Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Mira

(22,542 posts)
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:20 PM Oct 2013

This line-up of future Presidents would make some heads explode. All over the place.

It makes me smile to see this bumper sticker. I just might have to make some of those (I can, you know

103 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This line-up of future Presidents would make some heads explode. All over the place. (Original Post) Mira Oct 2013 OP
I like that gopiscrap Oct 2013 #1
The summersaults among the Founders graves are now epic nadinbrzezinski Oct 2013 #2
How silly DavidDvorkin Oct 2013 #3
It's meant, in my opinion Mira Oct 2013 #11
because we are a monarchy now roguevalley Oct 2013 #54
I think we elect on merit, rather than deny due to genetics. LanternWaste Oct 2013 #96
small minded. stupid. Really? Thanks loads. roguevalley Oct 2013 #101
k+r for the heads exploding entertainment value. ..nt TeeYiYi Oct 2013 #4
My Head Sure Did Explode left on green only Oct 2013 #8
Really? Interesting. ..nt TeeYiYi Oct 2013 #9
Nah - only one "L" in michele bachmann. calimary Oct 2013 #90
Hi, graham4whatever!! madinmaryland Oct 2013 #5
That fucking fool was the first thing I thought of. LuvNewcastle Oct 2013 #75
***snort*** progressoid Oct 2013 #77
Including liberal democrats. earthside Oct 2013 #6
Aristocracy is back baby! lancer78 Oct 2013 #37
The antebellum south was an aristocracy, and that is what their current leaders are supporting with alfredo Oct 2013 #89
Cute :) But it's more likely some of the folks listed below will be running in some of those years Tx4obama Oct 2013 #7
Yes, cute, and yes to the lineup and Mira Oct 2013 #13
Gillebrand has some nice points socially, but she's a blue dog. DireStrike Oct 2013 #16
Actually, as a member of the tomg Oct 2013 #40
Gillebrand may be a Bluedog but that doesn't necessarily totodeinhere Oct 2013 #42
same here... chillfactor Oct 2013 #35
So you want to amend the constitution and bring in hereditary monarchy? Spider Jerusalem Oct 2013 #10
No, I just wanted you to turn in today Mira Oct 2013 #14
Would that be under or above the amendment that denies candidacy solely due to genetics...? LanternWaste Oct 2013 #98
I'm laughing at you. truebluegreen Oct 2013 #12
Say Hi to G4A. Talking about nutcases... idwiyo Oct 2013 #15
No kidding.. shades of socks, perhaps? n/t X_Digger Oct 2013 #18
I don't know, Third-Way Royal Loyalist idwiyo would aprove and even be inspired to RETURN the Royals Dragonfli Oct 2013 #20
Yes! Modern Monarchies are to die for, fuck Democracy, I long for the pre revolution days myself. Dragonfli Oct 2013 #17
All it does is tell me that somewhere, there's a bumpersticker-maker making a living winter is coming Oct 2013 #19
You certainly got the humor-free brigade up in arms. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #21
+:) lunasun Oct 2013 #28
No kidding. Jaysus people!!! Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #34
What Mira inadvertently did with this OP is to attract DU's most unreasonable and stevenleser Oct 2013 #68
Just saw this, and am laughing almost uncontrallably with you Mira Oct 2013 #82
It's funny and so sad at the same time. stevenleser Oct 2013 #83
agreed..some people have no sense of humor...... chillfactor Oct 2013 #36
don't take much! BootinUp Oct 2013 #43
you said it. Notafraidtoo Oct 2013 #51
+1 JoePhilly Oct 2013 #65
light-hardhearted humor can be sooo difficult for the more-cynical-than-thou crowd to see as anythin LanternWaste Oct 2013 #99
Elizabeth Warren? alfredo Oct 2013 #22
Yes, please. Can we draft her? TDale313 Oct 2013 #33
She has to be willing to do the job. alfredo Oct 2013 #38
Hard to argue w/ that one MissMillie Oct 2013 #84
I bet she stays in Congress. It's a good gig. alfredo Oct 2013 #88
By 2048 pscot Oct 2013 #23
will we exist as a sovereign country by then? awoke_in_2003 Oct 2013 #39
No. I hate the idea of political dynasties and royal families. tblue37 Oct 2013 #24
Excellent post tblue (and question for all) Shemp Howard Oct 2013 #52
American Idol! Wilms Oct 2013 #25
Looks like the royal family. No thanks. JDPriestly Oct 2013 #26
Not gonna happen Brother Buzz Oct 2013 #27
Post removed Post removed Oct 2013 #29
Enjoy your very short stay. nt BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #30
I think you may have missed the joke. greyl Oct 2013 #46
Yeah, I had thought it was a joke too. A way to get Obama a third term to upset the GOPers :) Tx4obama Oct 2013 #55
I love the all female lineup. How about some Latinas in the mix too? DevonRex Oct 2013 #31
Below is a list of current 27 members of the Hispanic Congressional Caucus Tx4obama Oct 2013 #44
Filemon Vela, born in my hometown... DevonRex Oct 2013 #47
Vela's wiki pages says... Tx4obama Oct 2013 #48
Oh my. Did she do that to get the appointment? DevonRex Oct 2013 #50
OK, Michelle Lujan Grisham. DevonRex Oct 2013 #49
How about some non-dynasty females? redgreenandblue Oct 2013 #56
Sure. And let's be honest, no indication any Obama women want to run for anything. DevonRex Oct 2013 #102
I'm going to keep this on hand until the next time someone whines about "dynasties" BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #32
logo Coyotl Oct 2013 #41
A counter example. longship Oct 2013 #45
It was about WOMEN - not about lineage - and a pretty good joke. Mira Oct 2013 #59
No it was not about women... Demo_Chris Oct 2013 #61
No, it's not. It's not about how you see it and you are not the target. stevenleser Oct 2013 #70
You are claiming it was simply a coincidence that they ignored every non-dynastic female... Demo_Chris Oct 2013 #85
LMAO, please, you have me in tears. Let me put it to you this way stevenleser Oct 2013 #87
Of COURSE it's just a joke Steve... Demo_Chris Oct 2013 #91
Okay. longship Oct 2013 #62
No, thats the entire point. These people will never be President. It's a joke. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #71
Ya think? lol Demo_Chris Oct 2013 #86
Neither passed on by blood, not (and here's the tricky part for the pea-brains) denied by blood. LanternWaste Oct 2013 #100
Nobody thinks this is funny?!?! bravenak Oct 2013 #53
I think it's hilarious. And the reaction by some makes it more so stevenleser Oct 2013 #57
Can't have fun around here anymore. So series! bravenak Oct 2013 #58
But it lists the whole Clinton and Obama families who have not yet been president muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #60
Because everyone knows who they are, particularly those at whom this humor is aimed stevenleser Oct 2013 #63
Aren't you making the point? It's about "The Obama and Clinton families", not women muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #66
No, it's not about you or how you see it. It's not aimed at you. stevenleser Oct 2013 #67
I'll repeat the title of the post, since you didn't address it: muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #69
LOL, you are overanalyzing a joke that you don't get and is not aimed at you. stevenleser Oct 2013 #72
Pointing out how you disproved your own point is 'overanalyzing'? muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #74
LMAO, you're still doing it! stevenleser Oct 2013 #76
In at least two ways. Orsino Oct 2013 #93
Now that's just stupid Capt. Obvious Oct 2013 #64
Good thinking and, Hey, there are Tricia and Julie Nixon - still alive and kicking. Mira Oct 2013 #73
Not your fault. The folks who didn't get this should apply to be on that game show where comedians stevenleser Oct 2013 #79
All but the obvious one..highly unlikely SoCalDem Oct 2013 #78
For those who responded to this OP with anything other than laughter... stevenleser Oct 2013 #80
K&R n/t Dalai_1 Oct 2013 #81
Feudalism. Rule by heredity. No thanks. nt Zorra Oct 2013 #92
Shouldn't there be a Kennedy or three in there? Retrograde Oct 2013 #94
Some people have never gotten over that love for Royal Dynasties. bvar22 Oct 2013 #95
let's keep this kicked until 2016! bwahahahhaha! Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #97
K & R Scurrilous Oct 2013 #103

DavidDvorkin

(20,218 posts)
3. How silly
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:26 PM
Oct 2013

Hillary is looking more and more like a candidate, but what makes the others likely candidates?

Mira

(22,542 posts)
11. It's meant, in my opinion
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:53 PM
Oct 2013

more as a hopeful blueprint of more women being aspirants, and maybe winners.
I hope I live long enough to see what we women could do at the helm.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
96. I think we elect on merit, rather than deny due to genetics.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 06:20 PM
Oct 2013

I think we elect on merit, rather than deny due to genetics. However, I do understand how the small-minded may believe that denying a candidate due to genetics, marriage, or heritage is in fact, a democracy...

The stupid is dead... long live the stupid.

left on green only

(1,484 posts)
8. My Head Sure Did Explode
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:39 PM
Oct 2013

The first time I read it all I could think of for Michelle was Michelle Bachman

earthside

(6,960 posts)
6. Including liberal democrats.
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:27 PM
Oct 2013

The presidency isn't a family institution ... we rejected aristocracy 237 years ago.

(That's small 'd' democrats as in believers of the sovereignty of the people.)

 

lancer78

(1,495 posts)
37. Aristocracy is back baby!
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:05 AM
Oct 2013

Citizens United has allowed a de facto "Nobility" to arise in America. It took 232 years but the aristocrats have won the American revolution. Fat Tony and the Rapist, as well as the other conservative Justices, are the destroyers of America.

alfredo

(60,190 posts)
89. The antebellum south was an aristocracy, and that is what their current leaders are supporting with
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:33 PM
Oct 2013

Citizens United, estate tax Repeal, and trickle down.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
7. Cute :) But it's more likely some of the folks listed below will be running in some of those years
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:32 PM
Oct 2013

The new upcoming generation

Wendy Davis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Davis_%28politician%29

Kirsten Gillibrand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsten_Gillibrand

Alison Lundergan Grimes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alison_Lundergan_Grimes

Cory Booker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Booker

Julian Castro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Castro

Joaquin Castro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaqu%C3%ADn_Castro


I wish I was 30 years younger so that I would be able to see 'more' of what happens in the distant future

Mira

(22,542 posts)
13. Yes, cute, and yes to the lineup and
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 10:55 PM
Oct 2013

yes to wishing I were younger for that reason and a few additional ones.

DireStrike

(6,452 posts)
16. Gillebrand has some nice points socially, but she's a blue dog.
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:04 PM
Oct 2013

Booker is pretty centrist, isn't he? Grimes would have to beat turtleface first. Dunno about the rest.

tomg

(2,574 posts)
40. Actually, as a member of the
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:20 AM
Oct 2013

House she was a blue dog ( and it was one of the reasons I was strongly opposed to her initial appointment). I have to admit, I have been very pleasantly surprised by her actions in the senate, and, I believe, she is most closely allied with the Progressive Caucus.

totodeinhere

(13,626 posts)
42. Gillebrand may be a Bluedog but that doesn't necessarily
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:30 AM
Oct 2013

disqualify her from becoming president. The same applies to Booker. It might be wishful thinking to assume that only progressives will become future presidents.

chillfactor

(7,694 posts)
35. same here...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:02 AM
Oct 2013

I am much too old to be around when all of the excitement breaks out..unless I live to be 100....

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
98. Would that be under or above the amendment that denies candidacy solely due to genetics...?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 06:23 PM
Oct 2013

Would that be under or above the amendment that denies candidacy solely due to genetics...?


Six of one, half a dozen of the other (insert distinction without a difference here)

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
20. I don't know, Third-Way Royal Loyalist idwiyo would aprove and even be inspired to RETURN the Royals
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:13 PM
Oct 2013

to a governing throne across the pond in Great Britain.

I can see you are not nearly as serious and pragmatic as she is.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
17. Yes! Modern Monarchies are to die for, fuck Democracy, I long for the pre revolution days myself.
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:08 PM
Oct 2013

It wouldn't even be a sense of royal entitlement if the families were truly entitled to rule by birth either, simply superior noble blood being allowed it's proper place by birth rite.

I swoon to think of the lavish crowns and jewelry; the pomp and beauty of royal weddings that would make the British figuerheads look like trailer park peasants in comparison!

Well done, something, finally, worth fighting for.

winter is coming

(11,785 posts)
19. All it does is tell me that somewhere, there's a bumpersticker-maker making a living
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:11 PM
Oct 2013

off of someone else's fantasy life.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
68. What Mira inadvertently did with this OP is to attract DU's most unreasonable and
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:04 AM
Oct 2013

humor-less people to expose themselves as such.

It's fascinating really. Michelle, Sasha, Malia and Chelsea are never going to run for President. It's a joke, a joke aimed at pissing off misogynistic right wingers who might read it.

It's not a call for these folks to actually be President, or some advocacy for dynasties or other such nonsense.

Mira

(22,542 posts)
82. Just saw this, and am laughing almost uncontrallably with you
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:55 AM
Oct 2013

and I thank you for speaking for me so eloquently.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
83. It's funny and so sad at the same time.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:13 PM
Oct 2013

Some people take themselves so seriously they cannot get over themselves.

I know what happened here. A lot of the folks who don't like Hillary have latched on to the whole "Dynasties are bad for Democracy" meme as part of what they intend to use in their arsenal of arguments against her and so they are thinking that way already whenever they see Hillary's name.

Then the bumper sticker listed the other folks, which to most normal people really makes it an obvious joke, but these folks are so anti-Hillary they can't get their minds into joke mode after seeing her name. It's like waving a red cape in front of a bull and then expecting that bull to behave rationally right afterwards. It's not going to happen, the bull is just going to try to lash out.

That's what we have here. These folks who lashed out against you and your OP lost it for a silly bumper sticker whose intent flew a billion miles over their heads because of their single-minded anti-Hillary agenda.

chillfactor

(7,694 posts)
36. agreed..some people have no sense of humor......
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:04 AM
Oct 2013

sheesh..it is just a silly bumper sticker for god's sake!

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
99. light-hardhearted humor can be sooo difficult for the more-cynical-than-thou crowd to see as anythin
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 06:25 PM
Oct 2013

Kinda what I was thinking.

However, it *is* Monday... and light-hardhearted humor can be sooo difficult for the more-cynical-than-thou crowd to see as anything *but* a monarchy.

tblue37

(66,644 posts)
24. No. I hate the idea of political dynasties and royal families.
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:31 PM
Oct 2013

Just because someone is rich and famous or has a connection to someone who held high office, that does not make them a suitable president--or anything else. Each person should have to earn the position himself or herself.

I also hate the idea of one Bush after another taking such positions.

Shemp Howard

(889 posts)
52. Excellent post tblue (and question for all)
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 01:22 AM
Oct 2013

Here's my question for all: Would Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama make a good President?

If you answered "yes" for either person, then you are seriously part of the problem with this country. For you really have no idea what either one of them stands for. Yet you are willing to cast a vote based on their names alone.

The only proper answer to my question is: "Maybe. It depends on what their positions on the major issues are."

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
26. Looks like the royal family. No thanks.
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:35 PM
Oct 2013

That is one of the reasons that I oppose nominating Hillary for 2016.

We had enough of a dynasty with Bush II. Never, never, never again.

We need to move forward, not try to relive the past. That is what a Hillary presidency would mean. I know a lot of us liked Bill Clinton when he was president, but we need someone for our time, not a Clinton wife. No to dynasties.

That's Roman Empireish. No thanks.

Brother Buzz

(38,706 posts)
27. Not gonna happen
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:36 PM
Oct 2013

Chelsea Clinton would never relinquish her Chief Justice seat on the Supreme Court.

Response to Mira (Original post)

greyl

(23,005 posts)
46. I think you may have missed the joke.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:59 AM
Oct 2013

This thread is about making right-wing heads explode, correct?

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
55. Yeah, I had thought it was a joke too. A way to get Obama a third term to upset the GOPers :)
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 02:59 AM
Oct 2013

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
44. Below is a list of current 27 members of the Hispanic Congressional Caucus
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:41 AM
Oct 2013


Looks like SEVEN females (?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Hispanic_Caucus#Membership

Membership
Officers

Chair: Rubén Hinojosa (TX-15) (D)
1st Vice Chair Ben Ray Luján (NM-3) (D)
2nd Vice Chair Linda Sanchez (CA-38) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_S%C3%A1nchez
Whip Michelle Luján Grisham (NM-1) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Luj%C3%A1n_Grisham

Other Membership
Current

Xavier Becerra (CA-31) (D)
Tony Cardenas (CA-29) (D)
Joaquin Castro (TX-20) (D)
Jim Costa (CA-20) (D)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28) (D)
Pete Gallego (TX-23) (D)
Joe Garcia (FL-26) (D)
Raúl Grijalva (AZ-07) (D)
Luis V. Gutierrez (IL-04) (D)
Senator Bob Menéndez (NJ-D)
Grace Napolitano (CA-38) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Napolitano
Gloria Negrete McLeod (CA-35) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Negrete_McLeod
Ed Pastor (AZ-04) (D)
Pedro Pierluisi (PR-At large) (D)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucille_Roybal-Allard
Raul Ruiz (CA-36) (D)
Gregorio Sablan (MP-At large) (D)
Loretta Sánchez (CA-46) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loretta_Sanchez
José Serrano (NY-16) (D)
Albio Sires (NJ-13) (D)
Nydia Velázquez (NY-12) (D) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nydia_Vel%C3%A1zquez
Juan Vargas (CA-51) (D)
Filemon Vela, Jr. (TX-34) (D)

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
47. Filemon Vela, born in my hometown...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 01:03 AM
Oct 2013

Harlingen, TX. Now lives in Brownsville. Looks pretty good. Of course I'm impartial to The Valley. Solid Democrats there. I'd love to go back someday. Can you guys wrest the state away from the nuts?

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
48. Vela's wiki pages says...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 01:08 AM
Oct 2013

-snip-

For the past 22 years, Filemon has been married to his lovely and accomplished wife, Judge Rose Vela.[11] Rose was a Republican justice on Texas’ 13th Court of Appeals from 2007 to 2012.

-snip-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filemon_Vela,_Jr.



I would love to hear the political discussions that take place at the dinner table in that house

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
50. Oh my. Did she do that to get the appointment?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 01:11 AM
Oct 2013

Or did he run as a Democrat because only Democrats get elected in The Valley?

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
49. OK, Michelle Lujan Grisham.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 01:09 AM
Oct 2013

She'll pull in a lot of votes from TX, AZ, CO, NM, UT and CA. We know her name already. That's a plus!

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
102. Sure. And let's be honest, no indication any Obama women want to run for anything.
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 01:47 AM
Oct 2013

So no dynasty there. And Chelsea doesn't seem inclined either. It's all for fun.

 
32. I'm going to keep this on hand until the next time someone whines about "dynasties"
Sun Oct 27, 2013, 11:50 PM
Oct 2013

Just to give them further palpitations.

longship

(40,416 posts)
45. A counter example.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:48 AM
Oct 2013

So! The US Presidency is passed on by blood. I am not dumb. I really thought the USA resolved this on July 4, 1776.

Enough of this rubbish!

If that's what people want, so be it. Try this on for size:

2016: Bush
2020: Bush
2024: Bush
2028: Bush
2032: Bush
2036: Bush
... Etc.

After all, if your parent or your spouse was a president, you've earned the right to that office.

What the OP suggests is counter to democratic principles on which our country was founded.

Mira

(22,542 posts)
59. It was about WOMEN - not about lineage - and a pretty good joke.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:30 AM
Oct 2013

It was to get you to laugh while some seeds of thought get sown.

One thing I notice about the Republicans I am in contact with is their inability to recognize beauty in things and their inability to enjoy clever humor. Let's not become like them.

