Bush Wearing a Wire During Debates (?)

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I'm glad they brought on a "spyware expert" to crack the case. I think I remember seeing a shot of George and John shaking hands at the beginning of the debate, where Bush's back is visible from the side, in another thread... if anyone wants to dig a little.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/

By Dave Lindorff

Oct. 8, 2004 | Was President Bush literally channeling Karl Rove in
his first debate with John Kerry? That's the latest rumor flooding the
Internet, unleashed last week in the wake of an image caught by a
television camera during the Miami debate. The image shows a large
solid object between Bush's shoulder blades as he leans over the
lectern and faces moderator Jim Lehrer.

The president is not known to wear a back brace, and it's safe to say
he wasn't packing. So was the bulge under his well-tailored jacket a
hidden receiver, picking up transmissions from someone offstage feeding the president answers through a hidden earpiece? Did the device explain why the normally ramrod-straight president seemed hunched over during much of the debate?

Bloggers are burning up their keyboards with speculation. Check out
the president's peculiar behavior during the debate, they say. On
several occasions, the president simply stopped speaking for an
uncomfortably long time and stared ahead with an odd expression on his
face. Was he listening to someone helping him with his response to a
question? Even weirder was the president's strange outburst. In a
peeved rejoinder to Kerry, he said, "As the politics change, his
positions change. And that's not how a commander in chief acts. I, I,
uh -- Let me finish -- The intelligence I looked at was the same
intelligence my opponent looked at." It must be said that Bush pointed
toward Lehrer as he declared "Let me finish." The green warning light
was lit, signaling he had 30 seconds to, well, finish.

Hot on the conspiracy trail, I tried to track down the source of the
photo. None of the Bush-is-wired bloggers, however, seemed to know
where the photo came from. Was it possible the bulge had been
Photoshopped onto Bush's back by a lone conspiracy buff? It turns out
that all of the video of the debate was recorded and sent out by Fox
News, the pool broadcaster for the event. Fox sent feeds from multiple
cameras to the other networks, which did their own on-air presentations
and editing.

To watch the debate again, I ventured to the Web site of the most
sober network I could think of: C-SPAN. And sure enough, at minute 23
on the video of the debate, you can clearly see the bulge between the
president's shoulder blades.

Bloggers stoke the conspiracy with the claim that the Bush
administration insisted on a condition that no cameras be placed behind the candidates. An official for the Commission on Presidential Debates, which set up the lecterns and microphones on the Miami stage, said the condition was indeed real, the result of negotiations by both campaigns. Yet that didn't stop Fox from setting up cameras behind Bush and Kerry. The official said that "microphones were mounted on lecterns, and the commission put no electronic devices on the president or Senator Kerry." When asked about the bulge on Bush's back, the official said, "I don't know what that was."

So what was it? Jacob McKenna, a spyware expert and the owner of the
Spy Store, a high-tech surveillance shop in Spokane, Wash., looked at
the Bush image on his computer monitor. "There's certainly something on his back, and it appears to be electronic," he said. McKenna said that, given its shape, the bulge could be the inductor portion of a two-way push-to-talk system. McKenna noted that such a system makes use of a tiny microchip-based earplug radio that is pushed way down into the ear canal, where it is virtually invisible. He also said a weak signal could be scrambled and be undetected by another broadcaster.

Mystery-bulge bloggers argue that the president may have begun using
such technology earlier in his term. Because Bush is famously prone to
malapropisms and reportedly dyslexic, which could make successful use
of a teleprompter problematic, they say the president and his handlers
may have turned to a technique often used by television reporters on
remote stand-ups. A reporter tapes a story and, while on camera, plays
it back into an earpiece, repeating lines just after hearing them,
managing to sound spontaneous and error free.

Suggestions that Bush may have using this technique stem from a D-day event in France, when a CNN broadcast appeared to pick up -- and
broadcast to surprised viewers -- the sound of another voice seemingly
reading Bush his lines, after which Bush repeated them. Danny
Schechter, who operates the news site MediaChannel.org, and who has
been doing some investigating into the wired-Bush rumors himself, said
the Bush campaign has been worried of late about others picking up
their radio frequencies -- notably during the Republican Convention on
the day of Bush's appearance. "They had a frequency specialist stop me
and ask about the frequency of my camera," Schechter said. "The
Democrats weren't doing that at their convention."

Repeated calls to the White House and the Bush national campaign
office over a period of three days, inquiring about what the president
may have been wearing on his back during the debate, and whether he had used an audio device at other events, went unreturned. So far the Kerry campaign is staying clear of this story. When called for a comment, a press officer at the Democratic National Committee claimed on Tuesday that it was "the first time" they'd ever heard of the issue. A spokeswoman at the press office of Kerry headquarters refused to permit me to talk with anyone in the campaign's research office. Several other requests for comment to the Kerry campaign's press office went unanswered.

As for whether we really do have a Milli Vanilli president, the answer at this point has to be, God only knows.

― San Carlos, Friday, 8 October 2004 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

one of said blogs: http://www.isbushwired.com/

― morris pavilion (samjeff), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:26 (twenty-one years ago)

this is so stupid. He was wearing a box for the clip microphone!

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:27 (twenty-one years ago)

I never heard about this CNN incident from Paris though, does anyone have more info on that?

― kyle (akmonday), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Just imagine the hilarious results if his wire starts picking up a phone sex conversation from a nearby cellphone.

― Nemo (JND), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:29 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't believe John Kerry had a matching bulge though, stence.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:30 (twenty-one years ago)

HE HAD TO BE WIRED BECAUSE HE WAS HAVE SOMEONE SAYING IT ALL TO HIM

― San Carlos, Friday, 8 October 2004 17:30 (twenty-one years ago)

... resisting the joke.... resisting the joke.... (xpost)

― kyle (akmonday), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:31 (twenty-one years ago)

don't resist the joke!

I don't believe John Kerry had a matching bulge though, stence.

we don't have pics of Kerry, uh, bending over at the podium because he's taller!

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:32 (twenty-one years ago)

stence otm. this is a ludicrous charge.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:33 (twenty-one years ago)

just listening to his cadence suggests this very strongly - his pauses are long, totally disproportionate to the speed with which he speaks, and perfectly match the time for someone to complete or at least start well into the line he's about to say.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:34 (twenty-one years ago)

oh not you too

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:35 (twenty-one years ago)

who cares anyway? It certainly didn't help Bush, and probably won't tonight!

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:35 (twenty-one years ago)

you really think it's irrelevant if the President is a puppet?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:36 (twenty-one years ago)

there was no clip microphone, the microphone was on the podium. But that bulge could be anything, like part of a bulletproof vest.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:36 (twenty-one years ago)

would bush (more specifically, bush's people) be stupid enough to try something fishy when he's under so much scrutiny and so many people are hoping he'll fuck up?

― pfeffernuesse (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:37 (twenty-one years ago)

stence otm. this is a ludicrous charge.

A ludicrous charge which is PROBABLY OTM. Oh golly, it's just so unbelievable. Give me a break.

― JAYCEB, Friday, 8 October 2004 17:37 (twenty-one years ago)

yes, the bulge could be anything. i still am quite willing to believe that he's wired, though, and i think people are unwilling to believe such things because they don't want to be foolish either for having been duped for so long or if they turn out to be totally wrong about the theory.

would bush (more specifically, bush's people) be stupid enough to try something fishy when he's under so much scrutiny and so many people are hoping he'll fuck up?

how do you know he hasn't been doing it all along? would they be stupid enough to send him out there without assistance? these people are control freaks.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:39 (twenty-one years ago)

how i love the phrase "that bulge could be anything."

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:39 (twenty-one years ago)

no, I think it's irrelevant to expound on bizarre conspiracy theories based on "evidence" that's easily explainable, no matter what your political affiliations.

And if we wanna get all "meta," in a representative democracy what elected politician isn't a puppet?

there was no clip microphone, the microphone was on the podium.

wrong Dan, as per the terms of the debate, the candidates were also miced with wireless clip microphones, which typically are connected to a power battery of the same shape and size of this infamous lump, and are usually placed on the back of the person wearing them!

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:39 (twenty-one years ago)

can we think about this rationally for a second?

1. his answers were horrendous and he was consistently at a loss for things to say.
2. surely someone would've told him to stop smirking/frowning early on in the debate.
3. this is 2004, not 1987. if bush were to wear a wire he would NOT need a fucking gigantic box strapped to his back. surely the effing president of the united states could hook up some WIRELESS?! much much more likely answer = bulletproof vest

(massive xposts)

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:39 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.cityu.edu.hk/fmo/images/avitem37.jpg

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:41 (twenty-one years ago)

this theory does not rely on the bulge - that emerged as evidence after the theory was propounded. he would not have been told to stop smirking (which presumably he was doing while listening to the voice) because his people believe themselves infallible and are not self-aware. his answers were horrendous because they don't have good ones.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:42 (twenty-one years ago)

it's worth mentioning that this whole silly theory stems from a brief 5 second moment where bush appeared to be telling nobody in particular to let him speak. i'm much more inclined to believe that this is b/c he was flustered and trying to collect himself rather than speaking to the voices in his head.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:42 (twenty-one years ago)

SOMEONE PROBABLY TOLD HIM TO WEAR THAT BULLETT-VEST, PUPPETTTTT... START SPEAKIN FOR YOURSELF GEORG

― San Carlos, Friday, 8 October 2004 17:44 (twenty-one years ago)

i mean don't you think it's bordering on batshit to turn one verbal tic into the basis for a conspiracy theory when good old fashioned logic points to the contrary?

(haha xpost)

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:44 (twenty-one years ago)

yes, the 'evidence' is easily explainable, but his cadence is not - listen to him without any visuals and give me some alternative rationalization. the cadence was remarked upon by many after the debate, including the non-conspiracist quick-to-award-things-to-Bush people at MSNBC. it wasn't just the 'let me finish' bit.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:45 (twenty-one years ago)

you do realize that MSNBC is always looking for a story?

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:47 (twenty-one years ago)

good old-fashioned logic points directly to a need for such a device - Bush has never been particularly deep into policy and has been very carefully managed throughout his entire political career

xp: MSNBC never mentioned this theory; but they remarked on the strangeness of his speech immediately, before people raised this question

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:47 (twenty-one years ago)

haha dude you want alternative rationalizations for why GEORGE W. BUSH got his ass handed to him in 2004 debate? really?

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:48 (twenty-one years ago)

no, i want alternate rationalizations for the truly bizarre way he was speaking

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:49 (twenty-one years ago)

another possible explanation for his stunted 'cadence' = he is george bush

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:50 (twenty-one years ago)

i wish that it was discovered that bush was jamming out to the musical stylings of Ratt during the debate.

― Emilymv (Emilymv), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:50 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah even if this wasn't pretty implausible on its face, I'm not sure what purpose it serves other than feeding paranoia. Funny how CBS airing the fake docs is considered possibly a "Rove plot" but this Bush-was-wired thing is accepted by some Dems without skepticism!

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:50 (twenty-one years ago)

in fact, the smirking and such arguably is good evidence of a voice in his ear - he wants to rely on his own instincts, not what Karen or Karl is telling him

Funny how CBS airing the fake docs is considered possibly a "Rove plot"

funny how Rove has been doing stuff like that all through his career

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Ratt is appropriate since Bush probably "knew right from the beginning/that [Kerry] would end up winning" the debate.

― Nemo (JND), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Surely the feed would be easy to monitor.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:52 (twenty-one years ago)

so if the fake docs are disinfo could the wired thing be disinfo too, gabbneb? Please at least just acknowledge the possibility.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:52 (twenty-one years ago)

This kind of bullshit consipracy crap just makes the left look as desperate as the right. Take the high ground.

And if George Bush needs help sounding like a jackass, let him have help.

― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:54 (twenty-one years ago)

This kind of bullshit consipracy crap just makes the left look as desperate as the right. Take the high ground

exactly - the left is afraid to be wrong, and thus the right has incentive to engage in activities for which there is plausible deniability. the right is not so afraid.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 17:58 (twenty-one years ago)

We prefer that any talk about being "wired" and "mystery bulges" also involve tight parachute pants and, uhm, disco balls, which is sort of why we delayed posting anything about that totally credible theory that Bush wore an earpiece during last week's debate. Yes, we've seen the pictures. But we also watched the debate. If Bush was listening to some kind of radio signal, it was between stations.

from Wonkette

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Dude if he was getting FED the things he said then I fear every single individual with any power in the entirety of the United States. Did you guys, like, not actually listen to the words coming out of his mouth? There's no way any rational person would've told another person to say any of those things. Unless the people feeding him lines were DRUNK, maybe.

hstencil completely OTM.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:01 (twenty-one years ago)

the presence of "plausible deniability" does not give the left carte blanche to stab blindly at lame ideas gabb

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:01 (twenty-one years ago)

it's a weird world where wonkette is the voice of reason

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Hey, remember the Reagan days when Nancy was overheard prompting him? Of course, he was in the early stages of Alzheimer's back then.

― k3rry (dymaxia), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)

OK here is what happened:

1) Bush's people wired him to feed him answers.
2) Kerry's people found out.
3) Kerry sent trained team of ninjas to intercept and murder Bush people.
4) Kerry's ninjas hired Ross Perot, plied him with 8 shots of Makers', and then had him feed Bush lines.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:07 (twenty-one years ago)

we the people are powerless. God Bless America.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)

--the right is not so afraid.--

And people are getting sick of it.

― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:11 (twenty-one years ago)

http://templeimages.free.fr/images/images6/tortues8.jpg

(Kerry's ninjas, sending Ross Perot off to do his thing)

― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:11 (twenty-one years ago)

yes, yes, it's all coming clear

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Skipping 31 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

I guess if Bush had gotten into the habit of using an earpiece in speeches, the temptation to take one into the debate might have been hard to resist. But surely his team would have known that the potential fallout if he were caught would be catastrophic. I think that factor at least would have caused cooler heads on the Bush team to prevail.

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 8 October 2004 18:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Actually I think the whole thing is like that movie How to Get Ahead in Advertising, where the box in the back is actually Bush's original head, only it's been supplanted by a hideous-fascist boil-that-became-a-head growing out of his neck. Thus I predict that in the end Laura will leave him and he'll ride a horse up onto a hill and talk to himself about the wonders of capitalism and human desire.

― nabisco (nabisco), Friday, 8 October 2004 19:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Except in the movie the boil-head was actually very articulate and charming.

― nabisco (nabisco), Friday, 8 October 2004 19:10 (twenty-one years ago)

nabisco is on FIRE today

― pfeffernuesse (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 8 October 2004 19:29 (twenty-one years ago)

you guys are being so retarded.

it was obviously Bush's power coil. He hadn't been re-charged in like 3 days, thus his odd behavior.

― David Allen (David Allen), Friday, 8 October 2004 19:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Bush is on the cover of what, now?

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Friday, 8 October 2004 20:17 (twenty-one years ago)

It would be a better story as 'Bush wearing women's underwear during debates'. 'You can see the line when the camera films him from behind'. Anyway, this story is stupid. Why does the US left (young US left I guess) seem so committed to conspiracy theories? It's not enough to disagree with their policies and their plans for the nation, but they also have to be members of the illuminati, running around brainwashing and forming pools of power? Is there a historical reason why the US left thinks in this manner? Anyway, I hope it stops.

― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Friday, 8 October 2004 20:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Hey, I was just wondering - can I get that "eagle" song on mp3 somewhere on the web?

― k3rry (dymaxia), Friday, 8 October 2004 20:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, but it clearly broke down during the debate.

This is a hysterical quote.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Friday, 8 October 2004 20:59 (twenty-one years ago)

Kevin,

It's also self-deluded self-destruction. One should be happy he had a wire. It would show that he can't think on his feet. It would also be incredibly damning considering his performance. I actually expect some jokes about this tonight.

― Michael White (Hereward), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:02 (twenty-one years ago)

"Why does the US left (young US left I guess) seem so committed to conspiracy theories?"

Oh shut up. Pretending that being fascinated with conspiracies is the sole province of the US left is totally idiotic. Practically everyone (esp. in this election--look at conservative blogs lighting on Kerry's notepad or anything on the Drudge report) is fascinated by "conspiracies" (is that even the correct word.) And some of the things the left (the young left or the old left) is paranoid about (DIEBOLD! VOTE SUPPRESSION!) are pretty good things to be paranoid about, given this administrations track record.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:04 (twenty-one years ago)

just fyi - the official word from the Bush camp is that he wasn't wearing anything on his back - the picture shows his "backbone". sure, they can be barred by the USSS from talking about something protective, or maybe they're just trying to have fun with the paranoid left, but in the latter case they'd have to be willing to acknowledge later that they lied.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:29 (twenty-one years ago)

"Why does the US left (young US left I guess) seem so committed to conspiracy theories?"

because the US right stole the last election?

― stevie (stevie), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:36 (twenty-one years ago)

And because the current vice president is the former CEO of the company currently rebuilding the country we went to war with for reasons that are questionable to say the least.

― David Allen (David Allen), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Sure, I just find it odd that conspiracies are needed to explain anything occuring within government. In the UK, I am involved in politics via the SSP, and talk to young leftists (and old leftists) all the time. There just seems to be a realism present here (and in Europe generally) about the way power functions that appears to be lacking in young people in the US - all of this 'I'm not going to vote, Bush will steal the election anyway', 'THe Dems and Republicans are the same, it's a fix' or '911 was a hoax by Bush' stuff is very puzzling (I know these are not opinions any of you would hold, but the fact that I have heard them so many times must suggest they are fairly prevalent). Perhaps the 'American Exception' is in play, ad it is the lack of a powerful left in the US that has lead to a misunderstanding of the politics of capitalism.

This isn't to say that there isn't a great leftist tradition in the US - there is; but why do young people listen to Rage Against the Machine (Ok, a bit out of date), punk albums and visit conspiracy theory websites rather than getting involved in Trade Unionism, or joining, and trying to influence a Left drift within, the Democrats.

I'm not criticising the left on the whole, and certainly the right have their own conspiracy theorists - but I kind of expect it from armageddonists and people who think the left are trying to turn their children gay. I don't expect it from the left, mostly because it is totally unnecessary - Bush doesn't need to be opposed because of what he hides, but because of what he openly is and does. And if the stealing of the last election is an example of their abilities, it didn't got too well - surely a good conspiracy would have stolen the election without having most of the world think that was what they did.

― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:55 (twenty-one years ago)

and George Bush Sr. killed JFK.

Leftists are obsessed because it's the Right who are forming the conspiracies. The left is too busy getting high and watching TV.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 8 October 2004 21:55 (twenty-one years ago)

For K3rry: I don't know about mp3, but you can watch and hear Ashcroft lettin' the eagle soar here:

http://www.cnn.com/video/us/2002/02/25/ashcroft.sings.wbtv.med.html

― Nemo (JND), Friday, 8 October 2004 22:00 (twenty-one years ago)

"'THe Dems and Republicans are the same, it's a fix'"

That's a strictly US thing? So in the UK they dont play to the center?

― David Allen (David Allen), Friday, 8 October 2004 22:30 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, they have been recently - well, while the tories were in power, up until 1997, the Labour Party underwent a change from a moderate socialist party, to a centrist welfare party, leading lots of people to claim that they are the same as the Tories. However, the minor parties in the UK are playing to the left to pick up votes. Britain's centre is to the left of the US's, and there is a natural and inbuilt leftness to a great deal of Britain - at least as far as their instincts go. The independence parties like Plaid Cymru and the SNP, as well as the Lib Dems in some areas, have been playing to the natural left in the UK, while newer parties, like the SSP are taking up the Old Labour positions to gain votes. The fact that more than two parties in the UK get candidates into parliament, and wield varying degrees of power, makes it harder to say that they are 'playing to the centre', though that is what the two main parties do.

― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Friday, 8 October 2004 22:40 (twenty-one years ago)

[quote]all of this 'I'm not going to vote, Bush will steal the election anyway', 'THe Dems and Republicans are the same, it's a fix' or '911 was a hoax by Bush' stuff is very puzzling [/quote]

The first is because of Florida 2000, the Diebold machines and a history of Republican election tampering (Nixon in Paris, Ronnie in Tehran). It's not a great stretch to question the democratic integrity of the Bush Administration.

The second is rarely meant literally, it's a criticism of both parties playing to an agenda that favors the wealthy with little regard for the average person (and for both having a despicable foreign policy).

The latter I've never heard from anyone who was seriously into politics. That's black-helicopter stuff.

[quote]getting involved in Trade Unionism, or joining, and trying to influence a Left drift within, the Democrats.[/quote]
There isn't an American trade unionism movement to join in most places, at most you get individual actions to organize a company or campus.

The latter is a fool's errand that hasn't worked for the last 30 years of trying.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 8 October 2004 22:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah I know. I'm not really meaning much of what I'm saying - I think it's mainly that the US people I talk to about politics (ie never in real life) are young, male computer nerds who are prone to the 'black helicopter' stuff. I'm just getting frustrated about the election, and how down everyone seems to be about Kerry's chances - though this has been better since the first presidential debate (incidentally, anyone know the time, GMT, of the second?) and then everyone starts talking about Bush wearing a wire and things, and it bugs me for some reason. On a side note, parties get pushed to the right fairly easily, there must be a way to push them to the left. I guess we just wait until the right's policies blow up in their faces.

― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Friday, 8 October 2004 23:01 (twenty-one years ago)

the second starts in an hour

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 8 October 2004 23:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Cool, thanks.

― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Friday, 8 October 2004 23:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Bush listening to "Outdoor Miner" during debates.

"As a matter of fact, he lies on his side in this global effort.

We're facing a group of folks who have such hatred in their heart that they are trying to hide, they'll strike anywhere, with any means, in fact, on this earth.

And that's why it's essential that we have strong alliances from those we've known since birth, and we do."

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 8 October 2004 23:09 (twenty-one years ago)

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20041009/capt.pd14510090321.debate_pd145.jpg

― Sir Kingfish Beavis D'Azzmonch (Kingfish), Saturday, 9 October 2004 05:22 (twenty-one years ago)

compared with tonight:

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20041009/capt.pd14410090312.debate_pd144.jpg

― Sir Kingfish Beavis D'Azzmonch (Kingfish), Saturday, 9 October 2004 05:23 (twenty-one years ago)

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20041009/capt.pd13510090242.debate_pd135.jpg

okay, THAT is a bullet-proof vest

― Sir Kingfish Beavis D'Azzmonch (Kingfish), Saturday, 9 October 2004 05:37 (twenty-one years ago)

one year passes...

the bulge is back

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:04 (twenty years ago)

oh jeez.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:10 (twenty years ago)

that jpg is heavily pixelated, get your prescription fixed you tool.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:16 (twenty years ago)

THIS JUST IN: BUSH BACK FILLED WITH MYSTERIOUS RECTANGULAR FIGURES

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:16 (twenty years ago)

Wait, are they saying those jpg artefacts are some kind of bulge!?

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:18 (twenty years ago)

ASK GABB "MISTER OBTUSE" NEB, TRAYCE

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:18 (twenty years ago)

I though I was the obtuse one, ah ahar.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:21 (twenty years ago)

no, australian.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:23 (twenty years ago)

I have no difficulty believing that Bush was wired and receiving answers.

I also never, ever want to hear someone talk about it again. Democrats, please find new ways to look stupid.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:24 (twenty years ago)

what am i obtuse about, h?

xpost: aha. see, this is what gets me. why are you all so afraid of being wrong/sounding conspiracist about this?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:26 (twenty years ago)

we are not afraid, as long as you lead us, oh fearless gabbneb.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:28 (twenty years ago)

Because it sounds stupid. You are never going to get anywhere sounding like desperate losers who'll say anything and/or believe anything about Bush.

When come back please bring smoking gun.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:32 (twenty years ago)

I CAN TOTALLY SEE YOUR WIRE, MILO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:34 (twenty years ago)

Clearly there is something here I am missing.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:37 (twenty years ago)

not really. seriously.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:38 (twenty years ago)

You are never going to get anywhere sounding like desperate losers who'll say anything and/or believe anything about Bush.

who says we're trying to get somewhere?

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:40 (twenty years ago)

i'd wanna know the answer if the guy was on my side, too

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:41 (twenty years ago)

stop reading blogs during your billable hours, bro.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 04:43 (twenty years ago)

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/images/Conspiracy.jpg

― account settings (account), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 06:02 (twenty years ago)

I still say it's a bulletproof vest.

Only one way to find out, gabbneb. There - is - only - one - way.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 07:26 (twenty years ago)

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 07:57 (twenty years ago)

so...so...sleeepy....

― Hunter (Hunter), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 18:11 (twenty years ago)

"billable hours"

― don weiner (don weiner), Tuesday, 20 December 2005 18:21 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.