Bashir Brings on Addiction Expert to Analyze Tea Party: 'Delusion and Psychosis' - 'Could Become Violent'
The media attacks on the Tea Party are becoming truly deplorable.
On Wednesday, MSNBC's Martin Bashir actually brought on an addiction specialist to analyze the nation's most powerful conservative movement, and his opinions were nothing less than vile (video follows with transcript and commentary):
MARTIN BASHIR, HOST: In the battle to claim credit for resolving the debt crisis, the Tea Party has been quick to proclaim victory. No new taxes was their mantra, and there are no new taxes, indeed. For a relatively young and small political group they have pretty much gotten their way since entering the Congress in November. Of course, not everyone is thrilled with the tactics used by Tea Party lawmakers during the debt ceiling crisis.
After reading some of Maureen Dowd’s truly disgusting column in Wednesday’s New York Times - "[The Tea Party] were like cannibals, eating their own party and leaders alive. They were like vampires, draining the country's reputation, credit rating and compassion. They were like zombies, relentlessly and mindlessly coming back again and again to assault their unnerved victims, Boehner and President Obama. They were like the metallic beasts in 'Alien' flashing mouths of teeth inside other mouths of teeth, bursting out of Boehner's stomach every time he came to a bouquet of microphones" - Bashir brought on Peele:
BASHIR: Dr. Stanton Peele is a psychologist whose specialty is addiction, and he's the author of "Seven Tools to Beat Addiction." Good afternoon, sir.
STANTON PEELE, PSYCHOLOGIST: Good afternoon, Martin.
BASHIR: Can I ask you a question: what is the effect of giving people their way all of the time? How does it shape our thinking behavior if by being adamant and dogmatic we get our way?
Before we get to Peele's answer, you should understand who he is. According to his contributor bio at the Huffington Post:
Stanton Peele is an attorney, psychologist, and addiction expert. Beginning with the groundbreaking Love and Addiction in 1975, Dr. Peele has broken down myths about addiction. Among his accomplishments, discussed at his Website, showing that addiction is more than a physiological response to drugs, addressing life processes in treating addiction, and opening the field to harm reduction.
That's right: he's an addiction expert. So exactly why would Bashir and MSNBC consider him a fitting person to analyze members of the nation's fastest growing grassroots political movement?
If you're answer was, "To debase and humiliate them," you'd be right:
PEELE: Well, the way I think about it is they are pursuing goals that can't be achieved. It's sort of like a child who has some kind of fantasy, and they keep asking you to give them things to acquire that, but it's impossible to arrive at the goal that they want. The idyllic paths that they are pursuing probably never existed and certainly not something that we can reach right now.
The idyllic paths that they are pursuing probably never existed? That's not true.
The Tea Party much as its prior iteration the Reform Party wants a balanced budget and for the U.S. government to spend within its means.
For those that have forgotten, it was pressure from Ross Perot and his extremely powerful political movement that really brought attention to the perils of unrestrained deficit spending in the early '90s and not only assisted the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 but also had a hand in creating surpluses years later.
To say this either didn't happen or is no longer attainable is either the height of stupidity or unabashed dishonesty, but let's continue:
BASHIR: So you're saying that they are delusional about the past and adamant about the future.
Well, as I just demonstrated, the Tea Partiers are by no means delusional about the past, but let's see how the good doctor answered:
PEELE: They are adamant about achieving something that's unachievable, which reminds us of a couple of things. It reminds us of delusion and psychosis. It reminds us of addiction because addicts are seeking something that they can't have. They want a state of happiness or nirvana that can't be achieved except through an artificial substance.
They are adamant about achieving something that's unachievable? Once again, a balanced budget is not something that's unachievable.
Furthermore, if wanting such a thing "reminds us of delusion and psychosis," then according to a recent CNN poll, 74 percent of the nation are delusional and psychotic.
With each passing day, more and more Americans are realizing that they share the Tea Party's values as well as its concerns about the direction of this country, and people like Peele are so threatened they feel the need to go on television shows to defame its members with utter nonsense:
PEELE: And it reminds us also of the Norway situation, because when people are thwarted, when a child is thwarted in attaining something that can’t be had, they often strike out, and I think Norway is one example of one kind of reaction to that kind of a frustration.
BASHIR: But going back to the Tea Party in this country, do you think that having achieved their goal, no new taxes, instead of this actually making them think about compromise in the future, it's actually simply going to harden them so this kind of battle, this kind of standoff, this kind of face-off is just going to become routine in Washington?
PEELE: Well, I'm looking at one goal beyond. They want no new taxes because they seek some kind of idyllic past. No new taxes won't bring that. It won't bring them economic recovery, so then they’ll have to turn their attention to some other supposed method for attaining that until they go through all of them. Perhaps they can push through all of them. Perhaps people become discontented. Perhaps they will become discontented. And then I think people are likely to get riled up, and it could become a very angry movement, could potentially become a violent movement.
And there it is. Like most attacks on the Tea Party, the implication of violence seems to be a prerequisite for liberals.
Although Tea Party rallies have been shown to be far more peaceful than most other political gatherings, those on the Left work overtime to present a totally unsupported violent image of the group:
BASHIR: And what about those who oppose this angry group? I mean, do you worry that eventually the people who have been whacked will whack back?
PEELE: I think right now they are mystified. They are thinking how did they succeed? It's like when you look at a child who throws a tantrum. How do they get to win this when it makes no sense what they are looking for? And, we're operating at a symbolic level here, and they control the symbolism now until at some point there's some dramatic horrible clash between all of this symbolism and what really we have to face in what is in our hands.
So the Tea Party is like "a child who throws a tantrum."
And this is the kind of guest MSNBC brings on to analyze the fastest growing political movement in the nation.
Think Peele would have been brought on or even had such views if the Tea Party was a liberal group espousing higher taxes and weath redistribution?
No - I don't either.
(H/T Weekly Standard via NB reader Jammie Younce)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Why psychiatrists think psychologists are full of it.
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:07pm.
This is one example.
Addictions, like most other mental disorders, have a basis in brain chemistry and some forms are amenable to medication-assisted therapy.
Psychologists have their place in treating mental health disorders, but this guy is straying off into agenda-driven garbage.
agenda-driven garbage
Submitted by Dave81 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:20pm.
You nailed it with that line. His arguments were obviously based on ideological beliefs, not science or psychology. I'd say there's a bigger problem with a psychologist who thinks the treatment to someone's "psychological disorder" is a political ideology than there is with people who want to reign in out of control spending.
drsamherman
Submitted by amyshulk on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 7:07pm.
I thought Psychologists had less schooling and couldn't write scripts - that they were just a step above Dear Abby?
Ronald Reagan
Their schooling is different.
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 7:31pm.
Psychologists are NOT physicians. They have no prescriptive authority because they have no formalized training in pharmacology and other sciences that are necessary for managing a patient on a complex medication regimen. Some states are still experimenting with limited prescriptive authority for some psychologists, but only a few.
Their training may include some biology or neuroscience components, but not to the extent that they could ever manage a patient with more complex medical conditions. They are licensed to diagnose and treat a certain number of mental disorders with tools of their profession like cognitive behavioral therapy and other techniques, as are some types of therapists and counselors who are licensed in mental health disciplines.
An important distinction is that to practice psychology in many jurisdictions or to obtain a counseling or therapy license does not require a specific doctoral-level degree like an MD or a DO. Many clinical psychologists do have a PsyD or PhD, but many of them have Master's degrees. Any training they receive in neuro and systemic pharmacology is dictated by the specific program they follow. Their accreditation agency does have standards, but I don't know how much pharmacology it might include.
Physician's Assistants and Nurse Practitioners can be licensed to prescribe on a dependent (supervised by a physician - mostly PAs) or independently with limitations (Nurse Practitioners). The difference is that nurse practitioners have to be practicing registered nurses with appropriate master's level training and clinical experience to obtain admission to those programs. Physician's Assistants have to be licensed and usually have to have a practice supervision agreement with a licensed physician. Most recent Physician's Assistant graduates hold a Master's Degree from an accredited program, while some older licensed PAs received their training in different situations that were grandfathered or otherwise.
Psychiatry is a medical specialty that requires a year of internship (so-called "transition" year - internal medicine or family practice) and then a minimum of three years in a psychiatry residency. We are certified by the same board as neurologists (American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology - I am certified in both) and we have to complete the required medical training through accredited programs, pass the required licensing examinations (USMLE steps) and accredited post-graduate residency and/or fellowships. In psychology and other mental health disciplines, the level and length of required training varies highly based on program (e.g. counselor, therapist, clinical psychologist, etc.).
Sorry about the lecture on medical licensing.
To sum up, psychiatrists are physicians who are trained and licensed in a specific manner to diagnose, treat, prevent and mitigate the organic sources of mental illnesses with medications and other interventions. Psychologists, counselors and therapists are licensed to diagnose and treat within the scope of their license--which at this point excludes prescribing authorities in almost every licensing jurisdiction I can think of at this time.
Two immature psuedo brains, lost in the woods
Submitted by wotsizname on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:36pm.
Addiction is; The inability to stop performing a harmful act. It cannot be cured. Some will affect everyone, others, like alcoholism are selectively addictive, not affecting every person. The remedy is not pop psychology, but a fundamental soothing and cleansing and reorienting of the addict's mind, spirit, intellect, consciousness; or whatever you want to call it. The 12 step programs have the answer, whether you like that or not. Those two commentators have no clue, nor are they smart enough to look for one. I'd like to see the tearful look on their faces when a real counselor sends them to their first AA meeting. In the meantime, maybe a good psychiatrist could bring them back to reality.
drsamherman
Submitted by amyshulk on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 12:12am.
Pithy, concise, and easy to comprehend, I thank you!
I briefly entertained the notion of becoming a Psychiatrist - until I learned how long and intensive the training would be. Type A with massive amounts of lazy {do all the hard work up front so future work would be easy type of lazy} so I then thought briefly on becoming a Psychologist, but being a Type A, I didn't want just half a loaf, so I opted for no loaf ;-P
I was on medical hold {my back} for 1 1/2 years and ran intake and had to assign jobs so at times I felt like Dear Abby! I learned a lot of medical jargon during that time.
During A school in '84 I stressed out and was sent to a Psychologist who told me about what he had to do to get accreditation, but you filled in some {gaping} holes in my knowledge as to Psychiatrists!
Again, I thank you for responding, I *really* appreciate you taking the time!!!
Ronald Reagan
A psychologist from Huffington Post?
Submitted by Texndoc on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:09pm.
Gee, this can only be good.
What's funny: keep it up, the Tea Party is going to grow by millions. Remember when it was so "fringe" and "nothing"?
Texndoc
Submitted by 26CX on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:17am.
That was a good one.
Yup, it's crazy to insist
Submitted by rbosque on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:11pm.
Yup, it's crazy to insist that the gov't not stray from the Constitution, spend no more than it takes in, reduce it's size and end mountains of regulations that are strangling our economy.
Certifiable.
Bashir is beyond absurd. He's a hateful ass.
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:32pm.
BASHIR: Can I ask you a question: what is the effect of giving people their way all of the time?
Answer: We end up with a $14 trillion debt.
Ex-expert?
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:39pm.
Who is it that decides that Peele is an expert? Do you mail in $5.00 and 2 boxtops to "Become an Expert"? What happens when a so-called expert is proven wrong? Do they become and are introduced as an ex-expert?
definition
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:24am.
ex = has-been
spurt = drip under pressure
ergo, "expert" means a has-been drip under pressure.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Jerry Mack
Submitted by amyshulk on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 7:07pm.
Ask Thomas Sowell - he answered it in "Intellectuals and Society"
SHORT ANSWER? Nothing happens to them. I guess they are too big to fail or something?
Ronald Reagan
Law + Psychology --- good grief!
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:55pm.
Stanton Peele is an attorney, psychologist, and addiction expert.
TRANSLATION: Peele spent way too much time in school and ended up with a drug addiction.
Is it any wonder that he thinks a balanced budget is an unachievable fantasy?
PEELE: "And it reminds us also of the Norway situation . . ."
Of course it does, Peele. That's because of the obvious link between balancing a budget and schwacking 76 human beings.
Oh, for crying out loud!!
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:50pm.
Martin Basher jumps yet another shark.
It's like a game to them: Hey! Let's fantasize and make up stuff the Tea Party "might" do.
Perhaps they can push through all of them. Perhaps people become discontented. Perhaps they will become discontented. And then I think people are likely to get riled up, and it could become a very angry movement, could potentially become a violent movement.
What the H kind of deluded psychobabble is that?
Holy Cannoli!!
That's a stretch not seen since Joan Rivers' last face lift!!
What's next? A call for the government to crack down on them before it goes that far???
Bashir would be better off bringing on a camel-flea exterminator
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:49pm.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Yo:Dave
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:52pm.
Good one!
Come on Bashir*
Submitted by cajun2 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 9:58pm.
If you read this here is a suggestion that could save your network some money. Just invite a TEA Party conservative on your show and let the viewers decide who we should fear.
MSDNC kicks it up a notch
Submitted by lesterwink23 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:05pm.
Apparently, Bashir and Prissy Matthews have a bet going as to who can be the most pompous, TEA Party bashing-ist ass on MSDNC. Pathetic
I just forced myself to read
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:52pm.
I just forced myself to read this horse manure psycho-babble academia bullcrap.................that's all it is. And this guy is also a lawyer??? I'd say he's a multi-tasker when it comes to BS............he can spew it three different ways, but it's all the same when it's over...........
Maybe he ought to 'psyco-analyze' some of these so-called 'journalists' that are talking to him............or better yet, maybe he can give us a good analysis of Boy Barry - now there's a REAL Fruedien piece of work!!!!
Here's the funny part: he got it all wrong.
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 1:19pm.
Peele's conclusions are based entirely on his personal biases, thus eliminating their validity. I would challenge him to point out which particular facets of Tea Party behavior correspond to any Axis I/II diagnostic criteria in DSM-IV(TR). I would also challenge him to produce a corroborating diagnosis from a licensed psychiatrist without a similar political agenda. Psychologists and some therapists can diagnose and treat, but they are not licensed physicians and can therefore not address underlying biological factors of mental illness.
drsamherman
Submitted by amyshulk on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 7:13pm.
What do you think of Robin of Berkeley http://www.robinofberkeley.com/
This in particular was in line with how I viewed him from the jump:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/is_obama_a_narcissist.html
Ronald Reagan
I agree with her assessment of Odumbo's narcissism.
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:05pm.
Only I would add the descriptor "malignant" to her observations.
The "malignant" is a term that some of us older docs used to describe a patient completely devoid of positive intentions or capacity for the same. Ear Leader is a malignant narcissist in my view.
drsamherman
Submitted by amyshulk on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 12:33am.
Before the election, I ran into a friend {more of an acquaintance} who had just gotten out of the hospital {again} having been put there by her husband. While talking to her, I said she should read Sam Vaknin "Malignant Self-love: Narcissism Revisited", that I was considering buying the book, and that I thought she may benefit from it. I never did buy the book, and she is still with him. I think she wanted me to fix things for her, but she doesn't get that only she has that power, not I.
I had learned of Sam Vaknin when I was trying to figure out who Obama reminded me of {my dad it turns out} then I read Robin, and saw others applying the Narcissism label, but not the Malignant label.
I had hoped what I saw in Obama was the part of me that is indecisive, {I call it being a Charlie Brown} but after he was elected I sat open mouthed in shock at what he did with GM - most importantly, what he did TO the bondholders! I still think he's indecisive, but not because he is attempting to listen to all sides and make an informed judgment!
Ronald Reagan
Didn't drsam already render an opinion on the musings
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:59pm.
of Robin of Berkeley, or am I thinking of an even more trenchant published indictment of Obama's alleged personality disorder which was the subject of his analysis.
I have always understood the seeds of malignant narcissism were sown in early childhood, manifested by the early 20's [not so certain on that point] and generally peaking by the late 30's, but persisting throughout the lifetime of the narcissist. Often difficult to detect, even by trained professionals, it is considered to be virtually incurable, although the symptomology can respond positively to intensive therapy in the relatively rare cases of self-awareness.
