Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
danielh41
Posts: 1219
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:36 am
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Contact:

Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#1 Post by danielh41 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 8:56 pm

Liberalism: A Mental Disorder

I wasn't going to post this even though I found it rather enlightening. But after reading some of the comments about Sarah Palin's book deal, I figured what the heck. Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr.,a forensic psychiatrist, explains the madness of liberalism in his new book The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. You can read an excerpt below, and read more at his website libertymind.com.
Like all other human beings, the modern liberal reveals his true character, including his madness, in what he values and devalues, in what he articulates with passion. Of special interest, however, are the many values about which the modern liberal mind is not passionate: his agenda does not insist that the individual is the ultimate economic, social and political unit; it does not idealize individual liberty and the structure of law and order essential to it; it does not defend the basic rights of property and contract; it does not aspire to ideals of authentic autonomy and mutuality; it does not preach an ethic of self-reliance and self-determination; it does not praise courage, forbearance or resilience; it does not celebrate the ethics of consent or the blessings of voluntary cooperation. It does not advocate moral rectitude or understand the critical role of morality in human relating. The liberal agenda does not comprehend an identity of competence, appreciate its importance, or analyze the developmental conditions and social institutions that promote its achievement. The liberal agenda does not understand or recognize personal sovereignty or impose strict limits on coercion by the state. It does not celebrate the genuine altruism of private charity. It does not learn history’s lessons on the evils of collectivism.

What the liberal mind is passionate about is a world filled with pity, sorrow, neediness, misfortune, poverty, suspicion, mistrust, anger, exploitation, discrimination, victimization, alienation and injustice. Those who occupy this world are “workers,” “minorities,” “the little guy,” “women,” and the “unemployed.” They are poor, weak, sick, wronged, cheated, oppressed, disenfranchised, exploited and victimized. They bear no responsibility for their problems. None of their agonies are attributable to faults or failings of their own: not to poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgment, wishful thinking, lack of ambition, low frustration tolerance, mental illness or defects in character. None of the victims’ plight is caused by failure to plan for the future or learn from experience. Instead, the “root causes” of all this pain lie in faulty social conditions: poverty, disease, war, ignorance, unemployment, racial prejudice, ethnic and gender discrimination, modern technology, capitalism, globalization and imperialism. In the radical liberal mind, this suffering is inflicted on the innocent by various predators and persecutors: “Big Business,” “Big Corporations,” “greedy capitalists,” U.S. Imperialists,” “the oppressors,” “the rich,” “the wealthy,” “the powerful” and “the selfish.”

The liberal cure for this endless malaise is a very large authoritarian government that regulates and manages society through a cradle to grave agenda of redistributive caretaking. It is a government everywhere doing everything for everyone. The liberal motto is “In Government We Trust.” To rescue the people from their troubled lives, the agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. With liberal intellectuals sharing the glory, the liberal politician is the hero in this melodrama. He takes credit for providing his constituents with whatever they want or need even though he has not produced by his own effort any of the goods, services or status transferred to them but has instead taken them from others by force.

It should be apparent by now that these social policies and the passions that drive them contradict all that is rational in human relating, and they are therefore irrational in themselves. But the faulty conceptions that lie behind these passions cannot be viewed as mere cognitive slippage. The degree of modern liberalism’s irrationality far exceeds any misunderstanding that can be attributed to faulty fact gathering or logical error. Indeed, under careful scrutiny, liberalism’s distortions of the normal ability to reason can only be understood as the product of psychopathology. So extravagant are the patterns of thinking, emoting, behaving and relating that characterize the liberal mind that its relentless protests and demands become understandable only as disorders of the psyche. The modern liberal mind, its distorted perceptions and its destructive agenda are the product of disturbed personalities.

