Five People Having Baby Together

If it doesnt fit anywhere else but you still want to share, this is the place
Aesop
Posts: 6149
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:17 am

Re: Five People Having Baby Together

Post by Aesop »

Jericho941 wrote:The last POTUS with children over the age of 25 was Bush I. Or are we still operating under the assumption that presidents come to be electable based on personal merit?
I'm operating under the assumption that presidents come to be electable based on getting 50% +1 votes in at least the ten or twelve most populous states, at minimum.
How old the children of the last three presidents are says more about the recent asinine trend of electing young jackasses to the job than it says about anything else.
How's it working out for you?
If you want to be a part of the upper crust, you don't marry for love. That's a sure ticket out, though. Politics still runs on the old rules, despite the change in window dressing.
Bush the Elder was married as a high school graduate and Navy j.g. to his fiancée of 3 years, at the age of 21.
Unless we're getting out the tinfoil millinery, any aspirations for the White House for him were three decades and about nine jobs removed at that point in time, and he had to wait his turn behind fellow WWII alumnae Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, and Reagan before he earned the spot.
His successor was the child of an abusive alcoholic car dealer and a nursing school drop out in AR. Not so much upper crust there.
Bush fils, besides being aberrational in US history as a father-son presidential pair, was married to a kindergarten teacher at a time when his most notable professional achievements were leaving the TX ANG under a cloud, and racking up a DWI, at a time when his father was the quickly retired director of the then-thoroughly disgraced CIA. Still looking for any crust, upper or any other kind, there.
His successor was married to another affirmative action hire at a Chicago law firm. Outside of law firms, I know of no place where two aspiring lawyers are considered the upper crust of anything.

We have had a peanut farmer, an actor, an oil millionaire, a huckster, a businessman, and a shadowy party apparatchik elected to the White House in the last six iterations, which is about as far as we can go in proving that anyone can get the job, without electing Donald Trump, Kim Kardashian, Miley Cyrus, or Pauly Shore to the gig just to underline the point in red ink.
2) Not calling those kids bastards scars them more than calling them that does. (I'm not advocating taunting them to their faces daily, which is another thing entirely, and misses the point in the exact way a straw man is not the main argument.)
The distinction really has no meaning outside of the pseudo-nobility.
I know what those words mean separately, but strung together I have no idea where you're going with any of that. :|
3) Pretending a whore isn't a whore doesn't change that reality either; calling things what they are in reality is common sense, but the fact that such delivered wisdom from six millennia of recorded history seems such an alien concept even on this board is proof of how deep is the rot.
Six millennia of recorded history indicate that for everyone without personal political influence, traditional marriage is satire.
And history notes that people of common origins have had "personal political influence" for the last five hundred years give or take, in civilized nations.
If you want to argue for arranged marriage in nations still ruled by tribalism, pederasty, trading wives for cows or land, and goat-fucking, go ahead on.
For that part of the world commonly known as the "first" world, the argument against traditional marriage runs into some pretty tough sledding.
"There are four types of homicide: felonious, accidental, justifiable, and praiseworthy." -Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
User avatar
Kommander
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:13 am

Re: Five People Having Baby Together

Post by Kommander »

I do think that one both needs to be married and to a politically appropriate person (not sure how to define that though) in order to win the big chair. They also must be able to pretend to be christian, at least so far.
User avatar
Termite
Posts: 9003
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:32 am

Re: Five People Having Baby Together

Post by Termite »

Kommander wrote: They also must be able to pretend to be christian, at least so far.
Eisenhower was apparently non-theistic.
"Life is a bitch. Shit happens. Adapt, improvise, and overcome. Acknowledge it, and move on."
User avatar
Kommander
Posts: 3761
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:13 am

Re: Five People Having Baby Together

Post by Kommander »

Termite wrote:
Kommander wrote: They also must be able to pretend to be christian, at least so far.
Eisenhower was apparently non-theistic.
Wikipedia says otherwise, but you know, Wikipedia.
User avatar
Termite
Posts: 9003
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:32 am

Re: Five People Having Baby Together

Post by Termite »

Deist, then.
"Life is a bitch. Shit happens. Adapt, improvise, and overcome. Acknowledge it, and move on."
Post Reply