Bush Derangement Syndrome

[Big Don]

Bush Derangement Syndrome By Charles Krauthammer
Townhall.com | Friday, December 05, 2003
Frontpage Magazine
Excerpt:

Diane Rehm: ``Why do you think he (Bush) is suppressing that (Sept. 11) report?''
Howard Dean: ``I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is?'' -- ``Diane Rehm Show,'' NPR, Dec. 1
​

It has been 25 years since I discovered a psychiatric syndrome (for the record: ``Secondary Mania,'' Archives of General Psychiatry, November 1978), and in the interim I haven't been looking for new ones. But it's time to don the white coat again. A plague is abroad in the land.
Bush Derangement Syndrome: the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush.
Now, I cannot testify to Howard Dean's sanity before this campaign, but five terms as governor by a man with no visible tics and no history of involuntary confinement is pretty good evidence of a normal mental status. When he avers, however, that ``the most interesting'' theory as to why the president is ``suppressing'' the 9/11 report is that Bush knew about 9/11 in advance, it's time to check on thorazine supplies.
When Rep. Cynthia McKinney first broached this idea before the 2002 primary election, it was considered so nutty it helped make her former Rep. McKinney. Today the Democratic presidential front-runner professes agnosticism as to whether the president of the United States was tipped off about 9/11 by the Saudis, and it goes unnoticed. The virus is spreading.

 

[Big Don]

It should be noted that George W. Bush is not running for any office anywhere.

 

[elder999]

It should be noted that George W. Bush is not running for any office anywhere.

Yer right-golly, "Commander in Chief," and "Leader of the Free World."

Guess that makes him immune to criticism. I didn't know that. Golly.

Gotta agree with the author of that article, though. Howard Dean is deranged.....

Remember this:Howard Dean at his most deranged.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

So right up there with Liberalism is a Mental Disorder by the oh-so-mentally-stable Michael Savage and Voting for Kerry is a Vote for Terrorism (a paraphrasing from the 2004 race, not an actual title) by our morally upstanding friend Dick Cheney, we now have the claim that anyone who criticizes Bush and his administration is suffering from paranoia and derangement.

Think I'll write an article espousing a new syndrome, BCSS: the absolute refusal to acknowledge any of Bush & Co.'s deceptions, irresponsibilities, and disregard for any accountability, and instead see our great leader as the modern-day messiah. Points if you can figure out what BCSS stands for.

 

[Twin Fist]

not everyone Phantom, but as been demonstrated within the last 12 hours on this very forum, some people have an un-healthy obsession. It started with the controversy of the 2000 election, and just got weirder from there.


one funny symptom, if a sick person's illness can be funny, is that people who suffer from BDS can, at the SAME TIME, describe the president as "chimpy McStoopid" and yet credit him with incredibly detailed plots and plans that a genius would have a hard time pulling off.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

not everyone Phantom, but as been demonstrated within the last 12 hours on this very forum, some people have an un-healthy obsession. It started with the controversy of the 2000 election, and just got weirder from there.


one funny symptom, if a sick person's illness can be funny, is that people who suffer from BDS can, at the SAME TIME, describe the president as "chimpy McStoopid" and yet credit him with incredibly detailed plots and plans that a genius would have a hard time pulling off.

Doubtless, there are people who take criticizing the administration too far into conspiracy theories, and it is contradictory to call Bush a dumbass (which he is) and then turn around and say he orchestrated a national deception. Frankly, he is too stupid to come up with that on his own. I think it's more likely that such deceptions were orchestrated by neoconservative figures such as Wolfowitz, Cheney, and Rumsfield, and Bush was just their figurehead.

We can go back and forth about Bush's merits, of course. What is insulting, however, is to be called deranged for being at odds with the administration. The full repercussions of this administration's actions will be felt for decades; indeed, I think their actions have long since eclipsed the Nixon administration, and Nixon was impeached, for cryin' out loud. All of these complaints are brushed off, rather snidely, as a medical disorder, by some political pundit? Sorry, Big Don, but I call BS. Appreciate the unsigned ding, by the way.

Thank you, Twin Fist, for at least being respectful in your response. :asian:

 

[Twin Fist]

Phantom, thats the thing, I am not a huge Bush fan. I think he has made many mistakes, but fair critique is one thing, the un-mitigated hatred and vitriol he gets from the left is out of proportion to his actions and most of it is without proof of any kind.

perfect example, the Coke allegations. 8 YEARS, no evidence, yet every so often it rears it's head.

another example, you called the president a dumbass, lots of people say that. If you say that because you disagree with his decisions, thats fair.

if you say that because he has an accent, or the way he pronounces "nuclear" that isnt fair.

see the difference?

plus, the man does have a masters from an ivy league school and got better grades than Kerry or Gore. Does that make them dumb?

 

[Tez3]

Phantom, thats the thing, I am not a huge Bush fan. I think he has made many mistakes, but fair critique is one thing, the un-mitigated hatred and vitriol he gets from the left is out of proportion to his actions and most of it is without proof of any kind.

perfect example, the Coke allegations. 8 YEARS, no evidence, yet every so often it rears it's head.

another example, you called the president a dumbass, lots of people say that. If you say that because you disagree with his decisions, thats fair.

if you say that because he has an accent, or the way he pronounces "nuclear" that isnt fair.

see the difference?

plus, the man does have a masters from an ivy league school and got better grades than Kerry or Gore. Does that make them dumb?

Well actually since you ask, academic ability has actually nothing to do with being intelligent, having commonsense or morals. It may just mean they can pass exams! While a good many academics are intelligent it's well known in academe that the absent minded professor is more than a myth.
Anyway its things like this- see links - that give us a clue that Bush may not be as well educated as he thinks. He certainly doesn't help his own case does he?
http://www.bobrobles.com/new_page_1.htm

http://politicalhumor.about.com/cs/georgewbush/a/top10bushisms.htm

 

[RandomPhantom700]

another example, you called the president a dumbass, lots of people say that. If you say that because you disagree with his decisions, thats fair.

if you say that because he has an accent, or the way he pronounces "nuclear" that isnt fair.

see the difference?

plus, the man does have a masters from an ivy league school and got better grades than Kerry or Gore. Does that make them dumb?

Yep, in most cases, a masters degree from an ivy league school would indicate that the person is pretty bright. However, I think over the last 8 years, there's been enough misstatements, mispronounciations, substance-less State of the Union addresses, and YouTube moments of Bush being froze like a deer in the headlights to indicate that he really has no idea what he's talking about. Bush's definition of tribal sovereignity comes to mind, I'll have to find that clip.

And no, I dont fault him for his accent, I have a bit of southern slang myself. But if I had a dime for everytime I've rolled my eyes or hung my head in shame at his public addresses, my student loans would be well covered.

As for the distinction between valid critiques and vitriol, I'd suggest glancing at the United Methodist thread, where I'm accused of BDS, simply for saying that I do, indeed, hate the Bush administration. See how easily this BDS label is to throw around?

 

[Tez3]

Bush's definition of tribal sovereignity - no 46 on first link I posted.

 

[tellner]

Ah, yes. Right up there with "You're just a Bush hater". Anyone who doesn't believe exactly what WE want them to is insane or so consumed with hatred that he might as well be. Since there's nothing actually resembling science here - again typical for Republican True Believers - it's enough to make up an imaginary condition.

 

[elder999]

Since there's nothing actually resembling science here - again typical for Republican True Believers - it's enough to make up an imaginary condition.

Maybe we should catalogue the symptoms of "Clinton Derangement Syndrome." :lol:

 

[brianhunter]

For the record I am a registered libertarian.....

I think criticizing the president is a national past time no matter who is in office.

HOWEVER, I have heard Bush directly blamed for everything from wanting "cripples to not walk again" to hornswaggling the world into high oil prices while helping plan 9/11. Either he is an idiot...or he is super intelligent. I do not think you can have it both ways.

The hatred and over the top accusations to me are amazing.

Congress and the Senate have the REAL power in the states. With the supreme court giving the final yeah or nay at times. We have had a Democrat senate AND congress for 2 years and gas prices and the economy are blamed on Bush. They ALL are at fault.

