Education, politics, and anything else that catches my attention.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Hatred of the President
I've mocked and ridiculed those with Bush Derangement Syndrome, but here's a post wherein the author uses intellect, reason, and common sense to explain its lack of value--and how it harms the person who suffers under it.
Bush derangement syndrome has reached unbelievable levels. The very sad part of it is that the people practicing it are doing so because of hatred rather than reason. I'm reminded of a quotation by James Baldwin. "Hatred, which could destroy so much, never failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law."
Those suffering from BDS don't realize what their hatred has done to them. They embrace lies about Bush to feed their hatred although they would tell you they are against lying. Even when you can present a myriad of factual and irrefutable evidence against one of those lies, they will not admit it is a lie, and will continue to repeat it. They will do such things as advocate a position or action, but if Bush changes course and adopts that position they will immediately switch and then go so far as to say they were always against it. They are simply irrational on anything that can be connected to Bush. I truly pity them because I fear that one day they will be forced to recognize what their hatred has done to their own moral values.
Mr. Baldwin also wrote the following, "I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hate so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain." Perhaps that is why the BDS suffers are so unwilling to admit that many of the things they are basing their hatred on are built upon lies.
So, let me get this straight. Someone makes up a pretendy illness, some other people diagnose some people with the pretendy illness, and then someone else uses reason to talk about the pretendy illness?
When I go to my other blogs, it is obvious that there are some people out there who read, copy and paste whatever their selected leaders website says is the thought for the day. There are simply people who cannot "discuss" anything without screaming epithets and generally acting like part of the road tour cast of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I understand disagreement and debate. I even understand anger. What I don't understand is what appears to be the attempt to destroy someone not for what they have done, but for what someone else says they have done. I teach high school so I see this every day. But it doesn't mean I like it. And it's certainly not the way a nation, or a business, should be run. Yet when you turn on the TV, what do you see? Survivor, backstabbing, rumor-mongering, vile and unscrupulous behavior are considered edgy and aggressive. What happened to civility?
Donalbain; my question to you, since you obviously object to the term Bush Derangement Syndrome, is what term would you prefer that people use to describe such irrational behavior? I have no problem using a different term, but that one is one that most people understand what is meant and so fills the need. If you have a term that does a better job of describing such behavior, I'll be happy to use it. I merely thought that BDS was more polite than calling them outright or pathological liars, or a number of others that come to mind such as traitors or lunatics and so on. And believe me, I can make a very good argument for the term traitor with regards to a number of those people afflicted with what I call BDS. Understand, not all people suffering from BDS are traitors, but some are so your preferred term needs to be inclusive enough to cover all people who are irrational about Bush.
Bush derangement syndrome has reached unbelievable levels. The very sad part of it is that the people practicing it are doing so because of hatred rather than reason. I'm reminded of a quotation by James Baldwin. "Hatred, which could destroy so much,
ReplyDeletenever failed to destroy the man who hated, and this was an immutable law."
Those suffering from BDS don't realize what their hatred has done to them. They embrace lies about Bush to feed their hatred although they would tell you they are against lying. Even when you can present a myriad of factual and irrefutable evidence against one of those lies, they will not admit it is a lie, and will continue to repeat it. They will do such things as advocate a position or action, but if Bush changes course and adopts that position they will immediately switch and then go so far as to say they were always against it. They are simply irrational on anything that can be connected to Bush. I truly pity them because I fear that one day they will be forced to recognize what their hatred has done to their own moral values.
Mr. Baldwin also wrote the following, "I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hate so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain." Perhaps that is why the BDS suffers are so unwilling to admit that many of the things they are basing their hatred on are built upon lies.
So, let me get this straight. Someone makes up a pretendy illness, some other people diagnose some people with the pretendy illness, and then someone else uses reason to talk about the pretendy illness?
ReplyDeleteOh my god, logic just ate itself!
The diagnosis is nothing more than a description of observable behaviors.
ReplyDeleteWhen I go to my other blogs, it is obvious that there are some people out there who read, copy and paste whatever their selected leaders website says is the thought for the day. There are simply people who cannot "discuss" anything without screaming epithets and generally acting like part of the road tour cast of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I understand disagreement and debate. I even understand anger. What I don't understand is what appears to be the attempt to destroy someone not for what they have done, but for what someone else says they have done. I teach high school so I see this every day. But it doesn't mean I like it. And it's certainly not the way a nation, or a business, should be run. Yet when you turn on the TV, what do you see? Survivor, backstabbing, rumor-mongering, vile and unscrupulous behavior are considered edgy and aggressive. What happened to civility?
ReplyDeleteDonalbain; my question to you, since you obviously object to the term Bush Derangement Syndrome, is what term would you prefer that people use to describe such irrational behavior? I have no problem using a different term, but that one is one that most people understand what is meant and so fills the need. If you have a term that does a better job of describing such behavior, I'll be happy to use it. I merely thought that BDS was more polite than calling them outright or pathological liars, or a number of others that come to mind such as traitors or lunatics and so on. And believe me, I can make a very good argument for the term traitor with regards to a number of those people afflicted with what I call BDS. Understand, not all people suffering from BDS are traitors, but some are so your preferred term needs to be inclusive enough to cover all people who are irrational about Bush.
ReplyDelete