Retired Officials Say Bush Must Go

[IJ Reilly]

This looks to be fairly big story for later in the week, when the statement is formally released.

The 26 ex-diplomats and military leaders say his foreign policy has harmed national security. Several served under Republicans.

WASHINGTON — A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November.

The group, which calls itself Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, will explicitly condemn Bush's foreign policy, according to several of those who signed the document.

"It is clear that the statement calls for the defeat of the administration," said William C. Harrop, the ambassador to Israel under President Bush's father and one of the group's principal organizers.

Those signing the document, which will be released in Washington on Wednesday, include 20 former U.S. ambassadors, appointed by presidents of both parties, to countries including Israel, the former Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia.

Others are senior State Department officials from the Carter, Reagan and Clinton administrations and former military leaders, including retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East under President Bush's father. Hoar is a prominent critic of the war in Iraq.

Some of those signing the document — such as Hoar and former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill A. McPeak — have identified themselves as supporters of Sen. John F. Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. But most have not endorsed any candidate, members of the group said.

It is unusual for so many former high-level military officials and career diplomats to issue such an overtly political message during a presidential campaign.

...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-diplo13jun13,1,1142936.story

[Neserk]

WOW! The response will be interesting.

[Neserk]

IF you want to read the rest of the article without filling out a form here is a link through yahoo

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=2026&e=1&u=/latimests/20040613/ts_latimes/retiredofficialssaybushmustgo

[Neserk]

Republicans are taking a real beating today. Maybe we should give him a break ;)

[blackfox]

"you say containment, I say preemption...I say preemption, you say containment...containment, preemption...containment, preemption...let's call the whole thing off..."

[numediaman]

More from Capitol Hill Blue:

Washington Shrink Calls Bush a Paranoid, Sadistic Meglomaniac
By Staff and Wire Reports
Jun 14, 2004, 00:22

A new book by a prominent Washington psychoanalyst says President George W. Bush is a "paranoid meglomaniac" as well as a sadist and "untreated alcoholic." The doctor's analysis appears to confirm earlier reports the President may be emotionally unstable.

Dr. Justin Frank, writing in Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President, also says the President has a ""lifelong streak of sadism, ranging from childhood pranks (using firecrackers to explode frogs) to insulting journalists, gloating over state executions ... [and] pumping his fist gleefully before the bombing of Baghdad."

Even worse, Dr. Frank concludes, the President's years of heavy drinking "may have affected his brain function - and his decision to quit drinking without the help of a 12-step program [puts] him at far higher risk of relapse."

Dr. Frank's revelations comes on the heels of last week's Capitol Hill Blue exclusive that revealed increasing concern by White House aides over Bush's emotional stability.

Aides, who spoke only on condition that their names be withheld, told stories of wide mood swings by the President who would go from quoting the Bible one minute to obscenity-filled outbursts the next.

Bush shows an inability to grieve - dating back to age 7, when his sister died. "The family's reaction - no funeral and no mourning - set in motion his life-long pattern of turning away from pain [and hiding] behind antic behavior," says Frank, who says Bush may suffer from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

Other findings by Dr. Frank:
• His mother, Barbara Bush - tabbed by some family friends as "the one who instills fear" - had trouble connecting emotionally with her son, Frank argues.
• George H.W. Bush's "emotional and physical absence during his son's youth triggered feelings of both adoration and revenge in George W."
• The President suffers from "character pathology," including "grandiosity" and "megalomania" -- viewing himself, America and God as interchangeable.

Dr. Frank has been a psychiatrist for 35 years and is director of psychiatry at George Washington University. A Democrat, he once headed the Washington Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.

In an interview with The Washington Post's Richard Leiby, Dr. Frank said he began to be concerned about Bush's behavior in 2002.

"I was really very unsettled by him and I started watching everything he did and reading what he wrote, and watching him on videotape. I felt he was disturbed," Dr. Frank told Leiby. Bush, he said, "fits the profile of a former drinker whose alcoholism has been arrested but not treated."

Dr. Frank's expert recommendation? "Our sole treatment option -- for his benefit and for ours -- is to remove President Bush from office . . . before it is too late."

[Neserk]

WHile I may agree with his conclusions, it is extremely unprofessional of him. You can't diagnose someone w/o several consultations and certainly would not make it public. Shame, shame.

[IJ Reilly]

Yes, I think this qualifies as a cheap shot. The Bush personality has always disturbed me, if only on a completely amateur observer level. But I don't think anyone, including a Phd psychiatrist, can make a valid clinical diagnoses based on watching video tapes. In the small fact verification department, though, Barbara Bush apparently isn't the nice sweet granny we've been lead to believe. In a passage in his book, Al Franken tells a story about his unpleasant encounter with Barbara Bush on a airplane. He later found out that she's got a more private reputation as a very tough character -- as the Bush family "enforcer."

[Sayhey]

WHile I may agree with his conclusions, it is extremely unprofessional of him. You can't diagnose someone w/o several consultations and certainly would not make it public. Shame, shame.

How true. This of course never stops folks from putting out such crap. Take a look at the GOP and their talking heads response to Al Gore's speech in which they "diagnosed" him as having gone crazy.

[wwworry]

I don't see why a doctor can not have an opinion about the kind of crap Bush comes out with, an opinion informed by professional knowledge. However, the treatment he recommends is not for Bush but for us. So since that doctor has no power over that patient he can say what he wants.

How many times have we heard about the possible medical maladies of ancient Romans etc. Those are all based on guesswork as well.

[Neserk]

I don't see why a doctor can not have an opinion about the kind of crap Bush comes out with, an opinion informed by professional knowledge. However, the treatment he recommends is not for Bush but for us. So since that doctor has no power over that patient he can say what he wants.



Based on my experience in psychology one can NOT diagnos like this. We specifically talked about psychiatrists/psychologists "diagnosising" people like Marilyn Monroe and Nero. You simply can't do without time with the person. It is very unprofessional of him to use his degree to make the comments.

[wwworry]

I think it is pretty clear that it is an opinion, not a full fledged diagnosis. It is ironic that I can say that Bush is a megalomaniac but the doctor can not have that same opinion.

[IJ Reilly]

I think it is pretty clear that it is an opinion, not a full fledged diagnosis. It is ironic that I can say that Bush is a megalomaniac but the doctor can not have that same opinion.

He can have any opinion he likes, but he shouldn't represent it as medical.

[Voltron]

I think it is pretty clear that it is an opinion, not a full fledged diagnosis. It is ironic that I can say that Bush is a megalomaniac but the doctor can not have that same opinion.
Yet you would've voted for Gore and probably did. See his speeches lately? :eek:

[wwworry]

I don't recall Gore talking about his private communications with God. As if God, creator of infinte time and space has some sort of preference for the people that live on part of North America. And if God is so much for this war then how come He is allowing all these stupid mistakes Bush is making?

Anyway, so we can have opinions about why Bush blew up frogs as a child or why Bush thinks God told him to invade Iraq but a doctor can not? The doctor is speculating based on his knowledge. While we might presume Bush to be "an idiot" or "coo-coo", even "daft", "missing a cuppla scews" and "the personification of America's doom" this doctor uses the language he knows and makes the kind of connections he knows. Whilst the press reports it as a medical opinon they should perhaps report it as "the opinion of a doctor". It makes a difference. Take it for what you will. It is no less valid than what you or I say every day. You and I and everyone else have opinions based on personal experience.

He can have any opinion he likes, but he shouldn't represent it as medical. Who is representing it as "medical"? What is a "medical" opinion anyway? Doctors go on the information they have as do we. When I say Bush is crazy it is no more or less valid than his. What we can take from his speculation is that it may only be a "more fully informed by Psychiatry" type of speculation. Again, take it for what it's worth. You know he has never personally examined Bush but you also know that this is someone that tends to look at unresolved personal traumas as influencers on personal behavior.

[Neserk]

He can have any opinion he likes, but he shouldn't represent it as medical.

Exactly. He is abusing his degree. Although I'm inclined to agree with him :D But since my degree is a mere BA. I'm free and clear because I can't diagnos(e) anyone, anyhow. Just give my slightly educated opinion.

[IJ Reilly]

Who is representing it as "medical"? What is a "medical" opinion anyway? Doctors go on the information they have as do we. When I say Bush is crazy it is no more or less valid than his. What we can take from his speculation is that it may only be a "more fully informed by Psychiatry" type of speculation. Again, take it for what it's worth. You know he has never personally examined Bush but you also know that this is someone that tends to look at unresolved personal traumas as influencers on personal behavior.

Dr. Frank is clearly representing his opinion as a medical opinion. I doubt many respectable Doctors of Psychiatry would be willing to attempt a diagnoses of a person's psychiatric state after watching them on TV. I am taking it for what it's worth -- next to nothing.

[Agathon]

Kudos to the officials described in the first post. It's good that responsible people put themselves and their reputations at risk to protest against an administration that abandoned reason and diplomacy long ago.