Does Bush have brain damage?

[Pecker]

Originally posted by mindseye@Jul 30 2004, 11:20 AM
I'll agree that the number of minds out there that are open to change is very small, but they're still out there. If there were no undecided voters in the population, both parties would save a bundle on advertising.

I agree. However, my point (not well explained) is that these discussions on LPSG usually take place between the already converted.

It's like a Bible study between a devout Christian and a practicing Jew. They'll be excited about presenting their understanding of scripture. They'll take a certain pride in showing how the writings have affected their lives. But, try as they might, they won't convert each other.

But maybe, if they don't sling any mud or resort to name calling, they'll understand each other's point of view a little better.

 

[madame_zora]

Javier, Mindseye got me right about what I said about Tender. It was not her views, but the way she expressed them that annoyed the holy shit out of me! I do not seek to convert anyone, believe me! I am glad we are all different, I learn more from the people whose views oppose mine than from the ones who agree, although those feel more "warm and fuzzy". I have always enjoyed your posts here, and I'm sorry you misunderstood mine. I will try to be clearer about my intent in the future. I know there are many conservatives here, and I completely respect everyone's right to vote, speak, and feel how they see fit. As a side note, my opinions on the subject topic are from my own experience and from 11 years of researching the issues, along with knowing hundreds of alcoholics personally. There is a huge difference between "dry" and "sober", and this is a disticntion not well known by the public at large, so I was offering an insight that some may not be familiar with. I was not attacking the political views of anyone!

Pecker, thanks for the backup, bro! I was guilty of slinging mud at Tender, tho- she got to me for some reason. Most people will eventually get to a "live and let live" position in a debate, but like Mindseye said, she just stuck her fingers in her ears and kept repeating "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right" even though she almost NEVER had any rationale to back up her thoughts. Very frustrating. Most of us site some kind of evidence other than "I think so therefore it's true", THAT'S why I was glad she left. I was glad she deleted her posts because so many were chock full of hate rhetoric toward gays, which I found completely nauseating.


Whatever my personal views are on religion, politics, sex or whatever, I am not a closed minded person who does not consider other views. In fact, the whole reason I post in this thread is to learn from everyone, this is often as close to the news as I get for days! Thanks to everyone who posts articles and newsclips, it really does make a difference to me.

 

[KinkGuy]

I would like to think we are all open to discussions, even arguments. We all have our positions in life...politics, religion and even who(m)? we are inclined to have sex with. The difference is, arguing or judging and making sure everyone knows about the judgments. Tender was judgmental, Madame Zora may incite dialogue, there is a difference. The dear Madame, nor anyone else on the board has ever told me I am going to hell and deserve it. They may not agree with my opinions, hell, they may not even like me....but they generally don't inform me and numerous other members that their lifestyles, sexual habits and politics are damnable. Many, many of us devoted many, many hours to this person, not necessarily trying to change her opinions, but in trying to educate, and show how much hate and hostility was contained in her statements. All to absolutely no avail. You all should have copies of the PM's I received, shocking that those positions and statements could be posted and sent by a good, upstanding, Christian, married mother....visiting a website about cock.

 

[ponybilt]

Originally posted by Javierdude22+Jul 30 2004, 08:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Javierdude22 @ Jul 30 2004, 08:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-madame_zora@Jul 29 2004, 11:58 PM
As I stated earlier, I found rthe article entirely credible, based on my own knowledge of hundreds of alcoholics over the past 11 years. Tender, thankfully, withdrew her comments and her presence from this board.

If someone on the board is confronted by their views, maybe very different from theirs, deal with it. Discuss it, debate it, learn from eachothers opinions.
[/b][/quote]
Umm, that would mean that we&#39;re all acting like adults and actually debating. Stating something with dogma, making unqualified arguments (silly, even), and stomping out when you can&#39;t get your point across (or perhaps can&#39;t get your way), isn&#39;t a debate and it doesn&#39;t lead to any greater understanding of each others&#39; views.

As Madame points out, it&#39;s not what Tender said, but the delivery. Honestly, as I&#39;ve read this thread all of T&#39;s posts come across as a tantrum -- talk about being in kindergaarten.

Critical analysis skills aren&#39;t the sole domain of liberals.

My 2 cents.

 

[13788]

Javierdude22: I understand the remark, but God...we&#39;ve had worse around here.

Anyway...I read the article, and although she makes a plausible story, the correlation between the factors she names and heavy drinking is at best weak, and probably spurrious.

The average Muslim in the Middle East uses the same rigid tone in their speeches, the same extreme choice of words, and show a clear tendency towards paranoia. If they live by their faith though, they probably haven&#39;t even had an alcoholfilled bon-bon.

