The Slate's take on the Bush Library

Longtime · Post by **Longtime** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:25 pm

Long read, but it brings up some interesting points:

http://www.slate.com/id/2158699/pagenum/all/#page_start

Bergermeister · Post by **Bergermeister** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:33 pm

I must have missed every one of the "interesting points". What a load...

EastStang · Post by **EastStang** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:35 pm

I didn't know the Hoover Institute was at Stanford. You learn something new every day. Of course that probably means that your average slob might not connect the Bush Institute to Southern Methodist University, either. Food for thought.

mr. pony · Post by **mr. pony** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:15 pm

Correct. I've never heard the Hoover Institute mentioned with Stanford until this debate came up.

Water Pony · Post by **Water Pony** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:17 pm

I might add that propaganda would be a real concern for a sitting President or someone with a continuing public or political role. But, this will be for an ex-President by definition and a Think Tank, which studies role of the US and the World in countering terroism, is not necessary a bad idea. That is what Think Tanks are suppose to do. Defending George W. seems like a low priority for anyone.

Their fear appears to be associating with George. I don't think LBJ has hurt U. of Texas.

EastStang · Post by **EastStang** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:03 pm

Regarding the think tank - Do you think they'll be debating whether Superman ever did it with Lois? Or whether Batman and Robin were a couple? Or whether the X Men should have equal rights? And of course whether Ghost Rider should have been made into a movie with Nicholas Gage playing the lead?

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:20 pm

If anybody doubted the purpose of the think tank as being to prop up Dubya, I suspect the truth would come to light if SMU said we'll host the documents but not the "institute"--they are connected at the hip, no doubt, and I suspect SMU would get a quick "no thanks" from the White House.

abezontar · Post by **abezontar** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:06 pm

EastStang wrote:Regarding the think tank - Do you think they'll be debating whether Superman ever did it with Lois?

You know I have had an extensive debate with a friend of mine over this very subject. In Superman Returns, they indicate that Lois's kid is actually Superman's and not the guy she is married to (I say indicate because I don't remember if they came right out and said it or not), but I suggest that Superman couldn't have sex with Lois Lane without killing her. The speed at which the semen would leave his body would be so great that despite their low mass would rip holes in her genitalia. Discuss.

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:12 pm

abezontar wrote:
EastStang wrote:Regarding the think tank - Do you think they'll be debating whether Superman ever did it with Lois?
You know I have had an extensive debate with a friend of mine over this very subject. In Superman Returns, they indicate that Lois's kid is actually Superman's and not the guy she is married to (I say indicate because I don't remember if they came right out and said it or not), but I suggest that Superman couldn't have sex with Lois Lane without killing her. The speed at which the semen would leave his body would be so great that despite their low mass would rip holes in her genitalia. Discuss.

It is my contention that several exposures to Kryptonite would have left Superman sterile thus there is no way he could have fathered the child regardless of sperm speed. Plus in the words of Knucklestang, "he is gayer than Elton John".

abezontar · Post by **abezontar** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:20 pm

You think Jesus...I mean Superman from Superman Returns is gay?!? I mean just because he rescued the guy who is banging his crush doesn't make him gay.....well....maybe it does.

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:20 pm

abezontar wrote:
EastStang wrote:Regarding the think tank - Do you think they'll be debating whether Superman ever did it with Lois?
You know I have had an extensive debate with a friend of mine over this very subject. In Superman Returns, they indicate that Lois's kid is actually Superman's and not the guy she is married to (I say indicate because I don't remember if they came right out and said it or not), but I suggest that Superman couldn't have sex with Lois Lane without killing her. The speed at which the semen would leave his body would be so great that despite their low mass would rip holes in her genitalia. Discuss.

He became human in Superman II for a little while and that's when he bedded Lois.

Longtime · Post by **Longtime** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:59 pm

Exactly. He entered that clear, plastic phone booth-type device so he could lose his powers, boff Lois and get beat up by a trucker in a greasy diner. He reversed the wiring on the plastic phone booth to trick General Zod and his cohorts.

For some reason, I didn't have a problem with Superman losing his virginity to Lois in Superman II. Maybe it's because I was a kid at the time. But in Superman Returns, it kind of creeped me out that Superman, a role model for kids, had premarital sex and spied on Lois and her boyfriend like a stalker.

But what creeped me out even more was the actual kid they used in Superman Returns. Cripes, get that kid a haircut! Only in Hollywood movies and TV shows do young boys have shoulder-length hair. Doesn't matter if it's supposed to be present day, the 1950s or the 1890s.

Which reminds me: Had a man in the Little House on the Prairie Days actually had wavy, shoulder-length, permed hair like Michael Landon wore, someone like Merlin Olsen would have beat the snot out of him. Father Murphy would have no tolerance for sissy men.

Peruna2001 · Post by **Peruna2001** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:56 am

abezontar wrote:
EastStang wrote:Regarding the think tank - Do you think they'll be debating whether Superman ever did it with Lois?
You know I have had an extensive debate with a friend of mine over this very subject. In Superman Returns, they indicate that Lois's kid is actually Superman's and not the guy she is married to (I say indicate because I don't remember if they came right out and said it or not), but I suggest that Superman couldn't have sex with Lois Lane without killing her. The speed at which the semen would leave his body would be so great that despite their low mass would rip holes in her genitalia. Discuss.

I told you that Superman becomes powerless when exposed the the rays of a red sun. The yellow sun of earth is what gives Superman his powers. Like mentioned already, in Superman II he is exposed to radiation like the red sun of Krypton then becoming human and able to father a child without killing Lois. Since Superman Returns is a loosely-based sequel to Superman II, I would assume this is the story they're going with. They've also covered this in the Smallville television series. Clark loses his powers and is able to be with Lana physically. Once he regains his powers, he is scared he will kill her if he does it again.

Also, there is a certain color of Kryptonite that causes Superman to lose his powers without actually hurting him like green Kryptonite.

abezontar · Post by **abezontar** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:58 am

Interesting story about Superman and the KKK.

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro ... -9826.html

MustangStealth · Post by **MustangStealth** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:37 am

SMU LB wrote: "he is gayer than Elton John".

Confirmed.

Exhibit 1 (link)

Exhibit 2 (link)