Denial ain't just a river in Egypt - Republican conservatives can't handle the truth about Romney

Tom Hoefling for President 2012 ^ | April 27, 2012 | Tom Hoefling

[EternalVigilance]

Tom Hoefling

April 27, 2012

I deal on a regular daily basis with self-identified conservatives all across America who are addicted to the Republican Party. And when it comes to the impending nomination by their party of the most liberal governor in U.S. history, Mitt Romney, their reactions are overwhelmingly in line with the classic symptoms described below. We can't make them face reality, of course. All we can do is to keep pointing it out to them, in the sincere hope that they will recover in time to help save the country. 

-----

From Wikipedia :

Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. The subject may use:

• simple denial: deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether
• minimisation: admit the fact but deny its seriousness (a combination of denial and rationalization)
• projection: admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility.

The concept of denial is particularly important to the study of addiction. The theory of denial was first researched seriously by Anna Freud. She classified denial as a mechanism of the immature mind, because it conflicts with the ability to learn from and cope with reality. Where denial occurs in mature minds, it is most often associated with death, dying and rape.

Denial of fact

In this form of denial, someone avoids a fact by lying. This lying can take the form of an outright falsehood (commission), leaving out certain details to tailor a story (omission), or by falsely agreeing to something (assent, also referred to as "yessing" behavior). Someone who is in denial of fact is typically using lies to avoid facts they think may be painful to themselves or others.

Denial of responsibility

This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by:

• blaming: a direct statement shifting culpability and may overlap with denial of fact
• minimizing: an attempt to make the effects or results of an action appear to be less harmful than they may actually be, or
• justifying: when someone takes a choice and attempts to make that choice look okay due to their perception of what is "right" in a situation.

Someone using denial of responsibility is usually attempting to avoid potential harm or pain by shifting attention away from themselves.

For example: Troy breaks up with his girlfriend because he is unable to control his anger, and then blames her for everything that ever happened.

Denial of impact

Denial of impact involves a person's avoiding thinking about or understanding the harms of his or her behavior has caused to self or others, i.e. denial of the consequences. Doing this enables that person to avoid feeling a sense of guilt and it can prevent him or her from developing remorse or empathy for others. Denial of impact reduces or eliminates a sense of pain or harm from poor decisions.

Denial of awareness

This type of denial is best discussed by looking at the concept of state dependent learning. People using this type of denial will avoid pain and harm by stating they were in a different state of awareness (such as alcohol or drug intoxication or on occasion mental health related). This type of denial often overlaps with denial of responsibility.

Denial of cycle

Many who use this type of denial will say things such as, "it just happened". Denial of cycle is where a person avoids looking at their decisions leading up to an event or does not consider their pattern of decision making and how harmful behavior is repeated. The pain and harm being avoided by this type of denial is more of the effort needed to change the focus from a singular event to looking at preceding events. It can also serve as a way to blame or justify behavior (see above).

Denial of denial

This can be a difficult concept for many people to identify with in themselves, but is a major barrier to changing hurtful behaviors. Denial of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors which bolster confidence that nothing needs to be changed in one's personal behavior. This form of denial typically overlaps with all of the other forms of denial, but involves more self-delusion. Denial at this level can have significant consequences both personally and at a societal level.

DARVO

See also: Victim blaming

Harassment covers a wide range of offensive behaviour. It is commonly understood as behaviour intended to disturb or upset. In the legal sense, it is behaviour which is found threatening or disturbing.

DARVO is an acronym to describe a common strategy of abusers: Deny the abuse, then Attack the victim for attempting to make them accountable for their offense, thereby Reversing Victim and Offender.

Psychologist Jennifer Freyd writes:

...I have observed that actual abusers threaten, bully and make a nightmare for anyone who holds them accountable or asks them to change their abusive behavior. This attack, intended to chill and terrify, typically includes threats of law suits, overt and covert attacks on the whistle-blower's credibility, and so on. The attack will often take the form of focusing on ridiculing the person who attempts to hold the offender accountable. [...] [T]he offender rapidly creates the impression that the abuser is the wronged one, while the victim or concerned observer is the offender. Figure and ground are completely reversed. [...] The offender is on the offense and the person attempting to hold the offender accountable is put on the defense.

[EternalVigilance]

Seems like a waste to me, but it’s your vote.

[EternalVigilance]

My motto for a very long time has been “throw all the bums out.”

[gimme1ibertee]

Bad guess.

Ok...so,what are you,then? Independent? Conservative? Librarian? :P

And I'm Tom Hoefling, by the way.

Nonsense.
To me,you'll always be EternalVigilance. :) Good luck in your endeavors.

[HotHunt]

In denial, huh? And just who are us “deniers” supposed to vote for to keep Obama out of office.... Obama? Get real. We’re not in denial so much as we are realists. Romney is the guy that’s been anointed by the GOP so that’s who we’ll vote for. Elections have always been about selecting the lesser of two evils. I prefer to select the one that’s not currently running the country into the ground. I’ll take my chances on the new guy. I’ve seen enough proof in the last three and a half years to know that Obama is not doing the job.

And those of you that “see the light” and decide that Romney is just not your guy, can vote for whom? A third party candidate, thereby giving the election to Obama? Stay home and don’t vote, thereby giving Obama a better chance at winning? Write-in your “perfect” candidate that somehow didn’t make it through the primary process intact, thereby giving Obama a greater chance at reelection?

Do what your conscious tells you to do on election day but don’t let your ego get in the way of a good dose of reality. If we don’t elect Romney, then Obama will have a second term to really ruin this country.

[EternalVigilance]

When I left the GOP once it became clear they were going to nominate John Judas McCain, I checked out the Constitution Party very closely. Sorry, it’s not for me.

[Jim Scott]

Pseudo-intellectual approach to criticizing conservatives that intend to vote for Mitt Romney for president. Way too cerebral a method to diss those who would prefer that Barack Obama be replaced by someone that isn't a dedicated Marxist. Most conservatives I know are unhappy with Romney as the GOP candidate but downright frightened by the thought of another four years of Obama.

The premise of a conservative allegiance to the Republican party is a gross misunderstanding of the fact that we have a two-party political system in America and one is basically communist and the other, quasi-socialist. 'Independent' candidates don't win presidential elections. Conservatives have rebelled against the GOP establishment and the TEA party is evidence of that rebellion. To date, it has only been partially successful, as seen in the 2010 congressional election. However, the GOP establishment is well entrenched and managed to finesse the primary process, pitting the conservative candidates against each other and eventually the conservatives in the race were either forced to quit due to scandal or simply a lack of GOP primary voter support (and subsequent funding).

So, we end up with Mitt Romney as the putative Republican presidential nominee. Not because of a 'denial' of his non-conservatism - we're well aware of that - or some imagined loyalty to the Grand Old Party but in reality, a Hobsons Choice situation where it's vote for Romney, stay home and pout or vote for some no-chance independent candidate to 'send a message' to the GOP. Been there, done that. Barack Hussein Obama ends up as president and does severe long-term damage to our nation on many fronts, primarily economic. Never again.

Mitt Romney may not be a conservative but with a more conservative congress he can be somewhat corralled and his liberal penchants kept in check. In any case, the attempt to portray conservative Americans that chose to hold their nose and vote for Mitt Romney on November 6th as some sort of neurosis is not only vapid but insulting.

[Texas Eagle]

Mine, too.

Click pic to read first few pages

[Fiji Hill]

Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. The subject may use:

It's a fact that Tom Hoefling will not be elected president of the United States--in fact, he won't even come close to getting a single electoral vote. If you can't accept that, then you are in denial.

[rogue yam]

Dude!

You claimed that Mitt Romney is the most liberal Governor in U.S. history.

My reply was that Mitt Romney is not even the most liberal Massachusetts Governor of the last decade.

Deval Patrick is more liberal than Mitt Romney and everyone here knows it including you.

You spouted crap and I called you on it.

Stop wasting everybody’s time.

[EternalVigilance]

Thanks. :-)

I’m a Reagan conservative.

My views are very well expressed in the America’s Party Platform:

http://www.selfgovernment.us/platform.html

[HotHunt]

Sorry Sheri. My response was intended for EternalVigilance, not you.

[EternalVigilance]

I note that you can’t specifically point to any policies by any other governor that have been more liberal than Mitt Romney’s actions.

My assertion that Mitt Romney is the most liberal governor in U.S. history stands.

[P-Marlowe]

What is your Foreign Policy Experience?

Have you ever been elected to any office?

Have you ever run a business or corporation?

What is your position on Abortion?

What is your plan to balance the budget?

What kind of organization do you have to run up against Obama and Romney?

Is it possible that you are in that river in Egypt?

These are just some of the preliminary questions.

[Jack Hydrazine]

Voting for Obama or Romney is a waste of a vote. Might as well vote for someone worth voting for!

[dfwgator]

Mitt could have chosen any state he wanted, why not Utah, or his dad’s Michigan...no, he chose the most liberal state in the country to be governor.

[EternalVigilance]

It's a fact that Tom Hoefling will not be elected president of the United States--in fact, he won't even come close to getting a single electoral vote. If you can't accept that, then you are in denial.

I can accept that, if it occurs. Or, I can accept it if it turns out some other way.

The attitude I try to maintain is George Washington's:

"If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disprove, how can we afterwards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God."

So no, I'm not in denial. My feet are firmly planted in reality.

[Jack Hydrazine]

Why should FReepers or any Conservative vote for Romney?

[Fiji Hill]

From Wikipedia...

I often use Wikipedia for my own information, but I will never, ever cite it as a source.

[Carry_Okie]

Conservatism split our early efforts between an ugly set of choices: the unvetted (Cain), a retread (Newt), an air head (Perry), an err-head (Santorum), and a space cadet (Paul) because THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE WHO WERE RUNNING. Frankly, I thought Cain had a good chance, but then I had supposed him smart enough that he wouldn't have considered a run with the kind of problems he had. My mistake. I thought Santorum the best remaining option, but under-estimated the degree to which people would fall for a generic Republican voting record in a narrowly divided Senate as generalizations of his character.

How is that denial?

The RINO options to Romney got out early because their usual sources of cashola were going to Mittens. Meanwhile, big money and crooked GOP dealings dealt enough blows to conservatives to build the unstoppable mo. That's not denial; it's a fact.

So, who's the genius with cred you've got?

Look, if you plan to build a party, you'd better put up a superior program instead of throwing bricks. It's either that or STFU.

[Shery]

I looked at the Constitution Party, as well, but they don’t offer a viable candidate. Why do these 3rd party candidates always seem like weirdos? We conservatives (of all walks of life) should start a Conservative Party. PERIOD. Since conservatives are the largest voting block, but get the least attention once we help elect a crony, we should stop carrying water for the republicans and the democrats and serve ourselves up a better candidate.