inexperienced
inexperienced illinois senator
(Abraham Lincoln)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous caption included | Not worst Next »
» 273 comments
-
Recent Comments
clueless on KINDNESS paws4thot on KINDNESS paws4thot on Let’s imagine the look o… Kn0wledge1ne on TRAIN ORIGAMI Nucky, the Official … on Let’s imagine the look o… Rando the Filthiest,… on Let’s imagine the look o… Nucky, the Official … on KINDNESS Nucky, the Official … on KINDNESS Rando the Filthiest,… on Let’s imagine the look o… Nucky, the Official … on KINDNESS 
Cheezburger Network Blog
Too funny and too true. At least Lincoln served in the military.
I think the point was the fact that Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents.
Didn’t this argument take place about 6 lolz ago?
Who is going to participate this time?
Pass. Too busy watching Letterman eviscerate McCain on YouTube, and the Couric/Palin interview. Ahh… can’t -buy- entertainment like this.
Oh, Zach Braff. His MySpace is my moral compass (he has both videos up).
I know Abe Lincoln and Senator Obama, you’re no Lincoln.
excellent!!!!
Does that little quip help relieve the BURN of watching Letterman tear McCain a new one, and the terrible sinking feeling you get when you see Katie Couric demolishing Palin?
–
Obama is no Lincoln, but McCain and Palin are flat out pathetic jokes, I mean, how can you even parody them? They are walking parodies of what a real conservative is.
I don’t watch Letterman’s unfunny show, he is an ass and Palin didn’t do well with Couric but there will be other chances. Currently there is not a real conservative candidate, we have to go with what we have and McCain is much closer than Obama.
“other chances”
YES palin will have her chance to completely blow it
during the VP debate
anyone with a television show can run their mouths all they like and the fans of the show will believe it as the gospel truth. Doesnt make what they say fair, accurate, or even honest. I lost all respect for letterman years ago and hes just gotten worse since the 2004 election campaign. If letterman would take an honest look at the issues he would see that obama is the worst thing that could happen to America. Mccain isnt much better since he bends over backwards to work with the democRATS whenever he can and it always leads to more socialism. Which is why Im surprised honestly that more people arent more infavor of Mccain. Hes a complete RINO (republican in name only) and hes the farthest the republican party has from its base and yet he gets lumped in as a Bush lackey. He might vote with his party 90% of the time but obama votes with his 97.4% of the time… only standing up to his own party when it comes to pulling out the troops in iraq (now that we are winning he wants to quit… great leadership quality there eh?).
The reason Lincoln was such a great president is his stance on the issues of the time not his skin color, his experience, or who he associated himself with. Compare the first republican president with the most liberal (actually lets call him the communist he is) senator from the same state, by their stance on the issues of the times and you will see why obama is a complete farce.
Please kill yourself before you vote for obama.
Will you kill yourself when Obama wins?
No, but I’m going to quit my job and go on wellfare, I can’t wait. You should too, we all should! Wheeee!
Countries with a quality welfare system don’t have the sort of situation you are suggesting, where everybody quits their job to get welfare.
In Australia, we have a system where people on welfare are able to afford the necessities of life. We have lower unemployment than you.
We also have a minimum wage that is above the poverty line, so perhaps that helps.
In Austrailia, it’s called “living on the dole”?
Dole bludgers exist, but the problem is not as rampant as mr. chang suggests anything similar in the US would be.
We may have dole-bludgers, but most people realise you can ONLY afford the neccessities; nothing else. Hence why most get jobs
are people still afraid of commies? really?
Apparently so. Damn, this must make me a traitor for having not only a Russian friend, but a Vietnamese one as well. Let’s go slap my name on the blacklist, shall we?
Damn Pinko.
There are no winners in war
amen
Ummmmm….
Yes there are?
The last ones standing?
*shrugs*
“…only standing up to his own party when it comes to pulling out the troops in iraq (now that we are winning he wants to quit… great leadership quality there eh?).”
How the fuck are we winning? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, and you’re just running your mouth to make it look like you do. Why don’t you do some research before making yourself look like an idiot?
“Please kill yourself before you vote for obama.”
That’s something a good pro-life Republican should say. Good job.
pro-life only counts when it’s for babies, it seems. I mean, they certainly aren’t pro-soldiers-lives… -_-
you two are both retards, shut up and actually come up with some legitimate ideas for yourself instead of the ignorant bigotry thats the worlds problem today
And insulting people who made the statements you’re insulting them for 17 months ago is such a clear sign of your intellectual and social superiority?
1) If your mad at Letterman for being unfair, you must be pissed at every news channel on tv, especially cable news. Come on its comedy its not meant to be fair or reasonable. 2)90% voting for an administration that is wrong (McCain) or 97.4% banning together to vote against wrong (Obama). you have to put it into context. 3) Lincoln: The definition of a Republican has changed overtime. Lincoln would be considered a liberal and maybe even a Democrat if you put him in today’s context. just look at Reconstruction, Emancipation Proclamation. If he were conservative he would not have changed the structure of society the way he did. (Although he did it mostly because he was pressured by the people and he has stated he does not believe in equal rights for blacks).
“Hes a complete RINO (republican in name only)”
That why he votes with the Republicans, like, 85% of the time? (Yes I made up that percentage, but it’s definitely a high number over 80, I’m sure of that. Too lazy to check it to be exact though)
90%
Hmmm, a prodigy of “No Child Left Behind”! You right wing-nutts are truly f**king scary. What you lack in intelligence, you definitely make up for it in bigotry.
Hmmm, a prodigy of “No Child Left Behind”! You right wing-nutts are truly f**king scary. What you lack in intelligence, you definitely make up for it in bigotry.
Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black…
Oops, that’s un-PC, isn’t it?
Thought police are already here. And the lefties are the ones
that are doing it to us all by trying to it to those who oppose
them.
your analysis is so childish it’s astonishing.
Maybe you should learn what a Communist is before you mis-label someone as one you ignorant fear monger. Communism is an ECONOMIC structure that usually exists in socialist GOVERNMENTS. If you want to label Obama anything, at least label him a socialist, which is closer to true. But Socialism and communism are two very different things. FYI, the US has been a partially socialist country for almost 80 years, since the advent of unemployment, Social Security, and welfare benefits. Its nothing new.
Um, none of that crap is real socialism. The original idea behind socialism was “the workers own the means of production.” A cooperatively owned business is closer to socialism than anything any government might do. If something is being dictated top-down it’s still not real socialism because the people themselves are not controlling it.
Democracy is a lot closer to socialism than most folks in this country believe.
they are RINOs. the only real conservative in the race never had a chance.
RIP Ron Paul.
Thats what was said about Dan Quayle, don’t even compare Obama with Dan Quayle. idiot
You know Lincoln?! Wow! You might be as old as McCain!
lol, the funny thing about Zach Braff having MySpace is that despite him being a celebrity, I still think he needs MySpace to have more than 3 friends.
Couric: You’ve said, quote, “John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business.” Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?
Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie – that, that’s paramount. That’s more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.
Couric: But he’s been in Congress for 26 years. He’s been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more.
Palin: He’s also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he’s been talking about – the need to reform government.
Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you’ve said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?
Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.
Couric: I’m just going to ask you one more time – not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.
Palin: I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you.
Who put what in Katie’s tea?
Is she actually ASKING QUESTIONS and waiting – nay, PUSHING – for follow up answers? What’s happened to her?
I think it’s called asking a question and not standing for a fluffy, pageant interview, non-answer.
One of our greatest presidents?
Really?
Or were you one of the idiots that forgot to read your history book…
Lincoln only freed the slaves in the states in rebellion in attempt to persuade the southern states from succeeding.
If the southern states had stayed part of the union, they would have been allowed to keep their slaves.
Great job president!
Bribe the rebels by promising to let them own people.
More like one of the greatest frauds ever.
Persuade them succeeding? Did he hope they would just fail on their own?
What Patrick means is that Lincoln would have avoided the war by using Unionist strategy. It is estemated that if Lincoln had avoided the war then the Slaves would have been freed about the same time as the Slaves in Brazil, in about the 1870s (I think 1870s).
I’m not sure I really buy that argument, though. The conditions that led to abolition in Brazil (drought conditions causing plantation owners to sell their slaves, the need for manpower during the Paraguayan War, etc.) had no real analogues in the USA. The idea is often tossed around that slavery was, or would have become, uneconomical in the southern states due to industrialization, but I’m similarly unconvinced by that argument. Slavery, as an institution, was strongly woven into the self-image of the southern USA, and until an alternative source of cotton emerged as competitive, it’s hard to see how it was going to prove uneconomical enough for a serious voluntary abolition movement to emerge. And even that doesn’t provide any real guarantees: plenty of wags during the 1770s and 1780s were predicting the imminent demise of slavery due to the decline of the rice and tobacco markets. Instead, cotton emerged as the newest cash crop and gave slavery a brand new lease on life.
The only way, IMO, slavery was ever going to end in the United States was if it was enforced by the federal government. And if the federal government attempted to enforce such an action, the slave-holding states were almost guaranteed to attempt to secede. The economic conditions necessary to eliminate slavery only really emerged in the USA after the Civil War, and they emerged in large part because of it. Strong westward expansion, an influx of potential industrial labor, and so on were products of the war’s displacement, if not necessarily of emancipation itself.
But Lincoln would probably have been the first to admit that he wasn’t really interested in emancipation. He disliked slavery, but his first concern was preserving the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation was a political gimmick, first and foremost, designed to play to European observers more than anything else, and it only came about after it had become patently clear that the only way the southern states were going to be mollified was military defeat. It certainly wasn’t a “bribe” aimed at the rebelling states themselves, though: they had already rebelled, and they were therefore already subject to the Proclamation. By 1863, there was very little likelihood that the slave states remaining in the Union (Maryland, Delaware, Missouri, and Kentucky) were going to switch sides. And, in any case, several of these states (Maryland and Missouri) amended their constitutions almost immediately after the Proclamation to abolish slavery anyway.
The only problem with this argument is that Lincoln was the first president of the new political party called the Republicans. One of their principal platform planks was the abolition of slavery. Preserving the union was important to Lincoln, but I think he would have taken steps to end slavery during his term at any rate.
Abolition? Are you sure the plank you’re thinking of wasn’t the spread of slavery into territories and new states?
After all, there were more ways to be opposed to slavery than abolition.
History education: Fail!
Well, uneconomical in the sense you have to feed, house and clothe the slaves
all year long. There aren’t crops all year long to make money. You’re not
getting milk, wool or meat off the slaves so they are expensive…ok you ARE
getting wicked Thomas Jefferson style sex, but I digress. That is my take on it.
I think he meant secession, not succession.
Um. Lincoln kept the United States united. The freeing of the slaves was unfortunately just a side effect. It was like having TB and coughing up $100 bills instead of blood so it was an awesome side effect, but it was still a side effect. His main mission was to keep the United States together and he succeeded. If you don’t think Lincoln was an amazing President, you are probably just angry that you can’t own people.
Greatest presidents? Bull crap. Read your history rather than the propaganda spouted by the American education system.
Sorry!! No he wasn’t!! He was actually the person who started the Civil War!! The Civil War was NOT actually about Slavery (not until after the battles of Gettysburg and Vicksburg when the South realised they didn’t have a snowballs chance of winning and tried for a negotiated solution) but was actually to do withthe greed of people like Lincoln and many of the Northern Senators and Business men who forced the South to sell to the North at extremely reduced prices whilst the north sold the material on for vastly increased sums. The South would have preferred to be able to set the prices themselves thus enabling the farmers and growers to get more income. Also Lincoln was aware of the mass genocide committed by Sherman in burning and looting his way to Atlanta and then razing Atlanta. Also Lincoln was one of the last people to free his slaves.
Lincoln never served in the military. Also Lincoln hated the Democrats. Thats why he joined the relatively new party that was for abolishing slavery, the Republicans. Not sure how the Dems became the party of choice for AfAmericans as the Dems do nothing to help them up. All their policies keep them down.
Mr. Lincoln served as a captain in the Black Hawk War in his state’s militia. He saw no combat that I know of.
The Democrats became the party of choice for African Americans because they fought for their rights in the 1960s. That’s also the reason why the south is solidly red now.
Hey Goober! The policies of Lincoln are no where near Obama’s liberal rants. If you want socialism, leave this country. Russia is looking to expand their list of people who want to live under their thumb. Or better yet, realize the greatness of this country is a direct result of capitalism, free markets, and LIMITED GOVERNMENT.
Heh, you do realize that your country is in a little economic mess right now? One that was caused by capitalism, free markets, and limited government?
Yen does NOT have a point. Yen doesn’t have a clue what Yen is talking about. The economic mess this country is in is a direct result of government INTERFERENCE in capitalism. Banks were forced to make high-risk loans to people that had no business getting them. Because a “certain segment” of the population tended to have low credit scores, a “certain CRIMINAL community organization group”, hand in hand with a certain “darling” president from a decade ago strongarmed banks through legal maneuvering, threats of protests, ham-handed “politically correct” legislation and government regulation to grant said loans. The upshot was billions of dollars of debt attributed to people that would NEVER have the means to pay it back. If the financial institutions in question had been allowed to conduct their business in a businesslike manner, rather than in a touchy-feely politically correct manner, and grant loans ONLY to those with sufficient financial means, this mess would never have happened. But NOOOOOOOO… A certain president, and her husband, INSISTED that EVERYONE could afford a home, no matter their income. Do a little research before you start bleating. Look up Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s financial history, and follow the loans to their inception. Look at how many large loans were given to people making less than 20k per year.
Yeah…. Yen has a point, don’t ya think? The greatness of this country, I believe, is a direct result of the hard work, ingenuity, and independent spirit of the American people. At least the Americans of previous generations who loved an honest day’s work.
Let government BE limited in that we have the freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. But when it comes to making sure financial institutions are offering safe and sound loan products, give me oversight or give me an economic crisis.
We are not Capitalist society as much anymore as we are a Consumer society driven to buy more, consume more, want more, buy more, break more, waste more, spend more and buy more. We want, want, want and feed into the dreams the entertainment industry shows us. Until the consumers of America can stop behaving like bratty children and work and save toward the security of their own futures, someone needs to mind the cookie jar. Give me oversight; give me regulation.
Not true at all. Lincoln was never in the Senate. He lost to Stephen Douglas. He DID, however, serve in the House of Representatives.
Heh…. yet another indication of the ignorant folks that support Obama. Facts don’t matter.
Lincoln served 8 years in the state legislature and 3 years in the house of representatives. Hussein Obama served 3 years as a junior senator.
When was Lincoln in the military? Many of our early Presidents were not. Jefferson, for instance.
Lincoln was never a senator, either. This caption is epic fail.
He served in the Black Hawk War.
Awesome!
By awesome, I mean that it’s been done once… so it can happen again.
NO, the new guy is definitely more BLACK than Lincoln…
Awesome — a Republican President who started an unpopular war, and was widely hated in his own time.
Quite a lot like George Bush.
You’ve never had relatives who where slaves, have you?
The slavery issue very likely could have been resolved without a civil war, had the government of the time not had its head entirely up its butt. Kinda like it does now.
You don’t understand, he is complimenting Lincoln, he likes George Bush!! He isn’t being pro-slavery.
YAWN!! Yet another piece of crap from the African American, “Pity us because we were slaves” lobby. BULLSHIT!! Read your bloody history books. The Europeans were kept as slaves for a large part of their history by both the Romans, the Greeks, (and others before and since), (and the Eastern Europeans, by the Turks later – Where do you think the term Slav actually came from!!) Also Europeans enslaved other Europeans (a little known fact that!! Of course they couldn’t call it slavery, the name they gave it was Indentured Workers, but it was for all intents and purposes Slavery) So don’t go shouting your mouth off, saying you were the only ones who were enslaved. Also before you start talking crap about Slavery think about who benefited the most out of slavery. The Blacks themselves, when they invaded another tribe, they key the prisoners and sold them on to the Slavers for vast profits.
Let us not forget that there were also Asian slaves, South American slaves, and Native American slaves IN THIS COUNTRY at the same time. Why is it that we never hear any of THEIR organizations whining for handou..uh.. sorry.. ‘reparations’?
I’ll make you all a deal.. Confront me with someone..ANYONE, who’s grandparent was a slave owned by a relative of mine at ANY time in my family’s history, and I’ll sign my house and car over to them, free and clear. Until then, they should have a nice, big, steaming mug of shut the hell up, get up off their ass, and make a living like the rest of us.
I’ve never owned a slave. You’ve never been a slave. Stop whining, drop the sense of entitlement, and contribute to society. It never ceases to amaze me that a group that screams so loud about being kept down by the “white man” is always so quick to fall into line for the handouts from that same white man, satisfied to take his scraps rather than work for their own place at the table. Dr. Martin Luther King dedicated his noble life, finally paying the ultimate price to ensure that all races would have the same opportunities in this country, not to make sure that “the man” would keep throwing bones to keep expectations low and votes flowing.
Listen to the words of Chris Rock, and Bill Cosby.
I am so SICK of “Politically Correct”, “Oh, I HOPE I don’t offend someone’s delicate sensibilites” bull$**t.
wow you really dont know what its like to start a war do you? in 2003 the vast, vast, vast majority of the American public was for the war in iraq. 3 or 4 years later the war is technically over and we are only over there to keep the peace and be the iraqi police department while they formed their own government and we have soldiers dying which immediately turned people like you against the war. People who seem to forget that people die in war (when youre getting shot at and bomb set off under your truck driving around town that tends to ruin your afternoon). You and the people like you are the very reason we were attacked on 9/11. We were attacked because osama saw that we pulled out of Somalia after 18 soldiers died and he figured we were a paper tiger. People who want to go in and start a war and then run away when we lose some people only serve to make osama’s point. The fact that Bush didnt pull out when the war got unpopular is a testament to his character. He told us that the war on terror would take years and it would last long after the pain of 9/11 had subsided. He also told us to remember how we felt on 9/11 when things get tough in the war on terror.
My problem with Pres. Bush is that he is spending money on social BS like there are no consequences. The whole medicare prescription drug program and now theres this 700billion dollars that will end up going to line the federal government’s coffers (and 20% will end up being siphoned off to groups like La Raza and ACORN) are reasons why I dont like him anymore. I still fully support him on the war but he is not a conservative like he claimed to be.
The 20% will be off any profits from the “investment” of 700 billion. The Dems want to take 20% and give it groups like ACORN but that is probably not going to happen. That is one of the things McCain is fighting against and why he wanted to stay in Washington for this whole thing.
The majority was for the war because they had been lied to.
Even with the lies the majority was against the war until it started. Then parents of soldiers decided they had to support the war to support their kids.
Which is like supporting a guy who ground your kid into meat pies just because your children were involved in the process.
And, some believe, if you shut down his pie business then your kid will have died in vain.
Feb 15, 2003: Largest anti-war protest in history was a world-wide protest against the Iraq war.
You have a problem with the prescription drug program? Pray tell, please explain. Because being on Medicare, I have (and need) it. Most people on Medicare are on meds and need it (though the damned deductible, plus out of pocket between x amount and x amount and shit make it useless for many).
Actually, that’s a good point. Kinda makes you (well, me, anyway) wonder what people will think of George W. Bush a century from now.
Damn but he looked badass.
I’m pretty sure that look came from a life spent struggling with major depression. Didn’t he write in his journals how he thought about killing himself all the time? It’s inspiring that someone with such a serious mental health issue could rise that far and do that well.
He was under a suicide watch the night before his inauguration. So was his wife.
Mary Todd was a bipolar shopoholic & Abe was a gangly, geeky guy with an awkward voice and severe depression.
There’s no way today’s corporate media would have let that be.
And he’s not the only great world leader to have fought with depression. Winston Churchill also had it.
if you use the current definition of clinical depression about 90% of the country is depressed.
where exactly do you get that figure?
Can’t really blame him. He had to keep putting on a happy face while his own country was getting bombed to hell. I’d be a bit down in the dumps, myself.
4 liters of brandy @ day = happy face
!
Well if you can keep the apathy from keeping you down, you push yourself hard to get things done. Depression sucks but you can get some interesting things done if you can push past the apathy. -_-
I think his thousand yard stare came from well………..his ability to actually shoot at a thousand yards lol. (granted more like 100 or so but whatever).
WIN!
Sorry, Lincoln was never a senator.
Win. He did run. But he did not win.
Fail, running doesn’t mean you are one…….
Wich means Lincoln was even léss experienced then Obama. So how valid really is the experience argument?
PS: I hate the fact that I live in Europe, I really want to see the Obama/McCain
I think he was granting the win to AJ.
Wasn’t he a state representative?
“Sorry, Lincoln was never a senator.”
Well you just can’t get less experienced than that.
George Washington wasnt a senator either … he was the general of the “army” and they asked him to be president for life after the war was over.
Lincoln did server 4 consecutive terms in the illinois state house and was captain of a militia out of new salem during the black hawk war. He also began railing against slavery saying it was “founded on both injustice and bad policy.” in 1837… so the whole argument that he only fought the civil war to keep the south from seceding is wrong.
Yeah, Washington was only a high-ranking officer in the British Army during the French-Indian War, and only GOA during the Revolutionary War, in which an under equipped and inexperienced newly-formed militia/army defeated what was then the world’s greatest army.
I’d say he has some pretty damn good credentials.
Sadly enough, he lost quite a lot of the battles and was a piss-poor strategist. Not that I’ve got anything against the guy or anything – I think he did a bang-up job.
Indeed!! We are talking about the General who during the Seven Years War (Anglo-French war) had the bright idea of building a fort at the bottom of a hill. Some Military Genius. Also the reason why America won is because Britain couldn’t send its best troops to the battle since they were already heavily engaged in the War against France. Also the War in 1812 was won by the US only by a very thin margin. (The same kind of thing goes for Scots who think the Battle of Bannockburn was won by superior Scottish troops. WRONG!! Bannockburn was won because the Scots had superior leadership, and were fully aware of what they were fighting for and had home turf advantage. The English had no faith in their Leader King Edward II, not many people liked him or thought a lot of his leadership qualities. Edward didn’t really want to be in Scotland fighting a war he wasn’t the least bit interested in. And also he didn’t have the finest troops available, since the majority of the troops were Mercenaries hired for the purpose.)
he was JUST a general?? Um, do you have any idea how difficult it is to
become a general? I dont know about back in 1700s, but Washington was
more than qualified to run the country, as he has proven.
perfect – just to the right of this page is an ad for Obama.
Really? cause on mine its an ad for World of Warcrack.
the ads are a flash based banner on a rotation and/or random generation… I know because I wrote one for my forum avatar one time… people were pissed lol.
There’s a difference?
They are two completely different men with two completely different nations before them, and two completely different views of the world. Way to be completely freaking ridiculous and single-minded.
Um…amen to that.
So they’re from the same state. Er, clever…I guess…
They hold utterly different views and have completely different backgrounds and character. I, for one, have yet to hear Obama called “Honest Barack.”
I have yet to see history accurately believe Lincoln to be “honest”.
Lincoln and Obama aren’t the same man? Really? Holy shit. Has anyone told John Wilkes Booth?
Two different men, you say? Has anyone told John Wilkes Booth?
(apologies in advance if this is a double post)
It is.
Apology accepted.
great name!
hoorah!
As others have said, Lincoln was never a Senator.
Beside that, comparing Barack Obama to Abraham Lincoln does a real disservice to President Lincoln. Two very different men, from very different eras, with very different political views.
In fact, they are nothing alike, really. Guess thats what happens when the person who made the lol and the person who chooses which pictures to post never passed junior high American History.
Sorry I was wrong. They both have huge ears.
lol!
….or MAYBE they just thought it would be FUNNY, which is sort of the point of the website.
If so, then they failed. Since it is neither accurate nor funny. Just… wrong. Sometimes wrong is funny, but not in this case.
Their intent seems pretty clear, and they failed.
It’s a scientifically proven fact that if Lolnathan doesn’t laugh at something it’s just not funny. Those of us who laugh at things Lolnathan doesn’t find funny are just deluding ourselves.
in bed.
Making me think of lolnathan and bed at the same time is just mean.
You’re deluding yourself and I use BrainoBleach, Maximum strength. So I’m good. Just a bit pale.
i thought it was funny
Sadly, this one misses the mark of being funny. One would hope that Obama should he be elected doesn’t get the country embroiled in a civil war requiring him to show greatness similar to Lincoln. I have serious doubts that Obama could handle similar events in the modern day without getting millions killed. Sadly, getting millions killed seems to be something of a specialty of the left in this world.
WUT?
Yeah, I believe that remark was pretty unfounded. For starters. “the left” never wanted the Iraq war, and while millions haven’t been killed, Iraqi civillian casualties are great.
Of course, if we stay in Iraq for 100 years and start a war with Iran, we may see millions killed, but it won’t be “the left” that did it.
Mao Tse Tung, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Pol Pot were all leftists.
…..Fail….(my f a i l keys are going to break) They were European Leftists.
Completely different from the left today. Adolf was not a leftist btw, he
was power hungry – there is a difference.
They were European Leftists.
And they cheered wildly for the Obamessiah in Germany.
Adolf was not a leftist btw
Wrong. The Nazi’s were National Socialists. They were Marxists. The Nazis and Bolsheviks were simply two sides of the same Socialist coin.
History Fail.
Fail. Hitler and Mussolini were fascists. Far right. Not far left.
Also, there are plenty of far righties that are not nice people. Pinochet, anyone?
Read ‘Liberal Fascism’ by Jonah Goldberg. Trying to say Hitler was far right is factually and historically incorrect.
Hitler was a big government socialist who would fit in well with today’s Democrat Party.
Just because you don’t like that fact doesn’t make it any less true.
Using Jonah Goldberg as an unbiased source, FAIL.
The whole “Democratic party = socialism” thing is a giant canard. Take a look at the news headlines. Nationalising banks and mortgage giants isn’t exactly a capitalist kinda thing, seems more like socialism to me. But I thought Bush was a Republican! I’m so confused!
You are a major FAIL. Try to learn how our government operates ok? A president may wish for something but it is the house and senate that approves everything that comes to pass. If it is illegal, the judiciary fixes it. Unfortunately at the moment, the judiciary believes they can legislate and the legislature feels they can be judges.
Any president can put 1000 bills toward congress and there is zero guarantee that they will pass. Some powers given to the president cannot be superceded though by either justice department or any other governmental body.
In the end though, you are just as much to blame as anyone else of any other party for the mess we are in. You vote the same morons into these positions for decades! You no longer vote someone in who doesn’t want to be there but is compelled by a sense of duty to do so. You allow the lies to continue (like “But Clinton had a surplus!” which is a lie. SS is a cash cow on its own and he traded IOUs to it for the cash) and believe the “free” (ha ha!!) press. If you truly understood government, had served your country more than fries, and voted YOUR ideals and not any party’s (because a REPRESENTATIVE should represent YOU and your community, not any party) we would all be better off.
Obama and McCain are not the “end all” choices for president. But we are stuck with them. McCain is not a true republican and Obama is a puppet. A puppet? Yes. No voting record, no skills, no positions, no people around him of any integrity (terrorists, embezzlers, criminals, etc). Sure, McCain has his share as well. I would ask for a paper ballot and put in “None of the Above”. Problem solved.
Has anyone on here actually checked voting records? You can find the voting records of every person in the senate online. It’s law that they post where they stand and what they’ve voted for. If you are interested (and I think everyone should be) Go to votesmart.org and check their records. I think some people would find it slightly disheartening to discover what the candidates have said they’ve done and what they really have or in many cases HAVEN’T done are actually very opposite.
I’m a navy wife of 4 1/2 years stationed in Silverdale, WA and I have to say looking at McCain’s record on voting for Veterans and benefits for current military members actually made me a little angry. In the last year he’s either not been there to vote at all or voted against some things that would have really helped my family.
Jonahs book is actually historically incorrect with its term “fasist” and “leftist”. He seeks to prove a point but he is not a historian and he makes a vast number of mistakes. Most of his conclusions are interesting but I wouldn’t use his book as a strong document of support in favor of your thoughts. Sorry, just saying.
*Fascist*
Hag…
yarp
Are you sure he’s dead? He’s not still moving? He’s not going to get up is he?
……. Narp?
fascist isnt far right.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-fascism.html
its a totalitarian government that is like communism where the state owns everything. Communism though, at least in its ideal deployment (which has never happened btw), is 100% democratically run… aka mob rule. All of the “communist” countries are really fascist countries where the leader of the “communist” country runs everything and those who dont have a job or arent “cute enough to sing the national anthem” dont matter or “disappear”
Snide Remark Fail.
Read up on history, Only Mussolini and Stalin were Leftists in the European
sense of the term. The south asian men you mentioned are actually
Leninist.
Additionally, Germany was National Socialist but it doesn’t mean they
had a strict socialist economy. And who told you they were Marxist?
If anything Germany was an Autocratic Dictatorship that used principles
that fit their times and needs. Germany was in short, pragmatic (in its on
way).
I lol at your Bolshevik statement. No no no, Bolsheviks are far from
Nazis, Bolsheviks do not have the same social or political goals as
Nazis. Just read what Lenin wrote, nothing is the same as Hitler or any
of the German scholars who supported him (or whom he supported).
Also…..who cares about Germany and their opinion of our politics?
Besides, have you forgot? Germany is no longer run by Nazis……
sorry about how my text came out guys
Given that Hitler publicly denounced Marxism and Bolshevism, and that
the Nazis rose to power on a wave of anti-Communist sentiment (look
up the Reichstag fire, which was blamed on the Comintern and used as
a pretext for outlawing the Communist Party of Germany), I think you
may be confused. Historically speaking, Nazism and Italian Fascism had
more in common with the “Third Position” on economics that opposed
both communism and capitalism. In addition, one of the biggest traits
of Marxism is internationalism, while fascism (in all of its variants) is
a supremely nationalistic system (“Deutschland uber alles,” for example).
Socially and economically, Hitler was probably more rightist than leftist,
and the Nazis certainly singled out communists for more of their hate
than capitalists, but it doesn’t fit particularly well into the two-dimensional
right/left spectrum we’re familiar with today.
“Socialism” is not necessarily the same thing as “Marxism,” for that
matter. The latter is a version of the former, but socialism, as a ideology,
existed long before Karl Marx was born. And just because something
has the word “socialist” in its name doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s
true. The German Democratic Republic (East Germany) wasn’t democratic,
Argentina had a whole succession of dictators who went around calling
themselves President of the Argentine Republic, and so on. I mean,
just because I go and call myself Emperor of Neptune doesn’t mean it’s
true, right?
Its true if no one else can disprove you…..
Neptune eh? Are you close to Uranus?
Sorry had to.
Yes, and they go to war. The armies of Neptune invaded Uranus…..as well I couldn’t help it.
That explains the sensation I have… Oh wait, that was the doctor’s examination… *shudder*
Tell him to remove the Superbowl ring next time.
That wasn’t his finger …
The Nazi’s and Bolsheviks are like the Catholics and Protestants – two sides of the same coin.
Socialists in Germany had a mantra: First Brown, then Red.
*sigh* Bolsheviks are not on the same coin as the Nazis……completely different coin, think Euros and Dollars. Two different groups. Hitler only used the propaganda of the Socialist movement in order to take power from teh communist party in Germany which was really powerful. Look up voting statictis from that era and you see that it was neck and neck between who would win elections. Hitler and the Nazis were NOT!*** the same as Communist or Bolsheviks or whatever you prefer to call them.
Try telling that to a Calvinist during the Protestant Reformation. Or a Southern Baptist today, for that matter.
Sure, there were some similarities between Nazism and Bolshevism. When you get down to it, both were totalitarian-style governments. Atrocities were committed in the name of both, too. But they’re clearly not the same thing, and the distinctions are at least as noteworthy as the similarities. If nothing else, the deal-breaker should be the number of private or semi-private corporations started or continuing to operate during the Nazi rule of Germany, including Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW. The German economy was controlled, to be sure, but the same thing can e said of almost any economy on a serious, wartime footing. By comparison, private enterprise in a Marxist or quasi-Marxist state like the Soviet Union was virtually non-existent. And since that’s one of the main distinctions between a capitalist and communist economy, it’s really kind of difficult to call Nazi Germany Bolshevik, or even truly socialist, with a straight face.
See image. Hitler was not leftist.
when I said ’see image’, I meant click my name
Adolph was a right wing fascist, as was Mussolini.
From the cut-n-paste files:
Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism, class collaboration, populism, militarism, totalitarianism, dictatorship, collectivism, statism, social interventionism, and economic planning. Fascism strongly opposes communism, liberalism, and conservatism (taking into account that fascists made alliances with conservatives more often than other groups).[6][2][1][7][8][9][10] Though nationalist in nature, fascist movements have sought alliances with each other in different countries on common beliefs, such as opposition to communism. Fascist governments nationalized key industries and made massive state investments.[11][12] They thought private property was to be regulated to ensure that “benefit to the community precedes benefit to the individual.”[13] They also introduced price controls and other types of economic planning measures.[14] Fascists promoted their ideology as a “third way” between capitalism and Marxian socialism.[15]
FAIL
I agree with freakyface, and I’m not going to repeat all the excellent points made. Hitler and Mussolini were *NOT* communists, nor were they capitalists. I’d argue that in practice, none of the communist dictators you mentioned were truly communtist, like many, they used the idealogy to gain power.
Furthermore, those people have little to do with Lincoln, Obama, or liberal-left leaning people in American today. Most Americans who define themselves as liberal or left-leaning do not approve of communism and have a pretty staunch desire to uphold the bill of rights. It’s people on the right claiming all liberals are communists and comparing people to Hitler (and I’m not saying that it doesn’t happen both ways because it does), make people on the right look like dumbasses.
It does get rather creepy when people think there are only two parties in the whole world…
Yeah, it’s a sign that many people are really uniformed, or really ethno/egocentric. *sigh* There’s much more to the world than extreme hardcore communism and complete laise faire capitalism, and I don’t think anyone’s found the ideal political system yet, if one is even possible….
Ya, the people are dicks factor really gums up the works.
of…. the left… can I have whatever you’re smoking?
You need to lay-off and get with the program, this site is about humor. It’s funny. I’m sorry you don’t understand that or are tooo good to understand that. Get off your high horse and return to normal life please.
THIS IS ALL HUMOR! NOT POLITICS! GROW UP AND FIND HUMOR, IF YOU CAN’T DO THAT, PLEASE LEAVE!
Picture + Caption = not funny. Sorry if being educated is a bad thing…..
That was rude, sorry. Let me rephrase, sometimes being incorrect is the punchline but other times the punchline must be correct as well as witty.
You’re right maybe I should leave. But before I go, could you please explain to me where the funny is? I’m not seeing it. And I’m pretty good at spotting it because I visit all the “lol” sites everyday.
You also sound pretty naive saying this site is humor, and not politics. Don’t come here much do you?
Lincoln was a smart cookie.
You could say that, however, his best attribute is his ability to speak. He was the Pericles of the 1800s.
Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. And his inexperience showed the first few years of the Civil War.
Abraham Lincoln was also a liberal and following Europe’s lead. “Republican” and “Democrat” are labels and what matters are policies.
I’m a Democrat now, but back then I would have been a Republican.
Yeah….. which would make Democrats “Red” and Republicans “Blue”
which is how it is…. everywhere else.
Actually you would have been neither. No such party was around that would hold the views of the current Democratic party.
Also, Lincoln was not a liberal in the European way all together. He favored government reform from Germany and England but I wouldn’t call him a European liberal in complete confidence.
Probably the biggest part of the Republican Party platform circa 1860 was anti-slavery (not necessarily abolition, but certainly prohibiting the expansion of it). Not quite a hot-button issue nowadays (thank goodness). And, on the flipside, I don’t think there was much cry for the US military to withdraw from Iraq in the late 1850s, either.
If I was alive and voting in 1860, faced with the sort of issues 1860 America had to deal with, I’d almost certainly be a Republican. Nowadays, eh, not so much.
If you lived in the 1850s you would be like everyone else from that period, including how you vote. lol.
I didn’t know everyone voted the identically in the 1850s.
I think that the point of this caption isn’t to compare Barak Obama to President Lincoln, that after all is for history to decide. But rather to point out inexperienced does not mean ineffectual or bad.
OOoooh, the point of the LOL. I was waiting for somebody to say that.
As I have mentioned already on this comment page – Lincoln was not a such a great guy.
Nobody really is, are they?
Santa is….
No, he is a morbidly obese man who judges how naughty you have been to determine whether he will bring goodies made by child labor in the North Pole.
Santa and Satan have the same letters. They both wear red and black. You never see them together. Coincidence?
Dun dun dunnn… Next on Unsolved Mysteries.
My favorite Christmas song is by Weird Al Yankovic. “The Night Santa Went Crazy.”
I personally always considered Santa to be a stalker. Sees you while you’re sleeping? Knows when you’re awake? Roasts your chestnuts on an open fire? Santa is almost as scary as clowns!
True, so the same must apply to a VP nomination, wouldn’t it? Probably more so.
Probably so. Although ability to form coherent sentences might be a minimum qualification, regardless of experience.
Hasn’t stopped Biden !
Lincoln was never a US Senator, but he was a congressman (briefly) and was a respectey attorney.
Interestingly enough, though he only had a few bouts to his name and since it was a real sport back then, Lincoln also fought a few carnival matches in his younger days as a professional wrestler
Now I want to see the Washington/Lincoln match in my head.
CAGE MATCH!
In Bed…
OUCH MY BRAIN!!! I damaged myself….
I’m confused. Lincoln supported the bloodiest war in American history for the sake of the future of the Union. Obama is vehemently and shortsightedly opposed to one of the least costly military operations in the history of the country. Where are the parallels? Added to that, didn’t Lincoln usher out Winfield Scott, whose Anaconda Plan was eventually adopted after the United States tried to quickly end the war by pushing straight to Richmond and got bloodied for four years? So if Lincoln hadn’t been so inexperienced, the US would’ve ended the Civil War in two years, most likely, at much less of a cost. Oh, now I see the parallel. Both want to pander to the public and try to end a war quickly, even if that’s not the best option from a military perspective. At least Lincoln had the sense not to give up, which is more than I can say for Obama.
CHANGE!
Hey everyone,
just to settle this,
Lincoln was a four-term state legislator going back as far 1834. He was also in the House for the Illinois 7th district for a term in the late 1840s and a major force in local politics (though never elected. Kind of like a community organizer, lol) until he ran for President in 1860.
So lets see… inexperienced…. no. Illinois…. check. Senator….. no.
And, as a corporate lawyer and founding member of the Republican Party, he fought the Democrats tooth and nail, even and especially when they were calling themselves “confederates”.
Picture caption = FAIL. Try some research next time. But at least you and Biden are in good company. Did Lincoln go on TV to reassure the nation too? LOL @ http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36248
B for the WIN. I would have loved to have Biden for a history teacher.
Haha!! Does that guy EVER think before he talks? And to think he could be one heart beat from the presidency…
Maybe McCain and Obama have learned a lesson from Bush–pick someone to be VP who NO ONE wants to be president, then you don’t have to worry about crazy people trying to shoot at you.
You all fail history…………and hard. (Except for those who know that Lincoln was not a senator)
Just so who ever made this reads all the comments: Lincoln was actually one of the most vocal members of the Government before he was president. Where do you think he made a name for himself???? HMMMM! The Mexican American War, he was the most vocal advocate to NOT invade Mexico and accused the South of falsely reporting an attack into US land. Now then, he was also in involved in several large bills back in the 1850s.
I don’t understand how he could be compared to Obama. Lincoln is much more like Roosevelt if anyone, however, Roosevelt (Franklin) was governor of new york and never served in Congress.
“You all fail history…………and hard. (Except for those who know that Lincoln was not a senator)”
You all fail history…………and hard. (Except for those who know that Lincoln was not a senator)
“You all fail history…………and hard. (Except for those who know that Lincoln was not a senator)”
Uh…both Lincoln and Obama were elected to the Illinois state senate…so how were they not senators?
He only served as a Rep on both the state and federal level, not a Senator, as has been said a billion times already.
and B. rocks….
also why are we forgetting that Lincoln was a Republican with Core Values and Beliefs which I’ve not heard of B. Hussein.
The except that sometime around the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, the Republican party threw out the “Core Values and Beliefs” of the Lincoln era in favor of courting the support of mouth-breathers like the old Dixiecrats. Does the phrase “Southern Strategy” ring any bells?
The “Core Values and Beliefs” of Lincoln’s Republican Party are not the “Core Values and Beliefs” of McCain’s Republican Party. Or, for that matter, Theodore Roosevelt’s Republican Party. Or Eisenhower’s Republican Party. Political issues tend to change significantly over the span of 150 years, y’know? You may love Lincoln and hate McCain, or vice versa, or some combination thereof, but they’re not the same, any more than the Democratic Party of Barack Obama is the same as the Democratic Party of Woodrow Wilson (who had some distinctly racist views regarding blacks).
only some racist views……*cough* lots *cough*
Well, yes. But I was deliberately trying to avoid sparking a flame war with any Wilson-enthusiasts lurking around these parts.
Because the Republican party of that era is NOT the same republican party of this era? Were he alive now, with the same values as then, Lincoln would be moderate-to-liberal
Lets be clear, if Obama was Muslim he would be celebrating Ramadan right now……………not going around being Political.
Anyways, Lincoln did not really have core beliefs lol, what about the statement he made saying he would do what ever it took to win the war, if that meant freeing the slaves then he would do or if it meant not freeing them and fighting longer…..he would do it. Lincoln was a pragmatist not a moralist. Not to mention the horrific amount of Native Americans he ordered to be moved or killed by the Army out west…..
Agreed. Obama isn’t Muslim, but even if he was….HOW IS THAT RELEVANT? Are we still in the “Muslim = Al Quaida terrorist” phase?
Yes, you didn’t get the memo? It was sent out with your “How to Stop Illegals From Stealing Your Job” Handbook and stun gun.
I only used that stun gun in the bedroom with shocking results.
That’s what she said.
Did I tell you today that I love you in that flirty and platonic sort of way? Cuz I do. Give your fella a big hug for me, commending his great taste in women.
Call me crazy, but why is someone attempting to draw a line between the current democratic presidential candidate and the first republican president?
Some things make sense, but this isn’t one of them.
The facts and whatnot are above… Please read and don’t let freakface’s work and others go to waste.
Because why not?
More seriously, it’s all a matter of perspective. In some regards, the Democratic Party of 2008 has a lot more in common with the Republican Party of 1860 than the Republican Party of 2008 does. In other ways, not so much. A century and a half of evolving politics will do that to you. I don’t think it’s particularly useful to assume that either the Republicans or the Democrats are much like their equivalents in the mid-nineteenth century, so I don’t see much of a problem with the comparison, on its face.
Plus, Ronald Reagan regularly spoke highly of FDR, so I guess there’s some precedent….
A minor quibble, but Lincoln wasn’t a US Senator – he was a congressman. He was, like Obama, a State Senator, but that is a secondary issue.
Heh, I was about to quibble that one too. XD
And wasn’t he shot in the head?
Aye he was… but do you want to go through 4 years of Obama to get to that point?
Wasn’t Lincoln a Congressman?
Read, read, read. Scroll up. Read. Pick practically any place. Read.
Anyone else gonna call Godwin?
Humor fail.
Um, Lincoln was an inexperienced Illinois REPRESENTATIVE Congressman, not a SENATOR.
Well, if you’re going to start dragging boring things into the discussion such as facts, I’m not sure I can participate. Don’t you know the purpose of this PK item is to associate a politician with a sainted figure from American history? Reality has nothing to do with it, the reality about Lincoln in particular.
ironically lincoln was a republican, though the old republican party is different from the republicans of today.
It’s about time somebody said it.
As a Republican, Lincoln had to fight Right Republicans over how to proceed during and after the war. He believed in social ideals and religious (and unreligious) tolerance, and advocated racial equality.
Sounds more like the issues of a Democrat today. At least in many ways, not all.
Is it just me, or he looks EXTREMELY creepy? Like, on each photo/painting/whatever i see of him, he has this insanely creepy gaze paired with his weird skull structure.
They say that The Titanic was built by professionals & the Ark by amatuers; I suppose what it boils down to is sometimes the underdog is best suited for the job.
Like Palin ? Or Obama?
I think he refers to McCain and Obama.
Abe Lincoln, however, was never a Community Organizer like the Obamessiah. He also was not, as far as I know, not a Marxist like the Obamessiah.
However, Lincoln suspended habeus corpus and instituted the draft. If Obamessiah = Lincoln, then who knows what civil rights and liberties will Obamessiah suspend to have his way and he will draft your ass.
Prove the Obamarxist comment.
Put up or shut up.
Fail.
Your conception of Marxism is drastically incorrect.
Marxism is a means of explaining history and historical events by way of economic and political power struggles.
The fact that Lenin (who is probably closer to the ideology you are demonizing) was also a Marxist does not make Obama a Marxist.
Liberal, yes; as in “a liberal amount of government.” Think lotion. Goob.
really cause thats all i’ve heard about the last 8 years from him how the wealthy class has ruled the US keeping the middle and poor class down.
I think it’s incredibly sad that it took forever until someone finally posted that Lincoln was never actually a senator.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally against McCain…but still.
Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.
IQ tests for voters. Seriously. And bring back natural selection.
Annihilation of persons begins with any who use “to be” verbs in sentences where avoidable.
Moving forward, annihilation of persons whose screen names consist of “Sarah Micek.”
—
Honestly, where does the line get drawn? Are you stupid? We’ll start with idiots then…
sorry you dems wouldn’t survive in natural selection can’t welfare your way out of a tigers mouth.
until i read this i didn’t think anyone would vote for McCain. It just… seemed so out of the realm of possibility. i said i would move to america and become an assassin if palin become vice president. Don’t tell me there’s actually a chance i might have to?
Come on guys, the rest of the world hates you enough. No more war mongering republicans… please?
Stay right where you are. We’ll be there in a minute.
I know… it’s terrible, isn’t it? The spin machine works. I feel like every 4 years has become like “Groundhog Day”.
And the left is going ” But..but.. I didn’t know ANYONE who voted for Bush ! WAAAAAAHHHHH!”-
This will be repeated in November- stay tuned !
Considering half the people don’t vote in the first place, I’m not surprised that there are people who don’t know any Bush supporters. Similarly, there would be people who don’t know any Democrat voters.
The United States have lost their position on top of the financial and cultural world some years ago. Whoever is elected in the US, it doesn’t matter anymore, because the US will fall down to next to no international influence in the next 5 years.
As a matter of facts we can thank the Bush Administration for helping the world of getting rid of this Anti-Democratic farce of what was once supposed to become a country of freedom and equality. We can simply go back to ignoring this british colony again.
Wow. Unbelievable. I plan to vote for McCain. Not thrilled about him, but dislike Obama even more. He will cost us more in additional taxes and entitlements than we can afford. But if he can bring up our estimation in the world…goody! (insert sarcasm here).
Lincoln was not a great president. He started the dismantling of the Constitution by suspending habeas corpus and other deeds. He considered his ‘calling’ to be aoove the law of the land. WRONG! His actions took a toll on the South that has taken over 100 years to fight back from. He is the one who started the demolition of states’ rights that continues to this day.
See what inexperience got us? I don’t know if our nation can survive another inexperienced, socialist president.
He lost the race for senate to Stephen Douglas.
Though he only had two years as a Whig
Congressman, while Andrew Johnson served
every position possible from Mayor to VP.
Guess which one is know as a great president
and which got impeached.
Cross-post on the failblog.
Ahem. Lincoln was never a Senator. He served one term as a Congressman.
the worst pres ever. We are still paying the price down south.
I was about to make this same point but I am glad someone else did also. I just don’t understand what is wrong with a system that puts its resources into lifting up its citizens to a level that poverty is a non issue. If Obama is a socialist you might as well call me one too.
The person who posted this really needs a history lesson. Too bad schools don’t care much about history. That’s why we are doomed to repeat it, what happened in Georgia is proof of that.
Comparing Obama to Lincoln. That’s an insult to Lincoln.
Lincoln was never a Senator. He was a congressman in the House of Representatives.
I’m supporting Obama, and even I’m pissed no one noticed this before posting it.
I know, right? Caption fail.
He was an Senator in Illinois, just never a never a Senator of Illinois.
“Illinois Senator” could mean either.
Actually he was a state rep, and then a US rep. Never a Senator on either level.
Oh, I must have misread that. I thought he went from Illinois Senate to National house of reps.
But apparently not.
Except Lincoln was also a Republican. :/ Comparison FAIL.
This caption is fail and so are most of the conversations taking place beneath it.
Republicans these days wouldn’t have freed blacks from slavery anyhow. In fact they’re doing their level best to put blacks back INTO slavery along with the gays, the single moms and the “commie pinkos.”
America, in fact, is fail. Epic fail, a metric truckload of fail, the Failmageddon.
FAILMAGEDDON!!!!
( epic steal on my part… I now own that phrase! lol )
Wow, if you think America is that much fail, any airline would be happy to accept your ticket and take you to any other country of your choosing on a permanent vacation.
Isn’t it sad that your first response is ‘lolz, leave the country’ and not, ‘oh, what don’t you like about America?’
And look what lincoln did. He tore the country in two upon being elected. this is FAIL. You cannot deny it.
Rest in peace Mr. President.
Oh and Anthony, your just stupid.
Have a nice day ^_^
Actually, there are good reasons to think less highly of Lincoln than his current status as political saint. First, he was a human being, not a demi-god. Second, he violated the Constitution in numerous ways. Third, he got the United States into a terrible war, which arguably could have lead to the end of the United States as a constitutional republic, by centralizing power in the national government, a process which has been pretty much continual, with few if any reversals.
If you find the above surprising or contrary to your understanding of U.S. history, I would recommend reading “The Real LIncoln” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo or “Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men”, by Jeffrey Rogers Hummel. Or if you can’t bring yourself to do that, please at least read criticisms of those books, so you will know what issues are regarding Lincoln.
Oh come on – there is not need for a republic to be a federation, or, indeed, why a federal state needs to be a constitutional republic.
Made one helluva president though….
i wish u americans would get more inexpirienced illonois senators in ur administration….