Posts Tagged ‘Charles Krauthamer’

Am I A Hate-Monger?

October 14, 2014

Am I A Hate-Monger?

Someone recently read a couple of my blogs and then concluded the following:

“This guy is either so accurate that we should simply hang-the-president (and maybe ALL Democrats) –or he is just a hate-monger, as bad as ISIL?”

It’s hard to know how to answer such a question in a way that would convince any occasional reader of my blog of the purity of my patriotic values and intentions. My experience with many critics of anyone’s positions, on anything, is that a large number of individuals cannot be convinced of anything in conflict with their original beliefs.

Never the less, this is my answer to those who might remotely believe either parts of the preceding quote.

My blog is comprised of themes that build upon each other. If one reads many of them, or has somewhat kept-up, they will come to know what my defining principles and values are. They will then be more likely to get my “big picture”.

I can assure my readers that the central theme of my work is not “hate mongering”. However, I will confess to “hating” all political policies and court-mandated changes to America’s laws and cultural practices that have made this Nation the singular world power of the 20th century…and now represent design changes that are accelerating America’s decline.

There are several things that I believe true of myself and I conscientiously work to align my behaviors with these values and precepts.

I try to live my life by Christian precepts and ideals. “Hate mongering” would be a violation of all of this. But, being painfully truthful as I seek to identify the causes and outcomes of America’s elective and self-inflicted decline would be central to all of them.

I am a patriot in ways that resemble the patriotism of our Founding Fathers. Therefore, anyone who would blatantly attempt to transform America into a socialist/federalist state is my enemy. I do not hate President Obama, though I hate his perfectly consistent actions which I judge are designed (by his own admissions and behavior patterns) to moved America towards an open border, progressive/radical liberal, one-world government, and to destroy our hegemony among the world’s Nation States.

I agree with Charles Krauthammer, that it is a fool’s fantasy to believe that America’s abdication of its role as a world leader will lead to anything other than chaos and nuclear disaster exploding from the resulting power vacuum.

I would not call for President Obama’s death by “hanging” or any other means. I call for his impeachment and removal from office in disgrace. The same goes for any politician, no matter their party, who betrays the intent and values of our Founding Fathers, as clearly documented in our Constitution.

Finally, I am a practicing psychologist who was trained as a behaviorist.
As a behaviorist, I am happy to listen to what people say and what they say they think…until, that is, much of what they say is in conflict with their behavior. Once this happens, I disregard what they say and predict their future actions based only upon their past behavior patterns. When an individual lies to me over and over again, I find it easy to predict their behavior. Their behavior becomes just as easy as if they were scrupulously honest.

I have also spent 36 years studying and teaching the determinants of human behavior and their probable outcomes as a university professor of psychology. Also, based upon almost 40 years of private practice as a psychologist (and 73 years of life’s experiences), when one’s talk does not align with their behavior, my position is: B.S. walks and behavior talks.

In the following blog, I list the rules that socialist/communists use for “Transforming” societies. Please review them and tell me which of these rules/goals you have not seen Obama powerfully facilitate.

Considering more recent events, how do you feel about President Obama’s dismantling our military, purging experienced officers from its ranks and shackling its power in the face of what is now WWIII? A war now growing to world-wide proportions, largely as a result of President Obama’s refusing to take the advise of his top military advisers.

How about Obama’s failure to maintain America’s gains in the Middle East, won only by our bloody sacrifices there? The recent new evidence of his lies about stand-down orders in Benghazi? His refusal to identify clear terrorists attacks in America as what they really are? His order to send 3000 or more of our troops to Ebola infected Africa? His refusing to stop American flights to and from Ebola infected areas of the world? How about his defunct position that Americans have nothing to fear from Ebola infections coming to our Homeland?

Do not listen to what Obama says, watch what he does.

Obama is not stupid and he is not incompetent..he is brilliant. He is, in my studied judgment, an amazingly successful socialist revolutionary as well as an Islamic sympathizer. He is an enemy of America’s own traditional religions, as well as America’s economic and socio-political ways of life.

Evaluate the following and make-up your own mind.

I would abhor to be thought-of as a “hate-monger on a par with ISIL” Yikes!

I love Thoreau and Emerson. One or the other said, and I must paraphrase: To know the true course of a sailing ship, one cannot evaluate its present course; they must enlarge their perspective to see its many tacks. Only then can they see its rumbline pointing straight to its true goal.

I have now published over 1200 blogs. I invite you to sample some of them, back to 2009, when I began this effort. Only then are you likely to understand my true motives.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D, 10/14/14
Professor Emeritus of Psychology
Health Services Provider in Psychology

Style Vs. Substance

January 15, 2010

Style Vs. Substance

I have a very strong admiration for Charles Krauthammer’s ability to frame and analyze a political/social issue.

When he writes on a topic that I consider to be of central importance to our collective well-being, I will post his column and ferventlyhope that  you will read it. You should know that I when I do this it is because he has said what I would wish to say, but he has said it with greater wisdom and clarity than I can provide at this time.

I will continue to write my own blogs as I am moved by historical, current, and future events to do so.

The following is written by Charles Krauthammer. It is reproduced  from The Patriot Post.

V. Thomas Mawhinney, Ph.D.,  1/15/10


One Year Out: The Fall

By Charles Krauthammer (Archive) · Friday, January 15, 2010

WASHINGTON — What went wrong? A year ago, he was king of the world. Now President Obama’s approval rating, according to CBS, has dropped to 46 percent — and his disapproval rating is the highest ever recorded by Gallup at the beginning of an (elected) president’s second year.

A year ago, he was leader of a liberal ascendancy that would last 40 years (James Carville). A year ago, conservatism was dead (Sam Tanenhaus). Now the race to fill Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in bluest of blue Massachusetts is surprisingly close, with a virtually unknown state senator bursting on the scene by turning the election into a mini-referendum on Obama and his agenda, most particularly health care reform.

A year ago, Obama was the most charismatic politician on earth. Today the thrill is gone, the doubts growing — even among erstwhile believers.

Liberals try to attribute Obama’s political decline to matters of style. He’s too cool, detached, uninvolved. He’s not tough, angry or aggressive enough with opponents. He’s contracted out too much of his agenda to Congress.

These stylistic and tactical complaints may be true, but they miss the major point: The reason for today’s vast discontent, presaged by spontaneous national Tea Party opposition, is not that Obama is too cool or compliant but that he’s too left.

It’s not about style; it’s about substance. About which Obama has been admirably candid. This out-of-nowhere, least-known of presidents dropped the veil most dramatically in the single most important political event of 2009, his Feb. 24 first address to Congress. With remarkable political honesty and courage, Obama unveiled the most radical (in American terms) ideological agenda since the New Deal: the fundamental restructuring of three pillars of American society — health care, education and energy.

Then began the descent — when, more amazingly still, Obama devoted himself to turning these statist visions into legislative reality. First energy, with cap-and-trade, an unprecedented federal intrusion into American industry and commerce. It got through the House, with its Democratic majority and Supreme Soviet-style rules. But it will never get out of the Senate.

Then, the keystone: a health care revolution in which the federal government will regulate in crushing detail one-sixth of the U.S. economy. By essentially abolishing medical underwriting (actuarially based risk assessment) and replacing it with government fiat, Obamacare turns the health insurance companies into utilities, their every significant move dictated by government regulators. The public option was a sideshow. As many on the right have long been arguing, and as the more astute on the left (such as The New Yorker’s James Surowiecki) understand, Obamacare is government health care by proxy, single-payer through a facade of nominally “private” insurers.

At first, health care reform was sustained politically by Obama’s own popularity. But then gravity took hold, and Obamacare’s profound unpopularity dragged him down with it. After 29 speeches and a fortune in squandered political capital, it still will not sell.

The health care drive is the most important reason Obama has sunk to 46 percent. But this reflects something larger. In the end, what matters is not the persona but the agenda. In a country where politics is fought between the 40-yard lines, Obama has insisted on pushing hard for the 30. And the American people — disorganized and unled but nonetheless agitated and mobilized — have put up a stout defense somewhere just left of midfield.

Ideas matter. Legislative proposals matter. Slick campaigns and dazzling speeches can work for a while, but the magic always wears off.

It’s inherently risky for any charismatic politician to legislate. To act is to choose and to choose is to disappoint the expectations of many who had poured their hopes into the empty vessel — of which candidate Obama was the greatest representative in recent American political history.

Obama did not just act, however. He acted ideologically. To his credit, Obama didn’t just come to Washington to be someone. Like Reagan, he came to Washington to do something — to introduce a powerful social democratic stream into America’s deeply and historically individualist polity.

Perhaps Obama thought he’d been sent to the White House to do just that. If so, he vastly over-read his mandate. His own electoral success — twinned with handy victories and large majorities in both houses of Congress — was a referendum on his predecessor’s governance and the post-Lehman financial collapse. It was not an endorsement of European-style social democracy.

Hence the resistance. Hence the fall. The system may not always work, but it does take its revenge.

(c) 2010, The Washington Post Writers Group

%d bloggers like this: