Creepy-crawlies for
the evolved Obama
By Wesley Pruden
PrudenPolitics.com
Barack Obama, now fully evolved, is once more the
rage of the demimonde. All it took was for him to
man up, to acknowledge what everyone already knows
the president thinks about “gay sex.”
This is “sex” loosely defined, of course, since most
people do not associate the terminus of the
alimentary canal with poetry and romance, and not so
long ago we did not look to politicians, even
presidents, for moral guidance. But who needs such
guidance when we have presidents, celebrities and
media notabilities as models—now that we’re unbound
by morality, religious faith and ancient tradition?
That celebrated creepy-crawlie that often wanders up
Chris Matthews’ leg has jumped to another network,
where the celebration of the president’s coming-out
party, such as it was, continues without surcease.
“Whatever people think about this issue,” said
George Stephanopoulos, co-host of the ABC-TV morning
talk-show, “there’s no denying when a president
speaks out for the first time like that, it is
history.”
Replied Robin Roberts, his co-host and partner in
grime: “And let me tell you, George, I’m getting
chills again. When you sit in that room and you hear
him say those historic words . . . You never know
what he’s going to say until you ask him.” (Yogi
Berra might have said it better: You can hear a lot
by listening, just as you can see a lot by
watching.)
For these media aspirants to the intellectual
aristocracy, Mr. Obama’s “historic” assurance that
he has become fully evolved ranks with FDR’s address
to the nation on the day after Pearl Harbor (“a date
which will live in infamy”), with Lincoln’s
Gettysburg Address (“of the people, by the people,
for the people”) and Winston Churchill’s tribute to
the Royal Air Force (“never have so many owed so
much to so few”).
Lost in the gay abandon of happy hysteria in the
wake of media chilblains, one gay journalist – or a
fairly cheerful journalist, anyway – reprises
Freud’s famous question asking what women want: What
do the homosexually gifted want?
Writes Nathaniel Frank in Salon, an Internet
journal: “Barack Obama has supported repealing
‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ adding sexual orientation
and gender identity to the federal hate-crimes law,
passing a federal law to ban anti-gay employment
discrimination, and repealing the Defense of
Marriage Act. Why does it matter so much, then, that
[Mr. Obama] supports the freedom of same-sex couples
to marry? Why is this the all-important seal of
approval gay people have been waiting for?”
Why indeed? What else can Mr. Obama, who no longer
carries much moral weight, if he ever did, actually
do to further promote gaiety? The moral imprimatur
that homosexuals seek is the endorsement from the
larger culture, of the straight, sober society that
lives beyond gay-pride parades with their outlandish
prancing and eight-foot papier-mache penises meant
to taunt those whose approval they secretly want
most.
Such approval is beyond the power of presidents,
whether Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, to confer. The
landslide of disdain for same-sex marriage in North
Carolina, the 30th state in a row to give such
rebuke, demonstrates just how far the gays still
have to go to overturn centuries of rejection and
scorn of homosexual behavior. No hate-crime law,
even if it makes disapproval and scorn a capital
crime, will change that. Neither will media rants
and celebrity insults of religious belief and moral
conviction.
Nothing could have angered the straight majority
more than the mockery of marriage, the lasting
foundation of an ordered, sober society. The very
language of the rites of marriage is spoken in
tribute to the unique union of one man, one woman.
(You could look it up.) This anger will not be
assuaged by a hundred hate-crime laws or a thousand
lectures on ethics and morality from the unethical
or the famously immoral. This is the reality that
might be changed by demographics, as the mature die
to be replaced by young people who have grown up in
an amoral society. Or young people might mature in
ways they do not expect. Who among the fogies hold
to all the notions of their barefoot years? No one
is immune to evolving, after all.
President Obama’s evolution was obviously difficult.
But he had the example of Joe Biden, and like Jimmy
Carter seeking advice on nuclear disarmament from
his daughter Amy, then 13, he says he looked to his
own teenage daughters for moral tutelage. Only then
could he find evolutionary completion. Evolution
does not ordinarily run backward, from one
generation to the one before it. This would confound
Charles Darwin, but Mr. Obama, after all, is The
One.
Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington
Times.