Is bush unstable (mentally)??


Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
#1
Quote:

By David Brownlow
November 15, 2005
NewsWithViews.com

We are no longer able to hide from the obvious fact that something is very, very wrong with our President. His inability to admit, learn from, or even comprehend his mistakes has become pathologic. This anomaly is now seriously affecting his capacity to lead our nation.

As we observe President Bush sink further into an advanced stage of delusion and denial, we need to understand that we are dealing with a mentally unstable – and therefore an extremely dangerous - man. Our continued failure to deal with this situation has left our nation in a position of grave and imminent danger.

Too much is at stake to let our personal feelings or partisan politics get in the way of doing what needs to be done. It is time to remove President Bush from office. Members of the U.S. Congress should do their duty by beginning the impeachment proceedings immediately.

That analysis may sound harsh, but just look at how bad things have gotten. The President’s recent speeches are riddled with statements that could only have been made by a man who is rapidly losing his grip on reality. Case in point: During a Veterans Day speech at Tobyhanna Army Depot in Pennsylvania, the President demonstrated he has absolutely no idea why our men and women are still dying in Iraq. Bush said:

"As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them."

Now seriously, does anyone on this earth other than George Bush really believe the Iraqi people are a “ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life?” If the President actually believes that, in light of all the evidence to the contrary, then his mental condition is worse than we thought.

The Iraqi people are not our enemies. (Or at least they weren’t before we turned most of their country into a Depleted Uranium nuclear wasteland) Even their former dictator, who was a genuine moron, was smart enough to know that threatening to attack us would be suicide. Then there is the Iraqi army, which our guys tore through in a couple days, barely even slowing down on the way to Baghdad. And we are to believe the President when he says the Iraqis are a “ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life?” What a completely ludicrous thought!

For the President of the United States to believe something so absurdly wrong means he is living in a kind of alternate reality. That is not a very comforting thought considering he is already talking the same kind of pre-Iraqi war “imminent threat” propaganda when referring to Iran and Syria. Somebody needs to stop that man before he decides to invade some other hapless country.

The President went on in the same speech to say:

"While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began."

The “history of how the war began” is no longer in dispute, and to claim otherwise is “deeply irresponsible,” if not completely nuts. In the months leading up to the invasion, our leaders went on a campaign of fearmongering using evidence (much of it received from Iranian CIA double agents) that we now know to be false. High-level Bush administration officials, as well as the President himself, repeated over and over again the outrageous notion that Iraq posed an imminent threat to America. This propaganda campaign quite literally scared our nation into going off to war.

We have proven that every accusation made against Iraq was wrong. Iraq never posed a threat to America and had nothing to do with 9/11. They did not even have a functioning army! Everything we were told about the imminent Iraqi threat was based on completely false information - and it had been from day one.

That is the history of the war. It is well-documented and cannot be denied. No one needs to “rewrite” anything.

It is quite alarming that the President is still trying to deny the truth of how we got ourselves into the Iraqi quagmire. Clearly, there was a lot of false information disseminated by his administration before and after the invasion. But, does this mean the President is lying to us? Maybe, as many of his defenders are saying, the President actually believes what he has been saying.

OK. So let’s give President Bush the benefit of the doubt when he says he believed that the pre-war WMD and imminent danger stories were true, and that he had no intention of misleading this nation into war. Let’s take him at his word now when he says he still believes the war is justified – even to the point of authorizing secret CIA torture camps. Let us not dispute that he believes the history of the war is the honorable one he portrays. Let’s believe him when he says he is convinced that staying in Iraq is central to the war on terror.

The fact is however, it would be better for our country if Bush had lied. If the President actually believes everything that has come across his teleprompter lately, then this is far worse than simply having another lying President. Liars we can deal with.

Crazy Presidents we cannot.

We are faced with a situation where there are few ways to explain away George Bush’s increasingly odd behavior. He seems to have gone off into a fantasyland at exactly the moment in history when we need a man at the helm who can understand what a terrible blunder we made by invading Iraq.


hmmmmmm... what was their first clue ?? ( about bush's instability)
 
no1important
#2
Quote:

"While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began."

When I heard this part I thought, wtf. Man he has a warped sense of thinking.

The war began with lies and bs and thats how history will show it, he started the "war" on false pretences and lied about it.

There was no Iraqi involvement in 9/11, no wmd, hell no army really either. He intended to go in once he was elected and 9/11 became a handy excuse, as he was able to con the masses, that were rallied due to 9/11 that Iraq was a threat.

Bush belongs in a cell. He has more blood on his hands than Osama. He is responsible for many more deaths.
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by no1important

Quote:

"While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began."

When I heard this part I thought, wtf. Man he has a warped sense of thinking.

The war began with lies and bs and thats how history will show it, he started the "war" on false pretences and lied about it.

There was no Iraqi involvement in 9/11, no wmd, hell no army really either. He intended to go in once he was elected and 9/11 became a handy excuse, as he was able to con the masses, that were rallied due to 9/11 that Iraq was a threat.

Bush belongs in a cell. He has more blood on his hands than Osama. He is responsible for many more deaths.

his remarks ( the one you quoted) verifies that he belongs in a quiet room......with shades drawn and waiting for his next dose of medication............

as if he had half a brain........he would welcome a rewriting of how this mess started. At least then we would have some semblance of truth.-------well, maybe. As it stands the "history" he wants to preserve is all a fecking lie.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#4
Do you think liberatiion is blood-free?

The world thought Saddam had WMD. Except, of course, for the UN weapons inspectors. How long were you willing to let Saddam ignore the peace agreement made after the first Gulf War?

The article says "Now seriously, does anyone on this earth other than George Bush really believe the Iraqi people are a “ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life?” If the President actually believes that, in light of all the evidence to the contrary, then his mental condition is worse than we thought."

The writer is being obtuse. Bush does not believe he is fighting the Iraqi people, he is fighting Islamic extremism. The war in Iraq did not begin in that arena, as Saddam was a secular monster, but the Islamists have carried their fight to Iraq.

Good. We'll kill them there.

Has nobody noticed that there has not been an attack on "The Great Satan" in over 4 years of war?

Perhaps Bush s more of a success than you think.

DEATH TO TYRANTS.
 
Reverend Blair
-1
#5
How long was it between the first WTC bombing and 9-11, Colpy? There goes your proof that Georgie's illegal wars have accomplished anything.

This was never a war for liberation and you know it, or should be able to figure it out. If Bush is so interested in liberation and democracy, how do explain Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Uzbekistan? Colombia? You can't because Bush doesn't give a flying feck about liberation or democracy. He cares about oil. He cares about keeping it away from the Russians and the French and the Chinese. He cares about making sure that Exxon gets the contracts.
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
#6
Quote:

Do you think liberatiion is blood-free?


of course not. We have seen the blood shed when the Iraqis have been liberated from their limbs , and lives.But this of course is Eagle nation style.
 
EagleSmack
+1
#7
Ahhhhh.... a trip down memory lane!

The tears flowed then as well.
 
Murphy
Conservative
+2
#8  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

Ahhhhh.... a trip down memory lane!

The tears flowed then as well.

I guess anyone who OB doesn't like is crazy. A recurring theme for her it seems.
 
DaSleeper
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack View Post

Ahhhhh.... a trip down memory lane!

The tears flowed then as well.

Poor poor Breezy....such disappointment.......
 
petros
#10
The anxiety lady.
 
EagleSmack
#11
... and unstable.
 

Similar Threads

54
Parliament makes Canada unstable: PM
by Tonington | Jan 25th, 2010
0
NASA plan for unstable astronauts
by sanctus | Feb 25th, 2007