Posted on 04/27/2012 6:57:39 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
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:
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.
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.
This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by:
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 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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
That’s all news to me, EV.
The signing of that document was a big deal in the circles I run in, including here on FR, not so long ago.
I did not sign it because I do not believe that signing on to any document other than the Bible makes me (or makes me appear to be) a better follower of Christ.
What stands out to me right now is the horror of so many committing to signature their to-the-death opposition to abortion, gay marriage, etc., who now find it more convenient to vote for an abortionist homosexual-agenda pusher.
The republic can't stomach another helping of Mitt Romney as a chief executive. In the one term we have as an example he permanently banned scary looking guns, the exact sorts of weapons the British went to Concord and Lexington to grab, he socialized medicine, complete with $50 co-pay taxpayer-funded abortions, some of which are now "free," he instituted "gay marriage," in violation of the constitution he swore to support, he completely homosexualized state government and the public schools, and he loaded up the judiciary with liberal judges, mainly Democrats, among other things.
Left-wing Democrats can do lots of damage, that's for sure. But nothing like the damage left-wing Republicans can do with a "conservative" smiley face painted on their actions, and with corrupted "conservative" Republicans running interference for them.
No but at a point he pulls his support and allows man it destroy himself to a point. They he returns to rebuild. We have destroyed ourselves with two bad choices.
New tagline ...
It's non-negotiable to me to further the chance of the Obama regime maintaining power.
I think you are wrong in your actions, your strategy and tactics; I think they will be contrary to the good of the republic. I don't think you are evil or psychologically ill, or a moral relativist, etc. etc.
Your accusations towards those you disagree with on right political action are counter-productive and, in any case, have no weight in the argument.
I think it can with a strong congress; that's what I'm working for. Congress writes the legislation, we need a congress that will sent the right legislation for signing and a president that will sign it. This has no chance of happening with Obama as president.I think it obvious, Obama is poison.
This, again, reminds that we disagree on the gap between Obama and Romney. I believe you underestimate the harm Obama will do; you, likely think I underestimate the harm Romney will do.
To the extent your third party is effective, it furthers Obama democrats. I can't follow you there.
That's the fruit of your actions.
My actions are to remove the Obama regime and elect conservatives in Congress. I think this is the wisest action political at this time resulting in the greater good for the republic.
I don’t think Romney Republicans even know what a conservative Congress would look like. And they certainly won’t attain to what they don’t even know anything about.
No. Romney’s ascendency spells more liberalism in the Congress.
With a “conservative” veneer, and a “Republican” label, of course.
By the way, your posts continue to prove the point made by the original article at the top of the thread.
"In politics the middle way is none at all. "-- John Adams
“The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts.”-- Edmund Burke
"It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."-- Patrick Henry, Give me liberty or give me death speech
“There remains the one standard that has not yet been universally used, namely, the choosing of candidates on moral grounds. A nation always gets the kind of politicians it deserves. When our moral standards are different, our legislation will be different. As long as the decent people refuse to believe that morality must manifest itself in every sphere of human activity, including the political, they will not meet the challenge of Marxism. Contemporary history proves that modern political leaders, devoid of a moral inspiration and relying solely on a mass basis (might makes right), proves ineffectual in time of crisis."-- Fulton Sheen, “COMMUNISM and the CONSCIENCE of the WEST” -1948
You say a vote for Romney is a vote for Obama with no facts in evidence.
You base your opposition on the single issue of health care, assuming that were Romney to win he would create a National Plan on his own.
1. He has stated he opposes a national single payer plan and that he believes any effort at widespread coverage should be done at the state level.
2. A republican Congress would never allow a mandatory health care plan, especially if the Supreme Court rejects any or all of the current model. If the Supreme Court accepts the Obama plan as constitutional, we may be stuck with it and the potential Presidency of Romney becomes irrelevant respective of that issue. Even Obama was not the driving force behind the plan he wants to take credit for. It was created and pushed through congress by Pelosi and Reid.
3. When Scott Brown ran for the Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy he stated that the plan has been altered for the worst by democrats in the legislature after adoption and that process was part of his opposition to a national plan because he saw what a slippery slope it could be.
You assert that I am drinking Romney kool-aid. Although I have said he is not my favored candidate, I am trying to look at things objectively. If he is the nominee, I believe he is our only hope at ending Obama's career and we must work together to influence his style of governance. When you asked I offered what I thought were distinct differences between him and the community organizer. Beyond health care which he can't control alone, you aren't giving me the reasons you say he and Obama are the same. Again, looking at the Middle-East, International Foreign Policy, our borders, our domestic economy, treatment of our military, budget, taxation and education, I think they have very different views and opinions. For those reasons and contrasts, I would be much happier to cast my vote for Romney than I was for John McCain.
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.
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.
This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by:
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 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.
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.
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).
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.
Your attempt at objectivity reminds me of my local battles with global warming believers. There is nothing that will alter their thinking or bleed past their preconceptions.
And yet, you and those like you ignore all objective reality concerning Mitt Romney and what he represents.
As a Connecticut resident, I have absolutely no illusions that Romney will get more than 30% of the Nutmeg state vote. Just as I knew when I voted in the Republican primary (for Santorum) that Romney was almost guaranteed to be the winner in Connecticut. Connecticut is a dead loss for conservatives. Not so every other state. I'm not willing to simply sit and pout about how awful the Republican leadership is. That accomplishes nothing.
If the senate does end up with a Republican majority it's up to the people to hold their newly-elected Republicans accountable and not abdicate their responsibility just because 'we won'. I'm well aware that Washington is corrupt and the Republican 'leadership' is an integral part of that systemic corruption. However, I'm not willing to wallow in cynicism. Change will never come as long as 'good men do nothing'. If, indeed, change doesn't come, at least I won't have simply stood by and watched it happen, assuming that my cynicism reflects political sophistication.
"Moral principles do not depend on a majority vote. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong. Right is right, even if nobody is right."-- Fulton J. Sheen, 1953
If I could wave a wand and make your party equal in strength and notoriety to the other two before November, I would do it. But, since that is not reality I am looking to understand why four more years of Barack Obama, Eric Holder, David Axelrod, Cass Sunstein, Valerie Jarrett and team along with their support and advancement of the Muslim Brotherhood is preferable to Mitt Romney at this point in time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.