2007-03-03 03:09:15 · 8 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I'd say before. GW is what they call a "Dry Drunk" An alcoholic who stopped drinking but hasn't recovered from the behaviours usually associated with an addicted person.
What is the dry drunk syndrome? "Dry drunk" traits consist of:
Exaggerated self-importance and pomposity
Grandiose behavior
A rigid, judgmental outlook
Impatience
Childish behavior
Irresponsible behavior
Irrational rationalization
Projection
Overreaction
Clearly, George W. Bush has all these traits except exaggerated self importance. He may be pompous, especially with regard to international dealings, but his actual importance hardly can be exaggerated. His power, in fact, is such that if he collapses into paranoia, a large part of the world will collapse with him. Unfortunately, there are some indications of paranoia in statements such as the following: "We must be prepared to stop rogue states and their terrorist clients before they are able to threaten or use weapons of mass destruction against the United States and our allies and friends." The trait of projection is evidenced here as well, projection of the fact that we are ready to attack onto another nation which may not be so inclined.
To summarize, George W. Bush manifests all the classic patterns of what alcoholics in recovery call "the dry drunk." His behavior is consistent with barely noticeable but meaningful brain damage brought on by years of heavy drinking and possible cocaine use. All the classic patterns of addictive thinking that are spelled out are here:
the tendency to go to extremes (leading America into a massive 100 billion dollar strike-first war);
a "kill or be killed mentality;" the tunnel vision;
"I" as opposed to "we" thinking;
the black and white polarized thought processes (good versus evil, all or nothing thinking).
His drive to finish his father's battles is of no small significance, psychologically.
If the public (and politicians) could only see what has been noted as the pathology in the politics. One day, sadly, they will.
2007-03-03 03:27:24 · answer #1 · answered by cather2000 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
During a debate with then-Vice President Al Gore on Oct. 11, 2000, in Winston-Salem, N.C., Bush said: "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building. . . . I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have a kind of nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not."
2007-03-03 04:33:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He never had a grip on reality , he is just the Bush clan's little puppet.
2007-03-03 03:30:37 · answer #3 · answered by willow, the yodakitty from hell 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
He has never had a grip on reality. He has always lived in a world of privilege sheltered from the riff raff.
2007-03-03 03:22:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
after...... i saw a short film clip of him running for Governor of Texas. The guy was rattling off statistics left and right and he was not even using notes. It actually looked like it had to be two different people. If I can find it, I will post it.
2007-03-03 03:47:36 · answer #5 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
After. That's when the neo-cons got a hold of him. You remind me of a broken record.
2007-03-03 03:16:35 · answer #6 · answered by Matt 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
He never has.Liberals like youself on the other hand,never had it to begin with..
2007-03-03 03:15:13 · answer #7 · answered by BAARAAACK 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
i would say so... here, read this http://www.infowars.net/articles/february2007/270207Bushes.htm
2007-03-03 03:15:42 · answer #8 · answered by erotikos_stratiotis 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