Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Politics Government

Battle of the Bush Bulge 166

Posted by michael from the political-silliness dept.
cyberman11 writes "Get out your tinfoil hats! Salon.com is running an article about Internet speculation that Bush uses an earpiece prompter and ignores his teleprompter while making speeches. Bush exhibited peculiar pauses between sentences while speaking during the debate and a large solid object appears between his shoulder blades as he leans over the lectern. He also interrupts himself in the middle of one of his responses by interjecting "Let me finish!" while he still had time remaining to answer and no one else had spoken." If Bush was wired, the receiver would be the size of a deck of cards or smaller, not some giant thing strapped to his back. Update: 10/09 16:10 GMT by J : The NYT contacted the Bush campaign and got a few answers that rule out the innocuous explanation that I had assumed.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Battle of the Bush Bulge More

Battle of the Bush Bulge

Comments Filter:

  • Nothing to see here (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Shakrai ( 717556 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @09:22AM (#10468989) Journal

    Let's be real people. Most of us dislike George W. as much as the other guy but do you really think they would try to cheat at the debates? And don't you think that if they did cheat Bush would have done a better job? Do you really see Karl Rove (boy genius ®) couching him to say "It's hard work" over and over again?

    Even Michael doubts it's true and we all how about his political leanings. As for the big thing in his back -- may I be the first to make the obvious suggestion: bullet-proof vest?

    • Lets be real people? We are real people! Besides, the apparent dimensions of the bulge are not congruent with body armor.

      • Lets be real people? We are real people! Besides, the apparent dimensions of the bulge are not congruent with body armor.

        Then what do you think it was? Do you really want us to think that the Government that has the technology to put a cruise missile into your bedroom window couldn't come up with a small enough receiver that wouldn't show up on a tv camera in the small of your back?

        I could build such a receiver with parts from radio shack. Anybody here could. Do we really need this distracting us bef

        • > Then what do you think it was? Do you really want us to think that the Government that has the technology to put a cruise missile into your bedroom window couldn't come up with a small enough receiver that wouldn't show up on a tv camera in the small of your back?

          a) His handlers would have to be careful where they got the hardware. Since he has been trying to get the intelligence community to take the fall for his decision to invade Iraq, the people who could furnish the best hardware might have a m

        • Then what do you think it was? Do you really want us to think that the Government that has the technology to put a cruise missile into your bedroom window couldn't come up with a small enough receiver that wouldn't show up on a tv camera in the small of your back?

          Speculation is that it is an induction amplifier allowing him to use an earpiece without a wire. Those are necessarily larger than one with a wire.
          • I use an induction coil that receives a signal (from a standard Walkman jack; you can have basically any input for 'em, though, cellphone, short range FM, Bluetooth, etc, are all commercially available) and they are small. They are nearly invisible if you put 'em under your shirt, and if you were concerned about visibility, it would be very easy to make them impossible to spot.

            In fact, you could even put it in your pocket - they don't have to be that close to your ear if you pump the power up. I dislik

      • Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:23PM (#10470693)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: Nothing to see here (Score:4, Informative)

      by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @09:40AM (#10469096)


      > Let's be real people. Most of us dislike George W. as much as the other guy but do you really think they would try to cheat at the debates?

      Yes. There's not much his inner circle wouldn't do to win the election.

      > And don't you think that if they did cheat Bush would have done a better job?

      That's debatable.

      Pro the rumor:

      • Google for bush prompter debate and you'll get some semi-plausible claims that he has been wearing one of these things all year.

      Con the rumor:
      • Part of the argument is that he was hunched over due to the wiring rather than straight-shouldered as usual, but that doesn't make sense if he has been wearing this thing for months.
      • One site claims he was seen consulting a cheat sheet, but that also doesn't make sense if he was wired.

      Who knows. But it will be interesting to watch him in the upcoming debate.


      • One site claims he was seen consulting a cheat sheet, but that also doesn't make sense if he was wired.

        those 'cheat sheets' are as much as a prop as they are for finding facts. One major difference between speaches and debates, is that with a speach you don't have to stand around while someone else rips your viewpoint. While you don't want to look like your not at all paying attention, you don't want to show much reaction at all. Having something else to focus on can be important. I suppose that he c

    • Agreed, and the receiver wouldn't be between his shoulder blades, it would be on his belt.
    • may I be the first to make the obvious suggestion: bullet-proof vest?

      No, you may not. Someone called into to C-SPAN the other day to suggest the exact same thing, and it was quickly ruled out because (a) John Kerry, who is also under secret service protection, would have had one on as well and (b) security for the debates was super tight.

    • Even Michael doubts it's true and we all how about his political leanings. As for the big thing in his back -- may I be the first to make the obvious suggestion: bullet-proof vest?

      I could buy that one, but I'm voting for "back massager" or some such. It could explain the "hunching" if he had pulled some muscles in his shoulders, and it was a poorly applied heat pack or some such.

      If it was a bullet proof vest, my only question would be: why? With everyone being screened, did he receive a "credible thr

      • I could buy that one, but I'm voting for "back massager" or some such. It could explain the "hunching" if he had pulled some muscles in his shoulders, and it was a poorly applied heat pack or some such.

        Hmm -- that's a logical theory too. I can't rule out that they would cheat -- I just find it hard to fathom that they couldn't use a smaller receiver (and that it wouldn't have been clipped to his belt or in a shirt pocket as someone else pointed out) when I could build a receiver with radio shack parts t

    • A bullet proof vest with a wire that leads to one side of the head ? To me, that looks like an earpiece :) Of course, I'd still have to see the original video instead of pictures taken on the internet, which could have easilly be doctored. And even if it is the original unmodified image, it could be something else. But right now, IMHO *LET ME FINISH!* the evidence points to cheating.

      (note: "POINTS TO" != damning evidence)

      And for those who said "if he would have cheated, he would have done a better job of

    • Re:Nothing to see here (Score:2, Interesting)

      by torpor ( 458 )
      .. do you really think they would try to cheat at the debates?

      hell yes. do you not know what is at stake for the neo-con radicals, here? you brought up karl rove; do you really know what sort of individual he is, what sort of position he takes on world politics? ever read any of his treaties on the subject of the american statehood, personally?

      And don't you think that if they did cheat Bush would have done a better job?

      have you not been paying attention to the un-disputable litany of Bush public-

      • here? you brought up karl rove; do you really know what sort of individual he is, what sort of position he takes on world politics

        Yes I do. He's a fucking asshole. In his youth he stole the campaign letterhead of somebody running against "his man" and used it to sabotage one of their events (by advertising "free booze, free women and free food" to homeless people). He oversaw the advertisements that accused Max Cleland of siding with Osama Bin Ladin and being unpatriotic (the man only lost three limbs

    • maybe he's just happy to see you.

      ;)
    • I agree. This is ridiculous, they would not attempt to cheat in this way, because it would look very bad if they were caught.

      Before this silly thing came up everybody was laughing about how badly Bush stumbled. Wouldn't he do a better job if he was cheating? Or is the joke now that he still screwed up despite cheating? That "bulge" if it is not photoshopped in (and there is precedence for such lies on the internet, from people of all political persuasions) is probably a bullet-proof vest, as has been menti
      • This is ridiculous, they would not attempt to cheat in this way, because it would look very bad if they were caught.

        The GOP has cheated in the debates before and gotten caught, in 1980. They pilfered materials from the Carter campaign and used them to coach Reagan for the debates. This is hardly outside the range of risk they would take.
    • Yes, let's be real. From isbushwired.com [isbushwired.com]

      The agreement set by the debate commission barred shots of the candidates from the rear of the stage. (It also specified only hardwired podium microphones for the first debate, i.e. no lapel mics.) The networks refused to comply with the camera angle rules, broadcasting occasional shots of the candidates from behind. The images here are from the Fox video pool feed.

      "Sure, Bush uses an earpiece sometimes," a top Washington editor for Reuters said to me last spring.

  • Indeed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Yeechang Lee ( 3429 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @09:34AM (#10469068)
    If Bush was wired, the receiver would be the size of a deck of cards or smaller, not some giant thing strapped to his back.


    Indeed. Heck, there wouldn't be anything on the back at all; the earpiece would be all that's needed.

    The story's veracity is also hurt by Salon running it, given its reputation for "All Bush bashing, all the time." TeeVee [teevee.org]'s terrific parody [teevee.org] of Salon from earlier this year got that characteristic dead on.
    • Well, I agree that under normal circumstances, with an unencrypted/scrambled signal, your passive receiver could be very small, and if the signal is strong enough it could be self-contained within the ear-piece.

      But if the signal had to be very low strength and descrambled in some way (in order to avoid detection or bleed-over), wouldn't it be likely you'd need a larger piece of hardware for amplification/decoding?

      Also, Salon and certainly the author, Dave Lindorff, are liberal media sources and they own i
      • But if the signal had to be very low strength and descrambled in some way (in order to avoid detection or bleed-over), wouldn't it be likely you'd need a larger piece of hardware for amplification/decoding?

        Better yes, Larger no... Keep in mind the is the POUS, Im sure something less than the size of a cell phone would more than do the job of getting the signal, and decrypting it..

        He has access to the best technology the CIA/NSA has..

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • What we have here, if it is a tranceiver, is almost certainly off-the-shelf, the type of stuff sold by regular commercial outfits for private investigators and to the police, or possibly even to conference organizers and other groups involving people who need to speak publically with prompting without it being overly obvious. It would have been installed under the assumption that Bush's back would not have been visible.

            So when Bush is seen with a 'traceiver' its because his campaign is not good at chaetin

            • Comment removed based on user account deletion
              • Could be a seam.

                What would put an end to all of this stupidty would be pictures of his lef ant fight ears from the debate...

                • Assuming that "lef ant fight ears" means left & right ears, no, it wouldn't. If you have mild hearing loss, you can get a hearing aid for about $400 that fits entirely within the ear canal and can't be seen (unless you have *exactly* the right angle and are *extremely* close and well lit). Note: these are crapulent hearing aids, and much better equipment is available.

                  These hearing aids can be easily modified to use an induction coil + a microphone (on the aid, to pick up "localized" noise) as input.

          • What we have here, if it is a tranceiver, is almost certainly off-the-shelf, the type of stuff sold by regular commercial outfits for private investigators and to the police, or possibly even to conference organizers and other groups involving people who need to speak publically with prompting without it being overly obvious.

            But that's the whole point. You can get commercial off-the-shelf transceivers that aren't that big or obvious. Hell a friggen cell phone with an earpiece would have accomplished th

            • Comment removed based on user account deletion

              • It wasn't obvious until Fox did something they'd been specifically told not to do.

                I was hoping someone would bring that up. Fox and the other news networks said days before the debate that they wouldn't abide by that restriction. The campaigns had to know that going in. Still think they would have left him with such an exposed device?

                Yes, for example, Bush could have worn a bullet proof vest, but the bulge is not it.

                Really? It looks like it to me. Notice how the small of his back is missing and

              • As I've said before, I could build something with off the shelf parts ordered through the mail for about $700 that would do this. It'd be a standard ITC (in the canal) hearing aid, an induction coil (that would be completely undetectable placed under a t-shirt worn underneath your suit), a small radio receiver in the pocket (or under the shirt, small of the back, whatever) and a transmitter.

                Dirt cheap. And, come on, the FBI puts wires on folks when it needs to, right? The receiver/transmitter would be

  • Back Buldge (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I just assumed that's where the fuel cell's went for our robotic prez. Come on folks, this guy looks identical to the robot at Disney's Hall of Presidents. Indentical!

  • Not real. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Captain Rotundo ( 165816 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @09:45AM (#10469122) Homepage
    Too bad all the source sites I've seen for this appear to be fake and its a challenge posted on RTMark [rtmark.com] . Would have been an interresting story otherwise, myself not being a Bush supporter :)

  • A celebration wearing tinfoil hats during work hrs (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I just submitted this story along with this image [electoral-vote.com]. Its an high resolution version (independent from salon), much improved using frame interpolation. It shows something smaller then a deck of cards. Why the big wire is another thing though. The radio microphones used on stage have bigger wires then your usual headphone becouse of the wear and tear with the amount of movement they get. Wear and tear doesn`t mix well with... sweat. (ask google about something called a "sweat-out" one day, when you are not at w

  • Nothing to see here, move on (Score:3, Insightful)

    by KilobyteKnight ( 91023 ) <bjm.midsouth@rr@com> on Friday October 08, 2004 @09:54AM (#10469182) Homepage
    And Kerry took a note out of his pocket [drudgereport.com] and Badnarak wasn't even allowed to show up and nothign of substance got discussed.

    Please, can we stick to something that matters?

  • Silly (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Watcher ( 15643 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:00AM (#10469218)
    This is just as silly as all of the accusations that Kerry had a cheat sheet for the debate. Frankly, after listening to the debate a couple times, I've got to say that if Bush was cheating, he did a pretty piss poor job of it.
    • As far as a cheat sheet, are not both canidates aware of the questions that are going to be asked? They are also able to veto questions they don't like too I believe.
      • Apparently you didn't listen to the intro to the debate by the moderator. The general topic of the debate (e.g. foreign policy) is known ahead of time, but the questions are devised by the moderator and no one else hears them before the debate, including the candidates.
        • So did the moderator come up with any remotely surprizing questions?
          • In both the first presidential debate and the (only) vice-presidential debate the moderator asked a couple of questions that were essentially traps. They were opportunities for the candidate receiving the question to go really negative on his opponent. I found that surprising. I did not find it surprising that none of the candidates fell for it.

            Most of the rest of the questions were fairly predictable, and they didn't matter a whole lot since the candidates were about 30% question-oriented and 70% speech-a
        • Hmmm,
          Was not aware of this, was mainly going by what I have read about the debates being taken away from the league of women voters.

          Thanks for the information.

  • Though I love conspiracy theories... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by NeuroBoy ( 82993 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:02AM (#10469228)
    Instead of an in-ear prompting device, could it be a vest-type body cooler? There are quite a few of them around, though most are passive devices that you cool by freezing, etc. before you put them on.

    I can imagine keeping the "calm, cool, and collected" look was a high priority for the candidates, and neither wanted to look sweaty and nervous.
    • After seeing that picture, I went to that spot in the debate and went through it several times, backwards and forwards, at regular speed and in slow motion.

      At no point did I see a bulge that looked anything like the one in that picture. When you see the full motion video, it is very clear that he is wearing a fantastic suit that fits him perfectly, and there is no bulge whatsoever.

      That photo is doctored. I guarantee it.

  • In defense of Bush (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:04AM (#10469241)
    I'm no Bush fan. I think he is about as bright as the average American, probably less. This is why I am defending him. He was clearly confused by the lights. When he said "let me finish", the green light had just turned on a few seconds earlier. I think that was "who" he was talking to - the green light.

    Yes, the green light means he still has a lot of time, but this is Bush. Pay close attention to his inability to pace himself with the lights. At one point he started talking very fast in response to a green light, then slowed down realising that he still had time, but slowed down too much. Then after the light turned red he speeded back up way too late and kept talking after it started flashing.

  • This is ridiculous slander! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:31AM (#10469389)
    Everyone knows Cheney switched several years ago from using an earpiece to using anal electrodes to control Dubya.

  • That's just plain silly... (Score:4, Funny)

    by GreenKiwi ( 221281 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:37AM (#10469427)
    If Bush was wired, the receiver would be the size of a deck of cards or smaller, not some giant thing strapped to his back.

    Everyone knows that this is where the charging unit plugs in, Bush is just a robot puppet, being controlled by others.

  • "Cheating" in a debate? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:38AM (#10469432) Homepage
    I fail to see how having a better speaker make lines for you to speak during a presidential debate is cheating. I mean, they have swarms of people doing their research for them, their speeches are obviously entirely canned, what part do the presidential candidates actually play except for talking heads?

    As for the earpiece in general... If I had to write speeches for that man I'd do that too. His intelligence doesn't exactly burn like a nuke-u-ler fire.

    The only way this could be actual major news is if the format of the debate forbade audio prompts. Which, if true, would be the kind of trivial infraction that the American people would be able to understand and hate him for. Anyone know the rules?

    • Re:"Cheating" in a debate? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by brandido ( 612020 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @11:25AM (#10469931) Homepage Journal
      It's significant because the debuates give Americans a chance to see the candidates "one-on-one" presenting their ideas and defending their actions. If one of them is using a audio prompt, it gives a significantly unfair advantage to the one with the technological superiority, in this case the incumbent, and misrepresents the candidates ability to think on their feet, and explain themselves.
    • I fail to see how having a better speaker make lines for you to speak during a presidential debate is cheating.

      Then you must be an idiot! The debate is an examination of the men, not the aids. We see how they do with help all the time. The question the debates are supposed to answer is: how good is the brain leading all these advisors?

      We saw how unable Bush is to cope with a crisis on 11/9/01 when he sat in front of those kids obviously and totally confused about the WTC attack. I'm sure that he's been w

  • Neurophone (Score:5, Funny)

    by richie2000 ( 159732 ) <rickard.olsson@gmail.com> on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:39AM (#10469441) Homepage Journal
    If Bush was wired, the receiver would be the size of a deck of cards or smaller, not some giant thing strapped to his back.

    If they wanted to get rid of the earpiece, they could have used a Neurophone [neurophone.com] which is about the right size for that bulge. Flantech's FAQ states that the transducers do not have to be placed on the temples, they can be placed anywhere on the body - but closer to Bush's brain is obviously better (so they were probably placed on Karl Rove).

    • I'm not sure why this is funny. Is the neurophone a hoax or what? It doesn't sound funny to me.
      • Apparently it's real. I caught the reference in one of the comments in a linked blog, someone claimed to have one. They seem designed for people with hearing problems, for meditation assistance and whenever you want an earpiece without anything in your ear.

        Rove probably gave Bush one of them and told him he could channel God through it. The fun part is imagining watching Bush as Rove gets drunk and tells the President to don a top hat and hop around on one leg while whistling "Dixie".

  • house of cards? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Antibozo ( 410516 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:39AM (#10469447) Homepage
    If Bush was wired, the receiver would be the size of a deck of cards or smaller, not some giant thing strapped to his back.

    The larger size is due to the power supply for the electroshock device.

  • Ever thing it just the shoulder rest for the bulletproof vest that most recent presidents wear when out and about?

  • WHAT? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:48AM (#10469523)
    CRAWFORD, TEXAS:October 9, 2004 (UPI) : A member of the President's inner circle today answered allegations that the earpiece visible in the President's ear during a cutaway short near the end of last night's debate is in fact a hearing aid. The President, according to the source, who requested anonymity, has been partially deaf in one ear as a result of exposure to low air pressure during his "...exemplary service in the Texas Air National Guard." The source went on to say, "My husb---...The President is a proud man, and doesn't want people to know of this injury acquired in the service of his country; he thinks people injured for the love of their country should be content with the pride inherent in resolutely defending your nation, and not try to grand-stand or put in for medals over it."

    When pressed with the claim that the earpiece has been seen before, in his other ear, the source indicated that further information would be forthcoming. A gleeful Terry McAuliffe shot back with the claim that Bush was, "Deaf in one ear or another, depending on which side of him Colin Powell was sitting."

  • He sure sounds like it. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Squeeze Truck ( 2971 ) <xmsho@yahoo.com> on Friday October 08, 2004 @10:48AM (#10469529) Homepage
    I heard this yesterday and then rewatched the debate.

    When Bush begins speaking he spends more time not talking than talking, like he's repeating dictation. Not like a normal person at all.

    Good thing the ground rules say Kerry can't come near him or speak to him directly.

  • this is silly (Score:5, Funny)

    by joe094287523459087 ( 564414 ) <joe@jo e . to> on Friday October 08, 2004 @11:04AM (#10469695) Homepage
    i hate bush as much as anyone but i have bought a LOT of suits (was in sales for years) and that bulge is just the fabric bunching next to the stratch between the shoulder blades.

    try it yourself. get a piece of fabric and stretch it between 2 smooth surfaces (like shoulder blades). it will bunch up at the opt and bottom of the stretch.

    speaking of stretching, this whole theory is a real stretch too :( let's defeat bush because he is a psychotic half-wit, without breaking out the tin-foil hats
  • All these comments and not one reference to The Puppet Masters? I'd be shocked at the decline in American literacy, but it's even been made into a movie.
  • Bush is a target for assassination. He was probably wearing a bullet proof vest and what you see is most likely a bulge related to that. I hate GW but I can't see him cheating at a debate.

  • Completely innocent as charged? (Score:3, Informative)

    by bsdbigot ( 186157 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @11:11AM (#10469770) Journal

    From my experience, it is common for shirts that are not tailored well (or at all), and thus loose-fitting, to be pinched behind the back - a sort of taking up of slack in the shirt, so that your forward appearance is as crisp and clean as possible. I had a few modeling sessions (no, I'm no looker - it was a face-of-the-corporation thing for PR/advertising). Wasn't there a news anchor many years ago that admitted to sitting on his shirttails, his secret for keeping the unwanted billowing out of his camera view? In my military service, we were encouraged to tuck our dress shirts into our briefs/boxers to achieve a similar effect.

    To me, that's what this looks like, since the bulge appears more of a thick cable, like the folding or rolling of cloth, than a black box or the uniform displacement of a flack jacket.

    • That's a good point -- except that the pictures from the rear camera definitely show a rectangular box shape under his jacket.

      If you haven't seen the frames yet, check out this site [isbushwired.com], which features frame captures from the FOX news feed.

      There was a rear camera mounted on the stage (it's described in the MOU between the candidates). The FOX images are available from a number of sources, with slight positional differences -- so I don't think that we're looking at the work of a "lone photoshopper" here.

  • Let's try a more plausible explanation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hey! ( 33014 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @11:14AM (#10469812) Homepage Journal
    Let's try a more plausible explanation for Bush's weird speaking cadence. Bad debate strategy.

    The Republican political technique is based on repeating a small number of simple consistent messages to the electorate. It's the "talking point" thing. Get everybody top to bottom saying exactly the same thing in the same phrases over and over and over again in every venue you can put them in, and pretty soon the message starts to stick. The pauses in the President's delivery were him thinking on his feet, trying to find a way to connect the topic to one of these small number of messages they've chosen.

    First of all, he's not as skilled as the usual talking heads at this game. Furthermore, this wasn't some cable news segment, this was a presidential debate. Not only is he under greater scrutiny than the the normal talking head would be, he's under it for a lot longer. It's not five minutes of blather then cut to the commercial, it's ninety minutes of white hot attention, stacked up next to a determined opponent who has managed to eliminate all of his rivals up to this point.

    As a result, the dominant impression he left was that he didn't have enough material -- exactly the opposite of what you'd expect if he were wearing a wire.

    • What is funny is that the left is trying to give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that he really isn't as stupid as everybody thinks, but instead is just really crafty and deceitful.
    • The Republican political technique is based on repeating a small number of simple consistent messages to the electorate. It's the "talking point" thing. Get everybody top to bottom saying exactly the same thing in the same phrases over and over and over again in every venue you can put them in, and pretty soon the message starts to stick.

      To be fair... this isn't just Republican political technique, it's just plain "political technique". Both parties & candidates do it. It's the only way to get your m
  • if he where wired, why wouldnt it be in the small of his back where everone else on tv wears mic transmitters? it would be hidden under the loose part of his jacket instead the between his shoulder blades. which is really the tightest part of any mans jacket.

    well next to having a beer belly ;>
  • This has to be one of the most unoriginal hoaxes.....Come one, it's about as weak as W's WMD claims, and even he's stopped working that.
  • It was a radio jammer so Kerry's men could take over Bush's receiver and whisper subversive comments into his ear.


  • Suppose W actually did set out to have an earpiece/receiver set up so that Karl Rove could coach his dumb ass.
    He's all set to go but ...surprise... the Democrats have found out about it and are jamming him.
    Now wouldn't that be funny? He's got no way to complain at all.
    It probably didn't happen that way but it's fun to think about.

  • but wait a second.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ignu ( 749604 )
    I hate conspiracy theories, but explain this video: http://www.canofun.com/blog/videos/BushAndTheOddSy nc.wmv [canofun.com] The democrats should get Parker Lewis to jam Rove's signal and make Bush say "I.. uh.. love snorting unborn babies" during tonight's debate.
  • Bush Bulge?

    Oh, I thought you meant This Bush Bulge [bulgereport.com].

    Is he trying to impress us or is that just body armor?
  • that since they speak such different languages, it was neccessary for bush to resort to using a babelfish [babelfish.org]

    ;)
  • Conspiracy theories aside, the explanation is mundane.
  • Sometimes I hate how right I am all the time. I read Interface [amazon.com] at the start of this year as a prequel to the election, and have had the impression that Bush is remote-controlled ever since.

    Sadly nobody posted this obvious reference before, so I had to and couldn't moderate the very funny Seinfeld joke ("bro! - brazier!") above :)
    Which btw is even funnier if you know that the candidate in Interface is named Cozzano

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close