BS: Is George Bush Insane?

Subject: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:15 AM

Bush's "cognitive functioning" worries observers
by Andrew Stephen, The Observer [London, UK] Oct. 17, 2004

Excerpts...
....the momentous decision awaiting Americans is not whether they return to power a President who is uniquely qualified to protect the US against terrorism, as Cheney et al would have us believe. It is whether they re-elect a man who, it is now clear, has become palpably unstable. The evidence has been before our eyes for some time, but only during the course of this election campaign has it crystallized -- just in time, possibly, for the 2 November election. The 43rd US President has always had a much-publicized knack for mangled syntax, but now George Bush often searches an agonizingly long time, sometimes in vain, for the right words. His mind simply blanks out at crucial times. He is prone, I am told, to foul-mouthed temper tantrums in the White House. His handlers now rarely allow him to speak an unscripted word in public.

Indeed, there are now several confusing faces to the US President, and we saw three of them in the live, televised Presidential debates with John Kerry that culminated last Wednesday night in Tempe, Arizona. In the first debate on 30 September, watched by more than 62 million viewers, we saw Bush at his most unattractive: slouching, peevish, pouting, pursing his lips with disdain at what his opponent was saying. But he was unable to marshal any coherent arguments against Kerry and merely spewed out prepared talking points -- in what, even his ardent supporters concede, was Bush's worst-ever such performance.

In the second debate on 8 October in St Louis, Bush could not stay on his stool and leapt up to dispense what were -- certainly in contrast to Kerry's cogent recital of statistics and arguments -- frequently defensive, shouting rants. I assume that he was told by his handlers not to show displeasure at Kerry's words this time around, but, instead, he revealed his anger by blinking repeatedly. The moderator tried to stop him talking at one point (both campaign organizations had agreed the order in which the candidates could speak, with time limits imposed on both), but Bush insisted on riding roughshod over the briefly protesting moderator, Charles Gibson. (What, I wonder, would have happened if Gibson had kept to the rules and insisted that Bush stop talking? We will never know.)

By the time of the third debate on 13 October, this one witnessed by more than 50 million people, Bush had adopted yet another baffling persona. This time, he was peculiarly flushed, leading a colleague to speculate whether he was on something. He had clearly been told to look positive -- that was his main thrust of the evening, with frequent assertions that 'freedom is on the march' -- and spent the evening with a creepy, inane grin on his face, as though he was red-faced after a festive Christmas dinner.

So what is up with the US President, and why is this election so crucial not only for America but for the world? I have been examining videos of his first 1994 debate with Ann Richards, the Governor of Texas, who he was about to supplant, and of his 2000 debates with Al Gore. In his one and only debate with Richards a decade ago, Bush was fluent and disciplined; with Gore, he had lost some of that polish but was still articulate, with frequent invocations of his supposed 'compassionate conservatism'.

It is thus hard to avoid the conclusion that Bush's cognitive functioning is not, for some reason, what it once was. I am not qualified to say why this is so. It would not be surprising if he was under enormous stress, particularly after the 9/11 atrocities in 2001, and I gather this could explain much, if not everything. But I have heard wild speculation in Washington that he is suffering from a neurological disorder, or that the years of alcoholism might finally be taking their toll on his brain.

I think it unlikely that Bush was wearing a bug so that he could be fed lines in at least one of the debates, but it is indicative of how his capabilities are regarded these days that the suggestion that he needed advice is given credence, as well as passing mentions in the powerful Washington Post and New York Times. It does not help that Bush now lives in a positively Nixonian cocoon. He does not read newspapers; he sees television only to watch football; he makes election speeches exclusively at ticket-only events, and his courtiers consciously avoid giving him bad news. When he met John Kerry for their first bout on the debating platform, it was almost a new experience for the President to hear the voice of dissent.

A senior Republican, experienced and wise in the ways of Washington, told me last Friday that he does not necessarily accept that Bush is unstable, but what is clear, he added, is that he is now manifestly unfit to be President. This, too, is a view that is widely felt, but seldom articulated and then only in private, within the Republican as well as Democratic establishments in Washington. Either way, the choice voters make on Tuesday fortnight should be obvious: whether he is unstable or merely unfit to be President -- and I would argue that they amount to much the same -- he should speedily be turned out of office..........
Published by The Observer [London, UK]

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:19 AM

Psychoanalyst describes Bush as "paranoid megalomaniac," "untreated alcoholic" Capitol Hill Blue June 14, 2004

A new book by a prominent Washington psychoanalyst says President George W. Bush is a "paranoid meglomaniac" as well as a sadist and "untreated alcoholic." The doctor's analysis appears to confirm earlier reports the President may be emotionally unstable. Dr. Justin Frank, writing in Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President, also says the President has a "lifelong streak of sadism, ranging from childhood pranks (using firecrackers to explode frogs) to insulting journalists, gloating over state executions ... [and] pumping his fist gleefully before the bombing of Baghdad."

Even worse, Dr. Frank concludes, the President's years of heavy drinking "may have affected his brain function -- and his decision to quit drinking without the help of a 12-step program [puts] him at far higher risk of relapse." Dr. Frank's revelations comes on the heels of last week's Capitol Hill Blue exclusive that revealed increasing concern by White House aides over Bush's emotional stability. Aides, who spoke only on condition that their names be withheld, told stories of wide mood swings by the President who would go from quoting the Bible one minute to obscenity-filled outbursts the next. Bush shows an inability to grieve -- dating back to age 7, when his sister died. "The family's reaction -- no funeral and no mourning -- set in motion his life-long pattern of turning away from pain [and hiding] behind antic behavior," says Frank, who says Bush may suffer from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

Other findings by Dr. Frank:

. His mother, Barbara Bush -- tabbed by some family friends as "the one who instills fear" -- had trouble connecting emotionally with her son, Frank argues.

. George H.W. Bush's "emotional and physical absence during his son's youth triggered feelings of both adoration and revenge in George W."

. The President suffers from "character pathology," including "grandiosity" and "megalomania" -- viewing himself, America and God as interchangeable.

