babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Is Ralph Drunk Again?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Is Ralph Drunk Again?
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 23 March 2004 09:33 AM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
In response to the Federal Liberals aide package for Canada's beef farmers Ralph Klein said this " It's good news BUT one has to question the timing with an election coming up!"

Hey Ralph would it be better if they had of waited until the election was overwith?

By then some of these farmers would have no doubt been bankrupt!

Ralph the drunk and CON servative supporter doesn't think before engaging his mouth!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 23 March 2004 09:40 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For Ralph to be drunk again, there would have to have been a period where he was not drunk. I think it would be more correct to say Ralph is permanently drunk.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Nam
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3472

posted 23 March 2004 06:06 PM      Profile for Nam     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Brutus:
In response to the Federal Liberals aide package for Canada's beef farmers Ralph Klein said this " It's good news BUT one has to question the timing with an election coming up!"


This coming from the man who bribed his way into the last provincial election, spending billions of bucks on "rebates".


From: Calgary-Land of corporate towers | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
beverly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5064

posted 23 March 2004 06:29 PM      Profile for beverly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In response to the Federal Liberals aide package for Canada's beef farmers Ralph Klein said this " It's good news BUT one has to question the timing with an election coming up!"

SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT .... you beat me too it.

And people collected rebates who weren't even entitled to them. I grandma got one and she lived in a nursing home in Saskatchewan. My Mom tried to send it back and they just sent out the cheque again. I told her to cash it...... Ralph will never miss it.


From: In my Apartment!!!! | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 23 March 2004 06:52 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Brutus:
Ralph the drunk and CON servative supporter doesn't think before engaging his mouth!

Apparently neither do you.

I don't care for Mr. Klein or his politics. However, I do know that alcoholism is a serious illness. IMO, make fun of someone having it is pretty low.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 23 March 2004 06:56 PM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
RE::I don't care for Mr. Klein or his politics. However, I do know that alcoholism is a serious illness. IMO, make fun of someone having it is pretty low.

Shame on me! Was it a secret that Ralph was a drunk?

I wasn't making fun of him just stating a fact instead of ignoring it like you!

Shame on me!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 23 March 2004 07:33 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

I don't think using logic is a symptom of alcoholism. Though name calling and I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I arguments are symptoms of immaturity.

I think the timing of the package is also very suspicious. No one's saying it should come later-- they're saying it should have come WHEN THERE WAS A DROUGHT AND BSE CRISIS! It's obvious the Liberals are buying votes, and I don't see why so many people on babble are siding with Martin on this, beyond personal distaste for Harper and Klein.


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 23 March 2004 09:26 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ralphie-boy's just mad because Martin beat him to the punch instead of being able to score this as a win for the home team in Alburda.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
steam.machine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4916

posted 24 March 2004 01:06 AM      Profile for steam.machine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ralph's comments stem from the weekend when he met with the media and his following address to the Conservative convention.

He was merely observing that Paul Martin was making an announcement about a BSE package in Lethbrige the following Monday, in a constituency that former AB Liberal Leader Ken Nicol is running in. Pretty clear political observation.

All this while Ralph was in Washington the same day lobbying to open up the border. I would say that he was doing some of his own politicking before an expected provincial election next year, as well as to go to bat for the cattle industry.

I have never voted for Ralph but you know what I like the guy. He says what's on his mind and calls it the way he sees it. He's kinda like the Don Cherry of politics...you may not always agree with him, but you know exactly where he stands and what he is saying. Something rare in the field of politics these days.


From: Calgary | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 24 March 2004 04:15 AM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
as well as to go to bat for the cattle industry.

You mean welfare cowboys like Cargill and IBP/Lakeside. Those poor bastards. Why, I hear tell they almost missed a tee-off time at the golf course on accounta them mad cows.

As much as I want to see vibrant, successful, and sustainable farm communities in Alberta, these bailouts of cattle ranchers is the wrong thing to do. They will do little but continue the cycle. Which is good news if you are an American meat packing plant, or commodities trader, or investor. Not so good if you're trying not to lose your farm.

Cattle are a loser. They are not just a symptom but a primary cause of our unhealthy, disfunctional and environmentally destructive food industry. Instead of throwing good money after bad, use this opportunity to reexamine, reorganize and fix our disasterous agricultural policies.

Joke: Why do they bury farmers only three feet deep? So they can always have a hand out.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 24 March 2004 11:39 AM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by steam.machine:
He's kinda like the Don Cherry of politics...
Ah, yes. A boorish ass-hole.

From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 24 March 2004 02:27 PM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
RE:: He says what's on his mind and calls it the way he sees it. He's kinda like the Don Cherry of politics..

Don Cherry would never get drunk and go out of his way to bully the homeless!

If I were Don Cherry I would take what you said as an insult!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 24 March 2004 02:58 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So amid all this money to bail out the ranchers, is there any money for improved inspections?
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 27 March 2004 03:56 PM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I respone to the thread title:

Yes. Very, very, drunk.


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 27 March 2004 04:18 PM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
RE:: you may not always agree with him, but you know exactly where he stands

Yes sometimes he leans against a wall so he won't fall over!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 27 March 2004 06:31 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think the alchoholic jokes have gone quite far enough. If Lorne Calvert or Bill Blaikie or anyone else on the 'Left' came forward with their drinking problem(s) (just examples, folks) would we think it was okay to sneer at them for it? I find the tone here incredibly offensive, and I am not a very thin-skinned person.
From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 27 March 2004 06:39 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
I think the alchoholic jokes have gone quite far enough.

I agree. It's disgusting. audra??

[Edited by Michelle to replace Coyote's real name (which he used to use on babble) with his alias.]

[ 16 September 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
windymustang
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4509

posted 27 March 2004 08:33 PM      Profile for windymustang     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You might disagree with Klein's politic's, but attacking a man because he has a disease is unjust and immoral and you should be ashamed of yourselves.
From: from the locker of Mad Mary Flint | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
googlymoogly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3819

posted 27 March 2004 08:59 PM      Profile for googlymoogly     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree. But I don't think getting on a high horse will help anything
From: the fiery bowels of hell | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 27 March 2004 09:07 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Because she's angry, she's on a high horse?
From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 28 March 2004 07:32 AM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
RE::You might disagree with Klein's politic's, but attacking a man because he has a disease is unjust and immoral and you should be ashamed of yourselves

Listen my friend. I have lost a couple of good friends from alcohol abuse.

Do you feel the same remorse for a drug addict?

They take this stuff of their own free will fully knowing what might happen. Nobody ties their hands and forces it upon them!

Yes I feel sorry for disabled people who had no choice but I don't feel sorry for people who brought on their self inflicted problems!

Get real!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 28 March 2004 08:10 AM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
I think the alchoholic jokes have gone quite far enough. If Lorne Calvert or Bill Blaikie or anyone else on the 'Left' came forward with their drinking problem(s) (just examples, folks) would we think it was okay to sneer at them for it? I find the tone here incredibly offensive, and I am not a very thin-skinned person.

There are 2 kinds of alcoholics as Modern Drunkard magazine likes to point out:

1 there is the statistical alcoholic.

Most anti-alcohol groups state that alcoholism begins at 2 drinks a day which, coincidentally, is the same amount the FDA recently admitted is the minimum amount required to reduce the risk of heart attack and increase the lifespan from 3-10 years.

2 there is the dysfunctional alcoholic

The kind for whom the addiction harms.

It hams either the body though the great degreee consumed, or the psychological ability to function. It nurtures those aspects of the personality whcih make it difficult to carry on a relationship, deal with people, or do one's job properly.

After the 1976 leadership loss Brian Mulroney was what was known as a functional alcoholic. He routinely got drunk at lunch and finished his day at the office of iron ore co. It didn't affect his work, as evidenced by the magnanimous deal he made with the laid off Iron ore workers in which they were able to buy their homes for a dollar, etc. The only person that got Brian to quit was Mila, because she disapproved.

Ralph, on the other hand has, let his recreational alcoholism become a disease. It impacts his ability to deal with others, distorts and simplifies his world view, and nurtures his mean streak. Being a 'dry drunk' can also produce this behaviour, when one uses an outlet to deal with the psychological withdrawl of alcohol, such as, say, privatising everything in sight.

To conclude, the status of drinker does not make one dysfunctional, it is the use of alcohol as a medicative as opposed to a recreational drug or health supplement that makes one what we traditionally define as an alcoholic and that kind of person is disqualified to serve as a head of government.

[Edited by Michelle to replace Coyote's real name (which he used to use on babble) with his alias.]

[ 16 September 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 28 March 2004 01:26 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rationalize all you want, you two. If you wanna go after Ralph's policies, go to. I'm with you. But to bring in such an obviously external factor is ridiculous, and worse, prejudicial. I could 'out' more than a couple prominent Leftists on this, and a few prominent Rightists to boot. Alchoholism doesn't know any political stripes, and to assign a motivation to someone because of their condition is irresponsible at best, slanderous at worst. If you can't figure out that this goes beyond the pale, then I sincerely hope you never have to face such a condition in your life.

This thread now making me feel very, very dirty, I will not respond to it again.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 28 March 2004 02:33 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm with Thomas.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 28 March 2004 05:25 PM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
RE::If you wanna go after Ralph's policies, go to. I'm with you. But to bring in such an obviously external factor is ridiculous,

So you do not see that it is self inficted and no one forced any alcoholic to drink!?

As for Ralph's policies. Was it one of his policies to get drunk and go to a local homeless shelter and razz the homeless?

Just wondering?


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
The Oatmeal Savage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4353

posted 28 March 2004 06:33 PM      Profile for The Oatmeal Savage   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If Ralph was a drug addict who had murdered a family for another fix of heroin, he would be deserving of all sorts of sympathy. Since he is merely a productive member of society that has a drinking problem and has admitted it, he gets no slack.
BTW, I thought all bleeding hearted types considered alcoholism to be a disease, is it only a moral failing if it affects a right winger?

[ 28 March 2004: Message edited by: The Oatmeal Savage ]


From: top of the food chain | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
faith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4348

posted 28 March 2004 06:43 PM      Profile for faith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Alcohol is a disease. The old line about personal responsibility ( no one forced you to drink- so stop now) is a waste of energy and time when the addiction has a person in its grip.
When an alcoholic reaches out for help , then personal responsibility can play a part in the recovery but it is a constant fight to control the disease.
My experience with alcoholism in my own family and within my circle of friends has shown me that recovering alcoholics are the strongest , most compassionate, honest and spiritually connected people in our society. The practising alcoholic is the opposite of all these things and it is hard to imagine when the alcoholic is drunk what kind of person is possible when the disease is brought under control.
As for no one putting a drink in the alcoholic's hand , I have seen people trying to stop drinking only to have their family members or one of their social circle do just that - put a drink in their hand with a ' c'mon just one won't hurt'.
To say that people deserve derision because they have not been able to control their condition is to display a profound ignorance of the disease or a startling lack of compassion for the afflicted.

From: vancouver | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 28 March 2004 07:06 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Since he is merely a productive member of society that has a drinking problem and has admitted it, he gets no slack.
"productive"???
The only thing Ralph Klein has ever 'produced' in his miserable life is even more misery for the poor and disadvantaged.

From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 28 March 2004 07:10 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Brutus...

As someone who has buried two dozen friends, and is himself a recovering alcoholic, I suggest you continue this coversation when you've actually studied the current literature. Until then, enjoy a nice glass of

***PLONK***


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 28 March 2004 08:06 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
At the risk of piling on...

quote:
...I suggest you continue this coversation when you've actually studied the current literature.

Or, failing that, acquired some basic human compassion.

Otherwise: what pax said.

[ 28 March 2004: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 28 March 2004 08:50 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I suggest you continue this coversation when you've actually studied the current literature

I'm not sure whether it is compassionate or not, nor am I diminishing anyone's suffering but alcoholism is not a disease and there exists absolutely no scientific evidence to suggest that it is, how does one have a disease of volition.

I also find it disturbing that all forms of human struggle failing or tragedy are medicalized in order to give them some sort of legitaimacy.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
faith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4348

posted 28 March 2004 10:42 PM      Profile for faith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There have been many scientific studies done on alcoholism - there are reams of information on the subject and much evidence to suggest that the patterns of alcoholism are genetically inherited. Studies have been done with animals as well as human subjects .
Why in heavens name would you say that there are no studies on alcoholism as a disease?
Will power or volition is one of the treatments of the disease along with drugs and group therapy (AA). Even if a person does not drink and manages a 10 or 20 year sobriety the disease of addiction is still there . This is different from other addictions like cigarettes for example . The former smoker once they've been away from cigarettes long enough they don't feel the desire to smoke rather they are repulsed by smoke , not so for the alcoholic.

From: vancouver | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 29 March 2004 07:03 AM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
RE:: Or, failing that, acquired some basic human compassion.

I have all kinds of compassion I just have little compassion for self inflicted problems.

Do you think we would have alcoholics if they ""CHOSE"" not to drink alcohol in the first place?

On the other hand I have compassion for all the kids in this country who go to bed hungry every night.

I have compassion for people who have ended up in wheelchairs for the rest of their lives because of an accident not something they had control over.

I have compassion for all the women and kids who are abused on a daily bases by their alcoholic father or husband.

I have compassion for poor helpless animals who are left outdoors in freezing weather and end up freezing or starving to death.

I have no compassion for people that have self inflicted problems then whine for pity and compassion because they did it to themselves.

Sorry go cry on somebody elses shoulder I've got to go feed some abandoned animals!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 29 March 2004 10:24 AM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 'lance:
Or, failing that, acquired some basic human compassion.

It's common enough for people who have never struggled with addiction to continue to believe unswervingly in choice. To them it's inconceivable that someone could loose their capactity to choose. But, the literature, and the experience of millions of alcoholics show that alcoholics progressively loose their capacity to choose whether or not to drink.

Since the genetic markers have yet to be determined, someone would never know an alcohol problem existed without drinking. However, no one would know they are a social drinker either without drinking. Should we ban the production and consumption of alcohol? Indeed not. What's needed by people like our Brutus is a mind willing enough to hear scientific evidence -- eventhough such evidence offends his prejudices.

However, very few people who have no addiction problem are so willing. So, his behaviour here really ought to come as no surprise -- plonkable though it may be.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 29 March 2004 10:53 AM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In general, I agree with pax on self-inflicted disease: my dad killed himself smoking (lung cancer, after two heart attacks, phlebitis and a host of other smoking-related problems). Would people really lack compassion for such a case? By the way, faith, I tend to disagree with you about smoking, as unfortunately I know or knew several people who quit for some time, even years, who took it up again. One was a very good friend of mine, and it killed him.

But there is another problem here that I don't feel has been addressed. It is the question of what arms are legitimate to furbish against one's enemies - who do anything to destroy us, as anything from wars to social cutbacks and plant closures that leave people in the street attest to. I don't feel any compassion whatsoever for the class enemy. (This gets us back to the Belinda the "rich bitch" thread). I'm thinking specifically in this case about the contemptuous manner in which Klein treated homeless people. Perhaps that embarrassing public event made him go on the wagon, but it sure didn't teach him compassion towards the poor. I wish him a miserable existence.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 29 March 2004 10:54 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by paxamillion:

It's common enough for people who have never struggled with addiction to continue to believe unswervingly in choice. To them it's inconceivable that someone could loose their capactity to choose. But, the literature, and the experience of millions of alcoholics show that alcoholics progressively loose their capacity to choose whether or not to drink.

....

However, very few people who have no addiction problem are so willing. So, his behaviour here really ought to come as no surprise -- plonkable though it may be.


I used the example of quitting smoking in the thread that dealt with "free will". Perhaps the debate would have been more productive if more people that were familliar with addiction participated in that thread. The point that I made was that I was much more prepared to take a more deterministic view of "free will" than most, and that I was not prepared to absolutize "free will" as some are...


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
faith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4348

posted 29 March 2004 10:58 AM      Profile for faith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
While it comes as no surprise that some choose to blame the victim when it comes to alcoholism , I have seen and heard it many times, it does surprise me here on babble.
I have come onto this site and found open minded people that usually discuss issues passionately but respectfully, and can actually admit a mistake.
To hear such Victorian attitudes on a babble site is a little startling.

From: vancouver | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 29 March 2004 11:21 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nobody is perfectly progressive or innovative or "revolutionary" about everything, eh?

To me the key question about someone, beyond "Which side are you on?", relates to their character. A willingness to learn, how they conduct themselves in conflict, how they react to a mistake on their own part, their general orientation to exposure to new things and people in their lives...their truthfulness and their courage.

I look back to a time when I was much more politically active than I am now. And I recall a mentor that I had (I see him as a mentor now. I don't know if I really appreciated it properly at the time.) ...the most impressive thing was his ability to take me to the limits of his own knowledge, and leave it up to me to make the effort to continue to grow and learn...beyond what he could pass on to me. Funny, he had a very serious alcohol problem that he struggled with...


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 29 March 2004 02:10 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think there is anything progressive about denying people choice or acknowledging the personal responsibiltiy necessary for overcoming obstacles.

I also don't think there is anything particularly progressive in slavish adherence to AA or psychiatric dogma that dictates that people are in need of their medical expertise.

quote:
What's needed by people like our Brutus is a mind willing enough to hear scientific evidence -- eventhough such evidence offends his prejudices.

While, I would agree that Brutus' approach is insensitive, I would also challenge the existence of any scientific "evidence." This evidence consists of laugably flawed methodologies mixed in with very loose threads of association that lack in any firm evididence of any disease or a plausible explaination of the way such a disease would manifest itself.

There are a number of flaws in the model that don't hold up to a simple analysis.

A) The majority of heavy drinkers end up moderating their drinking without any intervention. You cannot scientifically designate people post hoc as alcoholics based on the trajectroy of their drinking patterns. To be scientific you would have to be able to distinquish between heavy drinkers prior to an outcome being known.

B)It is absurd to suggest someone has a disease of choice of volition. It may seem to those caught up in compulsive behaviour that the lack choice but this does not explain how alleged alcoholics can and do quit. Anyone who goes to AA does so by choice the quit drinking by choice and they continue not to drink by choice.

C) Cultural data does not support a disease model. If it was a disease you would expect consistent rates across cultures. You would also not see changes in alcohol consumption by ethnic groups who have now live outside their place of origin. It has also been noted that some ethnic groups did have access to alcohol but did not abuse the substance until post colonization.

D) Epidemiological data does not support the disease model. You would not expect fluctuations in patterns of drinking historically and these patterns can be seen across history and culture.

E)Social data demonstrates that substance abuse is more prevalent amongst impoverished and marginalized communities. It is also more prevalent amongst those who have experienced physical or pschological trauma.


As far as blaming the victim. I think it's more a case of blaming the victim if you believe they are somehow biologically defective rather than acknowledging that they are struggling againts a variety of social or psychological concerns.

Suggesting alcohol/substance abuse is a disease certainly diminishes the experience of trauma suffered by various communities in which this behaviour is prevalent.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
faith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4348

posted 29 March 2004 02:53 PM      Profile for faith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
NRK are you a scientist? Have you participated in or researched the studies done with twins (both fraternal and identical) or with rats that have been bred for alcohol consumption?
The direction that research has taken suggests a very strong genetic predisposition to alcoholism present in societies around the world.The stronger the tendencies towards drinking problems the more heritable the characteristics to the next generation.
I can only assume that either you are a genius researcher that has done studies that reputably refute the findings of all of the major health and addiction centres that have published research on the topic or for some reason you desperately want to hold on to your prejudices and are ignoring all research that belies your position .

From: vancouver | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 29 March 2004 03:13 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The point I think is not that Ralph is bad because of his drinking problem (which is none of my business) but that he abuses Albertans whilst drunk. I couldn't care less if he drinks or not, that's his own private life. But when he uses his alcoholism to elicit public sympathy as an excuse for abusing a homeless person, Ralph deserves to be called out.
From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 29 March 2004 03:19 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm for that, Noah.
From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 29 March 2004 06:27 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
To me, the important factor is that he is abusing Albertans; drunk or sober.
From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
mighty brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3148

posted 30 March 2004 11:06 AM      Profile for mighty brutus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Once again, I feel the need to point out that (upper case) Brutus is NOT to be confused with the one and only (lower case) mighty brutus! There are not enough rolly-eyed emoticons to convey my feelings toward his recent wrong-headed pontifications about alcoholism.
From: Beautiful Burnaby, British Columbia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 30 March 2004 12:05 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dude, if you were truly mighty, you'd be all in upper case.
From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 30 March 2004 12:07 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
mighty brutus is mighty, in part, through humility. I don't think all caps would suit.
From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
mighty brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3148

posted 30 March 2004 12:35 PM      Profile for mighty brutus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by paxamillion:
mighty brutus is mighty, in part, through humility. I don't think all caps would suit.

