Bush is finally considering a size-enlargement. In a nearly hour-long news conference before the President retreated to his stronghold in Crawford for Christmas, he announced that, "I'm inclined to believe that we need to increase...the permanent size," according to the International Herald Tribune.
We men get a lot of advertisements in our email inbox encouraging us to enlarge the size. Perhaps a size-enlargement ad finally got the better of him, or maybe Laura threatened him with divorce.
In any case, The New York Times is very desirous to see Bush increase the size. In a recent headline, the Times--which has had numerous intimate relationships with Bush--hoorayed: "The President Wants to Increase Size..." Judith Miller will be so disappointed she's not working there anymore.
The accompanying article went so far as to stretch the factual record and suggest that "many members of both parties have been urging an increase in...size."
The article drooled on: "[A] substantial increase in the size...could...maintain...the long run." Who knew that a size-increase could have any effect on endurance? However, showcasing expert knowledge on the subject, the Times acknowledged difficulties in achieving any noticeable difference. "Any big change in the size...would take years to accomplish," it noted.
In his press conference today, the President also acknowledged--perhaps in a related matter--his difficulties taking leaks. He takes leaks hard. When a reporter asked him about the problem, Bush replied, "I do recall expressing some angst about ongoing leaks."
Apparently nobody has told the President that ongoing leaks are perfectly normal, and if he didn't have anything to be ashamed about leaking, they wouldn't be such a problem. It's probably the rancid stenches that emanate from his leaks that cause him so much anxiety.
Reacting angrily to his own malfunctions, Bush told reporters that he doesn't appreciate "those who leak." The response was typical: another overreaction. So we're all supposed to stop leaking just because Bush's leaks typically provoke international uproar?
The President continued: "And we've had a lot of leaks. As you know, some of them - I don't know where they're from. Therefore, I'm not going to speculate." Now this is another problem entirely. You have real trouble on your hands if you have anonymous leaks. You might want to take care of that before you increase the size of anything.
On the mystery leak, Bush told reporters: "Turns out you never can find the leaker." But he continued undaunted: "But I do think that at some point in time it'd be helpful, if we can find somebody inside our government who is leaking."
In other news that serious journalists will take more seriously, President Bush promised that the next soldier to die is S.O.L. because he foresees no end to the bankrupting war in Iraq. Bush said that we are only in the "beginning of an ideological struggle."
An ideological struggle is something in which philosophers engage over tea and sea biscuits. Bush misused the phrase in his speech to mean: "bloody pointless war that's killed 3,000 Americans and 700,000 Iraqis because Exxon elected me and the government is going to provide them access to those oil reserves rather than work for what's in your or your children's best interest."
So close, yet ultimately the incorrect use of "ideological struggle."
We men get a lot of advertisements in our email inbox encouraging us to enlarge the size. Perhaps a size-enlargement ad finally got the better of him, or maybe Laura threatened him with divorce.
In any case, The New York Times is very desirous to see Bush increase the size. In a recent headline, the Times--which has had numerous intimate relationships with Bush--hoorayed: "The President Wants to Increase Size..." Judith Miller will be so disappointed she's not working there anymore.
The accompanying article went so far as to stretch the factual record and suggest that "many members of both parties have been urging an increase in...size."
The article drooled on: "[A] substantial increase in the size...could...maintain...the long run." Who knew that a size-increase could have any effect on endurance? However, showcasing expert knowledge on the subject, the Times acknowledged difficulties in achieving any noticeable difference. "Any big change in the size...would take years to accomplish," it noted.
In his press conference today, the President also acknowledged--perhaps in a related matter--his difficulties taking leaks. He takes leaks hard. When a reporter asked him about the problem, Bush replied, "I do recall expressing some angst about ongoing leaks."
Apparently nobody has told the President that ongoing leaks are perfectly normal, and if he didn't have anything to be ashamed about leaking, they wouldn't be such a problem. It's probably the rancid stenches that emanate from his leaks that cause him so much anxiety.
Reacting angrily to his own malfunctions, Bush told reporters that he doesn't appreciate "those who leak." The response was typical: another overreaction. So we're all supposed to stop leaking just because Bush's leaks typically provoke international uproar?
The President continued: "And we've had a lot of leaks. As you know, some of them - I don't know where they're from. Therefore, I'm not going to speculate." Now this is another problem entirely. You have real trouble on your hands if you have anonymous leaks. You might want to take care of that before you increase the size of anything.
On the mystery leak, Bush told reporters: "Turns out you never can find the leaker." But he continued undaunted: "But I do think that at some point in time it'd be helpful, if we can find somebody inside our government who is leaking."
In other news that serious journalists will take more seriously, President Bush promised that the next soldier to die is S.O.L. because he foresees no end to the bankrupting war in Iraq. Bush said that we are only in the "beginning of an ideological struggle."
An ideological struggle is something in which philosophers engage over tea and sea biscuits. Bush misused the phrase in his speech to mean: "bloody pointless war that's killed 3,000 Americans and 700,000 Iraqis because Exxon elected me and the government is going to provide them access to those oil reserves rather than work for what's in your or your children's best interest."
So close, yet ultimately the incorrect use of "ideological struggle."
