Seized by the power?
April 28, 2004 8:30 AM   Subscribe

"At some time in the past, according to both [redacted] and [redacted] the President suffered what one of his aides called "a very minor seizure" and as a result of this, the President has a very difficult time following any unscripted conversations."

Note: this link comes from a rather conspiratorial website [another source], but claims to be a report from a reporter with White House access. [/caveat] Via Easybakecoven.
posted by moonbird (28 comments total)

 
Wow, its just like the West Wing. Except that there's no evidence that people who take too much coke run an increased risk of having MS.
posted by biffa at 8:37 AM on April 28, 2004


So it wasn't really a pretzel.
posted by machaus at 8:39 AM on April 28, 2004


Well, it'll certainly make the election debates more interesting, that's for sure. If it's true. Which, given the source, I doubt.
posted by aramaic at 8:39 AM on April 28, 2004


Link just goes to a blank page for me. (moz/win)
posted by xmutex at 8:41 AM on April 28, 2004


Metafilter: the wings that rumour flies on. I mean come on, the website is ridiculously conspiratorial and the information is uncorroborated. The best attribution we get is "reporter with access to the White House and Presidential press briefings". Um, I'm a reporter - I have a blog. And I have access to the White House and Presidential press briefings too. Maybe I'm the source!

Then again rumour does have its uses. Maybe putting this on Metafilter will have a real reporter look into it and maybe, just maybe, it's true. Of course even if it is true, is this any worse than a president with Alzheimer's?
posted by Nelson at 8:45 AM on April 28, 2004


This sounds a lot like bullshit, it sounded vaguely plausible until the (from second link) "At one point during a staff conference, the President stood up and began to speak in an unknown language" bit. Born again or not, I don't think he speaks in tongues.

Honestly people, there's plenty of real things to be concerned/outraged about, no need for conspiracy theory.
posted by malphigian at 8:46 AM on April 28, 2004


The link is a little better in Opera 7.x but quite a bit is still [redacted]
posted by faceonmars at 8:47 AM on April 28, 2004


I think somebody forgot to put on their Velostat hat this morning.
posted by headspace at 8:50 AM on April 28, 2004


Come on. An unsubstantiated "report" from a clearly biased site (or two)? Isn't his reliance on completely scripted public appearances better explained simply by him being a terrible speaker and completely in over his head as POTUS?
posted by mkultra at 8:53 AM on April 28, 2004


Their source is TBR News, which is The Barnes Review. From The Barnes Review site, you can reach charming book order pages like this one.

'Nuff said, I think.
posted by bingo at 9:00 AM on April 28, 2004


Come on. An unsubstantiated "report" from a clearly biased site (or two)? Isn't his reliance on completely scripted public appearances better explained simply by him being a terrible speaker and completely in over his head as POTUS?

Absolutely! Honestly, who the heck knows, but I find explanations like this for genuine imbecility rather fascinating. Here's a grain of salt for ya...
posted by moonbird at 9:01 AM on April 28, 2004


After doing a little footwork, I'm satisfied that this is complete bullshit. The first link does not work for me (blank page, mozilla, etc) but the Guerilla News Network post claims that the article comes from here, which finally attributes the article to TBR News.

The actual article on TBR News is different from the one posted on the other sites, as it includes a lot of discussion about some sort of fundamental Christian conspiracy within the Whitehouse. Here's a letter to the editor of TBR News, the response to which claims that the author of the article is an "Orthodox Jew who is really offended by the rampant, aggressive Pentecostalism practiced [in the Whitehouse] and having heard about us from a friend, decided to pump all kinds of delightful information into our dispersing machine."

This is an interesting view of how journalism can be perverted, but beyond that, it's really nothing more than a curiosity.
posted by mmcg at 9:05 AM on April 28, 2004


but I find explanations like this for genuine imbecility rather fascinating.

I'm with moonbird. Blaming Bush's idiocy on something else lets him off the hook...after November, It'll be a moot point anyway. : >
posted by amberglow at 9:08 AM on April 28, 2004


I heard he was really an alien. No really! I read it on the Internet so it must be true!
posted by briank at 9:09 AM on April 28, 2004


I know that Bush avoids live and unscripted press conferences ...... will there be live televised debates between him and Kerry? And are they real debates or do they just take turns talking about issues ...... and finally how did Bush perform last time against Gore?

Excuse all the questions but I am not America....
posted by kenaman at 9:16 AM on April 28, 2004


Complete & utter bull. On the other hand, the linked site is great as a source of humor.
posted by davidmsc at 9:27 AM on April 28, 2004


Posts like this make it embarassing to tell rational, mature friends about Metafilter. Incidentally, no rationale can otherwise explain our president's daily douchebaggery to non-Americans.
posted by dhoyt at 9:34 AM on April 28, 2004


Well, if it is true, maybe he could discuss the matter with Ronald Reagan.

Ok, yeah, that joke was in really bad taste. But so is the whole thread.
posted by ilsa at 9:41 AM on April 28, 2004


Posts like this make it embarassing to tell rational, mature friends about Metafilter

dhoyt: sorry you feel that way... I made sure to include a caveat that the source could be questionable, and most of the readers, like me, don't buy it offhand. But it is a creative piece of speculation. I presented it as nothing more than that.
posted by moonbird at 9:44 AM on April 28, 2004


moonbird: I wasn't meaning to bash your post per se, just hoping for more filter in the Metafilter. What's to discuss once we've unanimously assessed it to be a silly conspiracy theory? It'd be more accurate to bash prisonplanet.com, I suppose.
posted by dhoyt at 10:02 AM on April 28, 2004


Vice President Cheney is the de facto President of the United States.

Assuming this sentence is true, the only part of this arrangement that seems technically wrong would be a continued deception that Bush is running things. If the President becomes unable to serve, the VP is supposed to take over.

Which brings me to the obvious question: why do things this way if Bush really did have this problem? I can't see what the administration would have to gain by proping up W as a figurehead, and so this doesn't seem credible.
posted by weston at 12:45 PM on April 28, 2004


bingo Last time I checked, my local library carries Mein Kampf. Does that mean I shouldn't believe what's in their other books?

/topic
Bush has trouble with intricate questions? News at [redacted].
posted by haqspan at 1:26 PM on April 28, 2004


I can't see what the administration would have to gain by proping up W as a figurehead, and so this doesn't seem credible.

The pity vote?
posted by y2karl at 2:07 PM on April 28, 2004


bingo Last time I checked, my local library carries Mein Kampf. Does that mean I shouldn't believe what's in their other books?

did you check out what other books are available at that site? When I saw Mein Kampf, I thought it was a rushed judgment, because I think that book is an interesting part of history/biography, and should be available somewhere... although I can't imagine I would ever want to actually buy it, which in a way clues you in to the fact that a publisher making money off that title must be catering to a particular sort of crowd. (and I'm very interested in WWII history - own 2 or 3 hitler bios and Shirer's R&F of the 3rd Reich)

But anyway, the point was, the other books on the site were all holocaust revisionism type stuff. So you don't have to go on the presence of hitler's book alone.

The pity vote?

There's definitely a case to be made for bush being a bit of a figurehead without supposing any sort of brain damage, and the purpose of having him at all is that people like him, whereas they don't relate to cheney & can see pretty clearly that he's a rich bastard etc. But bush is yr local neighborly religious down-home "man's man", apparently.

Why this is, I can't say. He seems like a rich kid in over his head from where I'm sitting -not in charge, not knowledgable, not skilled, and only nervously friendly & "local". I don't get why people feel secure under him.
posted by mdn at 2:32 PM on April 28, 2004


yoh gw-b
posted by specialk420 at 2:57 PM on April 28, 2004


will there be live televised debates between him and Kerry? And are they real debates or do they just take turns talking about issues ...... and finally how did Bush perform last time against Gore?

They're debates, but topics are usually submitted in advance, as far i know, and most participants just spout a canned reponse unless the other participant or the mediators force them to respond or clarify or answer. Bush did badly in the first one, but the media focused on Gore's aggressiveness, instead of Bush. Expectations were (and still are) so low for Bush that people were happy he didn't trip over his shoelaces on the way to the podium.
posted by amberglow at 3:36 PM on April 28, 2004


haqspan: what mdn said. Not that your analogy really made sense anyway.A library's relationship to any random book it contains is hardly the same as a news website's relationship to a relatively few select books (which revolve around a common theme) that can be purchased directly from the site.
posted by bingo at 6:27 PM on April 28, 2004


[This is embarassing.]


I did like this line though:

"At one point during a staff conference, the President stood up and began to speak in an unknown language"


He ALWAYS speaks in an unknown language!
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:25 PM on April 28, 2004


« Older Stupid Word Tricks   |   The Blissful Life Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments