Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides

[Beloved Citizen]

Capitol Hill Blue - June 4, 2004

President George W Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately express growing concern over their leader's state of mind.

In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats, and others he classifies as "enemies of the state."

Worried White House aides paint a portrait of a man on the edge, increasingly wary of those who disagree with him and paranoid of a public that no longer trusts his policies in Iraq or at home.

"It reminds me of the Nixon days," says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House.

"Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That's the mood over there."

In interviews with a number of White House staffers who were willing to talk off the record, a picture of an administration under siege has emerged, led by a man who declares his decisions to be "God's will," and then tells aides to "fuck over" anyone they consider to be an opponent of the administration.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_4336.shtml

[physioex]

1. That is scary...

Somebody take him away from that button..

[Skittles]

20. they don't let that clown anywhere near that button

Bush is a f***ing puppet; someone else is always pulling his strings.

[Renew Deal]

24. That's exactly what I said.

Great minds...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1720375&mesg_id=1720451

[FarLeftRage]

2. he needs to be locked up

and put away for the rest of his life...

[shanti]

3. duplicate post

albeit on LBN - a long post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=602189&mesg_id=602189

[nostamj]

12. dupe?? please....

it was posted in GD at least four times before noon today! (and yes, I was one of them)

crazy shit... if .001 percent is true it's still scary

[Beloved Citizen]

45. This article is everywhere now, a true internet phenomenon

Whether it is true or not is one issue. Another one why has it been received with such incredible enthusiasm? Is it because so many are looking for a confirmation of their suspicions, and this article could be it?

[jbane]

4. "Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides" Sounds like the Prez..

Sounds like the President needs to call his Sponsor, can't have resentments in the
White House!

[mitchum]

9. He doesn't have a sponsor...

since he is a "white-knuckler" and not a member of the program. I guess the humility requirements don't sit too well with the imperial chimp.

Welcome to DU :)

[Unperson 309]

11. WELCOME JBane!!!

C'mon in and set a spell! Look around and enjoy!!

:hi: :bounce: :hi: :bounce: :hi:

309

[Wonk]

5. From their faq...

Don't you take anything seriously?
Nah, we leave that to the politicians (and some of our readers). They take everything, including themselves, far too seriously.
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/faq.asp

[Senior citizen]

6. These are the chimp's white house aides--

They never cared about what * did that hurt the country or the world, but they do care about their own precious jobs. I'll bet those staff prayer meetings have never been so fervant. If he could ask for Tenet's resignation, who among them is safe? BWAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAA

[IHaveADream]

7. Skitzoid

see this link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1720299

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

8. Is Capitol Hill Blue reliable? This sounds a bit "out there"

I know Bush isn't a brigh light, but this does sound a bit much.

[JayS]

10. It is very "out there" just like Pluto. n/t

n/t

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

13. Bush Throwing Obscene Tantrums?

according to the article. I hope someone is getting this stuff on videotape. It would make the funniest viewing in the history of mankind.

[Fleshdancer]

14. Am I the only one who thinks it's odd that we're hearing about this??

For four years this administration has been the most secretive, quiet administration I've ever seen. Now the aides are talking to the media??? And about something as devastating as questioning the mental state of the POTUS???? During an election year?

Pardon my cynicism, but I have a hard time believing the Democrats could be THIS lucky. What, if anything, are they playing at??

[JayS]

15. It is not a real story. Here is yesterday's fake story.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_4144.shtml


Democrats and Gun Control


Sometimes people you think are your best friends may actually be your worst enemies, but it can take a while to figure that out


Some folks, in fact, require an amazing length of time to arrive at what ought to be a fairly obvious conclusion, but few can match the Democratic Party for being slow on the uptake.

The Democrats' bosom buddies in the media establishment have been leading them down the primrose path to defeat for about 30 years now, which is how long media liberals have been proclaiming that the American public strongly favors gun control.

[Fleshdancer]

16. okay, that makes more sense then

thanks for clarifying for me

[JayS]

17. The sad thing is it was so believeable! :) n/t

n/t

[seemslikeadream]

48. CommonDreams and Counterpunch are careful what they print

CommonDreams and Counterpunch are careful what they print


He's Acting Like Nixon in the Final DaysHas Bush Gone Over the Edge?


By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

A sensational account of an imploding George Bush is making the rounds.

It's by Doug Thompson, the publisher of Capitol Hill Blue, put out in the dawn hours of June 4.

"President George W. Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately express growing concern over their leader's state of mind."

So begins Thompson's insider report. He goes on,

"In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as 'enemies of the state.'

"It reminds me of the Nixon days," says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House. "Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That's the mood over there." He was obviously talking of late, Watergate-enmired Nixon, when a drunken president would rail on far into the night, and when Kissinger put it around that he had taken over command of the nuclear button.

And talking of the nuclear button, Thompson says he's interviewed, off-the-record, a number of White House staffers who talk of Bujsh declaring that his decisions are "God's will" and then tells aides to "fuck over" anyone they consider to be an opponent of the administration.

He quotes one aide as telling him, "We're at war, there's no doubt about it. What I don't know anymore is just who the enemy might be. We seem to spend more time trying to destroy John Kerry than al Qaeda and our enemies list just keeps growing and growing."

more
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn06042004.html


King George Has Gone Insane
by Kurt Nimmo
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June04/Nimmo0605.htm

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.sophists.org/article312.html

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0604-13.htm

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/06/04/0953763

Over the Edge
The Madness of King George
By KURT NIMMO
http://www.counterpunch.org/nimmo06052004.html

[VolcanoJen]

19. That article was widely published... what's so fake about it?

Even Capitol Hill Blue's byline on the story is Feb 29, 2004.

I'm not sure about the accuracy and reliability of Capitol Hill Blue, but it's not a satire site, and the article linked to is not satire (funny as it may seem).

Here are some links to other sites in which the Lowell Branham article cited was published:

Democrats and Gun Control, by Lowell Branham

http://www.gosanangelo.com/sast/news_politics/article/0,1897,SAST_4959_2688734,00.html

http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=7349

Lowell Branham is a pretty well-known anti-liberal Republican in my part of the country (I think he's out of Knoxville).

ON EDIT:Edited to add "Democrats and Gun Control" byline... this post is more confusing without it.

[seemslikeadream]

21. It would seem to me that the story was credible enough

for the LBN mod to accept it and let it accumulate 250 posts. Aren't there rules one must follow?

:hi:

[JayS]

22. It did get a lot of coverage...but it is not exactly what you would...

...call journalism. See the Democrats & Gun Control story for another true sounding but erroneous story.





http://www.capitolhillblue.com/faq.asp

Don't you take anything seriously?
Nah, we leave that to the politicians (and some of our readers). They take everything, including themselves, far too seriously.

[VolcanoJen]

25. But the "Dems & Gun Control" story wasn't fake.

It's hysterical, and laughingly stupid, but it wasn't fake. The writer is a well-known conservative hysteric columnist. The article wasn't written by the Capitol Blue gang, but by said hysteric consevative columnist in wide syndication.

The story referenced in this thread seems to have been sourced entirely by Capitol Blue. Look, I'm not saying the story is accurate, or that you could take it to the bank, but it's not intended to be fake. Neither was the "Democrats & Gun Control" story.

[JayS]

27. The stories have just enough truth to make them believeable.

I am sure the author was just having fun and the joke went a little far. I know the one on the Democrats & Gun Control is not a real story as I follow those issues closely. But it was funny though. :)

[VolcanoJen]

29. With all due respect, I disagree with your assessment of "fake" stories.

No big deal...

[JayS]

30. That is okay. Here is where we took apart the Gun Control...

...story yesterday. It did seem real at first too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=541304&mesg_id=541304

[VolcanoJen]

31. I guess you misunderstand me. The story is inaccurate; it is not "fake."

By claiming that a story is "fake," you're saying that it was completely fabricated, invented and distributed to the public, with malicious intent. That is not the case.

I read that thread yesterday too, but the thing is, as stupid and moronic as Lowell Branham may seem, he's a legitimate conservative columnist who is in widespread circulation across the midwest. He's hysteric, he's part of the right-wing-attack-machine, but his stories aren't really "fake." It's just not the right word for it. Branham's piece was an opinion piece. We have to be careful about this right-wing plant stuff, and we have to call it for what it is. Calling it "fake" just summarily dismisses it.

I think you're applying your opinion of the Branham story (not written by Capitol Hill Blue staffers, of course) to this story, written by Capitol Hill Blue, about Bush being off his rocker. It may be inaccurate, it may be ridiculous, but by calling it "fake" you're misleading a few people. You're saying the story has no merit, but you can't really back it up by linking to a completely unrelated story written by an unrelated person.

I think I understand where you're coming from, but "fake" is not the right word to describe your feelings about the relative merit of the story in question.

ON EDIT:Too many damned s's in "dismisses."

[JayS]

34. Perhaps another word would be better :) In any case, both...

...items were too poorly written to be of much value. I'm sure there are a few grains of truth in there that a better reporter will later uncover if there is anything to the story. The Lowell Branham piece though...he would have to be on holiday from reality to seriously write that. :)

[VolcanoJen]

35. Well, I've been laughing at Lowell Branham pieces for years...

... but, sadly, they keep popping up in the local papers. :-)

He's a complete asshat, basically...

