(Post a new comment)

	sepiamagpie 2003-11-24 07:20 pm UTC (link)
	The queen's a tough old broad. She could probably take him. Alternate answer: I envision the british following Bush's men around trying to protect the gardens and saying things like: "Sirs, if you could just PLEASE come insid--oh lord, there go the rose bushes. ;_;" In little british accents. (Reply to this)(Thread)

feenix
2003-11-24 07:43 pm UTC (link)

Only Bush. I mean, didn't his father ~~learn~~ teach him better than to destroy Buckingham Palace? The man has the least tact of any President I've seen--more often than not, his behaviour is downright unpresidential.

Of course, if it were Bubba, he'd probably be hitting on the Queen.

"Hey baby, wonder what it'd be like to REALLY know the leader of the free world?"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	smo 2003-11-24 07:54 pm UTC (link)
	Well, at least Slick Willie would have been a bit more eloquent in his propositioning. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	eljuno 2003-11-24 08:30 pm UTC (link)
	"Now, baby, howsabout you'n'me do some...diplomacy..." Cue Barry White (Reply to this)(Parent)

	ieatpeople 2003-11-25 05:31 am UTC (link)
	Didn't Daddy Shrub throw up all over the prime minister of Japan or something? Considering that I still remember that even though I must have been less than twelve at the time, I think our international reputation was more damaged by that event than by Dubya's inattention to the other bushes of the world. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	smo 2003-11-25 04:37 pm UTC (link)
	Indeed he did. As a result of that faux pas, the Japanese came up with a new term for being thrown up upon: "Bushururued." (Reply to this)(Parent)

	phosfate 2003-11-24 08:26 pm UTC (link)
	I wish we had a President with a less embarrassing surname. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	virago 2003-11-25 12:19 am UTC (link)
	My mind keeps wanting to make really, really horrid jokes about Clinton's placement in the lineup of presidents. Then I take my mind out back and wash its mouth out with soap. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	shoiryu 2003-11-25 06:43 am UTC (link)
	I wish we had a less embarassing President. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	smo 2003-11-25 04:56 pm UTC (link)
	Seconded. (Reply to this)(Parent)

walkingundine
2003-11-24 09:21 pm UTC (link)

I fail to see how the fact that Bush's entourage were Marines and Secret Service folks has anything to do with the destruction of the nice British lady's shrubbery. They were buttwipes and went for the super-dramatic entrance when it wasn't necessary. It's good to have respect for people in the protecting-people-with-their-lives line of work, but that doesn't mean they're perfect! It doesn't mean they automatically have the common sense not to land in HRM's garden and destructify it.
This, I think, is the result of people thinking with their muscles instead of their brains.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

rann
2003-11-25 01:03 am UTC (link)

You make it sound as if the marines swept into the gardens in a military style coup, killed the Queen's guards, shot the flamingos, and made the helicopter landing pads with combat shovels.
It was most likely the Queen's OWN PEOPLE who decided on this course of action, or at the very least, approved it and carried it out. If the Queen wants to be pissed at someone, she should be pissed at her own people for approving this and doing it.
But it just makes such a better story for her to be pissed at Bush, and for all the internet teenies to go "OMG BUSH IZ SOOOO INSENSITIVE HE DUM!!!11!!1"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	walkingundine 2003-11-25 01:54 am UTC (link)
	Ahem. All right, I make no pretense at common sense of any kind. This is probably good, as I make plenty of pretense at any number of other things. Color me teenie, I suppose. It honestly didn't occur to me that the Queen's people would have had to approve the manner of Bush's arrival. Thank you kindly for pointing it out to me. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

rann
2003-11-25 03:03 am UTC (link)

Sorry if I was a little antagonistic... I'm just used to people who can turn logical cartwheels of epic proportions to defend their favorite Left-wing personality, who conveniently shut down such skills when it comes to something they can blame Bush for. Wasn't singling you out or anything.
Besides, as even the anti-Bush person below admitted, the story seems likely to be an urban legend, most likely specifically crafted for the sole reason of bashing Bush, or at the least suffering the "purple monkey dishwasher" effect from repetition of the security gripes.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	walkingundine 2003-11-25 03:26 am UTC (link)
	It's okay. :) Now that I think about it, why on Earth would she have flamingos anyway? Seems... Uncharacteristic, to say the least. Funny mental image, though. (Reply to this)(Parent)

rhi_silverflame
2003-11-25 05:43 am UTC (link)

It was most likely the Queen's OWN PEOPLE who decided on this course of action, or at the very least, approved it and carried it out.

