September 27, 2000

12:57 AM

i happened to catch bush on larry king live last night.what i found to be especially interesting was his body language. talking about women, being popular with women, winning the women's vote - shaking head "no" the whole time...having women in top level govt. positions - shaking head "no"...he shook his head "no" a lot. talking about reagan and what a great president he was - shaking head "yes".
posted by centrs (14 comments total)

the more you see of him, the less you like him, and he looks like such a booze hound as well
posted by matucana at 7:21 AM on September 27, 2000

Here we go again another bash George Bush thread...
posted by gyc at 7:26 AM on September 27, 2000

I dunno, gyc. I thought matucana's post was extremely insightful. Christ this site sucks. I think I am done with it. Congratulations matucana, you are the dumbfuck that finally pushed me over the edge.
posted by Popstar at 7:45 AM on September 27, 2000

Middle brow, party-line follow-the-leaderisms not edifying enough for you popster & gyc? Umm...me neither, I thought I was the only one. Let me get it straight, Metafilterers : Bush = bad, Napster = good, Microsoft = evil, poorly written blogs posing as writing = good [though their fifteen minutes of web-importance is fading]
posted by Karla at 8:04 AM on September 27, 2000

Hang on a second, gyc, popstar, karla, there's still a chance to turn Metafilter into a playground of adoration for my neo-industrial fascist regime. Let's not abandon a work in progress when there's still a chance it might be used to worship my Supreme Authority.

With that in mind, and with a new purpose in our hearts, let us all join together in mutual adoration of me. The adoration will be followed by random beatings in the foyer.
posted by aramaic at 8:10 AM on September 27, 2000

Metafilterers : Bush = bad, Napster = good, Microsoft = evil, poorly written blogs posing as writing = good...
Now that is Breaking News!
MetaFilter has a dominant point of view!
I guess that means failure for mathowie's attempts to impose quotas (45% Gore voters, 45% Bush voters, 5% Nader voters... 80% Windows users... 2% subject to inheritance tax if they dropped dead today... .0001% webloggers)
My own set of deeply-held-beliefs are so off-mainstream, I happen to be delighted that MeFi's "community" agrees with me 27.2% of the time (the best percentage I can find on the Web), so when-and-if you disagree you can either:
(1) Write a non-troll response and post it to the comments
(2) Find something you agree with and post it on the front page
or (3) Just don't click on the "comments" link; it'll just get you upset.

After all, if aramaic can continue his World Domination campaign in spite of support from less than .06% of the MetaFilterers, then the Bush-ites should be able to participate even though they are only a somewhat-significent minority here.

In fact, I think I'll do a Number 2 with a story that anybody who doesn't like this thread is just gonna HATE! Bwahahahahaha!!!
posted by wendell at 10:18 AM on September 27, 2000

I would not have missed this Bush interview on Larry King if I had a TiVo! This is why I deserve--

Oops, wrong place for my essay!
posted by gluechunk at 10:20 AM on September 27, 2000

And the rumor is NOT true that if mr. mat had won one himself, he was gonna rename the site MeTiVoFilter (but I wanted to spread it anyway)...
posted by wendell at 10:31 AM on September 27, 2000

i didn't intend this to be a bush bashing...i was more interested in the psychology of body language...
posted by centrs at 1:36 PM on September 27, 2000

this talks a bit about body gestures around the world. most interesting was Bulgaria, where nodding your head up and down means No and nodding side-to-side means Yes. found at nubbin.
posted by modge at 3:35 PM on September 27, 2000

here's where i fall: Bush = bad, Napster = good, Microsoft = evil, people who take metafilter comments serioulsy = stupid

posted by alfredogarcia at 5:29 PM on September 27, 2000

...but 'serioulsy' folks.......angelina jolie = good, pyra = good, imf world bank = bad............and so on......i think all these guys are saying is, it's sometimes disappointing to see lots of me-too posts and not enough objectivity in a forum of supposedly younger open-minded web folks...otherwise it implies a lot of conformity....knowwhatimean?
posted by Karl at 5:46 PM on September 27, 2000

...imf world bank = bad... i think all these guys are saying is, it's sometimes disappointing to see lots of me-too posts and not enough objectivity in a forum of supposedly younger open-minded web folks...

Karl, if you have a good argument why the IMF and World Bank are not "bad" (for the poor, for the environment), I would love to hear it.

Conflict is good. Nothing is healthier than a vigorous, evidence-based dialogue with people you disagree with. Personally, I probably wouldn't be here if everyone agreed with me. Moreover, if the facts, upon examination, don't turn out to support my position, then I like to think I would correct my position rather than deny reality.

Anyway, if you have shocking new evidence, bring it on. Don't be shy.
posted by johnb at 8:01 PM on September 27, 2000