[JayS]

37. I am going to have to keep a watch out for his work then. I used...

...to read The Onion everyday until the world got so bizarre their stories did not sound like satire anymore. :)

[seemslikeadream]

32. Would you please stop insulting the moderator in LBN

There are rules!

edit for clarity

There are rules for posting in LBN maybe you should read them

[BurtWorm]

33. What's "fake" about that "story?"

It's an opinion piece, evidently by a writer for the The Knoxville News Sentinel (although his name is not listed among the staff at the paper's Website). This could have appeared in any newspaper. By contrast, the story in question purports to be "news," although it takes the form of gossip. In other words, you're comparing an onion to an orange to make a general statement about the fruit stand.

[JayS]

38. I took a little peak at our adversaries and they found the same...

...things I did. I'll post what they wrote since I didn't save anything.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/942488/posts

In this article on Capitol Hill Blue, there are the following lines:

"The report had already been discredited," said Terrance J. Wilkinson, a CIA advisor present at two White House briefings. "This point was clearly made when the President was in the room during at least two of the briefings."

Bush's response was anger, Wilkinson said.

"He said that if the current operatives working for the CIA couldn't prove the story was true, then the agency had better find some who could," Wilkinson said. "He said he knew the story was true and so would the world after American troops secured the country."

Serious allegations. But I notice it is a single source. Being a conservative, I value the lessons of experience, and experience has told me that single sources are to be treated with skeptism. When I see one, I want to know more about the source quoted so as to establish if I should treat that source as credible.
So what about "Terrance J. Wilkinson"?

A Google search for "Terrance J. Wilkinson" found no results (which will change when Google picks up the Capitol Hill Blue article).

Google suggested that the name might be Terrence. But a Google search on "Terrence J. Wilkinson" also produced no hits.

Perhaps the middle initial is the problem. Alas, a Google search on "Terrence Wilkinson" CIA gave no hits, and a Google search on "Terrance Wilkinson" CIA also yielded no hits.

A Google news search on Terrence Wilkinson comes up with nothing relevant. So does a Google news search of Terrance Wilkinson.

A Google search on one of the phrases from one of the quotations comes up empty.

I would anticipate a 'CIA advisor' who attends the same briefings as the President to live somewhere near D.C. But there are no listings according to Anywho for a Terrance or Terrence Wilkinson in D.C., Maryland, or Virginia.

A Google search on "CIA Advisor" Wilkinson also comes up empty.

Perhaps Capitol Hill Blue would be better served by providing some more information about the person quoted so that others can judge his credibility. That is, if he exists.

[BurtWorm]

39. I think it's wise to be skeptical of the Thompson story.

I just don't think you make that case by referring to the Branham editorial. This Thompson story, it seems to me, is too good to be true.

[Eric J in MN]

18. Who is DOUG THOMPSON and why would a "worried White House

Who is DOUG THOMPSON and why would a "worried White House aide" share his worries with Doug Thompson instead of a Washington Post reporter?

I don't believe the article.

[BurtWorm]

36. I'm skeptical of the story, but just because it isn't a WP story

doesn't mean it wasn't shared with a WP reporter. The WP is conservative about stories impugning the sanity of the "president." CHB sells itself as the kind of venue that isn't afraid of such stories--at least it did in the Clinton years, when CHB stories were about what nuts the Clintons were.

It's precisely because of what CHB was five years ago that makes me doubt the veracity of this story. But that doesn't mean it really ISN'T true.

[JayS]

40. I'm always skeptical when there are only unidentified aides...

...providing the information, but maybe there is some truth to it.

You are looking at this story, right?

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/printer_4636.shtml

I noticed the link given did not match the story.

What makes me most skeptical is this quote:

“We seem to spend more time trying to destroy John Kerry than al Qaeda and our enemies list just keeps growing and growing.”

If they were working on knocking Kerry down this early in the game there would be a lot more activity. True, they are doing some pot shots for kicks and grins...but the attack squad has not even broken camp yet. After seeing Bush run for Governor and then President, there just is not enough evil in the air for them to be seriously working on anything big.

He will spend hours personally reviewing and approving every attack ad against his Democratic opponent and then kiss off a meeting on economic issues.

I doubt this also. He has the best attack dogs money can buy and he trusts them to do their job.

[linazelle]

42. You sure are spending a lot of time trying to discredit this....

Methinks you protesteth too much.

[JayS]

46. Perhaps I'm just trying to give fair warning that we need to be...

...a little careful about what we accept as legitimate news. If it appears that we will believe anything you can bet that we will be made to look ridiculous.

[seemslikeadream]

47. CommonDreams and Counterpunch are careful what they print

He's Acting Like Nixon in the Final DaysHas Bush Gone Over the Edge?


By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

A sensational account of an imploding George Bush is making the rounds.

It's by Doug Thompson, the publisher of Capitol Hill Blue, put out in the dawn hours of June 4.

"President George W. Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately express growing concern over their leader's state of mind."

So begins Thompson's insider report. He goes on,

"In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as 'enemies of the state.'

"It reminds me of the Nixon days," says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House. "Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That's the mood over there." He was obviously talking of late, Watergate-enmired Nixon, when a drunken president would rail on far into the night, and when Kissinger put it around that he had taken over command of the nuclear button.

And talking of the nuclear button, Thompson says he's interviewed, off-the-record, a number of White House staffers who talk of Bujsh declaring that his decisions are "God's will" and then tells aides to "fuck over" anyone they consider to be an opponent of the administration.

He quotes one aide as telling him, "We're at war, there's no doubt about it. What I don't know anymore is just who the enemy might be. We seem to spend more time trying to destroy John Kerry than al Qaeda and our enemies list just keeps growing and growing."

more
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn06042004.html


King George Has Gone Insane
by Kurt Nimmo
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June04/Nimmo0605.htm

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.sophists.org/article312.html

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0604-13.htm

Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/06/04/0953763

Over the Edge
The Madness of King George
By KURT NIMMO
http://www.counterpunch.org/nimmo06052004.html

[JayS]

49. "careful what they print"

I've only read CommonDreams but I found them to publish what fits a particular viewpoint without regards to any journalistic standards. If they have changed any in the last few months, I am not aware of it.

[Lou_C]

23. Isn't that signs of Schizophrenia?

:shrug:

[seemslikeadream]

28. This is why I believe there is something to the story

from JohnOneillsMemory in LBN

Psych profile+fascism receptivity+Lakoff's family framing concept links.


This is entirely predictable. Bush* suffers from severe mental illness as has been well documented. We're experiencing Columbine High School on a global level.

Georgie was abused by his mother, shadowed by his father, shamed for mourning his sister's death and belittled in general. He became a self-destructive alcoholic with a cruel streak.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1033904,00.html
(So George, How Do You Feel About Your Mom and Dad?)

His 'authoritarian personality' matches what researchers discovered to be a marker for 'fascism receptivity' when the phenomenon was researched after WWII.
http://www.anesi.com/fscale.htm
(The F-factor questionnaire)

More recently, researchers have analyzed the components of the conservative personality. Their findings point to the fear-based tendencies that are similar in fundamentalist religious views and fascism receptivity, again the 'authoritarian personality.'
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml
(What Makes Up a Conservative Personality)

This family experience modeling sets us up for how we view all our relationships at work and in government, too. Linguist George Lakoff explains how this 'framing' is used in political language and propaganda.
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml
(Lakoff Explains Framing as Key to Thinking)

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=12&ItemID=4294
(Lakoff Explains Gender Language in Promoting War)

[Lou_C]

41. I would love to do a study on Bush/Schizophrenia

It might be the reason that he tried to kick the windows out of the Limo when McCain won a state out east.

[Sugarbleus]

26. More like Sociopathic/Narcissistic Personality disorder....

if the story is true. Even if it isn't, shrubya IS a sociopath; the worst type to be in charge of anything important. No reason. No sense of conscience. No empathy. No rational thinking. Mean streak. Self serving. Bloated ego. Cannot take responsibility or accept blame, even if applicable. Caught up in his own world/beliefs, blinders fully in place. Gradiosity. Basically insecure but hides it well.

Yes, kids, he's a spot on candidate for some serious cognitive behavioral therapy. Did someone say they're keeping him AWAY from the "button"? whew!


Please, George, smoke some pot and get over yourself!

[snippy]

43. I think the article is true but written with a bias against Bush.

There are hundreds of articles that describe a single incident of Bush's behavior which was entirely consistent with the behavior described in this article. The interview in which Bush repeatedly dropped the F bomb and mocked Karla Faye Tucker is one, and the article about Bush meeting with the new prime minister of Canada and describing his orders from the republican God and railing against Chirac is another. However, this recent article reminds me most of this USA Today article which was wriiten as a praise filled puff piece on Bush but describes Bush's obsession with micro-managing the invasion of Iraq, his mood swings, and his selection by the republican God to wage war against terror. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-01-bush-cover_x.htm


On edit: I forgot to include my favorite line from the USA Today article:

"He's being hard on himself; he gave up sweets just before the war began."

[IggleDoer]

44. Campaign note to Kerry:

When the Repubs come at you with charges of "Flip-Flopping" don't counter them citing the term "Flip-Flop" too. Say the Neo-Cons are displaying "Erratic Behavior" and note all the times that they have changed their minds. "Erratic Behavior" will make the uncommitted voter question wither the Repubs are stable to continue running the country. The Dems already know they are not.

[seabeyond]

50. kick

:)