If you are going to quote my post, it would be nice if you would read my post.
I explicitly disavowed any “diagnoses” regarding my opinions of the president and I explicitly denied that I felt that he was actually psychologically disturbed. You asked what ailment, described in the DSM-IV, was associated with an inability to apologize and I provided an example of one.
Until such time as I actually “prattle on about the psychopathology of Bush,” your comments would indicate that you are not actually reading the posts to which you are responding.
Are we to be bound henceforth that no disconnect between goals and behavior, no manifestation of confusion, no residua of prior substance abuse, no amount of denial of reality–all these we must put aside, take this fried refugee from a twelve step program at face value, and never ask ourselves, good god, how can he be so out of touch?
We don’t tneed dsm critera to see someone who is not processing the world around him to minimal higher primate standards…
I am quite capable of viewing a man’s failings without immediately ascribing them to mental illness or diminished capacity. (After all, if he is sick or stupid, then he cannot be held responsible for his actions.)
So you didn’t “disavow” any diagnosis - in fact you added your opinions about Bush having less than stellar communication skills in insinuating that this makes him a candidate for “Pervasive Developmental Disorder” - a psychological disturbance (He’s not psychotic, laziness and self-righteousness are adequate explanations for me, but here’s a jim-dandy psychiatric diagnosis that fits the bill). Again, this is a species of parlor psychology which I find objectionable in general (there are probably one or more diagnoses in the DSM relating to denial of one’s comments and actions, but I am not going there) and politically risky.
When I saw your original post I briefly wondered if someone else was posting under your name, as your contributions are usually more thoughtful. Based on the followup, one hopes that you’re just having a bad week.
Speaking of “intellectual laziness”, I can think of no better example than the tendency to indulge in endless personal diatribes against a politician one dislikes (Bush, Clinton etc.) instead of concentrating on the actual issues. War, the economy, energy issues, environmental degradation - nah, let’s get back to name-calling.
It is not parlor psychology; it is being a smart-ass, which is why I provided the explicit disclaimer regarding Bush’s mental state and continue to oppose alaricthegoth’s viewpoint.
As to Bush’s intellectual laziness, I have posted on the topic before and it is not a matter of name-calling; it is a very specific analysis of how Bush makes as many mistakes as he continues to make, (from correctly withdrawing from Kyoto in the worst possible way to pushing his weakening of the SOCAS through his “faith based initiatives” to the obsession for attacking Iraq that I have remarked upon several times in the years before Richard Clark’s recent publicity).
His self-righteousness has been demonstrated on several occasions (such as when he indicated that he got his advice from God rather than seeking advice from his own former president father). What is more self-righteous than claiming that one is carrying out the explicit instructions of God? Seeking moral guidance for general directions from God makes sense for a religious person. Seeking to justify specific actions by avoiding actual advice and getting it through prayer implies that he could not possibly misunderstand the message–a pretty clearly self-righteous position.
[QUOTE=JackmanniiSpeaking of “intellectual laziness”, I can think of no better example than the tendency to indulge in endless personal diatribes against a politician one dislikes (Bush, Clinton etc.) instead of concentrating on the actual issues. War, the economy, energy issues, environmental degradation - nah, let’s get back to name-calling.[/QUOTE]
At the risk of presuming too far, I will step up to the plate and assume this is for me.
What can I say?
I am flummoxed, and terrified.
I was so hoping it was merely a recognizable pathology of one sort or another,
but taking t&d at face value, good grief!!
The unexamined life, as they say, …
To say that Buish is not prone to introspection is a commonplace, but when everything that you are doing is turning to shit, when does reality begin to bite, so to speak?
I mean, even someone who’s self righteous can, with efficacy, decide to fake an apology, and carry through for half an hour of apologetic fakery.