Join 3,438 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Daddy's Little Girls?
January 7, 2004 10:24 AM   Subscribe

Laura's Girls Jenna and Barbara have not campaigned or reined in their adolescent rebellions. They have not appeared engaged in any of the pressing issues their generation will inherit, nor shown empathy for the struggles facing their mother and their father, the president of the United States. They have not treated with respect their Secret Service details, those highly trained men and women who literally would take a bullet for them. They don't show their faces at the White House often. So far, they have shown little inclination to embrace the life of public service modeled by their parents, uncle and grandparents. They are girls born rich, blessed with intelligence, good looks, trust funds, loving parents, boundless opportunities, freedom from many of life's daily vexing challenges. Yet they persist in seeing themselves as victims of daddy's job. In this attitude, they have been subtly encouraged by their mother.
posted by amberglow (78 comments total)

 
forgot to add: Adapted from "The Perfect Wife: The Life and Choices of Laura Bush," by Ann Gerhart, published this week by Simon & Schuster --and Ann Gerhart will be online at www.washingtonpost.com Tuesday, Jan. 13, at noon to answer questions about her book.
posted by amberglow at 10:26 AM on January 7, 2004


good looks

gimme a fucking break. no president's kids are attractive.

though i'd [insert something dirty] al gore's daughters any day.

also...why should i care? this hardly seems compelling, and mirrors every other trust fund baby who wants to get out from daddy's shadwo.
posted by taumeson at 10:32 AM on January 7, 2004


Hey, you don't have a crystal ball. For all you know Jenna's getting ready to be President Bush III in 2016. You go, girl.
posted by jfuller at 10:38 AM on January 7, 2004


This is a good read and a good post. George and Laura sound like good parents, doing a good job under very difficult circumstances.
posted by vito90 at 10:39 AM on January 7, 2004


This is a good read and a good post.

I agree.

George and Laura sound like good parents, doing a good job under very difficult circumstances.

Did you read the same thing I did? (After counting the number of "good"s in your comment, I realize you must have been sarcastic.)
posted by norm at 10:42 AM on January 7, 2004


For all you know Jenna's getting ready to be President Bush III in 2016. You go, girl.

Well, IV. I'll say Jeb's not running in 2008 when everyone says Hillary's not running in 2008.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:45 AM on January 7, 2004


So far, they have shown little inclination to embrace the life of public service modeled by their parents, uncle and grandparents.

This is a problem? Who wants a third generation of Bushes at power?
posted by Termite at 10:45 AM on January 7, 2004


You mean the US doesn't have a royal family? Oh for shame, how will we keep up with Great Britain?
posted by badstone at 10:46 AM on January 7, 2004


Do the Bush twins know that their weed habit directly funds terrorism?
posted by crazy finger at 10:46 AM on January 7, 2004


By the way, there already is a guy running for President in 2016.
posted by crazy finger at 10:50 AM on January 7, 2004


I don't understand the author's hostility toward these kids. Good for them — I wouldn't want the Secret Service following me around either, nor would I want to be a decorative flourish on my father's career. It cracks me up when people talk about the Bush twins as though they're "troublemakers" because they drank underage and smoke cigarettes and pot. Hello? Ever been 19? And good for George and Laura for refusing to comment in the press.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 10:52 AM on January 7, 2004


My memories go back to the Carter admin, and it seems every set of presidential kids (the ones below 30 at least) had to live a hellish life in the spotlight and it doesn't seem like there is any way to "win" as a presidential kid. The press seems to ravenge them no matter what they do. Party affiliation doesn't seem to matter, after watching the Bush girls and the Gore kids (one of them just got busted for pot possesion, right?) in the press. If I were in that position, I'd seek seclusion as much as possible.

We all remember Rush Limbaugh, among many others, calling Chelsea Clinton a dog, right?
posted by mathowie at 11:00 AM on January 7, 2004


George and Laura sound like good parents, doing a good job under very difficult circumstances.

Are you insane?

After reading the article I got the feeling that Laura is in a state of denial about her daughters, allowing them to dictate they way they want to be parented. Maybe it was the 'miracle' of their birth that causes Laura to be this way. Certainly as a Teacher she should know the importance of structure, rules and boundaries to the development of children. The strangest comment I saw in the article was where she described her then 21 year-old daughters as still being 'teenagers':
In the spring of 2002, while on that European trip, Laura Bush was asked if her girls had gotten more used to the limelight. "No," she said, "I would have to say not. They're going to be juniors in college. They just want to do like other teenagers do."
The quotes from Laura about her daughters are all really strange. She seems unwilling to say anthing of substance on the girls. As a mother she has shown a number of signs that she is failing her daughters. She should be there to help them prepare for what is expected in occasions like the ones listed int he article (arriving in Paris, the inauguration - that sort of thing). Barbara Bush seems to be one bitch of a grandmother though.

As for dodging the Secret Service, that is the height of irresponsibility. Obviously the girls need to be protected, if someone were to kidnap them then what would the President do? Faced with the choice of saving my child's life and say, letting a terrorist free, I'd pick my kid every time. I think that all parents would. That's why we tax payers pay for the secret service to protect them.

Dubya, on the other hand, sounds like he's doing a bit more parenting, but obviously not enough. I guess he is too busy ruining the country.
posted by DragonBoy at 11:06 AM on January 7, 2004


I really liked this article and, if anything, it gave me a little more respect for the Bush's. Just a little. They seem way more tolerant than I can believe given their political stances. The twins behavior seems perfectly normal to me.
posted by Raichle at 11:07 AM on January 7, 2004


"The Bushes were underage-drinking at my house. When I checked outside, one of the Secret Service guys asked me if they'd be spending the night. I said no. And then I go upstairs to see another friend and I can smell the green wafting out under his door. I open the door, and there he is, smoking out the Bush twins on his hookah."
A high profile star tattle telling on himself? say above is false. Also "his door", thought it was his house?
posted by thomcatspike at 11:08 AM on January 7, 2004


Yeah, going after Bush for teenagers that act like teenagers is beyond bizarre. It's like people whose biggest rip on Tom DeLay is that he used to be an exterminator. Why is it that people lash out at the messed-up Washington elite when they act normal?
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 11:11 AM on January 7, 2004


If one believes (as I do) that children are reflections of their parent's values and morals, then it's reasonable to see this article as an indictment of the Bush clan. Otherwise, it's nothing more than another rehash of today's youth culture and its possible origins.

Personally, I don't care about how these kids' behavior casts this country's image in the eyes of others around the world, we're not the only country whose leaders' childern have been spoiled by priviledge. I think it's far more interesting to consider what kind of parents it takes to raise two snot-nose lushy party girls of this caliber.
posted by bicyclingfool at 11:13 AM on January 7, 2004


it gave me a little more respect for the Bush's... They seem way more tolerant than I can believe given their political stances

How does this make you respect them MORE?

The Bush's tolerate marijuana and law-breaking by their irresponsible daughters in their own home. George Bush is known for being tough on crime and linking marijuana and terrorism.

How is this respectable? Sounds like they are the same as half of the middle-aged parents I know: Fairly conservative with wild children and a broken home; always in denial.
posted by crazy finger at 11:15 AM on January 7, 2004


Last I heard, "juniors in college" weren't usually teenagers.

Also, maybe it seems over the top to some of you, but kudos to Barbara for at least *trying* to get the granddaughters to stand up straight. I guess I am one of those old fashioned sorts who thinks young people can and should be taught to act properly in situations they are apt to encounter -- and in this case that involves how to behave at state functions.
posted by ilsa at 11:26 AM on January 7, 2004


In Canada, former Prime Minister Jean Chretien son was regularly in trouble with the law but this barely made the news. For some reason Canadian media seems to be obsessed with stuff like trade agreements and foreign affairs, stuff that's like relevent.

Stories like this reflect most poorly on the U.S. media in their continued slide towards more 'tabloid' style journalism at the expense of real news. The Washington Post should not be wasting space on this drivel.
posted by bobo123 at 11:26 AM on January 7, 2004


George and Laura sound like good parents, doing a good job under very difficult circumstances.

Are you insane?


I assure you, I am not. I just appreciate what I put my parents through at the time I was the girl's age, wonder if I will have the patience to not throw my own kids out on the street for that behavior, and look back now with a renewed respect for parents who do their best to do the right thing for their kids no matter what assholes they act like.

I guess he is too busy ruining the country. That is not what this post is about. It is however, what people will want to make this post about. Bush could find a cure for breast cancer and he would be criticized for not finding one for stomach cancer. Him and Laura are doing a better job at parenting than most, and the girls are prima facia evidence.
posted by vito90 at 11:30 AM on January 7, 2004


Vito, have to disagree on the parenting quality. How can one be a good parent by allowing one's children to indulge in behaviors that one constantly criticizes to the world at large? It's called hypocrisy and that's not good parenting. I would see consistency between public speech and private action as the good choice and the one the Bush family's made as a bad one, even though it is consistent (IMO) with other such matters.
posted by billsaysthis at 11:37 AM on January 7, 2004


Him and Laura are doing a better job at parenting than most, and the girls are prima facia evidence.

Yes, they've done a much better job than most. Despite all the odds being against them- all the obstacles in front of them like wealth, power, having a President for a father/father-in law- somehow, after all that, they've managed to raise children that act in a manner which is both disrespectful of and disgraceful to this nation and the American people. If that's better than average, then my parents were pros.

On preview: I agree with billsaysthis
posted by crazy finger at 11:41 AM on January 7, 2004


Him and Laura are doing a better job at parenting than most, and the girls are prima facia evidence.

WTF? Spoiled party brat trust funded unemployed. Great job George! vito90, do you mind explaining how you arrive at the conclusion that GW and Laura are doing a "better job then most" when the only defense that can be made for these girls is that other youngen's are the same at that age ... without the servants/protectors ... or the name-droppin'-high-profile-dope-buddies ... or the million dollor trust funds. Yup, there the same as reglar kids alright, and yet somehow your interpretation is that GW and spouse are better parents than most, with every tool and perk in the world at their disposal. I think a little support might be required for your position.
posted by Wulfgar! at 11:41 AM on January 7, 2004


I think it's far more interesting to consider what kind of parents it takes to raise two snot-nose lushy party girls of this caliber.
Guess you feel the same about Ex- Vice President Gore..his son's current run in with the law.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:45 AM on January 7, 2004


While I'm not a fan of Bush, I do sympathize with the daughters, and I don't think we can make judgements on parenting. No one knows what is said behind closed doors vs. what is said in public. I mean the carefully thought out statements by Laura is exactly what pretty much any parent would say. Is it expected of her to say, "Yeah they smoke pot and get drunk, they're a real pain in the ass"?

I can only imagine the headlines if it appeared that they had no control of their daughters. At least here there's a subtle acknowledgement of their behavior while reassuring the press (and us) that they're fun and normal, not pot-heads or alcoholics.

That said, at 21 they should be showing maturity now. But how many of us wouldn't take advantage of free pot at Ashton Kutcher's house and constantly be sober while our friends drink? The only difference between the majority of young Americans and them is that when they do it their parents read about it in the Rolling Stones.
posted by geoff. at 11:49 AM on January 7, 2004


Yet they persist in seeing themselves as victims of daddy's job.

Silver spoon aside, they are victimes of daddy's job. I'd never want to be the child of the most powerful man in the world. Everyone who wants the media to jump on them every time they drink a beer or smoke a joint for no other reason than to entertain the rest of us, raise your hand.

If I were in their their place I'd want nothing to do with The Presidency (although I'd probably be pretty grateful to anybody who's willing to take a bullet for me).
posted by tomorama at 11:51 AM on January 7, 2004


DragonBoy made a good point about the daughter's age, they're adults. Why is this article going on about in the future, as they're done being parented? As bobo123 mentioned, it's bad press.
posted by thomcatspike at 12:00 PM on January 7, 2004


"They are beginning to realize that they've got to take some responsibility for their own lives and beginning to think about their career paths. Laura chose her career path . . . early. I didn't choose mine until a little late. And uh," the president said, chuckling, "I never really was that worried about the career path."
posted by terrapin at 12:01 PM on January 7, 2004


For all you folks who feel that deep caring sympathy for these girls, I would like to remind you that when they use the Secret Service for their own ends, their wasting your money. And if that doesn't irritate you in the slightest, than perhaps you'd best remember that when other kids their age party hardy, it isn't a threat to national security.

Victims of their position? That's between them and their parents. But why in the hell should *I* be a victim of their position, and who on this green Earth could rationally expect me to care more for their trust-funded woes than I do about my country's needs and responsabilities?
posted by Wulfgar! at 12:05 PM on January 7, 2004


She seems unwilling to say anthing of substance on the girls.
Laura Bush seems unwilling to say anything of substance, period. She is the most low-profile first lady of my lifetime. I find it disappointing.

How can one be a good parent by allowing one's children to indulge in behaviors that one constantly criticizes to the world at large?
By brushing it off as a bit of careless youthful indiscretion. As long as they sober up and find god by age 40, they can be president, just like daddy!

Plus, NEWSFLASH: not every teenager (or college student) is hell-bent on partying all the time. I work with many of young Laura's classmates, most of whom are more, shall we say, "focused."
posted by whatnot at 12:11 PM on January 7, 2004


Wasn't there just a whole bunch of headlines about Al Gore's son being busted for smoking pot and how that was a sign that Gore would have been a bad president? Wouldn't the same logic apply to George W? I mean, he has two pot smoking kids instead of one, so I guess that would make him twice as bad. I'm just sayin'...
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:11 PM on January 7, 2004


Spoiled brats.
posted by FormlessOne at 12:17 PM on January 7, 2004


Victims of their position? That's between them and their parents.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. How is this important or anybody's business or whatnot?
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 12:19 PM on January 7, 2004


Look at these kids compared to Chelsey. No comparison. They are much less developed.
posted by stbalbach at 12:23 PM on January 7, 2004


whoops, I meant young Jenna's classmates. regrets.
posted by whatnot at 12:25 PM on January 7, 2004


Look at these kids compared to Chelsey. No comparison. They are much less developed.
That's what struck me the most about this piece--Chelsea Clinton got so much more attention, and far more insulting press, yet these girls (and they are just girls) repeatedly break the law and ditch their protection, and act like brats on the world stage, with no repercussion or anything, even from their parents.
posted by amberglow at 12:29 PM on January 7, 2004


Until the Bush daughters turn out to be devil worshippers or prostitutes, their behavior really doesn't matter (at least not to the election, as much as I wish it would).
posted by ubermesh at 12:29 PM on January 7, 2004


I'm as anti-Dubya as the next guy, but shame on the Post for printing this drivel. I don't see how ad hominem, unsupported attacks on Laura Bush serve to highlight an issue of national concern.

If Jenna and Barbara act like brats, judge them as brats. Whatever. But leave this tabloid crap to less important newspapers.
posted by PrinceValium at 12:36 PM on January 7, 2004


Wulfgar's right. It's not a matter of great consequence, but these girls are extremely well-funded and well-protected on MY DIME and fucking with MY SECRET SERVICE. If they want to squander their amazing privledge and opportunity on frippery, fine. They have only one job: to not act like idiots in public, and they have cocked that one simple thing right on up. I say: come on tabloids, have a go at 'em.
posted by DenOfSizer at 1:27 PM on January 7, 2004


God bless Ashton Kutcher for calling them out on their disgraceful behavior at his mansion. Is there a job at the Post for this young man? He's clearly got the goods.
posted by luser at 1:28 PM on January 7, 2004


I'm with bicyclingfool.
posted by wsg at 1:29 PM on January 7, 2004


Yeah, going after Bush for teenagers that act like teenagers is beyond bizarre.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. How is this important or anybody's business or whatnot?

Ignatius, what the hell are you on? I can't think of any responsible parents I know that actually condone this sort of behavior. As teenagers, I think they would at least be chastised for drinking, smoking, etc. Now that they're out of the house it's a different matter, but it seems that Laura and George aren't just turning a blind eye, but faking ignorance. Yes, most kids wouldn't be caught so often. But you know what? Sometimes they do get caught, and their parents get pissed.

I'm sorry, but being some random kid and being the President's daughter are not the same damn thing. They could very easily live an exciting life on slightly different terms, but have instead chosen to be jerks about it by stretching the rules and making their father look like a hypocrite.
posted by mikeh at 1:44 PM on January 7, 2004


I'm sorry, but being some random kid and being the President's daughter are not the same damn thing.

Not for the kid, but it ought to be for you and me. Even if they are both flaming fuck-ups and it is all W's fault, why is commentary on their child-rearing skills within the purview of public discussion (much less of the WaPo)? Of course their dad looks like a hypocrite, and he also looks like a war profiteer enabler and an ahistorical dickweed, but he is the President, not his daughters. I have confidence that the case against George Bush's performance as President can be made without metaphorical appeal to our armchair psychoanalyses of his relationships with his kids.

My friend Jay's dad used to beat him every day, but no one gives a fuck because Jay lives in a trailer park. I'm not going to give a fuck that Jenna lacks proper guidance just because her dad is the POTUS. Just as Bush's presidency should be judged in terms of cause, effect, and policy, if Jay's dad found a cure for cancer, his shitty performance as a father would not make him a less important scientist.

