Presidential race in 2008

[loncray]

From a certain point of view, you could say that just about anybody who is a serious Presidential candidate (or even Congressional) is probably an addictive personality of some sort. Just the raw ambition that it takes to go thru the election process seems like sort of addictive behavior in itself. Addiction to power/fame maybe? JFK and Bush41 (and Jimmy Carter) were Navy officers (a driven bunch to be sure), Reagan a successful actor, Johnson, Nixon and Clinton successful politicians (say what you want about any of them, they had the tenacity to get elected President) - even Bush43 was a major state governor. Is the drive to get to that high an office addictive in itself?

 

[illflem]

What makes you think I voted for Clinton? Is it just because I dislike your god George?

I'm just waiting for him to declare he's the second coming.



Rusty, you don't get it, I won't waste my time explaining the difference between mind altering substances and junk food.

 

[RustyJC]

Originally posted by illflem

Rusty, you don't get it, I won't waste my time explaining the difference between mind altering substances and junk food.

No, Bill, I do get it. Insofar as addictive behavior is concerned, there is no difference. Some addictions are just socially acceptable, or at least used to be (smoking, for example).



Rusty

 

[Boomer II]

So your opinon is based on being a friend of the spouse of a substance abuse counselor, WOW!! My friends spouse is a pilot, but I wouldn't tell you how to fly a plane. Your ignorance of alcoholism and alcoholics is astounding.

 

[loncray]

Attacking the Messenger

I'm not any sort of expert on alcoholism - but what did illflem say that isn't true? Y'all are jumping on him for an OPINION he has about the President - which he gives HIS reason for having. So what's the truth if his opinion isn't it? Bush43 is an admitted alcoholic - simple fact, no denying it. That means he got addicted to alcohol, also simple fact. So what's untrue about the post?

 

[RustyJC]

Originally posted by illflem

In my opinion a person with addictive tendencies just shows weak personality traits and never should be trusted even if they are reformed.

Well, there's one real problem area I have with it. Addictive tendencies cover a lot more than just booze and drugs. In addition to the examples I pointed out, some obese people are addicted to food. Some gamblers are addicted to gambling. The addiction mechanism is the same in all these cases. Are all individuals who have ever been addicted to anything covered by illflem's broad brush disqualification, even if they are reformed? It would appear so since they all have "addictive tendencies", right?



Rusty

 

[loncray]

Good point - it IS a rather broad brush statement, even if he meant only people who've been addicted to illegal drugs or alcohol. My addiction to caffeine (down to 2 cups of coffee a day, and no caffeinated sodas) used to be nasty - and I don't like to think it would disqualify me for public office.

 

[MGordon]

This “dry drunk” nonsense is a result of an article by Katherine van Wormer a Professor of Social Work at the University of Northern Iowa. This article has been relentlessly passed around the liberal internet sites under the premise that if you tell a lie often enough and loud enough people will be duped into believing that it is the truth.



Katherine van Wormer is an avowed far left liberal, probably left of Teddy Kennedy. Some of her other “scholarly” works include:



Are Males Suited to Police Patrol Work?

Capital Punishment as State-Assisted Suicide.

The Military Presence on Campus: An Indirect Threat to the Environment.

Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders.



I guess you have to consider the source.

 

[coldsteel]

Where did the chevy guys come from????I. E. were gonna need A V. I. N# on that report of dry drunks... A manufacture date on the alcohol GBJ consumed that caused him to become a dry drunk. . and possibly a oil sample... opps i mean a blood sample... . and well Illflem would u mind taking a lie detector test??Maybe a article in the TDR discussing Dry drunk theories... Illflem sees to be a honest man in the 2 years i've been on here. . and i find it hard to believe that he would make this stuff up. . but we all can make are own decisions on what we believe... . Maybe if we ask illflem to find some more info on dry drunks we can make a more educated decision before we shoot him down?... on a serious note anybody into competitive bass fishing? I hate when "other" goes into politics. . we need more fishing posts... hot bass bait in your neck of the woods?

 

[illflem]

Wormer isn't the only one by any means.

All I know is Bush's behavior since he's been president and the causes of it in his past have changed this redneck arms bearing Republican veteran forever. If it did this to a hardcore like me I have to think there are many others who feel the same way. All I had to do is open my eyes. Shortly after Bush took office I started wondering if something wasn't quite right with him even though I supported him right into Afghanistan. When he got onto his one track attack Iraq mode I was positive something was definitely wrong with him. Around about the same time my friend's wife explained what was going on, I was in shock, I knew nothing about the dark side of his past. All it took was a little searching on the net to prove without doubt it's all true.



Once the people are in the privacy of their ballot booth without fear of being labeled an anti-American liberal terrorist by the vocal mob we'll see things change. It really doesn't matter who runs against him, GW is finished.



Here's a series of articles, stretching back to September of last year. Taken together, they paint a chilling portrait of Bush as an addictive personality who is working through unresolved issues stemming from his history of alcoholism and a sense of inferiority in comparison with his academically gifted, war-hero father.

Of course Bush supporters will dismiss it as a liberal smear campaign and you're not going to hear about it in the conservative media. Just because a person is labeled liberal because they don't support Bush doesn't mean they're a liar. Most of the facts are straight from George, all of what they say is a matter of public record.

Read them and decide for yourself.



First, Alan Bisbort writes: Dry Drunk: Is Bush Making a Cry for Help?. Next comes "Dry Drunk" Syndrome and George W. Bush, by Katherine van Wormer. Finally, two pieces from Michael O'McCarthy: George W. and Alcoholism and Is Bush a "Dry Drunk"?

 

[Boomer II]

I guess I'd have to think something was wrong with him to begin with to buy into this other stuff. I think his stand on Iraq is dead on, you will notice from here on out that other countrys will take note not to mess with the US.

 

[coldsteel]

But before this mission other countries thought they could mess with the U. S. ??Those pesky canadians won't ever think about invading after this war... I don't think N. Korea will change their gameplan whatever it might be because of Iraq2... I heard mexico was ready to invade texas but wussed out because of the poor air quality from all those tuned up cummins down there. . hold down the fort down there... i've got some bass fishing to do down that way... .

 

[merryman]

Well, I don't have a friend who has a hubby/wify, who is a counselor, but during 30+ years of Oregons ongoing judicial ed. , there were probably very few years that did not include an educational program on alcohol/substance and dealing with those suffering from them or recovering from them.



The STUFF illflem set forth is more like the stuff I heard from the patients in mental hearing than anything I ever heard from the dozens of experts in the field over the years-----really did sound like some of the stuff the mentally ill woud talk about in describing what people around them were up to... wow!!!!

And its all to similiar to the drival about what Bush is doing in office; you guys are getting awfully far out of touch with reality. . . . that kind of hate can do bad stuff to ya.



All this is off the point of my thread anyway; its about the danger of Hillary Clinton getting elected in '08 and what characteristics a viable opponent would have to have to defeat her, ie, to offset the Woman's vote, the Black/minority vote, the very liberal vote, and the huge support she would get from those who hate the right such as the Demo. leadership, the major media, hollywood, etc, etc, and the guilt of the country to elect a woman or minority.



Guys, I reallly think she will run in '08, and I really fear that with the above areas of support, without someone who can offset those areas of support, we run a real risk of another clinton administration. WHO can beat her??



Vaughn

 

[Paychk]

How about Secretary of State Colin L. Powell?

 

[The patriot]

Re: Wormer isn't the only one by any means.

Originally posted by illflem

All I know is Bush's behavior since he's been president and the causes of it in his past have changed this redneck arms bearing Republican veteran forever. If it did this to a hardcore like me I have to think there are many others who feel the same way. All I had to do is open my eyes. Shortly after Bush took office I started wondering if something wasn't quite right with him even though I supported him right into Afghanistan. When he got onto his one track attack Iraq mode I was positive something was definitely wrong with him. Around about the same time my friend's wife explained what was going on, I was in shock, I knew nothing about the dark side of his past. All it took was a little searching on the net to prove without doubt it's all true.



Once the people are in the privacy of their ballot booth without fear of being labeled an anti-American liberal terrorist by the vocal mob we'll see things change. It really doesn't matter who runs against him, GW is finished.



Here's a series of articles, stretching back to September of last year. Taken together, they paint a chilling portrait of Bush as an addictive personality who is working through unresolved issues stemming from his history of alcoholism and a sense of inferiority in comparison with his academically gifted, war-hero father.

Of course Bush supporters will dismiss it as a liberal smear campaign and you're not going to hear about it in the conservative media. Just because a person is labeled liberal because they don't support Bush doesn't mean they're a liar. Most of the facts are straight from George, all of what they say is a matter of public record.

Read them and decide for yourself.



First, Alan Bisbort writes: Dry Drunk: Is Bush Making a Cry for Help?. Next comes "Dry Drunk" Syndrome and George W. Bush, by Katherine van Wormer. Finally, two pieces from Michael O'McCarthy: George W. and Alcoholism and Is Bush a "Dry Drunk"?

Bill, with all due respect, after reading many of your posts it seems to me that you could have never been a republican to begin with.

JMHO.

Eric

 

[sdalton]

Illflem, wow, I see your point. Alan Bisbort seems like a credible person. He takes his hard facts about Bush from what a group of alcoholics call themselves. Big stretch, little fact. Your hatred of Bush is clouding your mind.

*Your grandios thinking about your opinion is also interesting.

*You also seem to have a rigid judgemental outlook on Bush and the Republican party.

*You also seem to be very impatient with the Republican party.

*You also seem to over react to anything republican do or say.



I guess you might be able to classify yourself as a Dry Drunk, or maybe something else, referring to a Donkey(A democrat of course).

 

[Champane Flight]

Pride

I have to disagree with Ill on one point. Alcoholics and addicts can be trusted again. Maybe not in a position of power as high as President, without a strong program. You see one of the greatest dangers to a alcoholic is pride. It gives the alcoholic a sense of self importance that can ruin his program by putting him back in charge instead of his higher power. This puts them in a tail spin, either on a dry drunk, or drinking again. You can see the self-important air in our President right now. Just watching his mannerisms on the tube every recovering alcoholic in the nation is going "He needs a meeting"!



Now back on the subject. I still cannot see Hillary as a viable candidate. She has too many enemy's and would be nailed to the wall by Republican investigators as soon as she started her campaign. I do see others in the wings warming up though.

 

[Boomer II]

Re: Pride

Originally posted by Champane Flight

You can see the self-important air in our President right now. Just watching his mannerisms on the tube every recovering alcoholic in the nation is going "He needs a meeting"!

Get real, we must be looking at different Presidents.

 

[Sled Puller]

While the never tiring efforts of our out of the closet Liberal Democrats/Socialists, Communists, Moderates, whatever their name is this week, are entertaining to read, back to the original post.



Cheney will decline the VP in 04, due to health reasons.

Colin Powell will step up to VP.

Or perhaps Condoleeza.

I would back either one, even though I have disagreed with Powell much of the time.

I hope the days of picking a fish for VP are over. Quayle/Gore were an insult to the country.

Bush/Cheney are an awesome team.



Somebody was making fun of Al Sharpton last page. Last I heard, he was the Democrat front runner, much to the dismay of the people who thought they controlled him and his votes.



Hillary cannot win on legal votes.

However, LEGAL and HILLARY are never used in the same sentance.



BTW illflem, it is no shame to have voted for Bush. It was a very good desicion on your part, and I and the rest of the free world, thank you for it.

I don't imagine Osammy and Sadamy are very happy, though.

 

[loncray]

Another Clinton Administration

Yes, I guess the country has to fear another 8 years of prosperity and peace - the longest sustained economic boom in our history.

That said, I agree with CF that Hillary Clinton is probably not electable to the presidency. Too many enemies. For that matter, same thing for Colin Powell - and the funny thing is that it's the same people (right wing) that'd be opposed.