Sunday, December 03, 2006
It's a very, very remote chance.
And of course, it doesn't count as "drinking" if it's done in the course of one's official duties, right?
What I object to is Frank Rich's characterization of discussion of what sure as h--l looks like drinking as "feverish Internet speculation." This is one of those subjects where reasonable people can disagree, unless they contradict the received wisdom of The New York &^%$ing Times.
I believe Bush is drinking--either again or still, and there's evidence i have that it's "still". But I don't think that even he is stupid or arrogant enough to drink wine in public in front of photographers while claiming to be abstemious.
My opinion is formed from other information. I have a wire service photo of Bush holding a wine glass when he is visiting Poland. The next photo in the series, which I regrettably did not save, shows his face lit up like Rudolph's. I had, and am looking for, a photo of him at the 28th G-8 in Kananaskis, Canada. It shows him with a brown bottle. A friend with image enhancement software assures me that it is beer. I found those pictures persuasive, but since in any case I can't prove that there was alcohol and that George Bush consumed it, I don't expect others to necessarily share my assessment.
What people should agree on is that holding an opinion based on facts is not "feverish speculation."
As for Bush not being stupid enough to flaunt his drinking, with toadies like the ones we have in the press, why would he feel any need to hide it? They dismissed our doubts about Iraq as feverish speculation too.
More blogs about politics.