First time for everything



  • Well, it appears the Americans have finally elected their first non-white president. Now taking bets on how long before they elect a non-christian.

    On a side note I would pay good money for a video of the faces of white supremacists when they anounced the election results. I would also pay good money for a video of the faces of christian fundamentalists when/if they elect a non-christian president.

    Yes, I have a mean streak... 



  • @DOA said:

    Now taking bets on how long before they elect a non-christian.
    My bet is on that coinciding with our first robot president.



  • I think it is a fundamental flaw of our nation that we even NOTICE that he is the first black President. I am no Republican, but I doubt if as big a deal would have been made if Sarah Palin was the first woman VP. Regardless, these things should not matter.

    I wasn't fond of either party's ticket and voted third-party myself. That being said, I do have hope that with a single party in control of both the White House and Congress, that some accomplishments might be made where party politics doesn't constantly interfere. Obama has the chance to make the same kind of impression on this country in a time of need as FDR did. We can judge his worthiness after the fact.

     That is all.

     



  • @jpaull said:

    ...

    That being said, I do have hope that with a single party in control of both the White House and Congress, that some accomplishments might be made where party politics doesn't constantly interfere. Obama has the chance to make the same kind of impression on this country in a time of need as FDR did. We can judge his worthiness after the fact.

     That is all.

     

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉

    Others would argue that the entire purpose of our governmental system is to be so bogged down that change can only occur very slowly, and that "getting things done" is anathema to the benefit of the country.

    Personally, all I want out of the government is to ensure that people are responsible for their own actions, reap the just rewards of their efforts, and they don't beat each other up or get beat up by other countries. I don't want the government to fix my problems, give me money, rescue me, or solve the problems of foreign countries (or make problems in foreign countries). The farthest I'll go is that the government should provide good incentive for people to better themselves.

    So while I like the things the new President-elect has said about education and foreign relations, I dislike the bits about healthcare (I actually don't agree that it's a fundamental right - TANSTAAFL and all that) and entitlements (I don't care about increased taxes for certain brackets, I just don't like that the proposal is to hand it out to others just because they don't have anything. Tax credits for certain behavior I don't mind so much though as I agree with incentives - basically, I'll reward you for certain actions, but I definitely will not reward you for inaction).

    What I really like about the election, though, is that more than the person elected, the people have given themselves hope, and that will do more than a single administration could do any term.



  • @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉
    Many grammar nazis would argue that this was the mostest worsterestest sentence ever, too.  But on the serious tip, FDR did a lot of things that weren't particularly good coughSocial Securitycough, but he's well remembered because he gave people hope.  The question is, how much more can a president really do than give people hope?



  • @bstorer said:

    @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉

     

    Ah geez, I can't even claim coffee deficiency on that one....maybe I'll do more better next time 😉

    (I deserve all the backlash I'll get on this too; it's hard to stay credible when you say you esteem grammatical diligence when you err and the edit timer expires before you catch it.)



  • @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉

    I see your point. However, note that I did not say that FDR was a "good" president, I simply said that he had made a distinct impression in a time of need. 🙂



  • @bstorer said:

    @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉
    Many grammar nazis would argue that this was the mostest worsterestest sentence ever, too.  But on the serious tip, FDR did a lot of things that weren't particularly good coughSocial Securitycough, but he's well remembered because he gave people hope.  The question is, how much more can a president really do than give people hope?

    How about not pushing the economy into a 13-year-long depression that left the country as crippled as his useless, withered legs?

     

    Oh, but he gave us hope, that's right.  So it's alright to devastate a country so long as you also let the citizens know that one day they will be free of your insane, tyrranical rule.  Good to know. 



  • @jpaull said:

    I think it is a fundamental flaw of our nation that we even NOTICE that he is the first black President.

    Damn straight.  I understand it is a big event, but come the fuck on.  This whole election was a depressing show of racism by our nation and media.  If race was not an issue, then he would have been judged as a candidate and not as "the black candidate".  Unfortunately, assholets on the Right and the Left continue to propagate racism and encourage and exploit racial divisions to gain power.

     

    @jpaull said:

    That being said, I do have hope that with a single party in control of both the White House and Congress, that some accomplishments might be made where party politics doesn't constantly interfere.

    That doesn't even make sense.  You don't like either party's ticket but it's better to have a single-party system instead of checks and balances?  This isn't the Soviet Union.  Well...  yet...

     

    @jpaull said:

    Obama has the chance to make the same kind of impression on this country in a time of need as FDR did.

    We're still quite damaged from the "impression" that dumbfuck left on us.  How about we try electing leaders who aren't terrible?  Just a thought... 



  • @DOA said:

    On a side note I would pay good money for a video of the faces of white supremacists when they anounced the election results.

    As would I for the black supremecists.  We've got to shine light on these fuckers and show how twisted they are.

     

    @DOA said:

    I would also pay good money for a video of the faces of christian fundamentalists when/if they elect a non-christian president.

    Yes, I have a mean streak...

    No, you're a religious screwball.  You're just as bad as any Bible-beating wackjob.  You're engaging in petty retribution against a religion you don't care for, which makes you a sad, pathetic little man.  Then again, that's not news.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    No, you're a religious screwball.  You're just as bad as any Bible-beating wackjob.  You're engaging in petty retribution against a religion you don't care for, which makes you a sad, pathetic little man.  Then again, that's not news.
    I'm engaging in petty retribution by imagining how somebody's face would look in an imaginary scenario where I couldn't possibly have the slightest involvement? What? Are you off your medication again?



