• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bush Derangement Syndrome, V2

jj

Penultimate Amazing
J
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
21,382
Well, it's been popular for most of the last 8 years to refer to any criticism of 'W', who at this point is clearly one of the worst executives, if not the worst executive of them all, in this country's history, as "Bush Derangement Syndrome".

It occurs to me that such a thing exists, but that the real "Bush Derangement Syndrome" is in the failure of his rabid reconstructionist supporters to acknowlege that he is a complete and total failure, a failure who has very seriously weakened the country, moved it perilously close to second-world status in terms of economic dominance (not yet planning, but given the restrictions on so many harmless chemicals, etc, we're still headed there) and civil rights, and made us the punching bag of the entire world.

In doing so, he has attempted to create the "final conflict" in the middle east, and failed. He has attempted to improve the life of a country ruled by a vicious dictator, and instead make it notably worse, although free of the testosterone-poisoned dictator. He has started to free another country from the bonds of the Taliban, only to drop that necessary effort in his rush to get even with the dictator who 'tried to kill my daddy'.

In short, I submit that "Bush derangement syndrome" is represented by the following symptoms.

1) A failure to see the true character of "W''s leaderhsip
2) A willingness to use vicious, if not violent language to portray political opponents
3) A willingness to deliberately, conciously, and intentionally attempt to stifle criticism via accusations of "hating the USA", being a "traitor", etc.
4) Insistance that those who won't take the same position are in fact "deranged".
 
As a public service announcement, I repeat what I said in the other thread about this:

One of the symptoms of BDS is that the victims of the disease are unable to recognize it in themselves.
 
peptoabysmal said:
As a public service announcement, I repeat what I said in the other thread about this:

One of the symptoms of BDS is that the victims of the disease are unable to recognize it in themselves.
Click to expand...

The Same could be said for CDS and ODS.
 
peptoabysmal said:
As a public service announcement, I repeat what I said in the other thread about this:

One of the symptoms of BDS is that the victims of the disease are unable to recognize it in themselves.
Click to expand...
peptoabysmal, do you think you have BDS? If not, is that evidence that you showing a symptom of BDS?
 
jj said:
Well, it's been popular for most of the last 8 years to refer to any criticism of 'W', who at this point is clearly one of the worst executives, if not the worst executive of them all, in this country's history, as "Bush Derangement Syndrome".
Click to expand...

Popular with whom? Name names.

In short, I submit that "Bush derangement syndrome" is represented by the following symptoms.

1) A failure to see the true character of "W''s leaderhsip
2) A willingness to use vicious, if not violent language to portray political opponents
Click to expand...

So does Crowlogic have BDS? He's using violent language to portray his political opponents.
 
peptoabysmal said:
As a public service announcement, I repeat what I said in the other thread about this:

One of the symptoms of BDS is that the victims of the disease are unable to recognize it in themselves.
Click to expand...

So basically both extremes are laboring under an all-encompassing mental encapsulation by their respective memes and are doing their darndest to help the meme reproduce in other people by regurgitating line items from said memes?
 
Last edited:
jj said:
Well, it's been popular for most of the last 8 years to refer to any criticism of 'W', who at this point is clearly one of the worst executives, if not the worst executive of them all, in this country's history, as "Bush Derangement Syndrome".
Click to expand...
That's nonsense on steroids. I've been critical of Bush, at certain times, and yet no one ever accused me of BDS. Why is that, do you think?
 
jj said:
Well, it's been popular for most of the last 8 years to refer to any criticism of 'W', who at this point is clearly one of the worst executives, if not the worst executive of them all, in this country's history, as "Bush Derangement Syndrome".
Click to expand...

Excuse me? Care to prove it?

It occurs to me that such a thing exists, but that the real "Bush Derangement Syndrome" is in the failure of his rabid reconstructionist supporters to acknowlege that he is a complete and total failure, a failure who has very seriously weakened the country, moved it perilously close to second-world status in terms of economic dominance (not yet planning, but given the restrictions on so many harmless chemicals, etc, we're still headed there) and civil rights, and made us the punching bag of the entire world.

