On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:46:48 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

In other words, Bush has caused such offence to the populace, even his
image is insulting to people.
Thank you for giving the idiot point of view.
Do you mean to say that people on your intellectual plain can see that
the parents WEREN'T offended by the image of Bush?
Every classroom I was ever in had a picture of the current president.

Using this information, this proves you didn't go to school until the
year 2000 at the very earliest.

They usually also had pictures of Washington and Lincoln.

No Nixon? For shame!

I fail to see that,
like everyone else in this thread. Do explain how you know more than
us.
It's part of the education process, don't schools in Britain have pictures
of the Queen and/or the PM?

LMAO! Since when?

Ahem... I suppose they could do, to help kids on their firing
practice. The school cleaners wouldn't be too happy.

I have never heard of any school in the UK displaying pictures of the
Queen and/or Prime Minister (unless it was temporarily for educational
purposes - ie: This unelected woman spends millions of taxpayers'
money, and this man lied the British public about weapons of mass
destruction).

Oh hang on, plucking at straws here, there was a case in a fictional
humour novel, where a right-wing crackpot (is there any other kind?)
of a headmaster (principal in yank-speak) hung a photo of Margaret
Thatcher in the corridor, only for someone to daub on a Hitler
moustache and the words "3 million out of work".

--
pete [at] ¦ "I was so upset
horseshoe ¦ that I cried
[hyphen] ¦ all the way to
inn [dot] ¦ the chip-shop"
co [dot] uk¦ - Jilted John