Commentary: Outrage an Outrage

By Senator Trent Lott, special to OMGTN

By now, most of you have probably heard of the forthcoming movie Outrage. As such, most of you probably know that the premise of the movie is naming names of Republican politicians who have had homosexual experiences by interviewing their partners.

Needless to say, the filmmakers' underhanded tactics are a travesty, and a sham, and a mockery of justice and the American way. Now I'm not saying that I condone homosexuality- Jesus' autobiography clearly stated that marriage consists of a man, a woman, and the missionary position-, but what has the world come to when rich, white men can't have unseemly, private habits that contravene the ideological foundations of their careers?

Admit it: America would not function if white politicians had to confront their secret habits. If the public knew about Thomas Jefferson's affair with Sally Hemmings, he would never have made the Louisiana Purchase. If the people would have learned the truth about JFK and Marilyn Monroe- (amongst others), he would never have been the transformative figure that he became in society. And if society was brought up to speed on Barack Obama's obsession with barely-legal pornography that can't be sent through the mail- well, let's just say the economy wouldn't be the thing needing a bailout.

What I'm getting at here is that the world would be much better off if it stopped asking questions about politicians' private lives. Sure, the Patriot Act gives the government unfettered access to every citizen's private life, but speaking as someone who has access to that privileged information, I can tell you that most citizens' lives are extremely mundane. The money, power, and social connections available to politicians put them in a position of unique opportunity that should excuse them from the lowest level of public scrutiny.

If we allow filmmakers to start poking around and asking questions about male politicians discreetly getting pegged from time to time, where does the inquisition stop? Many prominent conservative theorists have analyzed the issue of slipping social values during the recent same-sex marriage debates, and have definitively concluded that once the taboo surrounding homosexuality falls, bestiality is next. So when you go to see this film, remember that every dollar you spend to see Outrage is a dollar spent toward researching photos of politicians having sex with pigs- a fate which could doom the American democracy.

In actuality, bestiality is not any worse than any other form of sexuality. Even though it is a social taboo, bestiality is only a few small steps from the affection an owner feels for his dog when scratching behind his ears. And any pet owner can tell you that he can perceive his pet's emotions- a whimper for hunger, and a wagging tail for happiness. So don't tell me a dog can't consent. You and I both know that a dog is a man's best friend, and in some cases, more than his friend. Even though no means no, a wagging tail definitely means yes.

[RIGHT- Senator Lott's newest staff member, Daisy]

Issues of consent become even murkier when one considers the totality of the circumstances. In the abstract, one must examine the social and psychological factors involved in someone's development before casting aspersions about his morality. More practically, nobody forced that dog to lick peanut butter off of my- excuse me, someone's- ball sack.

Finally, consider the hypocrisy of living in a world that raises animals for the sole purpose of killing them for food, but does not allow the same people who will eat those animals to enjoy their company while they are alive. Why is it acceptable to be a pig eater, but reprehensible to be a pig fucker? (Note that this comparison does not apply in Islamic or Jewish parts of the world.)

In fact, the thought of easy access to dead animals has given me an idea. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go visit my butcher.

Please turn off the camera.