|
|
| Author |
Message |
probably
|
|
Bush Fan Club
|
Jun 24 14:47 UTC 2003 |
BRAIN DAMAGE
According to Van Wormer, "scientists can now observe changes that occur
in the brain as a result of heavy alcohol and other drug abuse. Some of
these changes may be permanent."
Van Wormer characterizes this damage as "barely noticeable but
meaningful." Researchers have found that brain chemistry irregularities
caused by long bouts of drinking or drug abuse cause "messages in one
part of the brain to become stuck there. This leads to maddening
repetition of thoughts."
One of these powerful "stuck" thoughts, says van Wormer, is that
"President Bush seems unduly focused upon getting revenge on Saddam
Hussein ('He tried to kill my Dad'), leading the country and the world
into war, accordingly."
Grandiosity is another major trait of former addicts brain-damaged by
their addiction. Bush has reversed the successful, five-decade old U.S.
policy of containment and no first strikes. Now he says, Americans can
attack anyone, anywhere at any time with any weapons of their choosing
including banned cluster bomb munitions, radioactive explosives and
nuclear bombs.
AN AGENT OF ARMAGEDDON?
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, a person suffering
from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, "Has a grandiose sense of
self-importance-exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be
recognized as superior without commensurate achievements."
Sound familiar?
This personality is preoccupied with fantasies of power and being loved.
Such a person requires "automatic compliance". He or she is
"exploitative" of others, "lacks empathy, is unwilling to recognize or
identify with the feelings and needs of others." And also "shows
arrogant, haughty behavior or attitudes."
"This set of characteristics," says Dr. Wolman, not too reassuringly,
"may describe Rumsfeld and Cheney better than Dubya."
For those who, like Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stieglitz, warn that Bush
"has been captured by a small group of ideologues, Dependent Personality
Disorder describes someone who "has difficulty making everyday decisions
without an excessive amount of advice and reassurance from others." [CBC
Feb. 10, 2003]
From a Jungian perspective, writes Dr. Wolman, "Dubya may be identifying
with an archetype something out of Revelations, perhaps, whereby he
sees himself as an instrument of God's will to bring about Armageddon."
Concurs Katherine van Wormer, "To fight evil, Bush is ready to take on
the world, in almost a Biblical sense."
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/04/1600093.php
|
| 76 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 1 of 76:
|
Jun 24 15:05 UTC 2003 |
Sounds too plausible to be plausible.
|
jep
|
|
response 2 of 76:
|
Jun 24 15:36 UTC 2003 |
This was posted before.
|
polygon
|
|
response 3 of 76:
|
Jun 24 16:41 UTC 2003 |
To be blunt, I don't think this stuff matters. GWB is not making any
decisions. He's just a tool who reads speeches.
|
jazz
|
|
response 4 of 76:
|
Jun 24 17:41 UTC 2003 |
I hate it when thoughts get stuck in my head. In my head.
|
tod
|
|
response 5 of 76:
|
Jun 24 18:00 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
jazz
|
|
response 6 of 76:
|
Jun 24 21:19 UTC 2003 |
Shaddap, ya torque wrench.
|
mdw
|
|
response 7 of 76:
|
Jun 24 21:23 UTC 2003 |
I wonder if we can draw any conclusions regarding comparisons of Bush's
brain and the internet?
|
senna
|
|
response 8 of 76:
|
Jun 25 02:44 UTC 2003 |
Al Gore invented one, and lost to the other?
|
sj2
|
|
response 9 of 76:
|
Jun 25 09:28 UTC 2003 |
Well ... All this credits the man with having a brain of some kind!!!
I DISAGREE!!!
|
gull
|
|
response 10 of 76:
|
Jun 25 13:50 UTC 2003 |
Re #3: Well, he doesn't read them very well. ;) I think he
single-handedly demolished all the arguments that you have to look and
sound good to be elected in the TV age.
|
tod
|
|
response 11 of 76:
|
Jun 25 16:15 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 12 of 76:
|
Jun 25 17:27 UTC 2003 |
JFK got assassinated, so we have to say good things about him now. That
might be a good career strategy for George Dubya if he wants history to
treat him kindly.
|
oval
|
|
response 13 of 76:
|
Jun 25 17:47 UTC 2003 |
lol!
|
polygon
|
|
response 14 of 76:
|
Jun 25 17:58 UTC 2003 |
It worked for James A. Garfield.
A friend of his, Andrew Dickson White, former professor at the University
of Michigan, and the first president of Cornell University, wrote in his
autobiography that Garfield's assassin saved his reputation. White was
sure that Garfield's administration would have dissolved in scandal if he
had lived. Given that James G. Blaine was apparently making Garfield's
decisions, that fear was probably well founded.
See "The Autobiography of A. D. White" (1918), and the recent book by
Kenneth Ackerman: "Dark Horse: The Surprise Election and Political Murder
of James A. Garfield".
|
mdw
|
|
response 15 of 76:
|
Jun 25 18:12 UTC 2003 |
According to
http://www.aarrgghh.com/no_way/garfield.htm
Garfield was actually killed by his physicians.
|
polygon
|
|
response 16 of 76:
|
Jun 25 18:23 UTC 2003 |
Re 15. That has been the conventional wisdom for decades. And indeed,
they were shockingly careless, inserting unwashed fingers into the wound
and so on. It was only in the 1880s that medicine was starting to
understand just how antiseptic things needed to be for successful surgery.
However, an analysis of the evidence by surgeons and historians a few
years ago pretty well established that Garfield's doctors could not
possibly have saved him with the technology available at the time.
There was an organ rupture caused by the bullet which wasn't repairable
then.
In other news on the presidential-death conventional-wisdom front, the
story that President Harding was poisoned by his wife has been pretty well
discredited.
|
mdw
|
|
response 17 of 76:
|
Jun 25 18:36 UTC 2003 |
Apparently Garfield lingered for 80 days -- which organ rupture would
have got him no matter what but didn't in 80 days?
|
tod
|
|
response 18 of 76:
|
Jun 25 18:48 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mdw
|
|
response 19 of 76:
|
Jun 25 19:21 UTC 2003 |
Hm. According to
http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g20.htm
garfield's bullet lodged in a "harmless" spot behind the pancreas, and
he probably actually died of "ischemic heart disease" (presumably from
the infections, caused in large part by the doctors.)
According to
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/442239
McKinley probably did die of pancreatitis, and he also died quickly of
it, 8 days. Even today, 27% of people who get "penetrating" wounds to
the pancreas die (luckily such wounds are uncommon).
|
polygon
|
|
response 20 of 76:
|
Jun 25 19:24 UTC 2003 |
Ah, I think it was the pancreas. I will see if I can find the study and
post a citation. If I recall correctly, the new analysis indicated that
the bullet did enough damage to the pancreas that he would have been in a
precarious state from that alone for the rest of his life.
|
tod
|
|
response 21 of 76:
|
Jun 25 19:32 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
sj2
|
|
response 22 of 76:
|
Jun 26 05:33 UTC 2003 |
Heyy!! Get back to bashing GW Bush.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 23 of 76:
|
Jun 30 23:06 UTC 2003 |
Wouldn't that be single minded, raising suspicion of brain damage?
|
sabre
|
|
response 24 of 76:
|
Jul 4 11:51 UTC 2003 |
eat shit Bush bashers
|| ||
|\___/|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
_____|<--->|_____
/ | | \
/ | | | | \
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | |
| | |
| /
| /
\ /
\ /
| |
| |
|