Dr. Sanity

Very interesting. I don't believe that all who oppose Bush fall into this camp. But it does explain the common rational elision that the WTC bombing was a protest against Bush's evil, and therefore getting rid of Bush will end the problem.

I have seen this more or less explicitly stated all over Democratic circles, and have been struck by the complete unreason of it. For one thing, it ignores the series of attacks against the US since 1993. For another, it ignores Osama's explicit threat to attack the US in a way never before seen, which I read about before Bush took office. Minor technical details, yet relevant to those who look at our situation from the standpoint of reason.

I found it very interesting that Kerry was not able to figure out the timing of the first WTC bombing in the debate. This from a man who was portrayed as an expert on terrorism? Perhaps only a determined blindness to the facts could support his apparently real belief that the problem was the Bush administration's lack of diplomacy.
MaxedOutMama | Email | Homepage | 11.28.04 - 2:00 pm | #

Very good points, MOM! You are correct that not all Bush Haters have displacement. Some are not any different than the terrorists and are psychopathic; some are just evil themselves and determined to destroy all that stands for good. Those who are using the psychological defense of displacement I see as psychologically naiive individuals who are uninsightful and acting on the basis of emotions they have not really thought about. Their critical faculty has been turned off, because it is too threatening to face reality. These are not necessarily "bad" or "evil" people, and often their explicit goals are things like "peace" and "freedom"--it's just that they cannot see that their behavior enables those opposed to peace and freedom. They are the "useful idiots" and dupes of evil because they are psychologically blind.
dr. sanity | Email | Homepage | 11.28.04 - 2:40 pm | #

There's a lot of truth to what you are saying. It strikes me that a lot of people are behaving like adolescents acting out against a stern father figure, who wants them to be grown up.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.29.04 - 9:18 am | #

What I find interesting is the contagious nature of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Many sufferers would normally just oppose Bush on a rather prosaic political level, either because they are Democratic loyalists or they disagree with various issues and policies promulgated by the Bush Administration. But it appears that peer pressure is causing lots of people to buy into some of the conspiracy theories and extreme descriptions which engender hatred of President Bush.

When otherwise rational acquaintances or relatives exhibit BDS, I suspect it is difficult for some folks to resist the pressure. After all, disputing a Bush-hater means that you are questioning your friend's grip on reality. It also means you are questioning the integrity of well known authority figures -- pundits and important politicians and celebrities. How can all of these people so intensely believe all of these wacky theories about Bush if there isn't a substantial amount of truth to them? And do you want to openly challenge your peers and make yourself a laughingstock in their eyes by speaking out in Bush's defense?

It's so much easier to nod in agreement. And after awhile it becomes very difficult to admit you've been taken in or have acted in a cowardly manner. And thus the ranks of Bush-haters swell.

This is not only a psychological problem, it is a major problem for our country. We need credible, serious criticism of President Bush to provide a political feedback loop and help our country avoid or correct some of the inevitable mistakes which any administration will make. BDS short-circuits that feedback loop, to the detriment of us all.
dpwiener | Email | Homepage | 11.29.04 - 4:42 pm | #

This all seems an incredibly silly effort to avoid examining what the opposition to Bush et. al. is really about.

Bush is an embarassment not only for his lack of facility with his native language despite the most elitist educational oppotunities within the traditional eastern establishment. His is, btw, the kind of garbling of language that has always - even before I knew who GWB was - struck me as a display of fundamental, internal dishonesty. If the writer is really a psychiatrist I would expect that to be readily apparent to him. Some people have described his malfunctioning as evidence of his status as a "dry drunk." This writer prefers to avoid looking at GWB at all, instead analyzing a group that includes millions of people as all sharing some symbolic fixation on GWB as an inadequate father figure. The very idea just boggles the mind.

The reality gap re the war on terrorism is not that we who oppose GWB and his policies do not understand the threat. It has been proven flatly, time and again, that the invasion of Iraq was not ever likely to contribute to the defeat of terrorism. It seems likely it was never even intended to.

It is the constant use by this administration, the repetition and acceptance of the big lie - not only with respect to terrorism but to most of thsir issues and actions - that is so frustratingly dishonest that some mild derangement is the only possible sane response.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.29.04 - 10:26 pm | #

Way to go Dr. S! Anonymous was just using the old Michael Moore technique. Interesting that he/she thinks that psychology is "silly" but claims to know Bush's psychology. The refusal to face reality on the part of people like him/her is also very frustrating to me so I guess its ok for me to be deranged in my analysis of him/her, right?
JohnS | Email | Homepage | 11.30.04 - 10:16 am | #

I thoroughly enjoyed this analysis. I've been mulling over similar thoughts ever since I read Krauthammer's piece, but I kept coming back to cognitive dissonance and the Bush Haters' inability to ever admit they may have made a mistake (for example, the forged documents fiasco at CBS). Even admitting to the slightest error will cause the entire house of cards to come crashing down, and I doubt that their fragile psyches could withstand the onslaught of Reality. Thus, no questions can be seriously considered, and no doubts entertained. They know they're right about how eeeeevil GWB is, and well, the rest of us (who are not adverse to examining factual data from different sources) are just brainwashed idiots, or worse.

I had missed the displacement angle altogether, but now I see how much sense it makes as the basis for this pathology. How long do you think they will be able to sustain this, though? Eventually, I would think that some event in the world will demonstrate that Bush was right (about something), and then what will they do?

Or will they just forget all about their vitriol and hysteria? A dozen years from now, will the Conventional Wisdom recognize how fitting the Bush Doctrine was for these times? Will it be just like Reagan's funeral, with everyone remembering what a great man, and great president, RR was -- even though at the time, they all seemed to despise him?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I do not think they can continue to sustain this, even throughout Bush's 2nd term. Already cracks are appearing in their edifices...
Joan | Email | Homepage | 12.01.04 - 1:39 am | #

Joan,
I agree with you. History will prove that Bush was a great President, just as it did Reagan. I also remember the vitriol directed against Reagan and where I worked at the time, people actually cheered when Hinkley tried to assassinate him (Reagan). That has all been forgotten now, as everyone pushes others aside to praise him for ending the Cold War.
dr. sanity | Email | Homepage | 12.01.04 - 7:10 am | #

Anonymous - GWB is a flawed man (as was Clinton before him); There are reasonable issues to make with his policies and their application. Having said that, take a look at what you have written. You don't just disagree with GWB, you call him a liar. You refer to the "big lie" and that he is "frustratingly dishonest";

The thing is, you're right - I don't just disagree with GWB and I don't just randomly hate him or hate him from some sort of psychological derangement. Virtually everything he said in debates or elsewhere in the campaing was patently dishonest - either an outright lie or just deceptive and misleading.

As for his manner of garbling the simplest speech indicating dishonesty - I didn't know it **about him** even before I knew who he was. He just demonstrated something I already knew in general about people and human benavior.

As for **the big lie** - to some extent that approach to political campaigns was fairly openly outlined as far back as 1968 when Roger Ailes initiated application of commercial marketing principles.

The invasion of Iraq is the perfect example of the use of the big lie. While there were occasional admissions that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, far more frequently the two were paired in the same statement or juxtaposed closely - a subtle and very sophisticated way of making the point while retaining deniability.

Do you think it's an accident that such a large share of the population still believes that Saddam was involved in 9/11 despite the fact that even GWB has stated he was not? Do you think the population is stupid? Not at all.

I didn't say I think **psychology** is silly, I said I think your analysis is silly.

You say, "This mantra of his being a liar and an embarassment is tiresome, and seems to cover up any reasoned discussion of alternative plans. It is overly emotional and frankly dishonest itself."

It is a mantra only because it's so inescapable. Every time the man opens his mouth lies spill forth.

Lying about what? The obvious things: "clear Skies act" which allows more pollution; "Healthy Forests Act" opens the forests to wholesale logging. He talks about compromise but makes it clear that everyone coming together just means he'll invite everyone to agree with him.

The back door draft. Support the troops - there's a big lie. I work in a VA Medical Center. I see the amputees. I live the budget cuts.

How are the historic budget deficits not a lie? Combined with more and more tax cuts. Greater war spending.

They care about health care and its cost but propose removing employers' tax deductions for it.

A point I can't get past - how is it possible to claim to be "pro-life" and support an unnecessary war and the death penalty. That alone is a huge lie.

You people need to drop your worry about sex in the oval office. Do you really believe Clinton was the first president to get a bj in that sacred room? And
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.01.04 - 11:10 pm | #

Oh dear, I was truncated. That final line was about morality being all about sex. I don't think so. No president has been investigated as intensely as Clinton was. I doubt if many would have come out of such a pursuit looking any better than he did. Starting an unnecessary war that kills tens of thousands (p.s. Iraqis are people, too) and creates misery for many more - not so moral.

There was more. There is more. Too much and I'm tired now.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.01.04 - 11:14 pm | #

Maybe now you can analyze the intense hatred that Bush supporters feel towards "liberals" -- and their persistant refusal to define what a "liberal" is, beyond the implied definition:

liberal (n) - the cause of all your problems

And Bush lied to me. He said something that was not true. I supported the Iraq invasion until the facts came to light. As for the majority of Bush supporters who believe there is a connection between Saddam and 9/11. Cheney later denied he ever suggested such a connection existed. Even if that is technically true, they are surely aware of the common misconception. Why, then, have they not publicly set the record straight? It would be easy to do so. Do they not believe a well-informed public would benefit them?

And for the record, this has nothing to do with my father. I don't hate Bush. I do feel the palpable hate eminating from the red state people towards me. Ironically, even more so now that they got what they wanted.

So for the last time, lay off the liberals. You won. You run the world now. Pottery Barn rules apply. Talk about all the positive effects that Republican rule is having around the world, why don't you?
gun-toting liberal | Email | Homepage | 12.02.04 - 6:34 pm | #

gun-toting liberal-- Give me a f***king break. so now WE hate you? I think that is mere projection on your part. WE think you are the cause of all the problems in the world? Well, to be honest it is the ideology you embrace which I believe is the cause of most of them (like oppression, totalitarianism, poverty etc.). You are only an enabler of this kind of evil. As for "setting the record straight"--you must read the mainstream media, which is why you are so confused about the facts. Personally, I think there was very likely a connection between 9/11 and Saddam and I am backed up by a significant portion of the intelligence community. However, there was a disagreement about it, so I don't intend to make a big deal of it like you do. I think for MANY reasons, taking out Saddam was a strategic necessity for transforming the Middle East. Nevertheless, reasonable people can disagree about these tactics. What precisely would you have done?
I suggest that you and your fellow liberals wake up and take some responsibility for the consequences of what you believe. You used to stand for freedom and democracy--you seem to support the opposite these days.
dr. sanity | Email | Homepage | 12.02.04 - 7:20 pm | #

Talk about projection! My son - whose best friend is a republican - told me long ago that there's no point talking politics with republicans, they just aren't rational. You sure are a perfect demonstration of that.

"you must read the mainstream media" as opposed to what? Faux news? My big objection to the mainstream corporate media is that they are so incredibly cowed by conservative ranting you can only get the official republican talking points from it.

You think there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11 despite the fact that everyone including Bush Cheney and Rice have stated explicitly that there is not?

"taking out Saddam was a strategic necessity for transforming the Middle East" -- as if it's given that we should. I don't get that. Saddam was a very bad guy, no question about it. There are lots and lots of bad guys running things out there, worse things happening all the time than the evil Saddam pulled off in Iraq. Why have we done nothing about Sudan for almost 20 years? There's a stan that is at least the equal of Iraq in evil of it's leader. When do we go there. Do we just go into every country run by a dictator and "remake" it? How about Saudi Arabia. There's a repressive dictatorship for you. Why haven't we invaded there? And on and on and on.

And if some other country thinks we have a bad government here - what do they have a right to do? Invade? You know, ALL of the developed world believes universal health care is a basic human right. Do they get to take us over so they can transform us?

Or does it all have to be our way because - for now - we are the biggest bully on the planet? Or at least our top guy has the most practiced swagger.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.02.04 - 8:22 pm | #

Liberals have been cast adrift. When they were young, mommy would always protect them. When something bad happened she would do anything to protect their delicate self esteem. Kerry was willing to tell them what to do and that nothing was ever their fault. Bush just told them to go get a job. Democrats have always been the female figure in politics. Repubs the strong male.
Without the dems in charge the libs have been cast adrift provoking much anxiety.
There is probably a strong correlation between being raised without a father, and being a democrat.
castadrift | Email | Homepage | 12.03.04 - 8:45 pm | #

"Liberals have been cast adrift. ... and being a democrat.
castadrift

What a load of crap.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.04.04 - 11:58 am | #

Psychologizing people's beliefs could be recipie for provoking anger. We like to hold our ideas as either un-assailable, or want to discuss them on their own merits. Psychology is about *us*, so it might hit closer to home.
This issue, of how the patient reacts to being told that there is something "wrong" with him/her, is a common issue to the treatment of most psychiatric pathologies.

I think the "displacement" theory may have some merit, although it's not something that appears in every BDS sufferer.

Another psychological reason for BDS is that Bush was the president during 9/11, and when seeing him today people are reminded about that day. We wish for the time before 9/11 when all those people were still alive and the world seemed (if you didn't pay attention) to be friends.

One of the replies above kind of proves my first two points:
- Replier sounds, to me, to be annoyed by the pshygologizing.
- "Every time the man opens his mouth lies spill forth." Yes, I think this may be an indication of BDS, but it may also just be a rethorical/humorus point. It comes down to wether the reader *really believes* that every sentence GWB speaks conveys a lie, or wether it's just an exaggeration.
89 | Email | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 10:25 pm | #

How does this figure into Clinton hating? Is it similar or are Clinton haters given a free pass?
Mike | Email | Homepage | 06.06.05 - 4:39 pm | #

Your last paragraph goes to the core, IMO. It seems the hard left will engage almost any psychological maneuver to avoid taking personal responsibility for their lives.
Pete | Email | Homepage | 06.15.05 - 9:28 pm | #

To Anonymous of 12.01.04 at 11:10PM ( who is probably far away now, who knows?... ) who said;

"A point I can't get past - how is it possible to claim to be "pro-life" and support an unnecessary war and the death penalty. That alone is a huge lie."

My dear Anonymous,
I can't get past the fact that you liberals are so worried of the welfare of terrorists - people who kill innocent americans, or who say they will kill innocent americans the first chance they get - but you liberals are OK with killing human fetuses as if they were flies on a pic-nic table.

The life of a murderer is more valuable to you than that of an innocent baby ?...

This doesn't prove the left is worst than the right, but it proves - you as a lefty my dear anonymous - are just as bad as anyone on the right.

But then again, Anonymous, saying Bush lies ALL THE TIME just proves DR Sanity's point about the mental sate of people on the left.
Friend of USA | Email | Homepage | 06.20.05 - 5:42 pm | #

You talk about going to war with Iraq as if the only people who will be hurt or killed are terrorists. Did your psychology studies cover being delusional?
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 07.01.05 - 10:25 pm | #

Ok... nobody is saying Bush is the embodiment of evil, and the mastermind of all terrorism. That would be absurd. To be the mastermind of ANYTHING would be to assume he is more than just a very, very stupid, very, very pliable puppet. For that is what Georgie W. is, you know, a puppet in the hands of much more able pupeteers. The poor man is too stupid to even realize THAT.
Pame | Email | Homepage | 07.03.05 - 11:14 pm | #

Oh and looking to belittle people who think differently from you by inventing pseudo psychological studies about them only proves you have nothing solid to hold against them. Seems to me that democrats aren't the ones who are desperately holding on to mommy, its republicans who want Bush to be their Daddy... who cares if daddy lies or steals or kills as long as he smiles at baby and makes him gurgle?
Pame | Email | Homepage | 07.03.05 - 11:22 pm | #

Pame: "nobody is saying Bush is the embodiment of evil"

Where do you live? I swear I'll move there tomarrow.
Andrew | Email | Homepage | 07.25.05 - 8:06 pm | #

Problem with that wishful hypothesis, is that a majority of the world was not a victim of 9/11. Perhaps the New American Century has something to do with all of this, ya think.
Malcolm Jackson | Email | Homepage | 08.14.05 - 12:39 am | #

I am a clinical psychologist. I found Dr.Sanity's remarks shallow, and unbecoming of a psychologist. Using ONE simplistic explanation for ANYTHING is flatly unethical,let alone a human personality. Any phenonmena let alone a human personality, that is explained by ONE thing alone, clearly doesnt' exist at all. A kleenex is more complex such a fiction. One OTHER possibility for "Bush Hatred" (a SCALE of Bush emnity is more truly the case) is that Bush is suspected of not winning the election fairly. Another is that Bush's OWN behavior and decisions have resulted in an unquestioned and severely reduced respectability in the world. Another is his clear dishonesty and deception of the American public and world at large for invading Iraq. Another: nn Bush's watch, Russia and China have decided to become buddies now. Coincidence it happened now..under Bush's term? Bush is disliked by many people, NOT just in the US but abroad, and France is only ONE example. Maybe something about Bush here, not requiring any defense mechanisms at all? Maybe Dr. so called-"Sanity" is "displacing" his unexpressed anger at his father via "projection" onto "Bush Haters?" (I am 1/2 kidding).

Summarily, MOST SURELY the explanation for disliking Bush is due to multiple factors, terrorism being only one, and "displacement" being only one possible defense mechanism involved. As noted, many people simply don't like him, and this has nothing to do necessarily with political affiliation in the US. I am embarassed by Dr. Sanity's off-the-cuff, simplistic explanation. Hopefully, Dr., you don't diagnose your patients similiarly. They deserve better.
MB,Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
Matt | Email | Homepage | 11.04.05 - 7:55 pm | #

Great article, Dr. Sanity. It is unbelievable the inane comments that come out of the Bush haters mouths.
Karen | Email | Homepage | 11.29.05 - 7:20 pm | #

I hold that the hatred is not for Bush per se, but for the fellow in the White House, whomever he happens to be. The left is hysterical in having been removed from power and BDS is a result of withdrawl symptoms from those power-lusters.
Sharpshooter | Email | Homepage | 11.30.05 - 6:58 pm | #

You must be a communist.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.15.05 - 9:18 pm | #

"The purpose of displacement is to avoid having to cope with the actual reality."

This is an interesting concept, but Bushatred existed before 911.

I would offer that the Bushatred is the displaced rage from the "loss of power" after the 2000 election was "stolen".

In the case of Europe, it is the loss of the "illusion of power" caused by Bushitler's disrespect of their influence on world events.
TS | Email | Homepage | 03.11.06 - 7:36 pm | #

The first ones now shall later be last, for the times, they are a-changin'.

“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."”
-- Theodore Roosevelt
Dedalus | Email | Homepage | 03.16.06 - 3:07 pm | #

I strongly disagree with this article. Everyone I know hates Bush and the entire administration, because of their atrocious decisions.
Though I don't blame him for everything, like a lot of people do. He is hated internationally because he is a hypocrite. He calls people evil doers for crimes that he himself commits. It is embarassing for our country to have him as our leader. America deserves much better.
Margo Brosnan | Email | Homepage | 06.05.06 - 2:51 pm | #

This is way too emotionally charged to even be remotely considered as an intelligent discussion on the "psychology" of Bush Haters.

Just as the community hatred of an individual can (according to this article) bring about a false sense of security, so too can blind faith in any ideology. I suggest you take off the red-colored glasses and try to look at the situation objectively, rather than fine-tune your own personal agitation and hatred, which you have plainly succeeded in doing.

In my honest opinion, I think that any individual who supports Bush and his administration after 1) a war built on false pretense, 2) the revelation that not only were there no WMDs, but that we knew the whole time and misreported to the UN, 3) a tax plan that any idiot in remedial high school economics would tell you is doomed to fail, 4) a series -- no -- a wave of completely incompetent nominations, 5) Bush's government's complete indifference and lack of response to the Katrina disaster, 6) Bush's utter inability to communicate in elementary-school English, and 7) a scandal involving the NSA spying on international telephone calls and emails, is a cretin and should seriously consider staying home next time the presidential election rolls around.

But, if your commitment to self-conflicting "values" and a party that seems determined to embarrass itself repeatedly, be my guest.
Karl Johnson | Email | Homepage | 08.14.06 - 3:11 am | #

Only the right describes the left as "Bush haters". The truth is, many people recognise that Bush's solutions indicate a retarded morality that will make matters worse.

On Kohlberg's morality scale, when an individual advances in moral awareness we can make another observation. Their moral universe expands, from self, then to family and friends, country, etc. as moral awareness evolves. In each case of acquiring a wider moral universe or domain, the individual must find solutions to satisfy the needs of a larger universe without conflicting with the needs of the smaller moral domains, such as the self.

Most on the right have a moral domain that extends to their state or the USA, while the moral domain of liberals extends to other countries or all humanity. Conservatives simply do not comprehend this. They see the current "war on terror" as just that, an "us versus them" paradigm.

It is impossible for someone with a specific moral development to comprehend the viewpoint of one with higher moral development. Those who do not understand have fear, and fall back on a childish explanation that serves their need to label those they disagree with, "They hate Bush", or "They hate America".
Garrick | Email | Homepage | 09.04.06 - 1:02 am | #

So funny to watch the idiots on tv say" They hate us in Iraq they want us out of Iraq" Why dont you ask the Kurds that question you stupid libs. All they ever say is what they heard on the news. If they havent been there they dont know shit. I have I know I served did you? Maybe I should run for president. A conservative with proof of his battle wounds A boyscout a police officer. The Libs need to fear me the most.
OIFII Purple Heart recipient
Laughing | Email | Homepage | 09.21.06 - 3:35 pm | #

I think you'd have a great deal of difficulty justifying the diagnosis of "displacement" against those who accuse the Bush Administration of furthering plutocracy by his economic policies; fascism by his "Patriot Act"; radical militarism by his preemptive war doctrine; business corruption by his appointments to regulatory agencies; contempt for human rights by his adoption of torture, extraordinary rendition, secret prisons, habeas corpus and other police tactics common to totalitarian states. But, of course, you might support those policies and believe that liberty, justice, and egalitarianism are just "Leftist/Socialist/Communist bullshit". If so, it wouldn't surprise me.
Atlas | Email | Homepage | 09.24.06 - 12:19 am | #

Amazing that so many people disagree with your diagnosis of Bush Hatred Syndrome, BUT NOT A SINGLE NAY-SAYER HAS ACTUALLY DENIED THAT IT EXISTS AND IS TEARING AMERICA APART!
It's like Muslims using violence to demonstarte that they hate Violence!
"We had rather, in the ways of Good, follow our enemies, than in the ways of Evil follow our friends!"
Surely GWB is not wrong about EVERYTHING in the world today, but the nay-sayers won't even concede him that little piece of mind!
eliXelx | Email | Homepage | 09.28.06 - 8:53 am | #

"It strikes me that a lot of people are behaving like adolescents acting out against a stern father figure, who wants them to be grown up."
More like retarded clown figure. Heard any good fart jokes lately?
Jim Collins | Email | Homepage | 10.20.06 - 11:52 am | #

Great Post.

2 years ago, I tackled this issue in a call to Medved's show, and I posted on it here.

BDS is no different from Islamic Fascism or Christian Sharia. It's a simple equation.

Individualists/Freedom oriented people objectify that with which we disagree as evil.

Collectivists objectify those with which they disagree as evil.

We hate bad ideas, they hate people who hold ideas they think are bad.
Bruno | Email | Homepage | 02.21.07 - 2:18 am | #

Re: displacement. In 1940, as French armies disintegrated and the government collapsed under the Nazi blitzkreig, the French blamed the British for their defeat! Many in the military and gov't warmed to the Nazis as they swept thru France. They reserved their rage for their ally Britain. They were unable to blame their defeat on the Germans or themselves. BDS is just the latest example of why people cant see who their real enemies are.
Les Hardie | Email | Homepage | 07.05.07 - 5:51 pm | #

This guy's a psychologist?! He's an idiot! A theory is easy to explain when one ignores all facts and reality and relies only on their own interpretation that is blinded by their hatred for "free thinkers". Why I'm writing this? Anyone who's not a complete idiot can see for themselves.
S.I.D. | Email | Homepage | 10.06.07 - 4:53 pm | #

I'm disgusted with this article. I do hate George Bush, but for good reason. You sir, are an idiot. An evil one at that, you have supported a president who took the country to war, who kills and murders innocent civilians, AND you have done it while assuming a morally high stance.

I say you are a disgusting immoral and twisted individual, who has never taken the time to look past his own circumstance to see how people in the world live, and why they do so.

You sir, are a Nazi. Yes, at least in the way you have no moral judgement to call your own. You have been pushed into supporting your leader regardless of how stupid or wrong they might be.

Were all Germans Nazi's? Why did all those citizens just sit there quietly while Hitler ordered the death of millions? Well, they pretended to be morally right, just like you. They supported their leader, just like you. They supported the death of millions. Just like you.

Enjoy your new recession. America is a cess pool.
John Smith | Email | Homepage | 02.18.08 - 11:52 am | #

It also disgusts me that you hold a degree, and are a professional.

Why do you think you are justified to torture and murder people because of a few Saudi Arabian terrorists who received too much funding from the CIA?

Oh right, you have destroyed Afganistan, (death count = million... Don't forget to count the starvation deaths since you bombed and left.. way to help them out and recover too, way to instill democracy).

No one believes Bush is intelligent, or a mastermind. In fact, thats why we are so disgusted with people like you. You think your doing the right thing.

What are you going to do over there you idiot? There is nothing you can achieve. No help you can give. You are killing people, scaring people, and taking a rough place and making it a hell of a lot worse.

Why do you keep on supporting him? START TO THINK. SMELL THE FRESH AIR AND STEP OUT OF YOUR PATRIOTIC IDIOCY.
John Smith | Email | Homepage | 02.18.08 - 11:58 am | #

Hatred of Bush is like hatred of NAZIs.
It is the only rational and humane response to the horrors of their killing and greedy sadism.

You who who don't admit the Bush's pure evil are zero-compassion non-human Republicans.
william schmidt, ph.d. | Email | Homepage | 03.31.08 - 9:04 pm | #

The guy that wrote this article needs to take a few lessons in history and he will find that the CFR and the elite families are very real. And George bush is their puppet. This Nation is in real trouble and George Bush is abusing the Power of the President to eradicate this Great Nation. In having taken it upon himself to sign the "North American Union Treaty" with out the Peoples knowledge or Congresses concent, he broke Constitiutional law. But then again, he has been trying to strip us of our rights as outlined in the Bill of Rights since he stole his postition as President of these United States. The People of this Nation had better wake up and read the writing on the wall. Go to YouTube and type in the keywords "CFR", "North American Union Treaty", or Alex Jone's "Endgames". These articles and clips are not Media Controlled and will give you a history of what is and has been happening. A New World Order has been forming for Years. The formation of the Federal Reserve is a good example of how a few private families are taking steps to control the money supply and thus the people. If you watch the CFR series, you will see what I am talking about. The historical facts are there to see if you just open your eyes. So please look. There is good reason to hate George Bush and Dick Cheney and all that they stand for.
57girl | Email | Homepage | 04.16.08 - 9:14 am | #

The hatred of Bush is, to a large extent, a matter of group-think (and history shows where that leads). If you want to look like a fool, just defend him on even the smallest point. Then everyone will know you're a total dope (and ignorant, malevolent, brain-washed, anti-thought, inhuman, liberty-hating, etc.).

Very few people realize that what they think they know is virtually never first-hand. They are those of the people around them, the media (which themselves follow herd instincts), and political propagandists. So, like most students, they give out the teachers' answers (or opinions) and think they know the subject.

Hey, who wants to say "I don't know?" You need an opinion on everthing so you can look good in conversation. Actually, it makes me very sad to realize how limited is all our knowledge.

One of the books I continually return to is Jacques Ellul's "Propaganda."
Abhinavagupta | Email | Homepage | 05.16.08 - 12:50 pm | #

i will take your last paragraph, and chage it the way it should be:

As a psychiatrist, you should hope that patients of yours will develop insight and self awareness and begin to take responsibility for their own lives and actions- in other words, I hope that they will grow up someday. I hope the same for Bush. Because her does not think he is responsible, he think he is on a mission for god. A good psychiatrist should see this by himself
den | Email | Homepage | 10.30.08 - 4:04 pm | #

Why is Bush important?
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.15.08 - 3:43 am | #

There is a saying in the Hungarian culture that goes something like this: When everyone around you seems crazy, have your own brain checked. The author of the above article should know that the vast majority of people do not hate anyone, including Bush. However, there is no question that Bush is severely challenged in the fields of critical thinking, intellectual maturity, communication skills and even spiritual maturity. So inapt is this man that his presidency devastated this country and his own party. If he is capable to fully understand what he did, he should ask for forgiveness publicly.
The argument that liberals are hated (by the Religeous Right) is a "reaction" to the hatred they (liberals) show for Bush, has no leg to stand on. Jesus does not teach hatred.
Mary Kenez | Email | Homepage | 11.25.08 - 4:17 am | #

USA has lost all the respect it had. Don't even try to tell others what is right or what is wrong. The rule is pretty simple - either practice what you preach or shut the fuck up.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 03.11.09 - 6:16 am | #

This is the most ridiculous piece of writng i have ever read disguised as an acedemic text. It gives the impression that the writer believes that most Bush haters, for example those in France, are haters because they do not want to recognise the real evildoers. They are unhappy with, perhaps jealous of, the position of US power so dislace their insecurities onto W. Bush. The writer is making an unresearched generalisation. It would seem to most of us, that most people who don't like W. Bush, don't like others who abuse their power, which W. Bush did. Certainly, W. Bush did not gas the Kurds like Saddam but it could be said that he did support the Turks when they tackled the 'Kurdish problem' in Northern Iraq. The shelling and destruction of Kurdish villages in this little war, could have led the killing of thousands of innocent civilians- and the US continued their support of Turkey. Most government officials in the US will argue that Bush abused his power during his tenure, at least once - if not several times. I am a Bush hater, but I also hated Saddam and I hate Mugabe too. I hate all those in governemnts who abuse their power, but I don't put the blame squarly at them. These people are often voted into power, just like Hitler. It is with them that the ultimate responsibility lies. The writer of this essay, is neither ojective nor aware of the White House resignations during the reign of W. Bush. It's not zero-sum, just because we hate Bush doesn't mean we like the other rotten bastards in power. It's childish to say that.
Stu | Email | Homepage | 04.07.09 - 1:29 am | #

Commenting by HaloScan.com