Ask Dr. Helen: How do you deal with a Palin hater?
My PJM column is up:
Read the column about the Palin hater and let me know what you think.
When does political passion become obsessive and unhealthy?
Read the column about the Palin hater and let me know what you think.
Labels: palin bashing, PJM column, politics
posted by Helen at 6:20 AM
55 Comments:
I sometimes encountered this kind of hatred by Democrats while growing up in Alabama during the 1960s. Only then, the subject of their hatred were blacks. It's the same irrational hatred, only the subject has changed. Once they become convinced they're superior to someone else (e.g. "she's an intellectual lightweight"), then they have no problem hating that person. Pretty pathetic, actually.
I don't really understand how someone can feel that way. I can understand having anxiety about the direction she feels that Palin might take the country, I have such anxiety in heaps over Obama, but this kind of visceral hatred is tough to understand.
The Democrats are proof that even syphilitic nihilists are smarter than their rank-and-file members, as Nietzsche once said:
"When hunting a monster, one must be careful to not become a monster."
It's only fitting since anyone who steps back at this election realizes that Barack Obama will do many of the things they desperately fear Palin would do, such as rip apart the constitution. They're becoming the very monster they so greatly fear and wish slain.
Anyone asking free advice from Cary Tennis will get what they pay for.
Re: Palin hatred; I was remarking on this just yesterday to my wife. We live in the belly of the beast near New York City, and our local paper recently had several letters to the editor taking issue with the circumstances of the birth of Sarah Palin's last child. The writers went so far as to accuse her of attempted abortion/infanticide so that she could be rid of her Down's syndrome child without having an abortion on her conscience. I was just speechless at the thought that some of my neighbors are foaming at the mouth lunatics. Completely disgusting.
I love the hypocrisy of the liberal mind which recoils at the mention of the word "authoritarian" whilst simultaneously plotting a new law to get everyone to behave in the "correct" way.
Know almost less than nothing about psychology. Still, here’s my take. This poor ‘hater” is the classic “authoritarian” personality but without authority, i.e. without the power or opportunity to fix what is wrong with the world, in this case Palin’s rise to social/political prominence. I suspect the occasions in which this “hater” goes off the deep end are more numerous than just the Palin derangement. The world, society, and the individual are all vividly constructed and ordered in her mind. Any deviation, especially any deviation that becomes prominent or popular is a threat to her subjective world order. Were she an android there would be a major short in the circuits with accompanying sparks and smoke. On the large scale, it’s good that she doesn’t have the power to make things right, to correct or compel. On the smaller scale, the personal, what to say or do? Chill out? Take deep breaths and count to ten? Go shopping for shoes? I said I knew nothing about psychology, didn’t I.
How do blatant stereotypes help you analyze the world psychologically? I think it's dangerous to say all liberals are the same or all conservatives are the same. Don't you understand that you have become deeply offended by Tennis's claims,and have adopted a reactionary, at best, tone in your response? It might reveal the reason behind the gigantic leap in logic and absurd generalization in the 3rd to last graph about Adorno.
I don't think all conservatives need be offended by what he claims.He says Palin is what many people want. Not necessarily you , and not necessarily republicans. I think you're doing a disservice by merely turning this into a political snipe. The initial woman in question knows she is acting irrationally and it seems she is truly looking for help.
Is it absolutely 100% true that she is this incurable heathen because she hits a different button than you do on election day?You really believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is nothing to what Tennis is saying?There is nothing more to this than the fact that she is one of those dirty LIBERALS?I would say this is poor analytical practice due to an emotional response.
I love the question:
When does political passion become obsessive and unhealthy?
I think my wife would answer: When you start blogging about it.
:-)
"How do you deal with a Palin hater?"
Same as any other feminist --
bury them down deep.
Because really deep down, they are nearly human.
SteveinTX
Whenever I read a letter like this I wonder if the writer is serious or a put on. Although I suspect she may be real as, from reading blogs and comments, there seem to be plenty of people out there with their panties in a wad over Palin.
I love how Evern ignores the bulk of Tennis' response in attempting to defend the obvious bias. Hypothesizing the results of a test is far from rational or logical. It may be fun and allows one to easily proclaim whatever imaginary results they wish but it is not dealing with reality.
I don't think I've heard or seen a dime's worth of rational, truthful thought from the left this election cycle.
Evarn- go get yourself some psychiatric help.
I wasn't trying to defend his claims. I assume that's what you mean by obvious bias. Yes he was definitely obviously hypothesizing, but that's all one can really do in this case. In my opinion it's a pretty interesting hypothesis.
As you so eloquently put it, I do not have my panties in a wad over Palin. I just worry that political affiliation has clouded what could be a more academic discussion. It seems obvious that Dr. Helen has taken offense to something that really shouldn't be offensive. Her comments were curt and simplistic.
I believe issues like this give us a chance to explore the greater questions of how fear and hatred, and other irrational feelings, hold sway over something that should be as rational a decision as possible.We can't explore these issues if we treat each other like different species. To me this defeats the whole premise of psychology.It is especially worrisome when a doctorate in psychology writes like this.
How do my comments indicate I need psychiatric help? Why the extreme reaction to, what i thought, was a fairly trepid post? I don't believe I said anything extreme. Enlighten me if you would. I merely questioned someone who was questioning someone who had an obvious liberal lean. Maybe that's what upsets you so much as to question my sanity.
If so, this is a good example of the irrational emotions that spring from politics. I think that is the intriguing part of the original story, and I wish Dr. Helen would have addressed that.
MRI machines are shutting down nationwide in honor of the irony in
evarn' comment at 1:17PM.
SteveinTX
Wow another personal attack.I assume you allude to the fact that I used someone calling me "insane" as proof of their irrationality.You think this is ironic because I'm a 'crazy' calling someone irrational, Ha ha?
That's a reach in a variety of ways, but what's worse is that it's off topic and contributes in no way to constructive debate.
Evarn wrote: "You really believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is nothing to what Tennis is saying?"
Yes. Here is why.
Tennis made an assertion about someone they had never met, projected their own fears and thoughts on that person's "pretend" MBTI score, then justified the original assertion by using the pretend MBTI that Tennis never gave.
It is a circle of air, totally without substance or logic. If there was anything to it, that would only be accidental because of the huge projection and lack of critical thinking or using any data to come to substance.
Also, the Meyers-Briggs does not measure pathology but personality style! There is no pathology in any MBTI profile because the people who made the test made it so that there would be none.
So Tennis is just a poseur on this matter. I just gave you the data to support my conclusion. Disagree as you wish, but let's stick to the data while we discuss.
But why would we give a poseur any credibility?
Trey
Here is how the poseur in question gave his own credentials: "What I'm offering is, you know, good writing! Good writing can clarify overlooked or obscure areas of emotion. With sufficient craft, these things can be illuminated, and in a way that's pleasurable to read. Plus I'm kind. I offer sympathy to people who are in trouble."
So his credentials for giving advice and pretend MBTIs is that is he a good writer.
Doesn't work for me!
No wonder he is so clueless about the MBTI, he was writing about what he felt!
Doesn't work for me.
Now I found Hatred's letter solid and interesting. Too bad she sent it to a poseur.
Trey
I don't see this election as having anything to do with Palin. Or McCain.
My own two little cents, which you may all chew on and spit out at will...
Q: How in the hell did B. H. Obama, the most obviously unqualified ZERO in the history of nominated candidates, ever get this far?!
A: G. W. Bush.
Like him or hate him, you have to admit that the man simply does not inspire. He is not a "Hollywood" president. Never was. Couldn't be with injections.
JFK was an inspirer. Reagan was an inspirer. Even Clinton was deft as a communicator. Carter? Nope. Ford? Oh, please. Nixon? Don't make me laugh.
Judging past presidents strictly on the basis of their ability to communicate in a manner that makes the population stand up and take notice is a very valuable thing, and in the age of TV, radio and Internet (and, yes, YouTube!), it is a necessary capacity. It takes something more than being right, wise and of sound judgement; if you want good poll numbers and a shot at a second term, you have to project competence and passion. If Teddy Roosevelt were in office today rather than GWB, I'd bet he'd have made most of the same decisions (if not, he'd have gone nuclear on the Middle East on 9/12/01). And the country would have loved him for it. LOVED him!
GWB? Um, not the man to inspire. He may be right and 30 years down the road we could look back and say "Thank God for GWB when we needed him!" But that'll take some time.
Some presidents are treated well by history, and some are not. Most liberals look at Bush as the guy who got 4,000 troops killed (as if the left cares about troops!), but not the president who FREED IRAQ AND SET THE STAGE FOR A COMPLETE REVAMP OF A DESPOTIC MIDDLE EAST! Libs are too wrapped up in today's headlines to consider history's consequences. Professionally short-sighted.
It is my opinion that the only reason that this country is facing the volcano-class NOTHING called Obama is because the left has come to passionately hate GWB with such a fury that it is inconceivable to them that a "Republican" can be anything other than GWB, v. 2.0.
And that's the only reason anybody with something other than oatmeal between their ears would actually entertain Obama as the next POTUS.
Pure. Unadulterated. Hatred.
Our next president will be Barack Obama not because Obama is worth the hair on a rat's red ass, but because this country has come to hate Bush. Blindly.
And stupidly.
GREAT column, Dr. Helen. My responsive riff is up as a guest-post at HughHewitt.com.
Ok Tennis is wrong in making conclusions on what Sarah Palin's actual personality is like, but that's not the point.
He is using the same observations we all get of Palin to try and understand our reaction to her. Whether or not she is the person that is projected on tv, that is the person we vote for, and that's all we know about her.
This is not supposed to be taken as a professional analysis of Palin's behavioral patterns.By choosing to argue his professional abilities as a psychologist you skew his point.
The idea that he is a silky writer fooling people into believing what he says with his magic words is laughable. I think he is,however clumsily, trying to illuminate why some people hate Sarah Palin-because she's just like 'us', and why some people love Sarah Palin-because she's just like 'us'.The 'us' being "joe six-pack" everyday blue-collar American, that doesn't want to think too hard. To these people the perception of safety may be more important than the reality, thus the powerful mother-father authoritarians.
I believe this is what frustrates the initial Palin-hater.She doesn't believe that all people are interested in choosing a candidate based on reason, though her own party doesn't always try to influence with reason,which I think illustrates the larger issue here that I've been trying to talk about this whole time!
Politics seems increasingly fueled by fear and hate, whether you're a liberal or conservative! That is why I worry when it seems someone who has the ability to look at this issue in grander terms and provide meaningful insight(Dr. Helen) chooses to go on a rant clearly rooted to her political beliefs.
Beldar,
Thanks, great post. I agree with your point about Glenn Greenwald. When you're sending people for more advice from a notorious sock puppet, one has to wonder how good one's advice could be.
"The 'us' being "joe six-pack" everyday blue-collar American, that doesn't want to think too hard. To these people the perception of safety may be more important than the reality, thus the powerful mother-father authoritarians."
Yes, I love my pop psychology with a side of snide liberal elitism. Sure, there are a lot of uninformed voters who want big daddy government to take care of them. We'll leave it as an exercise for the class to argue which party is more adept at capturing that slice of the electoral pie.
Evarn wrote: "Ok Tennis is wrong in making conclusions on what Sarah Palin's actual personality is like, but that's not the point."
Evarn, if the writer was wrong in his premise and wrong in his execution he is wrong. THAT is the point!
"He is using the same observations we all get of Palin to try and understand our reaction to her."
I did not read anything that was even remotely like the pride, joy, and peace I got when I reacted to her. So it is not inclusive, so your use of the word "all" is innacurate. I do not hate Senator Obama even remotely. Why are you people on the left such haters?
"Whether or not she is the person that is projected on tv, that is the person we vote for, and that's all we know about her."
Who is this we? She was on my short list for VP before she was picked. That is not all I know about her. Read up!
"By choosing to argue his professional abilities as a psychologist you skew his point."
If Helen or I had started the pro psych critique, you would be right. But he started it by using psychological tests (well, pretend administrations of them) and commenting about the personality of someone he never met! We just showed how foolish, uninformed, and projective it was.
"The idea that he is a silky writer fooling people into believing what he says with his magic words is laughable."
We agree. He is the one who thinks he is qualified to administer advice because he is a silky writer.
"To these people the perception of safety may be more important than the reality, thus the powerful mother-father authoritarians."
Then they need some help with their issues. Don't you agree that they should figure that out before they give advice to others?
"Politics seems increasingly fueled by fear and hate, whether you're a liberal or conservative!"
I half agree with you.
(snip for brevity)(Dr. Helen) chooses to go on a rant clearly rooted to her political beliefs.
Reading the post I did not see Dr. Helen mention her political beliefs at all. What do you support that statement with?
We are critiquing Tennis for being a poseur.
And this is the way that critique is done. You pay attention to the words and write carefully.
Trey
I find it interesting that the focus has shifted away from Sen. McCain to Gov. Palin. You'd think she was running for President.
Not to pile on but: "To these people the perception of safety may be more important than the reality, thus the powerful mother-father authoritarians."
It is interesting, but in my experience the middle class have a much more secure understanding of real vs. imagined threats and real v. imagined security. We have fights.
People who have been in fist fights have a good, solid understanding of security. How big is the other guy, is he slow, are his friends here, who will help me if I need it? These are questions that people who have been in fights ask.
They are solid questions grounded in physics! The middle class are less worried about "issues" and feeglings than they are taking care of business and paying bills on time. It is a grounded lifestyle, and I count myself as one of its adherents.
The liberal elite are still thinking about how to think while we are moving on the the third order of business. We are not paralyzed by thought but are drawn to action.
Trey
It's only fitting since anyone who steps back at this election realizes that Barack Obama will do many of the things they desperately fear Palin would do, such as rip apart the constitution. They're becoming the very monster they so greatly fear and wish slain.
10:57 AM, October 06, 2008
Let Obama try to rip apart the Constitution, America will rip him a new one.
I met this one old gal, at one of them peace rallies. Fierce look, thin-rimmed horned glasses, you know the type.
Being as she was I reckoned that she'd be a little tough. So I broke out the marinade and grilled her, low and slow.
Libs, they're what's for dinner.
Holy crap, Trey. When someone writes stupidly about your chosen field, you can really drop that very nice guy you are and bring out the Krueger fingers! Go man! Wonderfully executed, and I chose that word purposefully. My admiration wells for the surgical precision.
"Let Obama try to rip apart the Constitution, America will rip him a new one."
-------
Unfortunately, I doubt it. A "living constitution" is all the rage. Any chance of getting ripped a new one died along with the nomination of Bork back in the 1980s.
Helen
OT comment - thanks for the link to Haidt. I can feel a really bad case of confirmation bias coming on. It certainly doesn't hurt/help that I've already read about half the books he cites.
This has been quite amusing reading Helen's post and the comments on it.
First we have Tennis projecting his 'authoritarian' diagnosis on Sarah Palin.
Then we have evarn projecting the political rant onto Helen.
It would be nice for once to hear a leftist like Tennis or evarn try speaking for themselves for once. I think many of them lack that capability.
tmink: poseur?
Is that kind of like "crap for brains"?
I'm not familiar with the word. But I run into many who fit my term.
I have to admit that I get a little tired of all the assumptions made by liberals regarding "blue collar, Joe six-pack" types as well...especially when they imply that Joe Six-pack doesn't think.
So I'm going to jump in and make a few assumptions myself. Joe Six-pack may not have a college degree, but I believe he knows a thing or two because he's taken the time to observe what seems to work, in his life and in the lives of others, as well as what does NOT work. He knows that he wants to keep his taxes low so he can keep more of his money to spend as HE sees fit. He wants the government to stay the hell out of his way, and he wants to be able to run a business with as little government interference as possible, should he decide to try that route. He believes that charity begins at home and that people need to take responsibility for their own actions. He knows that if you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, but if you teach him how to fish he'll feed himself for a lifetime. Heck, he may even want Supreme Court judges who will try to refrain from making crap up when they interpret laws in light of the Constitution.
One of the nice things about conservative principles is that you don't have to be a rocket scientist -- or a Harvard Law graduate -- to understand them.
This has been going on since "Bush is stupid!", "Blood for oil", and some of the the other bot-talk came out of the mouths of people who had never met the man and otherwise have no clue. Or, that is when I first became aware of the severity of the imbalance in the enemy. It seems the cockroaches of the 60's didn't die, yet.
And though I admit to despising Clinton, it is based on how he lives as a "man", his political actions, inactions, and foibles only added a few chunks of coal to a Texas A&M sized bonfire of disrespect and outrage. And, I don't think Clinton (pick one) is stupid, I think they are either evil or absolutely wrong in their leadership. And, I don't give them the benefit of the doubt due to their education and claim to Christianity.
One can only claim to be a Christian or genocidal. One truth makes the other a lie or untruth, if claimed. They have chosen, on abortion alone, but added to the rest...
So, the bot-talk about the feminist Palin is the same. Dealing with hate is not something that may be done rationally. The Republican party offers up a feminist on the ticket, and she is treated by the one's who wished for her to be in the position worse than any perceived woman-haters, including being told she isn't a woman, threatened with gang rape, being "suspected" of covering her daughter's pregnancy, to even being told she should have aborted her baby. For me, it is proof that sanity, rational thought, and reasonable discourse are not functional with the enemy. Good luck, however, on working with your clients.
br549 - poseur: one who affects a particular attitude, character or manner to impress others. (American Heritage Dictionary)
I learned the word from my son when he was 11 or 12 and into skateboarding. A skateboarder who tried to act too cool or pretend to be better than he was quickly became labeled a poseur and was looked down on. Even kids in baggy pants know some big words that their college educated dads don't.
The 'us' being "joe six-pack" everyday blue-collar American, that doesn't want to think too hard. To these people the perception of safety may be more important than the reality, thus the powerful mother-father authoritarians.
I tried to leave a comment about this earlier but I must have messed up some how. evarn clearly shows the leftist condescending view of everyday Americans - "doesn't want to think too hard." Translated that means "doesn't buy liberal crap."
When it comes to the "perception of safety," who cares more about this, the liberals with all their social support programs, clammering for free health care, free child care, gun control, special laws to "protect" certain groups, ad infinitum or the conservative who believes in individual freedom, rugged individualism, self responsibility and simply wants the government out of their life as much as possible?
Liberals are the ones wanting to protect everyone from everything. They don't want to keep score in children's sports, allow failing grades in school, etc, so as not to hurt anyone's fragile ego.
Sheesh.
"doesn't buy liberal crap."
Man I like that phrase!
"Don't buy liberal crap" works too.
Trey
But to hear the liberals, they're the ones who look out for the "little people" out there, at least so long as they keep electing liberals. In the meantime, while they're looking out for the "little people", they're also looking down on them.
Hey Larry, the wise political philosopher Charles Barkley said: "Poor people been voting Democrat for 40 years and they still poor."
Trey
You're trying to win an argument by deliberately not paying any attention to what I'm writing.I'm not here to argue. Obviously this is intended only to be a republican blog and comment rally. No open-minded give and take discussion here. As far as Dr. Helen's political slant, give me a break. Do we really need to ask her who she's voting for, and why her writing is so angry?I'm not going to go sentence by sentence of her comment. That's easy and you can make Abraham Lincoln look like the devil.
For whatever reason you're all trying to argue and I'm trying to get you to consider a point of view. Guess it's too close to election day. People are getting scared.
BY THE WAY you shouldn't be scared, I am not a democrat and there is nothing at all in what I've written that would indicate that. I'm voting for Bob Barr if you all must know.
And the reality of it all is that a lot of ignorant voters will vote and they are the undecided who will change the election. Don't act like I'm being elitist. I'm being realistic. It's the obvious reason Palin was chosen, and it's partly why Biden(the catholic) was chosen. To call me an elitist is hypocritical when your own party leaders(DEMS AND PUBS) have a most cynical view that results in anything it takes to win politics, and they obviously take into account the irrationality of voters.To say otherwise is extremely unrealistic. Do you not remember the "be afraid" campaign of 2004? Oh, and every other election in history.
Please spare me how noble everything about the two major parties is.Well at least how noble republicans are, obviously I don't need to worry about liberal whine hear. I'm done though. I don't even know why I wrote this because the second anyone gets the idea that I may be representing a different point of view the blinders are turned on, and we go from discussion and comment, to high school debate mode, meandering off topic and dissecting individual sentences.Twist words and avoid the larger concepts to prove to, well I don't know who or what you're trying to prove anything to,but you seem rather desperate for some reason. Might want to ask yourself those questions.
"No open-minded give and take discussion here."
----------
You're giving and taking. Other people just aren't biting as much as you want, so you are a bit frustrated.
Here's something to ponder, though: No one is deleting your posts or banning you.
If you think that's minor, go to Feministing or Pandagon or any of the other feminist Web sites and write something vaguely right-wing. You will see a difference in treatment.
I think people here for the most part seek the truth, it may be that you just aren't as important as you think you are.
I don't know if I write due to illusions of grandeur- a possibility no doubt, but who is as important as they think they are? A pretty easy insult.
I don't think anyone's seeking the truth for the next 4 weeks. It appears everyone is at war. Take for instance this chilling excerpt from doom's overall chilling comment:
"For me, it is proof that sanity, rational thought, and reasonable discourse are not functional with the enemy(someone who votes differently)."
I think he has put to words the same feeling i get from all of these other posts.That's almost as chilling as someone telling me I should consider myself lucky not to be banned or deleted.I still can't understand the nerve i seem to be striking.I really am doing my best to be as defferential as possible without completely conforming.Review my posts if you like.I don't think you could suggest that I'm saying anything vaguely left-wing.
I haven't been banned from more leftist sites when I've disagreed. I don't visit any place too extreme though, so I will test your theory on those feminist web sites and pandagon, and see how they react to vaguely right-wing rhetoric.Actually I'm not one to be ambiguous. I'll just go full blown McCain talking points.
Here's the links for my experiment:
http://www.feministing.com/archives/011470.html
and
http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/civil_rights_can_march_right_up_my_pow_ass/
Unfortunately the pandagon site seems to have its fair share of conservative voices in its comments already, so I might just be wasting exploring your claim on that one,but I was a little more brazen than the others so we'll see if i can get kicked out of there.
UPDATE:
haha well I've been banned on feministing, but I wasn't deleted. I was very crude though,and I think if I had chosen to be more eloquent as some other dissenters had, there would be no problem. I didn't say anything vulgar or threatening, however, so I am rather annoyed by the banishment.
It does seem clear that you can say anything you want on pandagon though, and there are as many republican commentors as democrat.
So if these are your examples of extreme liberal blog censors, your claims that I should consider myself relatively lucky to state my opinion here politely is unfounded.
"haha well I've been banned on feministing,... "
-------
What a surprise.
Evarn:
This is a post and commen about hate directed at liberal democrats. You can't win.
Evarn wrote: "You're trying to win an argument by deliberately not paying any attention to what I'm writing."
I find that a very interesting statement after I took the time to respond almost line by line to what you said.
Trey - who is done trying
Yes exactly. You read my posts as a bunch of disconnected single lines. Every new line provides you a crevice where you can slide in and crack open my credibility. I wrote a very lengthy post and that's what you respond to?Did you get past the first line?
Going line by line does help your purpose of vanquishing me in debate, which is obviously why you did it.Well it's obvious to me. Either you're being coy or you lack self-awareness, when you say you've been trying to understand me. You could try to examine the meaning of what I write as a whole, or you can continue to pull everything out of context and destroy any chance of meaningful communication in your effort to conquer the message board.
Evarn, honestly, I am not interested in vanquishing you in a debate and I lack the skills to conquer this message board!
My attempt was to help you see the flaws in your thinking. Obviously, I did a poor job of it and you felt attacked. That is my bad, and I appologize. It was not my intent to smear you, but it was my intent to really challenge the soft thinking.
It reads like you tend to use emotional reasoning instead of critical thinking. This is why you were perceived as a liberal, most of the liberals who post on the internet (I stand by that statement) engage in emotional reasoning and they have a lack of critical thinking skills. People with critical thinking skills can recognize them by the second or third sentence.
I was trying to show you how the respected posters on this and other blogs that engage in sometimes serious conversations do it. We parse our words and work hard to stay with the facts. When we are using our feelings, we look for facts to support or correct our emotional reactions.
I totally understand what you are trying to ask: Why do people hate Sarah Palin?
There are many reasons. I have read some thoughtful comment on the web that critiques the governor, and none of those posts were hateful. Honestly, I was happy to see that some liberals can think.
The hate has a few sources. First, the Governor is a Evangelical Christian, and some people hate us. Not without some cause mind you, but the Evangelical Christian community is painted with a broad brush as stupid, pitiful, and dangerous by the left. We are conflated with Islamofascists regularly. People who do not think critically or do not know any of us believe that tripe and fear us.
Some people hate the Governor because she is a conservative. Once again, we have been painted as racists who hate the poor and people without critical thinking skills believe that and fear us.
Some people hate the Governor because she draws as many people and as much excitement as Senator Obama. That scares liberals mightly, and instead of talking about their fear directly they seek to harm the Governor in order to lower her star factor.
For another reason, you just have to remember middle school. What happened to the beautiful, smart, new girl who transfered into the school? Did the girls who were popular welcome her with open arms? A few did! What did the others do?
They acted EXACTLY like most of the feminists are acting toward the Governor. Think Rip Her To Shreds and you are close.
That is what is going on.
But get a book on critical thinking and read it. You are a caring person of some character, once you improve your critical thinking skills you may be the one who conquers the board.
Trey
Hey we are getting somewhere I think. You are still patronizing me, but more subtly at least and very politely.You even admit that I am a person of some character. Thank you?
You still aren't considering reasons someone might hate the governor outside of things that shed a benign light on her, so I'll try to only talk about your reasons.
Yea I get it they hate her because they're jealous. That's not exactly enlightening. There is a lot of truth to the fact that many liberals see evangelicals in a prejudiced light. That's an enormously complex issue because there is some cause, which you stated.I tend to avoid trying to critically discuss faith because of the obvious paradox, so I'll leave it at that, and say while it could be part of the hate, I think liberals are now accustomed to the evangelical power in politics now, and it's a foregone conclusion that evangelicals will vote for republicans.
They hate her because she might win due to the excitement she generates.
There is definitely something to that, but it's not the fact that she's exciting people it's the way she's doing it.Some people feel she is only here to represent a simple pleasing image, not too substantive, too woo voters who respond to condensed sometimes irrational messages.I'm not saying that everyone votes republican because of this. Don't be personally offended.
The overarching theme of all of this in my opinion is the means that will decide the election.I think the original hater hates because of the frustration that %10 of rather apathetic and ignorant undecided voters will determine this election. This precludes anyone on this website. Don't feel that I'm saying everyone who votes for one of the major parties is ignorant and irrational. Just a small fraction.
After the election I think many of you on this blog will echo what I'm saying, because it's getting very likely that Obama is going to be the next president. I bet the original hater doesn't even give a second thought to the fact that Obama was elected because of negative campaigning.
"You are still patronizing me, but more subtly at least and very politely."
Nope, I am calling them like I see them. I appreciate your sticking in here despite taking a few on the chin, that shows your character to me. But I stick by the critical thinking comments.
I was lucky, I had a doctoral course in critical thinking. That book I suggested, I read it too and was tested on it. That was advice, not a put down, but I tend to post pretty bluntly, so I can take the blame for the confusion.
Now let me read the rest of the post!
Trey
"You still aren't considering reasons someone might hate the governor outside of things that shed a benign light on her"
A wonderful and accurate point.
I was not going to vote for John McCain before he selected her. Honestly, I laughed in thinking that anyone would change their cote for a VP, then it happened to me. It happened when she said she has a "servant's heart" in her acceptance speech.
That was Evangelical Christian code for "I am one of you." Then I studied her positions and accomplishments and I now have a mccain/PALIN bumper sticker on my car.
So yep, I am in the tank for Palin. Of course, I admit it and am still open to being talked out of it. This disqualifies me for any job with the MSM sadly.
"it's a foregone conclusion that evangelicals will vote for republicans."
Sadly, you are right. I don't think the Republicans deserve that allegience. But the left's fear of serious Christians goes far, far beyond politics. It is a moral and spiritual issue as well.
See, what if we are right about abortion. What would that mean? It would mean that MILLIONS of men, women, doctors, and nurses are murderers or accomplices. To the left, we CANNOT be correct. It would mean that abortion supporters are morally bankrupt.
That scares the shit out of liberals. And it should. We Evangelical Christians know that God has a special love for the innocent and helpless. Think about that for 5 minutes, let it wash over you. Can you image the horror and the overwhelming guilt and self-loathing that would occur within the hearts of the abortion folks. God help them. Literally.
"Some people feel she is only here to represent a simple pleasing image"
She is an accomplished governor with more actual accomplishments than Senator Obama. People can feel what they want, it is a free country. As a psychologist, I know that what some people feel is wacko. I am not talking about people with mental illness, I am talking about people with family trauma that fear a strong woman who knows right from wrong.
Think about this: most Republicans come from intact families and most Democrats come from broken ones. I was briefly a single father, and that was the hardest and most draining thing I ever did. That was one child. I see what happens to the children of single moms, the dather abandonment they deal with, the problems it causes in their limbic system, it is sad. And it leads to ceratin patterns of abandonment fears and hyperemotionality that all of us here see in the unhinged, emotionally escalated and driven liberal posters.
Governor Palin stirs those folks up like a hornet's nest. The belittie and diminish her to make her less of a threat. But it is deeper than politics.
"Don't be personally offended."
Thanks, nothing you have written has been offensive in the least.
"I think the original hater hates because of the frustration that %10 of rather apathetic and ignorant undecided voters will determine this election."
That is a very cerebral hate you are suggesting there. Hate does not work that way. Hate is not reasoned. It is reactive and happens when people first frighten or hurt us. So we disagree, I do not see Palin Derangement syndrome as thoughtful.
"it's getting very likely that Obama is going to be the next president."
That is incorrect. The CBS and Zogby have it to close to call at 47% to 45% Obama. That was today, after the 4 point Palin bump. Look it up if you wish, it is on Drudge.
One thing that has happened, is that more people say they vote for Obama than actually do. I think it is unconscious racism, and that totally sucks but there it is. I think if Obama polls by 7% over in polling he actually has a lead according to the refression analysis of the polling from the primaries.
Trey
Lenin, as cited by Saul Alinsky (from protein wisdom):
"They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns, then it will be through the bullet."
Saul Alinsky, for those few who still don't know, is hero to both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Lenin was evidently here to Saul Alinsky.
Neither of them belong at the helm in the White house. Ever.
I owe someone an apology. Can't remember the particular thread. I got mixed up between Ponzi scheme and Cloward-Piven Strategy (figure THAT one out). It had been a long time since reading anything about either.
So, as I stated on another blog, the first 3 page bailout scheme was never meant to be passed. It was meant to bring ACORN to the forefront. I was clueless about ACORN, being a suburbs raised and suburbs and rural living adult all my life.
(personal opinion presented here) The idea - being money for ACORN - was hatched and placed into the bill by democrats and republicans both, who are more for America than for their individual party.
Democrats who no longer want their party to be hijacked by extreme radicals.
Truly, there are people in our country - teachers, professors, "community organizers", politicians, movie stars, etc., who hate America, capitalism, democracy, freedom, even prosperity - for everyone except themselves. Many followers are duped. I have read many an article from many a source in the past few weeks, and have come to believe I have been asleep at the wheel. How does the saying go concerning freedom and vigilance?
Yes, we need change. We need to pay attention to and expose this virus that is attacking our nation in so many ways, and vaccinate it. That is the kind of change we need. The virus has names. Frank, Dodd, Pelosi, Raines, Obama, ACORN, and a cast of thousands.
I have stated before I thought perhaps I was bordering on paranoia about some of this stuff going on. I will no longer doubt my own gut feelings. And I will endeavor to know more than I know now.
Many have been beating around the bush about it. It is beyond time for anything but laying it out, wide open for all to see. It needs to be done by someone smarter than me, that's for sure.
視訊做愛聊天室avdvd-情色網ut13077視訊聊天A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費Ａ片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520plus論壇sex520免費影片85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費Ａ片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費Ａ片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片後宮0204movie免費影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片免費視訊聊天jp成人sex520免費影片
★一夜激情影音聊天室★☆♀ 美女視訊聊天 ☆♀☆♀ 成人聊天網 ☆♀真人視訊影音聊天一夜激情網愛聊天室舞之心情色論壇☆♀ skype網愛 ☆♀藍色愛情海聊天室168視訊美女女生遊戲區★影音視訊聊天情人網★★台北一夜激情聊天室★情色影音聊天免費真人視訊辣妹臺灣18歲成人成人視訊聊天☆♀ 辣妹視訊聊天 ☆♀☆♀ skype網愛 ☆♀上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室上班族聊天室免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀免費成人視訊聊天秀小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片小潘潘成人片女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍女學生自拍亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區亞當樂園討論區☆♀ 情色視訊聊天 ☆♀情色影音聊天哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音交友網☆♀ 情色成人影片 ☆♀激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室激情成人網愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室一夜情做愛聊天室免費線上漫畫免費線上漫畫免費線上漫畫免費小遊戲免費小遊戲免費小遊戲免費小遊戲免費小遊戲免費小遊戲免費小遊戲免費小遊戲亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當新樂園亞當樂園線上討論區亞當樂園線上討論區
Post a Comment
<< Home