BDS: Bush Derangement Syndrome
By Bird Dog on Tacitus
* * *
Last week, Charles Krauthammer made a diagnosis of people who make outrageous statements relating to President Bush, giving this ailment a name, Bush Derangement Syndrome. We've seen many examples of this malady in the last few weeks. To wit:
Howard Brush Dean III: "The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis," Dean replied. "Now who knows what the real situation is? But the trouble is by suppressing that kind of information, you lead to those kinds of theories, whether they have any truth to them or not, and they get repeated as fact."
Put the shoe on the other foot, guys. How would you react if Bush were to say this: "The most interesting theory about Dean that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he cheats on his wife. Now who knows what the situation is?" Simply put, this type and level discourse is unbecoming someone who desires the most powerful job on the planet. The question about Dean's judgment is a serious one.
HBD the III's weaselly response was: "The difference is that I acknowledged that I did not believe the theory I was putting out." Howard, here's a tip. If you don't believe the theory, don't repeat it. Come on.
John Kerry: "I voted for what I thought was best for the country. Did I expect Howard Dean to go off to the left and say, 'I'm against everything'? Sure. Did I expect George Bush to f - - - it up as badly as he did? I don't think anybody did."
Saddam Hussein, AFTER his capture: "I'd like to sit down now. I'm the president of Iraq. You wouldn't treat your own president this way". Uh, bub, let me whisper something to you. You're no longer president! He also predicted that he would win Iraq's upcoming presidential election. Actually, it looks like he's been deranged for a little while.
Cardinal Renato Martino: "Seeing him like this, a man in his tragedy, despite all the heavy blame he bears, I had a sense of compassion for him," he told reporters. Talk about misplaced compassion.
Hillary Clinton: "I cannot even imagine four years of a second term of this administration, with no accountability and no election at the end." So Bush is going to cancel the 2008 election?!
Madeleine Albright: "Do you suppose that the Bush administration has Usama bin Laden hidden away somewhere and will bring him out before the election?" The mad utterings of a former Secretary of State.
Jim McDermott: "I've been surprised they waited, but then I thought, well, politically, it probably doesn't make much sense to find him just yet," he said. "There's too much by happenstance for it to be just a coincidental thing that it happened on this particular day," he continued.
Again, Hillary Clinton: "I shouldn't take it personally. Because what (the Bush) administration was attempting to do was turn back the progress of the entire 20th century." The ENTIRE 20th century?! Holy smokes!
Derrick Z. Jackson: "With no weapons, no ties, and no truth, the capture of Saddam was merely the most massive and irresponsible police raid in modern times. We broke in without a search warrant." I wonder what the "Z" is his middle name stands for. Certainly not Zzzzz.
Again, from HBD the III: "The capture of Saddam Hussein has not made America safer." Those famous nine words. Rival Jilted Joe said it best: "If he truly believes the capture of this evil man has not made America safer, then Howard Dean has put himself in his own spider hole of denial." More from Spinsanity.
(Of course, Saddam and Martino are not Democrats. Just showing examples of BDS. The following paragraphs are specifically addressed to Democrats).
Folks, what in blazes is going on? Lileks suggests that Democrats are mainstreaming the extreme. The Washington Post makes a similar observation. Is that it? Or is it that the party out of power goes a little crazy, as David Brooks suggested a while ago.
In any case, taken as a whole, these comments do not help Democrats, as this Democrat made clear. A final note. As this article, Paranoia Politics: Some Democrats are Nuttier Than a Tin of Almond Roca, observes: "It's a different matter, though, when it comes to politicians. Paranoia does matter, and some liberals need to do a better job of either treating their paranoia or hiding it."
I believe in a strong two-party system, since one party serves as a check and balance on the other. Comments like the above do not help.
* * *