Jer
I'd like to see Dr. Sam's rendered musings on the---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 10:53pm.
musings rendered by a retired lawyer rendered when the barrister amusingly pontificated about Obama's alleged personality disorder.
I have always understood the seeds of malignant liberalism were sown, or in the case of a liberal, spawned, in early socialistic spasms, the cause of which were attributed to the desire of most youngsters to be loved and appreciated by all. While not at all difficult to detect, especially by the parasitic welfare class, malignant liberalism is considered to be virtually intolerable by most American taxpayers of the conservative class.
While malignant liberalism might possibly respond positively to intensive therapy, there are no instances on record of any practicing liberal being even remotely aware that a malignancy has taken root in their central political core.
Respectfully submitted,
MD, but not an MD. :o)
Matthew...drsam rendered a general analysis of yours truly
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:15pm.
many months ago. My recollection is that I was found to be even more profoundly psychologically damaged than the President.
Jer
Damn, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:18pm.
doesn't speak too well of my argumentative capabilities then, do it? :o)
MD
Don't sell yourself short, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:26pm.
It requires a rare capacity for intellectual dexterity to sustain an argument with a lunatic.
Jer
Your telling
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:29pm.
Us?
Glad to know you can
Submitted by ant on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:37pm.
Glad to know you can appreciate what it has been like for us dealing with the left all these years.
I'm sure it's tough, ant...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:43pm.
Handling all five of us here must be quite a challenge.
;-)
Jer
Well, hell..
Submitted by ant on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 12:05am.
That's a lunatic a day, excluding weekends. Almost the same as taking the subway to work.
How About...
Submitted by KornKing on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:53pm.
the millions that earned 13K at their government "make work job", had 1300 w/Hfrom their paycheck to cover their FICA,and got 9K "refund" from EITC?
ARE THEY
Submitted by KornKing on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 10:56pm.
Going to "share in the sacrifice"?
28 years
Submitted by grammajane on Wed, 08/03/2011 - 11:29pm.
I worked in a drug/alcohol center some 28 years and all I can say is this "expert" is in need of some very serious education. He has not a clue about addiction and God help any patient whom he treats. Their chances of recovery would be zero.He and Bashier are a threat to society with their ill-informed BS
No self-respecting
Submitted by tcm14 on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 12:09am.
No self-respecting psychologist would ever comment on something so far outside of their discipline. Addiction therapy is something that a lot of politicians could probably use, but beyond that an addiction therapist has no business commenting "profesionally" on political ideology.
Besides, if anyone sounds "delusional" and "psychotic" it is Maureen Dowd, with her comparison of the tea party to cannibals, vampires, zombies, and alien beasts. If this psychologist is worried about someone inciting violence, he might start right there.
Actually He Is Right
Submitted by Avitar on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 1:02am.
The model for psychologists calls for the behavior of sheep in a "health" person. In their book only a sick person fights back. He is also right in that if the elections are fixed to a degree that it is no longer possible to defeat the progressives then there could be violence. Tea Party is made up of the kind of people who built this country and they are eagles and grizzlies not sheep.
Like the founding fathers eleven score and fifteen year ago the Tea Partiers will fight against tyranny. This is the concern of Tea Party people do they face tyrants?
Liberals like to talk about violence and they reference
Submitted by johnsonl on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:44am.
it quite often in their ramblings.
They have no clue what real violence is. They lack the courage and moral fortitude to do violence. They smarm, snark, undermine, lie, propagandize and brainwash. They are capable of individual acts, such as Jared Loughner's heinous deed. They could never do violence on a national level. They are built to protest, whine and kvetch, not fight.
THE TEA PARTY DIDN'T WIN!
Submitted by gopcongress on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 1:40am.
I realize this is a broken record, but I need to keep reminding everyone...OBAMA WON BIG this time around. The reason he won is that he deflected the economy to the GOP, and in extension the Tea Party. This gives the media template to allow them to proclaim a victory for the Tea Party, when all we got is the preliminary steps for QE3, giving more money to Democratic constituents.
Since the economy will keep going in the doldrums, the media / democratic party will keep on blaming the Tea Part for malaise. This is all intended to win back the independents from moving to the Tea Party or at least the Republican Party.
In short, the RINO's caved, and you know the media likes to portray RINO's as Tea Party adherents when it suits them. Their entire goal is to keep people from joining the Tea Party.
The bottom line: 2012 will become the biggest and most fundamental election in US history, save for perhaps during civil war times. If the Tea party does not control the house, and we do not control the senate with mainly conservative members (no "gangs"), and of COURSE Obama is not president, the America will forever change to the worse as much of Obama's acceleration of the New Deal/Great Society programs will be cemented in.
The best I can say is this: I hope that this shameful execution of the budget "crisis" by the RINO leadership has fully been shown the peoople that there are only TWO factions of pragmatic circumstances: Constitutional Tea Party conservative/libertarians, and communists. No middle ground, period.
The congressional tea party members are the most vital individuals to act so far in the 21st century, and represent the last hope the planet faces for individual rights, not just in America. Our world's entire legacy rests on their shoulders for the next two years.
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
introspection?
Submitted by mayjon on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 2:40am.
90-95% of the blacks still support this guy as if he's their savior. Gas could be $100 a gallon, real unemployment is 18%, only the obama drug will suffice. The libs/progs want the tax rates to go back to the eisenhower rate, and want more government in our lives. So who's really addicted, delusional, and psychotic? The only way for obama to win in 2012 is by legalizing all the illegals and voting early and voting often. Anyone who cares about the next generation and their own paychecks will not put this black marxist back in office.
Conservatives believe there
Submitted by ant on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 2:27am.
Conservatives believe there can be a Utopia,a realization of past fantasies and are intent on making their own reality, throwing tantrums when that goal seems out of reach? Sounds more like a definition of libtardism to me. But, hey, who am I to judge from all my observations of libtard behavior and their stated goals? I'm just a racist...oops... I mean terrorist.
Don't forget..
Submitted by Calypso Jones on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:17am.
Mafia. Libs are hoping one of these labels will soon resonate with.....someone,.
Mafia now too? Couldn't that
Submitted by ant on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:36am.
Mafia now too? Couldn't that be considered a racial stereotype? I say Republicans throw that back at them, it's the least they could do.
Wow
Submitted by donabernathy on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 4:27am.
ya can't make this shit up
roflmao
Libs are terrified of the Tea Party.
Submitted by johnsonl on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 6:33am.
They know that we control the conversation now. We need to continue this momentum through the election.
What an interesting series of coincidences
Submitted by Calypso Jones on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:22am.
Just yesterday that old news of the Feds keeping their eyes on home grown terrorism pops up on the radio again. Is it just a coincidence that tea partiers have been likened to terrorists lately? The report on the radio told of how the feds were teaching local police to recognize the signs....addiction? delusional? waving the US flag? and to check social websites. Also, you libs keep a lookout for your neighborhood home grown terrorists. (hint: tea party sgns/dont tread on me flags)
Don't be paranoid
Submitted by Blonde on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 10:27am.
....particularly when everything you say is true!
The left is out of lies that are remotely believable, but since the MsM has given them a pass on all of their other lies, they're stepping up the rhetoric, calling us "hostage takers" and "terrorists". And they have Reno V.2.0 on the job...too bad for her people are sick of her Gestapo TSA.
I just saw an interesting segment on Fox, Rich Lowry vs. a blonde democrat strategist, Marsh??? It was about the ratcheted up rhetoric the democrats are using, i.e. terrorist, hostage taker. When asked why, particularly in light of the Giffords incident and the call for nicer words, the democrats were acting like this....all she had was "Joe Wilson shouted 'you lied'". That was the sum total of her argument. Over and over again. And gosh, he raised $1 million after that. That is their justification for the democrats and the media talking heads calling millions and millions of us, AND our elected congressional reps, terrorists.
So there's the talking point. It's Joe Wilson's fault for shouting at Obama something I shout at my TV at least 3 times a day when he's babbling.
The left is going down, badly, and they know it. They don't have an idea of how to get out of the corner they've painted themselves into....except trying to pin on us what they've been doing. It's not working. Look at how they denied their losing positions prior to the 2010 elections. They got their heads handed to them, and still they pretend not to understand why.
And just to clarify, for anyone who thinks I was actually calling Calypso paranoid, my sarcasm meter was on 11.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde,
Submitted by ant on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:13pm.
I also believe the left and their media minions are going down and they sense it. I feel I must throw in my two cents and suggest that when it becomes clearly obvious their time is at a nadir, we must continue kicking them, in the most civil manner, of course.
well
Submitted by kinijane on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:21am.
Isn't the tea party wonderful? Doing exactly what they were elected to do....how refreshing......what is equally wonderful is how tight the liberals shorts are.....they forgot to add racist in their rhetoric. I think they see the writing on the wall and now instead of grandma going over a cliff, now we are crazy......LOL.
Yep
Submitted by JLin on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:05am.
Well said.
Progressives
Submitted by TxVet on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 8:53am.
Re-read his comments and change Tea Party to Progressives. It makes a lot more sense.
Agreed
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:13am.
Having lived in a barracks room with two heroin addicts back in the '70s, there is a remarkably similar pattern to the progressives' fixation on spending and borrowing.
GETTING THE NEXT "FIX"
- "Lend me $20 bucks, man. I gotta score. I'll die without it!"
- "Just this one more time, man. After that, I'm going clean, but I just can't do it now, ya see."
NOT GETTING WHAT THEY DEMAND
- "You don't care if I live or die, man. What the hell is wrong with you?!"
GETTING WHAT THEY WANT
- "Oh, thanks, man. I won't forget ever this. I'll pay you back next payday, I promise."
Very similar to the crap the progressives were spewing.
Deport these foreign agitators posing as newspeople
Submitted by JLin on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:04am.
Morgan, Bashir, Ammanpour, Zacharia, get them all out. Get used to it people. We are already in a war for America, and it is being fought with words and propaganda.
I think Dick Morris is actually right to be optimistic...
Submitted by JLin on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:12am.
He says Obama will be thrashed in 2012. I agree, along with his Democrat collaborators in Congress. There is a real groundswell political tsunami building. The question is, will we once again let the liberal demon off the hook? The brainwashing of the culture is so complete that I am not sure if we can actually sustain a long-term social and economic recovery without totally reforming the public education system. It is depressing to consider.
I'd like to think Dick was right this time
Submitted by Calypso Jones on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:32am.
but i don't think he's been right once in the past in his predictions. Has He?
Being a lawyer says it all.
Submitted by jessieH on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:30am.
Being a lawyer says it all. Lawyers are the ones that put us into debt. Count how many polititians are lawyers. The only thing a lawyer knows is how to twist the laws to their advantage. They're bottom feeders.
The most disconcerting thing
Submitted by Semus on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 9:38am.
The most disconcerting thing about this is they'd like nothing better for these "Tea Party" members to become violent.
First mistake...
Submitted by Morganfrost on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 10:22am.
Bashir's first mistake on this was beginning with a citation to Maureen Dowd as if her purple prose were a recitation of facts, rather than an angry rant.
His second mistake was to get a psychologist to opine on political possibilities and then conflate them with psychological conditions. Pretty much everything else he did was a mistake, too...
Having said that, however, I think the idea of bringing psychology and psychiatry into the news is an excellent idea. For example, what if we were to inject Martin Bashir with a heavy dose of thorazine immediately before his show-- would his inclination towards sensationalism and outrageous statements flatten with his affect? What about electric shock therapy? Would it affect his delivery of his opinions, or would it just be lots of fun to watch? How about trying erectile disfunction medications? Perhaps if Martin's problems are really sexual, he wouldn't be so angry on Viagra-- we could even put together a really cool chart that showed how flaccidity varied inversely with bitterness; the graphics would be hysterical! Finally, I think it would be fun to explore some of Martin's unresolved oedipal issues. Maybe he should be required to deliver his opinions while viewing various slides of his mother... a strategically placed blood pressure cuff might clue us in to the extent to which the pictures were arousing him. Maybe the Obama administration could give me a thirty billion dollar grant to run some of these experiments.
NO Mr Peele,
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 10:26am.
Citizens forming a Tea Party and participating in the political market place does NOT "remind us also of the Norway situation." Only a psycho quack would think of the Norwegian terrorist in the context of free citizens participating in a political movement like the Tea Party.
Why
Submitted by azgal602 on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:19am.
doesn't Bashir just go back home to where ever it is. I am sick and tired of foreigners coming to our country and having a bully pulpit to spew hatred. We have enough Americans born here doing that. JUST GO HOME AND BADMOUTH YOUR OWN COUNTRY
As Pee Wee said ..
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:22am.
"I know you are but what am I?"
I wonder
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:27am.
what these guys would have to say about Chris Matthews' language of late. Talk about threats of psychotic violence--yeesh!
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Now you gotta admit...
Submitted by liberalsarefunny on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 12:03pm.
it's pretty funny when someone on that little network refers to someone else as delusional...now that's funny...
Talk about unattainable goals!
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 2:06pm.
"Well, the way I think about it is they are pursuing goals that can't be achieved."
Like the goal of government "investments" into the economy as a remedy for unemployment? Let's see, in excess of three TRILLION dollars in "investments" overt the last three yeas, and unemployment increases by several million per year. Yea, "government investment," that's an attainable goal, if your goal is to displace half of the American workforce!
What other "goals' have the supposed "sane" democrats achieved in the last three years?
The goal of producing a budget? Not attainable even when they controlled both Houses of Congress AND the White House!
The "goal" of deficit reduction? Not attainable as spending has increased by over a third, over a TRILLION dollars per year, since the Democrats gained control.
The "goal" of ending the war in Iraq? Not attainable as we still have troops there, troops who are still in harms way.
The "goal" of closing GITMO and trying terrorists in US Courts? Not attainable even after spending BILLIONS trying to do so.
The "goal" of achieving agreement on the various "global warming summits?" Not attainable even with a Presidential appearance! (but they did agree, each time, to agree to something in the future.)
Obama, and the rest of the Democrats, couldn't even achieve the "goal" of a Chicago Olympics!
And this barley scratches the surface of the democrat's unattainable "goals" in just the last three years!
The majority of the democrats "goals" have been unattainable, including the "goal" of raising taxes on just the "super rich." And, yet, it's the Tea Party that's delusional?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
The Tea Party Won Nothing
Submitted by rfburnhertz on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 2:10pm.
The mantra "the Tea Party won" is a progressive mantra.
It's purpose is to place blame in the not to distant future.
To the few Tea Party folks and organizations who are claiming victory, STOP!
You are being foolish, there is no victory here for the Tea Party or for America as a whole.
When fools like Martin Bashir and other MSM'ers and Tea Party haters try to assign victory to the Tea Party in the "debate", we in the Tea Party need to stand up and tell them we do not claim victory. No one is putting this piece of crap deal at my feet and telling me I had anything to do with creating it.
It was created by big gov types.
I sure the hell am not taking blame when this things goes from bad to worse.
http://hearus-now.org/?p=2594
That is why only sarah will
Submitted by countryfirst on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 4:25pm.
That is why only sarah will do as president, she is not a lawyer, bachmann is so are most of them, I am not sure about romney but he is a rino
Good God, Read Up On This Guy
Submitted by fatrat on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:11pm.
Stanton Peele is a quack who thinks alcoholics can return to normal drinking.
Mr Bashier did more harm to himself than to the Tea Party. :D
Thinks everything is an addiction
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 11:15pm.
He's is a quack
What A LAUGH!!
Submitted by redraider on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 8:45am.
These crackpots on MSLSD, as Mark Levin likes to call it, are a REAL LAUGH!! They act like they are so knowledgeable and official as they look, in depth, at this phenomenon, the Tea Party. This is HILARIOUS!! It's like a very dry, sarcastic skit from Saturday Night Live. Except that they believe and are delusional enough to think that this is legitimate!!! Talk about delusion and being out of touch and seeking something that can't be attained! What they want is what can't be attained; a perfect socialist state where everyone has everything they need and everyone is happy and all live happily under the caring, beneficence of the government, and no one will have a care in the world thanks to Barack Obama. WHAT A LAUGH!! These dweebs are completely lost.