As to him being a dumbass...everyone loves to jump on his speech screw ups....Yet Obama stated he visited all 57 states. If he were Bush we would have that clip looped on MSNBC for 72 hours.

3/4 of our politicians, democrat, republican or whatever do not give a rat's backside about us. The "Bush Hating" is a shell game to keep people off task.

 

[Marginal]

HOWEVER, I have heard Bush directly blamed for everything from wanting "cripples to not walk again" to hornswaggling the world into high oil prices while helping plan 9/11. Either he is an idiot...or he is super intelligent. I do not think you can have it both ways.

Bear in mind, this is the exact kind of rhetoric Bush also tends to engage in, just aimed the other way. I can't see why anyone would get an ulcer worrying over people co-opting the opposition's mode of argumentation.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Bear in mind, this is the exact kind of rhetoric Bush also tends to engage in, just aimed the other way. I can't see why anyone would get an ulcer worrying over people co-opting the opposition's mode of argumentation.

Oh god! no! iT'S CONTAGIOUS! This thread must be quarantined before its wings can take dream!

 

[Nolerama]

I think the paranoia comes from a long list of things that make some people a little... well... paranoid[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]. He tends to lean towards the "Religious Right" in a way that comes off (to a "latte' liberal" like me) as xenophobic, war mongering, and above all else: fanatical. It shows in his policy.

That's what makes me paranoid.

The simple truth is: Bush is no different than any other President we've come across in the past 50 years. He has ties to special interest groups. His politics can be seen as scary to those that oppose him, but if they weren't he probably wouldn't be a US President. He's charismatic to his followers (because many feel that they can sit down and have a beer with Bush.) And he has created an enemy in which many Americans can rally against and fight, thus fueling our military-consumer economic machine.

That works for many Americans, just not all of them. I see how the "other side" could feel that way. Great!

Presidents walk the blade's edge in terms of controversy. It just takes a GW BuSh (haha saw that one in another thread) to make a spectacle of it.

To me, he's an idiot; and idiot in charge that makes me paranoid. That's my right to say it, and my right to feel that way. It just sucks when people don't try to empathize with "the other side" and attempt to see how they feel. Those FOR Bush, he's probably an intriguing, dynamic (an oftentimes "lovable"-- like a Teddy Bear) leader that follows many of the same socio-policial-religious beliefs. Great!

Fine. Have at it. Feel great about his stance on the economy, the occupation of Iraq, and the American Justice system.

But it makes me paranoid, and praying that my vote for candidates stretching down from Presidency to a municipal level makes a change in the future.

[/FONT]"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam [Hussein], which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them." - GW Bush. (sorry, makes me paranoid about the state of things)

 

[Twin Fist]

me, i would much rather a leader seeks guidance from god and his own morality than from opinion polls and lobbyists.

at least this way, you know he is doing what he feels is RIGHT, and I can respect that.

 

[elder999]

at least this way, you know he is doing what he feels is RIGHT, and I can respect that.

Kinda like those guys who flew planes into the World Trade Center, or the ones who blow themselves up in marketplaces......doing what they felt was RIGHT....can you respect THAT???!!!

 

[RandomPhantom700]

me, i would much rather a leader seeks guidance from god and his own morality than from opinion polls and lobbyists.

at least this way, you know he is doing what he feels is RIGHT, and I can respect that.

As elder has pointed out, doing what you believe is right according to whatever deity you follow can lead to the committing of many unjustified attrocities. Additionally, it is the clergy's role to guide according to religion; the President should be making decisions based on what's best for the country. That's the entire idea behind the separation of Church and State.

 

[Twin Fist]

ok,
1) I dont care what Elder says, he is on Ignore for a reason.

2)no, it is NOT

the "idea behind the seperation of church and state" was to prevent the second Church of England, where the state founded a religion, and persecuted other beliefs. it had NOTHING to do with keeping religion out of government, but rather keep government out of religion.

See Jefferson:
"We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries."

Thomas Jefferson disagrees with you Phantom.