It's tabloid pap. A distraction.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 1:58 PM on January 7, 2004


I agree with some in this thread that it's relevant that Bush is being hypocritical in his public/private stances on drug use and posession laws. And he should be made to answer for that. But as for the rest, I have to admit a part of me loves hearing the gossip - but it's just not politically relevant.

Someone commented that Laura Bush is "disappointingly low-profile" - well, why not? Political spouses don't have any duty to the public. Nobody cared much what Margaret Thatcher's husband did or didn't do. If I were a political spouse, I would only be seen at the big events where it was customary for the politicians to bring their spouses. Otherwise I would just concentrate on living my own life. No one can really help a spouse do his or her job, those who try often end up having a terribly hard time, and wearing different outfits and smiling is no job for an adult.

Bobo 123 is right that Canadian political coverage never does seem to get as cheap shot as the American media does. The politicians are criticized only for the way they do their jobs. Some Canadian politicians have nearly impeccable private lives and others have terrible ones - but it never seems to have much bearing on their careers either way.

Jean Chrétien is, btw, reputedly a model father and husband. His other two children have turned out very well. His son Michel was adopted and has Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, and it was a case where everything possible was done to help him but sadly, it didn't help much. And there's no hypocrisy - the Chrétiens do not interfere with the legal process and Michel does jail time just like anyone else would for his crimes.
posted by orange swan at 1:58 PM on January 7, 2004


though i'd [insert something dirty] al gore's daughters any day.

this is a very disturbing, if added with 'into'. sorry, sorry...
posted by Peter H at 2:28 PM on January 7, 2004


Nobody cared much what Margaret Thatcher's husband did or didn't do.

For a very simple reason: The ceremonial duties are left more to the Royal Family in the U.K. In the U.S., the president has both ceremonial and executive duties, whether the former are on paper or not. (There's a reason the presidency is often described as a "peculiar institution," in much the same way U.S. chattel slavery is termed by historians). Consequently, Americans have long looked at the First Family in a way vaguely similar to the way people in other countries look at royals. And they gossip and make fun of family members, etc. In these times, even the mainstream media also helps further the gossip along, in both cases.
posted by raysmj at 2:37 PM on January 7, 2004


Don't forget the moral rectitude of Uncle Neil.

They are girls born rich, blessed with intelligence

I dispute "intelligence"...
posted by rushmc at 2:55 PM on January 7, 2004


If they are 21, mom and dad's job is over. Period.

It's not like I wasn't pretty much the same at that age. I was just more discreet. Course it helped that I wasn't in the White House.

The Bushes may or may not have screwed up in raising their kids. But that is their business and not ours. Meanwhile whatever these girls do needs to be on their own heads. They are old enough to choose not to be stupid.
posted by konolia at 3:13 PM on January 7, 2004


Too bad there isn't more of the article on the front page.
posted by herc at 3:24 PM on January 7, 2004


Chelsea Clinton got so much more attention, and far more insulting press, yet these girls (and they are just girls) repeatedly break the law and ditch their protection, and act like brats on the world stage, with no repercussion or anything, even from their parents.

The Bush twins entering the White House were Chelsea's age when Chelsea left the White House: the twins are much older and far from being teens. The twins do seem sheltered though as teens. They've lived on their own and need to be like/treated as woman their age implies.
(honestly thought the twins were 19 as that is how they are betrayed)
posted by thomcatspike at 3:27 PM on January 7, 2004


konolia, with respect, you couldn't be more wrong. If they choose to shuck security and get taken hostage, its on our heads. If they choose to go AWOL (not like its a family tradition or anything) and get whacked, causing the President to go all "War on Anything That May Have Lead To My Daughter's Demise", than its on our heads. If they choose to have the secret service procure the release of a criminal suspect without due process of law, than it's on our heads. If they choose to have public funds spent for their enjoyment and interest, while sitting on piles of daddy's cash, and we indentured servants say nothing, then and only then, is it on our heads.

As if it wasn't before, it's time to get pissed off. Bush claimed that he would restore honor and integrity to the White House. Where is the honor in defending your relative's criminal acts 'cause kids will be kids? Where is the honor in joking about how money absolves you from aspiring to the American ideal? Where is the integrity of allowing those closest to you to threaten the security of a nation? Where is the integrity of allowing the tax payer's dollors to be used in subversion of American law?

These people, the whole fricking clan of them, are incompetant and poor representatives of what our nation should be. I don't care if the Bushes raised good kids or not. But claiming that the children of the President don't have a bearing on my life is idiocy when they're spending my money and asking for my ignorance of their stupidity.

Billy Carter was a joke, not worthy of my respect or sympathy. Don't expect that I'll treat the Bush twits any different.
posted by Wulfgar! at 4:20 PM on January 7, 2004


Amen, Wulfgar!
posted by keswick at 4:27 PM on January 7, 2004


If they are 21, mom and dad's job is over. Period.

How nice. Fortunately, some people don't believe in dismissing familial responsibility at some arbitrary age.
posted by rushmc at 4:44 PM on January 7, 2004


As if it wasn't before, it's time to get pissed off.
Wulfgar, you have made a clear reason that they act like teens and have been been poorly raised. Like to add: point the finger @ the twins, they are adults and should have the treatment as one would have. Meaning, tell them not their parents as they are accountable for their own actions. Maybe mom & dad will learn something too, they can be a grown up by themselves.

Ok Rush, they kill someone, we put their parents on trial. (thinks about it, stands behind Rush)
It is sadder, that these women have a golden opportunity weather they participate or not. Think about all the wonderful people you would meet having dinner, that alone would be neat. I hate ties but a chance to listen to the world, no problem. Instead they act like they have been neglected children. Why do I have to dress nice, my friends don't.
posted by thomcatspike at 5:02 PM on January 7, 2004


You know, I can't stand George W. I hate this administration, I wish that I could wave my hands and make him not the president.

But, his kids? They didn't ask to be the President's daughters. They don't have a say in it, other than the same damn vote you and I have. If they want to act like twits, that's their damn business. Everyone was up in arms, when Chelsea Clinton was disparaged by the press, why should it be any different for the Bush girls?

Leave the kids out of it, regardless of their age, they aren't the President.
posted by SuzySmith at 5:22 PM on January 7, 2004


For the record, it's Barbara (the Yalie) that would be Presidential timber. Jenna is a dumb-ass UT sorority girl. She got her daddy's brains. Barbara, luckily, got her grand-daddy's brains. The two are lumped together, but as far as I can tell, it's Jenna that's the immature wild-child. From what I've read Barbara is fairly level-headed, comparatively speaking, but Jenna runs amok: Barbara had the standard teenage rebellions; Jenna is just too damn dumb to know how to do anything else.

The whole thing with Jenna being MIA for hours on 9/11, though--that is FUCKED up.

This article is lame though. I dislike the Bushies as much as the next people, but this attack on them has almost no "oomph" behind--the family just doesn't come off as that fucked up. It seems like the parents try to treat their kids hyper-democratically, and the kids behave the same--no special treatment, no special behavior. The kids aren't political animals and have declined, thank you kindly, to engage in the political scene--that's not a crime. It's just standard American youth apathy.

Further Reading on the Bush Twins
posted by jengod at 6:24 PM on January 7, 2004


They didn't ask to be the President's daughters. They don't have a say in it

They didn't ask to be born, either, any more than you did. Do you use that as an excuse when you behave badly? A reasonable person takes responsibility for making the most of the situation they find themselves in. When someone makes a point of preaching—and claiming—family values and the moral high ground, then the morality of their family members becomes fair game for assessing their authenticity. If the "Bush girls" don't like the attention (and it is quite reasonable that they might not), then they should take it up with their father and ask him to stop waving them around like a flag of righteousness.
posted by rushmc at 6:28 PM on January 7, 2004


It's like people whose biggest rip on Tom DeLay is that he used to be an exterminator.

I'd love to meet those folks. First I'll give them sunglasses to protect their eyes, then introduce them to the Internet, microwaveable foods and bicycles with two of the same size wheels.
posted by pineapple at 7:03 PM on January 7, 2004


The Bush Twins.

The Bush Presidency.

Two different threads.

I wish.
posted by kozad at 7:47 PM on January 7, 2004


How nice. Fortunately, some people don't believe in dismissing familial responsibility at some arbitrary age.

If my kids are acting like wild little heathens at age 21, I may hate it, and I may even try to do something about it-but I would have NO power because THEY WOULD BE ADULTS.

And don't tell me that most of you weren't wild little heathens at that age. I sure was.
posted by konolia at 9:01 PM on January 7, 2004


I'd love to meet those folks. First I'll give them sunglasses to protect their eyes, then introduce them to the Internet, microwaveable foods and bicycles with two of the same size wheels.