Dr. Frank has been a psychiatrist for 35 years and is director of psychiatry at George Washington University. A Democrat, he once headed the Washington Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. In an interview with The Washington Post's Richard Leiby, Dr. Frank said he began to be concerned about Bush's behavior in 2002. "I was really very unsettled by him and I started watching everything he did and reading what he wrote, and watching him on videotape. I felt he was disturbed," Dr. Frank told Leiby. Bush, he said, "fits the profile of a former drinker whose alcoholism has been arrested but not treated."
Dr. Frank's expert recommendation? "Our sole treatment option -- for his benefit and for ours -- is to remove President Bush from office ... before it is too late."

Published by
Capitol Hill Blue

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:23 AM

COncur.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:31 AM

Regressing to Talk Like a Pirate Day:

"Avast, Captain, we did not eat yon strawberries, but Aaaargh!!! we will be pleased to relieve you of duty and your cargo!"

Many images-- Bligh, Bogart, or that nice fellow on the TV "Horatio Hornblower" who was locked up in the cabin for awhile....

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Folkien
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:31 AM

Poor ol' dubya hasn't got much going for him has he, apart from world dominaton.

I'm convinced he's a lunatic, but what about the majority of the US electorate? Given that the entire world has to put up with the consequences of his lunacy, we should all be able to vote.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:37 AM

George Bush: Radical Perhaps, But Certainly Not Conservative
by Jonathan Mendelson

George Bush often calls himself a conservative, but to an increasing number of Republicans and conservatives, he is no such thing. He certainly is a social conservative, putting faith over science in opposing increased stem cell research that probably will save lives and signing an abortion bill that failed to include an exception in the case of danger to the mother's life. Still, in many other areas, chiefly economic policy, foreign policy, and civil liberties, he has hardly been conservative, and in some cases he has been quite radical. For this reason, several prominent conservatives, including Pat Buchanan, who ran for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2000, and former Congressman Bob Barr (R–Ga.) have started abandoning Bush's sinking ship, and other conservatives, including George H.W. Bush's national security advisor Brent Scowcroft and many Senate Republicans, have been vocal about their opposition to many of the President's policies.

It's not hard to see why conservatives have been abandoning Bush en masse. Economically, Bush inherited an economy that under the Clinton years created 22 million well-paying jobs, lifted millions out of poverty into a flourishing middle class, and created a ten-year $5.6 trillion surplus. He could have followed the Clinton model of fiscal responsibility, limiting government growth, paying down the debt, and creating jobs at home. Instead, he has pursued reckless and gigantic tax cuts for the rich, while at the same time signing Republican bills from Congress that have produced enormous increases in nondefense discretionary spending, and a Medicare bill that created a $540 billion giveaway to drug companies without actually improving prescription drug coverage for seniors. Conservatives have often supported tax cuts, but without equivalent cuts in government spending, this shifts the debt to future generations and increases the threat of a fiscal crisis in future years. Bush promised that his economic policies would reduce the national debt and create six million jobs, but with Republicans controlling Congress and the White House, and Bush failing to veto a single bill, he is seven million jobs short on his promise, according to the payroll survey, and we have annual deficits of half a trillion dollars that are on the increase, thanks to his radical policies.

Bush in 2000 promised a "humble" foreign policy, saying that "if we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us." Instead of following through on his promises, Bush has abandoned the multilateral approach of his father, of Bill Clinton, and of many decades of American Presidents who utilized international institutions and large coalitions in order to enhance America's power in the world and advance her interests. Bush could have worked closely with allies in order to effectively confront the growing nuclear threats of Iran and North Korea, as well as to secure loose uranium and confront terrorists. He has instead pursued radical policies that ignore and alienate our allies, and his foreign policy has been directed by a small group of neoconservatives who have radical notions of using military force to create a new American empire, all the while ignoring the real threats that America faces and engaging in a war of discretion that national security analysts say undermined the war on terror.

On civil liberties, George Bush and John Ashcroft have repeatedly undermined and attacked core American values that are codified in the Constitution in order to increase the power of government, under the guise of the War on Terror. It is true that America faces historic threats, and after September 11 law enforcement certainly did need to be improved, but detaining American citizens indefinitely without the right to a lawyer or trial, torturing people in Iraqi prisons, conducting "sneak and peek" searches, getting lists of what people have been checking out of libraries without

probable cause to suspect a crime, and talking about delaying elections are not ways to strengthen our country. There are plenty of ways we can keep our country safe without violating our civil rights and Constitution, but unfortunately the Bush administration has violated our rights, while failing to inspect 95 percent of containers that enter our ports, failing to confront Saudi Arabia over its terrorist connections, failing to prevent Pakistan from sharing nuclear secrets with Iran, failing to provide adequate funding for homeland security, failing to stop North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons, and failing to secure loose uranium abroad.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:41 AM

he'd never be technically diagnosed as insane...he is just a personality type with an unusual set of eccentricities.

If he were not in that scary position of being able to affect the whole world with his garbled view of things, no one would give him a 2nd look.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:43 AM

Reality Check: George Bush - A look at what the candidate said in the 3rd debate — and how his claims hold up By MITCH FRANK, Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004; ww.time.com/time/election2004/article/0,18471,723159,00.html

The Claim:
I have got a comprehensive strategy to not only chase down al-Qaeda wherever it exists — and we're making progress, three-quarters of al-Qaeda leaders have been brought to justice — but to make sure that countries who harbor terrorists are held to account.

Reality Check:
The CIA estimates that 75% of al-Qaeda's known leadership at the time of the September 11th Attacks has been killed or captured. The terrorist network has adapted, however, recruiting new leaders and gaining footholds in new countries. Some terrorism experts believe the president has been softer toward countries like Iran and Syria that are far more friendly to terrorists than Saddam Hussein's regime was.

The Claim:
I signed the Homeland Security Bill to better align our assets and resources. My opponent voted against it.

Reality Check:
Kerry voted against some provisions of the President's proposed Department of Homeland Security, but he voted for the final bill creating the department. The DHS was originally Joe Lieberman's proposal — the President solidly opposed it, but changed his mind after an onslaught of political pressure.

The Claim:
My opponent just this weekend talked about how terrorism can be reduced to a nuisance, comparing it to prostitution, illegal gambling. I think that attitude and that point of view is dangerous ... My opponent said this war is a matter of intelligence and law enforcement. No, this is a war as a matter of using every asset at our disposal to keep the American people protected.

Reality Check:
Kerry has repeatedly said that the military should be used to hunt down and destroy al-Qaeda, but that intelligence, law enforcement and diplomacy are key tools as well.

The Claim:
Gosh, I don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. That's kind of one of those exaggerations.

Reality Check:
At a March 13, 2002, press conference Bush said, "We haven't heard much from him ... And, again, I don't know where he is. I — I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run."

The Claim:
We have a problem with litigation in the United States of America. Vaccine manufacturers are worried about getting sued and so therefore they have backed off from providing this kind of vaccine.

Reality Check:
Lawsuits over vaccine side effects have raised liability costs for manufacturers and discouraged vaccine production. But there are several other reasons for the low number of vaccine producers. A big one is the low profits in the vaccine business. Flu vaccines take at least six months to produce, and often times, manufacturers don't know which strain of influenza will strike each year so they have to gamble on which type of vaccine to produce.

The Claim:
[Kerry's] proposed $2.2 trillion of new spending ... I proposed a detailed budget, Bob. I send up my budget man to the Congress and he says here's how we're going to reduce the deficit in half by five years, it requires pro-growth policies that grow our economy and fiscal sanity in the halls of Congress.

Reality Check:
Kerry's spending proposals are closer to $1.3 trillion. Bush's are closer to $2.2 trillion. The nonpartisan Concord Coalition estimates Mr. Bush's plan to make his tax cuts permanent, combined with new tax cuts and his domestic proposals, will add $1.32 trillion to the budget over the next decade. That does not include any increases in military spending and the President's proposal to create private social security accounts, which could cost at least $1 trillion more.

The Claim:
Health care costs are on the rise because the consumers are not involved in the decision-making process. Most health costs are covered by third parties. And therefore, the actual user of health care is not the purchaser of health care. And there's no market forces involved with health care. It's one of the reasons I'm a strong believer in what they call health savings accounts. These are accounts that allow somebody to buy a low-premium, high-deductible catastrophic plan and couple it with tax-free savings.

Reality Check:
The President is saying that health care costs are high because people will always choose the best, most expensive treatment when their insurance will cover the cost. While there's plenty of evidence that's true, the only way to lower costs that way is to force people to pay more of their own costs, which will force lower-income Americans to stop seeking treatment. Tax free health savings accounts are a popular idea, but many Americans are not saving enough to put money in them.

The Claim:
The Lewin Report accurately noted that there are going to be 20 million people — over 20 million people added to government-controlled health care [under Kerry's plan]. Be the largest increase in government health care ever.

Reality Check:
Bush implies that these people would be added to some new, big government program. In reality, the plan just makes more Americans eligible for Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

The Claim:
In order to take pressure off the border, in order to make the borders more secure, I believe there ought to be a temporary worker card that allows a willing worker and a willing employer to mate up, so long as there's not an American willing to do the job, to join up in order to be able to fulfill the employer's needs. That has the benefit of making sure our employers aren't breaking the law as they try to fill their workforce needs.

Reality Check:
Americans don't take many of the jobs the President is referring to because employers prefer illegal immigrants who will work for below minimum wage and no benefits. Until there is a crackdown on illegal hiring, businesses will prefer low cost illegal workers.

The Claim:
What he's asking me is will I have a litmus test for my judges. And the answer is no, I will not have a litmus test. I will pick judges who will interpret the Constitution. But I'll have no litmus tests.

Reality Check:
What Bob Schieffer asked was whether the President would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned. As for judges, Bush says he does not ask judges where they stand on issues like abortion, but he has predominantly nominated judges whose past decisions support overturning abortion rights. He has also supported restrictions on abortions and prevented U.S. funding of international health care programs that mention abortion as an option.

The Claim:
I made my intentions, my views clear. I did think we ought to extend the assault-weapons ban and was told the fact that the bill wasn't ever going to move. Because the Republicans and Democrats were against the assault-weapon ban, people of both parties.

Reality Check:
Bush said he supported the assault weapons ban but did nothing to encourage Congress to renew it.




The Claim:
I have got a comprehensive strategy to not only chase down al-Qaeda wherever it exists — and we're making progress, three-quarters of al-Qaeda leaders have been brought to justice — but to make sure that countries who harbor terrorists are held to account.

Reality Check:
The CIA estimates that 75% of al-Qaeda's known leadership at the time of the September 11th Attacks has been killed or captured. The terrorist network has adapted, however, recruiting new leaders and gaining footholds in new countries. Some terrorism experts believe the president has been softer toward countries like Iran and Syria that are far more friendly to terrorists than Saddam Hussein's regime was.

The Claim:
I signed the Homeland Security Bill to better align our assets and resources. My opponent voted against it.

Reality Check:
Kerry voted against some provisions of the President's proposed Department of Homeland Security, but he voted for the final bill creating the department. The DHS was originally Joe Lieberman's proposal — the President solidly opposed it, but changed his mind after an onslaught of political pressure.

The Claim:
My opponent just this weekend talked about how terrorism can be reduced to a nuisance, comparing it to prostitution, illegal gambling. I think that attitude and that point of view is dangerous ... My opponent said this war is a matter of intelligence and law enforcement. No, this is a war as a matter of using every asset at our disposal to keep the American people protected.

Reality Check:
Kerry has repeatedly said that the military should be used to hunt down and destroy al-Qaeda, but that intelligence, law enforcement and diplomacy are key tools as well.

The Claim:
Gosh, I don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. That's kind of one of those exaggerations.

Reality Check:
At a March 13, 2002, press conference Bush said, "We haven't heard much from him ... And, again, I don't know where he is. I — I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run."

The Claim:
We have a problem with litigation in the United States of America. Vaccine manufacturers are worried about getting sued and so therefore they have backed off from providing this kind of vaccine.

Reality Check:
Lawsuits over vaccine side effects have raised liability costs for manufacturers and discouraged vaccine production. But there are several other reasons for the low number of vaccine producers. A big one is the low profits in the vaccine business. Flu vaccines take at least six months to produce, and often times, manufacturers don't know which strain of influenza will strike each year so they have to gamble on which type of vaccine to produce.

The Claim:
[Kerry's] proposed $2.2 trillion of new spending ... I proposed a detailed budget, Bob. I send up my budget man to the Congress and he says here's how we're going to reduce the deficit in half by five years, it requires pro-growth policies that grow our economy and fiscal sanity in the halls of Congress.

Reality Check:
Kerry's spending proposals are closer to $1.3 trillion. Bush's are closer to $2.2 trillion. The nonpartisan Concord Coalition estimates Mr. Bush's plan to make his tax cuts permanent, combined with new tax cuts and his domestic proposals, will add $1.32 trillion to the budget over the next decade. That does not include any increases in military spending and the President's proposal to create private social security accounts, which could cost at least $1 trillion more.

The Claim:
Health care costs are on the rise because the consumers are not involved in the decision-making process. Most health costs are covered by third parties. And therefore, the actual user of health care is not the purchaser of health care. And there's no market forces involved with health care. It's one of the reasons I'm a strong believer in what they call health savings accounts. These are accounts that allow somebody to buy a low-premium, high-deductible catastrophic plan and couple it with tax-free savings.

Reality Check:
The President is saying that health care costs are high because people will always choose the best, most expensive treatment when their insurance will cover the cost. While there's plenty of evidence that's true, the only way to lower costs that way is to force people to pay more of their own costs, which will force lower-income Americans to stop seeking treatment. Tax free health savings accounts are a popular idea, but many Americans are not saving enough to put money in them.

The Claim:
The Lewin Report accurately noted that there are going to be 20 million people — over 20 million people added to government-controlled health care [under Kerry's plan]. Be the largest increase in government health care ever.

Reality Check:
Bush implies that these people would be added to some new, big government program. In reality, the plan just makes more Americans eligible for Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

The Claim:
In order to take pressure off the border, in order to make the borders more secure, I believe there ought to be a temporary worker card that allows a willing worker and a willing employer to mate up, so long as there's not an American willing to do the job, to join up in order to be able to fulfill the employer's needs. That has the benefit of making sure our employers aren't breaking the law as they try to fill their workforce needs.

Reality Check:
Americans don't take many of the jobs the President is referring to because employers prefer illegal immigrants who will work for below minimum wage and no benefits. Until there is a crackdown on illegal hiring, businesses will prefer low cost illegal workers.

The Claim:
What he's asking me is will I have a litmus test for my judges. And the answer is no, I will not have a litmus test. I will pick judges who will interpret the Constitution. But I'll have no litmus tests.

Reality Check:
What Bob Schieffer asked was whether the President would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned. As for judges, Bush says he does not ask judges where they stand on issues like abortion, but he has predominantly nominated judges whose past decisions support overturning abortion rights. He has also supported restrictions on abortions and prevented U.S. funding of international health care programs that mention abortion as an option.

The Claim:
I made my intentions, my views clear. I did think we ought to extend the assault-weapons ban and was told the fact that the bill wasn't ever going to move. Because the Republicans and Democrats were against the assault-weapon ban, people of both parties.

Reality Check:
Bush said he supported the assault weapons ban but did nothing to encourage Congress to renew it.
www.time.com/time/election2004/article/0,18471,723159,00.html

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,SueB
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:47 AM

I enjoyed reading the excerpts from the article, but I don't know what to think. He clearly seems unfit, to me, and to many others, but he also clearly has many supporters. Are all his supporters also insane? It's a conundrum.

Here's a link to an article in the Guardian
which talks about the many ways the Republican party is attempting to ensure a victory - apparently fraudulent ways, in other words, theft, cheating and trickery.

If I were a paranoid conspiracy theorist, which I try hard not to be, after reading the Observer article I would start to wonder if maybe the President is being kept drugged.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:51 AM

Well, he certainly is dramatically evasive, if not mad. I suspect this King George needs to let go of the Colonies and seek rest and recuperation.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:56 AM

This is a good link: monkeydyne.com/bushresume/resume.html


worth a blue clicky, but i'm a dinosaur...

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,SueB
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:56 AM

Did anyone watch the Daily Show last night? They showed a clip of Bush giving a speech to supporters in which he said "We will NOT have an all-volunteer army!" The crowd was stunned into an awkward silence, and Bush, after waiting for applause that wasn't coming, started to go on, when someone from the crowd yelled out, and Bush stopped and said "What? ...oh...We WILL have an all-volunteer army."
It was surreal.

Freda, you have certainly been busy reading!

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:59 AM

Those are some mighty long cut and pastes there freda, and I've not got the patience to read them.

I hate Bush's politics. I would love to see him bounced out of office. But making attacks on someone's mental health is about the dirtiest of campaign tricks I can think of.

You do no service to your candidate, whom I presume is Kerry, by falling in with this sort of despicable tactic.

Stick to the political message. There is a tremendous amount in the Bush/Cheney record to recommend voting for some other candidate, without this sort of thing being introduced.

Some people will obviously stoop to any gutter level to win. Sad to see it here.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 10:59 AM

yep! should be sleeping! - nite all!

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: JennyO
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:01 AM

Remind me freda, next time I'm at your place, to show you blue clickies. Anyway - here ya go

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:02 AM

nite guest!

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: JennyO
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:04 AM

You do no service to your candidate, whom I presume is Kerry, by falling in with this sort of despicable tactic.

GUEST, Kerry is not freda's candidate. She is in Australia.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:23 AM

http://www.monkeydyne.com/bushresume/resume.html

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:26 AM

JennyO, there are, as we have seen repeatedly here, plenty of non-US citizens campaigning for Kerry here at Mudcat. I don't know why they are engaging in this sort of thing, as it isn't their election anyway. Which makes freda's decision to start this sort of despicable rumor mongering (quoting from a Democratic anti-Bush propaganda source, Capitol Hill Blue) all the worse.

I'm sorry, it just doesn't matter what quarter this sort of thing comes from. It is a thoroughly despicable tactic in election campaigns, to impugn the mental health of one of the candidates. It is, as I said above, about as sleazy as it gets.

People really need to calm down, take some long deep breaths (and possibly time out to meditate), and turn off the US election thing. The level of hysteria and fear mongering is so far beyond the pale, I don't think anyone should even be listening to it anymore. Everyone already has decided how they are voting at this point, so people should just chill, and wait out the next couple of weeks, and ignore all the nasty shit flying all over the place.

Remember, it is ONLY an election. They happen every four years in the US. If your man doesn't get in this year, there is always the next election. Bush can't run again in 2008. It is perfectly possible to stop buying into the partisan hysteria, and tune out the media hype.

It is ONLY an election. Not much ever changes on inauguration day, even if the new president is from a different party than the old president.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 11:46 AM

That article that Freda originally posted was from Time magazine, not Capitol Hill Blue.

Impugn the mental health of the candidates--well, you don't see them complaining about Kerry's mental health, do you? Only the bizarre behavior of the man in office we've all had an opportunity to watch for the last four years (some of us longer than that--we in Texas have known what a crackpot this guy is for over a decade).

If we can't criticise how the man handles complex information (has it fed to him because he doesn't read newspapers), makes decisions (prays a lot) and never changes his mind (meaning changing events apparently aren't evaluated once the decision is made) and his history (heavy recreational use of illegal drugs and alcohol abuse) then what do you suggest? Toss a coin? It's his mental processes that are at the heart of the problem. Dime-store psychoanlaysis is probably not helpful, but clearly the man has a hair up his ass that means he is on a power trip like none other and it is costing this nation billions in war, in good will around the world, and reduced standards of living for everyone but the small percentage of obscenely rich folks in the nation. GUEST, go peddle your home-lobotomy kit somewhere else.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Chris Green
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 12:33 PM

I think it's all too easy to label someone insane just because they do unpleasant things. Bush is a menace and Bush is thick as two short planks but he's not insane. He knows what he's doing and so do all the neo-cons around him.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Chris Green
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 01:04 PM

Actually, having watched bits of the last presidential debate, I've come to the conclusion that there's been a typo somewhere along the line and he is in fact inane. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 01:18 PM

Good one!

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 01:24 PM

"Bush is a menace and Bush is thick as two short planks but he's not insane. He knows what he's doing and so do all the neo-cons around him. "

One can be insane and still know what one is doing. I would submit that pretty much all of the neocons are pursuing insane ideals. They know how to promote their ideals, that doesn't mean that their ambitions are "sane".

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Chris Green
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 02:14 PM

I was assuming that we were going with the legal definition of insanity. "Guilty, but unable to understand the consequences or implications of their actions". Not that Bush is ever likely to face a jury, unfortunately!

However, Jack, by your definition, I have no hesitation in agreeing that Dubya is a gibbering loon!

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 02:24 PM

I believe he has an underlying capacity for destruction, and an indifference to human suffering, that is nearly psychotic. This is based solely on an observation of his actions.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: DougR
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 04:09 PM

The question is not worthy of a reply.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 04:20 PM

I can't wait until Bush wins.

Just to shut up the compulsives like Amos and kangaroo brains like Freda.

Your blaming Bush for literally everything and stop at nothing tactics are what's going to backfire on you.

the more whining, the more people are seeing what kind of campain Kerry is running.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Peace
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 04:38 PM

Gotta agree with you, Martin. I can't wait until Bush wins, either. I'm 57 and I expect to pass on by the age of 65.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 04:56 PM

Well, Brucie, I'm 54 and plan to get to somewhere around 90 like those before me.

Do you notice that the compulsives for Bush are the Limbaughs and the Hannitys? You may not agree with them, but they have much more listening to them than Amos does or somebody like Bobert.

They are working hard to show that you just cannot run a campain like Kerry's twisting everyting to be Bush's vault.

I have a gut feeling that people are starting to realize that it is truly Kerry who is now saying anything he can to try to dsicredit Bush. It's like someone said in the Bush is insane thread. Are 50 % of the supporters of Bush insane also? I think not. However, I do believe more and more discreditation is being done every day by the ones who ask these type of questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Peace
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:01 PM

Well, for years I also had hoped to die at the age of ninety--being shot by a jealous husband.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:03 PM

No, the idea is to beat the shit out of the jealous husband when you are 90.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Peace
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:04 PM

Serious for a sec, Martin. Bush can back off a bit on the misinformation stuff the Republicans have been dealing in, because it seems some papers and TV stations/shows are gonna do it for him. However, all is moot. I would think that only an attack of some sort will secure the election for Bush, and I think Kerry will take it. However, I was wrong once in 1961 and I expect it could happen to me again.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:23 PM

"Do you notice that the compulsives for Bush are the Limbaughs and the Hannitys? "

Do YOU notice that the compulsives for Kerry are the Springsteens and the (Dave) Matthews', and that they have a lot more listeners than Limbaugh and Hannity?

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:36 PM

db I think that is a criminal definition of insanity. Not a complete definition. I think Bush fits two out of three of those definitions.


Here's what Webster says.

One entry found for insanity.

Main Entry: in·san·i·ty
Pronunciation: in-'sa-n&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 a : a deranged state of the mind usually occurring as a specific disorder (as schizophrenia) and usually excluding such states as mental retardation, psychoneurosis, and various character disorders b : a mental disorder
2 : such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility
3 a : extreme folly or unreasonableness b : something utterly foolish or unreasonable

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Chris Green
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:40 PM

Okay. So he's not criminally insane. Just normally, inoffensively insane! :)

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:48 PM

The Springsteens and the Dave Mathews band do not have the same clout as the Hannitys and the Limbaughs.

For example, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh are each heard every day on approximately 476 stations. They are at it everyday while over the hill types like Springsteen and limited talents like Dave Mathews are still in it to sell records and on a limited time basis only.

Your comparison Jack, is really no comparison and shows how limited you are in your knowledge of the power of the media.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 05:51 PM

Four years ago when Gore won the popular vote and the Supremes appointed Dubya the anger was palpable. It still is, and to many of us it was clear that Bush fully planned to do as much damage as possible in the first four years lest he suffer the fate of his father, not getting a second term. He has done just that. The deregulation that Reagan visited on the U.S. in the 1980s is a drop in the bucket compared to all of the reversals of programs and the dismantling of social services and other departments. What Bush has done to education is ridiculous. The only people who are truly better off are the very rich, and that's obscene. Need more money for the war? Okay, lets take it away from the CHiPS program. (Health care for poor children). Tens of thousands of children were dropped from the rolls here in Texas alone.

When the Kerry health plan was put forward, one of the conservative think tanks plonked a $1.5 trillion in ten years pricetag on it (where did they get the number?) with the remark ("we're assuming it would work, so this is how much it would take.") Wasn't anyone else paying attention? Bush doesn't have a real plan, and health care in the U.S. doesn't work for millions of people. Tax breaks don't cut it--too many people have other needs for the money than paying for health insurance out of their own pocket for a miniscule tax return. Truth be told, health care hasn't worked for a anyone, any administration, for as long as we've been around, but it was getting better. CHiPS was a substantial start. (And Hillary DID have the right idea!) Bush cut back or dismantled what had been working. So pull up your socks and plan to spend as much as it will take to fix health care (or live with the pissant amount Bush is going to spend while he quips "Don't get sick!")

from Factcheck.org

The Bush ad gives Kerry's plan a "1.5 trillion dollar price tag" and the figure is shown twice on screen during the ad. What the ad doesn't say is that the figure covers a full 10 years, and that it's the highest of three independent estimates issued so far. The figure comes from a study by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative, pro-business think tank in Washington.

But as we've previously reported, the Bush campaign originally quoted a study by Ken Thorpe of Emory University, who estimates the total cost of Kerry's plan to be $653 billion over 10 years. A third study released later by The Lewin Group concluded that Kerry's plan would cost about $1.25 trillion over 10 years.

The estimates all agree that Kerry's ambitious and expensive plan would provide health coverage for a large portion of the 45 million who currently lack it. The American Enterprise Institute put the figure of those who would gain insurance at 24 million, the Lewin Group put it at 25 million and Thorpe is estimating 27 million.

There are always choices that have to be made, and one assumes that the person in charge has the best view of the "big picture." So to consciously lie to the congress and the American public (and the rest of the world) about Saddham, to start a war without any significant support (that coalition is a joke, a collection of miniscule third world countries once you get below number four on the list) and to arbitrarily wage that war instead of looking out for the people here is an ego trip of monstrous scope. Bush's big picture shows him that multinational corporations rule the world and that he wants to position American industry (and many of them are his pals) to win in this the game.

Anyone see the 20/20 about the 5000 member Saudi royal family and their collectively concupiscent lifestyle? That's what we're supporting by fighting in Iraq, the power and oil folks in the Middle East and the lifestyle they aspire to hide. George W. Bush is so busy staring into the hypnotic glazed-over Saudi eyes that he isn't able to make responsible and rational decisions as the American head of state. He's not stupid, he's not insane, he's deluded and he's as greedy as hell.

Don't believe the numbers. Get out and vote because you're determined to get this SOB out of Washington, where he never belonged in the first place.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 06:09 PM

"Kerry's twisting everyting to be Bush's vault." MG

Damn. Kerry wants access to Bush's money? I have been misled.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 06:19 PM

Or does he secretly hanker to be a piece of gym equipment? He's fooled us all along.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 06:21 PM

"Your comparison Jack, is really no comparison and shows how limited you are in your knowledge of the power of the media."

Yeah? You want to bet on who will add more voters to each side?

Hannity's and Limbaugh's audiences were Republicans and Conservatives long before they's heard of either man. They listen to those guys because they support people like Bush.

Springsteen and Matthews are signing up hundreds of thousands of new voters in swing states. Both men have sold way more albums than then Limbaugh's and Hannity's audiences combined.

Toby Keith is doing a lot more for Bush than Limbaugh and Hannity. At least part of his audience is not already committed.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 06:39 PM

Anyone who can listen to Hannity and Limbaugh either has no brain or a very strong stomach.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 07:08 PM

He's not stupid, he's not insane, he's deluded and he's as greedy as hell.


I suggest you may be spliitin' them purdy yaller hairs, SRS!! It adds up to Loonie-Boy to me.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 08:36 PM

He's an opportunitist with tunnel vision and a reductive world view. That won't get him committed, but hopefully it will get him unelected.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 09:17 PM

Limbaugh et al are for people who need to be told what to think. It's scary that that might include 50% of the population. Shudder

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Oct 04 - 09:39 PM

I've always wondered why the Republicans chose George and not Jeb. Was it because George was so easily manipulated. Was it because Jeb may actually have a brain and might say, "Now wait a gol darn minute..?"

I wonder what his brother and his parents are thinking right now. For that matter, what do his wife and daughter think of him? I don't think he's insane. I think he is a hate and fear monger that thrives on conflict.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 05:23 AM

Some folks have strange "heroes". Limbaugh never could hold a decent job down till he at last fell into his present in-decent one, and found it suited his nasty temperament down to the ground. The similarity between his resume and G.W.'s is uncanny----

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 07:15 AM

I read this thread, along with all the articles.

Thanks freda.

I'm afraid that whether or not George W.Bush is insane or not, he IS currently President of the most powerful county on earth. How he became such, and who will vote for him again, is to me the far greater question and problem.

As those who continue to defend this man here at Mudcat can attest to, they don't think he's insane, and neither do they think they are in any way wrong in supporting him.

There is a far bigger question here than just about Mr Bush and this election, and it won't be answered by November 2nd, I'm sorry to say.

..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 04:08 PM

poor bush, he cant help it.
He was born with a silver foot in his mouth.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 07:14 PM

petr...

Like his dad?

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 07:17 PM

yup. Although I should say that
Ann Richards former Texas Gov. even though I wish Id thought of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 11:20 PM

I am not professionally in a position to call him insane, but I fear he is the worst leader the United States has ever had, the least honorable, the least informed, and the most illiterate.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 11:31 PM

Did you see the most recent (Oct 18, 2004) New Yorker cover? It's a hoot! The web site has the next one (not in my mailbox yet) so you'll have to find the art elsewhere for now. It had a debate setting with Kerry in full dress uniform and Bush in fatigues indolently hanging out on his lectern.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Oct 04 - 11:35 PM

Hey, folks, if you think Bush is insane....you oughta spend some time around the people who appointed him to high office, and who pull his little puppet strings! (you don't get to vote for or against them)

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: dianavan
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 01:29 AM

Maybe not but we can boycott.   Who are the companies. What are their names. Hit em where it hurts. The only thing they understand is money and I don't want to give them mine.

I deal in ethical funds. I used to have American ethical funds but the banks in Canada will no longer deal in those funds because they're so unstable. I say keep putting the pressure on the every business who does business with the bad boys. Isolate them. Bring them to their f*****g knees!

d

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 11:04 AM

Boycott Halliburton. Don't go to war, and put them out of business. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 01:10 PM

Open Letter to George W Bush from a 9/11 Mother Friday 22 October 2004

On the Thirty-third Anniversary of My Daughter's Birth
    cc: Senator John Kerry

    "Sometimes, Mr. Bush, it's the smallest of details that makes everything click. The smallest of details. Right now, Mr. Bush, I am looking at your watch. It's an item of clothing accessory and, unlike your other costumes, it is one that is particularly revealing.
    "On Halloween my daughter would be thirty-three years old. Her child would be almost three. Seven weeks before her twenty-ninth birthday, Vanessa, four months pregnant, ran from the falling towers of the World Trade Center. She did not make it. Her body, and in it the small body of her unborn child, was pulled from the rubble of the fallen towers on September 24th, just ten feet from an alley between towers IV and V. It is important for me to tell you that she was on the phone to her uptown office five minutes after the first plane hit tower I, explaining how she and others in tower II were "safe."
    "Here is what you did regarding specifically the events of that morning: You vacationed before, during and after August 6th, the day you were handed the presidential daily briefing that said very clearly Vanessa Lang Langer and many other Americans were not safe. After the first plane hit tower I, the fact of the PDB did not click in your mind, did not cause you to act, to turn on a television, to contact the Pentagon. You sat so that you did not frighten a group of children. You did not worry about Vanessa's brothers, or the young children who would certainly be directly affected by that event. You did not, like her fourteen year-old brother, rush from your seat and head for a phone, desperately trying to reach out, to fix, to save. You sat. You said, two weeks to the day before the general election of 2004, that you would protect Americans; that is, according to you, your primary responsibility as Commander-in Chief; no terrorists would get us, no terrorists would attack us (you said this with your arm extended), and I you said and I quote, on your watch. You said this with no sense of irony, no sense, no indication of how that text would sound to those you failed miserably to protect. You never notified officially the airlines, flight schools, persons who lived or worked in our tallest structures. You failed in your watch and on it. "


Click Here

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 01:22 PM

Crook: Yes
Creep: Yes
Heathen: Yes
Liar: Yes
Thief: Yes
Corrupt: Yes
Coward: Yes
Arrogant: Yes

Compassionate: No
Conservative: No
Christain: No

Insane: Maybe, maybe not. With all of his other personality disorders it's really a mute point.

Dr. Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 01:51 PM

That's "moot," Bobert, but I understood what you were saying anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,SueB
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 02:10 PM

In general, I reject the "evil genius" characterization of Bush that occasionally gets tossed into the conversation. I reject the "genius" part of it, for one thing. But I'm going to quote here from part of Salam Pax's blog that I read today in the Guardian Online (remember the Baghdad Blogger?). He talks about visiting DC and going to a political rally where Al Gore is speaking, and this is what he says that Gore was trying to get across:

"... dismissing Bush as someone who "does not have the normal, active curiosity about separating fact from myth" or as a born-again Christian who "relies on religious faith in place of logical analysis" makes him less dangerous. It makes him too easy to dismiss and underestimate...

Gore dismissed both those views as "cartoon images" and added: "I am convinced that the president's frequent departures from fact-based analysis have much more to do with rightwing political and economic ideology than the Bible. "Most of the problems president Bush has caused for this country stem not from his belief in God but from his belief in the infallibility of the rightwing Republican ideology . . . it is love of power for its own sake that is the original sin of this administration." "

In other words, not stupid or crazy, but evil. Calling him insane may have a similar effect, of trivialing how potentially dangerous he is. Something to think about, anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 03:40 PM

Well, I think that argument of Pax' is well-put. To me establishing that someone has power AND is insnae is tantamount to saying "therefore, he is dangerous". Like Mister Edwards, who said as much to the Vice-President in their debate, "I don't know if this country can TAKE four more years of this kindd of damage." Obviously, Big Dickus Capitus was not pleased.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 08:07 PM

From today's New York Times, a short editorial about Bush and Reality:

"ARTICLE TOOLS




E-Mail This Article

Printer-Friendly Format

Most E-Mailed Articles















Columnist Page: Bob Herbert

Forum: Discuss This Column

E-mail: [e-mail]










TIMES NEWS TRACKER



  Topics

Alerts


Bush, George W





Woodward, Bob





Suskind, Ron





Iraq











oes President Bush even tip his hat to reality as he goes breezing by?

He often behaves as if he sees - or is in touch with - things that are inaccessible to those who are grounded in the reality most of us have come to know. For example, with more than 1,000 American troops and more than 10,000 Iraqi civilians dead, many people see the ongoing war in Iraq as a disaster, if not a catastrophe. Mr. Bush sees freedom on the march.

Many thoughtful analysts see a fiscal disaster developing here at home, with the president's tax cuts being the primary contributor to the radical transformation of a $236 billion budget surplus into a $415 billion deficit. The president sees, incredibly, a need for still more tax cuts.

The United States was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, by Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The president responded by turning most of the nation's firepower on Saddam Hussein and Iraq. When Mr. Bush was asked by the journalist Bob Woodward if he had consulted with former President Bush about the decision to invade Iraq, the president replied: "He is the wrong father to appeal to in terms of strength. There is a higher father that I appeal to."

Last week the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University said in a report:

"During the past year Iraq has become a major distraction from the global war on terrorism. Iraq has now become a convenient arena for jihad, which has helped Al Qaeda to recover from the setback it suffered as a result of the war in Afghanistan. With the growing phenomenon of suicide bombing, the U.S. presence in Iraq now demands more and more assets that might have otherwise been deployed against various dimensions of the global terrorist threat."

There are consequences, often powerful consequences, to turning one's back on reality. The president may believe that freedom's on the march, and that freedom is God's gift to every man and woman in the world, and perhaps even that he is the vessel through which that gift is transmitted. But when he is crafting policy decisions that put people by the hundreds of thousands into harm's way, he needs to rely on more than the perceived good wishes of the Almighty. He needs to submit those policy decisions to a good hard reality check.

Here's one good reason why:

Dr. Gene Bolles spent two years as the chief of neurosurgery at the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, which is where most of the soldiers wounded in Iraq are taken. Among his patients was Pfc. Jessica Lynch. In an interview posted this week on the Web site AlterNet.org, Dr. Bolles was asked: "What kind of cases did you treat in Landstuhl? And these were mostly kids, right?"

He said: "Well, I call them that since I'm 62 years old. And they were 18, 19, maybe 21. They all seemed young. Certainly younger than my children. As a neurosurgeon I mostly dealt with injuries to the brain, the spinal cord, or the spine itself. The injuries were all fairly horrific, anywhere from the loss of extremities, multiple extremities, to severe burns. It just goes on and on and on. ... As a doctor myself who has seen trauma throughout his career, I've never seen it to this degree. The numbers, the degree of injuries. It really kind of caught me off guard."

If you're the president and you're contemplating a war in which thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of these kinds of injuries will take place, you have an obligation to seek out the best sources of information and the wisest advice from the widest possible array of counselors. And you have an absolute obligation to exercise sound judgment based upon facts, and not simply faith.

In a disturbing article in last Sunday's New York Times Magazine, the writer Ron Suskind told of a meeting he'd had with a senior adviser to the president. The White House at the time was unhappy about an article Mr. Suskind had written.

According to Mr. Suskind, "The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' " The aide told Mr. Suskind, "That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Got that? We may think there are real-world consequences to the policies of the president, real pain and real grief for real people. But to the White House, that kind of thinking is passé. The White House doesn't even recognize that kind of reality."

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 03:47 PM

Does that mean that the aide believes that it doesn't matter if the acts of the empire are logical or not?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 04:03 PM

I think so, DV, which indicates that the aide believes in the mandate brought about by power and the irrelevance of ethics.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 05:09 PM

Ethics seems to be a hot topic at the moment. Unethical politics, unethical business dealings, unethical worker relations, etc. In fact, it seems that the word "ethical" is losing its meaning or at least has very little relevance in the world today. Is this what we want or must we, as individuals, conduct ourselves in an ethical manner at all times. If so, I think we need a standard or a code of ethics which all people, of all nations agree upon before destroy our planet.

Are ethics culturally based?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Chris Green
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 05:22 PM

Dictionary definition of ethics is as follows:
a) A set of principles of right conduct.
b) A theory or a system of moral values.

So yes, ethics are based culturally. In order to impose a universal system of ethics you would really need to impose a world religion, political system or government and previous attempts to do this (Communism, etc) have failed. Had they succeeded, however, I imagine that they would have led to the death of ethics as a concept, due to a lack of any comparable system. Catch-22, methinks!

If the above doesn't seem to be particularly lucid, I apologise but a) I'm tired and b) political philosophy was never my strong point!

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 05:44 PM

We need to evolve toward a perspective of enlightened self-interest (for instance, understanding the idea that if I harm another, I also harm myself). I think maybe we are moving in that direction, but time will tell.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 07:15 PM

There are two different things. Moral codes are agreements made with your culture. Some moral codes look silly from outside, like eating rules and superstitions.

But the sense of right action inherent in the individual goes beyond moral codes and addresses the path to optimum well being. That is the sense of ethics.

Enlightened self-interest reaches out from the self, embraces the groups (family, civic, organizational or national) one is part of, and from there addresses life itself in all its manifestations and seeks the best path for all those considerations.

They are not derived from "cultural agreements" except secondarily, as a guideline to not distressing others in your culture.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Oct 04 - 11:45 PM

In this earnest article, Paul Levy discusses the madness of George Bush as a reflection of our larger mass madness.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 03:00 PM

We do know this. He considers it a sign of weakness to suggest that he is imperfect. He has this irritating manner of smirking and making light of serious issues. He is constantly looking for the approval of his audience.
He seems to espouse an evangelical view of religion that supports his actions which are for the most part not well thought out. He states positions that are not supportable by his record. He dwells on fear as a tactic to raise his approval rating. (various alerts, etc.) He can't seem to tolerate criticism and this is why he has so few press conferences. He is not able to allow anyone to disagree with him. He makes all kinds of Freudian slips in his speeches about the Volunteer Army and being a dictator. Some make fun of these gaffes. He has betrayed the American people by entering into a war under false pretenses. He claims to have a pipeline to God. He has a world view that is out of step with the principles of American Democracy. He makes promises that can't be kept such as destroying all "terrorists" and inculcating American values of freedom and free trade through hegemonic and military means.

Judge for yourself.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: dianavan
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 03:23 PM

Well put, Amos -

"But the sense of right action inherent in the individual goes beyond moral codes and addresses the path to optimum well being. That is the sense of ethics."

So George is definitely unethical, if not insane. Perhaps, in the first instance he is unethical and because he seems to lack the ability to reflect on those actions, he is also without conscience. I'd say that the combination of the two: unethical and without conscience might possibly make him insane.

I'd think that even if the American public elects him again, I would be very worried if I were his 'handlers' - even more worried if I were a staunch Republican. Do Republicans have a conscience?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 06:53 PM

You got that one fairly, DV.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Old Guy
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 07:39 PM

I think it is up to a shrink to decide.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Peace
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 10:33 PM

Shrink decides the size of jeans after a hot wash and dry.

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Old Guy
Date: 24 Oct 04 - 11:02 PM

Brucie:

Another drive by brain fart.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 04:59 PM

dianavan,
Donaldson is investigating the practices of the SEC. If it becomes that business practices continue along the Enron, Worldspan path, no one will want to invest anymore and that could spell disaster for the market.

As to the thread: ethics is culturally derived from various viewpoints. Reactionary Republican fundamentalist religion will cut corners in order to bring about their theocratic vision. Bush has embraced this as a political as well as quasi-religious position. It can tip the scales at the election.

The Crusade mentality pervades the Bush Adminstration and the kind of
New World Order it advocates could be justifiably labeled religious fanaticism and quasi-Christian-fascism. In this way it parellels the extremist Muslim path of Al Quaeda and could then be classified under the nebulous rubric of "terrorism". Is this crazy?

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 07:37 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 07:43 PM

Pause for thought above---!!
Insane? quite probably
Incoherent?---Absolutely
Incontinent?---Strongly indicated by the amount of unregulated drivel excreted by him.
Inconceivable? ... Now that would have been a real Heavensent circumstance 'way back then....

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Old Guy
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 11:53 PM

Not if you compare him to the Nerd.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Oct 04 - 11:56 PM

Slipping in to ad hominems again, OG??

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Old Guy
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 12:04 AM

Damn you Amos, let me go to bed. I have to work tomorrow.

Besides, that was just Nerd bait.

Old guy

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: Amos
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 12:19 AM

Baiting, is it? Go to bed -- you're too cranky to post.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: DougR
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 01:41 AM

No, I think he is a Methodist.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Is George Bush Insane?
From: dianavan
Date: 26 Oct 04 - 03:00 AM

Frank - I think war is crazy.

d