Furthermore, many Republican &#39;hawks&#39; have expressed the same choice of words, visions, and extremity, without much hesitation. Rummy and Cheney are good examples.

I also think the article gives Bush a bit too much credit. I really doubt he ever wrote many of his speeches, let alone come up with that choice of words. It probably does fit his thinking, but it also fits half of America&#39;s thinking. They ate his words like it was candy, and still support him.

So yeah, it&#39;s a fun article, but hardly scientific. I can understand where Pecker is coming from. It&#39;s obvious we have a strong liberal constituency on here. I consider myself mostly on the Democratic side as well. But dang...the Bushbashing indeed is starting to look like preaching before the choir. Walking into any Barnes and Nobles bookstore I started to seriously yawn...money grabbing vultures with popular eye catching titles like &#39;Bush must Go&#39; &#39;Bushwacked&#39; etc. produce books like it&#39;s going outta fashion. They all say the same boring, subjective stuff, over and over again...in books with lettertype 23. That&#39;ll get ya the 200 pages.

I started to seriously look for pro-Bush books, seemed far more interesting to find out what the Bush support is all about. This article seems to be more of the same as well. We&#39;ve heard it all before, nobody cares.

So like I said, fun, hardly new, hardly scientific, plausible at best.

 

[ponybilt]

Originally posted by Javierdude22@Jul 31 2004, 02:44 PM
But dang...the Bushbashing indeed is starting to look like preaching before the choir. Walking into any Barnes and Nobles bookstore I started to seriously yawn...money grabbing vultures with popular eye catching titles like &#39;Bush must Go&#39; &#39;Bushwacked&#39; etc. produce books like it&#39;s going outta fashion. They all say the same boring, subjective stuff, over and over again...in books with lettertype 23. That&#39;ll get ya the 200 pages.

I started to seriously look for pro-Bush books, seemed far more interesting to find out what the Bush support is all about. This article seems to be more of the same as well. We&#39;ve heard it all before, nobody cares.

Funny you should mention that, becasue I noticed the same thing about a month ago at a B&N. I first came across the pro-Bush/anti-Hillary/anti-Democrat books and thought, "Oh no..." and then I realized the other side of the table was only half filled with pro-Dem books.

So there seems to be a fair amount (equal or not) of bashing on both ends -- unfortunately 90% of it all is blah blah blah

:blink:

 

[mindseye]

Originally posted by Javierdude22@Jul 31 2004, 10:44 AM
The average Muslim in the Middle East uses the same rigid tone in their speeches, the same extreme choice of words, and show a clear tendency towards paranoia. If they live by their faith though, they probably haven&#39;t even had an alcoholfilled bon-bon.

Out of curiosity, how many Middle Eastern Muslims does one have to know to be able to make claims about how the "average" one behaves?

 

[13788]

Javierdude22:

Originally posted by mindseye@Jul 31 2004, 10:01 PM
Out of curiosity, how many Middle Eastern Muslims does one have to know to be able to make claims about how the "average" one behaves?

Yeah, average is definately an exaggeration, should be &#39;many&#39;.

 

[madame_zora]

Originally posted by Javierdude22@Jul 31 2004, 02:44 PM


Anyway...I read the article, and although she makes a plausible story, the correlation between the factors she names and heavy drinking is at best weak, and probably spurrious.


Furthermore, many Republican &#39;hawks&#39; have expressed the same choice of words, visions, and extremity, without much hesitation. Rummy and Cheney are good examples.

I also think the article gives Bush a bit too much credit. I really doubt he ever wrote many of his speeches, let alone come up with that choice of words. It probably does fit his thinking, but it also fits half of America&#39;s thinking. They ate his words like it was candy, and still support him.

So yeah, it&#39;s a fun article, but hardly scientific. This article seems to be more of the same as well. We&#39;ve heard it all before, nobody cares.

So like I said, fun, hardly new, hardly scientific, plausible at best.

Actually, the correlations she names are well known in AA circles, and while you may not find that credible, I do. If you have not personally researched alcoholism issues and personality types, I wonder what your basis is for dismissal of one who has? Her article was adressing his inability to think on his own, not his speeches. Everyone knows he has speeck writers. She adressed his "manner of speech" as what he says on his own, for which he is well known for bloopers and putting his foot in his mouth.

As for not being new, I haven&#39;t read very much on Bush&#39;s past. There have been quiet undercurrents of speculation, but very little based on actually trying to delve into it with any real research being done. I find this amazing since he is known to have had issues with both alcohol and cocaine- why doesn&#39;t anyone really ever talk about it? I don&#39;t believe the topic would be so "hush" if it were Kerry ( or Gore, or any other Democrat). She used information from his college test scores, quoted various studies, not just her own, and is a specialist in the feild of Alcoholism research, no I guess that&#39;s not very scientific&#33;

 

[jonb]

Actually, Bush acts like a lot of FAS/FAE children I&#39;ve seen. FAS/FAE children have problems with their temporal lobes, which would certainly explain the cult of Ronald Reagan that Republicans have built up. (What&#39;s interesting is, the Reagans are either endorsing Kerry or staying out of the election altogether. I did enjoy Ron Jr&#39;s little biology lecture at the Democrat convention: Those embryos are going to die whether we use them for stem cells or not.)

 

[madame_zora]

Okay, Jon, what does FAS/FAE stand for?

 

[13788]

Javierdude22:

Originally posted by madame_zora+Aug 1 2004, 01:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (madame_zora @ Aug 1 2004, 01:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Javierdude22@Jul 31 2004, 02:44 PM


Anyway...I read the article, and although she makes a plausible story, the correlation between the factors she names and heavy drinking is at best weak, and probably spurrious.


Furthermore, many Republican &#39;hawks&#39; have expressed the same choice of words, visions, and extremity, without much hesitation. Rummy and Cheney are good examples.

I also think the article gives Bush a bit too much credit. I really doubt he ever wrote many of his speeches, let alone come up with that choice of words. It probably does fit his thinking, but it also fits half of America&#39;s thinking. They ate his words like it was candy, and still support him.

So yeah, it&#39;s a fun article, but hardly scientific. This article seems to be more of the same as well. We&#39;ve heard it all before, nobody cares.

So like I said, fun, hardly new, hardly scientific, plausible at best.

Actually, the correlations she names are well known in AA circles, and while you may not find that credible, I do. If you have not personally researched alcoholism issues and personality types, I wonder what your basis is for dismissal of one who has? Her article was adressing his inability to think on his own, not his speeches. Everyone knows he has speeck writers. She adressed his "manner of speech" as what he says on his own, for which he is well known for bloopers and putting his foot in his mouth.

As for not being new, I haven&#39;t read very much on Bush&#39;s past. There have been quiet undercurrents of speculation, but very little based on actually trying to delve into it with any real research being done. I find this amazing since he is known to have had issues with both alcohol and cocaine- why doesn&#39;t anyone really ever talk about it? I don&#39;t believe the topic would be so "hush" if it were Kerry ( or Gore, or any other Democrat). She used information from his college test scores, quoted various studies, not just her own, and is a specialist in the feild of Alcoholism research, no I guess that&#39;s not very scientific&#33; [/b][/quote]
Madame Zora,

My point was not that she isn&#39;t credible, I don&#39;t remember even using that word, but that the relation she establishes between his drinking and his choice of words is probably spurrious. My point is that there could be a thousand other factors that could lead him to use those kinds of words, or his frequent bloopers. One of them could be his rightist upbringing, or his religion. Let&#39;s also not forget he is dyslexic, or is that merely a rumour?

So like I said, it is a plausible story, but hardly scientific, because I don&#39;t think she did extra research to cancel out the other factors that could have led him to his behaviour. Untill she has, it is hardly proven, regardless of her experience with drinking behaviour.

 

[madame_zora]

Javier, I actually emailed her privately, her addy was on one of the articles and she responded the same day. She did a great amount of research and was very willing to talk about it. It was interesting for me because it is a subject I know a bit about, so I am defending her work from what I feel is an educated place. I&#39;m not saying she&#39;s definitively right, but I will say she put far more effort into her views than many who write such articles do.

Interestingly enough, you bring up dyslexia, which I also have. As it turns out, this is a common thread amoung alcoholics as well, many of us are dyslexic. I don&#39;t think one causes the other, I just think there is a higher incidence of dyslexics who are alcoholic. While it causes confusion and adds difficulty in "sorting things out", it really wouldn&#39;t affect one&#39;s ability to respond in an appropriate manner to a question just because one&#39;s speechwriter hadn&#39;t prepared an answer. She said that while his SAT scores were slightly above average, his grades in college were in the c&#39;s. These are matters of public record, not opinions. Sounds to me like someone who didn&#39;t feel the need to apply himself, whether that be because of his family status, frustration with dyslexia, alcoholism and substance abuse, I really couldn&#39;t say. I do know I&#39;d feel more confidant with a leader of the free world who had a few less issues, or who had made a more marked investment in overcomming them. Just my opinion.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM
Okay, Jon, what does FAS/FAE stand for?

Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. FAE is Fetal Alcohol Effects, which means they act like FAS, but they don&#39;t have the Down syndrome look.

 

[madame_zora]

Oh okay. I actually know nothing about that. Is it related to down syndrome?

I wouldn&#39;t go so far as to say the shrub is actually retarded in the classical sense, but more that his thinking processes seem stunted- not fully developed as they should be for a man his age. Knowing that 1). He&#39;s had well documented substance abuse issues and 2). He doesn&#39;t own up to it and there&#39;s no record of him having attended any kind of treatment center or recovery groups, and 3) He exhibits familiar signs of alcoholic personality traits it seems fair to asses him as a "dry drunk". If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck......

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Aug 1 2004, 08:51 PM
Oh okay. I actually know nothing about that. Is it related to down syndrome?

I wouldn&#39;t go so far as to say the shrub is actually retarded in the classical sense, but more that his thinking processes seem stunted- not fully developed as they should be for a man his age. Knowing that 1). He&#39;s had well documented substance abuse issues and 2). He doesn&#39;t own up to it and there&#39;s no record of him having attended any kind of treatment center or recovery groups, and 3) He exhibits familiar signs of alcoholic personality traits it seems fair to asses him as a "dry drunk". If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck......

It&#39;s not related to Down syndrome; one&#39;s genetic and one&#39;s because the mother drank while she was pregnant. However, FAS has the same appearance, e.g. flat face, kinda Chinese-looking eyes.

I&#39;d agree he has those signs of substance abuse. Alcohol, maybe a bit of cocaine . . .

 

[madame_zora]

Yeah, and the funny thing about cocaine is- there is no such thing as a "social snorter"&#33; Alcoholism can sneak up on a person without their realizing it, alcohol is legal, and accepted- even encouraged in some settings. But everyone knows cocaine is illegal, and highly addictive. There aren&#39;t too many people who do coke on "special occasions" like weddings, birthdays, etc. so it is a little unnerving to me that someone who is able to cross the legal and moral boundaries to accomodate himself is now the sitting president. More serious than a blow job? You bet your ass.

 

[13788]

Javierdude22:

Originally posted by madame_zora@Aug 1 2004, 12:30 PM

I do know I&#39;d feel more confidant with a leader of the free world who had a few less issues, or who had made a more marked investment in overcomming them. Just my opinion.

O, I completely agree with that&#33; I do know of his alcoholism, even of his alleged cocaine habits in the earlier days (so I hope). I do wish someone with a record somewhat cleaner than his would be pushing the &#39;this could destroy the world&#39; buttons.

I find it disturbing, like many said before, with how much this president has gotten away, be it politically or personally. I also think the media did way too little to come up with the facts, or at least to hold on to them long enough so people would get to know about them instead of a quick mentioning in the &#39;brief news&#39; section.

My only comfort is the two term maximum...but I&#39;ll bet Jeb&#39;s fingers are itching already..

 

[madame_zora]

Originally posted by Javierdude22+Aug 2 2004, 11:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Javierdude22 @ Aug 2 2004, 11:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-madame_zora@Aug 1 2004, 12:30 PM

I do know I&#39;d feel more confidant with a leader of the free world who had a few less issues, or who had made a more marked investment in overcomming them. Just my opinion.

O, I completely agree with that&#33; I do know of his alcoholism, even of his alleged cocaine habits in the earlier days (so I hope). I do wish someone with a record somewhat cleaner than his would be pushing the &#39;this could destroy the world&#39; buttons.

I find it disturbing, like many said before, with how much this president has gotten away, be it politically or personally. I also think the media did way too little to come up with the facts, or at least to hold on to them long enough so people would get to know about them instead of a quick mentioning in the &#39;brief news&#39; section.

My only comfort is the two term maximum...but I&#39;ll bet Jeb&#39;s fingers are itching already.. [/b][/quote]
Javier, I would feel more comfortable about the two term max. if I had not seen what one term has done already&#33; I am seriously afraid of finding ourselves in a country, four more years down the road, where many of our civil liberties are gone, Social security is fucked, healthcare is almost no more, mandated prayer in schools- some very Orwellian things are just on the horizon of becomming reality, and that&#39;s just not the America I want.

I think the thing that bothers me is that many people will vote for bush because they agree with his ideas, which is fine, but they fail to see that once the government is allowed to make our decisions for something we want, they will also do it for things we don&#39;t want. Preserving our freedoms vehemently is important whether we like abortion, gay marriage, separation of church and state (god, I can&#39;t believe we are even still fighting this one) or any kind of equality issues. If we as a whole country don&#39;t stand up for being free, we may very soon be far less so.

 

[jonb]

AFAIAC, social drinking is like partial pregnancy.