Just to be clear, my angle is not that Tom DeLay isn't a dangerous criminal zealot, but that the damage done by his political career is not related to the fact that he used to have a regular job (which, independent of all else, is cool).

That being said, you've never heard the "that guy is stupid hick exterminator" insult? It is usually the first thing out of the mouths of my (I assume our) stupider partisan brethren. Mistekenly so, if you ask me, because one could instead cite solid evidence of DeLay's radical agenda being carried out.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 9:04 PM on January 7, 2004


If my kids are acting like wild little heathens at age 21, I may hate it, and I may even try to do something about it-but I would have NO power because THEY WOULD BE ADULTS.
Even if they were still in school, and lived with you still, and weren't working fulltime or supporting themselves? (which I believe is the twins' situation)
posted by amberglow at 9:07 PM on January 7, 2004


I'm almost 22 and I've never even been drunk.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:31 PM on January 7, 2004


Then you've got some serious work to do.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 9:36 PM on January 7, 2004


And don't tell me that most of you weren't wild little heathens at that age.

Actually, I wasn't.

/offtopic
posted by rushmc at 11:36 PM on January 7, 2004


I HATE, HATE, HATE, HATE, Bush's policies, politics and presidency but I think stories about the Bush twins are stupid, hypocritical, and irrelevant.
posted by McBain at 11:54 PM on January 7, 2004


Um....perhaps if GWB's "youthful foibles" had been more widely discussed, fewer people would have voted for him?
posted by cookie-k at 12:18 AM on January 8, 2004


I don't know what "marijuana" is, but if you bring some down here I'll drink it!

but I think stories about the Bush twins are stupid, hypocritical, and irrelevant.

much like the twins themselves.
posted by mcsweetie at 5:43 AM on January 8, 2004


We all remember Rush Limbaugh, among many others, calling Chelsea Clinton a dog, right?

Yes, and do you remember when he apologized to hillarys face for said comment?
posted by clavdivs at 8:33 AM on January 8, 2004


but I think stories about the Bush twins are stupid, hypocritical, and irrelevant.

much like the twins themselves.


LOLOL
posted by rushmc at 8:59 AM on January 8, 2004


Man, if I were 21 or so and my dad was not only the president, but GWB to boot, then I'd be smoking as much weed as possible just to deal ... at the time I was raising hell in many other ways ...
posted by krinklyfig at 10:49 AM on January 8, 2004


If the "Bush girls" don't like the attention (and it is quite reasonable that they might not), then they should take it up with their father and ask him to stop waving them around like a flag of righteousness.

That's my whole point, they don't have a say in what their father says or does. Anymore than I have a say in what my parents do.

They are acting like a lot of college students, only most college students aren't being followed around by reporters and cameras 24/7.
posted by SuzySmith at 4:08 PM on January 8, 2004


God damn you people criticizing the bush twins are idiots. So they drink and smoke a little weed like most kids, and suddenly they W. and Laura have “failed” them? WTF? Maybe they are not perfect little angles or something but they have a far better start in life then most Americans, and will probably do better then most Americans.

I can’t believe you have the audacity to criticize their parenting, either, while knowing almost nothing about it. Other then a few behavioral indicators, (like drinking, a little weed, etc) which are shared by a huge percentage of people in their demographic, you know absolutely nothing about how they were raised. They may have had ‘lax’ parenting, and while that does cause certain personality traits to flourish, it doesn’t mean they are going to die at 29 of a crack overdose. I mean come on.

Those two are going to lead reasonably happy lives, and the rest of you need to shut your pie hole.
posted by delmoi at 8:58 PM on January 8, 2004


I questiion your parents' parenting, delmoi.
posted by rushmc at 10:23 PM on January 8, 2004


well, I've certainly been stung. I will haunt the dumb and privileged no longer. at least not when delmoi is around.
posted by mcsweetie at 11:28 PM on January 8, 2004


Maybe they are not perfect little angles or something

Point taken, delmoi. I for one will stop expecting the Bush twins to resemble the pefect little angles, whether that be 90, 60 or any other degree.
posted by orange swan at 7:04 AM on January 9, 2004


The Bush Twins: Two Children Left Behind.
posted by DenOfSizer at 9:00 AM on January 10, 2004


« Older PowerLabs...  |  Why Did Attorney General Ashcr... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments