise, 
could Barack have ever been elected without a pro-minority bias, egged-on by a 
PC media; further—could he possibly retain over 40% support today despite a 
wholly flaccid and injurious reign? Common sense says, “No!”

II. What is Political Correctness, From Where Did It Arise?

A. Cultural Marxism

The idea behind Political Correctness was hatched by a group of progressive 
German academics, the Frankfurt School 
<http://www.schillerinstitute.org/fid_91-96/921_frankfurt.html> , before WWII 
when they relocated to America to escape Hitler’s wrath. They realized Marx was 
wrong—the poor were not ready to revolt and throw off Capitalism for a 
property-less society. These Marxists decided the only way to create the 
society Marx envisioned was by subverting its institutions by misinformation, 
propaganda and seduction of the mentally unformed. Writes one expert 
<http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/> ,

If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find 
out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is 
Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes 
back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World 
War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical 
Marxism, the parallels are very obvious.

B. Elements of Political Correctness

William Lind explains the Elements of Political Correctness 
<http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/> :

1.      Both Marxism and Political Correctness are totalitarian ideologies, ie 
they allow no dissent and claim ultimate truth which people are then forced to 
2.      Political Correctness, aka Cultural Marxism, claims all history is 
determined by power. Nothing else matters.
3.      In Political Correctness certain groups are good—feminist women, 
(non-feminist women don’t exist) blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups 
are “victims,” defined as “good” despite how they act. White males are 
categorized as automatically evil.
4.      Political Correctness relies on expropriation, ie arm-twisting use of 
the government to recover what was “stolen” from them.

III. The Obama Presidency, Unfit at Any Speed

A. Our Stillborn Napoleon

Obama’s incompetence has become so well attested, it’s reached apocryphal 
status. No matter what kind of imbecility is attributed to Barack, the average 
American would tend to believe it. But how did this transition of perception 
occur? How did one so touted as a super-competent, “messianic” mega-genius fall 
so utterly, so quickly?

According to Occam’s Razor, the likeliest explanation is that, whatever his IQ, 
Barack is, on a practical, real-world level—a staggering cretin. For example, 
he’s never taken note of the fact that socialism and Marxism always fail, and 
kill millions of the innocent along the way. How was one elected with all the 
fanfare of a Heisman winner, yet be such a zero? This can really only be 
explained by pointing out that Obama’s instinct for incompetence was masked by 
his lack of real leadership experience, which would have exposed his tragic 

B. The Secular “Messiah”

How on earth did the Intelligentsia ever come to the conclusion Barack was 
anything more than a conceited, unenlightened, journeyman political hack? The 
fact Obama was a dyed-in-the-wool liberal/ Marxist made his elitist backers 
think of their own genius. Barack’s visceral socialism merely proved to the Ivy 
Leaguers and media drones he was a fetal Aristotle or freeze-dried Isaac 
Newton. Just add a presidency, and out would wriggle Obama Buddha from his 
Harvard Law Review chrysalis, ready to rule the world.

But, having been coddled and given every advantage by the establishment, Barack 
responded not by growing into each task, but by learning to be a con artist. 
That is, for every special position or opportunity Obama was handed, instead of 
seeing it as a challenge and chance to grow, he responded by raising his 
con-man act another notch. So by the time Barack reached the US presidency, 100 
days after election to the US Senate, he was qualified for only a few things. 
These were: Speechifying, with a special emphasis on moral outrage; Marxist 
logic, in all its anti-intuitive convolution; and doing his con-man job of 
pretending to know everything as the African American Buddha.

Politically Correct special status belongs to such meritorious individuals as 
women, Blacks, or gays. Barack’s inclusion is described in a Los Angeles Times’ 
  penned by a liberal writer trying to explain Obama’s come-from-nowhere appeal:

Obama is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of 
the popular imagination—the “Magic Negro.” The Magic Negro is a figure of 
postmodern folk culture..“He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the 
white protagonist.”

He’s there to assuage white “guilt” (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) 
over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while 
replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign 
figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.

This op-ed also fostered an irreverent spoof 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5JFeaJ5A4g&feature=related>  by Rush Limbaugh.

IV. Obama & Herman Melville’s The Confidence Man

A. Melville’s Confidence Man

Herman Melville, in his last major work: The Confidence Man— 
 His Masquerade, well plumbs the psyche of the professional trickster. Melville 
tells a colorful tale of a con-artist traveling aboard a riverboat in the 
mid-19th century down the Mississippi. The protagonist first charms, then 
cheats his fellow passengers. The Confidence Man begs the question: In whom can 
we safely place our confidence?

The story may have been written after Melville read the New York Post account 
titled Arrest of the Confidence Man <http://chnm.gmu.edu/lostmuseum/lm/328/> , 
of “William Thompson, whose brazen deceptions ushered the term “confidence man” 
into the American vocabulary.” The story ran in 1849, a few years before 
Herman’s publication date of 1856.

Melville’s story is more a study of how the con-man’s victims react, than the 
criminal himself. Each person is psychologically sized up, won over to the evil 
doer’s confidences, and then robbed. And much like with Obama, the scam could 
not be pulled off without well-meaning, but fatuously naive people ready to be 

B. Sam Vaknin’s Diagnosis of Obama’s Malignant Narcissism

  Dr. Sam Vaknin <http://samvak.tripod.com/>  is the author of Malignant Self 
Narcissism Revisited. He famously diagnosed Barack as having a serious mental 
disorder, being a full-blown malignant narcissist. (A fascinating interview 
with Vaknin on Obama is found here: one 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CUp7qdej8g> , two 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioxdgmQNNuY&feature=related> , three 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcZuyP475dI&feature=related> , four 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5kqY_AEGAQ&feature=related> , five 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXyLm0CSUl4&feature=related> ) His description 
<http://www.globalpolitician.com/25109-barack-o>  of the Narcissist:

Feels grandiose and self-important; Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited 
success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance; Firmly 
convinced that he or she is unique; Requires excessive admiration, adulation, 
attention and affirmation—or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be 
notorious; Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with his 
unreasonable expectations for special priority treatment; Devoid of empathy. Is 
unable or unwilling to identify with the needs of others; Behaves arrogantly 
and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, 
“above the law”, and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, 
contradicted, or confronted by inferiors. 

V. Summary

So, Americans have the worst of all possible worlds. First, the poseur Barack 
was able to slip into the world’s highest office on the wings of a false, 
Marxist creed, Political Correctness. Second, Obama had spent his entire life 
learning how to pretend he is competent, effective, and even brilliant—while 
being continually advanced. But, instead of learning how to lead, he merely 
aped the outward traits of successful people. This left him particularly 
vulnerable to crises, since during normal times his leadership might go 
unnoticed, whereas during times of peril a leader’s quick decisions can make 
the difference between life and death. And so we observed Barack play golf 
while the Gulf Oil Spill hemorrhaged petrol for months.

Obama’s propensity to pretend he was qualified for various posts, despite any 
training, developed until he was a full-fledged con artist. This was perfectly 
symbolized by accepting the Nobel Peace Prize after 11 days of presidential 
eligibility, unaware this exposed him as a habitual fraud. But even his most 
recent actions, after two years of ineffectual service, were inane. He backed a 
radical Islamic sect, who favors Shari’ah Islamic law—the Muslim Brotherhood, 
after abandoning one of America’s most important allies in the Middle East, in 
the name of “democracy.” This reinforced perceptions of suspect analytic 
skills, a perpetual orientation towards radical Marxism, and default towards 
reactionary Islam.

Finally, Obama’s likely categorization as a Malignant Narcissist is unnerving 
because when conditions are most dire, we can expect the worst from Obama as a 
leader. We have already seen, even after getting repudiated in a gruesome 
election, Barack still demands hard leftist policies. And for all these 
reasons, he must be impeached from office for the survival of the American 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
Brooks Isoldi, editor


  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    osint-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
  Unsubscribe:  osint-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to