If You Think the Godawful "Pajama Boy" Obamacare Ad is Godawful, You're Probably Not Its Audience.

If you think the latest bid to reboot the public image of Obamacare is absolutely godawful, disturbing, pathetic, you name it (I know I do!), I've got news for you: You're probably not the audience for it. And you're playing into the aims of the image's creators.

For many - arguably most - Americans, this guy is hipster douchitude on a cracker. Jeebus H. Christ, at least be swilling brandy. The whole packaging, including the Christmas postcard styling of the image, the infantilized image of man-child, the vaguely imperial "GetTalking" hashtag, etc., runs through me like months-old egg salad.

Yet, as with the widely ridiculed Life of Julia agitprop rolled out during the 2012 campaign (read Reason's response here), the image above works perfectly as propaganda (and it turns out that Julia spoke pretty loudly to its audience, with women - especially unmarried women - overwhelmingly going for Obama).

First, it creates not just a clearly defined in-group (those who see this and identify either with the guy in the picture or his larger situation) but a clearly defined out-group (those of us who see this and wonder what injuries to karma we committed in previous lives that we are looking at this sort of shit in our current incarnations). Like Life of Julia, it is widely talked about and has effectively won the internet for at least a few days. And it creates a whole host of carriers for its essential message via parody, satire, screeds, and more.

Some of the parodies and rewrites are genuinely funny and some are not ( the ones that reek of conservative insecurity about sexual identity strike me as their own form of unfortunate expression). But they all ultimately do what the spot's creators wanted: They get people talking about health insurance.

And with that, I'm zipping up, albeit not in meta-ironical checkerboard pjs.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Drake||

    All I want for Christmas is a chance to punch and kick that douche until he stops making that face.

  • RBS||

    I don't know, he looks like the kind of guy who would keep getting up and keep looking douchey.

  • Drake||

    More exercise is a good New Year's resolution.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Ugh. Not for the people who normally use the gym.

  • Adam.||

    god yes, I dread january at the gym, fucking posers.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    He'd want to have a long conversation that ends in tears about your macro-aggression.

  • Lord Humungus||

    The Douche-inator!

  • wingnutx||

    All I want for Christmas is his two front teeth.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I seem to remember reading that for white women Obama did not have much or any advantage, that it was minority women that made up most of the gap.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "As you can see, white women actually favored Romney by 56 to 42 percent. In fact, Obama did worse among white women than he did four years ago. Granted, that’s significantly less than the margin among white men, who voted for Romney by a whopping 27 points. (The gender gap, after all, is very real–within every racial/ethnic group, Democrats usually do better among women than men.) But the only reason women overall went for Obama is thanks to the overwhelming support of black, Latina and Asian women. These groups opted for him at an even greater rate than the already high rate that their male counterpoints did."

    http://feministing.com/2012/11.....2-percent/

  • John||

    Yes. But that is really just a reflection of his advantage with unmarried women of all races. Since minorities are more likely to be unmarried, his advantage with unmarried women magnified his advantage among minority women.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    What interests me about that is that most of the 'war on women' and other catering to women voter advertisements I have seen from the administration see pitched to white women, and to that group it does not seem to have worked. I doubt any such pitch was necessary to get high turnout from minority women.

  • wareagle||

    the war on wimmin is pitched at whites because 1) there are more of them, 2) they are far less a sure thing that black women supporting Obama, and 3) the left habitually views people as nothing more than their demographic parts.

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    This new ad is aimed at nerdy lesbians like Igor Volsky, the Madcow and Chris Hayes, not at women generally.

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    This new ad is aimed at nerdy lesbians like Igor Volsky, the Madcow and Chris Hayes, not at women generally.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm having trouble coming up with a good reason why the difference would be that high. It's not like a huge chunk of single women are single moms on welfare, who you could come up with a good theory why they were voting mostly Dem.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I think John explained it: a huge chunk of single women are minorities, and for whatever reason minorities voted in incredibly high numbers for Obama, minority women did so even more.

  • prolefeed||

    I'd be surprised if Asian women are unmarried at significantly higher rates than white women, since Asians tend to average higher on most socioeconomic measures than whites.

    Tried to google it, but got a bunch of stuff about Asians and interracial marriage instead.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Incognito mode, I hope.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    No one's talking about Asians when we say "minority".

    But I think we all knew that already.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Really now? Is that why the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus has a running column in the Huffington Post? Because that caucus is just packed with conservative Republicans representing their constituency who would never give Obama the time of day?

  • Harun||

    Single women are afraid they might get married, have two kids, and then have their husband bail on them. Daddy Government makes sure that they will be taken care of.

  • #||

    Minorites on average are also younger than whites.

    There are a number of varaibles at work here, and requires multi variate analysis if you want to really learn something. but politics likes simplistic talking points.

    Some thing with say hispanics. Are hispanics more dem because they are hisapanic, or are the more dem because they are younger, more dem because they are poorer, more dem because they are more sinlge? All these variables interact with one another.

    As as you mentioned above, the gender gap has more to do with being married women vs non marries women, but obviously there are huge skews in those other factors between the groups.

  • MiloMinderbinder||

    Actually it was more marrieds vs singles where the gap is.

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/201.....overs.html

  • ||

    Can't all men and married women just come to an agreement that single women are monolithic uncompromising and unreasonable?

  • John C. Randolph||

    I'm guessing that this character was chosen by Obama minions who consider it an example of a typical American, since that's what all their friends look like.

    -jcr

  • Aloysious||

    Nick, that was beautiful.

    Take the rest of the day off, you've earned it.

  • John||

    Some of the parodies and rewrites are genuinely funny and some are not ( the ones that reek of conservative insecurity about sexual identity strike me as their own form of unfortunate expression)

    Really? I don't think you have to be insecure in your sexual identity to look at that picture and think "gay". To the extent that is wrong it is not because anyone is insecure about their identity. It is because somehow mass media in this country has equated "effeminate douche bag" with "gay man". And that is not true or fair. But I don't think you can blame conservatives for that.

  • WTF||

    My first thought on seeing that was not "gay"; it was "massive, massive douche".

  • SugarFree||

    Me too. And it's not the hair or the pajamas or the stupid mug... it's that smug look of unearned superiority that makes him such a douche. And it speaks volumes about why they are so perplexed that not everyone loves having their health insurance completely messed up.

    The look on his face is why they thought they had the right to do this in the first place.

  • WTF||

    Yeah, the incredible smug is what really sends me over the edge. It just gives me an uncontrollable urge to punch the smug right out of him.

  • SugarFree||

    Would it seep out or just gush all over the place?

  • Almanian!||

    I think South Park showed us what happens when the Smug gets too be too much (too lazy to link to the episode - I'd probably you it anyway...)

  • Rich||

    "The Desolation of Smug", as it were.

  • Almanian!||

    +1

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    Yes!

  • db||

    The guy in the picture is the type of person to support Obamacare but the absolute antithesisof the type of people Obamacare was sold to us as helping.

    The beneficiaries of Obamacare are supposed to be toothless, penniless working class stiffs wearing worn out carhartts two days before Christmas unloading trucks full of crap the pyjamadouche and his ilk buy for their family. Pyjamadouche sips hot chocolate and harangues his familyabout supporting Obamacare while Joe wakes up on Christmas morning thinking about the midnight shift he has to work that night.

  • Harun||

    Those are the people I would prefer to actually help. But they mainly just need a better economy.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    I get the feeling they're appealing to moms who can't let go. They could have made this guy look grown-up or collected, but instead made him look infantile and quirky. It's like a helicopter parent was asked to dress their 25-year-old son.

    Also, I hate when the push-back on these ads involves how stupid us young people are that this appeals to us. It doesn't! The people making these ads are all Boomers and Xers, and they're selling it to each other.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    My thought was "applying to grad school while on food stamps".

  • John||

    Not that everyone has to be a mouth breather or the Marlboro Man, but I cannot comprehend how any man could wake up one day and decide being that guy in the picture is a good idea. Fuck be a nerd, be a preppy or a punk, be a drag queen, anything. But why that?

    I guess what bothers me about it is that the whole look is so child like. The look of that sort of person reminds me of an earnest 8 year old boy. It is so asexual and immature it just comes across as creepy on an adult.

    It is not that I have some paleo idea of masculinity. Honestly a drag queen isn't going to creep me out the way the guy in the ad does. It is an adult looking that child like that bugs me.

  • Zeb||

    I don't know. It looks comfortable and warm.

    The problem is having your picture taken and distributed nationally while dressed like that.

  • John||

    Childhood is generally comfortable and warm, or at least the idealized version of it is.

  • Lord Humungus||

    He reminds me of someone I knew in college - a self-described feminist and professional story-teller, who once said "Men have never done any good in this world."

    To which I replied, "They built the house you're sitting in."

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    It's cool to self-hate

  • John C. Randolph||

    Not sure you can call it self-hate. I certainly wouldn't describe such a person as a "man".

    -jcr

  • John||

    Men have never done any good in this world.

    How does one arrive at that level of self hate? Did he not have a father? If nothing else a man was half responsible for your existence and hopefully helped raise you.

    I have known people who were told they were worthless pieces of shit their whole lives. And the resulting profound insecurity manifested itself in anger, self destructive behavior and hating some kind of stand in for the people, usually their parents, who told them that. How does self loathing result in subservience like this?

  • Andrew S.||

    Meh. I can understand to some degree. It's very easy to turn that kind of hate inward instead of outward when you've been dealing with that kind of situation.

    That being said, most people with self hate like Lord Humungus described had very comfortable childhoods.

  • John||

    In the same way parents who beat their kids down too much produces self hate, parents who build their kids up to much produce the same thing. If you are told how wonderful you are your entire life and develop a completely unrealistic view of yourself, you are going to be in for a real shock when you find out the world doesn't agree. One rational conclusion is not just that there is something wrong with the world also there must be something wrong with you because you manage to fail despite being so wonderful. It is counter intuitive but too much self esteem can cause you to hate yourself just like too little can.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    I think the self-hate and constant irony is to a large degree the result of 25 years of political correctness. It's socially unacceptable to mock most other groups (excluding those who do not have such moral restrictions), so the primary target for humor becomes yourself.

  • CE||

    Rednecks are always fair game though.

  • Lord Humungus||

    He was married to a member of the "woman's group" that my then-GF, now wife belonged to.

    Long story short, this couple tried to separate my GF and I by insinuating I was an evil male for making positive comments to other women. Evil stuff like "You look really nice today".

  • Almanian!||

    Yeah, nice. I was fortunate only to have a harpie friend of my (now) wife who was trying to get her to hook up with - basically - a beta. My wife is rather open minded, but she's definitely not into Beta Male :) I just remember seeing him, and thinking..."Oh, he's no threat." Despire the fact that he was a College Boy and I was still in high school at the time!

    Good times... shit, me and Mrs. A will have been married 29 years next June 1. Hard to believe.

  • John||

    How fucked up must straight hard core feminists be? Usually people who cannot deal with or be around the opposite sex are gay. If you can't deal with men or women or for whatever reason think they are evil, you just become a lesbian or a gay man depending on your sex. But straight feminists are biologically attracted to the object of their hate. They desire to marry and mate with the very thing they have convinced themselves is evil. And in fact many or most of them do. I can't imagine what living with that that kind of cognitive disobedience would do to your sanity.

  • SugarFree||

    They simply convince themselves they found "one of the good ones." Doing that also allows them to think they have superior dating skills and are uniquely attractive in some way.

    Or they are dating a closeted gay guy, like Lindy West. (I don't care what your family or town is like, surely being out cannot be worse than dating Lindy West. Can you even image what she smells like when she gets sweaty? I'm thinking generic cigarettes and summer roadkill, with just a hint of rancid french fry grease.)

  • John||

    The whole always dating the obviously gay guy is an interesting phenomenon. I have known women who seemed to only date guys who were obviously gay and then inevitably and genuinely end up broken hearted when the guy leaves her for another guy. They all seemed to have some kind of commitment or daddy issue that caused them to subconsciously be attracted to men they knew would never commit to them.

  • ||

    Just a hint???

  • #||

    The flip side is how messed up of a man do you have to be to want to marry someone like that?

  • John C. Randolph||

    Usually people who cannot deal with or be around the opposite sex are gay.

    None of my gay friends (male or female) fit that description.

    -jcr

  • John||

    Usually people who cannot deal with or be around the opposite sex are gay.

    None of my gay friends (male or female) fit that description.

    Okay. But I said most of the people who fit that description are gay. I didn't say most of the people who are gay fit that description.

  • Zeb||

    I misinterpreted you as well. But I still think that a lot of the people you describe might just be confused or troubled by sexuality in general.

  • Zeb||

    That's a novel theory of human sexuality. But in my experience, gay men at least love the company of women (and vice versa). And I don't know too many lesbians who seem to have a particular problem with male company.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Then you probably don't know many lesbians.

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    I suspect likes of people who are gay or lesbian have genes, or at least prenatal hormonal environments, that incline them that way. Do you think heterosexuals dislike dealing with people of their own sex and that is what makes them straight?

  • The Last American Hero||

    To be fair to them it is evil if you are touching yourself while making those statements.

  • CE||

    How could you have observed that any woman looked nice though, without exerting your male gaze first?

  • Zeb||

    I will gaze upon whomever I want. And I encourage women to to the same.

  • PRX||

    remember A Day Without Mexicans and DotComGuy? I'd like to see someone do a hybrid of the same type thing, living a year abjuring anything created by the patriarchy. they'd probably have to live in a very temperate place with a lot of low hanging fruit or die which is the point.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Well, his father obviously did no good by bringing him into the world.

    -jcr

  • #||

    "My first thought on seeing that was not "gay"; it was "massive, massive douche"."

    Ditto

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    Not mutually exclusive. Ask your gay friends.

  • Michael||

    Yeah, of all the words that scrolled across my brain when I saw that, "gay" definitely was not one. It was more along the lines of "worthless chickenshit, Oedipal beta-male with grossly inflated sense of self-importance". If that's considered synonymous with homosexuality these days then gays should very rightly be pissed off.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Rock Hudson agrees.

  • John||

    They should be. A lot of people think "smug douche" instead of gay. But people who don't live in big cities are not around the actual smug douches this guy represents are likely to think "gay" because the look is so effeminate.

  • Gweskoyen||

    People who use the word "beta-male" are never alphas.

  • Michael||

    Where did I make the claim that I was?

  • Almanian!||

    Chillax, ITG. Just a suggestion...

  • Lord Humungus||

    I've known gay men who look more masculine than Pajamaboy. He isn't gay, he's ultra-beta.

  • Zeb||

    And I've known quite a few straight men who are faggy as can be (minus the sex with dudes part).

  • Zeb||

    I just thought "model who got a lousy gig." Poor guy is probably just trying to pay the bills and he gets analyzed by a bunch of assholes based on one photograph that was probably set up by other people who told him what to wear and what kind of expression to have on his face.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Not gay. Beta. Who thinks all the Jezebel writers are funny.

  • John C. Randolph||

    As I understand the terminology, a "beta" is a provider who gets exploited by women who cheat on him with an "alpha". Pajama boy looks like a dependent, not a provider.

    -jcr

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    So he's an "omega".

  • BuSab Agent||

    No, the correct term is Epsilon Semi-Moron.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No self-respecting homosexual man would drape such hideous sleepwear upon his body.

    Seriously. Derek Rose has a fucking website, so it's not like finding quality, fashionable pajamas requires a research project by RAND.

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    I would think most gay guys looking at him would think he was gay, and not necessarily out of hope.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    alt-txt #FAIL

    I don't know quite how to feel about this. I think Nick's mocking me with the second picture?

  • Rich||

    But [the parodies and rewrites] all ultimately do what the spot's creators wanted: They get people talking about health insurance.

    They may get people talking about health insurance, but I suspect not in the way the spot's creators wanted.

  • WTF||

    Yes,in much the same way that people are talking a lot about Obamacare, but not in a way that is actually good for Obamacare or the administration.

  • Rich||

    And the more the administration tweaks this stuff the more laughter and anger they precipitate.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    It was bound to fail. When has nationalization of a huge industry sector ever worked? That it is failing so epically at the rollout phase is just the beginning. This is the 'easiest' part and look how bad they are doing!

    And they bet everything on it, every single one of them in the Senate voted for it and many of them are up in November. As I told PB yesterday they can say goodbye to that house, and this is why.

  • Leigh||

    Never underestimate the stupid party for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

  • WTF||

    Never underestimate the stupid party for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    Agreed, but even the Stupid Party would have to elevate their fail to a whole new level to fuck up this one. Not that I'm saying they can't, just that it's not as likely as in the past.

  • wareagle||

    you are employing reason, bo, which never works with proggies. They remain convinced in their ideas, believing that policy failures are the result of anything but the policies themselves.

  • WTF||

    They just know the fail is actually the fault of the Kulaks, hoarders, and wreckers.

  • The Other Kevin||

    They say any press is good press, but I think Obamacare is the exception to the rule.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Do Obamacare policies cover injuries due to repeated swirlies and wedgies?

    -jcr

  • Lady Bertrum||

    "...at least be swilling brandy."

    Good Lord, now I have an uncontrollable urge to get a snifter and loll about the house.

  • John||

    Don't we all Lady Bertrum? Don't we all. If I didn't have to work, I would spend most days like that.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Real Men(tm) don't wear pajamas.

  • Kid Xenocles||

    Real men don't worry about it.

  • Almanian!||

    The first rule aboubt Real Men Club is...

  • Killaz||

    He doesn't seem that worried about it to me. Anyone exposed to Aristotle's Ethics is likely to give some consideration to what it means to be a man in the sense of character attainment. The whole Real Men thing is a light hearted way to circle around the seriousness of the matter. It's critics always seem to be hyperbolic and have issues of their own to work out. It could hardly be a cultural negative to the extent we are churning out these man-childs like in the ad above.

  • Kid Xenocles||

    It works either way. If you're just breaking his balls about it the real man laughs with you. If you're taking a serious shot at him he just gives you the finger or ignores you.

  • Killaz||

    Eggs, heavy cream, cheese, bacon, how did quiche get demonized?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Because it's breakfast deep dish pizza.

  • CE||

    Because it's French.

  • wwhorton||

    Remember, the French have arguably the most inherently militaristic culture in Europe. Think of all of the French loan words in English. How many of them have to do with military concepts? France is all about war and cooking, and they even militarized the latter in the form of the classic "kitchen brigade". It has always mystified me that the French have a reputation in this country for being soft.

  • BuSab Agent||

    Because the name sounds lame.

  • ||

    The addition of spinach?

  • Andrew S.||

    For a President who supposedly was at the forefront of social media, blah blah blah... why does everything posted on his twitter account end up being so blatantly stupid?

    (rhetorical question, by the way)

  • Auric Demonocles||

    why does everything posted on his twitter account end up being so blatantly stupid?

    Well... that is the forefront of social media.

  • SugarFree||

    People who are funny and clever are far too self-aware to get a job in the royal court.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    "Talking about" not same as "doing"

    And, yes, this monumentally pathetic little weenie impresses me as the sort of person who talks big talk about big things, but calls the concierge when the light bulb in his closet burns out.

  • Michael||

    Hey, maybe the discussion he'll have about health insurance will include dental coverage for when he encounters the inevitable curb stomping on his first ever venture out into public at age 35.

    So at least there's that.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Real Men(tm) don't wear pajamas.

    Not true.
    I put my "pajamas" on when I get out of bed, and wear them while I lollygag around the house swilling coffee and commentering on HnR, until I take a shower and get dressed.

  • Lord Humungus||

    and by "pajamas", you really mean a codpiece and a leather vest?

  • Almanian!||

    better response than mine

    #WINNING

  • Almanian!||

    If by "pajamas" you mean "a ragged sweatshirt and sweatpants" (winter) and "comfy basketball shorts and a t-shirt" (summer), then, yeah - "pajamas".

    If by "pajamas" you mean "pajamas", then....

    *backs away slowly while maintaining eye contact*

  • SugarFree||

    I just raw dog it.

  • Almanian!||

    Well, yeah - but only you can pull off being you. Me - I gotta cover it the fuck up.

  • Lord Humungus||

    pre-shower: it's sweatpants and the t-shirt from the day before. My wife wears *shudder* pajamas.

  • Auric Demonocles||

  • Almanian!||

    YES!

  • BuSab Agent||

    No one over the age of 3 should ever wear those.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I have adult pajamas I wear with a robe. Because that's what adult men wear when there's scotch in the glass and your woman is rubbing your feet.

  • Killaz||

    Around the house, I wear over sized, baggy swim wear. My limbs stay at a maximum level of flexibility if the need arises to kick a motherfucker in the throat.

  • db||

    You should be wearing a banana hammock. Those baggy trunks offer motherfuckers something to grab onto in a fight.

  • Killaz||

    Who said anything about fighting? That's what the kick in the throat is suppose to prevent.

  • db||

    If you're serious about stopping a fight before it starts...

    http://www.serbu.com/top/super_shorty_870.jpg

  • Killaz||

    Now, that's a friend who has your back when shit gets real.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    An Oberlin (or The Colorado College) grad would probably be wearing one of his mother's hand-me-down flannel nightgowns, not those pajamas.

    In a totally-not-gay, ironic way, to be sure.

  • ||

    Oh man, I had a lacrosse game against Colorado College during the Duke stripper charade.

    There was a corner outside the stadium with a half dozen rotten feminists holding signs and calling us all rapists and privileged.

    Its truly a progressive shit hole and gave me the creeps.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    you really mean a codpiece and a leather vest?

    Not in this weather, Mate.

  • Locke||

    I guess what bothers me so much about this isn't just the hipster-douchiness of this guy, but his infantilized look. He's clearly in his 20s yet acts like a child. I think it speaks volumes about how this administration views its constituents. They want to be our parents, and insecure douches like this will want them to be their parents because they've never fully matured into rational, responsible adults.

  • Almanian!||

    I keep going back to pony-tail guy in the Clinton/whomever debate - "The presidency/government is like our parents, so how do you take care of us as your children..." - something to that effect.

    I almost destroyed my TV that night. That's where I mark the start (that I noticed) of this parent/child relationship some assholes have.

    "Take care of me!!" Fuck you!

  • wareagle||

    oh my lord, I remember him. What an embarrassing spectacle he was, mostly becuase of the earnestness in which the statement was made.

  • Killaz||

    I was embarrassed for my generation on first sight of that motherfucker.

  • Killaz||

    Whom, of course, I would still like to kick in the throat.

  • ||

    I can't find a link for this. Anyone care to help me dredge for this? I'm disgusted, but fascinated.

  • country bumpkin||

    I second that motion!

  • Atreides||

    It's even worse than I remembered.

    http://youtu.be/c8rp-tlgqa4

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm still not an adult according to the Great One! I should be one my parents' plan, like a good boy (even though I make more than them combined).

  • John||

    Yes. That is what I said above. I couldn't put my finger on it at first. But that is totally what it is that bugs me about that picture.

  • Almanian!||

    Yeah, I was engaging with the Twitterati in respoding to this last night. I received a "I wish you hadn't Tweeted that" in response to "You sure this isn't Rachel Maddow's less-masculine brother?" Couldn't decide if it was a troll or a fellow traveler who'd had to gouge out his/her eyes, so I blocked it for safety's sake...

  • John||

    Like I said above, it is the childish asexuality that creeps me out. He looks like an adult acting out some perverse sexual fantasy with a paid dominatrix where he plays a naughty 8 year old and she plays the mother.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Maybe she's playing the babysitter?

  • John||

    No, that would be half way normal. Look at that guy. He is a mommy issues guy if I have ever seen one.

  • Lord Humungus||

    a paid plaid dominatrix

  • SIV||

    That's so heteronormative.

  • wareagle||

    when all you know is messaging...... It's not the law, it's not the policies/regs behind it, it's the presentation.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Ask Obama what his greatest failure is...

  • Almanian!||

    Caring TOO much?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I believe he's answered this question about 3 different times, and it's always failing to explain himself (and how great whatever he just did is) to the public.

  • Almanian!||

    I blame us. If I - we - weren't so dense, we'd see his genius.

    I'm sorry, Great One! I will try moar harder!

  • wareagle||

    and from a man hailed as the greatest orator since, well, since ever. And no one on the dogwashing committee notices the disconnect.

  • SugarFree||

    Honestly, though... at first blush I thought it was screencap from the execrable Big Bang Theory.

  • John||

    Sheldon Cooper would kick that guy's ass. Those guys are A Team compared this douche.

    And I don't get the hate of that show. It think it is reasonably funny for a current sitcom. I would rather watch that than Modern Family.

  • SugarFree||

    I watch neither. Not being all uppity, I just don't find them funny at all.

    Although my main problem with BBT is that I already work with a bunch of people on the autistic spectrum and I'm not up for more of it when I get home.

  • John||

    My wife works for the medical research department at a university. In her words, she lives that show every day. But she likes it more than I do.

    Really BBT is just a re-imagining of the old Bob Newhart show with Leonard as Bob. Watch that show sometime and you can match every character on it to one from the old Bob Newhart Show. Sheldon Cooper is nothing but Mr. Carlin if he were a physicist. Bernadette is the receptionist Carol and so forth.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    SugarFree hates candy and loves Warty erotica. His tastes are already known to be questionable.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Funny and sitcom are mutually exclusive.

  • Killaz||

    Other than Ancient Aliens, South Park, CNBC with the evening meal, and some HBO fair, I just don't watch that much television anymore. Gets in the way of video games and reading. I will go through a season of shows on CRT or Netflix over a Saturday afternoon to keep up with some stories, but as a medium, it is definitely not my dominant go to now.

  • John||

    I watch Top Gear, Fast and Loud, a couple of other car shows on Velocity, the odd competitive cooking show with my wife and sports. That is really about it.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    People revolted over a tax on fucking tea while we're paying for THIS kind of shit and laughing about it. This place has become home of the nutless and the ad is targeted perfectly

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    People revolted over a tax on fucking tea

    Well, no. They didn't, actually. The Intolerable Acts that got the colonists all riled up were mostly the Stamp Act and the Quebec Act.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    Are you saying the BTP wasn't a revolt or that it didn't occur because of the Tea Act?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No, it wouldn't classify it as a "revolt", as the Continental Congress hadn't yet voted to leave the Empire. A demonstration, certainly.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    Okay. I disagree. People can revolt without someone voting for it and physically destroying property is more than a demonstration.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "1.
    to break away from or rise against constituted authority, as by open rebellion; cast off allegiance or subjection to those in authority; rebel; mutiny: to revolt against the present government.
    2.
    to turn away in mental rebellion, utter disgust, or abhorrence (usually followed by from ): He revolts from eating meat.
    3.
    to rebel in feeling (usually followed by against ): to revolt against parental authority.
    4.
    to feel horror or aversion (usually followed by at ): to revolt at the sight of blood. "

    It was clearly a revolt, HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    to break away from or rise against constituted authority

    Thank you for providing support to my argument, NK.

    Now go fuck yourself, you hydrocephalic mongoloid.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "Thank you for providing support to my argument, NK."

    By showing it's irrevocabvly wrong?

    You're welcome.

    I mean seriously, I provide definitions that shut you the fuck up, and your response is to respot the psrt that provs you wrong and claim victory?

    YOUR STUPID ASS CLAIMED IT WASN'T A REVOLT BECAUSE "the Continental Congress hadn't yet voted to leave the Empire", yet the definition YOU quote prove that's not necessary at all.

    Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I meant when I said HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I mean seriously, I provide definitions that shut you the fuck up, and your response is to respot [sic] the psrt [sic] that provs [sic] you wrong and claim victory?

    No, you didn't. The latter is your schtick, actually. Complete with the frothing at the mouth and tears of rage that cause you to spell like an 2nd-Grader.

    Again, on that day did the SoL attack British soldiers or declare that they were no longer subjects of the King? I know implication is hard for you, so I'll have to spell it out for you. This is merely a symptom of your childishness. For whatever reason, you, again, jumped into a conversation were no one was talking to you. You didn't have enough guts to engage me under your usual handle, so you thought you'd be cute and make a sockpuppet. And now you are throwing a tantrum, thinking you can rhetorically outshout me but typing in all-caps and cursing. How similar to last time!

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "No, you didn't."

    ""1.
    to break away from or rise against constituted authority, as by open rebellion; cast off allegiance or subjection to those in authority; rebel; mutiny: to revolt against the present government.
    2.
    to turn away in mental rebellion, utter disgust, or abhorrence (usually followed by from ): He revolts from eating meat.
    3.
    to rebel in feeling (usually followed by against ): to revolt against parental authority.
    4.
    to feel horror or aversion (usually followed by at ): to revolt at the sight of blood. ""

    Yes I did.

    "Again, on that day did the SoL attack British soldiers or declare that they were no longer subjects of the King?"

    Nothign in the definition of revolt requires them to.

    Again, this
    is pretty much exactly what I meant when I said HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    WHy do stupid motherfuckers like you think 2 paragraphs of your mental diarrhea trump a dictionary on the matter of definitions?

    No one cares what your argument is asshole, your claim was " it wouldn't classify it as a "revolt", as the Continental Congress hadn't yet voted to leave the Empire. ", but as anyone can see, none of the definitions of revolt require that as a condition.

    So you go into idiot ass covering mode and spew forth strings of stupidity, hoping to convince...people who don't know what a dictionary is?

    Because that's the only kind of person you've got a shot with.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Listen moron:

    to break away from or rise against constituted authority, as by open rebellion; cast off allegiance or subjection to those in authority; rebel; mutiny: to revolt against the present government.

    What the fuck do you think that means? Because that's exactly what I said, and all your crying and whining can't change that. You attempted to show I used the word incorrectly and it is clear that you are wrong. So go fuck yourself you cowardly piece of shit. Again, post under your usual handle. You're not fooling anyone.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    Again, this is pretty much exactly what I meant when I said HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

    "Again, post under your usual handle."

    Do you not speaky?

    This is my usual handle. It has been for quite some time. How stupid are you?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    This is my usual handle. It has been for quite some time.

    Which only mysterious appears when a certain someone is angered.

    Post under your usual handle, what are you afraid of?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Whom were the Sons of Liberty revolting against when they threw the tea in the harbor? I argue that "revolt" implies that you desire a new government. I don't argue that the Tea Party wasn't a protest against the Tea Act, but I do argue that the point of the protest was to get the British government to change the law, not a statement that they desired independence. On the other hand, I will admit that at that time there were some SoLs who were pro-independence already, like Sam Adams.

    The consequence of the BTP was the blockade of Boston and the Intolerable Acts, which pushed the colonists (well, historians guesstimate that only 1/3 of them were Patriots), not just Boston, over to the Patriot cause.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "I argue that "revolt" implies"

    WHo cares what you argue, you already deomnstrated you don't know the fucking defention when you claimed "it wouldn't classify it as a "revolt", as the Continental Congress hadn't yet voted to leave the Empire"

    You're a fucking idiot who can't aqdmit he's wrong.

    Even when it's impossible to avoid it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    defention

    That's gold. It really is.

    who can't aqdmit [sic] he's wrong.

    I'll admit I was wrong, if you provide evidence that my definition is incorrect. You have failed to do so, despite your screeching.

    Now that you are done shitting all over the thread with your juvenile tantrum, could you please let CIYP and me continue our conversation. If you wanted to point out you disagree, you could have just said "I disagree" like CIYP did and engaged in a rational and constructive conversation. However, you decided it would be more fun to troll. Which is why you're an asshole.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    By the way, look how mad you are, banging on spelling?

    Seriously? We're having a discussion, and you are so beaten and defeated you have to cheap shot spelling?

    That's too fucking funny.

    Maybe next you can tell me how my punctuation makes may argument wrong too.

    Again, this is pretty much exactly what I meant when I said HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "Now that you are done shitting all over the thread with your juvenile tantrum,"

    You've posted more, and angrier, than I have.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I seriously doubt an outside observer would come to the same conclusion as you.

    That you stoop to "No, you are!" is no surprise to me.

    Let me ask you a serious question. Do you enjoy trolling? Does it give you a thrill by acting so transgressive to social norms? I don't understand why someone would jump into a conversation that he is not involved in and start hurling abuse at someone. Could you explain it to me?

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "I seriously doubt an outside observer would come to the same conclusion as you."

    Yeah, but yopu can't read a dictionary and see your enemies everywhere, so you're not a reliable observer.

    "Could you explain it to me?":

    You're an asshole and you were wrong. You are frequently so, and always self assured about it. I felt a desire, between shitting and taking the dog for a shit, to point out that you were wrong and an asshole. You get irrationally pissed when people do so, because a large part of your self identity is wrapped up in your percieved expertise.

    Despite the fact, that like today for example, you are not only wrong but egregiously so. Embarassingly so.

    Post less, and it won't happen.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You're an asshole


    No argument.

    and you were wrong.

    I wasn't.

    You are frequently so, and always self assured about it.


    Maybe, but you haven't provided one iota of evidence to prove that is so. If you are so emotionally invested in me and my "expertise", perhaps you could provide an annotated digest of my postings here and how they are frequently "wrong"? That would go a lot further than your saying it was so

    I felt a desire, between shitting and taking the dog for a shit, to point out that you were wrong and an asshole.


    You really should take your dog for a walk. Perhaps some fresh air would clear your head.

    You get irrationally pissed when people do so


    Projection, as proven by our delightful little exchange

    Despite the fact, that like today for example, you are not only wrong but egregiously so. Embarassingly [sic] so.

    If by "wrong" you mean that every definition (that's how you spell the word, by the way) you provided supports my original argument, then I am egregiously, embarrassingly (that's how you spell that word; a good dictionary would help you with that.) "wrong".

    Post less, and it won't happen.

    Oh? Perhaps you feel I'm too "uppity"? That's an interesting admission.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    And you still haven't explained what you get out of trolling.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "No, it wouldn't classify it as a "revolt","

    Fuck off idiot.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Post under your usual handle, coward.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    This is my handle you stupid fuck.

    Apparently I'm not the onyl one who's tired of your stupid "I know more than ytou" games than inevitably turn into sutpid excuse making fests when it turnms out you're lying/full of shit/ can't read a dictionary.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I can't read the dictionary?

    You can't fucking spell simple words.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    And you can't identify people you're arguing with or read the definiton of revolt and understand it.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    By the way, look how mad you are, banging on spelling?

    Seriously? We're having a discussion, and you are so beaten and defeated you have to cheap shot spelling?

    That's too fucking funny.

    Maybe next you can tell me how my punctuation makes may argument wrong too.

    Again, this is pretty much exactly what I meant when I said HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Seriously? We're having a discussion,

    No, we aren't. You are ranting and raving.

    and you are so beaten and defeated you have to cheap shot spelling?

    If you're going to harp on about the dictionary, you should know how to, um, spell. So spare me your bullshit.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    That's too fucking funny.

    Maybe next you can tell me how my punctuation makes may argument wrong too.

    Again, this is pretty much exactly what I meant when I said HM is playing his stupid "I was wrong so rather than just say so I'll make stupid fucking arguments then act like an asshole" game.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "If you're going to harp on about the dictionary, "

    LOLOL WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT A WORD MEANS!

    Lol, you're so pissed you're not even coherent.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Yes, that is "pissed". Secondly, "lol" is not a word, Mr. Dictionary. Thirdly, post under your usual handle, what are you afraid of?

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "Thirdly, post under your usual handle, what are you afraid of?"

    Again, what part of, this is my usual handle do you not comprehend?

    You seem to think I'm some othe poster who you freak out over.\

    Feel; free to comb past threads, to disabuse yourself of the notion that I am who you think I am.

    That, more than anything, is the most embarassing part of this thread for you. You sound like a god damned psych patient in need of your meds.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    "Yes, that is "pissed". "

    Obviously, it's about time you acted like a man and admitted it.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    I love this, "what are you doing bringing up dictionaries when we're discussing what words mean...well..um..YOU TURNED OFF SPELLCHECK! SO YOU'RE ARGUMENT IS INVALID"

    Jesus, I think I made HM even more irrational and incoherent.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Dictionaries are not used for checking the spelling of a word?

    C'mon!

    Jesus, I think I made HM even more irrational and incoherent.

    Projection, projection, projection.

    Tell me what this really about? Which one of your sacred cows have I slaughtered in the past? Or are you too much of a coward to say so?

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    I love this, "what are you doing bringing up dictionaries when we're discussing what words mean...well..um..YOU TURNED OFF SPELLCHECK! SO YOU'RE ARGUMENT IS INVALID"

    Jesus, I think I made HM even more irrational and incoherent.

  • shut the fuck up mary||

    " Or are you too much of a coward to say so?":

    CHICKEN!!!! BWAK BWAK BWAK!!!!

    Seriously, that's you right now.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I wouldn't insult the noble chicken with a comparison to you. Chickens are of a benefit to society. You? Not so much.

  • db||

    The Quebec Act? Frequently threatening to secede in order to grab a bigger piece of the national handout pie?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Worse, they gave Ohio to the Canucks.

  • ||

    Montreal owned the Hinterland which included Ohio once upon a time.

    /looks longingly outside the window with nostalgia.

  • ||

    ...to pay for luxurious welfare programs they can't afford.

    And to boot, after spending energy with toxic rhetoric dividing Quebecers, play the "victim" card.

    It's their shtick. Losers gonna lose.

    http://fullcomment.nationalpos.....ncophobia/

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    People revolted over a tax on fucking tea

    Well, no. They didn't, actually. The Intolerable Acts that got the colonists all riled up were mostly the Stamp Act and the Quebec Act.

  • ||

    And the Tax Tax.

  • Almanian!||

    I also have to cop to actually seeing this guy (not LITERALLY this guy) at the grocery store one night. He was with a girl - not unattractive - who outweighed him by 40-50 lbs, and he was all effeminately buying Monster Energy or some such thing...with food stamps. While totally hipster skinny jeaning with a cardigan.

    WTF??

    I admit to having the STRONGEST urge to just punch the little douchefuck in the face - just cause of how he looked and acted. Plus - food stamps. I was not proud of that, and tried to figure out why I would react like that....

    Then I just didn't care, and have since devoted my life to ridding the world of their kind, one by one...

    /JK

  • Paul.||

    Plus - food stamps.

    That art loft doesn't pay for itself you know.

  • Loki||

    Seeing how his parents probably pay for his rent and other monthly bills, I don't think it's asking too much for the fuckhead to get a part time job and pay for his own fucking food. Assuming, of course, that he can find 20 hours a week to squeeze into his busy schedule of sleeping in until noon, meeting up with friends to play kickball in the park, hanging out at a local artisinal coffee house all after noon, making some shitty "art," tending his rooftop garden and beehive, and then meeting back up with friends for PBRs at the local hipster bar.

  • ||

    You forgot railing and ranting against the system and raging against the machine that keeps him down as he sips his latte while eying the cute girl reading 'How men ruined my life.' Or one of Obama's works of mythology.

  • ||

    He was with a girl - not unattractive - who outweighed him by 40-50 lbs...I admit to having the STRONGEST urge to just punch the little douchefuck in the face

    Don't give in to hate. Instead, have the girl punch him out. In the extremely unlikely event that he fights back, you get the double bonus entertainment of watching a girl administer a beatdown to the littlw bitch. Win-win.

  • ||

    *little

  • Almanian!||

    nice :)

  • wareagle||

    semi-related but all the proof you need re: the fucked up nature of govt programs is that food stamps can be used to buy energy drinks. Pisses me off to see "EBT-approved" stickers on prepared foods.

    Hell, no. If you're on the public's dime, buy the stuff that requires you to actually spend some time cooking. I have to wonder if this does not have a college tuition loan-type effect on groceries.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I have to wonder if this does not have a college tuition loan-type effect on groceries.

    You say that like farming subsidies don't already. As, I've pointed out before, SNAP/EBT is a farming subsidy. You know which department runs SNAP? Hint: It's not the Dept. of Health and Human Services.

  • John||

    Of course it is. If your concern was hunger and malnutrition, food is so cheap today that for probably less than a billion dollars a year, the government could just give away a adequate diet in the form of staples just bagged up and left out for anyone to take. It wouldn't be a great diet and you would have to get off your lazy ass and cook it but it would be a healthy one and one that kept you from starving and got your kids to grow up healthy.

  • Killaz||

    Grab the EBT card and ask, 'are you scamming the American public, or do you truly need this? It is my right to know.'

  • John C. Randolph||

    Punching him isn't necessary. Yelling "get a job, you hipster douche" would be quite sufficient.

    -jcr

  • ||

    If I walked into a party and saw THAT dude sitting with that stupid, smug smirk, I'd have two options. Walk out and tell the hosts to go fuck themselves or go Godfather on Johnny Fontaine and slap the shit out of him in front of everyone with no explanation. Or maybe both.

    Part of wanting to be cool is to pretend to be miserable.

  • John||

    Like I said above, I cannot imagine what would possess someone to think being like that is a good idea.

  • Killaz||

    I get all my ideas of cool from Asian mobster movies.

  • db||

    "I'm Covered."

    ...In smarm.

  • ||

    'I'm covered and you're paying for it. Suck that.'

    ...In smarm.

  • Acosmist||

    "the ones that reek of conservative insecurity about sexual identity strike me as their own form of unfortunate expression"

    The thing about your dime-store psychologizing is that, you know, that could also be turned against you. I hear people who criticize conservatives for criticizing gays are covering up their own homosexuality. Where did I get that? Made it up. See how that works?

  • woodsy||

    "I hear people who criticize conservatives for criticizing gays are covering up their own homosexuality. Where did I get that? Made it up."

    Actually, this is more prevalent than you claim or care to admit. There are plenty of folks who vocalize their sentiments against others who criticize homosexuality but then feel compelled to mention that they're "straight" because they're insecure. Or even because they're slightly homophobic themselves.

    See how that works?

  • ||

    In real life, I'm a remarkably tolerant and accepting person. But...why? Why would a man do...that...to himself?

  • John||

    That is exactly my thought Warty. I get it that everyone is different and people naturally seek out an identity and to fit in with some group. But good God why that? If you put a gun to my head and said I must change the way I look, dress and act, I would go full on tranny or cover myself in tattoos and look like a the worst hells angels reject before I would be that guy.

  • Lord Humungus||

    In real life, I'm a remarkably tolerant and accepting person

    it's a trap!

  • ||

    Wasn't it Oscar Wilde who said something to the effect, "It's better to work than be interesting."

    Wise words for the inexperienced hipsters lecturing us more seasoned folks at a party.

  • CE||

    A cocktail party? I thought so.

  • Finchster||

    Obamacare Guy v Leonard Hofstadter

    I'll take Leonard. He's banging Penny. (Sorry for my "conservative insecurity about sexual identity.)

  • John||

    I think banging Penny is a pretty big plus.

  • Loki||

    Considering the only chick Obamacare guy could ever hope to land is maybe some Lena Dunham look-a-like, I'd put my money on Leonard too. Banging Penny is instant cred.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    A group of drag queens in Louisiana has decided to use their cross-dressing talents to help promote Obamacare. Wednesday Night Tea — “a unique, interactive drag queen show held every Wednesday at Central Station in Shreveport, Louisiana” — has partnered up with the non-profit Out2Enroll to help market Obamacare to the LGBT community

    http://www.nationalreview.com/.....lec-torres

  • ||

    This guy has no idea what's coming to him on his Christmas Break.
    He's going to go home all smug and self-righteous with his OFA talking points in hand, ready to preach to the unwashed masses about the virtues of ObamaCare. Ready to explain how everything bad about it is just a bunch of Republican lies, and all those cancelled plans were substandard.

    And he's going to have his ass handed to him when his relatives tear him a new asshole.

    If this is the BEFORE photo, I want to see the AFTER photo.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Can you imagine the conversation this model's going to have with his agent when he realizes that he will be forever typecast by this?

    -jcr

  • Loki||

    Congratulations, OFA, you've somehow found the dude with the most punchable face EVAH! Truly a feat worthy of a slow clap.

  • ||

    The Wiserhood is epic.

  • Knutsack||

    Is it me, or is that the same Obama face from the famous cell phone photo?

  • Zeb||

    Boy, an awful lot of ridiculous speculation about the guy in the picture. Seems most likely to me that he is just a model doing a job, trying to make some money.

  • ||

    He is. It's what he is being asked to represent that we are judging.

    I don't know a thing about the guy, but the person he is asked to be for this picture is an open book.

  • ||

    It's been minutes since I gazed on this picture and I still haven't stopped laughing.

    How many desks did this cross? How many signatures and stamps did this get? How many sets of eyes at HHS and the WH looked at this like we just have before someone clicked 'submit'?

    This is like the water boy with downs finally suiting up for a varsity basketball game and drop kicking the ball into the net. The miracle of it actually happening is the funniest part.

  • Killaz||

    Nick gets its pretty bang on. The administration would very much rather like to spark a little cultural war debate than to discuss their destruction of an industry millions of people rely on. There odds of political success are greater and that should give pause. Their odds of political success are greater even when their first salvo is a man-child hipster douche than it is to fix this thing.

  • ||

    The administration would very much rather like to spark a little cultural war debate

    Hipsters are a culture now?

  • ||

    And even if they are do you honestly think their half-life will last to the end of the decade?

  • lulu||

    lord can we woosify the country anymore...then again we do have such a girlie man in The White House, to his ilk this is a modern male

  • ||

    What if the caption was "I'm glad I own a gun so I can defend myself when random people want to punch me in the face?

  • Bruce Majors Libertarian4Mayor||

    Pajama boy is rather obviously gay as was the man child in Obama's earlier ad who came home for the holidays to talk to his parents about something important. Any gay person would pick him out as gay, as I did. Obama is attempting to rally micro segments of his base, if he can find any who are not ashamed of him, in this case nerdy lesbians like Chris Hayes, Igor Volsky and the Madcow. And Slate's in house gay lick spittle, publishing distractions claiming Obama opponents are homophobes for identifying the hipster fag as gay, even as Obamacare raises the prices of AIDS drugs, just proves hos gonna ho ho ho.

    This makes me wonder what Joan Walsh's working girls are posting at Stalon.

  • Carolannes||

    Good points! And like it or hate it...the ad does seem to focus on Obama's ideal audience, based on an analysis of his most engaged followers on Twitter. More here: http://bit.ly/1bTfHv9

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement