OMG OBAMA

wait, did the USA just elect a black man as president?

  • Leave a comment ?

    67 Responses to OMG OBAMA

    1. Seems like. That isn’t what worries me. I’m concerned because the Senate, the House, and the Presidency are all Democratic.
      Doesn’t seem balanced, methinks.

      Reply

    2. wait, that guy is black? i thought that had nothing to do with it, since he’s half not-black anyway.

      Reply

    3. @jimmieq: is 100% balanced, lern to government.

      Reply

    4. It had nothing to do with him being black. It had all to do with him not being white.

      Reply

    5. i think a good bit of it had to do with the fact that he didn’t choose sarah palin as his running mate.

      Reply

    6. Just think, after 8 years of Obama, the US will be internationally respected again! OMG!

      Reply

    7. Nice! Made a decent wallpaper for gloating at work. :*

      Reply

    8. Please, obama will run one term, the economy will continue to APPROACH recession, the repubs will come back in 2012 and say “see he didn’t “Change” anything, see what mere “Hope” gets you” and repubs will be back in.

      Reply

    9. Election of a black president is a sign that this country is starting to progress socially. One taboo down… 1000 more to go.

      What’s left?

      – Pot is ok…

      – Calling someone an Atheist is not an insult…

      – Nipple is not evil…

      – Keep your god to yourself

      – If you don’t want your kids to see it on TV.. turn the damn thing off..

      you get the point…

      Reply

    10. @AlecDalek: Nah, it already happened pretty much. I hear from all corners in Europe, people telling me how glad they are Obama won. Of course now Obama has to prove himself, but non-Americans appreciate that such a great deal of Americans made up their mind about what’s best for their future.

      Reply

    11. I’ll be fully satisfied once we stop swearing people in and under oath on a fucking Bible.

      Reply

    12. I Voted independent for two reasons. One, because I truly didn’t want either of them to win. And two, because I know know independent will ever win anything, therefore I was automatically guaranteed the ability to complain since “Hey, I didn’t vote for him” rules come into play.

      Reply

    13. @Elepski:

      No I don’t get the ‘point’.
      A black man becoming the president of America wasn’t a ‘taboo’. At one time black people didn’t have the same rights, and that is over my friend, that’s all.
      You know, and then of course there was this thing with women who weren’t allowed to vote either, now that they’re allowed to, was that also a step into the wrong direction?

      Since when is ‘calling someone an atheist’ an insult?
      Atheism is a lack of belief, you’re either an atheist or not. You can’t call anybody an atheist the way I could call you an idiot.

      And what’s up with, ‘Nipple is not evil’? Is it too difficult or do you find forming correct sentences offensive as well? Get a grip.

      Reply

    14. @dieAntagonista:
      I agree with most of your post except:

      “atheist is a lack of belief.” This is untrue. Agnostic is a lack of “belief”, but atheists fully BELIEVE that there is not higher power or god(s).

      Reply

    15. @Catherine Longfellow:
      Ah yes that’s kind of true. But if you say it like, atheism is the lack of belief in any deity, then it is correct.
      I’d say agnosticism is not exactly a lack of belief either. Anyhow, I know what you mean and I agree.

      Reply

    16. Defining yourself by something you don’t believe in is ridiculous. I don’t believe in elves but I don’t think about it all day and make websites about it and call myself a aelvetheist.

      I can understand not wanting organized religion shoved in your face all day: it’s a piss-off. But fuck this semantic debating about strong atheists vs. weak atheists vs. agnostics is starting to look kind of like sects.

      Reply

    17. Yeah I honestly don’t see the point in calling yourself an atheist either. It’s useless. Though some would argue, that it helps to clarify certain things. Like, oh so that automatically means you have nothing against gay people.
      Things of that nature. Which again is ridiculous, since atheism has no agenda, and you could very well be a conservative republican as well as an atheist.

      It’s obviously rare though. 90% of all people whom I’ve talked to who called themselves atheists, turned out to be very open-minded people so I do think it helps you get a better picture of a person. Indirectly.

      Reply

    18. Elepski is spot-on, I do believe, and I’ll support those comments 100%.

      dieAntagonista must have had a bad morning or something – a black president is something that has only been spoken about like it’s a fairy tale that will not happen until the world turns upside down, wtf does women’s suffrage have to do with Elepski’s point, and yes, I’ve heard “atheist” used as an insult. Problem with informal incorrect sentences on teh interwebs?

      Although I rarely do it seems, I agree with Caio re: defining one’s self and lol @ “aelvetheist”.

      Reply

    19. YES, the idea of a black man being the president of America was somehow strange to some ignorant pussies like you. But it wasn’t a taboo. If it were, Obama wouldn’t be where he is now.

      ‘wtf does women’s suffrage have to do with Elepski’s point’ – Let’s examine his ‘point’, shall we?
      So he assumes, that because a large group of people in a country have come to tolerate black people to a very high degree – all of the sudden they will also legalise drugs, oppress religious people, and whatever his other garbage is supposed to mean.

      What does women’s suffrage have to do with BLACK PEOPLE HAVING THE SAME RIGHTS AS WHITE PEOPLE?
      Come again?

      You racist piece of shit.

      I have no problem with people being too dumb to spell. I have only a problem with people amputating the god damn English language, the fucking sole basis of our communication. Thank you god damn much.

      Reply

    20. Speaking of amputating the engrish language, can you form an ‘insult’ without the use of a curse-word?

      How is the air up there on your high-horse?
      Those who breach against ‘bible-thumpers’ are just as bad in their own respect.

      We swear on the Bible, because like it or not, the country was FOUNDED with the belief in Christianity. It was formed by Christian men, who had been persecuted for their beliefs at one point in time. The “freedom of religion” and “seperation of church and state” were established in order to see that the same thing never happened to an individual in this country. People like you who hate something, blindly, are no better than a racist, biggot, religious right wing zealout, etc.

      Get off the bandwagon or high-horse and grow up.

      Reply

    21. Everyone on the internet is from the United States of America.

      Reply

    22. @mintymadness:

      In no way am I trying to insult any body by using curse words. It’s merely a nice way to accentuate certain things that happen to be dear to my heart. Like common sense. And tolerance.

      I didn’t ‘preach’ against any ‘bible-thumper’.
      The main issue was about race and has nothing to with any religion.
      In no way does the bible mention any thing about black people not being allowed to become president of America, so what the fuck are you talking about.

      Again, the bandwagon you accuse me of being on, is called common fucking sense. Do you consider yourself to be educated? Do you think that the colour of any body’s skin should interfere with their rights?

      Maybe you’re the one who should grow up.

      Reply

    23. lol…holy crap. what are you so angry about?

      Once again, calling names isn’t necessary – it just makes you look bad and generally comes across as something you’re doing to compensate for your lack of a good argument.

      A black man being the President was “somehow strange” because 0% of the former presidents were anything but middle- to late-aged white men. Let’s not be silly – you know just as well as anyone else that it wasn’t expected just a few years ago that a black man would give a serious run for that office. The title of this very post that we’re commenting on is evidence of some of that disbelief, to one extent or another, even from his supporters (like tiki). No one is arguing that it couldn’t happen or it shouldn’t happen – just that it happened relatively quickly given that no black man before has really stood a chance and Obama went all the way.

      Elepski’s point was not tying a presidential election where a black(ish) man won to legalizing drugs, religious oppression, or any of the other taboos he or she was trying to convey. His (I’ll assume Elepski’s a guy) point was only to bring light to the other things that are spoken about, but not acted upon for the most part by our society quite yet. There are supporters of each of his bulleted items, but none of them are quite to the point to where they are generally accepted and embraced by our country’s population or government, and that’s what ties his points to Obama winning the election. They’re just “next in line”, so to speak.

      lol @ “racist piece of shit”. I’m not even going to address this one other than calling attention to the facts that not only do you not know enough about me to know if I am even remotely racist, but you don’t even know what race I am.

      I consider myself to be a bit of an internet grammar nazi, but in no way do I not grant others a little leeway when it helps get a point across.

      Reply

    24. @jascas_:

      You can only read the words I’m typing, so no I’m not angry. In fact I am fascinated.

      Ah thank you, are you done explaining what that guy *really* meant? I think his post speaks for itself.

      I’m going to repeat this, to make it clear, what he basically said:

      The fact that a society overcame a ‘taboo’, related to a man’s race (and yes that is precisely what he wrote), are signs that drugs will be legalised, religious people oppressed, and that suddenly women are going to run around topless. Can you say delusional?

      No I don’t know who you are and what your race is. And I do not care because there’s no way for me to know those things except if you tell me. All i was judging you by, were your words. If you have a problem with that, too bad.

      Reply

    25. Then stop acting all defensive about people judging you by YOUR words. and YOUR words are very harsh, trite, and full of anger.

      My previous post was only partially directed at you. I was also replying to previous posts about removing the bible from swearing in, etc. Forgive me, I am at work and trying (failing) to multi-task.

      In your words you speak of tolerance, equality, and the like. Yet the tone of your words are hateful, angry, and resentful. That is hypocratic and if you really want to make a point, then practice what you preach. I think you took the original poster’s words out of context. You saw the word “taboo,” and saw red. I can understand the original poster’s mentality and the point he/she was trying to make. You are hte one who got crazy, started dropping f-bombs, and criticizing people. So who’s discriminating now?
      Always remember, when you point your finger at someone, there are 3 more fingers pointing right back at you. Save the f-bombs for stuff that matters. Like lolcats.

      Reply

    26. I won’t repeat mintymadness’s post, but those are basically my thoughts. Perhaps later you’ll re-read these posts and understand what everyone is saying, maybe not. No harm, no foul though.

      One thing I’d like to reiterate is that he was drawing no connection between Obama winning the election and those things happening – he was merely stating that perhaps our society will loosen up a bit more about the things he listed as they, along with having a black President, are things that are good things that have been treated as bad or scary things by a lot of our society in the past.

      Reply

    27. @mintymadness:

      I was acting all defensive? I explained myself alright.

      My words on your screen were not full of anger. That is impossible. They were aggressive yes, I apologise if I hurt any body’s feelings but for some reason I doubt I did.

      So what do you propose, should I react to intolerance with tolerance? I’m sorry but that doesn’t make any sense.
      You’re taking things a bit too seriously if you think the word fuck has such significant meaning.

      And no, I did not see the word ‘taboo’ and saw red. I saw poor assumptions based on nothing but false logic.
      And how was I discriminating any body? Did you understand what *I* was trying to say? If you have a problem with people who have something against delusional/ racist assumptions then I don’t want to have any thing to do with you.

      I don’t care how many people ‘point their finger’ at me. I know where I stand on issues like racism, and irrational, intolerant fears. I could be arguing with 10 nazis, does that mean my arguments are any less valid? I beg your pardon. Your arguments are moot.

      Reply

    28. I’m glad I sparked such a deep conversation.

      As far as a black president being taboo…

      via wikipedia:
      ———————–
      A taboo is a strong social prohibition (or ban) against words, objects, actions, or discussions that are considered undesirable or offensive by a group, culture, society, or community. Breaking a taboo is usually considered objectionable or abhorrent. Some taboo activities or customs are prohibited by law and transgressions may lead to severe penalties. Other taboos result in embarrassment, shame and rudeness.
      ————————

      There are people who WOULD NOT vote for Obama strictly based on his race. They would not openly admit to being racist.. but did not want a black man for president.

      as far as the Atheist thing. That was in reference to a local lower office race where on of the candidates was hoping to deface her opponent by calling her an Atheist.

      Reply

    29. @jascas_:

      Say what? How was he stating that ‘our society will loosen up a bit more’?

      Dear god, please do me a favour and read what he wrote again: Election of a BLACK president is a sign that this country is starting to progress socially. One taboo down… 1000 more to go.

      He makes a clear connection between two things.
      I know what you are trying to say, but that is not what he said. Would you stop explaining things for him, in a way he didn’t even write?

      Reply

    30. @dieAntagonista:
      i guess the easiest way to solve DA’s problem with the “black guy getting elected= a broken/fix’d taboo” thing is to change the word from “taboo” to
      “ridiculously uphill struggle marked at the end by a milestone that many people didn’t think we’d see in our time”
      Many people, like me, believed that it wouldn’t happen- not because of any doubts in a candidate, but in my fairly understandable fear that any candidate who wasn’t a white guy with a ‘proper’ religious upbringing wouldn’t be able to win over enough of the country’s hidebound, lockstep, status quo, racist, unbelievers.
      and i didn’t dig all the way through your posts, what with my forehead baby tunneling out through my eyeballs, but let me stab at it:

      you are taking his post the way i would take a post that said: gays can get married, so now men can marry dogs and atheists will start killing babies in the streets- i.e. because this happened, now the world will go to shit or something like that- which is a retarded statement to make and we would be both justified in pouncing on how stupid and backwards the poster was.
      I agreed with his post in this sense: these are milestones in future history that he looks forward to.
      -legalization of pot because it’s current treatment is something he considers wrong or unfair.
      -“nipple is not evil” because the crazy reaction that society has to nudity, especially of the breast, is hopefully going to be a thing of the past- not that women should run naked in the streets, but if a woman goes topless, she doesn’t get a fucking indecent exposure ticket.
      -atheism as an insult- maybe you wouldn’t use it in the same way as idiot, but think about it in the election light: an atheist would have less of a chance to get elected than a woman and a black guy combined. Those ARE valid attributes to pair for the purposes of this statement because the challenges that a woman faces in ignorance are different than the ones black men have faced in ignorance- rather: some people who voted for a black man still wouldn’t vote for a woman of any color, race or creed, and unless he faked it all the way through, and then jumped the surprise out when elected, no atheist would ever even get close to election day. I’m not saying that this idea is retarded, but i think that there are a lot of people in the country who take the inequity between types of people very seriously.

      tl;dr:
      i took the comment you took exception to as a list of (poorly worded perhaps) milestones in history that he looked forward to- positive milestones that you could look back and say- “see kid? i was there for that.”

      Reply

    31. Although i think that his point was made pretty clearly – that the other taboos were going to fall in addition to, not as a result of…I generally agree with elzarcothepale.

      Reply

    32. It has nothing to do with race or color, but with a far left socialist.

      Reply

    33. @elzarcothepale:

      Your comparison to the gay marriage argument couldn’t have been any more perfect. So you understand what I was trying to say.

      And yeah I understand exactly what you mean.
      That’s what I thought at first as well.
      But think again, when women weren’t allowed to vote, that was just as much a taboo. Why is it, that just now after a black guy got elected, these things seem more realistic?

      Reply

    34. It was in “addition to”.. “not because of”… so please everyone stop freaking out.

      The election of Obama is proof that 63,112,190 of the 118,979,284 who voted (according to CNN.. so don’t be petty and pick the numbers apart). Can trust this nation in his hands.

      There are other taboo things that (I feel) need to go away. Only a progressive country is able to do away with those one by one.

      Reply

    35. @phantasm:

      I am a far left Socialist.

      Reply

    36. @dieAntagonista:
      because we are “doubting thomases.” All them were lumped into a “won’t happen” in our minds, and now that one has, we have the foundation to hope that more will.

      Reply

    37. @Elepski:

      Alright I am sorry. But it was worded very badly, Usually it’s the far right republicans talking like that. No offense.

      @elzarcothepale:
      I see. Well unfortunately, I don’t think those things will happen any time soon. And I don’t think now that Obama made it, any of those republicans will open up any more. We’re lucky if nobody tries to kill him.

      Reply

    38. @dieAntagonista

      No worries… conversation with out expression is vague sometimes.

      And someone has already tried to kill him..

      www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49Q7KJ20081028

      Reply

    39. Just to give an example that we’ve already took a step back – proposition 8 passed. By 63% or so.

      And yea again, I apologise. If you had understood it the same way I did, you’d understand why I was so aggressive.
      At least I’ve made my point about grammar.

      Reply

    40. Wow, I am done. You have assumed so many things about me and my intent, based on irrational logic. “Your point is moot.”

      Your point was moot, the second you pecked it out on the keyboard, sweetheart.

      “I should react to intolerance with tolerance.”
      That was never the intended meaning. YOU couldn’t read between the lines. I will make sure that I am completely blunt with you from now on, for your sake. I hate seeing you with your panties in a twist over something so trivial. Your vendatta against the world, is just that, YOURS. Don’t try to use me and my attempt to correct your misguided rants as a stepping stone to prove a point.

      Reply

    41. Right.. so how about that filibuster proof congress.. From the democratic view point… things are going to get done…

      hahahah.. *cough* ahem

      Reply

    42. Thank you for being so understanding.

      Yes I know. What’s even funnier, they have been released already.
      I think they caught already 116 people who planned on killing Obama? It’s insane.

      Reply

    43. @mintymadness:

      Since you never understood what I was trying to say, to begin with, what do you expect? I assumed those things about you based on what I thought you were defending. If you had understood what I said in response to Elepski, there would have been no conflict. Instead you accused me of being on a high horse?

      And thank you for your concern, but I don’t need you to be blunt with me or anything else. I was responding to another user, not you. Since he didn’t respond earlier, I couldn’t have realised my error.
      How are my arguments moot? I still think racism is wrong, do you object to that or what.

      Reply

    44. @dieAntagonista:

      Prop 8 passed? In fucking liberalville California? I am both surprised and disappointed.

      Who’s going to go out and annul all the transgender, post-op weddings; starting with Jamie Lee Curtis…

      I’ll never understand how they plan on “enforcing” this b.s. law. It’s a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy which just forces homosexuals back into teh closet and back into drag.

      Reply

    45. No I do not agree with racism at all in the slightest bit. But someone here being racist was never a point, only a point that you brought up because you read a post wrong. That’s all ANYONE has been trying to say to you all along. You took the whole original post out of context and read what you wanted out of it. At the first hint that it was possibly racist, you blocked everything else out.
      That’s it. That’s all. Game over. Like I said, I’m done. No offense intended, by-gones and all that.

      Reply

    46. @Catherine Longfellow:
      Yup.. sadly. No actually it’s worse than that.
      If I’m not mistaken, all those gay/bi/transgender people who got married (before the 4th of November), are still legally married. But they will remain the only ones for now.
      Isn’t that completely idiotic?

      Reply

    47. @mintymadness:
      I was only accused at first, so I assumed I was right and you people agreed with what I thought he said.
      You seem pretty offended. I apologised already and you talk about games. What more do you want

      Reply

    48. I want nothing. Only to make sure that we are all on the same page, that’s all. As long as we agree to that point, then we’re golden, right?
      Cheers.

      Reply

    49. Mhm. Again, sorray. Here have some /internet pie.
      And I really totally like mint flavoured things actually.
      K, glad we’re cool.

      Reply

    50. i thought he was Hawaiian…

      SKIN COLOR DOES NOT MATTER.

      Reply

    51. @Catherine Longfellow: I would not call California liberalville. I hate the way that people who are not from CA and don’t live in CA label the state. Did you look at the vote states for CA? McCain got quite a bit of support.

      Not only did prop 8 pass but prop 4 also passed. No one seems to be whining about that one but I think it’s just as disgusting.

      The subject of gay “marriage” isn’t going to go away anytime soon. Prop 8 is just one set back in a long battle that will eventually end up where all the liberals what it to be. Change takes time. Period. I seriously wanted to smack my friends last night for crying about prop 8 passing… I knew it was going to pass… What’s IMPORTANT is that the margin that it passed by is smaller than any previous vote. That’s proof of progress.

      Next stop… Supreme court.

      Reply

    52. Darko has posted two comments, and 50% of the words that they both contain are the word “fag”. Makes you think.

      Reply

    53. “I believe all Americans who believe in freedom, tolerance and human rights have a responsibility to oppose bigotry and prejudice based on sexual orientation.”
      – Coretta Scott King

      I was very disappointed when I found out Prop 8 passed. Two steps forward, one step back – as my friend put it. Anything that is right is worth fighting for and it’ll happen eventually.

      Reply

    54. Marriage should just be outlawed for everyone. Problem solved.

      Reply

    55. @outofocus:While I heard a lot about CA prop 8 out here in NM, didn’t hear anything about prop 4. What was that about?

      Reply

    56. Well in what is odd is that racism actually heped obama win. Beyond the stupid “if you don’t vote ofr him you’re a racist” crap a few people were spewing, in a number of states where McCain lead, the black panthers showed up to the polls and were intimidating white voters away. Fox News even had a run in with them in PA.

      Reply

    57. There have been five presidents with partial Black ancestry:

      Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge.

      Thomas Jefferson was the first president with Black ancestry. He was part native American on his mother’s side and part black on his father’s side.

      If Obama wins, he will probably be the president with the largest percentage of Black ancestry since his father was from Kenya is black.

      Seriously, people are dumb. And even then, Obama is only half black. But to me it doesn’t matter what color he is. It all depends on what he DOES with his time in office.

      Reply

    58. Wow, that was pretty fucked up. What were they thinking?

      Reply

    59. Fucking sheep.
      Ba Ba Barak sheep lead the heard to slaughter.
      For some reason people here in the states intentionaly ignorant about Obama.

      Reply

    60. @kitzmilr1: Haven’t you seen world reaction? It’s not just the “States”. We’re not the ones that made him a messiah, it was a term thrown out by the RNC and Faux News.

      Reply

    61. @Catherine Longfellow:

      Incorrect. Atheism literally means ‘without belief in a deity’. Atheism describes anyone who does not believe in god(s), whether they simply lack belief or ‘fully believe’ God does not exist. Atheism is a the default position.

      You are also incorrect about agnosticism. Agnosticism is the *belief* that it is impossible to know whether God exists.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie Posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas