Tuber Mirum 126 Posted June 28, 2005 I voted no, because he is too much of a coward to go anywhere even slightly dangerous, and anywhere at all without an army of security and a 10 mile exclusion zone for people who aren't in his club. Would be nice though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Oates 21 Posted June 28, 2005 What happens if enough people vote "Yes"? ......... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Banshees Scream 110 Posted June 28, 2005 I doubt it. Since 9\11 the security has been much more tight and i'm sure whenever bush make's somewhat of a public appearence he will be heavily guarded. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeppelin 1 Posted June 28, 2005 I voted no, because he is too much of a coward to go anywhere even slightly dangerous, and anywhere at all without an army of security and a 10 mile exclusion zone for people who aren't in his club. I voted no for the same reasons as Notapotato. But if someone wanted him dead enough they would do it regardless to the amout of protection he has surrounding him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Gunther Posted June 28, 2005 it wouldnt surprise me if some left wing nutjob tried to shoot him but i vote no Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Primal Scream 1 Posted June 28, 2005 I also think Bush is probably safe. Apart from the aforementioned security around him, I think someone would already have had a go by now if it was going to happen. Reckon Cheney and his dicky ticker will be checking out soon though. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Oates 21 Posted June 28, 2005 There would be no advantage to anybody if W were to be assassinated. Some similarly daft puppet would be put in his place by whoever is running him. There would be little point in making him a martyr. And he isn't even on the DL for this year. But the idea has a certain charm..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tuber Mirum 126 Posted June 28, 2005 Ritual humiliation would be the proper thing. Stripped down to his Damart, electrodes on the nipples, bibles down the toilet. Interview with Robin Day. That kind of stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Captain Oates 21 Posted June 28, 2005 Ritual humiliation would be the proper thing. Stripped down to his Damart, electrodes on the nipples, bibles down the toilet. Interview with Robin Day. That kind of stuff. Please can we have a poll on that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Bearer 6,130 Posted June 28, 2005 Interview with Robin Day Isn't he already broon breed?* * Scottish saying Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ted Posted June 28, 2005 Yes. He has great chance to die. I preffer the answer that he has big chances to be poisoned and/or have big troubles with he's kidneys and reproductive organs.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lospalmas7 12 Posted June 28, 2005 * Scottish saying Surely it's cock-er-ney rhyming slang? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gunjaman5000 32 Posted June 28, 2005 Is there a Cockney rhyming slang term for Cockney rhyming slang? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lospalmas7 12 Posted June 28, 2005 Is there a Cockney rhyming slang term for Cockney rhyming slang? Chitty Chitty Bang Bang Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest IYG Posted June 29, 2005 Only someone completely insane or completely stupid would assassinate Bush. Everyone knows that Cheney would be worst, so you have to kill him too, then you have the Speaker of the House who isn't such a nice guy himself. The president pro-tem of the Senate isn't really great and you don't want one of the secretaries to be president such as Rice now would you? You'd have to take out close to 26 people to get to the secretary of Agriculture who I think might be tolerable at best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magere Hein 1,400 Posted June 29, 2005 Before I vote, I'd like some clarification on the question. Is that assassination in ofiice as President or does a later murder also count? regards, Hein Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mortician 2 Posted June 29, 2005 It's not going to happen, even if he was being driven along Dealey Plaza in an open topped car, a headshot would only damage the organ that he uses least.... As for Deadly Dick, just tell him Halleburton shares are in free fall and it should push him over the edge... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrunoBrimley 86 Posted June 29, 2005 I refuse to vote in this poll. Aside from that, let me remind everybody that George W.Bush is a fine man and the best darned President we've had since Theodore Roosevelt (although W.H.Taft was a close second there). Mr.Bush is an honest and caring man who has had to spend the last several years cleaning up the debris left by his predecessor William Do-nothing Clinton. Throughout all of this he has held himself above the fray of naysayers and wimpy Democrats who have been bemoaning their failures since they lost against Eisenhower in 1952. Wake up people and smell the coffee (or roasted garlic juice for the caffeine challenged). George has been a great leader and the only sad matter related to him is that the blankety-blank b.st.rd Franklin Roosevelt caused the end of possibility for a President to be elected a third time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Magere Hein 1,400 Posted June 29, 2005 (edited) I refuse to vote in this poll. I can imagine that. After all for some federal agencies the logical step from "expects GWB assassinated" to "plans assassination of GWB" is smaller than that from "had WMD" to "has WMD". I don't share your view on his quality as president, but then he's not my president. regards, Hein Edited June 29, 2005 by Magere Hein Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest IYG Posted June 29, 2005 I refuse to vote in this poll. Aside from that, let me remind everybody that George W.Bush is a fine man and the best darned President we've had since Theodore Roosevelt (although W.H.Taft was a close second there). Mr.Bush is an honest and caring man who has had to spend the last several years cleaning up the debris left by his predecessor William Do-nothing Clinton. Throughout all of this he has held himself above the fray of naysayers and wimpy Democrats who have been bemoaning their failures since they lost against Eisenhower in 1952. Wake up people and smell the coffee (or roasted garlic juice for the caffeine challenged). George has been a great leader and the only sad matter related to him is that the blankety-blank b.st.rd Franklin Roosevelt caused the end of possibility for a President to be elected a third time. Please tell me that you're kidding. President Taft has become a joke because he did pretty much nothing and just what people told him to do. Kind of reminds me of President Bush now. President Bush is in office for one reason and one reason alone, September 11 and the fact that Americans aren't the sharpest tools in the box, so that's actually two reasons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_fan 42 Posted June 29, 2005 George has been a great leader and the only sad matter related to him is that the blankety-blank b.st.rd Franklin Roosevelt caused the end of possibility for a President to be elected a third time. If it had not been for Franklin Roosevelt, Bill Clinton would have easliy won a third term and President George Bush would never have been elected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrunoBrimley 86 Posted June 29, 2005 . A)I am not joking. Taft worked hard, not so much in the typical tapioca styled presidential format which people are used to but in a wise and judicial manner. Later (in 1921) he was placed on The United States Supreme Court. Look through your history books and you'll find that if Taft had been Catholic instead of Unitarian he would have been given Sainthood status. Are you forgetting how he governed the Philipines in the early 1900's? B)How dense are you? "Bush is in office because of September 11"? What exactly are you smoking? Bush was elected President, fair and square, the previous November and sworn in during the month of January of 2001, several months prior to the horrors of September 11 which were all courtesy of Bill Clinton who did nothing to stop Bin Laden when he had the chance. Sorry to tell you this but Clinton bombing a toothpaste factory, killing thousands of workers was not exactly a real attempt to stop Bin Laden and so we all suffered because of Clinton. C)Whether or not Americans are the sharpest tools in the box is of no never mind to me. The truth here is we at least have fair and valid elections and therefore we ... wait a minute...did you say I ain't playing with a full deck? Harumph! I don't need to take this type of insult, I know for a fact that I deserve much better insults. Double, even triple, Harumph!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bald rick 9 Posted June 29, 2005 If I could pick a nit here, Bush was elected last year, 3 years AFTER the events of 11th September 2001. The fact that he comes across as a poorly educated monkey is possibly a reflection of the level of bluntness in the American toolbox, but let's face it, we would have probably hated whoever you elected, as he would still have been a right-wing nutcase with no perception of the world beyond the good old US of A, whose foreign policy would consist of: any time there is a problem, throw a few bombs at it and hope it'll go away. And the Americans still can't work out why so many Islamic nations regard them as the great Satan. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrunoBrimley 86 Posted June 29, 2005 If I could pick a nit here, Bush was elected last year, 3 years AFTER the events of 11th September 2001. I was clearly indicating his first election in November of 2000. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites