Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
The Pathology of Liberalism
The Pathology of Liberalism
From the inception of psychology over 100 years ago, conditions such as
autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder,
narcissism and Tourette's syndrome were thought to be psychological in
origin - and that with enough therapy, enough blaming inadequate parenting,
enough talk, enough delving into "feelings," the sufferer could be treated
successfully or even cured.
We now know - thanks to tools like PET scans, MRIs, and pharmaceutical
advances - that these condition are all biological in nature, more receptive
to medications, augmented with behavioral techniques, than to any of the
other "therapies" that were inflicted so ineffectually on millions of people
over the past many decades.
The scans, in fact, have revealed the specific areas of the brain that give
rise to anger, revenge, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders, stuttering,
pathological lying, cheating, manipulation, obsessive-compulsive behavior,
depressive disorders, even cravings for chocolate!
How do we know these conditions are biological? Because in addition to the
fact that medications have treated these mental disorders successfully (for
example, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder, Wellbutrin for
depression, and Xanax for anxiety), they have identical symptoms (albeit
some more severe than others) in people who are raised in luxury high-rises
in Buenos Aires, slums in Los Angeles, kibbutzim in Israel, huts in rain
forests, and penthouses in Manhattan. And also in people raised in both
happy and dysfunctional homes.
What we also understand is that most intractable mental conditions seem to
be genetically driven, rooted in centers of the brain that are still not
fully understood. Perhaps this is why political affiliation - with
exceptions, of course - seems to run in families.
Liberal Pathology
I suspect that at the core of liberal "thinking" is the same kind of
pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the
brain that produces "feelings" and behavior over which liberals have no
control.
For instance, liberals are uniformly glum, not only in their grim demeanors
and persistent anger, but also in their outlooks. Even in the flush of their
midterm victory, they could hardly conceal their endemic rage, in spite of a
brief moment of toothy, appliquéd smiles.
"Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess,
clinging to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone
would just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy
death threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy
grownups in the current administration would see the light. And so they do
what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call names."
This is because their worldview is uniformly negative. When things are good,
they see only the bad and invoke the Misery Index cited routinely by Jimmy
Carter and resurrected by the dour wannabe president John Kerry. When things
could be better, they see only that things could be worse. When their
theories are refuted by hard fact, they are unable to process the true from
the untrue because their feelings tell them otherwise. For instance:
? In an unprecedented stellar economy - with the GDP, employment, housing
sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and
crude oil down - liberals see only the "threat" of recession.
? In measurable improvement in education, liberals see only "too much
testing."
? In the face of 3,000 lives being exterminated by Islamic terrorists on
September 11, 2001, liberals see a non-existent threat.
? In the Iraq war, which has liberated 25 million people, liberals see, to
quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "not a war but a situation" and a
"catastrophe."
? Worse, the liberals among us see that all of our country's problems are
the fault of, yes, America!
Liberals are Like Children
Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess, clinging to
a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone would just be
nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy death threats
and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy grownups in
the current administration would see the light.
And so they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call
names.
? Who but an out-of-control child - who didn't know any better - would
compare our heroic fighting troops to Nazis? Liberal Senator Dick Durbin
(D-IL) did.
? Who but a bully of a child would say that the head of his household (in
this case his country) was a liar? Liberal Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did.
? Who but a spoiled "princess" would call the leader of her country a
failure, a fraud, and incompetent? Liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
did.
? Who but a snobby and vacuous little brat would badmouth the president on
foreign soil while our troops were in harm's way? Liberal Senator John Kerry
(D-MA) did, as did liberal former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
? And who but a jealous tomboy would insist, again in a time of war, that
the Commander in Chief is the worst president in our nation's history?
Liberal Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has done just that.
All of these children - er, politicians - have gone to great lengths to
undermine President Bush, often in foreign countries and always in
contradiction to the unspoken but historically honored rule to support a
president in time of war - or at least to refrain from insult.
A Rage That Knows No Bounds
Children take things personally. "My father is bigger (stronger, smarter)
than your father" is just about intolerable to the average child. "Is not!"
"Is too!" is an exchange that inevitably results in either tears or fists.
In 2000, when George W. Bush ascended to the presidency, the initial despair
of liberals quickly morphed into childlike, irrational anger, which has
obsessed them for the past six years.
Not only have they called names, spewed insults and stamped their feet, but
they've also lined up like-minded friends in the liberal media and leftwing
think tanks to do the same. Much worse, they've aligned themselves with
America's mortal enemies.
According to Vasko Kohlmayer in World Defense Review, "the affection in
which [liberals] are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor surprising.
They have more than earned it by systematically subverting this country's
war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to those who have
pledged to destroy us." Kohlmayer lists some highlights of liberal
treachery:
? They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone calls
? They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured
terrorists
? They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial
transactions
? They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
? They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
? They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
? They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
? They have impugned and demeaned our military
? They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
? They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
? They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
? They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
If nothing else proves the rigidity - indeed the pathology - of the liberal
brain, it is what Kohlmayer says of liberals today: "Almost all of the
current democratic leadership was actively involved in [the Vietnam
anti-war] effort. Bill and Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard
Dean, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi were all in one way or
another personally engaged in the anti-war movement. And when at last it
bore its disastrous fruit, they gloated and danced in the streets.
Exhilarated and jubilant, they deemed America's disgrace their finest hour.
In their skewed world, America's defeat came to represent their personal
triumph."
Fathoming Liberal Rage
To understand the left's treasonous rage, it is important to understand that
the most cherished value in the life of children (read liberals) is to be
"liked" by their peers, a theory that Judith Rich Harris has exhaustively
documented in her best-selling and revolutionary book, The Nurture
Assumption.
To be liked - according to the evangelical religion of liberalism - is not
to engage in conflict, not to fight, not to judge, After all, if you fight
with anyone, including Islamic terrorists, they won't like you. And if you
judge them as savages, murderers, enemies of democracy, they will fight you.
So don't judge them and they won't fight you and everything will be hunky
dory. Such are the fantastical fantasies of children (read liberals).
They are fantasies that flourish, says writer Evan Sayet, because liberals
are "wedded to the childish philosophy of 'multiculturalism' . the fantasy
that all cultures are equally good and equally right. It is why liberals
"believe we should 'celebrate diversity,' as if all differences - say
freedom of religion and massacring all infidels - are equally worthy of
celebration."
It is also why liberals, like children, are driven so compulsively by
emotion that they simply don't have the ability to apply rational thought
when it comes to George W. Bush. To them, he is still the stronger father to
whom they continue to insist: "Is not!"
Rage Trumps Rationality
The reason why liberals have remained so intractably unhinged about
President Bush is not because of their ideological differences with his
conservatism. It is because of their collective inadequate egos. This is no
surprise because children have "developing" egos, not fully-fledged senses
of themselves, their places in the world, and their worth. Children are
wildly egocentric, seeing themselves as the center of the universe and
having no appreciation of the vast world that lies outside their limited
awareness. In fact, they echo a saying from the Talmud: "We do not see
things as they are; we see things as we are."
Liberals entertain the conceit that they are quite evolved and superior,
both morally and intellectually. In their childlike minds, they are "good"
and the people who set limits, demand accountability, expect empirical
results, fight their enemies and also make judgments about what is good and
bad and right and wrong are "bad."
But Rabbi Aryeh Spero says that liberals are "morally inferior, given their
lack of heartache over what grieves normal people - the actual torture of
our soldiers, the real beheadings, the tearing of Israelis limb by limb, and
the burning and dragging of American, British, and Israeli half-dead. Their
silence shows their amorality; their selectivity proves their concern is not
with human dignity but tarnishing their country's image." He calls this
thinking "a psychological aberration."
This, again, is no surprise, given that children cannot be expected to have
fully actualized moral compasses. Or egos. Which is why it was a mortal
wound to the egos of the monumentally egocentric and childlike liberals in
our midst that a Southern-drawling, non-King's-English-speaking Texan could
possibly defeat - not once but twice - the collective forces of a
hot-air-spewing Al Gore, the Vietnam war traitor John Kerry, and a liberal
media of such great numbers that it would not even fit into the vast acreage
of Guantanamo Bay!
But liberals are educated, you may say, credentialed, accomplished, smart in
all areas of life - business, the arts, medicine, law, even politics. Which
only goes to prove what most people know instinctively: Emotion always
trumps rationality!
Symptoms of Liberal Pathology
As I've mentioned, liberals want to be liked. They believe that if America
were not so strong, so powerful, so rich, so successful - so enviable to the
rest of the world - things would be better. This is because liberals hate
strength and power and wealth and success, except, that is, when they are
the beneficiaries! It is interesting to note here that the richest
politicians in Congress are liberal Democrats. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller,
Reid, Byrd, the list goes on and on.
In our nation's Mecca of Liberalism, Hollywood, those who announce the
Oscars always refuse to say, "And the winner is ." Instead they say, "And
the Oscar goes to ." This is because liberals don't like the concept of
winning or losing - someone might feel bad and get angry and pick a fight .
and then they won't like me! In the world of liberalism, it's always all
about me!
Among the many symptoms of liberal pathology is out-of-control anger. When
things aren't going their way, liberals behave much like any child who has
not yet learned to debate and so resorts to his or her most primitive
emotions. Here's a very brief sample, provided by conservative columnist JB
Williams:
? Liberal columnist Jonathan Chait: "I hate President George W. Bush. I hate
the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. I even hate the things that
everybody seems to like about him."
? Liberal DNC Chairman Howard Dean: "I hate Republicans and everything they
stand for."
? Liberal Michael Moore: "The Patriot Act is as un-American as 'Mein
Kampf.'"
? Liberal Al Gore: The Bush administration "works closely with a network of
'rapid response' digital brownshirts."
Simply, the liberals' childlike rage completely eclipses any semblance of
rationality. Their opposition to and obsession with President Bush has
frozen the higher centers of their brains, effectively preventing them from
ever presenting any intelligent alternative to the domestic and foreign
policy strategies they object to, outside of socialist let's-all-get-together
ideas that eliminate capitalism, the competitive spirit, and American
exceptionalism.
Raymond S. Kraft, who has written at length about American exceptionalism,
cites those who "want an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq: Al
Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Muqtada al Sadr, and Osama bin Laden . and America's
Democrats." [Read liberals].
That is why the only liberal "plan" for Iraq is cutting and running. Hillary
Clinton spoke for all liberals when she said she "resented" the president's
saying that the next president would have to withdraw troops from Iraq. In
essence, she was whining: How dare he inflict me with that adult
responsibility?
And on the domestic front, liberals offer no better plan for education than
more unions, no better plan for the economy than raising taxes, no better
plan for Supreme Court justices than more rule-from-the-bench liberals, and
no better plan for healthcare than socialized medicine.
In addition, liberals are intellectually lazy. Like the children they are,
their feelings supersede their self-described much-vaunted intellects,
rendering them biologically incapable of objective thought or reasoned
debate. So controlled are they by the emotional centers of their brains that
when President Bush says we must defend our country with every means
possible - diplomatic, strategic, and military - liberals figuratively say,
or rather screech, "I don't like those rules, Dad!" and then they have
pathological temper tantrums.
Another symptom of liberal pathology is a deep identification with
"victims," who to liberals are all women, all African-Americans, all
Hispanics, all union members, and all denizens of Third World countries, as
well as anyone else they perceive as being either "victimized" by bi
From the inception of psychology over 100 years ago, conditions such as
autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder,
narcissism and Tourette's syndrome were thought to be psychological in
origin - and that with enough therapy, enough blaming inadequate parenting,
enough talk, enough delving into "feelings," the sufferer could be treated
successfully or even cured.
We now know - thanks to tools like PET scans, MRIs, and pharmaceutical
advances - that these condition are all biological in nature, more receptive
to medications, augmented with behavioral techniques, than to any of the
other "therapies" that were inflicted so ineffectually on millions of people
over the past many decades.
The scans, in fact, have revealed the specific areas of the brain that give
rise to anger, revenge, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders, stuttering,
pathological lying, cheating, manipulation, obsessive-compulsive behavior,
depressive disorders, even cravings for chocolate!
How do we know these conditions are biological? Because in addition to the
fact that medications have treated these mental disorders successfully (for
example, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder, Wellbutrin for
depression, and Xanax for anxiety), they have identical symptoms (albeit
some more severe than others) in people who are raised in luxury high-rises
in Buenos Aires, slums in Los Angeles, kibbutzim in Israel, huts in rain
forests, and penthouses in Manhattan. And also in people raised in both
happy and dysfunctional homes.
What we also understand is that most intractable mental conditions seem to
be genetically driven, rooted in centers of the brain that are still not
fully understood. Perhaps this is why political affiliation - with
exceptions, of course - seems to run in families.
Liberal Pathology
I suspect that at the core of liberal "thinking" is the same kind of
pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the
brain that produces "feelings" and behavior over which liberals have no
control.
For instance, liberals are uniformly glum, not only in their grim demeanors
and persistent anger, but also in their outlooks. Even in the flush of their
midterm victory, they could hardly conceal their endemic rage, in spite of a
brief moment of toothy, appliquéd smiles.
"Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess,
clinging to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone
would just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy
death threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy
grownups in the current administration would see the light. And so they do
what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call names."
This is because their worldview is uniformly negative. When things are good,
they see only the bad and invoke the Misery Index cited routinely by Jimmy
Carter and resurrected by the dour wannabe president John Kerry. When things
could be better, they see only that things could be worse. When their
theories are refuted by hard fact, they are unable to process the true from
the untrue because their feelings tell them otherwise. For instance:
? In an unprecedented stellar economy - with the GDP, employment, housing
sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and
crude oil down - liberals see only the "threat" of recession.
? In measurable improvement in education, liberals see only "too much
testing."
? In the face of 3,000 lives being exterminated by Islamic terrorists on
September 11, 2001, liberals see a non-existent threat.
? In the Iraq war, which has liberated 25 million people, liberals see, to
quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "not a war but a situation" and a
"catastrophe."
? Worse, the liberals among us see that all of our country's problems are
the fault of, yes, America!
Liberals are Like Children
Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess, clinging to
a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone would just be
nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy death threats
and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy grownups in
the current administration would see the light.
And so they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call
names.
? Who but an out-of-control child - who didn't know any better - would
compare our heroic fighting troops to Nazis? Liberal Senator Dick Durbin
(D-IL) did.
? Who but a bully of a child would say that the head of his household (in
this case his country) was a liar? Liberal Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did.
? Who but a spoiled "princess" would call the leader of her country a
failure, a fraud, and incompetent? Liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
did.
? Who but a snobby and vacuous little brat would badmouth the president on
foreign soil while our troops were in harm's way? Liberal Senator John Kerry
(D-MA) did, as did liberal former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
? And who but a jealous tomboy would insist, again in a time of war, that
the Commander in Chief is the worst president in our nation's history?
Liberal Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has done just that.
All of these children - er, politicians - have gone to great lengths to
undermine President Bush, often in foreign countries and always in
contradiction to the unspoken but historically honored rule to support a
president in time of war - or at least to refrain from insult.
A Rage That Knows No Bounds
Children take things personally. "My father is bigger (stronger, smarter)
than your father" is just about intolerable to the average child. "Is not!"
"Is too!" is an exchange that inevitably results in either tears or fists.
In 2000, when George W. Bush ascended to the presidency, the initial despair
of liberals quickly morphed into childlike, irrational anger, which has
obsessed them for the past six years.
Not only have they called names, spewed insults and stamped their feet, but
they've also lined up like-minded friends in the liberal media and leftwing
think tanks to do the same. Much worse, they've aligned themselves with
America's mortal enemies.
According to Vasko Kohlmayer in World Defense Review, "the affection in
which [liberals] are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor surprising.
They have more than earned it by systematically subverting this country's
war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to those who have
pledged to destroy us." Kohlmayer lists some highlights of liberal
treachery:
? They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone calls
? They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured
terrorists
? They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial
transactions
? They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
? They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
? They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
? They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
? They have impugned and demeaned our military
? They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
? They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
? They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
? They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
If nothing else proves the rigidity - indeed the pathology - of the liberal
brain, it is what Kohlmayer says of liberals today: "Almost all of the
current democratic leadership was actively involved in [the Vietnam
anti-war] effort. Bill and Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard
Dean, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi were all in one way or
another personally engaged in the anti-war movement. And when at last it
bore its disastrous fruit, they gloated and danced in the streets.
Exhilarated and jubilant, they deemed America's disgrace their finest hour.
In their skewed world, America's defeat came to represent their personal
triumph."
Fathoming Liberal Rage
To understand the left's treasonous rage, it is important to understand that
the most cherished value in the life of children (read liberals) is to be
"liked" by their peers, a theory that Judith Rich Harris has exhaustively
documented in her best-selling and revolutionary book, The Nurture
Assumption.
To be liked - according to the evangelical religion of liberalism - is not
to engage in conflict, not to fight, not to judge, After all, if you fight
with anyone, including Islamic terrorists, they won't like you. And if you
judge them as savages, murderers, enemies of democracy, they will fight you.
So don't judge them and they won't fight you and everything will be hunky
dory. Such are the fantastical fantasies of children (read liberals).
They are fantasies that flourish, says writer Evan Sayet, because liberals
are "wedded to the childish philosophy of 'multiculturalism' . the fantasy
that all cultures are equally good and equally right. It is why liberals
"believe we should 'celebrate diversity,' as if all differences - say
freedom of religion and massacring all infidels - are equally worthy of
celebration."
It is also why liberals, like children, are driven so compulsively by
emotion that they simply don't have the ability to apply rational thought
when it comes to George W. Bush. To them, he is still the stronger father to
whom they continue to insist: "Is not!"
Rage Trumps Rationality
The reason why liberals have remained so intractably unhinged about
President Bush is not because of their ideological differences with his
conservatism. It is because of their collective inadequate egos. This is no
surprise because children have "developing" egos, not fully-fledged senses
of themselves, their places in the world, and their worth. Children are
wildly egocentric, seeing themselves as the center of the universe and
having no appreciation of the vast world that lies outside their limited
awareness. In fact, they echo a saying from the Talmud: "We do not see
things as they are; we see things as we are."
Liberals entertain the conceit that they are quite evolved and superior,
both morally and intellectually. In their childlike minds, they are "good"
and the people who set limits, demand accountability, expect empirical
results, fight their enemies and also make judgments about what is good and
bad and right and wrong are "bad."
But Rabbi Aryeh Spero says that liberals are "morally inferior, given their
lack of heartache over what grieves normal people - the actual torture of
our soldiers, the real beheadings, the tearing of Israelis limb by limb, and
the burning and dragging of American, British, and Israeli half-dead. Their
silence shows their amorality; their selectivity proves their concern is not
with human dignity but tarnishing their country's image." He calls this
thinking "a psychological aberration."
This, again, is no surprise, given that children cannot be expected to have
fully actualized moral compasses. Or egos. Which is why it was a mortal
wound to the egos of the monumentally egocentric and childlike liberals in
our midst that a Southern-drawling, non-King's-English-speaking Texan could
possibly defeat - not once but twice - the collective forces of a
hot-air-spewing Al Gore, the Vietnam war traitor John Kerry, and a liberal
media of such great numbers that it would not even fit into the vast acreage
of Guantanamo Bay!
But liberals are educated, you may say, credentialed, accomplished, smart in
all areas of life - business, the arts, medicine, law, even politics. Which
only goes to prove what most people know instinctively: Emotion always
trumps rationality!
Symptoms of Liberal Pathology
As I've mentioned, liberals want to be liked. They believe that if America
were not so strong, so powerful, so rich, so successful - so enviable to the
rest of the world - things would be better. This is because liberals hate
strength and power and wealth and success, except, that is, when they are
the beneficiaries! It is interesting to note here that the richest
politicians in Congress are liberal Democrats. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller,
Reid, Byrd, the list goes on and on.
In our nation's Mecca of Liberalism, Hollywood, those who announce the
Oscars always refuse to say, "And the winner is ." Instead they say, "And
the Oscar goes to ." This is because liberals don't like the concept of
winning or losing - someone might feel bad and get angry and pick a fight .
and then they won't like me! In the world of liberalism, it's always all
about me!
Among the many symptoms of liberal pathology is out-of-control anger. When
things aren't going their way, liberals behave much like any child who has
not yet learned to debate and so resorts to his or her most primitive
emotions. Here's a very brief sample, provided by conservative columnist JB
Williams:
? Liberal columnist Jonathan Chait: "I hate President George W. Bush. I hate
the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. I even hate the things that
everybody seems to like about him."
? Liberal DNC Chairman Howard Dean: "I hate Republicans and everything they
stand for."
? Liberal Michael Moore: "The Patriot Act is as un-American as 'Mein
Kampf.'"
? Liberal Al Gore: The Bush administration "works closely with a network of
'rapid response' digital brownshirts."
Simply, the liberals' childlike rage completely eclipses any semblance of
rationality. Their opposition to and obsession with President Bush has
frozen the higher centers of their brains, effectively preventing them from
ever presenting any intelligent alternative to the domestic and foreign
policy strategies they object to, outside of socialist let's-all-get-together
ideas that eliminate capitalism, the competitive spirit, and American
exceptionalism.
Raymond S. Kraft, who has written at length about American exceptionalism,
cites those who "want an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq: Al
Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Muqtada al Sadr, and Osama bin Laden . and America's
Democrats." [Read liberals].
That is why the only liberal "plan" for Iraq is cutting and running. Hillary
Clinton spoke for all liberals when she said she "resented" the president's
saying that the next president would have to withdraw troops from Iraq. In
essence, she was whining: How dare he inflict me with that adult
responsibility?
And on the domestic front, liberals offer no better plan for education than
more unions, no better plan for the economy than raising taxes, no better
plan for Supreme Court justices than more rule-from-the-bench liberals, and
no better plan for healthcare than socialized medicine.
In addition, liberals are intellectually lazy. Like the children they are,
their feelings supersede their self-described much-vaunted intellects,
rendering them biologically incapable of objective thought or reasoned
debate. So controlled are they by the emotional centers of their brains that
when President Bush says we must defend our country with every means
possible - diplomatic, strategic, and military - liberals figuratively say,
or rather screech, "I don't like those rules, Dad!" and then they have
pathological temper tantrums.
Another symptom of liberal pathology is a deep identification with
"victims," who to liberals are all women, all African-Americans, all
Hispanics, all union members, and all denizens of Third World countries, as
well as anyone else they perceive as being either "victimized" by bi
Re: The Real Emergency
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 16:52:43 -0500, Alan Bernardo wrote:
> PLONK!
>
> Alanb
Hey, you plonked yourself. That's a first.
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 16:52:43 -0500, Alan Bernardo wrote:
> PLONK!
>
> Alanb
Hey, you plonked yourself. That's a first.
Re: The Real Emergency
"Pipboy" <no@email.invalid> wrote in message
news:8zgdynpp20l0$.78xrojrgoxhl$.dlg@40tude,net ...
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 16:52:43 -0500, Alan Bernardo wrote:
>
>> PLONK!
>>
>> Alanb
>
> Hey, you plonked yourself. That's a first.
Yeah, I know. I figured the best way to get rid of an annoying person other
than myself is to first get rid of myself.
Alanb
"Pipboy" <no@email.invalid> wrote in message
news:8zgdynpp20l0$.78xrojrgoxhl$.dlg@40tude,net ...
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 16:52:43 -0500, Alan Bernardo wrote:
>
>> PLONK!
>>
>> Alanb
>
> Hey, you plonked yourself. That's a first.
Yeah, I know. I figured the best way to get rid of an annoying person other
than myself is to first get rid of myself.
Alanb
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
> They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone calls
Who get's to pick who the terrorists are? Personally, I don't care if they
listen to my calls, although it would take a lot of storage to save all my
wifes conversations.
> They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured terrorists
What is proper; Waterboarding? Electricity? Rack?
> They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial transactions
Hiding financial transactions seems like a common trait among businesses
and politicians, more of a Republican trait.
> They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
You mean no one could have guessed?
> They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
Mostly pointing out the fact of bad intelligence, and ignoring the history
that anarchy / civil war often results when a government is overthrown,
as in the relatively recent case of Serbia.
> They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
It's not a war anymore. It's an attempt to police the terrorists.
After Viet Nam and Somalia, the USA was getting pretty good at
cherry picking which wars it would get involved in. This was
demonstrated in Afghanistan, and the first Iraq war. Now the USA
is bogged down with most of it's military commited to Iraq. What
happens if another country becomes a threat?
> They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone calls
Who get's to pick who the terrorists are? Personally, I don't care if they
listen to my calls, although it would take a lot of storage to save all my
wifes conversations.
> They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured terrorists
What is proper; Waterboarding? Electricity? Rack?
> They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial transactions
Hiding financial transactions seems like a common trait among businesses
and politicians, more of a Republican trait.
> They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
You mean no one could have guessed?
> They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
Mostly pointing out the fact of bad intelligence, and ignoring the history
that anarchy / civil war often results when a government is overthrown,
as in the relatively recent case of Serbia.
> They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
It's not a war anymore. It's an attempt to police the terrorists.
After Viet Nam and Somalia, the USA was getting pretty good at
cherry picking which wars it would get involved in. This was
demonstrated in Afghanistan, and the first Iraq war. Now the USA
is bogged down with most of it's military commited to Iraq. What
happens if another country becomes a threat?
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
Yes, Mitch, you've figured it out, Liberalism has indeed become a
surrogate religion. We encounter tte same dogmatism, intolerance and
emotionalism that characterizes say, oh, Islamism. Did you realize
that religions are fungible?
Here's a book that will alter your perceptions: The True Bleliever by
Eric Hoffer.
Yes, Mitch, you've figured it out, Liberalism has indeed become a
surrogate religion. We encounter tte same dogmatism, intolerance and
emotionalism that characterizes say, oh, Islamism. Did you realize
that religions are fungible?
Here's a book that will alter your perceptions: The True Bleliever by
Eric Hoffer.
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
Jesus! Mitch-The-Bitch!!, didn't I tell you already on you're other
Neo-Hitler Post to go suck on limbough and bush's dick?..For god sake man!,
stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here! We all
know you are a joke!!
Peace!
"Mitch_A" <naman@nospam.pacbell,net > wrote in message
news:mz5zh.74625$qO4.56731@newssvr13.news.prodigy,net ...
> From the inception of psychology over 100 years ago, conditions such as
> autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder,
> narcissism and Tourette's syndrome were thought to be psychological in
> origin - and that with enough therapy, enough blaming inadequate
> parenting, enough talk, enough delving into "feelings," the sufferer could
> be treated successfully or even cured.
>
> We now know - thanks to tools like PET scans, MRIs, and pharmaceutical
> advances - that these condition are all biological in nature, more
> receptive to medications, augmented with behavioral techniques, than to
> any of the other "therapies" that were inflicted so ineffectually on
> millions of people over the past many decades.
>
> The scans, in fact, have revealed the specific areas of the brain that
> give rise to anger, revenge, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders,
> stuttering, pathological lying, cheating, manipulation,
> obsessive-compulsive behavior, depressive disorders, even cravings for
> chocolate!
>
> How do we know these conditions are biological? Because in addition to the
> fact that medications have treated these mental disorders successfully
> (for example, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder,
> Wellbutrin for depression, and Xanax for anxiety), they have identical
> symptoms (albeit some more severe than others) in people who are raised in
> luxury high-rises in Buenos Aires, slums in Los Angeles, kibbutzim in
> Israel, huts in rain forests, and penthouses in Manhattan. And also in
> people raised in both happy and dysfunctional homes.
>
> What we also understand is that most intractable mental conditions seem to
> be genetically driven, rooted in centers of the brain that are still not
> fully understood. Perhaps this is why political affiliation - with
> exceptions, of course - seems to run in families.
>
> Liberal Pathology
> I suspect that at the core of liberal "thinking" is the same kind of
> pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the
> brain that produces "feelings" and behavior over which liberals have no
> control.
>
> For instance, liberals are uniformly glum, not only in their grim
> demeanors and persistent anger, but also in their outlooks. Even in the
> flush of their midterm victory, they could hardly conceal their endemic
> rage, in spite of a brief moment of toothy, appliquéd smiles.
>
> "Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess,
> clinging to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone
> would just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy
> death threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those
> grumpy grownups in the current administration would see the light. And so
> they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call names."
>
> This is because their worldview is uniformly negative. When things are
> good, they see only the bad and invoke the Misery Index cited routinely by
> Jimmy Carter and resurrected by the dour wannabe president John Kerry.
> When things could be better, they see only that things could be worse.
> When their theories are refuted by hard fact, they are unable to process
> the true from the untrue because their feelings tell them otherwise. For
> instance:
>
> ? In an unprecedented stellar economy - with the GDP, employment, housing
> sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and
> crude oil down - liberals see only the "threat" of recession.
>
> ? In measurable improvement in education, liberals see only "too much
> testing."
>
> ? In the face of 3,000 lives being exterminated by Islamic terrorists on
> September 11, 2001, liberals see a non-existent threat.
>
> ? In the Iraq war, which has liberated 25 million people, liberals see, to
> quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "not a war but a situation" and a
> "catastrophe."
>
> ? Worse, the liberals among us see that all of our country's problems are
> the fault of, yes, America!
>
> Liberals are Like Children
> Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess, clinging
> to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone would
> just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy death
> threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy
> grownups in the current administration would see the light.
>
> And so they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call
> names.
>
> ? Who but an out-of-control child - who didn't know any better - would
> compare our heroic fighting troops to Nazis? Liberal Senator Dick Durbin
> (D-IL) did.
>
> ? Who but a bully of a child would say that the head of his household (in
> this case his country) was a liar? Liberal Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did.
>
> ? Who but a spoiled "princess" would call the leader of her country a
> failure, a fraud, and incompetent? Liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
> (D-CA) did.
>
> ? Who but a snobby and vacuous little brat would badmouth the president on
> foreign soil while our troops were in harm's way? Liberal Senator John
> Kerry (D-MA) did, as did liberal former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill
> Clinton.
>
> ? And who but a jealous tomboy would insist, again in a time of war, that
> the Commander in Chief is the worst president in our nation's history?
> Liberal Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has done just that.
>
> All of these children - er, politicians - have gone to great lengths to
> undermine President Bush, often in foreign countries and always in
> contradiction to the unspoken but historically honored rule to support a
> president in time of war - or at least to refrain from insult.
>
> A Rage That Knows No Bounds
> Children take things personally. "My father is bigger (stronger, smarter)
> than your father" is just about intolerable to the average child. "Is
> not!" "Is too!" is an exchange that inevitably results in either tears or
> fists. In 2000, when George W. Bush ascended to the presidency, the
> initial despair of liberals quickly morphed into childlike, irrational
> anger, which has obsessed them for the past six years.
> Not only have they called names, spewed insults and stamped their feet,
> but they've also lined up like-minded friends in the liberal media and
> leftwing think tanks to do the same. Much worse, they've aligned
> themselves with America's mortal enemies.
>
> According to Vasko Kohlmayer in World Defense Review, "the affection in
> which [liberals] are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor
> surprising. They have more than earned it by systematically subverting
> this country's war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to
> those who have pledged to destroy us." Kohlmayer lists some highlights of
> liberal treachery:
>
> ? They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone
> calls
>
> ? They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured
> terrorists
>
> ? They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial
> transactions
>
> ? They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
>
> ? They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
>
> ? They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
>
> ? They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
>
> ? They have impugned and demeaned our military
>
> ? They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
>
> ? They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
>
> ? They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
>
> ? They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
>
> If nothing else proves the rigidity - indeed the pathology - of the
> liberal brain, it is what Kohlmayer says of liberals today: "Almost all of
> the current democratic leadership was actively involved in [the Vietnam
> anti-war] effort. Bill and Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard
> Dean, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi were all in one way or
> another personally engaged in the anti-war movement. And when at last it
> bore its disastrous fruit, they gloated and danced in the streets.
> Exhilarated and jubilant, they deemed America's disgrace their finest
> hour. In their skewed world, America's defeat came to represent their
> personal triumph."
>
> Fathoming Liberal Rage
> To understand the left's treasonous rage, it is important to understand
> that the most cherished value in the life of children (read liberals) is
> to be "liked" by their peers, a theory that Judith Rich Harris has
> exhaustively documented in her best-selling and revolutionary book, The
> Nurture Assumption.
> To be liked - according to the evangelical religion of liberalism - is not
> to engage in conflict, not to fight, not to judge, After all, if you fight
> with anyone, including Islamic terrorists, they won't like you. And if you
> judge them as savages, murderers, enemies of democracy, they will fight
> you. So don't judge them and they won't fight you and everything will be
> hunky dory. Such are the fantastical fantasies of children (read
> liberals).
>
> They are fantasies that flourish, says writer Evan Sayet, because liberals
> are "wedded to the childish philosophy of 'multiculturalism' . the fantasy
> that all cultures are equally good and equally right. It is why liberals
> "believe we should 'celebrate diversity,' as if all differences - say
> freedom of religion and massacring all infidels - are equally worthy of
> celebration."
>
> It is also why liberals, like children, are driven so compulsively by
> emotion that they simply don't have the ability to apply rational thought
> when it comes to George W. Bush. To them, he is still the stronger father
> to whom they continue to insist: "Is not!"
>
> Rage Trumps Rationality
> The reason why liberals have remained so intractably unhinged about
> President Bush is not because of their ideological differences with his
> conservatism. It is because of their collective inadequate egos. This is
> no surprise because children have "developing" egos, not fully-fledged
> senses of themselves, their places in the world, and their worth. Children
> are wildly egocentric, seeing themselves as the center of the universe and
> having no appreciation of the vast world that lies outside their limited
> awareness. In fact, they echo a saying from the Talmud: "We do not see
> things as they are; we see things as we are."
> Liberals entertain the conceit that they are quite evolved and superior,
> both morally and intellectually. In their childlike minds, they are "good"
> and the people who set limits, demand accountability, expect empirical
> results, fight their enemies and also make judgments about what is good
> and bad and right and wrong are "bad."
>
> But Rabbi Aryeh Spero says that liberals are "morally inferior, given
> their lack of heartache over what grieves normal people - the actual
> torture of our soldiers, the real beheadings, the tearing of Israelis limb
> by limb, and the burning and dragging of American, British, and Israeli
> half-dead. Their silence shows their amorality; their selectivity proves
> their concern is not with human dignity but tarnishing their country's
> image." He calls this thinking "a psychological aberration."
>
> This, again, is no surprise, given that children cannot be expected to
> have fully actualized moral compasses. Or egos. Which is why it was a
> mortal wound to the egos of the monumentally egocentric and childlike
> liberals in our midst that a Southern-drawling,
> non-King's-English-speaking Texan could possibly defeat - not once but
> twice - the collective forces of a hot-air-spewing Al Gore, the Vietnam
> war traitor John Kerry, and a liberal media of such great numbers that it
> would not even fit into the vast acreage of Guantanamo Bay!
>
> But liberals are educated, you may say, credentialed, accomplished, smart
> in all areas of life - business, the arts, medicine, law, even politics.
> Which only goes to prove what most people know instinctively: Emotion
> always trumps rationality!
>
> Symptoms of Liberal Pathology
> As I've mentioned, liberals want to be liked. They believe that if America
> were not so strong, so powerful, so rich, so successful - so enviable to
> the rest of the world - things would be better. This is because liberals
> hate strength and power and wealth and success, except, that is, when they
> are the beneficiaries! It is interesting to note here that the richest
> politicians in Congress are liberal Democrats. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller,
> Reid, Byrd, the list goes on and on.
> In our nation's Mecca of Liberalism, Hollywood, those who announce the
> Oscars always refuse to say, "And the winner is ." Instead they say, "And
> the Oscar goes to ." This is because liberals don't like the concept of
> winning or losing - someone might feel bad and get angry and pick a fight
> . and then they won't like me! In the world of liberalism, it's always all
> about me!
>
> Among the many symptoms of liberal pathology is out-of-control anger. When
> things aren't going their way, liberals behave much like any child who has
> not yet learned to debate and so resorts to his or her most primitive
> emotions. Here's a very brief sample, provided by conservative columnist
> JB Williams:
>
> ? Liberal columnist Jonathan Chait: "I hate President George W. Bush. I
> hate the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. I even hate the things
> that everybody seems to like about him."
>
> ? Liberal DNC Chairman Howard Dean: "I hate Republicans and everything
> they stand for."
>
> ? Liberal Michael Moore: "The Patriot Act is as un-American as 'Mein
> Kampf.'"
>
> ? Liberal Al Gore: The Bush administration "works closely with a network
> of 'rapid response' digital brownshirts."
>
> Simply, the liberals' childlike rage completely eclipses any semblance of
> rationality. Their opposition to and obsession with President Bush has
> frozen the higher centers of their brains, effectively preventing them
> from ever presenting any intelligent alternative to the domestic and
> foreign policy strategies they object to, outside of socialist
> let's-all-get-together ideas that eliminate capitalism, the competitive
> spirit, and American exceptionalism.
>
> Raymond S. Kraft, who has written at length about American exceptionalism,
> cites those who "want an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq:
> Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Muqtada al Sadr, and Osama bin Laden . and
> America's Democrats." [Read liberals].
>
> That is why the only liberal "plan" for Iraq is cutting and running.
> Hillary Clinton spoke for all liberals when she said she "resented" the
> president's saying that the next president would have to withdraw troops
> from Iraq. In essence, she was whining: How dare he inflict me with that
> adult responsibility?
>
> And on the domestic front, liberals offer no better plan for education
> than more unions, no better plan for the economy than raising taxes, no
> better plan for Supreme Court justices than more rule-from-the-bench
> liberals,
Jesus! Mitch-The-Bitch!!, didn't I tell you already on you're other
Neo-Hitler Post to go suck on limbough and bush's dick?..For god sake man!,
stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here! We all
know you are a joke!!
Peace!
"Mitch_A" <naman@nospam.pacbell,net > wrote in message
news:mz5zh.74625$qO4.56731@newssvr13.news.prodigy,net ...
> From the inception of psychology over 100 years ago, conditions such as
> autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder,
> narcissism and Tourette's syndrome were thought to be psychological in
> origin - and that with enough therapy, enough blaming inadequate
> parenting, enough talk, enough delving into "feelings," the sufferer could
> be treated successfully or even cured.
>
> We now know - thanks to tools like PET scans, MRIs, and pharmaceutical
> advances - that these condition are all biological in nature, more
> receptive to medications, augmented with behavioral techniques, than to
> any of the other "therapies" that were inflicted so ineffectually on
> millions of people over the past many decades.
>
> The scans, in fact, have revealed the specific areas of the brain that
> give rise to anger, revenge, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders,
> stuttering, pathological lying, cheating, manipulation,
> obsessive-compulsive behavior, depressive disorders, even cravings for
> chocolate!
>
> How do we know these conditions are biological? Because in addition to the
> fact that medications have treated these mental disorders successfully
> (for example, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder,
> Wellbutrin for depression, and Xanax for anxiety), they have identical
> symptoms (albeit some more severe than others) in people who are raised in
> luxury high-rises in Buenos Aires, slums in Los Angeles, kibbutzim in
> Israel, huts in rain forests, and penthouses in Manhattan. And also in
> people raised in both happy and dysfunctional homes.
>
> What we also understand is that most intractable mental conditions seem to
> be genetically driven, rooted in centers of the brain that are still not
> fully understood. Perhaps this is why political affiliation - with
> exceptions, of course - seems to run in families.
>
> Liberal Pathology
> I suspect that at the core of liberal "thinking" is the same kind of
> pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the
> brain that produces "feelings" and behavior over which liberals have no
> control.
>
> For instance, liberals are uniformly glum, not only in their grim
> demeanors and persistent anger, but also in their outlooks. Even in the
> flush of their midterm victory, they could hardly conceal their endemic
> rage, in spite of a brief moment of toothy, appliquéd smiles.
>
> "Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess,
> clinging to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone
> would just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy
> death threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those
> grumpy grownups in the current administration would see the light. And so
> they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call names."
>
> This is because their worldview is uniformly negative. When things are
> good, they see only the bad and invoke the Misery Index cited routinely by
> Jimmy Carter and resurrected by the dour wannabe president John Kerry.
> When things could be better, they see only that things could be worse.
> When their theories are refuted by hard fact, they are unable to process
> the true from the untrue because their feelings tell them otherwise. For
> instance:
>
> ? In an unprecedented stellar economy - with the GDP, employment, housing
> sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and
> crude oil down - liberals see only the "threat" of recession.
>
> ? In measurable improvement in education, liberals see only "too much
> testing."
>
> ? In the face of 3,000 lives being exterminated by Islamic terrorists on
> September 11, 2001, liberals see a non-existent threat.
>
> ? In the Iraq war, which has liberated 25 million people, liberals see, to
> quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "not a war but a situation" and a
> "catastrophe."
>
> ? Worse, the liberals among us see that all of our country's problems are
> the fault of, yes, America!
>
> Liberals are Like Children
> Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess, clinging
> to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone would
> just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy death
> threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy
> grownups in the current administration would see the light.
>
> And so they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call
> names.
>
> ? Who but an out-of-control child - who didn't know any better - would
> compare our heroic fighting troops to Nazis? Liberal Senator Dick Durbin
> (D-IL) did.
>
> ? Who but a bully of a child would say that the head of his household (in
> this case his country) was a liar? Liberal Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did.
>
> ? Who but a spoiled "princess" would call the leader of her country a
> failure, a fraud, and incompetent? Liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
> (D-CA) did.
>
> ? Who but a snobby and vacuous little brat would badmouth the president on
> foreign soil while our troops were in harm's way? Liberal Senator John
> Kerry (D-MA) did, as did liberal former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill
> Clinton.
>
> ? And who but a jealous tomboy would insist, again in a time of war, that
> the Commander in Chief is the worst president in our nation's history?
> Liberal Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has done just that.
>
> All of these children - er, politicians - have gone to great lengths to
> undermine President Bush, often in foreign countries and always in
> contradiction to the unspoken but historically honored rule to support a
> president in time of war - or at least to refrain from insult.
>
> A Rage That Knows No Bounds
> Children take things personally. "My father is bigger (stronger, smarter)
> than your father" is just about intolerable to the average child. "Is
> not!" "Is too!" is an exchange that inevitably results in either tears or
> fists. In 2000, when George W. Bush ascended to the presidency, the
> initial despair of liberals quickly morphed into childlike, irrational
> anger, which has obsessed them for the past six years.
> Not only have they called names, spewed insults and stamped their feet,
> but they've also lined up like-minded friends in the liberal media and
> leftwing think tanks to do the same. Much worse, they've aligned
> themselves with America's mortal enemies.
>
> According to Vasko Kohlmayer in World Defense Review, "the affection in
> which [liberals] are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor
> surprising. They have more than earned it by systematically subverting
> this country's war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to
> those who have pledged to destroy us." Kohlmayer lists some highlights of
> liberal treachery:
>
> ? They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone
> calls
>
> ? They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured
> terrorists
>
> ? They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial
> transactions
>
> ? They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
>
> ? They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
>
> ? They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
>
> ? They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
>
> ? They have impugned and demeaned our military
>
> ? They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
>
> ? They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
>
> ? They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
>
> ? They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
>
> If nothing else proves the rigidity - indeed the pathology - of the
> liberal brain, it is what Kohlmayer says of liberals today: "Almost all of
> the current democratic leadership was actively involved in [the Vietnam
> anti-war] effort. Bill and Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard
> Dean, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi were all in one way or
> another personally engaged in the anti-war movement. And when at last it
> bore its disastrous fruit, they gloated and danced in the streets.
> Exhilarated and jubilant, they deemed America's disgrace their finest
> hour. In their skewed world, America's defeat came to represent their
> personal triumph."
>
> Fathoming Liberal Rage
> To understand the left's treasonous rage, it is important to understand
> that the most cherished value in the life of children (read liberals) is
> to be "liked" by their peers, a theory that Judith Rich Harris has
> exhaustively documented in her best-selling and revolutionary book, The
> Nurture Assumption.
> To be liked - according to the evangelical religion of liberalism - is not
> to engage in conflict, not to fight, not to judge, After all, if you fight
> with anyone, including Islamic terrorists, they won't like you. And if you
> judge them as savages, murderers, enemies of democracy, they will fight
> you. So don't judge them and they won't fight you and everything will be
> hunky dory. Such are the fantastical fantasies of children (read
> liberals).
>
> They are fantasies that flourish, says writer Evan Sayet, because liberals
> are "wedded to the childish philosophy of 'multiculturalism' . the fantasy
> that all cultures are equally good and equally right. It is why liberals
> "believe we should 'celebrate diversity,' as if all differences - say
> freedom of religion and massacring all infidels - are equally worthy of
> celebration."
>
> It is also why liberals, like children, are driven so compulsively by
> emotion that they simply don't have the ability to apply rational thought
> when it comes to George W. Bush. To them, he is still the stronger father
> to whom they continue to insist: "Is not!"
>
> Rage Trumps Rationality
> The reason why liberals have remained so intractably unhinged about
> President Bush is not because of their ideological differences with his
> conservatism. It is because of their collective inadequate egos. This is
> no surprise because children have "developing" egos, not fully-fledged
> senses of themselves, their places in the world, and their worth. Children
> are wildly egocentric, seeing themselves as the center of the universe and
> having no appreciation of the vast world that lies outside their limited
> awareness. In fact, they echo a saying from the Talmud: "We do not see
> things as they are; we see things as we are."
> Liberals entertain the conceit that they are quite evolved and superior,
> both morally and intellectually. In their childlike minds, they are "good"
> and the people who set limits, demand accountability, expect empirical
> results, fight their enemies and also make judgments about what is good
> and bad and right and wrong are "bad."
>
> But Rabbi Aryeh Spero says that liberals are "morally inferior, given
> their lack of heartache over what grieves normal people - the actual
> torture of our soldiers, the real beheadings, the tearing of Israelis limb
> by limb, and the burning and dragging of American, British, and Israeli
> half-dead. Their silence shows their amorality; their selectivity proves
> their concern is not with human dignity but tarnishing their country's
> image." He calls this thinking "a psychological aberration."
>
> This, again, is no surprise, given that children cannot be expected to
> have fully actualized moral compasses. Or egos. Which is why it was a
> mortal wound to the egos of the monumentally egocentric and childlike
> liberals in our midst that a Southern-drawling,
> non-King's-English-speaking Texan could possibly defeat - not once but
> twice - the collective forces of a hot-air-spewing Al Gore, the Vietnam
> war traitor John Kerry, and a liberal media of such great numbers that it
> would not even fit into the vast acreage of Guantanamo Bay!
>
> But liberals are educated, you may say, credentialed, accomplished, smart
> in all areas of life - business, the arts, medicine, law, even politics.
> Which only goes to prove what most people know instinctively: Emotion
> always trumps rationality!
>
> Symptoms of Liberal Pathology
> As I've mentioned, liberals want to be liked. They believe that if America
> were not so strong, so powerful, so rich, so successful - so enviable to
> the rest of the world - things would be better. This is because liberals
> hate strength and power and wealth and success, except, that is, when they
> are the beneficiaries! It is interesting to note here that the richest
> politicians in Congress are liberal Democrats. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller,
> Reid, Byrd, the list goes on and on.
> In our nation's Mecca of Liberalism, Hollywood, those who announce the
> Oscars always refuse to say, "And the winner is ." Instead they say, "And
> the Oscar goes to ." This is because liberals don't like the concept of
> winning or losing - someone might feel bad and get angry and pick a fight
> . and then they won't like me! In the world of liberalism, it's always all
> about me!
>
> Among the many symptoms of liberal pathology is out-of-control anger. When
> things aren't going their way, liberals behave much like any child who has
> not yet learned to debate and so resorts to his or her most primitive
> emotions. Here's a very brief sample, provided by conservative columnist
> JB Williams:
>
> ? Liberal columnist Jonathan Chait: "I hate President George W. Bush. I
> hate the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. I even hate the things
> that everybody seems to like about him."
>
> ? Liberal DNC Chairman Howard Dean: "I hate Republicans and everything
> they stand for."
>
> ? Liberal Michael Moore: "The Patriot Act is as un-American as 'Mein
> Kampf.'"
>
> ? Liberal Al Gore: The Bush administration "works closely with a network
> of 'rapid response' digital brownshirts."
>
> Simply, the liberals' childlike rage completely eclipses any semblance of
> rationality. Their opposition to and obsession with President Bush has
> frozen the higher centers of their brains, effectively preventing them
> from ever presenting any intelligent alternative to the domestic and
> foreign policy strategies they object to, outside of socialist
> let's-all-get-together ideas that eliminate capitalism, the competitive
> spirit, and American exceptionalism.
>
> Raymond S. Kraft, who has written at length about American exceptionalism,
> cites those who "want an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq:
> Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Muqtada al Sadr, and Osama bin Laden . and
> America's Democrats." [Read liberals].
>
> That is why the only liberal "plan" for Iraq is cutting and running.
> Hillary Clinton spoke for all liberals when she said she "resented" the
> president's saying that the next president would have to withdraw troops
> from Iraq. In essence, she was whining: How dare he inflict me with that
> adult responsibility?
>
> And on the domestic front, liberals offer no better plan for education
> than more unions, no better plan for the economy than raising taxes, no
> better plan for Supreme Court justices than more rule-from-the-bench
> liberals,
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
"Ernesto Guzman" <egguzman@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:d_wzh.3118$B8.1470@bignews6.bellsouth,net ...
> Jesus! Mitch-The-Bitch!!, didn't I tell you already on you're other
> Neo-Hitler Post to go suck on limbough and bush's dick?..For god sake
> man!, stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here!
> We all know you are a joke!!
The typical I have no facts so I'll resort to name calling response. How
funny!
"Ernesto Guzman" <egguzman@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:d_wzh.3118$B8.1470@bignews6.bellsouth,net ...
> Jesus! Mitch-The-Bitch!!, didn't I tell you already on you're other
> Neo-Hitler Post to go suck on limbough and bush's dick?..For god sake
> man!, stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here!
> We all know you are a joke!!
The typical I have no facts so I'll resort to name calling response. How
funny!
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
"Ernesto Guzman" <egguzman@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:d_wzh.3118$B8.1470@bignews6.bellsouth,net ...
> Jesus! Mitch-The-Bitch!!, didn't I tell you already on you're other
> Neo-Hitler Post to go suck on limbough and bush's dick?..For god sake
> man!, stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here!
> We all know you are a joke!!
>
> Peace!
>
All this guy does is post a bunch of nonsense and then waits for everyone to
reply, without replying himself. One would think that if he believes that
what he says has some truth to it, he'd argue. But he doesn't. He just
posts like a troll, priding himself of the fact that his posts are getting
responses. That is his only purpose.
The best thing to do-- unless he shows something other than cowardice by
posting and running away-- is to ignore.
Alanb
"Ernesto Guzman" <egguzman@bellsouth,net > wrote in message
news:d_wzh.3118$B8.1470@bignews6.bellsouth,net ...
> Jesus! Mitch-The-Bitch!!, didn't I tell you already on you're other
> Neo-Hitler Post to go suck on limbough and bush's dick?..For god sake
> man!, stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here!
> We all know you are a joke!!
>
> Peace!
>
All this guy does is post a bunch of nonsense and then waits for everyone to
reply, without replying himself. One would think that if he believes that
what he says has some truth to it, he'd argue. But he doesn't. He just
posts like a troll, priding himself of the fact that his posts are getting
responses. That is his only purpose.
The best thing to do-- unless he shows something other than cowardice by
posting and running away-- is to ignore.
Alanb
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 23:28:58 -0500, Ernesto Guzman wrote:
> stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here! We all
> know you are a joke!!
>
> Peace!
>
It might further your cause if you refrained from full-quoting Mitch's
drivel.
Thanks, uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 23:28:58 -0500, Ernesto Guzman wrote:
> stop cutting and pasting other peoples neo-con propaganda on here! We all
> know you are a joke!!
>
> Peace!
>
It might further your cause if you refrained from full-quoting Mitch's
drivel.
Thanks, uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
I was once happy to race with you. Now I am happy to plonk you. Sorry bud,
but I've had enough...
-Larry
"Mitch A" <naman@nospam.pacbell,net > wrote in message
news:mz5zh.74625$qO4.56731@newssvr13.news.prodigy,net ...
> From the inception of psychology over 100 years ago, conditions such as
> autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder,
> narcissism and Tourette's syndrome were thought to be psychological in
> origin - and that with enough therapy, enough blaming inadequate
> parenting, enough talk, enough delving into "feelings," the sufferer could
> be treated successfully or even cured.
>
> We now know - thanks to tools like PET scans, MRIs, and pharmaceutical
> advances - that these condition are all biological in nature, more
> receptive to medications, augmented with behavioral techniques, than to
> any of the other "therapies" that were inflicted so ineffectually on
> millions of people over the past many decades.
>
> The scans, in fact, have revealed the specific areas of the brain that
> give rise to anger, revenge, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders,
> stuttering, pathological lying, cheating, manipulation,
> obsessive-compulsive behavior, depressive disorders, even cravings for
> chocolate!
>
> How do we know these conditions are biological? Because in addition to the
> fact that medications have treated these mental disorders successfully
> (for example, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder,
> Wellbutrin for depression, and Xanax for anxiety), they have identical
> symptoms (albeit some more severe than others) in people who are raised in
> luxury high-rises in Buenos Aires, slums in Los Angeles, kibbutzim in
> Israel, huts in rain forests, and penthouses in Manhattan. And also in
> people raised in both happy and dysfunctional homes.
>
> What we also understand is that most intractable mental conditions seem to
> be genetically driven, rooted in centers of the brain that are still not
> fully understood. Perhaps this is why political affiliation - with
> exceptions, of course - seems to run in families.
>
> Liberal Pathology
> I suspect that at the core of liberal "thinking" is the same kind of
> pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the
> brain that produces "feelings" and behavior over which liberals have no
> control.
>
> For instance, liberals are uniformly glum, not only in their grim
> demeanors and persistent anger, but also in their outlooks. Even in the
> flush of their midterm victory, they could hardly conceal their endemic
> rage, in spite of a brief moment of toothy, appliquéd smiles.
>
> "Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess,
> clinging to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone
> would just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy
> death threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those
> grumpy grownups in the current administration would see the light. And so
> they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call names."
>
> This is because their worldview is uniformly negative. When things are
> good, they see only the bad and invoke the Misery Index cited routinely by
> Jimmy Carter and resurrected by the dour wannabe president John Kerry.
> When things could be better, they see only that things could be worse.
> When their theories are refuted by hard fact, they are unable to process
> the true from the untrue because their feelings tell them otherwise. For
> instance:
>
> ? In an unprecedented stellar economy - with the GDP, employment, housing
> sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and
> crude oil down - liberals see only the "threat" of recession.
>
> ? In measurable improvement in education, liberals see only "too much
> testing."
>
> ? In the face of 3,000 lives being exterminated by Islamic terrorists on
> September 11, 2001, liberals see a non-existent threat.
>
> ? In the Iraq war, which has liberated 25 million people, liberals see, to
> quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "not a war but a situation" and a
> "catastrophe."
>
> ? Worse, the liberals among us see that all of our country's problems are
> the fault of, yes, America!
>
> Liberals are Like Children
> Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess, clinging
> to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone would
> just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy death
> threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy
> grownups in the current administration would see the light.
>
> And so they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call
> names.
>
> ? Who but an out-of-control child - who didn't know any better - would
> compare our heroic fighting troops to Nazis? Liberal Senator Dick Durbin
> (D-IL) did.
>
> ? Who but a bully of a child would say that the head of his household (in
> this case his country) was a liar? Liberal Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did.
>
> ? Who but a spoiled "princess" would call the leader of her country a
> failure, a fraud, and incompetent? Liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
> (D-CA) did.
>
> ? Who but a snobby and vacuous little brat would badmouth the president on
> foreign soil while our troops were in harm's way? Liberal Senator John
> Kerry (D-MA) did, as did liberal former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill
> Clinton.
>
> ? And who but a jealous tomboy would insist, again in a time of war, that
> the Commander in Chief is the worst president in our nation's history?
> Liberal Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has done just that.
>
> All of these children - er, politicians - have gone to great lengths to
> undermine President Bush, often in foreign countries and always in
> contradiction to the unspoken but historically honored rule to support a
> president in time of war - or at least to refrain from insult.
>
> A Rage That Knows No Bounds
> Children take things personally. "My father is bigger (stronger, smarter)
> than your father" is just about intolerable to the average child. "Is
> not!" "Is too!" is an exchange that inevitably results in either tears or
> fists. In 2000, when George W. Bush ascended to the presidency, the
> initial despair of liberals quickly morphed into childlike, irrational
> anger, which has obsessed them for the past six years.
> Not only have they called names, spewed insults and stamped their feet,
> but they've also lined up like-minded friends in the liberal media and
> leftwing think tanks to do the same. Much worse, they've aligned
> themselves with America's mortal enemies.
>
> According to Vasko Kohlmayer in World Defense Review, "the affection in
> which [liberals] are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor
> surprising. They have more than earned it by systematically subverting
> this country's war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to
> those who have pledged to destroy us." Kohlmayer lists some highlights of
> liberal treachery:
>
> ? They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone
> calls
>
> ? They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured
> terrorists
>
> ? They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial
> transactions
>
> ? They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
>
> ? They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
>
> ? They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
>
> ? They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
>
> ? They have impugned and demeaned our military
>
> ? They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
>
> ? They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
>
> ? They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
>
> ? They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
>
> If nothing else proves the rigidity - indeed the pathology - of the
> liberal brain, it is what Kohlmayer says of liberals today: "Almost all of
> the current democratic leadership was actively involved in [the Vietnam
> anti-war] effort. Bill and Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard
> Dean, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi were all in one way or
> another personally engaged in the anti-war movement. And when at last it
> bore its disastrous fruit, they gloated and danced in the streets.
> Exhilarated and jubilant, they deemed America's disgrace their finest
> hour. In their skewed world, America's defeat came to represent their
> personal triumph."
>
> Fathoming Liberal Rage
> To understand the left's treasonous rage, it is important to understand
> that the most cherished value in the life of children (read liberals) is
> to be "liked" by their peers, a theory that Judith Rich Harris has
> exhaustively documented in her best-selling and revolutionary book, The
> Nurture Assumption.
> To be liked - according to the evangelical religion of liberalism - is not
> to engage in conflict, not to fight, not to judge, After all, if you fight
> with anyone, including Islamic terrorists, they won't like you. And if you
> judge them as savages, murderers, enemies of democracy, they will fight
> you. So don't judge them and they won't fight you and everything will be
> hunky dory. Such are the fantastical fantasies of children (read
> liberals).
>
> They are fantasies that flourish, says writer Evan Sayet, because liberals
> are "wedded to the childish philosophy of 'multiculturalism' . the fantasy
> that all cultures are equally good and equally right. It is why liberals
> "believe we should 'celebrate diversity,' as if all differences - say
> freedom of religion and massacring all infidels - are equally worthy of
> celebration."
>
> It is also why liberals, like children, are driven so compulsively by
> emotion that they simply don't have the ability to apply rational thought
> when it comes to George W. Bush. To them, he is still the stronger father
> to whom they continue to insist: "Is not!"
>
> Rage Trumps Rationality
> The reason why liberals have remained so intractably unhinged about
> President Bush is not because of their ideological differences with his
> conservatism. It is because of their collective inadequate egos. This is
> no surprise because children have "developing" egos, not fully-fledged
> senses of themselves, their places in the world, and their worth. Children
> are wildly egocentric, seeing themselves as the center of the universe and
> having no appreciation of the vast world that lies outside their limited
> awareness. In fact, they echo a saying from the Talmud: "We do not see
> things as they are; we see things as we are."
> Liberals entertain the conceit that they are quite evolved and superior,
> both morally and intellectually. In their childlike minds, they are "good"
> and the people who set limits, demand accountability, expect empirical
> results, fight their enemies and also make judgments about what is good
> and bad and right and wrong are "bad."
>
> But Rabbi Aryeh Spero says that liberals are "morally inferior, given
> their lack of heartache over what grieves normal people - the actual
> torture of our soldiers, the real beheadings, the tearing of Israelis limb
> by limb, and the burning and dragging of American, British, and Israeli
> half-dead. Their silence shows their amorality; their selectivity proves
> their concern is not with human dignity but tarnishing their country's
> image." He calls this thinking "a psychological aberration."
>
> This, again, is no surprise, given that children cannot be expected to
> have fully actualized moral compasses. Or egos. Which is why it was a
> mortal wound to the egos of the monumentally egocentric and childlike
> liberals in our midst that a Southern-drawling,
> non-King's-English-speaking Texan could possibly defeat - not once but
> twice - the collective forces of a hot-air-spewing Al Gore, the Vietnam
> war traitor John Kerry, and a liberal media of such great numbers that it
> would not even fit into the vast acreage of Guantanamo Bay!
>
> But liberals are educated, you may say, credentialed, accomplished, smart
> in all areas of life - business, the arts, medicine, law, even politics.
> Which only goes to prove what most people know instinctively: Emotion
> always trumps rationality!
>
> Symptoms of Liberal Pathology
> As I've mentioned, liberals want to be liked. They believe that if America
> were not so strong, so powerful, so rich, so successful - so enviable to
> the rest of the world - things would be better. This is because liberals
> hate strength and power and wealth and success, except, that is, when they
> are the beneficiaries! It is interesting to note here that the richest
> politicians in Congress are liberal Democrats. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller,
> Reid, Byrd, the list goes on and on.
> In our nation's Mecca of Liberalism, Hollywood, those who announce the
> Oscars always refuse to say, "And the winner is ." Instead they say, "And
> the Oscar goes to ." This is because liberals don't like the concept of
> winning or losing - someone might feel bad and get angry and pick a fight
> . and then they won't like me! In the world of liberalism, it's always all
> about me!
>
> Among the many symptoms of liberal pathology is out-of-control anger. When
> things aren't going their way, liberals behave much like any child who has
> not yet learned to debate and so resorts to his or her most primitive
> emotions. Here's a very brief sample, provided by conservative columnist
> JB Williams:
>
> ? Liberal columnist Jonathan Chait: "I hate President George W. Bush. I
> hate the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. I even hate the things
> that everybody seems to like about him."
>
> ? Liberal DNC Chairman Howard Dean: "I hate Republicans and everything
> they stand for."
>
> ? Liberal Michael Moore: "The Patriot Act is as un-American as 'Mein
> Kampf.'"
>
> ? Liberal Al Gore: The Bush administration "works closely with a network
> of 'rapid response' digital brownshirts."
>
> Simply, the liberals' childlike rage completely eclipses any semblance of
> rationality. Their opposition to and obsession with President Bush has
> frozen the higher centers of their brains, effectively preventing them
> from ever presenting any intelligent alternative to the domestic and
> foreign policy strategies they object to, outside of socialist
> let's-all-get-together ideas that eliminate capitalism, the competitive
> spirit, and American exceptionalism.
>
> Raymond S. Kraft, who has written at length about American exceptionalism,
> cites those who "want an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq:
> Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Muqtada al Sadr, and Osama bin Laden . and
> America's Democrats." [Read liberals].
>
> That is why the only liberal "plan" for Iraq is cutting and running.
> Hillary Clinton spoke for all liberals when she said she "resented" the
> president's saying that the next president would have to withdraw troops
> from Iraq. In essence, she was whining: How dare he inflict me with that
> adult responsibility?
>
> And on the domestic front, liberals offer no better plan for education
> than more unions, no better plan for the economy than raising taxes, no
> better plan for Supreme Court justices than more rule-from-the-bench
> liberals, and no better plan for healthcare than socialized medicine.
>
> In addition, liberals are intellectually lazy. Like the children they are,
>
I was once happy to race with you. Now I am happy to plonk you. Sorry bud,
but I've had enough...
-Larry
"Mitch A" <naman@nospam.pacbell,net > wrote in message
news:mz5zh.74625$qO4.56731@newssvr13.news.prodigy,net ...
> From the inception of psychology over 100 years ago, conditions such as
> autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder,
> narcissism and Tourette's syndrome were thought to be psychological in
> origin - and that with enough therapy, enough blaming inadequate
> parenting, enough talk, enough delving into "feelings," the sufferer could
> be treated successfully or even cured.
>
> We now know - thanks to tools like PET scans, MRIs, and pharmaceutical
> advances - that these condition are all biological in nature, more
> receptive to medications, augmented with behavioral techniques, than to
> any of the other "therapies" that were inflicted so ineffectually on
> millions of people over the past many decades.
>
> The scans, in fact, have revealed the specific areas of the brain that
> give rise to anger, revenge, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders,
> stuttering, pathological lying, cheating, manipulation,
> obsessive-compulsive behavior, depressive disorders, even cravings for
> chocolate!
>
> How do we know these conditions are biological? Because in addition to the
> fact that medications have treated these mental disorders successfully
> (for example, Haldol for psychoses, lithium for bipolar disorder,
> Wellbutrin for depression, and Xanax for anxiety), they have identical
> symptoms (albeit some more severe than others) in people who are raised in
> luxury high-rises in Buenos Aires, slums in Los Angeles, kibbutzim in
> Israel, huts in rain forests, and penthouses in Manhattan. And also in
> people raised in both happy and dysfunctional homes.
>
> What we also understand is that most intractable mental conditions seem to
> be genetically driven, rooted in centers of the brain that are still not
> fully understood. Perhaps this is why political affiliation - with
> exceptions, of course - seems to run in families.
>
> Liberal Pathology
> I suspect that at the core of liberal "thinking" is the same kind of
> pathology that characterizes other mental disorders, i.e., a glitch in the
> brain that produces "feelings" and behavior over which liberals have no
> control.
>
> For instance, liberals are uniformly glum, not only in their grim
> demeanors and persistent anger, but also in their outlooks. Even in the
> flush of their midterm victory, they could hardly conceal their endemic
> rage, in spite of a brief moment of toothy, appliquéd smiles.
>
> "Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess,
> clinging to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone
> would just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy
> death threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those
> grumpy grownups in the current administration would see the light. And so
> they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call names."
>
> This is because their worldview is uniformly negative. When things are
> good, they see only the bad and invoke the Misery Index cited routinely by
> Jimmy Carter and resurrected by the dour wannabe president John Kerry.
> When things could be better, they see only that things could be worse.
> When their theories are refuted by hard fact, they are unable to process
> the true from the untrue because their feelings tell them otherwise. For
> instance:
>
> ? In an unprecedented stellar economy - with the GDP, employment, housing
> sales, and consumer confidence up, and inflation, the trade deficit, and
> crude oil down - liberals see only the "threat" of recession.
>
> ? In measurable improvement in education, liberals see only "too much
> testing."
>
> ? In the face of 3,000 lives being exterminated by Islamic terrorists on
> September 11, 2001, liberals see a non-existent threat.
>
> ? In the Iraq war, which has liberated 25 million people, liberals see, to
> quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, "not a war but a situation" and a
> "catastrophe."
>
> ? Worse, the liberals among us see that all of our country's problems are
> the fault of, yes, America!
>
> Liberals are Like Children
> Liberals, like children, live in a world of utopian dreaminess, clinging
> to a narrow, circumscribed reality and believing that if everyone would
> just be nice to each other - let's talk, let's chat - all the noisy death
> threats and pesky suicide bombings would go away, and all those grumpy
> grownups in the current administration would see the light.
>
> And so they do what children do when they're mad at grownups. They call
> names.
>
> ? Who but an out-of-control child - who didn't know any better - would
> compare our heroic fighting troops to Nazis? Liberal Senator Dick Durbin
> (D-IL) did.
>
> ? Who but a bully of a child would say that the head of his household (in
> this case his country) was a liar? Liberal Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) did.
>
> ? Who but a spoiled "princess" would call the leader of her country a
> failure, a fraud, and incompetent? Liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
> (D-CA) did.
>
> ? Who but a snobby and vacuous little brat would badmouth the president on
> foreign soil while our troops were in harm's way? Liberal Senator John
> Kerry (D-MA) did, as did liberal former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill
> Clinton.
>
> ? And who but a jealous tomboy would insist, again in a time of war, that
> the Commander in Chief is the worst president in our nation's history?
> Liberal Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has done just that.
>
> All of these children - er, politicians - have gone to great lengths to
> undermine President Bush, often in foreign countries and always in
> contradiction to the unspoken but historically honored rule to support a
> president in time of war - or at least to refrain from insult.
>
> A Rage That Knows No Bounds
> Children take things personally. "My father is bigger (stronger, smarter)
> than your father" is just about intolerable to the average child. "Is
> not!" "Is too!" is an exchange that inevitably results in either tears or
> fists. In 2000, when George W. Bush ascended to the presidency, the
> initial despair of liberals quickly morphed into childlike, irrational
> anger, which has obsessed them for the past six years.
> Not only have they called names, spewed insults and stamped their feet,
> but they've also lined up like-minded friends in the liberal media and
> leftwing think tanks to do the same. Much worse, they've aligned
> themselves with America's mortal enemies.
>
> According to Vasko Kohlmayer in World Defense Review, "the affection in
> which [liberals] are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor
> surprising. They have more than earned it by systematically subverting
> this country's war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to
> those who have pledged to destroy us." Kohlmayer lists some highlights of
> liberal treachery:
>
> ? They have tried to prevent us from listening in on terrorists' phone
> calls
>
> ? They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured
> terrorists
>
> ? They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial
> transactions
>
> ? They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
>
> ? They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
>
> ? They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
>
> ? They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
>
> ? They have impugned and demeaned our military
>
> ? They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
>
> ? They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
>
> ? They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
>
> ? They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.
>
> If nothing else proves the rigidity - indeed the pathology - of the
> liberal brain, it is what Kohlmayer says of liberals today: "Almost all of
> the current democratic leadership was actively involved in [the Vietnam
> anti-war] effort. Bill and Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Howard
> Dean, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Nancy Pelosi were all in one way or
> another personally engaged in the anti-war movement. And when at last it
> bore its disastrous fruit, they gloated and danced in the streets.
> Exhilarated and jubilant, they deemed America's disgrace their finest
> hour. In their skewed world, America's defeat came to represent their
> personal triumph."
>
> Fathoming Liberal Rage
> To understand the left's treasonous rage, it is important to understand
> that the most cherished value in the life of children (read liberals) is
> to be "liked" by their peers, a theory that Judith Rich Harris has
> exhaustively documented in her best-selling and revolutionary book, The
> Nurture Assumption.
> To be liked - according to the evangelical religion of liberalism - is not
> to engage in conflict, not to fight, not to judge, After all, if you fight
> with anyone, including Islamic terrorists, they won't like you. And if you
> judge them as savages, murderers, enemies of democracy, they will fight
> you. So don't judge them and they won't fight you and everything will be
> hunky dory. Such are the fantastical fantasies of children (read
> liberals).
>
> They are fantasies that flourish, says writer Evan Sayet, because liberals
> are "wedded to the childish philosophy of 'multiculturalism' . the fantasy
> that all cultures are equally good and equally right. It is why liberals
> "believe we should 'celebrate diversity,' as if all differences - say
> freedom of religion and massacring all infidels - are equally worthy of
> celebration."
>
> It is also why liberals, like children, are driven so compulsively by
> emotion that they simply don't have the ability to apply rational thought
> when it comes to George W. Bush. To them, he is still the stronger father
> to whom they continue to insist: "Is not!"
>
> Rage Trumps Rationality
> The reason why liberals have remained so intractably unhinged about
> President Bush is not because of their ideological differences with his
> conservatism. It is because of their collective inadequate egos. This is
> no surprise because children have "developing" egos, not fully-fledged
> senses of themselves, their places in the world, and their worth. Children
> are wildly egocentric, seeing themselves as the center of the universe and
> having no appreciation of the vast world that lies outside their limited
> awareness. In fact, they echo a saying from the Talmud: "We do not see
> things as they are; we see things as we are."
> Liberals entertain the conceit that they are quite evolved and superior,
> both morally and intellectually. In their childlike minds, they are "good"
> and the people who set limits, demand accountability, expect empirical
> results, fight their enemies and also make judgments about what is good
> and bad and right and wrong are "bad."
>
> But Rabbi Aryeh Spero says that liberals are "morally inferior, given
> their lack of heartache over what grieves normal people - the actual
> torture of our soldiers, the real beheadings, the tearing of Israelis limb
> by limb, and the burning and dragging of American, British, and Israeli
> half-dead. Their silence shows their amorality; their selectivity proves
> their concern is not with human dignity but tarnishing their country's
> image." He calls this thinking "a psychological aberration."
>
> This, again, is no surprise, given that children cannot be expected to
> have fully actualized moral compasses. Or egos. Which is why it was a
> mortal wound to the egos of the monumentally egocentric and childlike
> liberals in our midst that a Southern-drawling,
> non-King's-English-speaking Texan could possibly defeat - not once but
> twice - the collective forces of a hot-air-spewing Al Gore, the Vietnam
> war traitor John Kerry, and a liberal media of such great numbers that it
> would not even fit into the vast acreage of Guantanamo Bay!
>
> But liberals are educated, you may say, credentialed, accomplished, smart
> in all areas of life - business, the arts, medicine, law, even politics.
> Which only goes to prove what most people know instinctively: Emotion
> always trumps rationality!
>
> Symptoms of Liberal Pathology
> As I've mentioned, liberals want to be liked. They believe that if America
> were not so strong, so powerful, so rich, so successful - so enviable to
> the rest of the world - things would be better. This is because liberals
> hate strength and power and wealth and success, except, that is, when they
> are the beneficiaries! It is interesting to note here that the richest
> politicians in Congress are liberal Democrats. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller,
> Reid, Byrd, the list goes on and on.
> In our nation's Mecca of Liberalism, Hollywood, those who announce the
> Oscars always refuse to say, "And the winner is ." Instead they say, "And
> the Oscar goes to ." This is because liberals don't like the concept of
> winning or losing - someone might feel bad and get angry and pick a fight
> . and then they won't like me! In the world of liberalism, it's always all
> about me!
>
> Among the many symptoms of liberal pathology is out-of-control anger. When
> things aren't going their way, liberals behave much like any child who has
> not yet learned to debate and so resorts to his or her most primitive
> emotions. Here's a very brief sample, provided by conservative columnist
> JB Williams:
>
> ? Liberal columnist Jonathan Chait: "I hate President George W. Bush. I
> hate the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. I even hate the things
> that everybody seems to like about him."
>
> ? Liberal DNC Chairman Howard Dean: "I hate Republicans and everything
> they stand for."
>
> ? Liberal Michael Moore: "The Patriot Act is as un-American as 'Mein
> Kampf.'"
>
> ? Liberal Al Gore: The Bush administration "works closely with a network
> of 'rapid response' digital brownshirts."
>
> Simply, the liberals' childlike rage completely eclipses any semblance of
> rationality. Their opposition to and obsession with President Bush has
> frozen the higher centers of their brains, effectively preventing them
> from ever presenting any intelligent alternative to the domestic and
> foreign policy strategies they object to, outside of socialist
> let's-all-get-together ideas that eliminate capitalism, the competitive
> spirit, and American exceptionalism.
>
> Raymond S. Kraft, who has written at length about American exceptionalism,
> cites those who "want an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq:
> Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Muqtada al Sadr, and Osama bin Laden . and
> America's Democrats." [Read liberals].
>
> That is why the only liberal "plan" for Iraq is cutting and running.
> Hillary Clinton spoke for all liberals when she said she "resented" the
> president's saying that the next president would have to withdraw troops
> from Iraq. In essence, she was whining: How dare he inflict me with that
> adult responsibility?
>
> And on the domestic front, liberals offer no better plan for education
> than more unions, no better plan for the economy than raising taxes, no
> better plan for Supreme Court justices than more rule-from-the-bench
> liberals, and no better plan for healthcare than socialized medicine.
>
> In addition, liberals are intellectually lazy. Like the children they are,
>
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:47:21 -0500, Larry wrote:
> I was once happy to race with you. Now I am happy to plonk you. Sorry bud,
> but I've had enough...
>
> -Larry
Hey Larry, please refrain from full-quoting Mitch as it only helps to
spread this stuff further. I was happy *not* having to read this stuff
from its original author, but if you guys keep full-quoting him then the
killfile only gets larger. I guess hitting Ctrl-a once, followed by
Backspace isn't too much work for anybody ;-)
All the best, uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:47:21 -0500, Larry wrote:
> I was once happy to race with you. Now I am happy to plonk you. Sorry bud,
> but I've had enough...
>
> -Larry
Hey Larry, please refrain from full-quoting Mitch as it only helps to
spread this stuff further. I was happy *not* having to read this stuff
from its original author, but if you guys keep full-quoting him then the
killfile only gets larger. I guess hitting Ctrl-a once, followed by
Backspace isn't too much work for anybody ;-)
All the best, uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
My apologies.
-Larry
"Uwe Schürkamp" <hoover@hoover.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:slrnet07c5.rj6.hoover@hoover.dyndns.org...
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:47:21 -0500, Larry wrote:
>> I was once happy to race with you. Now I am happy to plonk you. Sorry
>> bud,
>> but I've had enough...
>>
>> -Larry
>
> Hey Larry, please refrain from full-quoting Mitch as it only helps to
> spread this stuff further. I was happy *not* having to read this stuff
> from its original author, but if you guys keep full-quoting him then the
> killfile only gets larger. I guess hitting Ctrl-a once, followed by
> Backspace isn't too much work for anybody ;-)
>
> All the best, uwe
>
>
> --
> GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
My apologies.
-Larry
"Uwe Schürkamp" <hoover@hoover.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:slrnet07c5.rj6.hoover@hoover.dyndns.org...
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:47:21 -0500, Larry wrote:
>> I was once happy to race with you. Now I am happy to plonk you. Sorry
>> bud,
>> but I've had enough...
>>
>> -Larry
>
> Hey Larry, please refrain from full-quoting Mitch as it only helps to
> spread this stuff further. I was happy *not* having to read this stuff
> from its original author, but if you guys keep full-quoting him then the
> killfile only gets larger. I guess hitting Ctrl-a once, followed by
> Backspace isn't too much work for anybody ;-)
>
> All the best, uwe
>
>
> --
> GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
Re: The Pathology of Liberalism
Ok. Where's the block list in Vista's Mail Newsreader?
-Larry
Ok. Where's the block list in Vista's Mail Newsreader?
-Larry
