Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by muhfuhkuh 3272 days ago
But it does mean "better than the current guy", though. So, he is better. Better than the man before (who started the wars in the ME, but in the countries who didn't plan and execute 9/11 oddly), and better than the man after (who pals around and holds globes together with the country where 80% of the 9/11 terrorists were born).
1 comments
StevePerkins 3272 days ago
Well "muhfukuh", I can't believe that Amy Adams didn't win the Golden Globes for "Arrival" this year.

(I mean, if we're just latching on to a word or phrase in the previous post, to talk about things irrelevant to its point for cheap upvotes...)

link
jbooth 3272 days ago
No, he actually went right after your implied (to me and muhfuhkah, at least) argument.

Your argument is that we should aspire to merely "just better than the other guys", with the subtext that Democrats aren't really any better than Republicans.

'muhfuhkah' pointed out that it IS better. Which is worth pointing out in a two party system.

We just watched a whole bunch of people make your same arguments, saying Obama wasn't perfect so whatever they're all the same, and as a result we elected a guy who's much worse in every possible way. Great job, everyone.

link
StevePerkins 3272 days ago
You're reading too far into it (and "muhfuhka" is just Reddit-posting).

Parent post was surprised that Obama did not legalize drugs. Presumably due to binary thinking ("correct" politician does "correct" thing, etc). But even in a two-party system, "correct" does not equal "perfect". It's dangerous to presume that a politician's beliefs and actions will always line up with your preference, just because he or she is not with the other party that you oppose.

That is all. It is not even remotely a statement that all politicians and parties are equivalent. My sentence that he quoted from explicitly says the opposite, for pete's sake. You guys are just venting.

link
SippinLean 3272 days ago
>Presumably due to binary thinking ("correct" politician does "correct" thing, etc)

This is not a safe presumption. Michael Botticelli (former director of the drug czar’s office) came out and said that the administration was considering it, but it was too dangerous, politically.

The Obama administration pushed lots of sentencing reform legislation, so it would follow that they might decriminalize cannabis as well. It's not just because they were democrats.

>No, Obama didn't embrace drug decriminalization

We can easily find examples to refute this, 2010's Fair Sentencing Act and Holder's 2013 memo regarding mandatory sentences in low-level drug cases come to mind.

link