14 Dec 08
Originally posted by SeitseNo !!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7782422.stm
Do you agree that a chair would have been better than a shoe?
Debate!
I think we should treat our elected politicians like the precious symbols of democracy they are.
Naturally I think the man is a jerk who have done more damage to my perception of America than anything else I can imagine. But we should still protect our democracy.
14 Dec 08
Originally posted by SeitseYa gotta admit.... Bush Got Game! All that ducking and weaving and still he was able to discern they were size 10 flip flops. Most less athletic politicians would still me huffing the camel turds embeded in their sinuses. What a guy! Chair? Nah,chairs are too difficult to throw with just your right hand.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7782422.stm
Do you agree that a chair would have been better than a shoe?
Debate!
GRANNY.
14 Dec 08
Originally posted by SeitseIt may have been more than a shoe. You know, like that guy who boarded a plane and tried to blow it up by lighting his shoe on fire with explosives tucked away neatly inside.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7782422.stm
Do you agree that a chair would have been better than a shoe?
Debate!
It's like my pappy always used to say, "You can always tell a man's politics by the shoes he wears."
14 Dec 08
Originally posted by whodeyNow you've got my curiousity aroused. How did he ascertain a man's politics by the shoes he wore?
It may have been more than a shoe. You know, like that guy who boarded a plane and tried to blow it up by lighting his shoe on fire with explosives tucked away neatly inside.
It's like my pappy always used to say, "You can always tell a man's politics by the shoes he wears."
14 Dec 08
Originally posted by smw6869It was poor technique by the thrower; if you want to hit a mobile target, you have to aim where the target is likely to move to. Since it would be expected that Bush would duck, the thrower should have aimed for Bush's chest. It would also have helped if there had been less of a time delay between shoe #1 and shoe #2 thus limiting the target's response time.
Ya gotta admit.... Bush Got Game! All that ducking and weaving and still he was able to discern they were size 10 flip flops. Most less athletic politicians would still me huffing the camel turds embeded in their sinuses. What a guy! Chair? Nah,chairs are too difficult to throw with just your right hand.
GRANNY.
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by no1marauderYes indeed,sight in from behind, pass your target in direction of flight, throw the shoe, and follow through, much like duck hunting.
It was poor technique by the thrower; if you want to hit a mobile target, you have to aim where the target is likely to move to. Since it would be expected that Bush would duck, the thrower should have aimed for Bush's chest. It would also have helped if there had been less of a time delay between shoe #1 and shoe #2 thus limiting the target's response time.
GRANNY.
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by SeitseI have'nt laughed so hard at breakfast news on t.v since i dont know when! Good cricket all around there with G.W ducking and weaving like those shoes were press questions on WMD's. The "chucker" was on song with his delivery and time to get off a second shot.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7782422.stm
Do you agree that a chair would have been better than a shoe?
Debate!
A chair doesnt have the same insult value as a shoe and a chair would have been probably interferred with, either on purpose or inadvertantly, as its size makes it a bit more unwieldy in a melee and old mate minding his own business two rows down would have copped it in the back of the head.
The "chucker" was also a lucky boy not to be shot on the spot considering all the guns around and not one was drawn on the video afterwards. He did appear to cop a couple of kicks when he was down though.
Nice intercept on the second shoe by the Iraqi President too.
15 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ScheelI have always thought of Bush as a symbol of kakistocracy rather than democracy. And I think the damage he may or may have not done to perceptions of America may pale into insignificance besides the damage he may or may not have done to "your" democracy. Is it not possible that undermining or humiliating him in any way possible, may be - in effect - a justifiable attempt to restore and protect that damaged democracy? Discredit him, discredit his "achievements". Attack him physically with a shoe, attack enemies of democracy physically with, um... by whatever means are at hand.
I think we should treat our elected politicians like the precious symbols of democracy they are. Naturally I think the man is a jerk who have done more damage to my perception of America than anything else I can imagine. But we should still protect our democracy.
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by no1marauderIndeed, you should be hitting the target from that range, but Iraq has no history of cricket or baseball (rounders on steroids) so perhaps he can be forgiven.
It was poor technique by the thrower; if you want to hit a mobile target, you have to aim where the target is likely to move to. Since it would be expected that Bush would duck, the thrower should have aimed for Bush's chest. It would also have helped if there had been less of a time delay between shoe #1 and shoe #2 thus limiting the target's response time.
Though to be fair to W. he did duck and dive pretty impressively for a guy in his 60's.
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by SiskinBut can we forgive thw U.K. Government Minister who told us, in 2002, that Iraq could hit Britain with an intercontinental ballistic missile within 45 minutes?
Indeed, you should be hitting the target from that range, but Iraq has no history of cricket or baseball so perhaps he can be forgiven.
15 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by smw6869LOL Anyone who said W wasn't quick on his feet or who could'nt duck an issue without breaking stride on another never saw this clip.😉
Ya gotta admit.... Bush Got Game! All that ducking and weaving and still he was able to discern they were size 10 flip flops. Most less athletic politicians would still me huffing the camel turds embeded in their sinuses. What a guy! Chair? Nah,chairs are too difficult to throw with just your right hand.
GRANNY.
Originally posted by no1marauderThat's the problem when you have a lone shoeman. No grassy knoll position to get him with the crossthrow!
It was poor technique by the thrower; if you want to hit a mobile target, you have to aim where the target is likely to move to. Since it would be expected that Bush would duck, the thrower should have aimed for Bush's chest. It would also have helped if there had been less of a time delay between shoe #1 and shoe #2 thus limiting the target's response time.