Thursday, February 21, 2008

Top psychiatrist concludes liberals clinically nuts

Top psychiatrist concludes liberals clinically nuts- Eminent psychiatrist makes case ideology is mental disorder
Posted: February 15, 20083:40 pm Eastern© 2008 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.
"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."
While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to "the vast right-wing conspiracy."
For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.
Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

"A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do," he says. "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do."
Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:
creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Newt Gingrich's Crystal Ball on the GOP

Take a few minutes and listen to Newt's speech to CPAC. Is is telling about how Conservatives have done sucha bad job of leading change in government and have become what they hate in Liberals... politically correct bureaucrats.

Click here to link to the video page

I would love to hear your comments on this speech.

Gingrich is my hero and one of the only shining stars in the Conservative movement.

Immigration Gumballs

If you don't think thatthere is acurrent immgration problem, then you need to watch this video and see what kind of legacy that we are passing onto our children and grandchildren.

This isn't about politics, it's about the government lying to us about this pending problems that we are constantly denying in the name of polictically correct lies.

Click here

Michelle Malkin: FISA Wins Approval!

The FISA fight: Nutroots lose, America wins
By Michelle Malkin • February 12, 2008 12:51 PM
I’ve been keeping you up-to-date on the FISA fight in the Senate (see here and here). This morning, a series of votes took place and you’ll be happy to know that the defeatist Dems were defeated.
Carter Wood at the NAM’s ShopFloor blog sums up the votes:
The Senate has just rejected an amendment to S. 2248, the FISA amendments legislation, by Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Russell Feingold (D-WI) that would have stripped out the retroactive immunity for telecommunication companies.
The vote was 31-67. Roll Call vote here.
This is a clear statement in favor of effective, legal surveillance of suspected terrorists overseas, and an endorsement of good corporate citizens aiding in the protection of Americans. A very important vote…
…UPDATE (12:13 p.m.) Second string of Kos commentary here. Quotes e-mail from Senator Reid’s office: “If, as appears likely, none of the amendments to strike or modify the provisions of the bill concerning retroactive immunity are adopted, we expect Sen. Reid to oppose cloture and oppose final passage of the bill.”
UPDATE (12:34 p.m.): Cloture invoked, 69-29. Senate now breaks.
The Senate Roll Coll votes are here.
Dow Jones dispatch reports:
The U.S. Senate Tuesday voted down an amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that aimed to strip out immunity for telecommunications companies alleged to have cooperated with the government’s warrantless wiretapping program.
The result of the vote makes it increasingly likely that phone companies will receive retroactive immunity from civil lawsuits over their involvement in the controversial wiretapping program.
The development comes even though Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and other senior Democrats have argued in favor of the amendment.
The vote was 67-31 against removing the immunity provision.
The Senate has been divided over the legislation underpinning the warrantless wiretapping program for weeks. At the heart of the debate has been over whether the phone companies should be sheltered from the dozens of lawsuits they potentially face.
The amendment was backed by Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis.
In last-minute arguments before the vote, Dodd pointed out that three out of four Congressional committees that had considered the immunity issue had decided against granting retroactive legal cover to the phone companies.
Only the Senate Intelligence Committee’s version of the FISA legislation includes an immunity provision. It is that version which is currently on the Senate floor. Last year, the House approved legislation which made no mention of immunity.
Even if the final Senate bill includes immunity, the matter will have to decided at a meeting between leaders of both houses of Congress to resolve differences over legislation.
The White House has threatened to veto any bill that doesn’t include immunity for the phone companies.
Lawmakers hope to conclude voting on the FISA legislation later Tuesday.
The nutroots are despondent. Profanity-spewing despondent. See here and more here.
***
Ed Morrissey:
Telecom immunity should have never taken this long to approve. The immunity covers companies who received assurances from the Department of Justice that their cooperation broke no laws, and they cooperated to help defend the US from attack. Their reward for trust and assistance should not be billion-dollar class-action lawsuits, which would have been nothing more than a back-door attempt to kneecap intelligence operations that kept this nation safe for more than six years after 9/11.
The House has to put this bill into motion now, and the clock is ticking. The Democrats set up these sunset provisions as a means to pressure the White House, and once again they have had the opposite effect. Faced against bipartisan agreement in the Senate on immunity, expect the House to quietly acquiesce.
John Boeher’s office sent me the following this morning:
It speaks volumes about the national security priorities of congressional Democrats that they have failed to permanently close the terrorist loophole. And it certainly speaks volumes that they have failed to do so because they have bowed to the demands of those on the Left seeking to derail common sense terrorist surveillance laws that would help keep our country safe from attack.
With the deadline coming this Saturday, will Democratic leaders finally work with Republicans to permanently close the terrorist loophole in our nation’s terrorist surveillance laws and extend appropriate liability protections for third parties who have stepped up to the plate in the interest of our national security? Or will the Majority’s allies on the Left demand that Congress backs down from this responsibility once again, kicking the can even farther down the road while the safety of Americans at home and abroad hangs in the balance?

Welfare Ain't What It Used To Be....

Welfare Ain’t What It Used To Be
December 22, 2007 by jimbyrd

Sharon Jasper has been victimized. Sharon Jasper has been rabidly wronged. She has become a Section 8 carcass–the victim of ever changing public housing policies.
Sharon Jasper has spent 57 or her 58 years dedicated to one cause and one cause only, and has nothing to show for her dedicated servitude. She has lived in Section 8 housing all but 1 of her 58 years. It was a legacy passed down from her parents who moved into Section 8 housing in 1949 when she was six months old. She has passed the legacy down to her children, but fears they may have to get jobs to pay for the utilities and deposits. She laments about her one year hiatus from the comfort of her Section 8 nirvana, ” I tried it for a year..you know…working and all. It’s not anything I would want to go through again, or wish on anyone in my family, but I am damn proud of that year.”
Sharon was moved out of her St. Bernard housing project after hurricane Katrina and into a new, yet albeit, substandard quarterage. As can be noted from the above photo of her new Section 8 home, it is repugnant and not suitable for someone of Sharon Jasper’s seniority status in the system. “Don’t be fooled by them hardwood floors,” says Sharon. “They told me they were putting in scraped wood floors cause it was more expensive and elegant, but I am not a fool–that was just a way to make me take scratched up wood because I am black. The 60 inch HD TV? It may look nice but it is not a plasma. It’s not a plasma because I’m black. Now they want me to pay a deposit and utilities on this dump.” “Do you know why?”
She has held her tongue in silence through the years of abuse by the system, but it came to a head at the New Orlean’s city council meeting where discussions were under way about the tearing down of the St. Bernard projects. When a near riotous exchange between groups opposing the tearing down of St. Bernard and groups wanting the dilapidated buildings torn down and newer ones built, Sharon unleashed verbal hell with her once silenced tongue. The object of her oratory prowess was an acquiescent poor white boy in attendance. The context of her scathing rebuke was, “Just because you pay for my house, my car, my big screen and my food, I will not be treated like a slave!” and “Back up and Shut up! Shut up, white boy! Shut up, white boy!”
Recapping from the mental log of the city council minutes in her head, Sharon repines, “Our families have been displaced all over the United States. They are being forced to commit crimes in cities they are unfamiliar with. It is a very uncomfortable situation for them. Bring them back, then let’s talk about redevelopment.”
To try bring notice to her tribulation, Sharon has graciously allowed parts of her slummy abode to be photographed for documentation of her abuse.

Above is the dinning room the housing authority pawned off on her. Sharon will acknowledge that it is a nice and all, but the “man” knows she has 25 family members to feed and the size is inadequate. She believes she is the recipient of malevolence by the “man”.

Above is her bathroom. This was done solely to taunt her because the “man” knows she is going to have to start paying her utility bills and this was only done to run up her water and towel bill. Once again, she is the recipient of malevolence by the “man”.

Above is the stocked wine cellar that came with her new Section 8 house. Sharon states this is another example of the white man is taking advantage of a poor black women. “Look at all these bottles of wine”, she said–”they are worthless. Just another example of thinking I am stupid. All this wine is at least 10 years old and some of it is 20 years old, you know the white man kept all the fresh stuff for himself. I ain’t that stupid.”
Sharon directs the reporter’s attention across the street to Duncan Plaza where homeless people are living in tents and states that, “I might do better out there with one of these tents.” She further lamented her sentiments about her situation,” I might be poor, but I don’t have to live poor.”
Sharon Jasper is not going down without a fight. She is the head of a tenant association that works with the AFL-CIO’s Gulf Coast Revitalization Program who is working closely with the Congressional Black Caucus, who is working very closely with Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to get a bill, operation Section 8 Time Share, passed in Congress. The bill would allow people of seniority, like Sharon Jasper, who have been a loyal recipient of Section 8 housing for a minimum of 30 years, to be able to use a special Section 8 permit for a time share vacation home 2 weeks out of the year in a tropical location.