Thanks, Pax, and a tip of the brutus chapeau to you. Keep rocking and keep on asking the big questions, my man!

BTW was it Golda Meir that said, "Don't be so humble, you're not that great"---


From: Beautiful Burnaby, British Columbia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 30 March 2004 02:18 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
NRK are you a scientist? Have you participated in or researched the studies done with twins (both fraternal and identical) or with rats that have been bred for alcohol consumption?

To answer the first question I am educated in scientific method and analysis. Even perhaps more importantly I am aware of how mechanistic reductionist models in science can lead to logical absurdities.

To answer the second question I don't think rats bred for alcohol consumption would be very tasty nor would PETA approve.


quote:
I can only assume that either you are a genius researcher that has done studies that reputably refute the findings of all of the major health and addiction centres that have published research on the topic or for some reason you desperately want to hold on to your prejudices and are ignoring all research that belies your position .

You really don't have to be a genius to identify the glaring flaws in the disease model research. The most obvious one I have already pointed out you cannot speak if any genetic influnece if you lack any credible diagnostic distinctions between heavy drinkers or alcoholics.

you might also consider that science is not meant to be based on a show of hands if there are 1000 po0rly designed studies it does not negate the truth of one well designed study.

You might also wish to consider that the entire alcohol treatment/research industry is a probably close to if not exceeding 1 billion dollar operation and there is a large vested interest in promotion of a disease model. I am not suggesting a "conspiracy" just recognizing that "science" is never value neutral.

Just because the "disease" model is the most promosted by the media and the medical establishment it does not immediately make it the valid scientifically. An honest assessment of the literature reveals that drinking behaviour is best predicted by social , cultural and psychological factors , genetic factors are weak to non-existent.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sisyphus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1425

posted 30 March 2004 02:39 PM      Profile for Sisyphus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't know the literature in this area, so I'll withold comment on the specific issue of the heritability of addictions; however, let me muddy the waters by reminding people that genotype is not destiny, even when it comes to phenotypic characteristics like coloration in Calico cat clones, for example.

Nice introduction to "epigenetics" here.

Edited to add: Noah hit the nail on the head: Ralph's drunken tirades against the poor are reprehensible, whatever their cause.

[ 30 March 2004: Message edited by: Sisyphus ]


From: Never Never Land | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
mighty brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3148

posted 30 March 2004 02:48 PM      Profile for mighty brutus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I won't pretend that I'm a scientist, N.R, but I would seriously question your position that when it comes to alcoholism, there is little to no genetic component. There would seem to be quite a bit of evidence (and admittedly I'm not offering any here) to the contrary.

Like many, I'm not completely at ease with the concept of alcoholism as a disease or an allergy, but it is definitely a sickness--is there a difference or am I just talking semantics here???


From: Beautiful Burnaby, British Columbia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 30 March 2004 03:42 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm glad that beyond mean-spirited "bootstraps" models that we should leave to the likes of Klein himself, this has touched upon the question of the disease model with respect to substance abuse issues. I find that very defective too - it doesn't take social and cultural factors into account nearly enough.

Right now I'm translating a document that relates to the problems of marginalised urban aboriginals - often with multiple addictions. So many aboriginal populations - with very different genetic makeups - have fallen into such patterns of despair, be they Mohawk or Maori.

Noah is right. Drunk or sober, Ralph is a meanie.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 30 March 2004 05:46 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Brutus:
Listen my friend. I have lost a couple of good friends from alcohol abuse.

Do you feel the same remorse for a drug addict?


By the way, Brutus, I'm sorry that I didn't acknowledge your loss. I've seen how awful a death by alcohol abuse can be like. You have my sympathies.

Yes, I do feel the same remorse for a drug addict. I'd say that most of the alkies I know are also addicts. I'm one of the rarer "pure juicers."


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
cantstopthebeat
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5343

posted 31 March 2004 12:41 AM      Profile for cantstopthebeat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that its not sympathy that is lacking in Brutus' case-it's empathy.
From: canada | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 31 March 2004 08:34 AM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
Yes pax I lost a couple of friend because of alcohol but the fact remains it was self inflicted.

Nobody forced them to drink so it was liken to a long drawn out suicide.

One guy was heavy into booze but was just a so called weekend boozer. Then his wife left him and the drinking got worse.

So using your logic we blame the wife right?

Sorry that doesn't cut it with me. Bottomline it's self inflicted abuse and it's the same for all the dopeheads out there.

Cannot handle life so they use drugs and alcohol to get them through the day. And when they realize that is only a tempory fix what do they do? Keep on truck'in full steam ahead pass the bottle!

Wonderful. Call it a disease call it what you want but the bottomline is it is a lack of willpower. Never heard anyone say having a lack of willpower was a disease!

Sounds like an old fashion cop out to me!

[ 31 March 2004: Message edited by: Brutus ]


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 31 March 2004 10:04 AM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Brutus:
Call it a disease call it what you want but the bottomline is it is a lack of willpower. Never heard anyone say having a lack of willpower was a disease!

You are quite right, Brutus. A lack of willpower is EXACTLY what it is. Personally, I didn't have the resources to effectively stop on my own. I tried for quite a long time before I finally admitted I was quitting that way. That's why I went to get help (rehab, therapy, AA).


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Nam
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3472

posted 31 March 2004 08:46 PM      Profile for Nam     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Brutus:

Wonderful. Call it a disease call it what you want but the bottomline is it is a lack of willpower. Never heard anyone say having a lack of willpower was a disease!


[ 31 March 2004: Message edited by: Brutus ]


Remarkable case of empathy exhibited here. Actually, addiction is a disease, and to suggest lack of willpower is actually their real problem, is a bit like blaming a diabetic for lacking the willpower to overcome their disease. "Come on, blood sugars!! Get your readings straightened out"


From: Calgary-Land of corporate towers | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 31 March 2004 10:45 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes and diabetics control their blood sugar by going to twelve step meetings just like alcoholics. it is the perfect comparison.

As much as I dismiss the disease model I also do not think dependence is just a matter of will power. The majority of those who use alcohol heavily do so in order to cope with legitimate pain it may not seem the best strategy but for many it is the best the can do at the time. Unless people learn other ways to deal with their pain it is unlikely the will give up their coping mechanism.

I also do not think that choice can be taken out of context. Choice is intimately connnected to both power and stability. I don't think the ability to choose is the same for a comfortable middle class person and someone from a marginalized and impoverished person. Nor is it possilbe to compare the coping mechanisms of traumatized persons with those who have not experienced trauma.

[ 31 March 2004: Message edited by: N.R.KISSED ]


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5073

posted 01 April 2004 07:49 AM      Profile for Brutus        Edit/Delete Post
I think it's time we dropped this subject it started out as a statement about Ralph Kleins actions and ended up as a debate about alcoholics.

Yes sir blame the booze blame life blame the job blame whatever but never ever question an alcoholics lack of willpower or refer to it as self inflicted problem!


From: Montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 01 April 2004 09:59 AM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
As much as I dismiss the disease model I also do not think dependence is just a matter of will power. The majority of those who use alcohol heavily do so in order to cope with legitimate pain it may not seem the best strategy but for many it is the best the can do at the time. Unless people learn other ways to deal with their pain it is unlikely the will give up their coping mechanism.

I think this is a pretty fair description, NRK. I'd suggest that the drinking seems to reduce the interest in finding other ways to deal with life issues. More issues, more drink.

And brutus, if you want to move on to other things, by all means do. I'll make my own decision on that, thanks.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 01 April 2004 11:55 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I think it's time we dropped this subject it started out as a statement about Ralph Kleins actions and ended up as a debate about alcoholics.

I think the discussion is quite relevant. If you believe Ralph has a disease it would be in poor taste to mock him.

If you believe his drinking is a manifestation of his personal pain then how do you respond. Is it necessary to respond to his suffering with compassion when his insensitivity has caused so much suffering. I don't think so. I think a degree of schadenfreude is acceptable.
I think the same could be said about the likes of Gordo and Bush.

It also might suggest that if these people understood the nature of their own pain they might not be so insensitive to the suffering of others.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca