Is It Bush or Is It Perry?

Around this time last year I pointed out that  Pope Francis looked very much like Jonathan Pryce [March 13, 2013, 'Astounding Resemblance Between Pope Francis I and the Actor Who Played Peron']. I was surprised to  hear from someone in Belgium who thought the same thing.

I have this habit ---it gets on my wife's nerves at times---of noticing similarities in the features of people, usually famous people. Not always. My brother-in-law vaguely reminds me of Clark Gable, for example.

This being said, another one of these doppelgangish ideas has struck me.  As our elder statesman, George W. Bush,  gracefully ages,  he resembles more and more  Perry  Como as he rounded out his career.

I recall that Mr.  Como started out as a barber, and I've  read that in his Florida home  he even had a barber's chair. After he retired from show biz, he occasionally would give a visitor (like a reporter checking up on him) a pretty decent haircut.

In a sense, Mr. Bush also  had a connection with the art some call tonsorial.  Around 2007-2008, he stood by when our country got  a doozy of a financial haircut.

Filed under: entertainment, politics

Comments

Leave a comment
  • I don't know about that, but Stephen Colbert sure looks like Greg Proops.

    Also, the guy on the Chiapetti Veal label sure looks like fat Drew Carey.

  • Speaking of financial haircuts, did you read about the Presidents budget last week? It was voted down in the the House 413-2. Those that identify with 'being' a Democrat should be confused with their brethren in the House. It called for raising taxes and increasing spending every year for the next ten years. I had to make sure I was reading the Washington Times and not the Onion.

    Anyway, I think Como looks a lot like Frank Langella in that first picture. Just watched him in 'Muhammad Ali's greatest fight', a good movie I would recommend.

  • In reply to 4zen:

    I don't think you found anything significant for the first one.

    Most of the entries in Google News are for articles like this from Bloomberg that the House passed the Ryan budget resolution "219-205, today. Every House Democrat and 12 Republicans voted against the budget plan. "

    There is a reference in the Washington Times to the vote you mentioned, and also says "House Republicans staged the vote to be able to argue that Mr. Obama’s plans are unpopular on both sides of the aisle, though Democrats said it was a useless vote and said the plan — which Republicans wrote to reflect the president’s budget — wasn’t actually Mr. Obama’s own plan."

    So, it appears you were snookered by a procedural sham.

  • In reply to 4zen:

    Washington Times link..

  • In reply to jack:

    To your point I did say I had to check to see if I was reading the Onion, but I wouldn't say looking at current policy through the prism of a budget is a sham.

    No love for Frank Langella?

  • In reply to 4zen:

    Image #3 (with the microphone) maybe, but the more recent ones of Frank on IMDB seem to accentuate his close cropped gray beard. Images #3 and #4 look like the same person, but I assume Bush was not in front of a string section (AW, am I right?).

    As for the sham, the question was whether that resolution and vote were shams, as opposed to the substance of what the President and Ryan proposed, which may reflect policy. If the Washington Times (not the Post) suggested that the res. and vote were shams, that tells me something.

Leave a comment