Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II



 Religions > Atheism > Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Brian E. Clark"
Date: 31 Mar 2004 08:42:14 PM
Object: Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

* Exaggerated self-importance and pomposity
* Grandiose behavior
* A rigid, judgmental outlook
* Impatience
* Childish behavior
* Irresponsible behavior
* Irrational rationalization
* Projection
* Overreaction

Well, Bush aside, this list describes more than a few people I've met
who work in the IT and engineering fields. ;-)
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.

User: "stoney"

Title: Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II 02 Apr 2004 01:49:36 PM
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 02:42:14 GMT, Brian E. Clark
<reply@newsgroup.only.please>, Message ID:
<MPG.1ad54b936d376cee98a30d@netnews.comcast.net> wrote in alt.atheism;

stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

* Exaggerated self-importance and pomposity
* Grandiose behavior
* A rigid, judgmental outlook
* Impatience
* Childish behavior
* Irresponsible behavior
* Irrational rationalization
* Projection
* Overreaction


Well, Bush aside, this list describes more than a few people I've met
who work in the IT and engineering fields. ;-)

And elsewhere.


Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
User: "Kevin Robinson"

Title: Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II 02 Apr 2004 09:41:03 PM
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<5ugr601uejoso7kbcst2nd65g1kfp7fjuv@4ax.com>...

On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 02:42:14 GMT, Brian E. Clark
<reply@newsgroup.only.please>, Message ID:
<MPG.1ad54b936d376cee98a30d@netnews.comcast.net> wrote in alt.atheism;

stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

* Exaggerated self-importance and pomposity
* Grandiose behavior
* A rigid, judgmental outlook
* Impatience
* Childish behavior
* Irresponsible behavior
* Irrational rationalization
* Projection
* Overreaction


Well, Bush aside, this list describes more than a few people I've met
who work in the IT and engineering fields. ;-)


And elsewhere.

Whether GWB is clinically an alcoholic, however recovering, is
pure speculation. Any such diagnosis done by a professional
counselor who hasn't actually interviewed the "patient" is
bound to be contrary to canons of ethics.
Does anyone remember the hoo-hah when psychobabblers tried to
shrink Ol' Slick as a sex addict? Same difference.
Kevin
(not a Bushie, actually)
.
User: "stoney"

Title: Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II 03 Apr 2004 12:10:39 PM
On 2 Apr 2004 19:41:03 -0800,
(Kevin Robinson),
Message ID: <3be3f335.0404021941.718c7d74@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;

stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<5ugr601uejoso7kbcst2nd65g1kfp7fjuv@4ax.com>...

On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 02:42:14 GMT, Brian E. Clark
<reply@newsgroup.only.please>, Message ID:
<MPG.1ad54b936d376cee98a30d@netnews.comcast.net> wrote in alt.atheism;

stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

* Exaggerated self-importance and pomposity
* Grandiose behavior
* A rigid, judgmental outlook
* Impatience
* Childish behavior
* Irresponsible behavior
* Irrational rationalization
* Projection
* Overreaction


Well, Bush aside, this list describes more than a few people I've met
who work in the IT and engineering fields. ;-)


And elsewhere.


Whether GWB is clinically an alcoholic, however recovering, is
pure speculation. Any such diagnosis done by a professional
counselor who hasn't actually interviewed the "patient" is
bound to be contrary to canons of ethics.

The article doesn't indicate a professional diagnosis. It states based
on; Bush's stated history, speeches, written quotes, as well as
comparisons with clinical observation such a speculative conclusion.
There is a difference.
If you notice, via the replies, no one is taking the article as an
actual diagnosis. Instead, people are having fun with it-myself
included.

Does anyone remember the hoo-hah when psychobabblers tried to
shrink Ol' Slick as a sex addict? Same difference.

Kevin
(not a Bushie, actually)



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
User: "Kevin Robinson"

Title: Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II 03 Apr 2004 07:28:32 PM
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<b8vt60hkgml99j1qd76frjvitas2iv6ptq@4ax.com>...

On 2 Apr 2004 19:41:03 -0800,

(Kevin Robinson),
Message ID: <3be3f335.0404021941.718c7d74@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;

Whether GWB is clinically an alcoholic, however recovering, is
pure speculation. Any such diagnosis done by a professional
counselor who hasn't actually interviewed the "patient" is
bound to be contrary to canons of ethics.


stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<5ugr601uejoso7kbcst2nd65g1kfp7fjuv@4ax.com>...


The article doesn't indicate a professional diagnosis. It states based
on; Bush's stated history, speeches, written quotes, as well as
comparisons with clinical observation such a speculative conclusion.
There is a difference.

If you notice, via the replies, no one is taking the article as an
actual diagnosis. Instead, people are having fun with it-myself
included.

Alan Bisbort, who wrote the original article, doesn't seem to
be a professional psychologist or the like, but a mere journalist.
He apparently had a brother who drank himself to death.
Van Wormer (shades of Animal House) is a Phd. in social work,
who is responsible for a program in substance abuse at
the University of Northern Iowa. She's the one I'm pointing a
finger at. That a leftist journo who writes for Mother Jones
wants to pin the "alcoholic" label on his political opponent
doesn't surprise. Someone such as Prof. van Wormer ought to
be more reticent.
Bush admits to abusing booze in his younger days. What seems
to bother some in the recovery movement is that he didn't stop
drinking by joining one of their programs. He claims that he
had a spiritual awakening, under Billy Graham, no less, and his
involvement in his church probably served a similar function as
going to AA meetings does for some, but he didn't follow the
official 12-steps in an official program, so he can't really
have dealt with his problems. By AA logic, someone who quits
drinking some other way than theirs is in great danger of
slipping back to the bottle.
On alt.atheism I would expect a little skepticism about the AA
model. If I ever thought I needed to quit drinking and wanted
a support group, the Secular Organization for Sobriety would be
more to my liking. I have also known young hell-raisers who
have been convinced - or forced by a court - to seek AODA
counseling and straightened themselves out, either by quitting
drinking or learning to be moderate in their alcohol use.
The crypto-religion of AA isn't the only way to go.
Kevin
(neither a counselor, nor a Republican)
.
User: "stoney"

Title: Re: Bush-Dry Drunk I, II, & II 04 Apr 2004 01:44:49 PM
On 3 Apr 2004 17:28:32 -0800,
(Kevin Robinson),
Message ID: <3be3f335.0404031728.11fc137@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;

stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<b8vt60hkgml99j1qd76frjvitas2iv6ptq@4ax.com>...

On 2 Apr 2004 19:41:03 -0800,

(Kevin Robinson),
Message ID: <3be3f335.0404021941.718c7d74@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;


Whether GWB is clinically an alcoholic, however recovering, is
pure speculation. Any such diagnosis done by a professional
counselor who hasn't actually interviewed the "patient" is
bound to be contrary to canons of ethics.


stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in message news:<5ugr601uejoso7kbcst2nd65g1kfp7fjuv@4ax.com>...


The article doesn't indicate a professional diagnosis. It states based
on; Bush's stated history, speeches, written quotes, as well as
comparisons with clinical observation such a speculative conclusion.
There is a difference.

If you notice, via the replies, no one is taking the article as an
actual diagnosis. Instead, people are having fun with it-myself
included.


Alan Bisbort, who wrote the original article, doesn't seem to
be a professional psychologist or the like, but a mere journalist.
He apparently had a brother who drank himself to death.
Van Wormer (shades of Animal House) is a Phd. in social work,
who is responsible for a program in substance abuse at
the University of Northern Iowa. She's the one I'm pointing a
finger at. That a leftist journo who writes for Mother Jones
wants to pin the "alcoholic" label on his political opponent
doesn't surprise. Someone such as Prof. van Wormer ought to
be more reticent.

Ok. Thank you for the clarification.

Bush admits to abusing booze in his younger days. What seems
to bother some in the recovery movement is that he didn't stop
drinking by joining one of their programs. He claims that he
had a spiritual awakening, under Billy Graham, no less, and his
involvement in his church probably served a similar function as
going to AA meetings does for some, but he didn't follow the
official 12-steps in an official program, so he can't really
have dealt with his problems. By AA logic, someone who quits
drinking some other way than theirs is in great danger of
slipping back to the bottle.

AA and 'logic' are diametric opposites.
One doesn't need a 12-step process, a higher power or anything other
than their own mind to beat it.

On alt.atheism I would expect a little skepticism about the AA
model. If I ever thought I needed to quit drinking and wanted
a support group, the Secular Organization for Sobriety would be
more to my liking. I have also known young hell-raisers who
have been convinced - or forced by a court - to seek AODA
counseling and straightened themselves out, either by quitting
drinking or learning to be moderate in their alcohol use.
The crypto-religion of AA isn't the only way to go.

No argument.


Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.






  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER