Prancer, Dancer, and Vixen

Phil-Robertson-813x1024I linked obliquely to this video yesterday, but as the Phil Robertson matter heats up, I want to include the following Obamacare video here, with its focus on getting gay  men to sign up.  Please be warned that the video is vaguely NSFW.  There’s no bad language, nudity, or sex, but it’s full of partial nudity and gay sexual allusions that may make you and your colleagues uncomfortable.

As Dan Calabrese notes, although the government probably didn’t fund the video, it’s almost certain that taxpayer dollars funded the video indirectly.  The bigger point, however, is this one:

Now before you start disputing the comparison between this and the Phil Robertson situation, let’s get it straight. Yes, this is a video on YouTube and Phil Robertson could do one of those too. I’m talking about the broader stance of the prevailing culture. Robertson cites and embraces scriptural teaching on homosexuality, and he is suspended because A&E is “disappointed” in him for what he said. These guys prance around in a clear and unmistakable celebration of a) gay sex; and b) ObamaCare; and that’s perfectly fine because hey, what are you, some sorta bigot or something?

Please note that neither Calabrese nor I are saying this video shouldn’t have been made.  What he says, and I agree with this, is that in a truly free society, both videos get made, rather than having the one supporting traditional values get axed.

Two more things:

(1) Couldn’t they have gotten a better singer? Her voice is dreadful.

(2) Is it a coincidence in this carefully staged set piece that one of the prancers and dancers is wearing dog tags?

(I didn’t come up with my clever post title.  The friend who emailed me the link did, and it was such a delicious line that I had to borrow it.)

Another formerly major American magazine goes off the tracks *UPDATED*

Yesterday, I got to be snarky about Time Magazine’s aggressive breast feeding cover (and if “aggressive breast feeding” isn’t a post-modern liberal oxymoron, I don’t know what is).  Today, I get to poke fun at Newsweek, for it’s “Obama : The First Gay President” cover:


Newsweak isn’t actually claiming that the President is gay. Although there have been completely unsubstantiated rumors to that effect, it seems that Michelle, who would know him best, fears the presence of attractive women around Obama, not attractive men.

No, what Newsweak is claiming is that Obama has for three years been laying the ground work for a pro-gay Presidency, one that is slowly reaching its culmination with this latest announcement:

It’s easy to write off President Obama’s announcement of his support for gay marriage as a political ploy during an election year. But don’t believe the cynics. Andrew Sullivan argues that this announcement has been in the making for years. “When you step back a little and assess the record of Obama on gay rights, you see, in fact, that this was not an aberration. It was an inevitable culmination of three years of work.” And President Obama has much in common with the gay community. “He had to discover his black identity and then reconcile it with his white family, just as gays discover their homosexual identity and then have to reconcile it with their heterosexual family,” Sullivan writes.

Ah! Something to bring joy to the American heartlands.

What’s really funny about the Newsweak headline is that it runs counter to a continuing narrative on the left that James Buchanan was the first gay president (not to mention Abe Lincoln).  If this keeps up, most American presidents are going to be able to claim that title (not that there’s anything wrong with that).

I can’t wait ’til the silly season ends, and people start focusing on what really matters in this election:  the economy and national security.

UPDATE:  Others who are having fun:  American Power, American Digest, and Gateway Pundit.  I wonder when the Obamites are going to figure out that New Media is not amenable to Old Media bullying, manipulation, lies, and meme spreading.