Did Bush Have A Stroke?

During the debate I saw Bush’s face drooping down, it’s as if he had a stroke or something. You’ll recall that in the past few weeks the White House announced something about Bush not getting his annual physical until after the election (something like that). I think there’s something wrong with him.

Note this Reuters story from one week ago:
The White House cited Bush’s heavy travel schedule for his decision to delay his annual physical exam, which usually takes place in August, until after the election.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush’s doctors “felt it was perfectly fine to do it later this year… The president is a very active person. He’s in great health.”
Bullshit I saw drool at the beginning of the debate. There was something wrong with his face during the debate and he’s not admitting it.

Look at this short movie “Bush Now and Then” (about 2 minutes) that shows Bush 10 years ago… lucid, well-spoken, fast thinking. He doesn’t stumble over big words, he doesn’t make long pauses while he collects his thoughts…

http://www.adbuzz.com/bushbuzz.htm

Then they show Bush now. BIG difference!

Interesting - what do the R gang have to say about this stuff? Is this an old D publicity stunt or something you guys were unaware of? There does seem to be a difference, but of course the video makers got to pick the clips didn’t they! : )

This is retarded. The election is close, he’s tired and stressed – haven’t you guys read Ian King? Stress is a killer…

As for spittle on the side of his mouth, I ‘m no doc, and I don’t even play one on the internet, but come on now… A little dehydration in the desert and the conspiracy wheels are a turnin’…

Or are you trying to be funny?

Uhh, nobody mentioned spittle on the sides of Shrub’s mouth.

Care to elaborate?

I’m not sure why I’m even acknowledging this crap.

The fact is, he’s ten years older. Less testosterone and more stress may be part of his speech pattern problems.

What some folks in this forum don’t seem to realize, is that it doesn’t really matter what comes out of a person’s mouth. What matters is the action taken.

Our President has taken the appropriate action to save this country from a long recession that began during the Democrats watch, he was a firm leader when we suffered the most tragic event since the Civil War, and he has taken the fight of terrorism to the terrorists (rather than let them bring it here). The list goes on, but I know that the liberal pro-kerry folks on this forum will type with their blinders on to discount every good deed and confuse the rest of our forum members.

Take care folks.

The recession started in March 2001.
Bush was the president.

Back on topic, I saw an article where a doctor speculated that Bush was exhibiting signs of pre-senile dementia.

I don’t think a person can be a hard-core alcoholic for 20 years, and then just supposedly turn it off all of a sudden, and not expect any repercussions down the road… Substance abuse causes brain damage, that is a fact.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
The recession started in March 2001.
Bush was the president.

Back on topic, I saw an article where a doctor speculated that Bush was exhibiting signs of pre-senile dementia.

I don’t think a person can be a hard-core alcoholic for 20 years, and then just supposedly turn it off all of a sudden, and not expect any repercussions down the road… Substance abuse causes brain damage, that is a fact.[/quote]

Who’s budget was in place in March of 2001? It was Clinton’s.

Who was able to bring both parties together to pull us out of that budget nightmare almost immediately? That was your president of March 2001.

Are you an expert on the definition of alcoholism? Have you ever done any actual research on what deterioration happens when you consume alcohol? As usual, you don’t have a clue Lumpa. You spit the same BS rhetoric that your beloved Scary Kerry shouts, and with a straight face. You wouldn’t know “fact” if it bit you on the arse. “Harsh?”, you might ask. No. Your Micheal Moore style just has to be tamed once in a while.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Substance abuse causes brain damage, that is a fact.[/quote]

Yes, and your religious devotion to JFK suggests some sort of brain damage. The next logical question is of course- what substances have you been abusing to make you this way?

[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
I’m not sure why I’m even acknowledging this crap.

The fact is, he’s ten years older. Less testosterone and more stress may be part of his speech pattern problems.

What some folks in this forum don’t seem to realize, is that it doesn’t really matter what comes out of a person’s mouth. What matters is the action taken.

Our President has taken the appropriate action to save this country from a long recession that began during the Democrats watch, he was a firm leader when we suffered the most tragic event since the Civil War, and he has taken the fight of terrorism to the terrorists (rather than let them bring it here). The list goes on, but I know that the liberal pro-kerry folks on this forum will type with their blinders on to discount every good deed and confuse the rest of our forum members.

Take care folks.[/quote]

I’m not going to get involved in the economic discussion. I think everyone is pretty much talking out there ass on the economics thing.

However, on terrorism, you are dead wrong. Bush did not, in fact, take the fight to the terrorists. The terrorists are in Saudi Arabia (funding/intel), Pakistan (funding/intelligence/training), Iran (actual weapons of mass destruction/funding/training/intel) and Syria (actual WMDs/funding/training). We basically kissed the Saudi’s asses, gave Pakistan a raise and a pat on the back, and pretty much have ignored Syria (until they started shelling our troops), and have our heads firmly up our asses regard Iran (the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism). Nevermind the whole business of letting Bin Laden go and not actually putting much of an effort into going after him. Don’t give me any crap about the Taliban, which, you may have noticed, has more or less integrated itself into the “legitimate” Afghanistan government. So much for teaching them a lesson. No, we haven’t done crap about terrorism actually–except pissed off more Arabs and given them a lot of combat training against us in Iraq. I mean we could have rolled the Saudi princes in about a day, seized their assests, put an end to all their funding (so bye bye Chechens for instance), and taken over their oil infrastructure, told OPEC to take a flying fuck into the Gulf, and we’d have fifty cent a gallon gas right now. We could have spent the manpower we are using in Iraq to take on Iran (the real threat) and probably enlisted Saddam to help again (and hence reduce the strain on our troops). Syria pretty much buckles once Tehran falls. Al Qaeda buckles once Saudi falls. At that point, who gives a fuck about Afghanistan? You tell Pakistan to turn over its intelligence people who were helping Al Qaeda, turn over its nukes, or you arm India to the teeth and green light them to do what needs to be done. And while he was at it, Bush could have and should have given Sharon the green light to put a bullet in Arafat’s head, clean out Gaza and the West Bank and send anyone who has any complaints about it into the Sinai or over the border into Jordan. There you go, case closed.

But Bush didn’t do any of that did he? He spent a lot of money creating the TSA, which has not made airports or flying any more secure, but a lot more expensive and a pain in the ass. Also, the TSA has become the most corrupt government agency according the GAO. Bush hasn’t secured borders. Hence, we’ve got a band of rogue Chechens running around right now waiting to kill our school kids. Bush has thrown a bunch of random Muslims into Gitmo, but hasn’t actually done much to crack down on funding of terrorist cells domestically (yeah, they closed one network that they’ve known about for 5 years last week, great job guys). Oh yeah, and, where the fuck is Bin Laden? Why the fuck isn’t his head on a goddamn stake on the White House lawn?
That bitch cannot be that hard to find with $20 million on his head. Ummm, and why are the Saudi’s still funding terrorists and jacking our goddamn oil prices? And why is Iran being allowed to build nukes and have long range missiles? Not to mention Pakistan. Yeah, we all sleep a lot better at night knowing there are Chechens on the loose in the US and their buddies in Iran or Pakistan will happily give them material to make a dirty bomb. Yay for Bush!

So seriously, what has Bush done to actually combat terrorism? See Saddam, besides funding Palestinians (which, honestly is reason enough to bomb him I’ll grant), didn’t really have jack or shit to do with Al Qaeda. And the Taliban, besides being gangsta opium growing warlords didn’t really have anything to do with Al Qaeda other than basically taking protection money from them to allow them to operate on Taliban (and would have gladly handed him over for more money than Bin Laden was paying them). So we got rid of a guy who not even a regional threat anymore (pretty much Iran, Syria, Israel, or the Saudis could have kicked his ass if he acted up), and sort of bombed a bunch of shit in Afghanistan and then decided that maybe some nice Taliban guys might be ok to be in the government. And, well, outside of Kabul it is just fine if everyone wants to be all gangsta.

Is the economy better or worse? Hell if I know. Is Bush really a moron, a stroke victim, or just plain stressed out? Doesn’t really matter, but he and Kerry both look pretty stupid up there. Has Bush actually done anything about terrorism? Nada. So if you’re going to spout nonsense like that, I want to see the Saudi princes responsible for 9/11 lined up before a firing squad before I believe you.

rg73: Hehehe… I like the way you think.

Did Bush have a stroke? (shaking head once again). Yes…he must have after all his face looked odd during the debate! And John Kerry may have Aids! Hey…he’s 6’ 3" and only 180lbs. Looks pretty gaunt…yea he might have Aids.

And what’s up with John Edwards wife? I think she is addicted to carbohydrates. She has to go over 200lbs.

Hey…I’m starting to like meaningless threads like this one :slight_smile:

(By the way Lump the recession started with the market crash which happened on Clintons watch)

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Uhh, nobody mentioned spittle on the sides of Shrub’s mouth.

Care to elaborate?[/quote]

Someone said something about Bush ‘drooling’ at the beginning of the debate. In the interest of truth - BB said it was spittle.

You left-wingers need to stay away from oak trees this fall, lest you think the sky is falling.

Lumpy -
Two nights ago I got no sleep. Why? There was this bassett hound that was yelping all night long. Not a constant yelp, but a steady, intermitent one that would pierce the calm like a knife.

There was no reason for his vocal performance - almost like he doing it to hear his own voice.

You, my friend, are much like the basset hound - And henceforth I shall refer to you as ‘hound dog’.

Why? Because you are the constant yelping on this political forum. There’s no real reason to be yelping - you just do it. I’m mean, it’s not like you’ve treed a 'coon or anything.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
The recession started in March 2001.[/quote]

Actually the downturn began in March of 2000.

The Internet had fueled an incredible amount of entrepreneurial activity throughout the 1990s, which was primarily funded by venture capital and by debt (a LOT of debt). Most of the business models did not pan out as was speculated. As such, the companies that supply growing businesses (telecom, information technology, real estate, equipment providers, etc.), and that fund them (banks, investment bankers, etc.) lost a great deal of business in the midst of their OWN growth, much of which was funded by debt, and which was needed to supply these thousands of new customers. The economy, being the intertwined and multi-faceted phenomenon that it is, declined simply as a natural consequence. No president, then or now, had a damn thing to do with it.

No. He did not.

He didn’t get his physical because George H.W. Bush would not pay for it. Further, Halliburton’s stock had a bad day and he was depressed so he couldn’t make his appointment. Also, the oil prices are so far up that he was busy trying to open a few oil fields in Iraq so he could personally cash in on the profits. It took him “seven minutes” to make up his mind on all of these events. Remember, it’s the speed of the decision making that really matters.

By the way, were you watching when Kerry looked directly into the camera in the second debate. My God, that was terrifying!!!

JeffR

rg73 ~

You’re entitled to your opinion. I respectfully disagree with you on many points. Disagree may not be the right word, but I certainly question your text.

Take care.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:

As for spittle on the side of his mouth, I ‘m no doc, and I don’t even play one on the internet, but come on now… A little dehydration in the desert and the conspiracy wheels are a turnin’…

[/quote]
I don’t think there’s any real conspiracy theory brewing, I just think the spit on the corner of his mouth was, well, nasty and embarassing for him. Shit like that happens all the time, it’s unfortunate it happened to GWB during a nationally televised debate.

Rove musn’t worry too much, he let GWB go on stage in the first debate with a suit that wasn’t tailored…K sera sera the new GOP strategy?

lol

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:
I just think the spit on the corner of his mouth was, well, nasty and embarassing for him.[/quote]

Reason #3,647 why I listened to all the debates on the radio :slight_smile:

Certainly, Bush seems a lot slower now than he did 10 years ago (he damn right seemed sure of himself in that speech), but have you considered the fact that he probably memorized that speech, while nowadays he seems to mostly answer questions, debate, and even come up with speeches (that’s what he likes to call them:) on the spot?

Just a thought…

By the way, rg73, you raised some very good points. Nonetheless, I am glad that WW III hasn’t happened yet. If Bush did what you think he should have done, the Middle East would be a mess, and the war would have probably spread to other countries as well.

[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
Have you ever done any actual research on what deterioration happens when you consume alcohol?[/quote]

Why yes I have.

Regards
Heywood Jablowmie