« Beyond the blogosphere... | Main | Scary thoughts »

The Onion makes a serious point relevant to Bachmann

"America's Finest News Source" runs an article this week that I think Michele Bachmann should take a look at if she's really serious about "defending marriage." Take a look:

Government To Defend Marriage From Dashing Reginald St. Croix, Esq.

June 28, 2006 | Issue 42•26

WASHINGTON, DC—Amid clamor from thousands of cuckolded husbands nationwide, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has drafted legislation designed to safeguard the institution of marriage, the moral cornerstone of American society, from the greatest threat to its sanctity: suave master-seducer Reginald St. Croix, Esq.


Although little is known of St. Croix's parentage, provenance, or means of support, he is known to be an unusually well-formed man in his mid-to-late 30s, possessed of pellucid blue eyes, dark wavy hair, a silver tongue, and an all-encompassing appetite for the company of attached womanhood.

Tax records and divorce statistics, as well as hundreds of signed affidavits, demonstrate that the charismatic roué has been the cause of over 1,300 American divorces since January 2001.

"I was as a fawn mesmerized before a serpent, helpless before its untoward advances," said Mrs. C. Clemmons Burroughs, estranged and disgraced wife of the noted industrial magnate, now cloistered in the Philadelphia Home For The Ruined Woman, run by Carmelite nuns. "I considered myself as sworn to my mate as any wife, secure in my devotion, until I granted a single dance to Reginald at the Industrialists' New Year's Ball. One dance, and I was enraptured; one week, and my reputation ruined; one month, my marriage followed suit. I urge our leaders to take any action, invoke whatever power possible, pass whatever law necessary to stop the predations of Reginald St. Croix, Esquire!"

"Yet I love him still!" added Mrs. Burroughs, who collapsed on a nearby divan, quite inconsolable.

The Defense Of Marriage From Reginald St. Croix Bill, expected to easily pass both houses of Congress before the summer recess, will include legal measures against St. Croix, as well as a number of punishments, ranging from banishment to a chemically derived form of gelding.

The picture that accompanies the article is pretty funny, too:

To those who missed the point of the satire here: there are many real threats to the "sanctity of marriage" that Michele Bachmann is doing nothing to combat. Divorce, abuse, philandering, and any number of real concerns are of greater importance than Senator Bachmann's favorite straw man, marriage for gays. So why the concern with gays when there are much more pressing issues that Michele could be dealing with? Eric Zaetsch left an insightful comment at Dump Bachmann a while back. I'll quote a relevant snippet, but please do read the rest-- it's fantastic.

The bigger picture I see - it is a tactic to press the "gay-lever" and a low cost one. 7-10% of voters, alienated, turned-off, hostile, depending on whose unreliable statistics you like.


As soon as you talk about marriage, and legitimately defined perils to marriage, you get into divorce - it is unavoidable that you must do so, if you are at all intellectually honest about anything you are talking about.

Bachmann's website bio admits she was a child of a difficult divorce situation. So why the deafening silence following that admission?

Face up to divorce as a modern trend in families, and you get into the real and actual family dynamics; the nitty gritty, not a problem in demonizing gay people wanting respect for their rights.

The affected critizized, turned-off bloc shifts from under ten percent to well over fifty percent and you say to yourself, "My god, I could lose an election going there." So you don't.

So it is original sin from the get-go to take the Bachmann dump-on-gay-people path. The low road.

Exactly. This isn't about morality or protecting marriage at all. This is about winning elections using the most disappointing, divisive, and silly tactics available. Let's make sure it doesn't work this time for Michele Bachmann.


Does Bachmann blame gays for her own parents' failed marriage? It's certainly a fair question to ask.

If you mention me I get to pull on your sleeve.

You have open commenting, not censored, and you may have space there on the margin for the blue ribbon:


In spirit, you look to already be with them.