jump to navigation

THE LIBERAL MIND: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness May 20, 2010

Posted by kidkev in Liberals.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

I originally posted this blog in June of 2009.  This book was written over 5 years ago and it does explain a lot.  Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

“Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” “Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”

While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to “the vast right-wing conspiracy.”

For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by both Barack Obama and his Democratic primary opponent Hillary Clinton can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

“A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.”

The liberal agenda urges the citizen to place his basic trust in government, to see it as the mother of all providers, and to mistrust those with whom he would have to trade voluntarily in order to get what he wants. In doing this, the politician seeks to redirect to government offices the trust which can and should empower the individual to run his own life through voluntary cooperation with others. Government programs appeal to the citizen’s passivity by implying that he need not provide for his own health care, housing or retirement. And he need not cooperate with his fellows for these purposes either. Instead, he is told, he need only trust the government to make available to him whatever he needs and to implement that trust by ceding to its officials the power to tax the people and regulate them for his benefit. In short, the government invites the citizen to vote for the candidate who promises what a parent gives a child. It invites him to assume the dependent role of the child, to surrender his personal sovereignty to the state, to ignore his existential obligation to take full responsibility for his material and social welfare, and to empower government officials as his guardians.

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

* creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
* satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
* augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
* rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

“The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind,” he says. “When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”

For more on this book click here: Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.”

The Silence Is Deafening! July 1, 2009

Posted by kidkev in Iran.
Tags: , , , , ,
add a comment
 As the Iranian authorities warned the opposition on Tuesday that they would tolerate no further protests over the disputed June 12 presidential elections, a report emerged of the hangings of six supporters of defeated candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi.   

Unfortunately they are apparently on their own.

Still nothing regarding the protests in Iran.  As much as we try and espouse democracy when given the chance we (the POTUS) says nothing.  I know, some say “what do you think we should do, go to war?” or some other non-sense.  No, how about something like this…

The recent events and senseless killings of these protesters are part and parcel to an internal conflict that has been brought on by a stifling regime.  The people have spoken out and we as freedom loving Americans stand with you in your moment of need.  The rhetoric of the “U.S.” meddling in your election is false propaganda and should be considered nothing more than that.  We urge you and the theocracy that rules Iran to look into the election process that has so many of your citizens outraged to the point of demonstration to come to a reasonable solution for all parties involved.

I could go on, but at least something would be said for the people that are trying to gain some semblance of a democracy in an area almost completely devoid of it.  As much work and loss of lives (American Soldiers fighting for democracy in the Middle East) that has gone on for the past decade, you would think that this is a great time to side with these people instead of ignoring it.  It would look as if someone does not what the mullah’s mad at them.

The reaction to events in Iran has shown once again the double standards and hypocrisy of those in Europe and the West who jump at the slightest opportunity to protest Israel but remain stoic in the face of events in Iran.

While many have compared the outpouring of anger in Iran to what presaged the 1979 revolution, there is one key difference; this time around, no Western students care. Before the shah fell from power, he often visited the capitals of major European and North American cities. Every time he did, tens of thousands of progressive students and human-rights activists poured out onto the streets calling him a fascist and protesting his visit.

In one such protest on June 2, 1967 a German student, Benno Ohnesorg, was even killed.

But now there is no such outpouring of emotion. Neither is there any interest from the UN or from Jimmy Carter.

YET IN January, when Israel was embroiled in a war with Hamas, the anger directed at her in Europe was apoplectic. When Israel fought a war against Hizbullah in 2006, Western students even proudly wore the symbol of Hizbullah, a clenched fist holding an AK-47.

So where were the Western students to hold aloft the green armbands of Iranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi?

Why will Western students who call themselves progressives wear green for Hamas and Hizbullah – terrorist organizations that murder civilians – and not for Iranian dissidents?

Why have CNN and other major media been so coy when it comes to covering the outrages perpetrated by the regime in Iran?

Describing the deaths of protesters, CNN never once, in the coverage I watched, mentioned who had killed them. It simply said they were “shot.” But when Iranian dissidents in Washington were interviewed with “death to the dictator” placards, the CNN reporter challenged them, demanding to know if they were calling for “murder.”

Murder? The only murder that has taken place so far is the murder of Iranian protesters.

Amid the talk of despair and quashed protests, one defiant reformist supporter told this reporter: “The regime wants the world to think they have won. Don’t believe it… Even if this regime is about to collapse, they would not let anybody know until their final hour.”  

More of this story here:

On the other hand, we have made a strong rebuke of the events that happened recently in Honduras.  It would seem the military and it’s people did not what thier communist dictator and ally of Chavez in power anymore and staged a coup.  This was done in an attempt to change from a communist leader to a more democratic society.  And what do we (the POTUS) do?  We condemn them for this and tell them we will not stand for it and to put them back in power!

TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) – Honduras faced growing pressure to reinstate ousted President Manuel Zelaya on Wednesday after the Organization of American States set a 72-hour deadline to reinstate him and reverse an army coup.

The ouster of Zelaya — forced out over his push to extend presidential terms beyond a single four-year term — has been condemned by leaders from U.S. President Barack Obamato Zelaya’s left-wing allies in Latin Americaand posed a test for both regional diplomacy and Obama’s ability to improve the battered U.S. standing in Latin America.

The OAS resolution, agreed early on Wednesday in an emergency session at its Washington headquarters, demanded the “immediate, safe, and unconditional return of the president to his constitutional functions.”

Since coming to power in 2006, Zelaya has become a divisive figure in Honduras, an impoverished coffee, textile and banana-exporter of 7 million people, especially after he allied himself with firebrand socialist and fierce U.S. foe Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

So, what does this say about us?  Extreme Islam is good and fighting against tyranny is bad?  Why is it more important to save the socialists/communists in South America but not to say, again, I said say something to what is happening in a part of the world were we (American Soldiers) are dieing to promote democracy?  Please, someone explain this.