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
61. No it was not about women...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:54 AM
Oct 2013

It was about political dynasties. I think we need a whole lot less cult of personality, and a whole lot more government of, by, and FOR the people.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
70. No, it's not. It's not about how you see it and you are not the target.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:07 AM
Oct 2013

The target is misogynistic right wingers who will recognize all of these people as not only Liberals/Democrats (or family members of Liberals/Democrats) who they hate but female Liberals/Democrats.

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
85. You are claiming it was simply a coincidence that they ignored every non-dynastic female...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:20 PM
Oct 2013

To focus on these select individuals and at these select dates. They ignored QUALIFIED females in order to showcase women -- or, in this case pre-teens, who's only qualification is their right of birth, suggesting that that's how women earn it.

That's sexist as hell.

But, of course, the sticker isn't intended to be sexist -- that part is unintentional. Rather, it's a joke intended to troll people. But it's insulting to women in general and to liberalism as a movement. Liberals don't select people because their daddy's were famous and had a cool cult of personality thing going for them, we select our candidates because they were the best for the job.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
87. LMAO, please, you have me in tears. Let me put it to you this way
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:29 PM
Oct 2013
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3936636

What is a more likely possibility to you. That the bumper sticker is a simplistic joke aimed at your average right winger who might see it on the roadway, or that it is a complex conspiracy aimed at overturning the democratic order of the country and replacing it with a hereditary monarchy from the Clinton and Obama families to include two adults who show little desire to run for political office and two children.

I suggest you think that over.

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
91. Of COURSE it's just a joke Steve...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:38 PM
Oct 2013

That's all that ever needed to be said. I only responded to the people suddenly claiming that it was somehow more than that, that it was a message of women's empowerment of some such nonsense. Well, two can play the spin game.

On a more serious note, I don't think jokes or messages like this help us though. Not a big deal obviously, but we should try not to even give the appearance of choosing style and connections over substance. Leave the dynasty garbage to the GOP and elect the best we can from our more than capable pool of candidates. Hillary, whether you support her or not, is objectively qualified -- the only thing missing from her resume is a governorship, and I think she has that covered as first lady of a state, a nation, Senator, and Sec State.

Which is not to say she deserves our automatic support -- she's too corporatist for my taste -- but there is no doubt she's qualified. She might be the MOST qualified candidate in a long time.

longship

(40,416 posts)
62. Okay.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:55 AM
Oct 2013

But none of the women were anything but spouses or children of a male president. So maybe it undermines the point.

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
86. Ya think? lol
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:23 PM
Oct 2013

Apparently "My daddy was President" is a statement of female independence and empowerment. Or so we are now being asked to believe.

The best and only defense of this is to say, "Lighten up, it's just a joke."

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
100. Neither passed on by blood, not (and here's the tricky part for the pea-brains) denied by blood.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 06:27 PM
Oct 2013

Neither passed on by blood, not (and here's the tricky part for the pea-brains) denied by blood.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
53. Nobody thinks this is funny?!?!
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 02:03 AM
Oct 2013

Really?
This would make the right gnash their teeth and wail like banshees.
Talk about your negative Nancys.
This is funny!! And cute!!

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
57. I think it's hilarious. And the reaction by some makes it more so
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 07:47 AM
Oct 2013

No one actually expect to nominate all of these people. It's an obvious joke meant to get a rise out of misogynistic right wingers.

The fact that some here felt the need to get upset about it and respond as if it's real says a lot about those who got upset.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
58. Can't have fun around here anymore. So series!
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 07:55 AM
Oct 2013

Some people refuse to have a good time. I'm disappointed, not that it matters.

Now that I know it causes such a reaction on the left, I can only imagine how the right might react.
I live in a red state so, I'm getting one. I'll get 50. I'm giggling imagining the pinched hard faces of my tea party neighbors. They used to peel off my African Americans for Obama sticker once a week.
I'm going to sneak some of these on their bumpers over the Palin stickers. I hope they don't notice.

muriel_volestrangler

(103,951 posts)
60. But it lists the whole Clinton and Obama families who have not yet been president
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:43 AM
Oct 2013

and doesn't list a single woman outside those 2 families. It only lists one politician. The obvious link is "member of the 2 families", not "female Democrat". If there had been one politician other than Hillary - Elizabeth Warren, or Wendy Davis, say - it would indeed be 'obvious' that it's about misogyny. But without that, it does look more like a wish for dynasties.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
63. Because everyone knows who they are, particularly those at whom this humor is aimed
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:55 AM
Oct 2013

specifically, misogynistic right wingers. They do not know who Barbara Lee is, for instance. They may not even know who Debbie Wasserman Schultz is.

But the object of their hatred? The Obama and Clinton families? Oh they know who THEY are.

muriel_volestrangler

(103,951 posts)
66. Aren't you making the point? It's about "The Obama and Clinton families", not women
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:58 AM
Oct 2013

You could put Nancy Pelosi in, if you want a woman those kind of people hate, but outside the families.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
67. No, it's not about you or how you see it. It's not aimed at you.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:00 AM
Oct 2013

You are not going to get it until you put yourself in the shoes of those at whom it is aimed.

muriel_volestrangler

(103,951 posts)
69. I'll repeat the title of the post, since you didn't address it:
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:06 AM
Oct 2013

Aren't you making the point? It's about "The Obama and Clinton families", not women

I also added that Nancy Pelosi could have been put in, as a woman that would be better known to (and hated by) misogynistic RWers than the Obama daughters, if this was about misogyny. But since you see it as "the Obama and Clinton families", I think you have successfully put how those it's aimed at see it - a hatred of anyone called Obama or Clinton, not of women.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
72. LOL, you are overanalyzing a joke that you don't get and is not aimed at you.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:10 AM
Oct 2013

Address the title. We might as well address Rodney Dangerfield's signature "I tell ya I don't get no respect"

In some cultures, I am guessing that is a faux pas and possibly offensive. It's not aimed at them.

muriel_volestrangler

(103,951 posts)
74. Pointing out how you disproved your own point is 'overanalyzing'?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:17 AM
Oct 2013

Let us know when you want us to stop thinking, or talking to you, the next time. I suspect it will be right after you've made a point you'd rather wasn't examined at all.

Orsino

(37,428 posts)
93. In at least two ways.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 02:21 PM
Oct 2013

One of which is DU's royalist tendency, which could use a good ribbing like this.

Mira

(22,542 posts)
73. Good thinking and, Hey, there are Tricia and Julie Nixon - still alive and kicking.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:12 AM
Oct 2013

Maybe in their late 50s or so. Too late I bet for Jennie Eisenhower.

(just between us, I'm sorry I posted this thing. It deserved a good laugh, and after that a continuation of whatever hopefully worthwhile thing the reader was doing - GEEZ)

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
79. Not your fault. The folks who didn't get this should apply to be on that game show where comedians
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:28 AM
Oct 2013

try to get you to laugh and when you don't, you get money and other prizes because they are absolutely humor-less, stick in the muds.

One of them is still trying to get me to analyze and re-analyze the bumper sticker!



SoCalDem

(103,856 posts)
78. All but the obvious one..highly unlikely
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:24 AM
Oct 2013

I like my presidents one at a time.. And since we are not a monarchy, we need to stop the speculation that leadership is genetic..

The Bushes showed us that

I'd love to see Hillary being a doting Grandma, while she serves on various boards & gives speeches & writes books.

It's time for a young generation who were reared with high tech, to take over.. The future is theirs..

Retrograde

(11,157 posts)
94. Shouldn't there be a Kennedy or three in there?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 05:28 PM
Oct 2013

If we're going to go for dynasties, let's go all the way

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
95. Some people have never gotten over that love for Royal Dynasties.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 05:36 PM
Oct 2013

They called them "Royalists" and "Tories" back in 1776.

 

Pretzel_Warrior

(8,361 posts)
97. let's keep this kicked until 2016! bwahahahhaha!
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 06:23 PM
Oct 2013

And Chelsea, hurry up and have an heir--I mean a baby.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This line-up of future Pr...