Re: eek!

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Kendall Clark wrote:

[snip]
> > Mr Bush, whose fondness for early nights in his own bed is famous in
> > Washington, refused and took his wife to their normal bedroom in the family
> > quarters.
> 
> The creepiness of this is beyond words.

Indeed.

[snip]
> > Dressed only in a T-shirt, running shorts and a pair of old shoes, he
> > grabbed the two family dogs and led his wife, who could not find her contact
> > lenses, back down to the nuclear bunker.
> 
> First his dad barfs on a Japanese high official; now I have this image
> burned into my imagination 'til I die... When will the world no longer be
> afflicted with these disgusting Bush fuckers?

hehehehheheh. I'll keep that in mind.

> > There they stayed, until an officer in uniform walked into their room, and
> > said: "Mr President, good news! It's one of our own."
> 
> Heh, no followup? No nail-biting Presidential decision as to which bed Bush
> took his blind wife back to? :<

Is this the article that puts this in the same breath as "Saddam is evil"?

> All of this seems somehow to have the Clintons -- and the right wing's "he's
> a philanderer, she's a half-lesbo" fantasies -- as a subtext.

But in a good way or a bad way? I.e., is it "oh look, bush is
wholesome" or is it "yeek! what a loser!"?

Hmm. "Bush likes to go to bed early for manly seed dispensing" is an
interpretation i hadn't considered...and there's early so he can still get
to bed early vs. early so he has lots of sex early. Yeach.

Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.