In doing so, he has attempted to create the "final conflict" in the middle east, and failed. He has attempted to improve the life of a country ruled by a vicious dictator, and instead make it notably worse, although free of the testosterone-poisoned dictator. He has started to free another country from the bonds of the Taliban, only to drop that necessary effort in his rush to get even with the dictator who 'tried to kill my daddy'.
Click to expand...

Actually, when I see BDS referred to, it usually means being so caught up in hyperbole and vitriol, you blame him for every bad thing. Whether it is realistic or not. thats why it gets thrown at Twoofers so easily.

I also notice that sufferers like to have fall backs like "neocon talking points" or "Cheney parrot" when they are losing an argument.

In short, I submit that "Bush derangement syndrome" is represented by the following symptoms.

1) A failure to see the true character of "W''s leaderhsip
Click to expand...

Yes on both ends of the spectrum. Some people refuse to see his short comings (although I don't see too many of them around here) or they blame him for everything (a few rather vocal people)

2) A willingness to use vicious, if not violent language to portray political opponents
Click to expand...

You think thats new? And its isolated to Bush defenders?

3) A willingness to deliberately, conciously, and intentionally attempt to stifle criticism via accusations of "hating the USA", being a "traitor", etc.
4) Insistance that those who won't take the same position are in fact "deranged".
Click to expand...

Aren't you just repeating #2 with both of those? And you've never seen someone trashing Bush going overboard trying to label their opponents?
 
BPSCG said:
That's nonsense on steroids.
Click to expand...

Take that back. You don't have any evidence his nonsense has been doing drugs. It could have become excessively muscular from frequent and vigorous exercise. :o
 
jj said:
Those of you arguing otherwise, including those of you making dishonest, unwarranted personal attacks...
Click to expand...
Please, jj, don't go there.

One E.J. Armstrong whining in every post that he's being subjected to personal abuse and demonisation is more than enough.
 
Actually, when I see BDS referred to, it usually means being so caught up in hyperbole and vitriol, you blame him for every bad thing. Whether it is realistic or not. thats why it gets thrown at Twoofers so easily.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I am no big fan of Bush, but found some of the accusations..including by some people who were not twoofers and were intelligent enough to really,really, know better...were just plain loony.
I have seen only a couple of people here who call every criticism of Bush BDS. And they are generally as crazy as the extreme BDSers.
BTW nice name calling and creating a Straw Man of anybody who defended Bush, JJ.
 
BPSCG said:
That's nonsense on steroids. I've been critical of Bush, at certain times, and yet no one ever accused me of BDS. Why is that, do you think?
Click to expand...

No one has accused me of having it either but I think I might have it. So I think the value of this diagnostic test for BDS is questionable. Or maybe I don't have it and it was diagnostic and it correctly excluded me?

And if I was excluded what form of BDS don't I have? The form that leads to unwarranted praise and defense of Bush or the form that leads to unwarranted criticism?

And peptoabysmal says that one symptom of the disease is that one can't recognize it in one self, so does the fact that I think I might have it rule out the possibility that I do have it?
 
davefoc said:
And peptoabysmal says that one symptom of the disease is that one can't recognize it in one self, so does the fact that I think I might have it rule out the possibility that I do have it?
Click to expand...

Name one good thing you think Bush has done that you supported and respect him for.

If you can do that, you probably don't have it.

And yes, you can put that same question to conservatives and republicans to see if they have Obama Derangement Syndrome.
 
BPSCG said:
Please, jj, don't go there.

One E.J. Armstrong whining in every post that he's being subjected to personal abuse and demonisation is more than enough.
Click to expand...

Wasn't addressed to you.
 
BPSCG said:
That's nonsense on steroids. I've been critical of Bush, at certain times, and yet no one ever accused me of BDS. Why is that, do you think?
Click to expand...

Part of it has to do with the reason for your criticism. For example: if you criticize his spending, or his immigration policy, or his stance on climate change as not conservative enough, you don't have BDS. If you criticize his foreign policy, economic policy, environmental policies, etc, you have BDS. It's quite simple, really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom