Archives

Obama is in, what’s next?

Today I watched Obama’s inaugural on the news. Washington is very crowded. According to the news, there are two million people witness the ceremony. It is a historical moment to the Americans. Many people compare Obama to John F. Kennedy. When JFK was elected US president in 1961, he is the Catholic president. In 2008, Obama becomes the first black president. Both of them breaks White Ango-Saxon Protestant male’s monopoly claim to the presidency. We already got a Catholic, a black, what’s next? It is just a matter of time before will be a female president. Hilary Clinton almost become the first female president if she didn’t lose to Obama. After a female president, the next one on the line is probably a gay president. There are gay governor already. It may take sometime before the American consider voting for a gay president. By that time, probably computer is so advance that we have AI smarter than people. If the American willing to vote for a gay, they must as well vote for a robot. Having a robot president is more defining historical moment than having a black president. On a second thought, why don’t we call the robot president Skynet.

11 comments to Obama is in, what’s next?

  • uncleray

    How long do you think it takes to get there?

  • 第一個天主教總統、第一個黑人總統、第一個華裔總統、第一個女性總統、第一個基佬總統、第一個機械人總統,下一個係……外星人總統。

  • Michael Cheung

    There’s an interesting statement I heard in the news. What’s special in Washington on the Jan 20 is because of race (because Obama is black), and also because of non-race (because black and white come together).

  • 可能我們會有外星人總統先過有基佬總統。

  • Or what’s special is simply Obama is non-Bush.

  • Horace,

    You are a funny man. All these passive-aggressive attacks and dress-downs of gay. It is the society’s (including yours) general acceptance or support or tolerance of the verbal insults of gay that allows bigots to actually pick up arms (sticks, guns, or whatever) to physically attack gays or someone who look like gay. Equating gays to robots (i.e. machines) are the first steps in dehumanizing gays and readying them for physical violence. Horace, I know you not a bigot but what you are doing is helping those bigots.

    P.S. Obama is a president that respect the rule of law and is trying to repair the US constitution. Witness what he did on his first day, signed an order to close Gitmo in 1 year.
    http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/21/khadr-adjournment.html

    P.P.S. In contrast, the way Prime Minister Harper’s decision to ignore the Khadr case (captured when he was clearly a child soldier) was shameful and showed a total disrespect the rule of law.
    http://www.un.org/rights/concerns.htm

  • Kempton: I object the use of physical violence, but actually I do support elimination of gay through non-violence means, such as education or genetic engineering.

  • 亞占

    其實某些attritube根本與總統無關. 膚色只是顏色, 思想才是重要. 就如第一個用左手的總統, 對治國有何關係?

  • Horace,

    Imagine one day someone want to eliminate black or red hair or certain skin colours through genetic-engineering? You know what you are doing is called passive-aggressive against gays, right?

  • Kempton: Why would anyone want to eliminate black or red hair? There is no disadvantage having those genetic features. I can image eliminate midget genes or “pork-chop” genes though.

    What’s wrong passive-aggressive against gay? Is it unconditionally wrong against gay? Actually, I don’t think I am passive-aggressive gay according to Wiki’s definition of passive-aggressive. I think I am quite active in againsting gay.

Leave a Reply