Saturday, April 20, 2013

Cognitive dissonance in the Tea Party

Cognitive dissonance is a major disturbance in an individual's psyche. Just google it and read the highly educative results. You may be asking yourself why I bring this up. It's because in this one week alone from Monday April 15 through Saturday April 20, 2013 I have seen more examples of cognitive dissonance on the part of the Tea Party (aka in my mind as the Party of Hate and Fear) than I have ever seen in such a small amount of time. I really wonder how it is that their heads don't explode from all the contradictory stuff members of the Tea Party hold in tension. I really urge them to seek out mental health services. Examples: The accusation: Obama failed to keep the USA safe from terrorist attack on Mon in Boston. The rebuttal: Aside from the fact that right now the evidence points to what is called "lone wolf" terrorism (individuals acting alone which cannot be predicted), can the Tea Party really and truly forget that the largest act of terrorism, largest loss of American life on American soil fell on September 11, 1993 when terrorists acting under Osama Bin Laden et al, stole the lives of people in the Twin Towers the Pentagon and the exceedingly braver martyrs of Flight 93? Surely it was Bush2 who deserves to be accused of failing to protect the American people. The accusation: That on Tuesday after the Senate betrayed the American people and failed to represent their constituencies by accepting bribes from the NRA, that Obama was far more angry about that then he was about what happened in Boston. The rebuttal: He was obviously very upset about both. But even if he were more upset about the vote than the bombing, is it really so hard to understand that any President would not be blisteringly angry at the failure of elected representatives of the people to prefer bribes to actually representing the people. What President would not be angry at such blatant corruption on the part of Senators? I would have thought accepting bribes would be reason for recall. The request: There was a horrible explosion in a fertilizer plant in West, TX. Both Senators of TX and the Governor of TX have their hands out begging for government aid. The rebuttal: Both TX Senators voted against federal aid for victims of a natural disaster, Sandy, which caused major damage in 3 states, because of too much "pork" in federal spending. But it is not "pork", apparently, to beg for government aid for what happened in one town in one state. Aside from the hypocrisy, I have to ask these 2 Senators why it is their 1st thought is government aid and not to ask for money from the corporation that ran the plant? The rebuttal cont'd: Governor Perry, let us not forget, campaigned against Obama on the basis of too high levels of government spending. You know that old song "Tax and Spend Democrats have no Fiduciary Responsibility" as compared to the song of the Bush2 years. "Let's cut taxes and spend as if we hadn't." (Which fits no definition of fiscal responsibility I'm familiar with." Yet here's Perry with his hand out begging for that which he has condemned Democrats for favoring. And let us not forget, Perry wants TX to secede from the United States. But he'll take the money. I could go on and on. But let me address the example of cognitive dissonance that has gone viral: That Bush2 was a better President than Obama. The rebuttal: The problem here is that there are too many examples from which too choose. How about the fact that W was not actually elected the 1st time? Gore had the popular vote. Bush2 was inflicted upon us by appointment of SCOTUS. But let's set that aside since unfortunately there is no Way Back Machine to allow us to correct this error. I mentioned above that the largest loss of American life occurring on American soil was under the Bush2 watch. The rebuttal continues: The highest increase to the national debt occurred under Bush2 because of 2 wars. The war on Afghanistan was at least understandable. They were harboring those who had attacked our country. But the invasion of Iraq was a war crime because there was no good reason to invade it. Every single loss of lraqi life is a war crime for that reason alone, let alone the results of Bush2 decision that the Geneva Convention did not apply to Muslim prisoners. Sorry, Obama is not a war criminal and that alone makes him a better President. The one good thing I can say about the Tea Party and cognitive dissonance is that it is starting to break the Tea Party up. The Christianaistas are threatening to leave the GOP. They are turning on their own. The GOP claims that Fox news is hurting them is one example. Michelle Bachman serving on the House Intelligence committee and almost betraying top secret info in a public interview is another example. How about the fact that she committed ethics violations with her finances in her bid for the Presidency? But the best bit of cognitive dissonance is Glenn Beck's accusation that the investigation in to her ethics violation is the result her very own Chief of Staff who is her biggest accuser. So maybe we will see the inevitable results of forcing one's self to live with cognitive dissonance after all.


  • At 6:29 PM, Blogger Inspector Clouseau said…

    The whole mindset is fascinating. Quite a bit of it obviously stems with their dissatisfaction about many things in life, and Obama is the lightning rod.

    Nice blog work. I came across your blog while “blog surfing” using the Next Blog button on the Nav Bar located at the top of my site. I frequently just travel around looking for other blogs which exist on the Internet, and the various, creative ways in which people express themselves. Thanks for sharing.


Post a Comment

<< Home