Alternate Explanation for “Bush Bulge” fiasco
I won’t be so arrogant that I will proclaim this explanation as the truth. It still seems a bit far fetched (in terms of the seriousness of his alleged illness). I will only suggest that sometimes there are the sinister, explosive theories for an event, but often the truth ends up being more conventional, yet still compelling.
It certainly seems at least no less plausible than the “communication device” assertions.
February 8th, 2005 at 5:31 am
I will also mention that there are links between top leading Democrats and the Socialist/Communist Parties. Question is, what’s the point? It’s not like anybody’s going to believe me, even though I’m telling the truth.
February 8th, 2005 at 10:19 am
You know, I bet Bush had a Button on his back that would launch nuclear missles if Kerry patted him on the back in order to blame Kerry for the resulting fallout.
February 8th, 2005 at 3:06 pm
Yeah, that’s interesting.
Note that it still makes Bush out to be a liar, withholding important information from the electorate (his being in such ill health that he has to wear a portable defibrillator).
Let’s be grownups for a minute. No, of course I don’t know for certain what was under Bush’s jacket. I’m reasonably certain, though, that it wasn’t any of the things he and his team have said it was: bad tailoring, a bullet-proof vest, or nothing, I think is the official list. That’s not arrogance. That’s being rational.
The one thing we know for a fact is that Bush has lied about it (since his own explanations can’t be reconciled with each other). So whatever it is, it’s something embarrassing enough that he’s willing to look foolish by floating ridiculous explanations, rather than just telling the truth.
Maybe it was an electronic receiver to get instructions during the debate. Maybe it was a portable defibrillator. Both seem plausible enough to me. Either would be evidence of Bush’s essential dishonesty. Yeah, I loathe the guy, and think he’s the worst president by far of my lifetime. But even if you don’t share that view, I don’t see how you argue away the evidence in this case as being insignificant.
February 9th, 2005 at 6:18 am
I love the excuse by the Bushwackers, “Don’t you think the most powerful man in the world would have a smaller, unnoticable electronic receiver?”
Then the White House comes out and says the bulge was a result of a “bad tailor job”. Ha! Apparently the most powerful man in the world buys his suits from Wal-Mart?
Lefteee
February 9th, 2005 at 9:48 am
I can’t argue it down to a 0% likelihood, but I can present the statements I made in the earlier comments thread that indicates that the “cheater” theory just doesn’t make much intuitive or practical sense. I don’t know if the defibrillator/heart condition story is true either, but it is certainly no less likely than the more popular one.
I got the impression from your own comments on their earlier “bulge” post, that you now believed the “cheater” story to be factual. I don’t think any of the “grown-ups” here are in a position to proclaim that, unless they are self-delusional.
By the way, a number of Presidents have hidden their medical conditions from the public over the years (eg. FDR and JFK).
February 9th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
Can we stop living in the past at some point? The voting public was well aware of the photos, the dialogue, and the theories prior to casting our votes more than three months ago. I understood the intended purpose of rehashing the 2000 Florida garbage for four years – Bush was running again in 2004. He can’t run again, and it has no relevance today. Surely we can “move on.”
February 10th, 2005 at 5:13 am
nah – its so refreshing to find some liberals who don’t think that history began this morning!
abraham lincoln couldn’t keep his suits looking nice either.
February 10th, 2005 at 5:42 am
“The story states that Paul McCartney was involved in a car accident. Apparently “he hadn’t noticed that the lights had changed.” The accident occurred at 5 a.m. on a Wednesday morning. Cause of death was massive head trauma. So severe were his wounds that dental records were useless for identifying the body.
No accident report was made public due to pending investigation of the occupant. Beatles’ insiders learned it was Paul, but kept silent. Understanding the ramifications of such news, the remaining Beatles hatched a cover-up.
A Paul McCartney look alike contest was held. William Campbell won first place, but the results were never announced. Campbell’s prize was to be made a clone of Paul for photos, videos, movies, etc. Plastic surgery was used to smooth out the minor differences. They failed to fix a scar on Campbell’s upper lip – this is how you can tell authentic McCartney photos from the Campbell ones.”
February 10th, 2005 at 8:44 am
And elvis didnt die – he was willingly abducted by space aliens. What does this absurdity have to do with anything?
February 11th, 2005 at 11:14 am
Well , Bush claims that God speaks through him. Perhaps He’s gone hi-tech
February 12th, 2005 at 1:13 pm
Brian, Bush claims that he speaks to God, seeking direction. Please provide the source of a Bush statement that “God speaks through him.” It would be a more accurate assessment that “God’s greatest adversary speaks through Bush’s adversaries.”
February 12th, 2005 at 2:34 pm
Point is Bush is guided by his so-called “faith”. Any “faith” that condones the slaughter of thousands of innocents is something I do not want my leader to have. Osama Bin Laden does his work in the name of religion as well, maybe there’s a pattern here.
February 14th, 2005 at 5:25 am
Hitler said Christianity was a lie of the Jews.
Stalin said Christianity mere propoganda for the evil capitalistic West; a lie of the bourgisie.
Yasser Arafat called upon Allah to “destroy America for she is ruled by ‘heather Jews'”
American Leftists are beginning to make similar statements.
Maybe there’s a pattern here….
February 14th, 2005 at 6:44 am
Wow, thank you for associating Bush with the company he will be listed beside in future history books, Hitler, Stalin…
February 14th, 2005 at 6:50 am
LOL Patriot.
Yeah, compare anti-war, peace loving, anti-corruption democratic activists to the likes of those brutal dictators, thats makes a lot of sense.
Running out defences for your lying administration?
And yes, I would have to agree with buddy above me, if anything, Bush will be associated with these people in the history books and his admin. will be remembered for nothing more than lies and corruption.
February 14th, 2005 at 9:00 am
That was supposed to be showing the absurdity of your earlier statement:
“Point is Bush is guided by his so-called “faith”. Any “faith” that condones the slaughter of thousands of innocents is something I do not want my leader to have. Osama Bin Laden does his work in the name of religion as well, maybe there’s a pattern here.”
You’ve repeatedly compared Bush to said evildoers – I’m just showing that it is more valid to compare just about any Democrat with Hitler, stalin ect.
February 14th, 2005 at 11:53 am
I am also guided by my “so-called faith” as is every other Christian in the world. How intolerant of you to discriminate against people who happen to believe in a different God than you do.
You know, I got attacked by some of those “anti-war, peace loving, anti-corruption democratic activists.” And not for making any political statement. Just for holding a small american flag given to me by a volunteer at a Bush rally down the street. Not in their faces or anything. Just in my pocket.
They got in my way, shouted curses at me and gave me the finger. I had no intention of causing trouble, I was just trying to get by to my car. Real “peaceful” you Democrats are.
February 14th, 2005 at 12:01 pm
Isn’t “peace protester” is a self-contradictory phrase?
funny, logical answer is “yes” no matter what your ideology is. a conservative would respond “Yes” meaning that the peace protesters are illogical, and an intellectual Communist would also respond “Yes, in the sense that all things are contradictory” and proceed to explain why the peace protesting is nessicary in dialectical terms.
February 14th, 2005 at 12:04 pm
Don’t believe me, just ask one. Especially check out the Struggles page and the Youth activism page.
February 14th, 2005 at 8:57 pm
Hey Patriot I can’t condone what those people did to you, you’re all Americans, I guess that’s just how you treat each other, it’s your culture. Comes from your leadership maybe?
If not accepting the killing of innocents and the causing of millions to suffer defines me as intolerant views, so be it.
I am intolerant
If I am discriminatung against the ideology of war and profit from war, so be it.
I discriminate.
You try to turn this into a liberal/conservative issue. Quite frankly for me it’s not that at all. George W. Bush is a danger to world peace. I cannot remember in my reletively short lifetime the world being anymore unstable. And then to watch him and his cronies lie to the world repeatedly over and over makes me ill. I support and respect conservative/liberal/green/independants of all races and religion views. I guess that you can just say I hate Bush, that’s all.
Obviously I am not alone.
I actually vote conservative in my country more than not, but our conservatives are nothing like Bush, they have integrity.
Do you ever wonder why so many different people in the world despise Bush? If so, please enlighten as to why you think that is.
February 15th, 2005 at 5:30 am
I am intolerant
I discriminate.
wow I cannot believe I’ve actually succeeded in getting one of ya to actually admit some of the truth. I wasn’t even hoping it would come in such direct terms. The next logical step is to realize that sometimes discrimination and intolerance is good despite some of the ugly implications of that concept. Discrimination and intolerance of evil in the world for example.
George W. Bush is a danger to world peace. I cannot remember in my reletively short lifetime the world being anymore unstable.
And I cannot remember in my relatively short lifetime the world being at peace. World peace is a mythical concept; it has never happened and it never will – unless that is, that some of us people who believe in God turn out to be correct, and there is supernatural intervention to ensure world peace.
But then, what is peace? Tell me, under what conditions would you define the world as being at peace?
I can see several scenarios for the end to this war:
1. The United States & Co defeats the islamo-facists soundly, ensuring that their states either do not exist, are mere puppet governements like this new one in iraq or are powerless to wage war/terrorism.
2. Osama & Co manages to nuke several countries, causing a new Evil Empire to be established with it’s capitol in the land now known as Israel, and doing God-Knows-what to whatever parts of the West that don’t glow in the dark.
3. The United States and Co surrenders iraq, causing the deaths and enslavement of it’s people on a scale that makes the accidental deaths of civillians (who voted in the recent iraqi elections) in combat zones look like a microbe next to the Sun. Trouble is, in this scenario the United States may still exist, and see many more of it’s towers come tumbling down.
And then to watch him and his cronies lie to the world repeatedly over and over makes me ill.
Now you know how we Republicrats felt during the Clinton years.
I support and respect conservative/liberal/green/independants of all races and religion views. I guess that you can just say I hate Bush, that’s all.
Ah, you see this hatred towards someone who disagrees with you is exactly what y’all have condemned in all non-leftists. (leftist being relative to the United States’s center) How dare we hate people like Saddam Huissen and Yasser Arafat; terrorist leaders who in their hatred of the Jews make Hitler look like a moderate.
February 15th, 2005 at 6:52 am
World peace is a mythical concept….so sad Patriot, so sad sad, that we now live in world where people make statements like that. And your scenarious are absurd.
Apprently you don’t know how to read either, or rather you read selectively, which is a trait of a narrow minded individual. Take some time to see what i discriminate against, and won’t I won’t tolerate.
You don’t even make any sense, you just ramble on about stuff, once in a awhile I even hear you regurgatate word for word lines from Scott Mclellen, or Bush himself. You have mind or thoughts of your own, I beleive that have a word for people like you, sheep.
February 15th, 2005 at 7:05 am
If Bush had concentrated his war efforts on catching Osama Bin Ladin instead of wasting our tax dollars and countless lives on his war of choice in Iraq, Osama would probably be caught or dead by now. If we had continued Clinton & Bush Srs policy of containment with Saddam, we’d be 200+ billion dollars less in debt right now. Iraq was not a threat to us, as they had no weapons of mass distruction as we were repeatedly told.
Iraq is a terrorist threat NOW, making scenarios 2 & 3 of yours a possibility unless we dump untold billions of dollars and lives into the effort to accomplish scenario 1: enslaving the entire middle east — which seems unlikely without going bankrupt in the process. In which case Osama has won. Congratulations Bush supporters.
February 15th, 2005 at 7:24 am
Sorry for the sloppyness of the above, I’m at work and have to type fast!!
Peace (yes, it is possible, although unlikely for the next 4 years)
February 15th, 2005 at 8:55 am
That is very interesting Sven.
If Bush had concentrated his war efforts on catching Osama Bin Ladin instead of wasting our tax dollars and countless lives on his war of choice in Iraq, Osama would probably be caught or dead by now.
As if catchin Osama is a federal spending numbers game.
“Iraq was not a threat to us, as they had no weapons of mass distruction as we were repeatedly told.”
By Clinton. By our allies. By the UN. All too cowardly to do anything about it but not cowardly enough not to tell Saddam that they were going to do something about it and then not follow thru. Bush’s decision to enforce the UN resolutions against Saddam is what you’re complaining about not a “war of choice” out of the blue.
“Iraq is a terrorist threat NOW, making scenarios 2 & 3 of yours a possibility unless we dump untold billions of dollars and lives into the effort to accomplish scenario 1: enslaving the entire middle east – which seems unlikely without going bankrupt in the process.”
Not if we can get at the oil as well. And if the “silent palistinian majority” exists, as Bush stupidly seems to think it does, they should turn around and help us the more they begin to realize that wherever our army comes it brings freedom. However if all they hear and read are the kinds of stories propogated by lies.com, that wherever our army comes it brings even worse oppression than there was before, (all the while convieniently ignoring the oppression that existed before) I think your analysis could well prove correct.
February 15th, 2005 at 9:03 am
“If we had continued Clinton & Bush Srs policy of containment with Saddam, we’d be 200+ billion dollars less in debt right now.”
I agree that Bush is not committed enough to Reagan’s idea of smaller government. However I have neither seen read or heard anything that convinced me that Kerry wouldn’t have spent everything Bush did, only with an extra couple 0s in every number.
However that is irrelevent.
If we had continued Clinton & Bush Srs policy of containment with Saddam, Saddam could have easily aquired WMDs. The burden of proof was on Saddam to prove that he did not have them and wasn’t developing them. This he repeatedly refused to do.
If we had continued Clinton & Bush Srs policy of containment with Saddam, the mass graves and rape rooms would never have been discovered.
If we had continued Clinton & Bush Srs policy of containment with Saddam, the mass graves and rapge rooms would still be being filled.
February 15th, 2005 at 10:37 am
If we had continued Clinton & Bush Srs policy of containment with Saddam, the mass graves and rapge rooms would still be being filled.
You know what? It’s not our problem. We have more pressing needs in this country. Like trying to find a job here that pays enough that you don’t have to depend on now non-existant programs in order to support your family. The real threat was (and is )Bin Laden.HE attacked us. And he will do it again given the chance. And Shrub doesn’t care. After all , killing your business partner’s family members doesn’t look too good. And what about the human rights violations (and terrorist support) in Saudi Arabia? That’s right , more Shrub business partners. Can’t meddle in THEIR affairs. As someone mentioned above , whatever Shrub says , I just believe the opposite. Makes it much easier to figure out what’s goin on. And when he APPEARS to actually be doing something to help the serfs(That’s those of us who don’t have the money to get his attention)I look to see what rich buddy of his will really be profitting. Besides , I would rather have my president lie about who he’s sleeping with than about justification for a war
February 15th, 2005 at 1:02 pm
Wow – excellent points Brian.
February 17th, 2005 at 5:30 am
That’s not our problem
That is quite refreshing to hear. Not because you are right, but because you’re a liberal who has decided not to throw money at a social problem for once.
February 17th, 2005 at 6:17 am
So Patriot. You would rather spend $300,000,000,000.00 plus on an illegal war, that hasn’t even accomplished anything other than thousands of deaths, than social programs?
Just so you know, every Canadian (33 million of them)receives universal healthcare. This costs the government about 40 billion per year. Just to give you an idea of the kind of waste Bush’s policies created.
We spend our money on things like healthcare, education, the environment… not bombs and bullets. And you know what? Canada is more secure than the US will ever be. Because we don’t bully people, we are not arrogant and we beleive in human rights for all. Damn those social-minded people!!
I guess that explains why so many Americans are moving here, eh?
February 17th, 2005 at 9:21 am
First of all it is not an illegal war. What laws are being violated?
Just so you know, every Canadian (33 million of them)receives universal healthcare.
And the Canadians have seen the results of what happens whenever a gubbermint tries to act like a buisness:
– compeition is elminated reducing quality.
– enourmous sums of money dissapear into the pockets of a corrupt burocracy.
– private alternatives are eliminated or reduced to being practically black-market.
– people lose their private sector jobs.
– the system is not eliminated if it fails, it’s merely propped up with more tax money.
– taxes are increased.
– wages are decreased.
– prices rise.
Do you honestly believe that socialism, not just in medicine but in any area, can get more people the things they want and need than capitalism?
February 17th, 2005 at 11:16 am
Your government invaded a soveriegn nation that posed no threat to your country. That is illegal my friend, the UN says so, so does leaders across the world.
And I think your just jealous of our great healthcare, clean water, clean air. We’re not a socialist society, we’re a democratic society that values the quality of life for all of our citizens through social reforms. And yes our healthcare isn’t perfect, but we’re working on it. I broke my leg last year, all fixed up with in days.
See we beleive healthcare should not be a for-profit business. I can see why you wouldn’t agree with that, you’re all about big business, most conservatives are.
And I don’t mind paying higher taxes because I know that the old little old lady across the street is getting her medicine when she needs it, she’s not choosing to buy food over her buying medicine. Now if I was paying higher taxes to support illegal wars and fund our leaders’ friends businesses, then yes I would not be happy. But we take of each other, which in turn fosters a family-oriented society which benefits all.
A capitlist society with strong social morals is my ideal society. There’s a difference between what people what, and what people need. Think about that while your sitting there wearing your Nike shoes, Tommy Hilfiger jeans and drinking a bottle of Pepsi, while the little old lady across the street from you is trying to figure out how she is going to pay for her medicine.
February 17th, 2005 at 12:17 pm
Your government invaded a sovereign nation that posed no threat to the American people – that my frined, is illegal.
Canada is a democratic society with strong social foundations. See we beleive healthcare should be not-for-profit, and all of our citizens should have equal access to healthcare. Of course you wouldn’t agree with that, you’re conservative, everything is about the all mighty dollar. Those points you made above have no merit, trust me I live here. I break my leg, it’s fixed in a day. My grandma needs medicine, she gets it.
And no, I don’t mind paying higher taxes because I like to know that the little old lady across the street will get the medicine she needs, rather than having to choose buying food over her medicine.
There’s a difference between socialism and a capitlist society that fosters a strong social foundation, and takes care of one another. There’s also a difference between what people what and what people need.
Think about that when you’re sitting there wearing your Nike shoes, Tommy Hilfigher jeans and drinkin a can of Pepsi while the little old lady across from your street is trying to figure how she is going to buy her medicine. That is not socialist thinking, thats moral, compassionate thinking.
February 17th, 2005 at 12:18 pm
Oops, i think the delay is on, sorry for the double post.
February 18th, 2005 at 5:24 am
what? I dont see any doublepost.
There used to be a time when Democrats did care about things like that. What happened to it?
hmm… perhaps the Sixties happened to it.
February 18th, 2005 at 6:07 am
No i don’t beleive socialisim is the way, quite frankly thats retard thinking. But what i do believe is that a democtratic society with a string social foundation is the key.
See we believe you can’t put a price on healthcare, on someone’s life. The points you listed above about Canada’s healthcare system are unfounded and fundementally lacking fact. Sure poeple complain about it, but see in Canada people aren’t afraid to question our leadership and demand better. The UN has listed Canada’s healthcare system number 3 in the world, behind 2 European countries with similar systems in place. The US is further down on that list, much further. FACT 50% of all personal US bankrupties are the result of unbelievable healthcare costs.
No I don’t mind paying higher taxes because i know that the poor little old lady, or the WWII vet across the street from me can get the medicine he or she needs, without having to choose between buying food or drugs. The US is the richest country in the world and 30 million US children don’t have health coverage, and everyone of you should be ashamed that.
Before you go off thinkin’ corporate capitalism is the absolute ay, while you’re wearing your Nike shoes, Tommy Hilfigher jeans and drinkin’ a bottle of pepesi, try to think of the old lady acrosss from your street as she’s sitting there trying to decide if she should buy food or medicine.
I noticed you seem to be a really bitter person Patriot. For example, you’re willing to ‘hate’ the sixties, why? Because that’s when people rose up against corporate greed, unjust war? How can you be angry about things like that? I thought you believed in god? Doesn’t god want children to be taken care of? Doesn’t he want peace for all mankind? Do you think god would be pleased by the choas that is know Iraq? The human torture? The holding of people in cells when they haven’t even been charged for a crime? All of this is moral?
You don’t have to answers thos Patriot, you and your leader will have to answer for them some day.
I’m done with this page, I’m “moving on” to the new posts, about the military deaths in Iraq.
February 18th, 2005 at 12:12 pm
Healthcare should be a non-profit business. Thats why the UN ranks countries with universal healthcare the highest. Your drug companies spend more on advertising than they do on research, does that make sense to you? The points you laid out re: Canada’s healthcare system are unfounded and are lacking fundemental facts.
I also don’t mind paying higher taxes because I know that the little old lady living next to me will get the medicine she needs. No one here is championing Socialism, thats a right-wing rebuttal for everything that doesn’t turn a profit.
So while you’re sitting there wearing your Nike shoes, Tommy jeans and drinking a bottle of pepsi, try to think about the little old lady next to you who is trying to decide if she will buy food or medicine. Thats not socialist thinking, that’s moral, compassionate thinking.
February 18th, 2005 at 12:13 pm
hmmm, my last 3 posts aren’t showing up?
February 21st, 2005 at 1:55 pm
The activists’ success in the 60s was only possible by fabrication. All of their contentions in opposition to the Vietnam War have been proven false, but, with the assistance of a very liberal media and activists in the world of academia, their numbers have soared to become a large minority. The lies of the activists of the 60s have become a model for those at the beginning of the 21st century.
What a shame that the media in the 60s did not investigate and publicize the lies of those activists with regard to the war in Vietnam. The “compassion” of those people resulted in the deaths of at least 2.5 million peasants, the scorn of our brave soldiers upon their return, etc. I’ll reserve more detailed comments for another post.
March 10th, 2005 at 11:59 am
Blah blah blah. Is your real name John Rambo?
March 13th, 2005 at 5:28 pm
Nope, I’m certainly not John Rambo. That series of movies was just another in a long series of lies in the MSM and Hollywood about Vietnam and it’s effects on our heroes in that war. Is your real name Jane Fonda?
March 18th, 2005 at 5:30 am
my computer won’t highlight text at the moment so I’ll try to retype the bits I’m trying to respond to.
Now first of all who’s my leader? What are you talking about?
Second of all when did I say I had all the answers to all of life’s problems?
“See we believe you can’t put a price on healthcare, on someone’s life”
An abortion costs between $400 and $5,000, so getting rid of life has a price.
I think individuals can provide better health care for themselves then the gubbermint ever could, and the less fortunate ones can go to private charities (that already exist to take care of this) to get help. These charities, by the way, are supported largely on donations. (from rich people)
On the other hand, gubbermint health care is supported by middle-class taxes. So they would still end up paying for their own health care under socialized medcine, just in disguise.