Actually, I believe that Bush demanded that US forces be in charge of all security-related matters during the visit.

. . . of course, he also demanded that the Secret Service, including the sniper forces, be issued diplomatic immunity. Y'know, in case they accidentally shot and killed a protester.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	electric_sheep 2003-11-25 01:36 pm UTC (link)
	Don't forget they wanted to close the tube and wield miniguns. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	darthfi 2003-11-25 03:24 pm UTC (link)
	And "shoot to kill" is such a popular term in this country, after all. There's absolutely no emotional baggage associated with it, no, no, no, no, none whatsoever. :( (Reply to this)(Parent)

	rhi_silverflame 2003-11-26 04:29 am UTC (link)
	I like the part where he insisted on shipping over his own entire motorcade. And of Humvees, no less. Gah. Actually, it seems that the biggest testament to his rudeness is the way he didn't seem to be willing to trust the host country to be capable of handling the visit. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	smo 2003-11-26 05:57 pm UTC (link)
	Oh, how I would love for the host country to call him on his shit. Unfortunately they're too polite for that, as unlike him, they weren't, oh, I dunno, RAISED BY WOLVES. (Reply to this)(Parent)

darthfi
2003-11-25 02:03 am UTC (link)

Lessee, for the past nine years, the furthest I've lived from Buck House has been four miles. I have friends who've been there and told me about it. In all that time, I've never heard of a flock of flamingos living in the gardens. It's not exactly something the Queen would do - if she *did* have flamingos, they'd more likely be housed properly at a zoo or at a country residence.

Secondly, Buck House already has a helipad. Needs one.

Admittedly, Bush was an ungracious house guest. He insisted on his own security at all times, who tried to demand revamps at Buck House to make it more terrorist-proof and also tried to demand the right to shoot to kill anyone who disturbed them. On a more normal scale, this is accepting an invitation from your Auntie Liz who you desperately want to visit because everyone else will be dead jealous, and then demanding that she a) make all the neighbours move out of the street, b) install new double glazing, new fences and gates and redecorate, and c) allow you to kill all of her neighbours that you don't like.

Personally, when I went marching last week, I was on a double crusade against the TWAT and against bad manners towards a hostess.

Also, the security thing was *really* rude. The last time the UK lost a prime minister or monarch to an assassin was 1812. None have been even seriously wounded since then. How presidents have you lost since then? 3? 4? Not to mention the shooting of Regan.

Also, the UK has faced a serious *immediate* terrorist threat on its own turf for at least 30 years. Again, Mr Bush, who do you think has more experience in dealing with terrorism on the ground?

I bet he even didn't say "thank you, I had a lovely time" to Her Maj before he left.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	rann 2003-11-25 02:56 am UTC (link)
	I bet he even didn't say "thank you, I had a lovely time" to Her Maj before he left. Sorcha's Law 2. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	puipui 2003-11-25 06:29 am UTC (link)
	Is it wrong that I always want to add an "Electric Boogaloo" to the end of the name of that law? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	cmikhailovic 2003-11-25 06:57 am UTC (link)
	Hrm. The point being made was that "Bush has extremely bad manners, as demonstrated by x." I'm failing to see how "I bet he didn't say thank you" isn't a logical extrapolation. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:

rann
2003-11-25 07:02 am UTC (link)

If, during a debate, one party makes statements about hypothetical activities of another party that would make said other party a hypocrite, a liar, or just plain wrong, with no proof or indication that said other party engages in such activities, the first party shall be declared the loser.

Where does it say in there that "logical extrapolations" are allowed? Hm? Or, conversely, where is there proof that Bush didn't say thank you?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:

cmikhailovic
2003-11-25 07:16 am UTC (link)

Um, considering that it looks like simply a snarky remark elaborating on the theme of Bush's otherwise amply demonstrated complete lack of courtesy, "proof" is not required. Also, the quoted law appears to apply to the invoking of unrelated hypothetical issues. Not to mention that since a huge chunk of argumentative technique is based upon the concept of logical extrapolation, it can't be fully disallowed. Simmer down, dude.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rann 2003-11-25 07:30 am UTC (link)
	No! I wanna overreact and whine a lot! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: cmikhailovic 2003-11-25 07:44 am UTC (link)
	That, young lady, calls for... a spanking. Hey, do you think if we start threatening to spank all wankers, it would cut down on the wank? considers Oh, wait... (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: rann 2003-11-25 07:45 am UTC (link)
	throws herself across your lap and wiggles If you really think it'll help me behave... 9.9 (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: cmikhailovic 2003-11-25 08:04 am UTC (link)
	Oh, you are a naughty thing. It's for your own good, really. ;D (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: rann 2003-11-25 08:06 am UTC (link)
	nodnods A spanking! You must give me a spanking! ... And then the oral sex! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Mmmm, Castle Anthrax cmikhailovic 2003-11-25 08:28 am UTC (link)
	As you wish, m'lady! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Mmmm, Castle Anthrax virago 2003-11-25 02:54 pm UTC (link)
	Hey now, Our Great And Holy Leader And Grand And Mighty God Of Everything Ever Bushlet says sex that dun make babies is bad. pouts ;) (Protection from Oral Sex Week would be amusing, wouldn't it...) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	bubosquared 2003-11-25 04:53 pm UTC (link)
	How about a Protection from Bush Week? Just put him in a closet somewhere with some crayons. ;D Actually, that might not be a bad thing to do with some of my own country's politicians, either. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

tempslut
2003-11-27 05:24 am UTC (link)

How about a Protection from Bush Week?

But...but...but that means that the ladies of the world won't be getting cunnilingus for a week. Thus, a stoppage to lesbian sex altogether!

(Never mind...I need to stop giving the religious right more ideas...)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	bubosquared 2003-11-27 10:40 am UTC (link)
	Hey, if I ain't gettin' any, no one is! :p </TMI> (Reply to this)(Parent)

	darthfi 2003-11-25 11:52 am UTC (link)
	Yep, it was actually a joke based on children's parties, where your mother always tells you to make sure you say "thank you, I had a lovely time" after the party to your hostess, even if you didn't. And I'm afraid the rest about Bush's bad manners were perfectly true. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: cmikhailovic 2003-11-25 07:23 pm UTC (link)
	g I remember that. And the rest? I completely believe it. (Reply to this)(Parent)

panthea
2003-11-25 05:28 pm UTC (link)

[wank]

Not to mention the way Bush simply DID NOT WANT TO SEE any protesters while he was there-- not a one!-- and expected Britain to foot the bill for shielding his virgin eyes from the sight of people who-- gasp-- don't agree with him. Yes, that's the democratic process in action, right there.

I'm wondering if this whole helicopter-landing thing wasn't just an extreme method of avoiding protestors altogether. Can't see 'em in the streets if you don't use the streets! Twat.

[/wank]

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	oxydosic 2003-11-26 05:46 pm UTC (link)
	Our president has to be one of the biggest fuckheads on the planet. He seriously scares me with his attitude. If he had his way, we'd all have to pray in school, gays would have no rights, and we'd go around declaring war on any country that didn't dare bend down and kiss our ass. Luckily the worst he can do is one more term, but four years..well, a lot can happen. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	smo 2003-11-26 09:00 pm UTC (link)
	He puts the "dick" in "dictator." (Reply to this)(Parent)