As is the case in all personality disturbance, defects of this type represent serious failures in development processes. The nature of these failures is detailed below. Among their consequences are the liberal mind’s relentless efforts to misrepresent human nature and to deny certain indispensable requirements for human relating. In his efforts to construct a grand collectivist utopia—to live what Jacques Barzun has called “the unconditioned life” in which “everybody should be safe and at ease in a hundred ways”—the radical liberal attempts to actualize in the real world an idealized fiction that will mitigate all hardship and heal all wounds. (Barzun 2000). He acts out this fiction, essentially a Marxist morality play, in various theaters of human relatedness, most often on the world’s economic, social and political stages. But the play repeatedly folds. Over the course of the Twentieth Century, the radical liberal’s attempts to create a brave new socialist world have invariably failed. At the dawn of the Twenty-first Century his attempts continue to fail in the stagnant economies, moral decay and social turmoil now widespread in Europe. An increasingly bankrupt welfare society is putting the U.S. on track for the same fate if liberalism is not cured there. Because the liberal agenda’s principles violate the rules of ordered liberty, his most determined efforts to realize its visionary fantasies must inevitably fall short. Yet, despite all the evidence against it, the modern liberal mind believes his agenda is good social science. It is, in fact, bad science fiction. He persists in this agenda despite its madness.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#2 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:07 pm

Um. ***************. Seriously.

If the same thing were to be posted about "conservativism-mental disorder"...
Well, then

User avatar
sunflower
Bored Hooligan
Posts: 8010
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 11:32 am
Location: East Hartford, CT

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#3 Post by sunflower » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:28 pm

inability to let go -- mental disorder??

???

User avatar
franktangredi
Posts: 6678
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:34 pm

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#4 Post by franktangredi » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:42 pm

danielh41 wrote:Liberalism: A Mental Disorder

I wasn't going to post this even though I found it rather enlightening. But after reading some of the comments about Sarah Palin's book deal, I figured what the heck. Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr.,a forensic psychiatrist, explains the madness of liberalism in his new book The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. You can read an excerpt below, and read more at his website libertymind.com.
Like all other human beings, the modern liberal reveals his true character, including his madness, in what he values and devalues, in what he articulates with passion. Of special interest, however, are the many values about which the modern liberal mind is not passionate: his agenda does not insist that the individual is the ultimate economic, social and political unit; it does not idealize individual liberty and the structure of law and order essential to it; it does not defend the basic rights of property and contract; it does not aspire to ideals of authentic autonomy and mutuality; it does not preach an ethic of self-reliance and self-determination; it does not praise courage, forbearance or resilience; it does not celebrate the ethics of consent or the blessings of voluntary cooperation. It does not advocate moral rectitude or understand the critical role of morality in human relating. The liberal agenda does not comprehend an identity of competence, appreciate its importance, or analyze the developmental conditions and social institutions that promote its achievement. The liberal agenda does not understand or recognize personal sovereignty or impose strict limits on coercion by the state. It does not celebrate the genuine altruism of private charity. It does not learn history’s lessons on the evils of collectivism.

What the liberal mind is passionate about is a world filled with pity, sorrow, neediness, misfortune, poverty, suspicion, mistrust, anger, exploitation, discrimination, victimization, alienation and injustice. Those who occupy this world are “workers,” “minorities,” “the little guy,” “women,” and the “unemployed.” They are poor, weak, sick, wronged, cheated, oppressed, disenfranchised, exploited and victimized. They bear no responsibility for their problems. None of their agonies are attributable to faults or failings of their own: not to poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgment, wishful thinking, lack of ambition, low frustration tolerance, mental illness or defects in character. None of the victims’ plight is caused by failure to plan for the future or learn from experience. Instead, the “root causes” of all this pain lie in faulty social conditions: poverty, disease, war, ignorance, unemployment, racial prejudice, ethnic and gender discrimination, modern technology, capitalism, globalization and imperialism. In the radical liberal mind, this suffering is inflicted on the innocent by various predators and persecutors: “Big Business,” “Big Corporations,” “greedy capitalists,” U.S. Imperialists,” “the oppressors,” “the rich,” “the wealthy,” “the powerful” and “the selfish.”

The liberal cure for this endless malaise is a very large authoritarian government that regulates and manages society through a cradle to grave agenda of redistributive caretaking. It is a government everywhere doing everything for everyone. The liberal motto is “In Government We Trust.” To rescue the people from their troubled lives, the agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. With liberal intellectuals sharing the glory, the liberal politician is the hero in this melodrama. He takes credit for providing his constituents with whatever they want or need even though he has not produced by his own effort any of the goods, services or status transferred to them but has instead taken them from others by force.

It should be apparent by now that these social policies and the passions that drive them contradict all that is rational in human relating, and they are therefore irrational in themselves. But the faulty conceptions that lie behind these passions cannot be viewed as mere cognitive slippage. The degree of modern liberalism’s irrationality far exceeds any misunderstanding that can be attributed to faulty fact gathering or logical error. Indeed, under careful scrutiny, liberalism’s distortions of the normal ability to reason can only be understood as the product of psychopathology. So extravagant are the patterns of thinking, emoting, behaving and relating that characterize the liberal mind that its relentless protests and demands become understandable only as disorders of the psyche. The modern liberal mind, its distorted perceptions and its destructive agenda are the product of disturbed personalities.

As is the case in all personality disturbance, defects of this type represent serious failures in development processes. The nature of these failures is detailed below. Among their consequences are the liberal mind’s relentless efforts to misrepresent human nature and to deny certain indispensable requirements for human relating. In his efforts to construct a grand collectivist utopia—to live what Jacques Barzun has called “the unconditioned life” in which “everybody should be safe and at ease in a hundred ways”—the radical liberal attempts to actualize in the real world an idealized fiction that will mitigate all hardship and heal all wounds. (Barzun 2000). He acts out this fiction, essentially a Marxist morality play, in various theaters of human relatedness, most often on the world’s economic, social and political stages. But the play repeatedly folds. Over the course of the Twentieth Century, the radical liberal’s attempts to create a brave new socialist world have invariably failed. At the dawn of the Twenty-first Century his attempts continue to fail in the stagnant economies, moral decay and social turmoil now widespread in Europe. An increasingly bankrupt welfare society is putting the U.S. on track for the same fate if liberalism is not cured there. Because the liberal agenda’s principles violate the rules of ordered liberty, his most determined efforts to realize its visionary fantasies must inevitably fall short. Yet, despite all the evidence against it, the modern liberal mind believes his agenda is good social science. It is, in fact, bad science fiction. He persists in this agenda despite its madness.
I think you have finally crossed the line. I can respect many, many positions, but this degree of self-righteousness, this ascribing of mental disease to those you disagree with politically, is beyond the pale. Never mind how many people you're insulting. Never mind the fact that there are many shades to the term 'liberal,' just as there are many shades to the word 'conservative.' It's ...

Oh, damn it, why am I bothering to try to argue reasonably with somebody who has clearly gone beyond reason. Crap like this represents all that I find worst in mindless idealogy. We may even have crossed over into Ann Coulter territory here. I really don't think there is any reason to respect your opinion anymore. Lord knows, you have no respect for mine. I am simply appalled.

Oh, and about your whole 'they started it' defense, the difference between this and the attacks on Palin -- which I agree were somewhat gratuitous -- was that those were reactions to a single individual. This is pseudo-serious claptrap aimed at discrediting an entire way of thinking (as defined, of course, by the person doing the 'analysis.')

If you don't get any more disgusted responses than this, it either means that people have decided that you aren't worth arguing with, or that you have already alienated so many people that they've put you on 'the list.'

On principle, I don't have a foes list because I believe it's healthy to hear other opinions. But I'm rethinking that position.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#5 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:48 pm

Frank, hugs.
Well, then

User avatar
franktangredi
Posts: 6678
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:34 pm

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#6 Post by franktangredi » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:49 pm

Beebs52 wrote:Frank, hugs.
Back at you.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#7 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:56 pm

franktangredi wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:Frank, hugs.
Back at you.
I just have to say, I'm a good one for either responding to or even starting incendiary things at times, but it's generally pointed towards something specific, and if it's not I realize my stupidity. God knows I've been stupid. Not that it makes it any better, but, well, hey. You know.

This stuff isn't worth angsting about. I've seen you respond to some of these things and feel bad that you're beating your head at walls of weirdness. Some of this stuff is just nutballiness. One cannot let nutballiness make you nuts. Unless you feel like flipping nutballiness back just for giggles.

Just reinforcing the hug.
Well, then

User avatar
WheresFanny
???????
Posts: 1299
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:24 am
Location: Hello Kitty Paradise

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#8 Post by WheresFanny » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:30 pm

You obviously have a lot a spare time on your hands. I bet the history folder on your computer is a very scary place.

Perhaps some of that time could be better spent volunteering with a Teen Abstinence group or getting involved with a Helping Women to Work program. Unless you feel that the causes you champion are better served by investing your energies in searching for and spouting off inanity on the internet.

I can't believe I spent three minutes of my life to see who this nutjob was and how he managed to get published. He managed to get published because he created a "publishing company" and printed them off himself. And it's not a 'new' book, he managed to save up enough for the paper and ink in 2006.

Maybe you should spend three minutes of all that extra time checking out the validity of the nonsense about which you seem to get so super excited.
We, the HK Brigade, do hereby salute you, Marley, for your steadfast devotion to ontopicosity. Well done, sir!

User avatar
danielh41
Posts: 1219
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:36 am
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Contact:

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#9 Post by danielh41 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:34 pm

franktangredi wrote:
I think you have finally crossed the line. I can respect many, many positions, but this degree of self-righteousness, this ascribing of mental disease to those you disagree with politically, is beyond the pale. Never mind how many people you're insulting. Never mind the fact that there are many shades to the term 'liberal,' just as there are many shades to the word 'conservative.' It's ...

Oh, damn it, why am I bothering to try to argue reasonably with somebody who has clearly gone beyond reason. Crap like this represents all that I find worst in mindless idealogy. We may even have crossed over into Ann Coulter territory here. I really don't think there is any reason to respect your opinion anymore. Lord knows, you have no respect for mine. I am simply appalled.
Most of those words in that post were not mine. But I did find them interesting in a "how can they think like that?" kind of way. I'm interested in why liberals believe what they believe. I'm sure that some liberals are also interested in why conservatives believe what we believe.

And what's wrong with Ann Coulter anyway?
franktangredi wrote:
Oh, and about your whole 'they started it' defense, the difference between this and the attacks on Palin -- which I agree were somewhat gratuitous -- was that those were reactions to a single individual. This is pseudo-serious claptrap aimed at discrediting an entire way of thinking (as defined, of course, by the person doing the 'analysis.')

If you don't get any more disgusted responses than this, it either means that people have decided that you aren't worth arguing with, or that you have already alienated so many people that they've put you on 'the list.'

On principle, I don't have a foes list because I believe it's healthy to hear other opinions. But I'm rethinking that position.
Why should I not post something that I find interesting whether it is a video of an artist who creates works on the tip of an eyelash or a psychologist who is attempting to categorize liberalism? Yes, I found the psychologist's writings fascinating. I read it the other day, but I decided not to post it then since the election was over. What would be the use, I thought. And then I read the Sarah Palin book thread, so maybe I thought I could just see how many people I can tick off by posting it. Apparently, that number was pretty high.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#10 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:35 pm

WheresFanny wrote:You obviously have a lot a spare time on your hands. I bet the history folder on your computer is a very scary place.

Perhaps some of that time could be better spent volunteering with a Teen Abstinence group or getting involved with a Helping Women to Work program. Unless you feel that the causes you champion are better served by investing your energies in searching for and spouting off inanity on the internet.

I can't believe I spent three minutes of my life to see who this nutjob was and how he managed to get published. He managed to get published because he created a "publishing company" and printed them off himself. And it's not a 'new' book, he managed to save up enough for the paper and ink in 2006.

Maybe you should spend three minutes of all that extra time checking out the validity of the nonsense about which you seem to get so super excited.
Hey Fanny. I think you'd enjoy my take on this.

Do you think we're being played here? By this "Daniel" guy?

Could he be a well-entrenched troll?
Well, then

User avatar
clem21
Nose Exploder
Posts: 2333
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 1:25 pm
Location: Got the New York City Rhythm

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#11 Post by clem21 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:35 pm

danielh41 wrote:
franktangredi wrote:
I think you have finally crossed the line. I can respect many, many positions, but this degree of self-righteousness, this ascribing of mental disease to those you disagree with politically, is beyond the pale. Never mind how many people you're insulting. Never mind the fact that there are many shades to the term 'liberal,' just as there are many shades to the word 'conservative.' It's ...

Oh, damn it, why am I bothering to try to argue reasonably with somebody who has clearly gone beyond reason. Crap like this represents all that I find worst in mindless idealogy. We may even have crossed over into Ann Coulter territory here. I really don't think there is any reason to respect your opinion anymore. Lord knows, you have no respect for mine. I am simply appalled.
Most of those words in that post were not mine. But I did find them interesting in a "how can they think like that?" kind of way. I'm interested in why liberals believe what they believe. I'm sure that some liberals are also interested in why conservatives believe what we believe.

And what's wrong with Ann Coulter anyway?
franktangredi wrote:
Oh, and about your whole 'they started it' defense, the difference between this and the attacks on Palin -- which I agree were somewhat gratuitous -- was that those were reactions to a single individual. This is pseudo-serious claptrap aimed at discrediting an entire way of thinking (as defined, of course, by the person doing the 'analysis.')

If you don't get any more disgusted responses than this, it either means that people have decided that you aren't worth arguing with, or that you have already alienated so many people that they've put you on 'the list.'

On principle, I don't have a foes list because I believe it's healthy to hear other opinions. But I'm rethinking that position.
Why should I not post something that I find interesting whether it is a video of an artist who creates works on the tip of an eyelash or a psychologist who is attempting to categorize liberalism? Yes, I found the psychologist's writings fascinating. I read it the other day, but I decided not to post it then since the election was over. What would be the use, I thought. And then I read the Sarah Palin book thread, so maybe I thought I could just see how many people I can tick off by posting it. Apparently, that number was pretty high.
There's an answer to your own question.
Just drop it man, for all of our sakes.
"Some people never go crazy, What truly horrible lives they must live..."
-Charles Bukowski

2011 [Bleep]house Rats Award Winner
2011 I've Been Everywhere New England Region Co-Champion

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#12 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:47 pm

danielh41 wrote:
franktangredi wrote:
I think you have finally crossed the line. I can respect many, many positions, but this degree of self-righteousness, this ascribing of mental disease to those you disagree with politically, is beyond the pale. Never mind how many people you're insulting. Never mind the fact that there are many shades to the term 'liberal,' just as there are many shades to the word 'conservative.' It's ...

Oh, damn it, why am I bothering to try to argue reasonably with somebody who has clearly gone beyond reason. Crap like this represents all that I find worst in mindless idealogy. We may even have crossed over into Ann Coulter territory here. I really don't think there is any reason to respect your opinion anymore. Lord knows, you have no respect for mine. I am simply appalled.
Most of those words in that post were not mine. But I did find them interesting in a "how can they think like that?" kind of way. I'm interested in why liberals believe what they believe. I'm sure that some liberals are also interested in why conservatives believe what we believe.
franktangredi wrote:
Oh, and about your whole 'they started it' defense, the difference between this and the attacks on Palin -- which I agree were somewhat gratuitous -- was that those were reactions to a single individual. This is pseudo-serious claptrap aimed at discrediting an entire way of thinking (as defined, of course, by the person doing the 'analysis.')

If you don't get any more disgusted responses than this, it either means that people have decided that you aren't worth arguing with, or that you have already alienated so many people that they've put you on 'the list.'

On principle, I don't have a foes list because I believe it's healthy to hear other opinions. But I'm rethinking that position.
Why should I not post something that I find interesting whether it is a video of an artist who creates works on the tip of an eyelash or a psychologist who is attempting to categorize liberalism? Yes, I found the psychologist's writings fascinating. I read it the other day, but I decided not to post it then since the election was over. What would be the use, I thought. And then I read the Sarah Palin book thread, so maybe I thought I could just see how many people I can tick off by posting it. Apparently, that number was pretty high.
And what's wrong with Ann Coulter anyway?

Other than the fact that she's a shrill, anorexic, poorly dressed, hyperbolic, cliche spouting caricature of a commentator, nothing.
Well, then

User avatar
ontellen
FNGD Forum Moderator
Posts: 1021
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:25 pm
Location: Kitchener, Ontario

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#13 Post by ontellen » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:31 pm

Great reply Frank. I am appalled that people like Daniel actually have this outlook on the world. Very scary. This scares me more than any terrorist.

User avatar
franktangredi
Posts: 6678
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:34 pm

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#14 Post by franktangredi » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:31 pm

danielh41 wrote: Most of those words in that post were not mine. But I did find them interesting in a "how can they think like that?" kind of way. I'm interested in why liberals believe what they believe. I'm sure that some liberals are also interested in why conservatives believe what we believe.
Since you ask:

This sounds good, but I don't buy it for a minute. If you truly want to understand why liberals believe what they believe, why not ask a liberal? (And, by the way, there are as many types of liberals as types of conservatives.) Why not engage in a dialogue instead of quoting some hatchet job by somebody who clearly has no more idea than you do?

When I try to understand why conservatives believe what they believe, I ask them. Check out my posts in the Proposition 8 thread if you don't believe me. I never got an answer, but I asked.

You want to understand why liberals believe what they believe? Here, I'll help you: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/opini ... ef=opinion I'm not asking you to agree with it. I fully expect you not to agree with it. I'm asking you to look at it from another point of view.

That is, if you really want to understand. Which I have no reason to believe, based on anything you have ever posted.
danielh41 wrote: And what's wrong with Ann Coulter anyway?
I've already answered that. She epitomizes everything I said I was against in my original response to you. She's a yahoo. She'd be a yahoo if she were a liberal.
[/quote]
danielh41 wrote: Why should I not post something that I find interesting whether it is a video of an artist who creates works on the tip of an eyelash or a psychologist who is attempting to categorize liberalism? Yes, I found the psychologist's writings fascinating.
I never said you shouldn't post it. You have a right to do so. And I have a right to respond.

And the word you used was not 'interesting' or 'fascinating.' I also found it fascinating, in a kind of 'what kind of nut really believes this' sort of way. The word you used was 'enlightening.'[/quote]
danielh41 wrote: And then I read the Sarah Palin book thread, so maybe I thought I could just see how many people I can tick off by posting it. Apparently, that number was pretty high.
And you end by showing that everything else you said up to this point about 'wanting to understand' and 'i found it interesting' was pure smoke and mirrors.

Congratulations. You succeeded in ticking me off. (I wasn't one of the people you were aiming at, but that's besides the point.) You are welcome to whatever satisfaction you can get from that. My opinion is as it was. Farewell.

User avatar
SportsFan68
No Scritches!!!
Posts: 21300
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:36 pm
Location: God's Country

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#15 Post by SportsFan68 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:37 pm

danielh41 wrote: And then I read the Sarah Palin book thread, so maybe I thought I could just see how many people I can tick off by posting it.
I just wonder how many foe lists DanielH made with that remark.
-- In Iroquois society, leaders are encouraged to remember seven generations in the past and consider seven generations in the future when making decisions that affect the people.
-- America would be a better place if leaders would do more long-term thinking. -- Wilma Mankiller

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 16549
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#16 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:42 pm

SportsFan68 wrote:
danielh41 wrote: And then I read the Sarah Palin book thread, so maybe I thought I could just see how many people I can tick off by posting it.
I just wonder how many foe lists DanielH made with that remark.
Ah. It's sort of like the trolls in chat. Or the morlocks. It offers me playtime like Merv the cat with the busyballs.
Well, then

User avatar
Weyoun
Posts: 3353
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#17 Post by Weyoun » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:43 pm

Daniel, I am a lifelong Republican. You actions indirectly embarrass me.

Please stop.

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 24613
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#18 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:58 am

By now, many of the people on the Bored have diagnosed me as having totally schizophrenic.

However, reading articles like this do put me firmly back in touch with my liberal roots.

The main thing about the election that upset me was that we as Democrats have abandoned the moral high ground which we held for so long and engaged in a win-at-all-costs strategy; I believe that's going to haunt us in the long run. I also believe that no matter what we tried, we would never be as good (or bad, depending on your point of view) at this sort of sleaze as the Republicans; they've been at it for far too long and have made both an art and a science of it.

That article proves my point.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
peacock2121
Posts: 18451
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:58 am

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#19 Post by peacock2121 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:55 am

This was fun to read.

My opinions got validated.

That is almost always fun.

I didn't like how upset those not on my foe list got.

User avatar
themanintheseersuckersuit
Posts: 7635
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#20 Post by themanintheseersuckersuit » Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:39 am

This reminds me of the defense of Alger Hiss who put on a Psychiatrist to "prove" Whitaker Chambers was a pathological liar or something like that. The government prosecutor was not kind on cross. Irving Younger wrote it up.
Suitguy is not bitter.

feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive

The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.

User avatar
starfish1113
Posts: 1156
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:50 am
Location: Mount Airy, MD
Contact:

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#21 Post by starfish1113 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:01 am

And this original post just proves that the pathetic label is bipartisan.

User avatar
nitrah55
Posts: 1613
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:46 am
Location: Section 239, Yankee Stadium

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#22 Post by nitrah55 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:14 am

Whenever I hear people define behvior they don't like as mental illness, I always think of this incisive diagnosis. The excerpt is from "In Our Own Voices" by Vanessa Jackson:

In 1851, Dr. Samuel Cartwright, a prominent Louisiana physician and one of the leading authorities in his time on the medical care of Negroes, identified two mental disorders peculiar to slaves. Drapetomia, or the disease causing Negroes to run away, was noted as a condition, "unknown to our medical authorities, although its diagnostic symptom, the absconding from service, is well known to our planters and overseers. " Dr. Cartwright observed, "The cause in most cases, that induces the Negro to run away from service, is such a disease of the mind as in any other species of alienation, and much more curable, as a general rule. " Cartwright was so helpful as to identify preventive measures for dealing with potential cases of drapetomania. Slaves showing incipient drapetomania, reflected in sulky and dissatisfied behavior should be whipped-strictly as a therapeutic early intervention. Planter and overseers were encouraged to utilize whipping as the primary intervention once the disease had progressed to the stage of actually running away. Overall, Cartwright suggested that Negroes should be kept in a submissive state and treated like children, with "care, kindness, attention and humanity, to prevent and cure them from running away. "

Dr. Cartwright also diagnosed Dysaethesia Aethiopica, or "hebetude of the mind and obtuse sensibility of the body-a disease peculiar to Negroes called by overseers-Rascality. " Dysethesia Aethiopica differed from other species of mental disease since physical signs and lesions accompanied it. The ever-resourceful Dr. Cartwright determined that whipping could also cure this disorder. Of course, one wonders if the whipping were not the cause of the "lesions" that confirmed the diagnosis. Not surprisingly, Dr. Cartwright was a leading thinker in the pro-slavery movement. Dr. Cartwright, in his article "Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race, " chided his anti-slavery colleagues by noting "The northern physicians and people have noticed the symptoms, but not the disease from which they spring. They ignorantly attribute the symptoms to the debasing influence of slavery on the mind without considering that those who have never been in slavery, or their fathers before them, are the most afflicted, and the latest from the slave-holding south the least. The disease is the natural offspring of Negro liberty-the liberty to be idle, to wallow in filth, and to indulge in improper food and drinks. "
I am about 25% sure of this.

User avatar
minimetoo26
Royal Pain In Everyone's Ass
Posts: 7874
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:51 am
Location: No Fixed Address

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#23 Post by minimetoo26 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:26 am

Well, heck--I always knew I was a bubble or two off plumb. But since you think we're a bunch of pathological nutjobs, what the hell are you doing associating with us? Aren't you worried it's contagious? Don't you fear your credentials may be scrutinized by the RedState groups and you'll be denied some position of glory someday just for hanging around with us dangerous loonies? I mean, you seem to believe such illogical bs, that wouldn't sound too farfetched to some of them.

I never got the connection as to how a person with an infertile wife ditched her for one who was more fecund, then devoted the rest of his life not to helping those who wanted children of their own to get them, but to making sure those who didn't want them were forced to have them. But I'm finally realizing that you just create your own logic the way the current administration created its own "science."

So, buh-bye. Enjoy your twisted reality.
Knowing a great deal is not the same as being smart; intelligence is not information alone but also judgment, the manner in which information is collected and used.

-Carl Sagan

Timsterino
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:31 pm
Location: Plantation, Florida
Contact:

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#24 Post by Timsterino » Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:41 am

Hey Frank, great post. But, consider the source my friend, consider the source. This proves two things a) any crackpot with an agenda can write a book and b) some people just can not let go of the election results and the will of the American people.

I know several conservatives that I would say has a screw or two loose. Maybe I should write a book based on my "liberal" agenda.
Tim S.
Twitter: @TriviaChat
Instagram: @TriviaChat
Tik Tok: @TriviaChat
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sternberg

User avatar
danielh41
Posts: 1219
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:36 am
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Contact:

Re: Liberalism -- Mental Disorder

#25 Post by danielh41 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:25 am

minimetoo26 wrote: I never got the connection as to how a person with an infertile wife ditched her for one who was more fecund, then devoted the rest of his life not to helping those who wanted children of their own to get them, but to making sure those who didn't want them were forced to have them.
I'm surprised that you would stoop this low in your personal insults to me. You should stick to speaking about things you actually know something about. But then you wouldn't have much to talk about...

Post Reply