I apologize for my technical inadequacies — linking this video is apparently beyond my capability — so I have provided the link information.
The truth is I cannot see GWB’s face or hear his voice without reflexively saying “the man’s an idiot” — so to actually feel empathy for him is a little disconcerting.
Forget that I found this video on a site called “george bush is the antichrist” — if you can find it, take a couple minutes and watch it.
It will remind you why anyone would have voted for him to begin with — and, if you are anything like me and see yourself a little too clearly in the before and after condition — you might find yourself doing a little stuttering as well.
http://www.adbuzz.com/bushbuzz.htm
In fact, I have seen some “blooper reels” that are pretty “funny”- except for the sinking feeling that they represent truths beyond the obvious blunders.
http://www.innocentenglish.com/funniest-bushisms.html
All joking aside – should we be concerned about Mr. Bush’s apparent decline in mental acuity? The “after” clip is not some odd abherration – but a fairly representative performance.
Is his brain just so full and he wants to say so much that he just cannot get the words out? (i don’t think so) Or is it just too hard to keep all the plates spinning when you can’t “simply tell the truth”? (it takes a lot of RAM to be a good liar)
Serious and potentially devestating health crisis have been withheld from the American people before — can there be any doubt that some must have “more than suspected” Ronald Reagan’s alzheimers during his terms? What decisions made by JFK (other than riding in the open car in Dallas) were clouded by his use of amphetamines?
Without an interactive time machine we can’t really know what might have been different had different decisions been made – or what role illness or impairment have played in previous administrations.
I suppose trying to find understanding of the current administration by questioning the very sanity – not just competence – of the President would be a rather unproductive exercise in speculation. And still, I wonder.
We think we have protocols in place to monitor the health – both physical and mental – of the nation’s leader. But how much do we trust the government to share the results of these examinations freely?
Wouldn’t it be a threat to national security to disclose that the president has begun a downhill slide into dementia?
Most people do not become functionally impaired over-night. Without clear, decisive evidence of a complete inability to perform the duties of office – isn’t the potential for abuse too great (think bloodless coups) to make it too “easy” to remove an elected president who “slips” even a little on tests of cognitive function? Where would we draw the line?
While the emperor was traipsing around town naked … did the minister of war keep him placated and substitute his own judgment? Being afraid to tell the emperor he’s naked is one thing — letting him make life and death decisions would be another.
Which “unelected” (not including Bush) staffers do we want running the country?
I used to believe that “one man” could not really do all that much damage – and I still do basically (there is enough blame to go around even inthe Bush debacle) – but GWB sure is giving that notion a test.
“Crazy” people have led many countries to ruin — when did their people start to worry?
Cindy V.
