The American Mind

I’m sure there isn’t a selection effect at play at Malkin’s site. I’m sure her readers and those that submit letters subscribe to the “fair and balanced” theory. Surely their minds weren’t made up before Sen. Reid uttered a word….

Bush Derangement Syndrome…..give it a rest, Sean. Your dialogue is as immature as the rabid sites on the Left tat you lampoon.

Bush Derangement Syndrome…..give it a rest, Sean. Your dialogue is as immature as the rabid sites on the Left tat you lampoon.

I was trying to figure out how to get my thoughts across on this until i read your post, Andy, and then it hit me:

Sean, your posts over the last few months have begun to devolve into a string of Republican buzzwords and talking points. Every other post i see “Bush Derangement Syndrome,” “cut and run,” “Islamists…” Chet and Andy and i could probably start a TAM drinking game, or maybe TAM Buzzword Bingo.

Whether or not you agree that phrases like “Bush Derangement Syndrome” are a lazy, throwaway label that enable you to simply dismiss a dissenting opinion as “crazy” (or maybe “evil?”), at least take this bit of criticism to heart: your insistence on repeating these tired phrases make your blog come off as just another voice in the din of right-wing soundalikes. Since you have joked in the past about lefties thinking you take your marching orders from Karl Rove, prove it. Quit echoing the same tired buzzwords and push yourself to be the truly unique conservative voice i know you have it in yourself to be.

Senator Joe Lieberman laid a smackdown on Harry Reid. A beautiful thing to see.

Sean, don’t listen to those two nimrods. Just because they refuse to understand it nor come to grips with the fact that BDS is a demonstrable and recognized psychological malady should be no concern of yours.

Ok, on with it then….

Moran has an excellent point, but it’s not exaclty a new one. It’s the same concept as all the deadlines the Donks (like our own Sen.Fakegold) have been proposing; if it’s a great idea to C&R in the fall of ‘08, why isn’t a great idea to C&R in spring ‘08? …or even RIGHT NOW?

(Answer: ‘cuz it’s not politically expedient.)

Sean writes: >>First, the Democrats won their Congressional majorities by opposing President Bush and the Republicans.

Well -heh!- obviously!

I suggest that what really and finaly gave congress to the Donks was the Mark Foley scandal. The Repubs shot themselves in both kneecaps by not ousting that freak the very moment they caught wind of his activities, and the entire sorry preventable incident(s) pushed a lot of middle-America - and maybe even some rightsiders - Dem-side at the last moment.

And while most pundits/talking heads think and constantly regurgitate the mantra that America Voted Against the War, I beleive many, if not a majority, voted for a change of direction only, not to end the entire fight as the Donks seek to do. The Dems may know this, which is why Ried&Co appear unable to pull the trigger on the Retreat Gun.

But the saftey is off, and yes they do prattle on and on and, as usual, that tends to get someone in trouble. Such as Reid, who has truly stepped in it. Not that the MSM will actually press him on it, but he will have to answer Moran’s questions.

Hopefully.

Sean writes: >>It’s Bush’s war, and Reid and Pelosi want to keep it that way.”

Not entirely. It is becoming Reid&Co’s with each statement they made at the podium.

Just because they refuse to understand it nor come to grips with the fact that BDS is a demonstrable and recognized psychological malady should be no concern of yours.

Oh, really? Where in the DSM IV can I find it? Page number, please.

I beleive many, if not a majority, voted for a change of direction only, not to end the entire fight as the Donks seek to do.

Believe based on what evidence? Wishful thinking? Every time Bush stands up and accuses the Democrats of wanting to bring the troops home immediately, “before the job is done”, public approval of the Democratic congress goes up another tick. Clearly the American people see “leaving as soon as possible” as something they’d like to happen.

Call it displacement, delusional projection, or just the street “hate blame game”. Whatever. (You won’t find the last one in your book but the other two are probably there.)

BDS is quite a stew of pathology. One can find examples easily, such as persistancy in claiming Bush as dumb as a stump while also entertaining that he is the head of a world-wide oil cartel conspiricy and the mastermind behind 9/11 (see Rosie O’Donnel, Michael Moore, Kossicans, lefties from sea to shining sea), or simply blaming GW for everything (hurricanes, Daniel Pearl, not winning the lottery, etc. etc.).

Another example is the wholesale delusional belief in utopia, i.e., get rid of Bush - elect democrats! - and all the world will instantly become a peaceful paradise where butterflies waft on the breeze and unicorns prance in the meadow (no virgins for you, chester).

The root of it, possibly for some it might be deep-seeded father-figure hatred, for others it’s probably low self worth. Earned, deserved, or otherwise.

chester inquires >>Believe based on what evidence?

A gut feeling, really. That and the fact that most donkey candidates didn’t actually have the gonads to shout “RETREAT!” before the election. My words were taken from their campaign literature: “We need a change of course.”, “New Directon”, and all that.

[fwiw, I respect Sen. Fakegold for his consistancy in calls for immediate retreat. Not the right move by any means, but at least he’s not wishy-washy)

chester bubbles: “Every time Bush stands up and accuses the Democrats of wanting to bring the troops home immediately, “before the job is done”, public approval of the Democratic congress goes up another tick.”

Oooh. A whole “tick”? Meaningless gibberish, chester. ABC/WashPost numbers have remained steady for the last four months, hovering around a 54% disaproval rating for you new congress, and Gallup shows 60% disaproving.

Call it displacement, delusional projection

Finding fault with Bush’s actions taken as president is “displacement”?

Tell me, dumbass, if Bush hasn’t been president for the past 6 years, who has?

One can find examples easily

So easy, apparently, that you’re completely unable to actuallly do it. You’re forced to invent fictious circumstances like “Michael Moore saying Bush was behind 9/11.”

Another example is the wholesale delusional belief in utopia, i.e., get rid of Bush - elect democrats! - and all the world will instantly become a peaceful paradise where butterflies waft on the breeze and unicorns prance in the meadow (no virgins for you, chester).

At any time are you going to present actual examples of your assertions? Because right now it looks like the only one displacing his delusions is you. Seriously, your views of what Democrats are saying are delusional.

A gut feeling, really.

So, nothing. Which is sort of what I suspected all along.

You really just make up your own reality, don’t you, MjM? The rest of us living on Planet Earth find your delusions hilarious.

ABC/WashPost numbers have remained steady for the last four months, hovering around a 54% disaproval rating for you new congress, and Gallup shows 60% disaproving.

Not that I can see. Gallup has them at %55+ approval and the latest ABC/WaPo numbers are the same. But I guess in MjM-land you can just make up your own numbers.

I like how MjM’s strawmen get backed up with, like, other strawmen. That’s awesome. If they were built out of wicker Christopher Lee would be on his fifth orgasm.

chester toots: “Finding fault with Bush’s actions taken as president is “displacement”?

That is not what I wrote. Do I need to type s l o w l y again, chester?

~sigh~

Displacment is directing emotion at the person or thing least likely to be a threat to you or not around to react to your emotions.

A fine example is Bill Maher; the 9/11 terrorists are Islam’s heros but Bush is “… a rube. He is a dolt. He is a yokel on the world stage. He is a Gilligan who cannot find his a@@ for two hands. He is a vain half-wit who interrupts one incoherent sentence with another incoherent sentence”.

Maher’s displaced anger (very similar to Alec Baldwin’s) let’s him vent without much worry of repercussion.

chester waddles on: “Seriously, your views of what Democrats are saying are delusional.”

Why, thank-you, chester! Copy-cat-ism is, I suppose, a form of flattery.

However, the childish game of “No I’m not, you are” is, well, just childish.

chester wimpers: “So, nothing. Which is sort of what I suspected all along.”

As I never wrote nor implied in any manor that I had some locked-down Perry Mason-type evidence to support my belief it seems quite odd for you to have expected any. Indeed, I was quite honest about it. I take that in your Gestapo world they not have simple opinions, intuitions, and free-wheeling thought.

Point to be made, though, that in thinking I had made such promises you are proving my point about delusional projection.

chester manly boasts: “Gallup has them at %55+ approval and the latest ABC/WaPo numbers are the same.”

Quite wrong, chester. So sorry. According to Gallup the approval rating for congress hasn’t topped 37% in at least more than a year. ABC, which makes the claim about it’s latest poll that, “Congress as a whole has a 44 percent approval rating, a bit higher than its long-term average, 40 percent in data back 30 years.”, seems to disagree with Gallup slightly. The last time ABC polled 50%+ was in 2003.

Indeed, Gallup noticed quite a down “tick” - nine “ticks”, actually - last month from the first two of the year, to a 64% disapproval rating. It’s “ticked” back to 60% in it’s latest poll, taken 4/2-5/07.

I guess, given that ABC was kind enough to put that nice 30-yr statistic in perspective, your prior comments of above-50% congressional approval ratings can only seen as as… well…

… delusional.

Displacment is directing emotion at the person or thing least likely to be a threat to you or not around to react to your emotions.

The President is the least likely person to cause America to do undesirable things?

This is why you’re delusional, MjM. Again - if Bush hasn’t been president for the past 6 years, who exactly has been?

He is a dolt. He is a yokel on the world stage. He is a Gilligan who cannot find his a@@ for two hands. He is a vain half-wit who interrupts one incoherent sentence with another incoherent sentence”.

“Fool me once, shame on–shame on you. Fool me–you can’t get fooled again.”

I rest Maher’s case. There aren’t even any conservatives who would credit Bush with a mastery of Churchillian oratory, MjM. Just you in your delusional state.

Quite wrong, chester. So sorry.

Look, dumbass, you can look up the numbers yourself instead of just making them up. If they still let you read in your padded cell, that is.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_041607.html

b. the Democrats in Congress

Approve Disapprove Noopinion
4/15/07 54 44 2

Remember that it is the Democratic congress we’re talking about…

And from that very same poll:

3. Do you approve or disapprove of the way the U.S. Congress is doing its job? 4/15/07
——- Approve —– —— Disapprove —— NET Strongly Somewhat NET Somewhat Strongly 44 8 36 54 25 29

Interestingly, the “Approve” is soft as quicksand.

And really, chester, you should try to frame your own arguments instead of simply parroting what other contributers write.

Hand typed….

Approve Disapprove
NET Strongly Somewhat NET Somewhat Strongly
44 8 36 54 25 29

Damned auto-formating

Do you approve or disapprove of the way the U.S. Congress is doing its job?

“The US Congress,” dumbass. As in, “the whole thing.” Democrats and Republicans.

The numbers make it clear that what you described as “disapproval of the Democrat congress” is actually disapproval of congressional Republicans. Support for Democrats specifically keeps going up - which is what I originally said.

And really, chester, you should try to frame your own arguments instead of simply parroting what other contributers write.

It’s “Chet”, by the way, and you should try thinking (and reading) before you “frame arguments.” My prediction that you would be completely unable to interpret a chart of polling results was spot-on, I see.