Why not?
Because she's a woman.
And there won't be a woman president of the United States until the year 3000. Now, the fact that it will take another 992 years before we get a woman in the Oval Office may seem hard to believe, but that's the way it is. Don't take my word for it though; I'm just repeating what I heard from Wonder Woman and her mom:
And how do they know what's going to happen so far in the future, anyway? Because it's already happened!
Drop some science on us, William Moulton Marston!
That sounds reasonable.
So does this mean that the Republicans will keep the White House for another term? Or that Barack Obama will be our next president? All we can know for sure is that the next president won't be a woman. So Democrats in the upcoming Super-Tuesday states would do well to give their votes to Obama or John Edwards; otherwise they're just throwing them away.
8 comments:
What the hell? Everything I've read about Golden Age Wonder Woman claims that Marston created her as a female counter to Superman, a strong female role-model for young girls to aspire to(or young boys to accept domination from). Why in the hell would he then say "Woman president, a thousand years from now and it's a pretty fantastic idea." Couldn't he just as easily had Diana say "Oh, the first female president!" and left the year off, without having to throw sexual equality a thousand years into the future?
Anyway, this prophecy doesn't rule out Hillary being elected and then assassinated by some Republican nutjobs.
I like the things that Hilary says, but the way she says them makes me doubt her sincerity. She seems rather devote of emotion and has mastered the politician-speak that every good Republican knows. At least with Obama, I feel like he's speaking from the heart. A lot of the time I get the same vibe from McCain, too.
Wait.
Hillary's a woman?
Well, wait, it didn't say "first woman president," it just said a woman would be president in 3000. Maybe if they had looked earlier, they would have seen other woman presidents.
It's like if they had checked 2001 and exclaimed, "Oh, look, a Bush will be president in 2001!" Doesn't mean one hadn't happened earlier...
I'm trying too hard here, aren't I?
sounds logical to me! can't argue with science like that!
osama bin obama in '08!
um, wait that's not right!
aw sheeit!
Snell's right! (And `trying to hard' to read something positive into golden age stories is part of the point and completely reasonable).
I gotta say, at first you really threw me: this isn't one of those blogs I come to for political insight...(not that isn't GREAT to find it here, mind u...)
You just can't argue with Amazon science, though. It's hard to refute any aspect of it. I mean, what do we know...*we're* not Amazons, right?
I wonder where Senator Clinton stands on the issue of "loving submission."
Scott, Snell,
Yeah, these are just three panels totally out of context, and I suppose Marston's future of the U.S. is open to interpretation. The way Wondy emphasizes "woman" in the first part makes me think that woman was the first. Diana Prince is the second though!
Jason, Greg,
Yeah, the Amazons had conquered space travel (using giant kangaroos no less) before the Soviet Union and the U.S. had even started shooting up sattelites. Our science just can't touch theirs.
Post a Comment