  • @DOA said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    No, you're a religious screwball.  You're just as bad as any Bible-beating wackjob.  You're engaging in petty retribution against a religion you don't care for, which makes you a sad, pathetic little man.  Then again, that's not news.
    I'm engaging in petty retribution by imagining how somebody's face would look in an imaginary scenario where I couldn't possibly have the slightest involvement? What? Are you off your medication again?

    You even admitted you have a mean streak.  You just want to see Christians upset that someone they don't support will rule their lives.  Yes, that makes you an asshole. 



  • @too_many_usernames said:

    @bstorer said:

    @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉

     

    Ah geez, I can't even claim coffee deficiency on that one....maybe I'll do more better next time 😉

    (I deserve all the backlash I'll get on this too; it's hard to stay credible when you say you esteem grammatical diligence when you err and the edit timer expires before you catch it.)

     

    Aww, and so soon after trying to bash me for my gramatical mistakes? too_many_usernames meet kettle, kettle this asshat.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    You even admitted you have a mean streak.  You just want to see Christians upset that someone they don't support will rule their lives.  Yes, that makes you an asshole.
    Guess it takes one to know one.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

     You just want to see Christians upset that someone they don't support will rule their lives.  Yes, that makes you an asshole. 

    Christians seem very happy to direct their rule on the rest of the world.  I would love to see someone running a country point out that christians (or anyone else) do not deserve special support just because of their beliefs.  They are subject to the same world as the rest of us and what they believe is no more legitimate than what I believe, even if it contradicts their narrow world. 

     



  • @LoztInSpace said:

    I would love to see someone running a country point out that christians (or anyone else) do not deserve special support just because of their beliefs.
    That would be every first-world nation you're describing. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, but I do know you're making it poorly.



  • @LoztInSpace said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

     You just want to see Christians upset that someone they don't support will rule their lives.  Yes, that makes you an asshole. 

    Christians seem very happy to direct their rule on the rest of the world.  I would love to see someone running a country point out that christians (or anyone else) do not deserve special support just because of their beliefs.  They are subject to the same world as the rest of us and what they believe is no more legitimate than what I believe, even if it contradicts their narrow world. 

     

     

    what the fuck are you talking about?  Christians don't try and direct their rule on other people any more than everybody tried to direct their rule on other people.  Yes, some christians evangelize, but they haven't declared any holy wars in the last 700 or so years.   I also don't know of any christian country that has persecuted people that live their that aren't christians in modern history.  And if you are going to argue about imperialism of the Americas, that is a farce, because pretty much all of the violent conquerors were after gold, and used christianity as a thin veil to cover their actions.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @bstorer said:

    @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉
    Many grammar nazis would argue that this was the mostest worsterestest sentence ever, too.  But on the serious tip, FDR did a lot of things that weren't particularly good coughSocial Securitycough, but he's well remembered because he gave people hope.  The question is, how much more can a president really do than give people hope?

    How about not pushing the economy into a 13-year-long depression that left the country as crippled as his useless, withered legs?

     

    Oh, but he gave us hope, that's right.  So it's alright to devastate a country so long as you also let the citizens know that one day they will be free of your insane, tyrranical rule.  Good to know. 

    You've been listening to Biden too much.  FDR wasn't even in office when the economy went into the tank.



  • @bstorer said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    @bstorer said:

    @too_many_usernames said:

    Many historians would argue that FDR was the most worst president to ever serve this country though 😉
    Many grammar nazis would argue that this was the mostest worsterestest sentence ever, too.  But on the serious tip, FDR did a lot of things that weren't particularly good coughSocial Securitycough, but he's well remembered because he gave people hope.  The question is, how much more can a president really do than give people hope?

    How about not pushing the economy into a 13-year-long depression that left the country as crippled as his useless, withered legs?

     

    Oh, but he gave us hope, that's right.  So it's alright to devastate a country so long as you also let the citizens know that one day they will be free of your insane, tyrranical rule.  Good to know. 

    You've been listening to Biden too much.  FDR wasn't even in office when the economy went into the tank.

    Half credit.  The stock market crash happened under Hoover and he attempted to shore up the economy with bailouts, fiat currency and bank seizures.  All this led to further economic devastation.  Sound familiar?  However, when FDR took over he simply fucked the system to hell.  He destablized the banks, outlawed gold, fucked up the currency, established minimum wage laws that put millions out of work in months, established price controls that led to shortages, set up massive agricultural subsidies that used taxpayer money to destroy ungodly amounts of food while people were going hungry, set a 95% tax rate on the wealthiest people, launched a campaign of Communist anti-wealth class warfare that led a lot of wealthy people to hide their money and further limit available capital... I could go on and on. 



  • @tster said:

    Christians don't try and direct their rule on other people any more than everybody tried to direct their rule on other people.

    Agreed, for the most part.  I'm not fond of the social conservatism they preach, but Christians don't try to force their faith on people any more than the wacky Left.  Honestly, the Left is probably worse.

     

    @tster said:

    I also don't know of any christian country that has persecuted people that live their that aren't christians in modern history.

    The only example I can think of is some of the genocide that went on in the Balkans.  That place has been fucked up for so long, it's hard to keep track of who is murdering who.  There are probably another few examples, but American and European Christians have generally advanced along with Western Civilization.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.