Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Jenna and Not Jenna

I check in over at Farnsworth's blog almost daily (and I think we missed him on the blogroll). Oops. He writes a weekly column about the Bush twins, referred to as Jenna and not Jenna who, like most of this Administration and their relatives, have managed to avoid military service.

Since I missed him on the blog roll and I've borrowed from him more than once, I'm recommending his blog here.

The following quote ties in nicely with what Farnsworth has been saying.

Zay N. Smith - Chicago Sun-Times QT Today:

Duty calls

*Queen Elizabeth II regarding the likelihood that her grandchildren, Princes William and Harry, will see military combat duty:

"I think it is inevitable that they are going to see action of some kind, somewhere, in the not too distant future, particularly as young officers, because we are already out in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so they are open to those sorts of deployment just as everybody else is, as I was."

*President Bush regarding the likelihood that his children --

No. Wait.

The British seem to have a different system.

5 comments:

  1. Well, it's simple! Prince Harry is a boy, and boys should be over there fighting for our freedoms! Jenna and her sister (darn! Now I forgot her name!) are girls and their place is in college, where they hopefully will find the right man to marry!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Carrie!! Wondered how you'd been? How's the career taking off?

    And how's your darling stepbrother?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Carrie, it's NotJenna. And we don't actually have any proof of anybody's gender. All we have is their word....

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's funny how people tease Canada about the monarchy and the Queen and all, and then you have an example like this where it all sort of backfires.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Krupo

    I might not want a monarchy here (although we seem to be on our way with the Emperor) but the Queen had it right. If anyone goes, they all go, starting at the top.

    ReplyDelete

Our Friends Speak