Will Michael Moore Be The One To Bring Up Bush's Cocaine Abuse?

[DrFunkenstein]

There was a hilarious moment in Fahrenheit 9-11 when Mike mentions that Bush skipped his physical - and Clapton's "Cocaine" plays in the background.

Moore was really the person who brought the AWOL story to the media's attention - thanks again, Dan Rather, for mentioning it during a prime time debate!

Do you think Mike will push the envelope again?

[EnfantTerrible]

1. He may

but would it be the most credible source? I love MM... but it seems to me that the media too easily relagates him to the fringe. He's painted as "extreme"... I don't know. It's just a thought.

[mr_binklesworth]

2. I hope not...

I think that fire should be fought w/ fire, eye for an eye, etc. Answering the discrediting of Kerry's Vietnam service with the AWOL/etc. scandal was justified.
In other words, we should stick to the issues as best as we can, but when we're attacked, only then should we retaliate.

I hope Kerry runs a clean campaign, as issues permit. We can win on issues alone.

Cheers!
-Mike

[EnfantTerrible]

3. Welcome to DU mr_b

I think these things CAN (and should) be brought up. I don't think that Kerry needs to address them specifically, but get 'em out in the ether. Let 'em float around and create doubt. IMO

[DrFunkenstein]

5. Kerry Explains Why This Is A Relevant Campaign Issue

Kerry was asked by reporters to explain why he thought that questions surrounding George Bush regarding whether or not he had used cocaine were more substantively relevant than Gore's use of marijuana. Kerry, noting that Al Gore had already admitted his use of marijuana, said:

"(H)e (Gore) said 'I used it.' So that's not an issue... And I don't think Al Gore intends, you know, to make prior use an issue of other people, except to the degree that it affects public policy."

Pressed later on the question of the Bush cocaine rumors, Kerry laid out his thinking on why Bush's drug use, if substantiated, is indeed an important issue for voters to consider:

"The issue about George Bush is not the fact that he may have used it, said Kerry. "The issue about George Bush is, how can you, if you have (used cocaine), have a position that is so at odds in terms of being a governor where you send a lot of other people who may have done the same thing you do to jail. That's the issue. It's not a question of whether he used it or when he used it, it's a question of what his policy is today and whether that's hypocritical and dangerous."

The Week Online spoke with Kerry Spokesman David Wade, who reiterated the Senator's position.

"The Vice President has long admitted that he has used marijuana," said Wade. "Governor Bush, on the other hand, will say only that when he was young and irresponsible, he was young and irresponsible. But when Bush has had the opportunity to score political points in Texas by promulgating tough, extremely punitive new laws against drug users, he has been happy to do so."

http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4508.shtml

[EnfantTerrible]

7. Thank you Dr.

Pretty smart way to field the question. I retract my earlier statement that Kerry shouldn't speak to it. He's spoken to it eloquently and revealed the heart of the issue. God it makes me feel good that he's running.


:D

[Dookus]

8. Nope

they're gonna throw everything they can at Kerry. He needs to fight back. As long as he tells the truth, it's fine by me.

[murielm99]

4. Kitty Kelley has already brought it up.

They will certainly write her off as a gossip, and unreliable.

However, it will get people talking again. Then, another journalist might pick it up.

[DrFunkenstein]

6. Bush Has Always Refused To Answer This Question Directly

Bush has essentially admitted that he used cocaine in his Clintonesque, carefully worded partial denials. He won't deny using cocaine or marijuana, though under persistent questioning he said that he hadn't used cocaine in the last 7 years. Most newspapers report that he denies using cocaine since 1974, but that's not exactly true.

That is the most favorable interpretation of what Bush said, but since Bush and his campaign have already made Clintonesque denials on other issues, we need to look at his words carefully.

What Bush actually said was ""I could have passed the FBI background check on the standards applied on the most stringent conditions when my dad was president of the United States - a 15-year period," Mr. Bush said. This is ambiguous because background forms ask slightly different questions, depending on the position. Drug questions can go back one year, seven years or 10 years. Bush Jr. didn't have any formal position in his father's administration, so which one applies is unclear. And 15-years is not one of the choices.

Since Bush Sr.'s presidency began in January 1989, reporters assumed that Jr. was denying drug use for 15 years before that, to 1974. But that is not at all clear. His only direct statement was for seven years before today. He could easily have been denying drug use only for 15 years before today, based on 7 or 10 years dating back from the END of his dad's term. 10 years before 1993, the end of Bush Sr.'s term, is pretty close to 15 years before today.

The Clinton administration actually has a stricter standard than Bush did -- the FBI now asks about any drug use after age 18. But Governor Bush has refused to say whether he would pass that standard, even though that is what he will be asked if he wins. Bush also has refused to answer whether he could have passed the FBI test when his father was vice president, during the 8 years from 1981-1989.

As for the arrest and diversion charge, Governor Bush admits working at the center in 1972. When asked for comment, Bush's campaign spokesman reportedly said "Oh shit... no comment."

http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm#partied