Skip to comments.What IS Wrong With Clinton (and those like him) (my title)
Posted on 11/10/2001 4:07:45 PM PST by nicmarlo
After reading threads about Clinton, and one of the posts, especially, "What is wrong with Clinton?" (which refers to his recent, disgraceful speech at Georgetown), it made me wonder, really, what is wrong with him, what created him and those like him, and why anyone admires him.
My input on "what's wrong with Clinton," those like him, and his "admirers," is for the purpose of enlightenment (myself included) and prevention (in ourselves and over those whom we have some control, i.e., our children).
I. Philosophically: In the Republic, Plato attributes Socrates as saying "in all of us, even in good men, there is a lawless wild-beast nature." But it is the tyrannical man who does not control this beast from within. Instead, he allows the beast to devour any remaining goodness, or "sense of shame," within him and, simultaneously, allows the basest part of himself to grow and control what and who he is. He progressively is taken over by this lawless nature and, ultimately, becomes enslaved to his vices. The tyrannical man's needs, according to Socrates, are "insatiable."
This type of person is the most "unjust and miserable" of all. They live in constant fear of betrayal, amongst others. He is superficial, "always . . . in a fury of passions and desires." It is worse with a tyrant in power, not only because those beneath him are subject to his whims, but also because he "is not master of himself." He has no temperance, patience, steadfastness, stability, or confidence, in himself or others. I would say this type of man has no kind of respectable characteristics nor anything good that would attract genuine loyalty.
His fear (loss of power, prestige, possessions) drives him to behave in ways dishonorable and despicable: he is "obliged to practice the greatest adulation and servility, and to be the flatterer of the vilest of mankind. He has desires which he is utterly unable to satisfy, and has more wants than anyone. . . ."
Because the tyrannical individual's desires and needs are neverending, the good originally within has become diminutive or non-existent. Greater power, therefore, makes him more corrupt and, consequently, he becomes "more jealous, more faithless, more unjust, more friendless, more impious, than he was at first." Socrates also said, according to Plato, that an unpunished tyrant is worse yet.
II. Psycho/Social: According to Elliot Aronson (The Social Animal), people are subject to "cognitive disonance: a state of tension that occurs whenever an individual simultaneously holds two cognitions (ideas, attitudes, beliefs, opinions) that are psychologically inconsistent." In other words, when you believe one thing but act in contradiction to your belief, you experience cognitive disonance. When this occurs, people seek to justify their "wrong" behaviors so that neither they nor others will think badly of them.
Aronson writes "people don't like to see or hear things that conflict with their deeply held beliefs or wishes." Deep-seated attitudes are hard to change because we distort what we hear/see to fit our beliefs. The stronger our beliefs, the greater the distortion. Truth is filtered through our biases. And it becomes our own form of truth, or what my professor called our own "fog." We do not question our strongly held beliefs, we seek to justify them. Examples of this type of filtering abound. Aronson cites one study performed on cigarette smokers. (Don't flame me, I smoke.) Smokers were told studies showed that cigarettes cause cancer. They didn't want to feel stupid for continuing to smoke, so smokers sought to justify their behavior by mentally discrediting the studies. By doing so, they justifyied their behavior but continued harming themselves.
This kind of justification process has been applied to other behavior, such as investments (i.e., emotional or financial). There is a direct correlation between the greater the investment, the greater the loyalty. Why? Because you want others to think you're smart. If you're smart, you would only invest in smart people. If you've made a "major investment" in a person, it's difficult to admit you made a "huge mistake" without feeling foolish (hence not smart). This would explain why some individuals stick by a "poor investment."
III. Spiritually: In the Bible, it says that when people repeatedly commits acts which they know in their hearts are wrong, they are given over by God to a depraved state of mind. (Therefore God gave them up to uncleaness through the lusts of their own hearts . . ., Rom. 1:24; God gave them up unto vile affections, Rom. 1:26; God gave them over to a reprobate mind, Rom. 1:28.)
I suppose you could say the more wrong you do, the more callous you become to doing wrong and the easier it becomes to continue in wrongdoing.
Based, generally, on the above, I have come to the conclusion that Clinton has been encouraged, from his youth, to allow his "wild-beast nature" to grow unchecked. He has not been held accountable for his actions. He proclaims himself a Christian and attends church, holding his Bible for the cameras, but not holding himself to the mirror of its truths. He has surrounded himself with people he could "buy," who, through their own cognitive dissonance, could not allow themselves to admit or perceive the truth of who or what he is (a shameful and base human being). His followers live in a fog, filtering out this truth, thereby, encouraging him and themselves to become more blinded to the truth and, he, more base. God is the judge of all. I do not proclaim to be God. But He also said, you shall know them by their fruits. We have the right to judge their behavior and actions to determine right from wrong. And wrong should be punished, not encouraged.
I don't know, but a team of psychologists could make a career out of studying Klinton. There are plenty of sociopaths with delusions of grandeur out there in the world. It's really sad that the news media, Congress, and a large segment of our society enabled Klinton's outrageous behavior for so long. No wonder so many countries in the world have lost respect for us. I'm glad that GW Bush is doing a good job of getting respectability back into the White House.
Bush is the antithesis of Clinton. Bush's sincerity and selflessness are probably a couple of reasons why Hillary Clinton rolled her eyes at his speech. Bush doesn't have to buy anybody's loyalty. He exudes everything good and respectable, in a man and as President. What a contrast from Clinton.
what created him and those like him,
Answer: goober inbreeding
Thank God. If Al Gorp was president right now, we would be finished as a country. I sincerely believe that that is the real intention of the Klinton/Gorp team. They sold out our country for money and celebrity status and they knew what they were doing.
No, that would only serve as another excuse and also allow him to not accept responsibility for his disgusting behavior (for probably most of his life).
Yep. And probably plotted it for a long time beforehand (and are probably still plotting).
The same thing that was wrong with Norman Bates.
I'll drink to that.
Based, generally, on the above, I have come to the conclusion that Clinton has been encouraged, from his youth, to allow his "wild-beast nature" to grow unchecked. He has not been held accountable for his actions.[My favorite line... He proclaims himself a Christian and attends church, holding his Bible for the cameras, but not holding himself to the mirror of its truths. He has surrounded himself with people he could "buy," who, through their own cognitive dissonance, could not allow themselves to admit or perceive the truth of who or what he is (a shameful and base human being). His followers live in a fog, filtering out this truth, thereby, encouraging him and themselves to become more blinded to the truth and, he, more base. God is the judge of all. I do not proclaim to be God. But He also said, you shall know them by their fruits. We have the right to judge their behavior and actions to determine right from wrong. And wrong should be punished, not encouraged.
Not only nailed, but glued and melted down.
Now, that's a scarey thought; one I've never thought of, but quite possible. I believe there's a reason why the Clintons picked New York. I hope this never comes to be.
No way, they drink Klinton Koolaid.
Nothing shameless here, but the subject bill clinton
Hey, the democrats have been using this method of projection for years upon the republicans. This is nothing new - this is just par for the course with these people.
So, for what it's worth - what Clinton said was, "I didn't do it, it was YOUR fault". What a guy!!
I would generally believe that; however, with Clinton I believe his guilt has been seared, his conscience so deeply smothered in hundreds of atrocities, he can no longer feel guilt, as normal people can and do. In this way, he has gone beyond what is normal and has been consumed by the vices he relentlessly seeks.
Why, thank ya.
Mine too! Thanks for the ping!!
EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT!!!! Thank you, nicmarlo!!!
That is possible, however, that would be a dignified act, protecting his daughter (in another devious family "event," whatever the true story is, probably Hillary and Chelsea both made up stories). Somehow, I can't see Clinton putting anyone before himself, even his daughter.
Beelzebubba is a wild beast with no self-restraint. A critter, not a man.
While I re-read Plato, Book IX, and that particular part of the book, I felt as if he was describing everything about Clinton. The nature of human beings remain constant; unfortunately, so do recurrences of tyrannical men.
What was it the philosophers said about the 'banality of evil'?
Don't know, but probably something like, there's no new evil that has not already been done. (Just a guess.)
Not true. At least according to some of the Nostradomus scholars. The 3rd A-C (Napolean, Hitler the first two) is supposed to be killed early (30 days?) in the conflict that the A-C starts. However, the downside is that the conflict is supposed to last a really, really long time. Can't recall the details.
According to the Bible, the 3rd A-C is probably more accurately portrayed as Damien in Damien Omen, the movie. (Not everything in the movie, of course, is accurate.) He is supposed to rise up from a European country (the "little horn") and unite them. From my memory of what I read, he appears to be benevolent, disguising his evil. I believe he has powers, but they are not from God. The A-C fools the world about his plans for peace and everyone's welfare. Then conflict does break out. And, no, I don't believe he lives for very long, but I believe he's in place for longer than 30 days.
I didn't know Clinton did that. I did hear he walked the streets. There's another thread posted that Clinton knew where OBL was but didn't go after him.
I also heard a Congressman (Dana ?) on the Savage show saying he had contacts in Afghanistan (I think he was there as Ambassador or something, not sure) that knew where OBL was, it was a credible tip; he personally contacted the CIA (a couple years ago?), telling them the contact has credible info. of OBL's whereabouts, for the CIA to contact this individual. The congressman made another call to the CIA after a week of waiting; they were unresponsive. He finally went to Congressional Committee (Security?), which prompted a meeting with the CIA, FBI, and the Committee (this almost a month after his initial call to the CIA). Nothing happened. It was suggested by Savage, and the Congressman agreed, that Clinton put the kabosh on going after OBL. (Maybe Clinton can feel guilt.)
The press, as you know, was protected originally so that they could be the watchdog and whistle-blower on government. (That no longer occurs on the alphabet channels, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN). The press has become another aristocracy, aiding and abetting the "criminals and crooks" who, more often than not are democrats, who run the democrat agenda, the ACLU, etc. My understanding of the democratic party of today: it no longer resembles what it stood for at inception; rather, it has become a machine (or aristocracy, as you put it) that runs over the citizens, forcing them to accept what the democrat higher-ups want: a socialistic/communistic empire.