While it was reported, Mike Huckabee’s bizarre behavior at a shooting range recently, in which he pointed his gun in the direction of a group of reporters, received very little media attention. The Chicago Tribune blog, “The Swamp,” did a good job of describing just how reckless the behavior was. But all we heard on the corporate television media was about Huckabee’s “morbid sense of humor,” in which he joked that the birds he killed did not vote for him. As if that were not enough, the Swamp reported:
“Huckabee emerged happily from his hunt, three dead pheasants in tow ... Asked for a metaphor to describe the hunt, he replied, ‘Don't get in my way. This is what happens.’"
This behavior gives a glimpse of how Huckabee’s easy-going image is a façade. But this type of thinly veiled rage and hostility is, unfortunately, not limited to Mike Huckabee. It’s an important theme that runs through this year’s Republican campaign, and through much of neo-conservative rhetoric. Maybe it started when Ronald Reagan famously exclaimed, “I paid for this microphone!” or when he joked about bombing the Soviet Union.
Psychiatrist and author, Justin Frank, did a masterful job of describing similar, destructive tendencies in George W. Bush, in his book Bush on the Couch. Frank points to Bush’s traumatic childhood (e.g., the loss of his sister, with no outlet for grief), his sadistic tendencies (e.g., blowing up frogs, branding fraternity pledges), his history of drinking, and his alleged learning disability, to make a compelling explanation for Bush’s self-defeating and destructive presidency. But, again, this theme is not limited to Bush, even given all these pathologies. It is something that has grown, as traditional conservatism has given way to neo-conservatism and the Radical Right.
George Lakoff’s work, of course, casts a similar light on the Right’s punitive “strict father” approach to policy positions, creating a world in which unwanted pregnancies, poverty and STD’s are just reward for immoral behavior. But even Lakoff's "strict father" strikes me as mild, compared to the increasing hostility we hear from the Right. The most recent displays of this Republican rage came from the Fox GOP debate, where Fred Thompson confused the Iranian Navy with suicide bombers, gleefully calling for them to realize their fantasy of meeting their 72 virgins - apparently enjoying his fantasy of a violent confrontation. Then, of course, there has been the steady drumbeat of Republican enthusiasm for torture and detention without charge, with Mitt Romney calling for the doubling of Guantanamo.
The most disturbing aspect of this mean streak, however, is not that Republicans and other neo-cons are not nice. It is the fact that the most satisfying policy result for this mindset, is not peace and prosperity, their espoused goals. Free-floating rage constantly searches for an excuse to be expressed. What better excuse than the perpetuation of war, chaos, and conflict? When you’re casting about for a fight - and trying to prove your manhood, to boot - escalating conflict can be so satisfying!
Progressives have long tried to explain to the electorate that the Bush policies have increased the risks of terrorism, not decreased them. Many progressives have - correctly - pointed to the “secondary gains” of increased government powers that come from keeping the American people in a constant state of fear. But perhaps there’s another semi-conscious motivation at play - keeping those juices of rage flowing.
http://neoconmind.blogspot.com
The author received her Ph.D. in the field of Organizational Behavior, which she now applies to her political writing. She's been an advocate for church-state separation and other civil liberties issues. She writes on the neoconservative mind, women's issues, media, veganism and the Religious Right.
It's so good to see the concepts of "inclusion" and "diversity" applied to all "normal" people - with the obvious exception of the filth known as Republicans. If ever there was an example of "broad brushing" a set of people, you have succeeded, Dr. Fried.
Is this article an example of your transitioning an escalating commitment (e.g., a subjective emotion like contempt) into a course of action (e.g., declaring intellectual superiority)?
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1767 comments)
on Monday, January 14, 2008 at 11:16:33 PM
Your comment is an example why the Left fails to compel continuously a sustained interest among the existing periphery. Too often, there is a tendancy within the ideology to state that you know what another person is feeling and you know how best to "take care" of the issue - including the diagnosis and treatment.
My comment was sarcasm (a means of passive-aggressive communication) on what I see as a hypocrisy with the article's assertion and its author's academic background. I could have come right out and said, "Practice what you preach academically," but I thought that I'd be dismissed promptly.
Therefore, the passive-aggressive approach at least gets the reader to think - if only for a second as in your case. Questioning, then, is not rage (violent excitement; eager passion; extreme vehemence of desire, emotion, or suffering, mastering the will) - Republican or otherwise.
Regardless, I understand your need to know my feelings and mandate a solution.
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1767 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 8:36:08 AM
Ron Paul's strict adherence to the Constitution, and conservative views on economics and foreign policy will help guide America out of the tragic path this administration has taken us on. The rest of the candidates offer just more of the same. Dr. Ron Paul is a great patriot who will make us proud again.
by
ronheri (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 190 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 7:12:30 AM
Either the Republican base recognizes the ill of their current path (yeah, right) or the revolution brings enough disenfranchised outsiders into the party to effectively "hijack" it back to where the bulk of american conservatives really are (one can hope). Both of these outcomes look highly improbable to me :(
by
William Casino (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 9:43:42 AM
I agree, tho hard to remember he's nominally a Republican
I agree, and in fact he speaks out against neo-conservatism. He's in such a different category, since he's really a libertarian, it's hard to remember that he's nominally a Republican. (Not that I agree w/his libertarianism.)
by
Amy Fried (40 articles, 113 quicklinks, 64 diaries, 213 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 11:31:24 AM
I'd be angry to if I believed power/money would bring me happiness . . . and it didn't. They was robbed. Only solution, MORE. Now I see why Mike's son is so sweet.
by
davy (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 240 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 7:22:53 AM
lesse... pride... "patriotism;" Ron is right (Reagan... Paul... whatever) about everything... wow. Isn't that how we all got stuck in all this crap to begin with?
by
waldopaper (11 articles, 3 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 430 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 11:35:41 AM
As a conservative I oppose Socialism and Fascism. The Republican and Democratic parties in the past few years have violated our rights.
The president violated the Constitution (which he has done many times) when he bailed out the airlines after 9-11. The Repubican Party is beholden to energy, primarily oil. Fortunately people are beginning to take action. Plug-in hybrids are coming on the market, and people are beginning to buy electric cars.
The Democratic Party has denied tens of millions of people the freedom of a successful life. After decades of abuse of bloated government programs that don't work, it has only been in the past few months that the truth has surfaced - all due to Barack Obama. Several days ago Sen. Clinton stated that Micheal, also known as Martin, Luther King, Jr. was able to achieve his victories only because it happened when a Democrat was president.
All this is good, because Americans are learning the truth. Conservatives such as myself, who have left the Republican Party, are voting Libertarian and Constitution parties. Democrats are seeing the truth about Sen. Clinton as someone they don't want to vote for.
What people of the world deserve is the freedom to live life as they choose. We are slowly achieving this - I see an interest in foreign adoption, which allows peasants the opportunities they would never have in their Second or lower world nation. I see people buying hybrids and electric cars, the first steps towards energy independence. I see conservatives leaving the Republican Party, realizing their rights and responsibilties to serve mankind.
by
Barker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 120 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 12:00:00 PM
I must confess that I'm not quite following some of these comments. Tho, I'll try to respond to a couple of things:
* contempt is not an example of escalating commitment
* I don't claim intellectual superiority
* I don't think you have to be a mind-reader to infer anger/hostility from a person aiming a rifle at a group of people, or delighting in the thought of violent confrontation & torture. The point is that there's a pattern among the pols. I don't aim my comments at the Republican rank & file (who seem to be disgusted with their choices, anyway.)
* I don't see how Democrats are denying people a successful life
* I'm obsessed with the idea of an electric car! Cool!
by
Amy Fried (40 articles, 113 quicklinks, 64 diaries, 213 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 12:14:18 PM
The rage is a neo-conservative idea, and one that is gaining momentum in the Republican Party, but the Democrats offer no better solutions by voting to increase the presidential powers and accept the patriot act. They were also in favor of this war and both parties are stimulating the idea of going into another Middle East country and residing there for God knows how long. Neither party have a clear agenda for these wars other to disarm them and spread democracy. I hope you all see through this, because these wars are making considerable money for the “powerful and elite”. This is going to lead to our demise; because our economy is sliding down the tubes we don’t have the funds to finance sustained wars. Plus it will breed more terrorism and hatred towards the United States. To me the rage should reside in the American people for the silent loss of our liberties and distorted ideology that the United States of America is or ever was a democracy. We need to get back to the principals that made this country strong, and elect statesmen instead of arrogant corrupt politicians. We need to re-educate ourselves, and quickly if we want to restore the Republic and get rid of the rage. It is for this and many other reasons I am voting for Ron Paul. And yes, the United States of America is not a democracy. The founding fathers despised that form of government, for reasons that it goes against the constitution. Please Google >the John Birch Society- overview of America< before you comment, and then you can focus your rage on the real culprits.Thank you, Lou Park
by
Louis Park (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 12:22:43 PM
Mrs Fried is right. Thee stupid and shallow behavior of some politicos like Huckabee and Cheney, say show them as deeply disturbed people. Such people ( GW included) are prone to rage because they are in constant stage of defense. They are afraid to be disclosed of who they are: cowards. Now, Mr. Murphy here can whine about 'superiority' as much as he wants. It is his Twilight Zone notice. We here are not the 'left' or ' right'. We just see things other people do not want to see. And then we tell them.
Most of the acts of the GOP people I had witnessed so far were the acts of shameful cowardice. That goes for many Dems too. Cowardice brings malice and malice uses rage as a defense mechanism. But there is another aspect too. Phesants did not do anything to Huckabee and ke killed them because he could. Then he pointed a gun at people and if he could he would have killed them too. Cheney already stepped over the line. THAT'S what has to be shown. That's more than cowardice and even malice. That's evil.
by
Mark Sashine (53 articles, 19 quicklinks, 250 diaries, 3574 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 12:49:00 PM
Twilight Zone, indeed... How rude - and so - I rage
“Now, Mr. Murphy here can whine about 'superiority' as much as he wants. It is his Twilight Zone notice.”
Hmmm… I offer you this quote to substantiate my previous assertion:
“…[W]here conservatives are relatively aware of how their politics relates to their views of family life and morality, liberals are less aware of the implicit view of morality and the family that organizes their own political beliefs. This lack of conscious awareness of their own political worldview has been devastating to the liberal cause,” - http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/467716.html .
And…
“Nurturant Parent [aka liberal] morality has a different set of priorities. Moral nurturance requires empathy for others and the helping of those who need help. To help others, one must take care of oneself and nurture social ties. And one must be happy and fulfilled in oneself, or one will have little empathy for others. The moral pursuit of self-interest only makes sense within these priorities.”
In the end, Mr. Sashine, I believe it comes down to the fact that we are talking past each other because we speak different languages when it comes to our ideologies.The difference is that I acknowledge this mis-communication, whereas you continue to chastise my comments at most every opportunity.I believe this is done so that you’ll be propped up more so in the certainty of your beliefs.
As you have stated previously, Mr. Sashine:
“…[N]either do I think that [Tom Murphy’s] comments are witty or contributive in any way. He is rather boring, sorry. Hope it is not considered ad hominem or anything; he has been praised as 'clever' here too. In fact if it was my site I would tell him to go waste his time elsewhere. But I am not in charge here. I would like to mention though that Tom has the same disease other similar kind of people here have: he just ignores the whole site,” - click here .
Well, I was certainly happy for you, Mr. Sashine, to see that you have your perceptions of others – especially trolls – well in hand.I wonder if you can see the example you set with respect to you’re being happy and fulfilled with yourself here so that you can have some sympathy for others – even a troll.
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1767 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 1:44:00 PM
and I did not use the word 'troll'. Actually, I think, the ' troll' concept comes from Henrik Ibsen's ' The human being must be thyself; troll must be self-satisfied.' but I can be mistaken. So, if we follow Ibsen here about people being themselves I would argue that as soon as we have that division into 'liberals and conservatives', imposed and nourished by the media ( because in reality it is all baloney) the reasonable and honest approach to the people is impossible. You kind off follow that trend, so I, obviously react. But as for sympathy, why not; I do not mean you harm. Twilight Zone does not seem to be rude either- it just specifies the area where you reside according to my findings. In our site we had risen the issues you tackle now many times before. You might as well have a look. And moreover, the way you approach things here is not supportive; it is undermining. Yes, we here have a deeply rooted sense of discontent and it drives us ( OK, it is my opinion but I have been here for a long time). If you do not share that sense you should at least try to understand it and see why. None of that effort is seen in your comments, sorry. You seem to indulge in mockery (sorry, again, my opinion only).
Otherwise, again, I am very sympathetic. In one of my comments I asked you to use your logic and common sense and analyse the ' gem of lies'- the Colin Powell's speech which led to the horrible war. You surely can do that. And BTW, all the private things aside- you do seem to agree about the 'rage of cowards'?
With that adjourn
by
Mark Sashine (53 articles, 19 quicklinks, 250 diaries, 3574 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 2:14:06 PM
If you read my comments in total, there are times I do agree with an article, comment, or diary entry. True, it's not often, but that doesn't mean or imply I'm here to undermine. I'm here (honestly) to offer balance on the issues. Too much discontent leads to tunnel vision, taking one into the often-referenced "rabbit hole".
The majority of posters here, though, are so discontent that they remind me of the character Glum from the Banana Split's "The Adevntures of Gulliver" who walked around the whole episode stating, "We'll never make it. We'll never make it," - http://www.banana-splits-show.com/slide_show.html .
I'm not trying to be "clever" here; I am, though, trying to put my perceptions into a real-world example that other might be able to identify with.
by
Tom Murphy (3 articles, 4 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1767 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 2:50:52 PM
I am impressed on re-reading Amy Fried's article, with her simple and dispassionate descriptions of very offensive public postures by a certain group of politicians. It is interesting that some readers felt so identified with these attitudes that they triggered lengthy emotional reactions, passive-aggression, sarcasm, etc. To me, the most pathological yet subtle features of these violent syndromes in public behavior, include the shameless braggadocio of the armed thug: a "bring 'em on" persona, as though this were acceptable in the same breath as civil order or rule of law, and a casual racism that goes way beyond the usual American exceptionalism. I will not dwell on Ron Paul's past association with David Duke enthusiasts, or words attributed to him on his newsletters, for I happen to greatly admire the Congressman even in some of his basic stances which are the opposite of my own. Likewise, former candidate Patrick Buchanan, a devout and outspoken defender of the Constitution and advocate for peace, has expressed some quirky, even ugly assertions with regard to the "immigration issue", never mind that the blood of the "undocumented" frequently carries the bloodline of the original Americans, as the white majority does not. These folks are a product of upbringing, educational indoctrination, and the soupy marinade of media disinformation which warps their views even as it warps their words. Mark Twain, a noted egalitarian and anti-imperialist in his day, is now excluded from high school literature curriculum, for his loose language about the African Americans of the time. Candidates today must step up to the frame for their media photo-op. Add to this the obligatory knee-jerk machismo which our female campaigner certainly feels pressed to fulfill, I fear that the bully-pulpit is the only public proclamation the press will allow, regardless of which party is raging. Under the code-name of "security", the electorate must choose again, an armed thug who can stomach genocide as "resolve", and surrender actual policy choice just as we surrender control of the national budget. So I am very grateful for articles such as this one which questions the flamboyant testosterone, casual race-baiting, and above all, the ceaseless spin which sugar-coats imperialism and re-packages it as patriotism.
by
ladyguru (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 29 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 4:21:49 PM
Progressives have long tried to explain to the electorate that the Bush policies have increased the risks of terrorism, not decreased them.
Really? Is that why there have been so many terrorist attacks in the US since 9-11??
It must be the republican RAGE causing it... I have been the targeted of DEMOCRAT RAGE many times on this site, and it is not pretty, it is not nice, it is most DEFINITELY not intelligent discourse. Being a Libertarian, I am free to point out the vitriol being spewed from both sides, and I must say that lately, there has been much less in the way of intelligent discourse.
I read your post, and I noticed that you brought up former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee comments made in jest as a way of illustrating how filled he is with rage... Do you think that the same sort of observations could not be made of your democrat candidates? PLEASE!
Bill Clinton had 76 people burned alive including 21 children and two pregnant women because he was so filled with RAGE... Hillary Clinton was called out for her display of rage by Fact Check "When the going gets tough, the tough get misleading. " It was a reference to how she LIED when she was called out for being a candidate for the status quo. Plus, I have never seen the Hyperbole and outright lies about an opponent like I have seen since Obama beat her in Iowa.... She even attacked the people of Iowa for not being sophisticated enough to see that she was the logical choice!
Obama, I am sure has his own issues, but I am thinking what I provided is enough to prove my point... Rage is not a monopoly for the Republicans... Everyone has the potential for displays of rage...
BTW, Ron Paul has not demonstrated any rage against anyone... Which is probably why he is being accused of being a Nazi and a racist....
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 673 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 6:58:30 PM
Not sure what you're referring to with "burned alive." I don't agree w/many things Clinton did, and I don't pretend that Democrats never do anything wrong. You seem to be generalizing to all kinds of faults.
What I was referring to, was the gratuitous and gleeful use of violent imagery, in the service of policies that keep the American people in a state of fear.
by
Amy Fried (40 articles, 113 quicklinks, 64 diaries, 213 comments)
on Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 7:29:36 PM
