Crazy George?

[Daisy]

I thought he was merely stupid, but this gives me pause, this interesting editorial from the UK:

Has Bush lost his reason?

The President's apparent mental fragility should
give US voters pause for thought at the ballot box

Andrew Stephen
Sunday October 17, 2004

The Observer

<snip>

The evidence has been before our eyes for some time, but only during the course of this election campaign has it crystallised - just in time, possibly, for the 2 November election. The 43rd US President has always had a much-publicised knack for mangled syntax, but now George Bush often searches an agonisingly 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.

<snip>

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.

<snip>

Does he have impaired reasonning? Is that why they keep him from hearing any dissent?

 

[tragic_pizza]

Yeah, it's a really good idea to get your information about American political figuresd from the UK. Way to go.

 

[Pete]

I can't put it any better than Dubya himself...."This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses."

Maybe half-choked himself on too many pretzels?

 

[tragic_pizza]

I wish you people would make your point for once.

 

[Enoch]

Daisy calling someone “STUPID” just shows your character or lack of!!!!!

How sad!!!!

 

[tragic_pizza]

Yeah, I was going to mention that, Enoch, but had high hopes that she was actually trying to make a point...

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by Enoch:
Daisy calling someone “STUPID”

Perhaps I should have worded it more genteelly for your delicate sensibilities?

I thought he was merely, um, none too bright? Surprisingly non-intellectual? I'm not poking fun at him - I sincerely mean that he has always struck me as less than admirable in his thinking. For a man educated as thoroughly as he, a graduate of Andover, Yale and Harvard, to refer to the Russian president as "Pootie-poot" is just plain strange, but I do admit a prejudice against grownups indulging in baby-talk with non-babies.

just shows your character or lack of!!!!!

How sad!!!!

I'm not disparaging a fellow poster, I'm discussing the competence of our president. Is that not allowed? Is that showing bad character?

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Yeah, I was going to mention that, Enoch, but had high hopes that she was actually trying to make a point...

If you don't get the point, you are indeed aptly named.

 

[tragic_pizza]

daisy, you really need to gain some maturity. Making posts based on foreign news services which call the Commander-in-Chief, any Commander-in-Chief, "crazy" is not only immature, but an obfuscative straw-man as well.

Perhaps George is sane and you are crazy. Please, prove me wrong.

 

[Pete]

"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?" .... "I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe - I believe what I believe is right."

How could I have ever doubted him

 

[Daisy]

Judge for yourselves - listen and compare Bush debating 10 years ago and Bush debating recently:
Audio-visual quicktime link

Listen to the download of Bush-before and Bush-after and then tell me you don't see the "point". He wasn't always "none too bright", contrary to what I had thought, having heard him only since around 1999.

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
daisy, you really need to gain some maturity. Making posts based on foreign news services...

You really need to grow-up and join the world, tragic. Reading outside sources gives perspective which Fox-only does not.

... which call the Commander-in-Chief, any Commander-in-Chief, "crazy" is not only immature, but an obfuscative straw-man as well.

You don't know what a straw-man is, if you think I presented one. (A straw-man is a mischaracterization of your opponent's argument, which you can then easily refute.) Did you actually read the article and listen to the download or are you basing your opinion solely on the unpleasantness of hearing that someone you admire might be suffering from a cognitive disorder?

Perhaps George is sane and you are crazy. Please, prove me wrong.

Listen to the download - it's somewhat disturbing - then google on "Bush presenile dementia". If I'm crazy, at least I'm not alone.

 

[tragic_pizza]

So having company in your paranoid state means it's OK to be paranoid? Oooooookay.

 

[Daisy]

Apparently, you don't know what paranoid means either. I don't think he's out to get me personally; I just think he may not be all there.

Instead of attacking the messenger, consider the message before dismissing it out of hand.

If I'm wrong about George, then so much the better. But if I'm right....well, we (and I include the rest of the world here) are all in trouble.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Yeah. And the men in the black helicopters are coming to get you, aren't they?

Tell me, sweetheart, where in Scripture is it OK to call people "crazy?"

 

[ballfan]

They probably wouldn't like Yogi Berra or Will Rogers either.

 

[Daisy]

O tragic! I'm sorry this has upset you so much that you feel compelled to belittle me. Please, let's discuss this like civil adults.

Have you seen and heard the Richards-Bush debate? C-Span has a good archive,(link to debate download). Do you think that George has not deteriorated since then? I think the change is obvious and disturbing.

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by ballfan:
They probably wouldn't like Yogi Berra or Will Rogers either.

I like Yogi Berra well enough, but I would never vote for him to hold the highest office in the land.

Everyone likes Will Rogers.

 

[The Galatian]

Bush has always had a hard time expressing himself in public. But he's a lot different from the cheerful, optimistic, and reasonable guy he was as governor of Texas. He got high marks for being nonpartisan, and working out compromises to get things done.

People have noticed this. Bush has become divisive, defensive, and not very open to dissent, even among his closest associates.

Something's wrong, although I doubt if he's crazy.
It's just that everything fell in place for him in Texas, and now everything is going wrong.

He kept saying, during the debate how hard it is. I think he's genuinely puzzled. Truman had the answer.

The buck stops here.

 

[Daisy]

Ok, perhaps "crazy" is the wrong word, a bit insensitve. "Pre-senilely demented" seems to be the proper term. Whichever, it's not what I want to see in a president.