1
   

The President is plainly plastered

 
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:08 pm
Don't you mean things which Clinton set in motion?
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:10 pm
I'm not so confident, Soz. The fundy, right-wing agenda still has a lot more support than I'm comfortable with - witness yesterday's Constitutional amendment in Texas. I don't know who the Dems will come up with for the next round, but if it's Hillary we're in trouble.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:11 pm
Hee hee, OK, Phoenix, I'll lay off.

Sturgis, no, I don't.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:13 pm
Completely agreed there, J_B. I like Hillary fine as a person, as a first lady, as a Senator, what have you, I will just scream and rend my hair if she is the Democratic candidate in 2008.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:15 pm
Kucinich
vote early
vote often.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:18 pm
I'll scream and rend my hair if it's Kucinich, too, and I like the guy.

Who WON'T make me scream and rend my hair? I dunno. There are the people I like, and the people who are electable, and it's rare that they share the same body.

Obama? Possibly.
Feingold? Yes/no -- love the guy, too much in the Kucinich mold
Bill Richardson? Maybe.

I dunno.

We'll see.
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:23 pm
I think we should all get together and push for Newt Gingrich to register as a Democrat...
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:24 pm
I was going to post earlier that I respected Phoenix for admintting that she made a horrible mistake for voting for the monster in the White House.

Most Bush voters don't have such courage -- they will stand blindly behind that freak in order to save face, while deep down inside they are screaming in pain.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:25 pm
If it were Newt I think I'd add some garment-tearing, or flagellation, or something.

-sigh-
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:25 pm
Good point, Gus.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:58 pm
Ahem, the not particularly well shown telltale rash is rosacea. Alcohol can do it and so can at least thirty other things, and it tends to happen to people of certain heritages.

I have a little of it and I do drink. I have a friend who has significant rosacea and has a glass of wine once every few months.

I'm not a fan of Bush much less his next-in-lines. Hate is not the right word - total despair is closer. Still, don't paint everyone with a telltale rash with fifth a day habit.

Ah, I've waxed on about this on a2k before, but I tend to believe in performance criteria. 'nuff said.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 07:09 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
soz- I already said that I messed up when I hit the button for Bush. He has turned out to be a terrible, and dangerous leader. OK, am I forgiven by all you guys who were attempting to change my mind?

That's my last mea culpa, and I am saying no more about it!!! Neutral


No.

The entire international contingent of A2k blames you, too.


We can't blame the actual rusted on Bushies, they are clearly not mentally competent!

Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 08:42 pm
gustavratzenhofer wrote:
I was going to post earlier that I respected Phoenix for admintting that she made a horrible mistake for voting for the monster in the White House.

Most Bush voters don't have such courage -- they will stand blindly behind that freak in order to save face, while deep down inside they are screaming in pain.


hear hear
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 08:47 pm
where where
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 09:45 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
gustavratzenhofer wrote:
I was going to post earlier that I respected Phoenix for admintting that she made a horrible mistake for voting for the monster in the White House.

Most Bush voters don't have such courage -- they will stand blindly behind that freak in order to save face, while deep down inside they are screaming in pain.


hear hear



Indeed.

Hear hear Phoenix.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 11:38 pm
dyslexia wrote:
I'm pretty sure neither Richard Nixon nor Jimmy Carter took strong drink, what does that tell us?

No, but Nixon sure hit the sedatives, as has been documented.

Of course, though I hate Nixon, I have to say something in his defense here. In the early seventies, doctors were prescribing drugs like candy. Antidepressants all over the place. Kids were getting ritalin.

Want to lose a few pounds? No problem, the doctor will prescribe some nice amphetamine pills.

So Nixon, in his last days, was indeed zonked. But it was considered okay then, because the doctor gave him a prescription.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 11:50 pm
If I recall, in Nixon's final days, he was reported to have wandered the halls drunk, talking to statues.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 11:53 pm
Quote:
For example, in discussing Nixon's drinking and his alcoholic sessions with Bebe Rebozo, Isaacson writes on page 263:

"That was the excuse that Kissinger often used when defending Nixon: When he was tired and under strain, Kissinger would say, Nixon would begin slurring his words after just one or two drinks, even if he wasn't really drunk. Still, Nixon's drinking became unsettling to Kissinger, who barely drank at all. He would poke fun at 'my drunken friend' the way people joke about things that truly scare them.
"The drinking was also a festering issue among his staff, who often listened in on the slurred late-night conversations. Kissinger used this to his advantage; he needed their support, he would tell aides, because as they alone knew, he was the one man who kept 'that drunken lunatic' from doing things that would 'blow up the world.'"



http://www.trussel.com/hf/kissingr.htm
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 12:00 am
Quote:
The signs have been there for too long. Bush fell off a couch after, his aides say, "falling asleep." He has appeared in public with bruises on his face, the kind of injuries a person would suffer from falling in alcohol-impaired conditions. He disappears from public view for extended periods, takes more vacations than other Presidents.....


See, this is the part that convinces me.

People don't fall down and hurt their face. The body automatically responds by throwing the hands in front of the face. I have never fallen on my face, ever.

You might hurt your wrist, your elbow, or your knee. But unless you are strongly under the influence of something, you won't fall on your face.

And I don't want to hear any half-baked litany of injuries that have happened to members on this forum about their knees, ankles, etc. I am talking about standing or walking on the floor, not on a ladder, and falling forward and hitting your face. Fact is, you have to be pie-eyed drunk to do it, it is as simple as that. That is why when people are found dead in their homes from falls, alcohol is almost always indicated.

If one is on a ladder, I can see falling off and hitting your face, because we are not used to falling from a height. We are very skilled, since childhood, in falling forward from ground level, but not on a ladder. Or the misuse of power tools can cause a facial injury.

But Bush does not get up on ladders, because maintenance is done by White House staff. Similarly, Bush has no reason to use power tools to fix anything. That is also done by staff.

So tell me, how does a physically fit, former athlete of sorts, who has a nice quiet mansion to walk around in, end up injuring his face twice his first year in office?

Don't tell me you actually buy that "choking on a pretzel and hit my face on the furniture trying to dislodge it" bit.

And the extended Crawford trips make it all the more likely. Why so many trips? Because on the Crawford ranch, in relative privacy Bush can get the tereatment he need to either,
A) get off drinking or
B) prevent a relapse.

Ihn Washington, it would have been impossible to keep such treatment out of the public eye. In Crawford, it would bee much easier.

For all I know, the strategy might have worked, and Bush might well have been dry since his first year. But there is little doubt that Bush was drinking heavily his first year, at least on a couple of occasions.

Because you have to be very, very drunk before you are unable to automatically throw your hands up in front of your face while falling forward.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 06:43 am
but keltic, he was way up on a couch. Laughing
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 03:03:57