Lynne Cheney parody draws White House ire
March 6, 2003 7:13 AM   Subscribe

Lynne Cheney parody draws White House ire An Internet lampoon of Vice President Dick Cheney's wife is no laughing matter at the White House, which has asked a satirist to remove pictures of her - complete with red clown noses - from his Web site. But the New York Civil Liberties Union struck back Wednesday on behalf of John A. Wooden, 31, threatening a lawsuit to protect his First Amendment rights to parody the White House and Bush officials on his site,
posted by turbanhead (56 comments total)
What I find more disconcerting is that it looks like Lynne Cheney used government resources to send a letter threatening civil action on her behalf. Perhaps this is legal, but it seems to me like an action that should not be sponsored by the government.
posted by mosch at 7:26 AM on March 6, 2003

Lynne Cheney? I thought her name was "Mrs. Dick Cheney."

This site is great, though parody is almost unecessary given the behavior of certain well-appointed political relatives.
posted by alms at 7:29 AM on March 6, 2003

They couldn't kill irony, so now they're having a go at parody?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:36 AM on March 6, 2003


"President's Statement Urging Cessation of Public Hysteria in the Face of Certain Annihilation by Nuke Pox"

"Christian Patriot Alerts:
- Godly Tips: Saving Your Christian Child Through Righteous Beatings
- Yoga: A Religion for Terrorist Sex Addicts
- St. Patrick's Day: Just Another Excuse for Catholics to Get Drunk?
- Visit the Presidential Prayer Squad Now!"

"WHITE HOUSE PRESS RELEASE: Tens of Dozens of Bush Supporters Take to the Streets to Defend President's War Plans"

I like it. viewership just increased about 10,000 percent. Hee hee hee!
posted by troutfishing at 7:39 AM on March 6, 2003

joke -n.
Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.
A mischievous trick; a prank.
An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation.
Something not to be taken seriously; a triviality.
An object of amusement or laughter; a laughingstock.
posted by Hugh2d2 at 7:43 AM on March 6, 2003

I've always thought the funniest thing on the site was the regular, non-official reader mail.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:45 AM on March 6, 2003

Dick and Lynn Cheney have no humility and appreciation of humor? Who would have thought it?
Next thing you know Duhbya will be smirking and laughing at death row inmates about to be executed, calling journalists names and never admitting to a seedy past.
posted by nofundy at 7:55 AM on March 6, 2003

I can't wait to say bye-bye to Bush in 2004.
posted by the fire you left me at 7:56 AM on March 6, 2003

I love John Wooden's sites. If you like this one, you might enjoy an older one called chickenhead.
posted by whatnot at 8:22 AM on March 6, 2003

Uhh. have you looked at the letter?

It's extraordinarily professional and polite. The lawyer notes that you can't make money (presumably through the site's gift shop) off of someone's name and likeness without their consent, points out that the primary parody case -- the Hustler one -- had a big PARODY! disclaimer on the fake ad itself, not a wee tiny disclaimer that you'd have to click through to see, and states that it's an improper/illegal use of the vp's seal.

That's it. No big deal.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:31 AM on March 6, 2003

Reminds me of "The Daily Word" section of Mark Morford's SF Gate Morning Fix newletter. For example:

== The Daily Word ==
It's almost like learning something

anarthria (an-'ar-thre-e) noun [New Latin, from Greek anarthros, not articulated]

Loss of the motor ability that enables speech
anarthric - adjective

Usage example: And then Lynne just stood there, gasping and grinning, utterly speechless, giddy as a schoolgirl on meth, very nearly anarthric, quivering and goosebumped all over her oatmealy skin, as the big tanks rolled by in front of her, their big long cannons resplendent and gleaming, the rumble making her thigh flesh jiggle.
posted by muckster at 8:34 AM on March 6, 2003

...and while on the topic of lampooning the spouses of the high and mighty, Betty Bowers pages on Laura Bush are also rather amusing.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:37 AM on March 6, 2003

ROU_Xenophobe: The improper use of the VP seal is on that lawyer's unctious legal threat. The office of the vice president should not be used to squelch the First Amendment right of parody.
posted by rcade at 8:40 AM on March 6, 2003

ROU_Xenophobe - here's a lovely quote:

"Please send me written confirmation by fax ... that your company will delete all photographs of Mrs. Cheney and the ficticious biographical statement about her from your website."

Signed by David Addington, Counsel to the Vice President.

Sounds like a pretty heavy lean to me, despite the disclaimer that he's not trying to insinuate any accusation of illegal behaviour.
posted by Irontom at 8:40 AM on March 6, 2003

But the New York Civil Liberties Union struck back Wednesday on behalf of John A. Wooden, 31, threatening a lawsuit to protect his First Amendment rights to parody the White House and Bush officials on his site,

Lynne Cheney is not a Bush official. She is married to the VPotUS, but she's a private citizen. While pundits and satirists have free rein to make fun of government officials, usually their families are off limits. For example, conservatives who made fun of Chelsea Clinton were held in contempt even by other conservatives [see: Andrew Sullivan vs John Derbyshire].

Note that Wooden was 'asked' to remove the pictures. In return, he's threatening a lawsuit.

Who lacks a sense of proportion here? Who's overreacting? I'd say it's Wooden.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 8:43 AM on March 6, 2003

This is the appropriate response to such spats.
posted by lilburne at 8:48 AM on March 6, 2003

Lynne Cheney is not a Bush official. She is married to the VPotUS, but she's a private citizen.
So she doesn't write books and newspaper articles, or make TV appearances then.

Perhaps the person impersonating her in public should be arrested.
posted by lilburne at 8:56 AM on March 6, 2003

Slithy_Tove: Good point. As an example, conservative pundits and the like never, ever made fun of Hillary Clinton until after she won her Senate seat, at which point she was fair game, right? In fact, I believe if you check the archives of FreeRepublic, there is nary a mention of Mrs. Clinton until just after the 2000 elections.
posted by phong3d at 9:00 AM on March 6, 2003

Slithy_Tove: Lynne Cheney's biography is featured on the White House's web site. That alone makes her fair game in a parody of that site. Of course, if she's such a "private citizen," maybe she could have hired her own private attorney rather than using one the citizens have to subsidize?

Moreover, a private citizen can be a public figure. The First Amendment is given extra leeway in comment about public figures, regardless of how they're employed. In this case, such comment is at the heart of expressive speech because Lynne Cheney has made a career out of criticizing liberal speech. I.e., what's good for the goose...?
posted by subgenius at 9:05 AM on March 6, 2003

Well, Slithy, obviously, someone like Lynne Cheney, who hosted CNN's Crossfire, served as Chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities, and co-founded a group to speak out against academics decry Bush's war policies could not possibly be construed to be a public figure.

Was a lawyer necessary merely to "ask" Wooden to remove the pictures, or was the letter sent as an empty threat of a lawsuit?

Interestingly, this is yet another case in which these "cease-and-desist" orders are shown to be nothing more than an official-looking "polite request." They have no legal standing and only exist to scare the recipient into complying with the request.
posted by deanc at 9:06 AM on March 6, 2003

and states that it's an improper/illegal use of the vp's seal.

The vp's official seal features a vulture now? (hint look at the site and the site's response to the letter) Wow, there's some truth in advertising I wouldn't have expected out of that lot.
posted by willnot at 9:07 AM on March 6, 2003

I'm always amazed at how many people are eager to prove they have no sense of humour (Dick Cheney, I'm looking at you)....
posted by Raya at 9:23 AM on March 6, 2003

phong3d: Unlike Lynne Cheney, Hillary Clinton was an administration official. She chaired President Clinton's Task Force on National Health Care Reform, and took an active role in policy decisions. As such, she was fair game for political satirists, as is any public official.

subgenius: And speaking of Hillary Clinton, her biography is also featured at the site. Does that mean she's a Bush administration official? Not likely.

deanc, she's a public figure, but she's not an administration official. She's a family member.

Guys, ask yourselves: if Lynne Cheney were not married to the VPotUS, would she be made fun of on Wooden's site? Would he even know who she is? She's being made fun of solely because she's Dick Cheney's wife.

Wooden broke an unwritten rule of journalism: leave the family members out of it. Yes, he has a right to do it, under the First Amendment, but that doesn't mean he should do it.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 9:23 AM on March 6, 2003

Wooden broke an unwritten rule of journalism: leave the family members out of it.

Are humorists journalists?
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 9:26 AM on March 6, 2003

PinkStainlessTail: I dunno. Sometimes. If they're political humorists, maybe they are?

With respect to Chelsea Clinton, I was remembering an editorial cartoon that appeared in the Philly Inquirer (an editorially liberal paper) during the 1992 campaign, or shortly after Clinton took office. It was a very unflattering caricature of Chelsea, with big frizzy hair, huge lips and teeth, holding a struggling cat. (Remember the incident in the campaign when reporters drugged her cat to get a picture of it, and Chelsea was angry with them?) I'm not sure what the point of the cartoon was exactly, except to poke fun at her presumed homeliness.

The cartoon drew a raft of letters to the editor, all criticizing the cartoonist for picking on Chelsea. And they were right. The cartoonist was trying to be funny, but he picked the wrong target.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 9:35 AM on March 6, 2003

"Wooden broke an unwritten rule of journalism:"

I think you're trying just a bit too hard. You made your point. But now you're just being silly.
posted by y6y6y6 at 9:43 AM on March 6, 2003

I dunno. Sometimes. If they're political humorists, maybe they are?

It's tricky, isn't it? Humorists like Herb Block, Mort Sahl or Gary Trudeau might shy away from the family since they're aiming for a higher level of credibility and discourse (ore journalistic). On the other hand, a Terry Southern (who wrote hilariously about Ladybird Johnson I think it was) or a John Wooden is aiming more at shock and mockery. They play more by the rules of the "nothing is sacred" satirist than the journalist with an agenda.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 9:47 AM on March 6, 2003

You gotta be kidding, Slithy Tove. Lynne Cheney has been the subject of public interest since she became chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1986.

There's no comparison between her and Chelsea Clinton, who wasn't even a teen-ager when Clinton took office.

As for "unwritten rules" about family members being off-limits -- when were these rules in effect? Billy Carter and Roger Clinton were both the butt of many jokes.
posted by rcade at 9:52 AM on March 6, 2003

looking at this from a different angle, based on some of the cases i have heard about in the news, couldn't they just "take" from him?
posted by probablysteve at 10:15 AM on March 6, 2003

Whether or not she's a "public official" has nothing to do with it. You pulled that out of your ass. She's a public figure--just like thousands of others from Bill Gates to Pamela Anderson--and is fair game for parody.

Is it in bad taste? Sure. But there's nothing illegal or defamatory about it.

Addington's letter is indefensible.
posted by jpoulos at 10:16 AM on March 6, 2003

Slithy_Tove: Yes, I suppose they could have decided to parody other aspects of the White House website. What's your point?

Lynne Cheney is worthy of public comment -- not to mention ridicule and contempt -- merely by virtue of the fact that she's carried out a very public, very embarrassing, anti-intellectual crusade throughout here career. Clearly she's taking advantage of the fact that she's married to Dick Cheney (bigger soapbox! free lawyers! woohoo!), which makes this parody even more appropriate.
posted by subgenius at 10:18 AM on March 6, 2003

oh yeah, he's surely within his right to parody the wife of the most powerful man in the world...

...but he shouldn't be surprised when he gets those audits of his last 10 years worth of income tax.
posted by crunchland at 10:21 AM on March 6, 2003

jpoulos: Is it in bad taste? Sure. But there's nothing illegal or defamatory about it.

Yes, that's pretty much what I said, isn't it?

rcade: Billy Carter was definitely made fun of; I don't remember that Roger Clinton came in for the same treatment, though. Billy, though, asked for it: he was a drunken good 'ole boy, sort of proud of it, courted media attention, and even sold his name to a brand of beer.

For that matter, the Bush sisters were the subject of public ridicule when they were arrested for attempting to buy alcohol though underage. Again, they asked for it, by breaking the law. But once that business was over, the media again ignored them, appropriately.

My point, once again, is that Lynne Cheney hasn't done anything to deserve public ridicule -- except be married to Dick Cheney. If she weren't married to him, Wooden would have completely ignored her, regardless of her job or her publications.

Okay, I think I've made my point as clearly as I can. If you folks aren't buying it, so be it. I'm off to the pancake flipping thread.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 10:34 AM on March 6, 2003

Good thing, too. Saying that Lynne Cheney has not done anything to "ask for" public ridicule is laff-out-loud funny.
posted by soyjoy at 11:27 AM on March 6, 2003

The Supreme Court has also previously ruled that parody is a protected form of free speech -- see Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. I mean, come on! Weren't Dick and Lynne paying attention during "The People Vs. Larry Flynt"?
posted by scody at 11:35 AM on March 6, 2003

Sounds like a pretty heavy lean to me, despite the disclaimer that he's not trying to insinuate any accusation of illegal behaviour.

I don't see a lean at all, though. If I got that letter, I'd read it something like this:

"I'd rather you just pulled the pictures, because they're embarrassing to my client so I might as well ask for that -- after all, nothing ventured, nothing gained. But I'm also giving you free legal advice that if you don't take them down, you at least need to make your disclaimer more obvious and effective per the Hustler decision."

For that sort of letter, it seemed downright friendly. A normal letter would talk about PURSUING ALL LEGAL REMEDIES!!!! and go into great detail about how intrusive the discovery process is and generally promise that if you don't do it right now, your grandma will die.

Also note that even if it somehow came to a suit, it would just be one person suing another in civil court, not any sort of criminal matter. I dislike Cheney as much as the next guy, but this lawyer seems to be being a class act.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:56 PM on March 6, 2003

My point, once again, is that Lynne Cheney hasn't done anything to deserve public ridicule -- except be married to Dick Cheney.

T H I N G S  L Y N N E  C H E N E Y  H A S  D O N E

T O  D E S E R V E  P U B L I C  R I D I C U L E

D U R I N G  T H E  T W E N T Y  Y E A R S

B E F O R E  S L I T H Y  T O V E

E V E R  H E A R D  O F  H E R

  • While chair of the NEH, asked for $187 million in funding. A short time after leaving the post, called for the NEH's abolishment.
  • While NEH chair, called the National History Standards Project her "single most important legacy." Three years later, called it "politically correct to a fare-thee-well."
  • While NEH chair, opposed less than one percent of the grant requests that reached her desk for approval. After leaving, described her heroic and solitary fight to hold back a flood of politically motivated applicants that ended in defeat because "one can hold back the ocean only so long."
  • "Lynne Cheney has been on a mission for over a decade now to try to clamp down on dissent on campus, and to clamp down on multiculturalist perspectives in education." -- Hugh Gusterson, MIT professor of anthropology and science and technology studies, one of the academics listed on a anti-American blacklist by an organization she founded
  • Repeatedly maligned the standards project for not being a comprehensive textbook of American history, even though it was not a textbook at all -- instead, the project was a framework of suggestions for making the subject more inclusive. As Timothy Noah described in Slate, "Cheney ... proved to be such a transparent phony that sympathetic panel critics like Arthur Schlesinger Jr. and John Patrick Diggins had to denounce her."
  • While at the NEH, criticized colleges for shifting away from traditional Western Civilization courses toward global history and culture instead of treating the American experience as the high point of world history
  • Recommended Carol Iannone for the NEH advisory panel after Iannone said that giving Pulitzer Prizes and other awards to African-American writers Alice Walker and Toni Morrison exemplified "the democratic dictatorship of mediocrity"
  • In 1995, wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed criticizing a vocational school-to-work bill for encouraging women to seek "nontraditional employment."
  • Testified before Congress that no government money should ever fund historical research unless it portrays the American past in a favorable light.
  • Campaigned actively for the first President Bush while NEH chair, in spite of the long-time expectation the position was non-partisan.
  • Claimed in her book Telling the Truth that liberal postmodernism was to blame for onlookers who danced and celebrated when a Philadelphia ice-cream vendor was killed in 1994, writing, "Intellectual elites do no one a favor by sending through society messages that there is no external reality in which we all participate, that there is only the game of the moment, the entertainment of the day."
  • At an American Enterprise Institute panel discussion after Monicagate, she criticized Hillary Clinton for holding her husband's hand, saying, "It is just so distressing to me."
  • And my personal favorite, claims not to remember the plot of the 1981 novel Sisters, which she wrote, an Old West feminist romance novel in which women "band together for the strength they needed and at times for the love they wanted."
posted by rcade at 1:27 PM on March 6, 2003

rcade: Score! BooYaa!

Anyway I found this on on amazon. It didn't look like they had a copy, but I'm going to look around. This could be the coolest book since "The Great American Parade."
posted by elwoodwiles at 2:10 PM on March 6, 2003

I'm one of the five buyers on Amazon waiting for that book, which does have immense comedic potential. No one has put one up for sale in the years I've been on the list. I'
posted by rcade at 2:19 PM on March 6, 2003

The site is a frickin riot. I love this part (From the linked news story) "And, it added, the editors of the Web site were "confident that any rumors about Mrs. Cheney formerly being a crystal meth pusher are 100 percent likely to be absolutely untrue. Similarly, any stories about her penchant for licking brandy Alexanders off the hirsute belly of her spouse are all lies, lies, lies!" "

I love it when people make me laugh.
posted by aacheson at 4:07 PM on March 6, 2003

ROU_Xenophobe -

Seems to me that you underestimate the "oh my fucking god" component of receiving an official note from the Counsel to the Vice President.

It's a lean by it's very existence.
posted by Irontom at 4:10 PM on March 6, 2003

I believe the reason that the media were asked to back off of Chelsea in particular, and the reason they complied for the most part, is that she was in puberty when Clinton took office. Hillary and Lynne are/were both where they are by choice--Chelsea had no say in the matter.
posted by vraxoin at 5:07 PM on March 6, 2003

Leaves you panting for more!, February 20, 2003
Reviewer: A reader from San Francisco, CA
This story of a Washington wife who leaves her powerful husband to join a womyn's commune is charged with the kind of eroticism you just don't expect from the Second Lady of the United States of America. I was amazed at how graphically Ms. Cheney details the commune's daily "massage classes" and their predictable free-for-all aftermaths, while at the same time delivering a devastating critique of phallocentric discourse in modern culture. I can't wait for the sequel, in which the Sisters declare war against the male-dominated multinational corporation that is threatening to foreclose on their commune. Four Stars!

posted by homunculus at 6:46 PM on March 6, 2003

That's right.
posted by four panels at 8:11 PM on March 6, 2003

Interestingly, I just saw this and popped over to look at (which I've enjoyed in the past) and all I get is a DNS error.

The Revenge of the Dick?
posted by umberto at 9:11 PM on March 6, 2003

rcade: I call bullshit on this laundry list of highly spun accusations, with lots of loaded language, no detail, and the only links are to left-wing opinion pieces. Tim Noah certainly does seem to have a grudge against her, doesn't he?

Anyway, you're still missing the point: she would not be attacked on Wooden's site if she weren't married to Dick Cheney.

Would she? Answer me honestly, now.

You're right. I was barely aware of Lynne Cheney before this flap. I'm no fan, and no critic of her. I'm a libertarian, not a movement conservative, and I'll bet I differ with her on many philosophical and policy issues.

But your list fairly reeks of left-wing spin.

You want to debate? Get links to the original materials you're citing, and we'll go at it.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 9:27 PM on March 6, 2003

You said that there was no reason to ridicule Lynne Cheney outside of her marraige to the veep; I provided 13. Even if you think some of them are unfair, the sheer volume disputes your point that she's an innocent bystander in the rough and tumble world of partisan politics.

Lynne Cheney has been one of the most combative and obnoxious ideologues for conservative views in the last 20 years. Even her friend William Bennett told the Washington Post that she'd be "hard to muzzle" as the vice president's wife.

Of course there's spin in the list, but the fact remains that many liberals (and other critics) have found plenty of reasons to dislike the woman for two decades.

If you want to offer reasons why any of the items on the list are unfair, be my guest. Considering that you have been "barely aware" of her, however, I think you'll discover in further reading what many people have about Lynne Cheney -- she's a sanctimonious, power-hungry phony who does her own side absolutely no favors.
posted by rcade at 6:35 AM on March 7, 2003

rcade, Lynne Cheney hasn't done anything to deserve public ridicule with respect to the current administration. She isn't a member of the current administration. Any public figure can be ridiculed by someone of the opposite political persuasion, of course.

You're still missing my point, you know.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 7:29 AM on March 7, 2003

Well, we know who read all their talking points this morning.
posted by owillis at 8:05 AM on March 7, 2003

It's tough to see your point when you keep narrowing it down smaller and smaller. What next -- Lynne Cheney hasn't done anything to deserve public ridicule this week, so it's wrong to make fun of her again until such time that she does?
posted by rcade at 8:08 AM on March 7, 2003

Yeah, slithy, I think you'd be better off bailing, and quickly. Your "didn't ask for it" point has been flayed by the facts, and you keep trying to recast it without being able to offer any substantive rebuttal to them. Face it, Lynne Cheney has used her being "Mrs. Dick Cheney" to do a lot of public, noteworthy, questionable things, and that makes her fair game for satire as such.
posted by soyjoy at 9:11 AM on March 7, 2003

BTW, the only reason I linked to a piece on this instead of the original document is that it's a PDF. But here it is. If you've read it, and want to debate it, have a go. It's definitely something she's done with respect to the current administration to deserve ridicule.
posted by soyjoy at 9:16 AM on March 7, 2003

Er, that should have said "a piece on this", sorry.
posted by soyjoy at 9:18 AM on March 7, 2003

rcade: no, I'm really not. If you don't agree with her policy positions, fine. In fact, I'm sorry I criticized your criticisms of her, because they don't matter, they're irrelevant to what I'm saying.

Let me try to spell it out it out one more time, and I'll quit (really):

Lynne Cheney isn't a member of the current administration. She is the VPotUS's wife. She is a public person, but not a public official. She has publications, with political content, and media appearances, and a job with a foundation.

As do thousands of other people in the country.

Why aren't they on There are surely thousands of conservatives that Wooden could abuse. Why pick on Lynne Cheney?

Because she's the VPotUS's wife. He doesn't give a rats ass for her, he's picking on her because she's the wife of an elected official he doesn't like. See? My point is that that's bad manners to abuse the family of politicians you don't like just because they're family. That's all.

Oh, btw: I think the same thing about his treatment of Laura Bush, too. What next, is he going to pick on the family pets?

This is juvenile. Let him stick to actual political figures.

soyjoy: I've been saying the same thing all along. Read back what I've written in this thread.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 9:20 AM on March 7, 2003

Lynne Cheney is an "actual political figure." She has been one, in her own right, for more than 20 years. I fail to see why she should be immune to parody, regardless of the motivations of the parodist. No offense, but that's goofy.

I also refuse to shed a tear at the prospect of disrespectful treatment for Barney the presidential terrier.

Parody is ill-mannered by nature, injecting itself into public debate in sarcastic, obnoxious, and disrespectful ways. That's one of the reasons we should value it.

There are times I find a presidential relative's treatment offensive -- Rush Limbaugh holding up a photo of Chelsea Clinton and calling her "the family dog" was, to my thinking, absolutely unforgiveable -- but I don't need to invent an unwritten rule of journalism to repudiate it. The guy's a pilonidal cyst on the butt of humanity.
posted by rcade at 9:33 AM on March 7, 2003

If I may quote Morford one more time (cuz I think it's funny):

Hello? Lynne Is A Puppy-Mangling Nuke Fetishist? Hello?
An Net lampoon of VP Dick Cheney's noxiously deleterious and deeply and soul-cringing wife is no laughing matter at the White House, which has asked a satirist to remove pictures of her -- complete with red clown noses -- from his Web site,, claiming said mocked-up photos make the normally twitching scaly heavily cellulitic Lynne look remotely human and even passably amusing, when in fact she is widely considered to be a quintessential example of an oozing animated death burp incarnate. But the NY Civil Liberties Union struck back on behalf of John A. Wooden, 31, threatening a lawsuit to protect his First Amendment rights to parody the White House and Bush officials. In related news, certain newsletter columnists are waiting patiently and humbly for their official angry White House notification letter, as they have been earnestly and aggressively pointing out how Lynne Cheney is essentially a seeping cancerous nodule on the big colon of life, a snarling pit viper of anti-choice venom, a Lockheed Martin sycophant who single-handedly buzzkills the world's high with one of her infamous snorting morning rat's blood rituals, and who loves nothing more than to inhale copious quantities of laudanum through a Crazy Straw stuck in her husband's shockingly massive and disturbingly Void-like belly button. But, you know, whatEVer.
posted by muckster at 10:04 AM on March 7, 2003

« Older Navy sea lions   |   GEEK! Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments