In psychology, projection is the act/behavior of assigning to others blame or traits for which you have responsibility or know you are "guilty" of engaging in yourself. Often it is done to deflect blame or otherwise create a tangible defense by "blaming the other guy" first in order that the fingers don't point back at you.
Yet, much like the finger-pointing analagy of the hand, projection is often seen by others is shirking blame. Would that it were always so on some topics and some levels.
The GOP, in my life, has very nearly always been a group that spent a lot of time pointing fingers. People who were out of work were "lazy", women who chose to have an abortion were "sluts", people who needed a financial hand were "not taking personal responsibility", and so on.
The modern day GOP is at least as guilty of projection as they have been at any point in my memory of the past. Mitt Romney calls Obama's campaign style "vituperative", a overly-long, needlessly complex word for "harsh language" aka saying things which the other guy thinks are insulting. Funny that they then complain about Obama being too "professorial.", but that's not the projection I'm talking about. No, what I'm talking about is at the same time Romney complains about "insulting" rhetoric, the Republican National Committtee is calling people, me included, and referring to Obama and liberals in general as "downright criminal." Now, I get attacking the President, you're running for office, it's what you do. Calling him a criminal is, however, absolutely uncalled for. What law has he been CONVICTED of breaking? Where is the presumption of innocence here? But worse, far more a problem for me, you just called 33% (or so) of this country's population criminals. You're using wording which justifies what, exactly? Putting them in jail? Pursuing them through the courts?
Maybe Romney and the RNC are just engaging in "vituperative" hyperbole - and I suspect for the leadership of the RNC, that's exactly what it is, but words carry meaning, they have power. Words encourage folks to act, to, say, shoot Dr. Tiller for providing abortions, to shoot kids on an island in Norway. Words matter. if you want to promote a campaign about issues as soooo many politicians claim they do, then start yourself. Take "personal responsbility" yourself, RESPECT your opponent as having differing views, but still as Americans who love their country and want the best for it. Above all, don't promote hatred of entire swaths of the country. Using words which call others criminal is FAR over the top, doing that is more than just campaign hyperbole, doing so is the worst sort of "vituperative" campaign, doing THAT is ugly and irresponsible. It shows nothing in the way of respect.
This is the first of several points I'll make on the tendency of the GOP to project their worst conduct onto their opposition. If they TRULY want to be the party of personal responsibility, it is time they took some.
Two things for your readers to consider :
ReplyDelete#1. Did you read the GOP platform ?
We applaud legislation to require photo identification for voting and to prevent election fraud, particularly with regard to registration and absentee ballots. We support State laws that require proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration to protect our electoral system against a significant and growing form of voter fraud. Every time that a fraudulent vote is cast, it effectively cancels out a vote of a legitimate voter.
States or political subdivisions that use all-mail elections cannot ensure the integrity of the ballot. When ballots are mailed to every registered voter, ballots can be stolen or fraudulently voted by unauthorized individuals because the system does not have a way to verify the identity of the voter.
So if you happen to be a Minnesota voter in Cass County (for example) that votes via mail ballots, (or other states like Alaska, Utah, Washington), the Republicans want to take away your ability to vote via mail ballots.
And, having a driver’s license may not be sufficient, as they want “proof of citizenship”.
#2. Did you hear what Speaker Boehner told a luncheon hosted by the Christian Science Monitor in Tampa Monday ?
“This election is about economics… These groups have been hit the hardest. They may not show up and vote for our candidate but I’d suggest to you they won’t show up and vote for the president either.”
So the Republican Party is counting on apathy from the Latinos and blacks to just sit this election out.
And just to make it a little harder for working people to vote, read this story about Ohio and Florida, limiting poll hours … with this money-quote “I guess I really actually feel we shouldn’t contort the voting process to accommodate the urban— read African-American — voter-turnout machine,” said Doug Preisse, chairman of Franklin County Republican Party and elections board member who voted against weekend hours, in an email to The Columbus Dispatch. A study by Northeast Ohio Voter Advocates says that under the revamped authorized voting hours, when more than 200,000 Ohioans voted in 2008 have been wiped out.
Pen- Don't you agree however that the Democratic Party participates in the same practices? What was Biden trying to accomplish by telling a handful of black voters that a Romney presidency would put them in shackles? Would that be the same finger pointing type tactics as Romney's criminal comment?
ReplyDeletePersonally, both should knock that shit off.
Romney needs to concentrate on why Obama has done a bad job and how he can do better.
Obama needs to concentrate on What he has accomplished, what he may accomplish, and how Romney will not do better. Leave the shackle and criminal comments out of it.
"Romney needs to concentrate on why Obama has done a bad job and how he can do better."
ReplyDeleteAnd those things that Romney would be talking about? Put up or shut up.
War in Afghanistan
ReplyDeleteStagnant economy
Major healthcare reform w/o proper funding
Never ended income tax for Seniors making less than 50K
Solyndra
Keystone pipeline
JOB - One, Biden's comment was in reaction to a comment by Romney that he would "break the chains" Obama had put on business. Projection is saying something about someone you know to be true about yourself (usually MUCH more true). Biden has no desires, does not speak, does not behave in any way indicative of, wanting to put people in chains? Do you think he does?
ReplyDeleteIf your point is that there is bad rhetoric on both sides, that's obviously true. I'd never deny it. Biden's comments were needlessly harsh - even vituperative - but Romney has no room on this point to talk. Accusing Obama of criminality isn't just harsh words, it's slanderous. It's WAY over the top vituperative. The point is, I think Romney is complaining knowing damn well he's doing much worse.
I don't find Biden's comments to be constructive, but we talk about "wage slaves" in this country, his terminology was euphemistic - maybe poorly so, but still euphemistic. It represented an idea about wage slavery that the middle class increasingly is facing. Obama has committed no crimes anyone with a shred of dignity suggests he committed. There isn't an ounce of truth in it, but what's worst is that Romney complains while making the comment. This is a pattern of the GOP I've long disliked.
As far as your list of broken promises - politicians make promises, all of them do, few are kept. With respect to Solyndra, there's no evidence whatsoever of criminality by Obama nor anyone in his administration. By contrast, George Bush and Dick Cheney WERE indicted and convicted in foreign courts, including one of our allies, of war crimes. They improperly (illegally) violated Habeaus Corpus protections for US citizens (US v Hamdan), they violated (illegally) our own treaties. People complaining about criminality or corruption in this administration while turning a blind eye toward that of the most recent GOP administration are wilfully ignoring facts of a higher order of magnitude. I NEVER excused Bill Clinton's conduct. It wasn't an impeachable offense, but lying to the US public was an enormous embarrasment for the office of the President and he should have resigned 6 months after he was impeached. Will you say the same about George Bush and the Iraq War, a war that killed 500,000 Iraqi civilians?
Hi Pen- "Do you think he does?" Hard for me to say. At this time, literally speaking, I'd have to say no.
Delete"Will you say the same about George Bush and the Iraq War, a war that killed 500,000 Iraqi civilians?" No. He was indicted by foreign courts. But he did receive congressional approval. Where did you get the 500,000 figure from? I checked it out, and there is a bunch of different calculations.
When I mention Solyndra, I'm not talking about anything illegal. Just the fact that this administration paved way for a 500 million dollar loan that tax payers are on the hook for.
My intention of the original comment was that both candidates need to stop with the back and forth name calling. Concentrate on what they think is wrong with the country, and how they can fix it. Of course this will most likely not happen.
My second comment was just because Commie asked.
I think Biden's language about chains was not only a paraphrasing of language used by Romney, as an appropriate rebuttal, I think it was an excellent choice of words.
ReplyDeleteThe complaint that it was too harsh is I think inaccurate. When you look at the damage done by the financial sector to our economy and to other countries economies, and especially the extent of the outright fraud and bad risk taking behavior.......seriously, can we claim hyperbole about regulation being necessary to stop banks from doing things like putting people out of houses they (the banks) don't even own the paper on in the first place, as has happened? Is that not reducing people to a level of poverty and dependence that was very similar to slavery?
The growing chasm of wealth and poverty in this country, the erosion of the middle class downwards economically rather than upwards, in reversal of the American dream of self-improvement is in a real sense about the difference between chains and freedom.
It is about a re-emergence of the kind of corporate power that used to keep people in effective slavery in 'company towns'. And if you don't believe we have anythign like that anymore, I suggest you look at some of the practices in which money was the power in modern mining in recent mining disasters like the Upper Big Branch or the Crandall Canyon Mine.
People's lives are literally subordinate to profits in a way which reduced them to having so little value the fines involved (most of which the companies didn't pay anyway)and where the mining jobs were the ONLY jobs available equated to something very like people being chattal, forced to work in bad conditions without regard for their health or safety or lives.
I think there are some very appropriate uses for that kind of language, and that we should not be so quick to criticize when it is in fact used appropriately. Money has horribly corrupted our government, and it is getting worse.
I refer you to the ALEC posts I've written. Or the Citizens United decision results.
J.O.B,
ReplyDeleteFirst, and I want to be very clear about this.
THANK YOU, thank you, thank you for being a reasonable person to discuss things with. When I started this blog 4 years ago, it was with the intent of having EXACTLY this kind of discussion. It is rare, rare in right leaning blogs and rara in left leaning too, though my own biased meter says lefties behave better on right leaning blogs than righties do on left leaning ones.
So, with that out of the way, and in case anyone missed it, I am commending J.O.B. for his courtesy. It would be impolitic to repay his courtesy with scorn... nuff said.
Your comment that the rhetoric is ugly on both sides is, of course, perfectly true. Whether Biden's comments were consistent with a prior message (as DG noted) to me (and to many) wasn't the point. I could easily have said something like, "and Mitt Romney wants to have you all on the chain gangs again." It's an ugly comment, beneath his office.
The point is, attack the idea, leave the person out of it. And by the way, J.O.B., that's EXACTLY what many people in the Republican party have a problem with when looking at the Tea Party types (and their impact on the GOP). Saying things like Obama is a socialist, that he's a muslim, that he's looking to destroy the country... all those things are untrue, all those things are ugly, all those things are WAY out of bounds and NONE of them talk about the issues. I agree those should never EVER be going on, on either side. Mitt Romney is NOT a fascist, he's not Hitler, he's not completely devoid of concern for the poor. I don't like his ideas, but he clearly is an altruist, clearly has compassion. Saying otherwise is not only base and vulgar, it's just plain wrong.
THAT said, though, where I go off the rails, where I get pretty upset, is when we use ad hominem to avoid actually talking about facts. The Tea Party types have ruined the GOP by ignoring fact, being anti-science, being extreme Xenophobes, being religious zealots seeking to impose their own version of history to support their religion (such as claiming the US was founded as a Christian nation and so christian values - aka the edicts of the bible - should prevail). There isn't room in their discussion for dissent, any dissent is "unAmerican" as Michelle Bachmann claims.
Yet, the point of this post was one thing and one thing only. I have LONG seen the GOP make complaints, for example, about the deficit, when they in fact were engaging in policies which were much more destructive and worse than anything they complained about. I'd say the same thing about election integrity. The GOP complains about election integrity while pursuing policies which disenfrancise hundreds of thousands.
That's called progjection. I'm not pointing a finger at anyone specifically - I did use Romney's campaign as an exampe - yes, but I AM complaining about conduct. The left does this same thing - but to a much smaller extent, imho.
ReplyDeletelast, on Iraq, President Bush was NOT given approval to open Gitmo, he was NOT given approval to suspend habeaus Corpus, he was NOT given approval to ignore treaties. He was admonished for doing so by a very conservative SCOTUS in each case. The 500,000 figure is a mid-point figure between the Johns Hopkins figures (of 350,000-800,000 iirc) and other estimates. Further, while Bush was given approval to take "any means necessary" to rid Hussein of WMD, the facts were and still are, he rushed into Iraq after being told by David Kay (the UN inspector) that Kay needed only a handful of weeks (no more than 6) to complete the final points of searches. Thus, it was NOT necessary to invade Iraq - Bush said he HAD to because summer was coming, but NO ONE felt Hussien was in imminent danger of attacking the US with WMD, no one, not the NSA, DSA, CIA or any of our allies. So no, J.O.B, I don't concur that Bush's conduct was lawful. He was told so by SCOTUS on multiple fronts, he rushed into a war needlessly, and almost certainly his administration lied to the US about the urgency and facts.
Anyway, the point is, it's about projection.
ReplyDeleteThe big problem we have in getting people to talk about ISSUES is, it doesn't work. People ignore fact based discussions. Commercials use 3 second sound bites because THOSE work, negative ads work. Issue adds don't. The American public complains about the tone, but THEY vote on that tone, they react to that tone.
So, while you and I can talk about tone and talk about issues, and I'm glad you will do so, the fact is, it won't change until people hold these folks accountable. Accountable in the media (by holding the media accountable) and accountable at the polls.
Pen- I would like to start off by saying thank you so much for the compliment. I really enjoy visiting your blog, because of how excellent the posts are written by you and DG. Not to mention all the links you two include. Don't even bother checking mine out. Mostly jokes, funny pictures, and half naked girls. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL...
ReplyDeleteWhat makes me laugh, is that when I first started blogging, I hit it off with a couple lefties. But most of my visits were from righties. As I started to explore more Liberal blogs, I would leave a comment here and there. Now what surprises me, is that many consider me a Conservative. Maybe because of the company that I keep, or maybe because I'm an admitted Non supporter of Obama. I truly feel that no one could be more in the center than I am. I have voted for Democrats just as much, if not more, than Republicans. I just refuse to vote for President Obama. Which I guess makes me a Conservative.
This behavior even happens over here. DemoCommie once referred to be as a Guzloons NRA supporter. But nothing could be further from the truth. I've never been an NRA member, I don't even like hunting. The AR-15 I've spoken about on this blog, was purchased for one reason. The gun club I belong to, now prohibits handguns. Rifles & Shotguns only. I never liked shotguns, and hunting isn't my thing. I shot the AR a few times, and liked the action, so I bought one, just so I can continue shooting at this club. I use it once every 4-5 weeks, I clean it, and it goes back into the safe. But some people would be led to believe that because I own an "Assault" weapon, I'm anti-government, I think blogs like yours and Mike's are trying to take my guns, and I hate Obama. I assure you, nothing could be further from the truth.
FYI- I also believe, Same sex marriage should be legal, Abortion should be kept legal, and I believe the tax burden of people who gross more than 500k a year should be at 55%, while people over the age of 60 who make less than 40K a year should pay 0. I'm also a Union member, and agnostic.
The point of this drivel Pen, is to state the obvious. Don't judge a book by it's cover.
I thank you again for your kind words. I assure you, I thoroughly enjoy the friendly back and forths with you a DG. My biggest thing is politeness, has been since I started blogging, and you and DG personify it. For that, I say thank you very much.
"Yet, the point of this post was one thing and one thing only. I have LONG seen the GOP make complaints, for example, about the deficit, when they in fact were engaging in policies which were much more destructive and worse than anything they complained about. I'd say the same thing about election integrity. The GOP complains about election integrity while pursuing policies which disenfrancise hundreds of thousands.
ReplyDeleteThat's called progjection. I'm not pointing a finger at anyone specifically - I did use Romney's campaign as an exampe - yes, but I AM complaining about conduct. The left does this same thing - but to a much smaller extent, imho."
I agree with your statement, except I'm not to sure how much smaller of an extent the Left take this practice. Luckily the DNC will be soon.
"last, on Iraq, President Bush was NOT given approval to open Gitmo, he was NOT given approval to suspend habeaus Corpus, he was NOT given approval to ignore treaties. He was admonished for doing so by a very conservative SCOTUS in each case." I can see your point Pen, but the original question was, "Will you say the same about George Bush and the Iraq War, a war that killed 500,000 Iraqi civilians?" My answer is still no. My opinion is this. The President, and I mean any President, has information provided to him, that no civilian will ever know. They base decisions off of intelligence that we (the citizens) can only speculate about. Just because he was indicted in a foreign court, does not make me think he committed a criminal act. Not to mention, did these foreign courts have an agenda for the indictment?
Personally, I think it was a huge mistake to invade Iraq at that time, but he did it. He could have let the UN inspectors complete their investigation, but he didn't. I don't agree with it, but I don't think it's criminal. Clinton lied under oath at a deposition. That's a crime. IMHO.
"The big problem we have in getting people to talk about ISSUES is, it doesn't work. People ignore fact based discussions. Commercials use 3 second sound bites because THOSE work, negative ads work. Issue adds don't. The American public complains about the tone, but THEY vote on that tone, they react to that tone.
So, while you and I can talk about tone and talk about issues, and I'm glad you will do so, the fact is, it won't change until people hold these folks accountable. Accountable in the media (by holding the media accountable) and accountable at the polls."
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I believe there is ample evidence that Dubya misrepresented the intel he was given, as stated by those who gave that intel, and who also saw that intel.
ReplyDeleteGeneral Colin Powell and security adviser / terrorism expert Richard Clarke both have been very vocal that Bush lied, and that he planned the war in Iraq well before 9/11 and that he lied about wmd, and any connection between Iraq and 9/11. So the 'we don't know what the President knew stuff doesn't fly. We may not have known at the time, but we know from expert informed members of that administration AFTER that Bush just plain LIED. LIED to us, LIED to the U.N., and apparently LIED to allies.
The UK investigation into lies and misrepresentation relating to Iraq is an excellent model for what we should be doing, but didn't do, and at this point no doubt won't do.
Although we should. Pen was right, and on this JOB, you are wrong.
Isn't the first time Dog and won't be the last. But still, why hasn't the American Government investigated this? Or did they, and I just don't know it?
Delete