Robin of Berkeley - A Shrink Asks What's Wrong with Obama?

Originally Published on THP 7/21/11.

So what is the matter with Obama? Conservatives have been asking this question for some time. I've written a number of articles trying to solve the mystery.

Even some liberals are starting to wonder. James Carville railed about Obama's blasé attitude after the catastrophic oil spill. The New York Times' Maureen Dowd revamped Obama's "Yes We Can" motto into "Will We Ever?"

The liberal women of the TV show "The View" have expressed sympathy for Michelle Obama's living with a man so out of touch. Peggy Noonan, hardly a vehement Obama foe, recently pronounced him disconnected.

Obama's odd mannerisms intrigue a psychotherapist like me. He also presents a serious diagnostic challenge.

For one, Obama's teleprompter and the men behind the Blackberry keep him well-scripted. We know so little about the facts of his life.

But it's more than just a lack of information. Obama himself is a strange bird. He doesn't fit easily into any diagnostic category.

Many people attribute Obama's oddness to his narcissism. True, Obama has a gargantuan ego, and he is notoriously thin-skinned.

Yet a personality disorder like narcissism does not explain Obama's strangeness: his giggling while being asked about the economy; his continuing a shout-out rather than announcing the Ft. Hood shootings; or his vacations, golfing, partying and fundraising during the calamitous oil spill.

Take also Obama's declaring on the "Today Show" that he wants to know whose ass to kick. Consummate narcissists would never stoop to this vulgar display of adolescent machismo.

Obama is flat when passion is needed; he's aggressive when savvy is required. What's most worrisome is that Obama doesn't even realize that his behavior is inappropriate.

So if it's not just simple narcissism, what is wrong with Obama? Since I've never evaluated him, I can't say for sure. But I can hazard some educated guesses.

If I saw a client as disconnected as him, the first thing I would wonder: Is something wrong with his brain? And I'd consider the following theoretical diagnostic possibilities.

--Physical problems: There are a multitude of physiological conditions that can cause people to act strangely. For instance: head injuries, endocrine disturbances, epilepsy, and toxic chemical exposure.

It makes me wonder: Did Obama ever have a head injury? His stepfather in Indonesia was purportedly an alcoholic abuser. Was Obama subject to any physical abuse?

-- Drugs and alcohol: Damage to the brain from drugs and alcohol can also cause significant cognitive impairments. Obama once said that there were 57 states -- and didn't correct himself. Memory problems can be caused by both illicit and prescription drug use.

Obama admits to a history of drug use in his youth. Did his usage cause some damage? Does Obama still use?

--Asperger's Syndrome: Also known as high-functioning autism, Asperger's causes deficits in social skills. A person with Asperger's can't read social cues. Consequently, he can be insensitive and hurtful without even knowing it.

Could Obama have Asperger's? He might have some mild traits, but certainly not the full-blown disorder. In contrast to Obama, those with Asperger's get fixated on some behavior, like programming computers. Obama lacks this kind of passion and zeal.

--Mental Illness: Obama's family tree is replete with the unbalanced. His maternal great-grandmother committed suicide. His grandfather, Stanley Dunham, was particularly unhinged: He was expelled from high school for punching his principal; named his daughter Stanley because he wanted a boy; and exposed young Barry to not just drunken trash talk, but unrestricted visits with alleged pedophile Frank Marshall Davis (who might or might not be Obama's biological father). Barack Sr. was an abusive, alcoholic bigamist.

Since mental illness runs in the family, does Obama have any signs? Yes and no. No, he is not a schizophrenic babbling about Martians. But there are red flags for some other conditions.

While Obama doesn't appear to hallucinate, he seems to have delusions. His believing he has a Messiah-like special gift smacks of grandiose delusions. His externalizing all blame to conservatives, George W. Bush, or the "racist" bogeyman hints at persecutory delusions.

Along with a delusional disorder, Obama may fit for a mild psychotic disorder called schizotypal disorder. It may explain some of Obama's oddness.

People with schizotypal disorder hold bizarre beliefs, are suspicious and paranoid, and have inappropriate and constricted affect. They have few close friends and are socially awkward. A schizotypal is someone like your strange cousin Becky who is addicted to astrology, believes she is psychic, and is the oddball at social gatherings.

Schizotypal Disorder does ring some bells vis-à-vis Obama. One way the diagnosis doesn't fit, however, is that schizotypals are generally harmless, odd ducks. Not so with Obama.

--Trauma: My gut tells me that Obama was seriously traumatized in childhood. His mother disregarded his basic needs, dragged him all over the place, and ultimately abandoned him.

But I think there may be something even more insidious in his family background. While I can't prove it, the degree of Obama's disconnect reminds me of my sexually abused clients.

With serious sexual abuse, the brain chemistry may change. The child dissociates -- that is, disconnects from his being -- in order to cope. Many adult survivors still dissociate, from occasional trances to the most extreme cases of multiple personality disorder.

Apparently, young Barry was left in the care of Communist Frank Marshall Davis, who admitted to molesting a 13-year-old girl. As a teenager, Obama wrote a disturbing poem, "Pop," that evoked images of sexual abuse -- for instance, describing dual amber stains on both his and "Pop's" shorts.

Would trauma explain Obama's disconnect? In many ways, yes. A damaged and unattached child may develop a "false self." To compensate for the enormous deficits in identity and attachment, the child invents his own personality. For Obama, it may have been as a special, gifted person.

Let's return now to my original question: What is wrong with Obama? My guess is a great deal. The answer is complex and likely includes some combination of the above.

Along with the brain issues are personality disorders: narcissism, paranoia, passive-aggressiveness. There's even the possibility of the most destructive character defect of all, an antisocial personality. Untreated abuse can foster antisocial traits, especially among boys.

If my assessment is accurate, what does this mean?

It means that liberals need to wake up and spit out the Kool-Aid...and that conservatives should put aside differences, band together, and elect as many Republicans as possible.

Because Obama will not change. He will not learn from his mistakes. He will not grow and mature from on-the-job experience. In fact, over time, Obama will likely become a more ferocious version of who he is today.

Why? Because this is a damaged person. Obama's fate was sealed years ago growing up in his strange and poisonous family. Later on, his empty vessel was filled with the hateful bile of men like Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers.

Obama will not evolve; he will not rise to the occasion; he will not become the man he was meant to be. This is for one reason and one reason alone:

He is not capable of it.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

Related Post: The Three Faces of Barack Obama

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Most Read Article on Town Hall Patriots in 2010 and 2011

So what is the matter with Obama? Conservatives have been asking this question for some time. I've written a number of articles trying to solve the mystery. 

Even some liberals are starting to wonder. James Carville railed about Obama's blasé attitude after the catastrophic oil spill. The New York Times' Maureen Dowd revamped Obama's "Yes We Can" motto into "Will We Ever?"

 
The liberal women of the TV show "The View" have expressed sympathy for Michelle Obama's living with a man so out of touch. Peggy Noonan, hardly a vehement Obama foe,  recently pronounced him disconnected.

Obama's odd mannerisms intrigue a psychotherapist like me. He also presents a serious diagnostic challenge. 

For one, Obama's teleprompter and the men behind the Blackberry keep him well-scripted. We know so little about the facts of his life.

But it's more than just a lack of information. Obama himself is a strange bird. He doesn't fit easily into any diagnostic category.

Many people attribute Obama's oddness to his narcissism. True, Obama has a gargantuan ego, and he is notoriously thin-skinned.

Yet a personality disorder like narcissism does not explain Obama's strangeness: his giggling while being asked about the economy; his continuing a shout-out rather than announcing the Ft. Hood shootings; or his vacations, golfing, partying and fundraising during the calamitous oil spill.

Take also Obama's declaring on the "Today Show" that he wants to know whose ass to kick. Consummate narcissists would never stoop to this vulgar display of adolescent machismo.

Obama is flat when passion is needed; he's aggressive when savvy is required. What's most worrisome is that Obama doesn't even realize that his behavior is inappropriate.

So if it's not just simple narcissism, what is wrong with Obama? Since I've never evaluated him, I can't say for sure. But I can hazard some educated guesses.

If I saw a client as disconnected as him, the first thing I would wonder: Is something wrong with his brain? And I'd consider the following theoretical diagnostic possibilities.

--Physical problems: There are a multitude of physiological conditions that can cause people to act strangely. For instance: head injuries, endocrine disturbances, epilepsy, and toxic chemical exposure.

It makes me wonder: Did Obama ever have a head injury? His stepfather in Indonesia was purportedly an alcoholic abuser. Was Obama subject to any physical abuse?

-- Drugs and alcohol: Damage to the brain from drugs and alcohol can also cause significant cognitive impairments. Obama once said that there were 57 states -- and didn't correct himself. Memory problems can be caused by both illicit and prescription drug use.

Obama admits to a history of drug use in his youth. Did his usage cause some damage? Does Obama still use?

--Asperger's Syndrome: Also known as high-functioning autism, Asperger's causes deficits in social skills. A person with Asperger's can't read social cues. Consequently, he can be insensitive and hurtful without even knowing it.

Could Obama have Asperger's? He might have some mild traits, but certainly not the full-blown disorder. In contrast to Obama, those with Asperger's get fixated on some behavior, like programming computers. Obama lacks this kind of passion and zeal.

--Mental Illness: Obama's family tree is replete with the unbalanced. His maternal great-grandmother committed suicide. His grandfather, Stanley Dunham, was particularly unhinged: He was expelled from high school for punching his principal; named his daughter Stanley because he wanted a boy; and exposed young Barry to not just drunken trash talk, but unrestricted visits with alleged pedophile Frank Marshall Davis (who might or might not be Obama's biological father). Barack Sr. was an abusive, alcoholic bigamist.
 
Since mental illness runs in the family, does Obama have any signs? Yes and no. No, he is not a schizophrenic babbling about Martians. But there are red flags for some other conditions.

While Obama doesn't appear to hallucinate, he seems to have delusions. His believing he has a Messiah-like special gift smacks of grandiose delusions. His externalizing all blame to conservatives, George W. Bush, or the "racist" bogeyman hints at persecutory delusions.

Along with a delusional disorder, Obama may fit for a mild psychotic disorder called schizotypal disorder. It may explain some of Obama's oddness.

People with schizotypal disorder hold bizarre beliefs, are suspicious and paranoid, and have inappropriate and constricted affect. They have few close friends and are socially awkward. A schizotypal is someone like your strange cousin Becky who is addicted to astrology, believes she is psychic, and is the oddball at social gatherings.

Schizotypal Disorder does ring some bells vis-à-vis Obama. One way the diagnosis doesn't fit, however, is that schizotypals are generally harmless, odd ducks. Not so with Obama.

--Trauma: My gut tells me that Obama was seriously traumatized in childhood. His mother disregarded his basic needs, dragged him all over the place, and ultimately abandoned him.

But I think there may be something even more insidious in his family background. While I can't prove it, the degree of Obama's disconnect reminds me of my sexually abused clients.

With serious sexual abuse, the brain chemistry may change. The child dissociates -- that is, disconnects from his being -- in order to cope. Many adult survivors still dissociate, from occasional trances to the most extreme cases of multiple personality disorder.

Apparently, young Barry was left in the care of Communist Frank Marshall Davis, who admitted to molesting a 13-year-old girl. As a teenager, Obama wrote a disturbing poem, "Pop," that evoked images of sexual abuse -- for instance, describing dual amber stains on both his and "Pop's" shorts.

Would trauma explain Obama's disconnect? In many ways, yes. A damaged and unattached child may develop a "false self." To compensate for the enormous deficits in identity and attachment, the child invents his own personality. For Obama, it may have been as a special, gifted person.

Let's return now to my original question: What is wrong with Obama? My guess is a great deal. The answer is complex and likely includes some combination of the above.

Along with the brain issues are personality disorders: narcissism, paranoia, passive-aggressiveness. There's even the possibility of the most destructive character defect of all, an antisocial personality. Untreated abuse can foster antisocial traits, especially among boys.

If my assessment is accurate, what does this mean?

It means that liberals need to wake up and spit out the Kool-Aid...and that conservatives should put aside differences, band together, and elect as many Republicans as possible.

Because Obama will not change. He will not learn from his mistakes. He will not grow and mature from on-the-job experience. In fact, over time, Obama will likely become a more ferocious version of who he is today.

Why? Because this is a damaged person. Obama's fate was sealed years ago growing up in his strange and poisonous family. Later on, his empty vessel was filled with the hateful bile of men like Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers.

Obama will not evolve; he will not rise to the occasion; he will not become the man he was meant to be. This is for one reason and one reason alone:

He is not capable of it.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Robin of Berkeley - Anatomy of an Occupation

Originally Posted on American Thinker

---

If you're wondering whether I was at Occupy Berkeley on October 15, the answer is no. I didn't have to attend; every day around here is Occupy Berkeley.

Because every moment of every day, I am surrounded by people who believe the insanity spewed by the occupants of Occupy. When I listened to the well-crafted video produced by three intrepid, Bay Area tea partiers at Occupy Oakland, none of what I heard surprised me. I thought, "Just another day in Berkeley or Oakland.

Around here almost everyone thinks like these Marxist spewing militants. While in your neck of the woods random strangers may comment, "Nice day if it doesn't rain," around here the words would be, "Nice day for a revolution."

While the video didn't shock me, it did disturb. What troubled me wasn't just how widespread is the diatribe, but that up until a few, short years ago, I believed all of it. Before Obama came on the scene, I could have been interviewed, mumbling and bumbling, just like those other frothing-at-the-mouth leftists.

I would also have parroted the Third-World loving party line. I too would have angrily and self-righteously proclaimed that the US was the root of all evil in the world.

To me, capitalism was bad, communism good (which I discovered after watching the handsome Warren Beatty in the sweeping thriller, Reds). I envied Cuba, home of the finest health care system in the world (thank you, Michael Moore). And I, like our current occupiers, ranted and raved about the racist, patriarchal, capitalist system with its millionaire fat cats (which I learned from reading books by those millionaire fat cats, Noam Chomsky, Al Franken, Gloria Steinem and the late Howard Zinn.)

I believed all of this despite the now glaring inconsistencies in my argument. For one, I (like most leftists) had mutual funds that invested in the horrible corporations. While I was never flush with money, I wouldn't have minded being so. And just like those demonic capitalists, I got a kick out of procuring a big-ticket item, such as a car with that wonderful new car smell.

So how did I fall so deeply into the progressive chimera? Given that I am (I hope) an intelligent person, with the potential to see the light, why did I drink the Kool-Aid for so long? In the service of shedding some light on our current occupiers, I offer the following observations:

Monkey see, monkey do: Leftists follow the leader. Since most progressives believe the anti-capitalist nonsense, the majority will follow in lock step. In liberal areas, there is groupthink -- cult-like behavior, where people must chant the same old tired mantras. To step out of line will undoubtedly bring social condemnation and shunning.

Indoctrination: While I thought I was an independent thinker, it never occurred to me to look outside the moveon.org box. All of my media was leftist; the so-called independent bookstores (the ones that celebrate "Banned Books Week") ban conservative books. So while Noam Chomsky is always welcome to give a book reading, Ann Coulter would never be invited within 50 miles of here.

The programming is particularly acute in the schools. In Berkeley, we have Malcolm X Elementary School and Malcolm X Park. Just to make sure that the kiddies get the message to emulate Mr. X, public school students (and all city employees) get Malcolm X's birthday off (same with Indigenous People's Day, aka Columbus Day, and International Women's Day).

While most areas aren't so extreme, there are hard-core activists all over this nation's school systems with union jobs for life. It's not a coincidence that Bill Ayers is a tenured professor of education; he knew the power of brainwashing kids when knee-high. With youth and their parents subscribing to the Party Line, it's not difficult to lead the progressive sheep to slaughter.

Of course, leftists are badly misguided about what a revolution actually entails. They weren't told, for instance, that Che Guevara, whose handsome face is emblazoned on their fashionable t-shirts, was actually a psychotic killer. Che got such a thrill from watching executions that he had a picture window installed in his office, and had the butchery conducted below.

And then there's another historical fact that eludes our gullible revolutionaries. After a revolution, the activists and militants themselves often get offed. Of course this would be the case; why would the regime want troublemakers and insurrectionaries in the populace?

The Cool Factor: Obama was elected, in part, because he was viewed as cool (though most of us on the right saw him not as cool, but cold). Being a leftist/revolutionary/radical type is viewed as hip and trendy. Simply consult your thesaurus to see the negative words associated with being a "conservative" versus a "liberal." And aren't we a society enamored by anything and anyone who is considered cool?

Alienation and the Search for Meaning: People of all ages, but particularly youth, have an inherent need to find meaning. With spirituality shunned, people look to the secular religion of progressivism to fill the existential void. By fighting against "The Man," capitalism, and America, the radicals believe that they are good people who live lives of value in an otherwise nihilistic world.

An increasing number of people feel alienated in this culture. They are Americans, yet are told that America is bad. They may have a hunger for God, and yet turn away because believers are mocked.

This sense of alienation from God and country compels many people to look to political movements for their raison d'etre . Being leftists offers the lost souls a sense of belonging and identity.

60s Fever: There's a hunger to relive the 60s, even though the Hollywood, sanitized version didn't exactly happen. I've heard young people bemoan the fact that they were too young to enjoy San Francisco, adorned with flowers in their hair.

Of course, the Bay Area in the 60s was besieged by drug overdoses, rapes, the gangster Black Panthers, and radical terrorist bombings. But given that the Baby Boomers wax rhapsodic about the good-old days, both grey haired and youth take to the streets to relive a reality that never happened.

Delusion: The radicals misunderstand the nature of reality. They believe that life should be fair, that hierarchy and differences among people shouldn't exist. It is a form of delusion to embrace utopia and perfection in this human realm.

But, again, this secular society has trashed religion and deconstructed history, the realms of which would explain the way life works. Instead, people on the left live in a fantasy world; and they go ballistic on opponents because truth threatens their dreamworld.

Control: Occupying the streets allows participants to feel good about themselves, noble, as though they are saving the world. In contrast, it's a buzz kill to realize how little control one has over this life. To feel insignificant, like a little cog in the wheel, is depressing. How much more exciting to elevate oneself into the role of some revolutionary involved in a movement to radically transform America.

Generation Me: Scores of studies show the same thing: that today's youth are more narcissistic than ever before. While previous generations of the l8 to 24-year-old crowd prioritized family and meaning, today's young want six figures and they want it now. They have been raised to feel special and entitled, particularly those in supposedly disenfranchised groups (which, incidentally, is most of the American population). And if they have to take some of your hard earned dough to live the good life, no problemo.

Greed: Despite the leftists' lofty claims about fairness, isn't socialism all about greed, about coveting thy neighbor's house? Can't the essence of progressive politics be distilled to this: wanting money, money, and more money?

While those on the left profess to be anti-capitalists, they are the real capitalists. They are so preoccupied with capital, and envious of those who have it, that they want it through any means necessarily. Even billionaire Warren Buffet must be less obsessed with cash and the things it can buy than these love-of-money leftists.

The Need for a Scapegoat: Human beings know instinctively that there is both good and evil in the world. But the moral relativism inherent in liberal education tells people that everyone is good. When people are robbed of the knowledge of good and evil, they will create scapegoats.

Of course, Obama, Pelosi, and the left are masters at pointing fingers rightward, and insinuating that conservatives are racist/Nazi-like subhumans. Whenever there's a lunatic out of control somewhere in the world, the left impugns conservatives. It's no wonder that there's such anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and anti-conservative vitriol all over the airwaves. Not surprisingly, a mob mentality ensues, with angry, violent, and demonic mobs taking to the streets.

****

As for me, I somehow snapped out of my leftist trance a few years ago, and, since then, have realized that everything that I thought (and I mean everything) was wrong. I thank my lucky stars every day that I finally saw the light.

But will others wake up as well...will people get a grip and get a clue? Will they realize that while imperfect, capitalist America is the best around -- which is why so many people are desperate to become citizens here?

Sadly, I doubt it. I think that the indoctrination is way too far gone. Further, we have a President who will stop at nothing to keep the masses in an enraged, hypnotic trance.

The best we can do is to dislodge the militants from the streets and restore order. But more than this: we need to expel the number one militant, the one with the secret cabal of Czars and obvious disdain for the Constitution.

Because the biggest danger isn't Occupy Chicago or Occupy Wall Street -- it's Obama himself. What we're seeing is: "Occupy The White House."

Our greatest peril isn't the mobs on the streets of Manhattan; it's having a President who thinks he's above the law. It's having our head of state support violent insurrections here and abroad.

The United States doesn't need any more occupations; what we need is a new occupant in the White House. And hopefully, prayerfully, we will have a new one come next November.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

Related Post: A Shrink Asks What is Wrong With Barack Obama
Related Post: Why Obama is Just Not That Into You

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - The Power of Herman Cain

Originally Posted on American Thinker

---

One of my first church experiences was also the most memorable. It was a spontaneous occurrence, when the power went out.

I was in a huge, mostly black church in a rough part of town. This was at a time when church shootings in that city had reached epidemic proportions.

The pastor had started delivering his sermon when suddenly most of the lights went out. The stage and the auditorium were very dimly lit.

Over a thousand people sat there in awkward silence. From what I could see of the stage, the minister and the staff who rushed to help looked worried and uncomfortable.

All of a sudden, an older black woman rose from the audience and strode confidently up to the stage. We all stared at her; no one had any idea what she was going to do.

When she reached center stage, she started singing, passionately, a cappella. She sang some sort of "Negro spiritual" (as they were once called), one that I had never heard before. Most of the black people in the audience applauded thunderously and stood up to sing along. Though the church was nondenominational, the majority of them were likely raised Baptist and were familiar with the songs.

I could see the excitement and feelings of pride on the faces of those standing and singing. They were not just sharing their history and songs. Their soaring spirit was shining a bright light in the darkness. One song led to another and another, and soon most of us, of every race, were standing up, clapping, and trying our best to sing along.

Once the lights went on, the minister again took to the stage. He appeared moved, astonished, really...swept away by the power of God to bring us all together peacefully in the darkness.

I thought of this amazing happening when I read about what Herman Cain decided to do when the power went out at his recent speech in Tennessee. He had just started delivering his talk when the generator fueling his mike failed.

After a few awkward moments, Cain did the most amazing thing, something perhaps unique in the annals of politics: he started singing -- and an apt song, "The Impossible Dream." Perhaps inspired by the power of music, Cain even ended his appearance with a hymn about God's infinite grace and forgiveness called "He Looked Beyond My Faults."

One could hardly imagine Obama handling the situation so seamlessly and graciously. When his teleprompter fails, Obama is usually rendered speechless or tongue-tied. My guess is that Obama also becomes irritated at the people running the show.

Yet Cain didn't flinch or get frustrated or angry. He did what my church friends did...he invoked music and joy and, even more importantly, God, the only true force that unites. Not surprisingly, the mostly white audience was dazzled.

What Cain did that day reminds me of the legacy of "Negro spirituals," of how blacks composed and sang them during slavery. Astonishingly, the slaves did not lose their faith, even amidst the horrors of slavery. Instead, they summoned God Himself through their sonorous songs. Rather than descend into misery and despair, the slaves sang words that invoked God's mercy and deep and abiding love.

What a staggering demonstration of character in those slaves, and in the people in my church, and Herman Cain himself. When the power went out, Cain reached for the highest of powers, the One who illuminates every church and every stage and everyone who cries out to Him.

Cain's impromptu serenade demonstrates that he understands the power of God to heal and unite and empower every situation. For this reason alone, he has the potential, in my eyes, to illuminate the White House.

Because the White House, and our own houses, will only...can only...be brightened by the spirit of God. And the fact that Cain understands this says to me that he may be the man to return God there.

To dream the impossible dream

To fight the unbeatable foe

To bear with unbearable sorrow

To run where the brave dare not go. . .

This is my quest, to follow that star,

No matter how hopeless, no matter how far

To be willing to give when there's no more to give

To be willing to die so that honor and justice may live. . .

And the world will be better for this

That one man scorned and covered with scars

Still strove with his last ounce of courage

To reach the unreachable star.

-"The Impossible Dream"

Robin of Berkeley

---

Related Post: A Shrink Asks What's Wrong with Obama?
Related Post: ZONATION - Herman Cain Is Black and He Doesn't Smoke Crack

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - Which Republican Can Beat Obama?

Originally Posted on American Thinker

---

I love Michele Bachmann. I'd vote for Sarah Palin in a heartbeat. In fact, I'd pull the lever for any Republican candidate for President, though I'd have to hold my nose for the more moderate ones.

But who do I think could actually win against the Obama machine? A strong black man. . as in the brainy, charismatic Herman Cain.

One of the things I've been doing since I woke up from my leftist coma three or so years ago is closely observing Obama. I've been trying to figure out what makes the man tick.

My guess is that Obama had a terrible childhood, worse than we know. I wouldn't be surprised if there was quite a bit of abuse, as well as neglect. We all know about the continual abandonments.

Without much nurturance, but given the illusion of greatness by others, Obama has developed a Messiah Complex. He thinks he walks on water. There are not too many mere mortals who could intimidate him.

Obama made mincemeat of Hillary. While I am a huge Sarah fan, I think he'd do the same to her. The genial and gracious Michele -- he'd descend on her like a vulture. A white male, a Native American man. . . all the same. He and his handlers would chew them up and spit them out. But it would be different with an African American alpha male.

I think that someone like Cain could and would put Obama in his place. And though Obama would pounce on Cain, Obama's bark would be worse than his bite.

My guess is that Obama would feel weak around him; Obama would become the beta male he truly is deep inside, though he hides it. It's not a coincidence that Obama chose dominant black men as father figures such as Frank Marshall Davis and Rev. Wright.

I predict a more tongue-tied and intimidated Obama if he has to go up against Cain. For one thing, Obama is used to using race to silence white people. How much harder it would be for Obama to bulldoze and menace Herman Cain.

I see many other potential benefits of a qualified, black candidate like Cain. Certainly, Cain's running would neutralize the left's cries of racism. And their attempts to smear Cain as an "Uncle Tom" would reveal for all the world to see the inherent racism in the so-called progressive movement.

Cain as nominee would also draw new people to the Republican Party. Cain's straight-talking personal style and compelling message would attract blacks to the Party for the first time in eons. He would grab the imagination of dissatisfied blacks, particularly traditional families who have been skittish about joining the right.

A black man would also have the gravitas to articulate the core values of conservatism in a way that could appeal to minorities. Who knows? Given, Cain's down-to-earth manner and his strong character, he has the potential to be another Ronald Reagan.

Is it fair to choose a candidate partly based on race? Two words here: Barack Obama. Only the most hard-core and deluded leftist would argue that Obama's meager resume prepared him to be the Leader of the Free World.

With Obama nominated and installed based almost entirely on his race, choosing based on skin color along with integrity and intelligence is perfectly appropriate. Cain brings plenty of both to the table, along with common sense, business experience, and economic prowess. And, along with the sanity of a Cain presidency, wouldn't it be icing on the cake to have the first fully black president be a conservative?

Will I get my wish? God, I hope so. Anything is possible in this year's GOP horse race.

But from what I see, the strongest chance we have to reclaim the White House -- and perhaps to save this nation -- is Herman Cain. I just hope that the head honchos in the Republican Party, as well as the American people, see things the same way.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

Related Post: Art Laffer - Herman Cain's "9-9-9 Is A Wonderful Plan"
Related Post: Could Herman Cain Take on President Obama?
Related Post: Herman Cain - I'm Not Giving the President a Pass
Related Post: Robin of Berkeley - The Sleeping Giant Awakens
Related Post: Robin of Berkeley - Why Obama is Just Not That Into You

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - Obama and the Meaning of Life

Originally Posted on American Thinker

---

When I was a young girl, I would often lie awake at night and ask myself what was the meaning of life. Why was I here? What was this strange existence all about? These questions usually triggered feelings of panic.

Of course, I had absolutely no idea what was the meaning of life -- and I had no one to ask. No matter how much I wracked my young brain for an answer, I hadn't a clue.

As I grew up, I found some soft spirituality, in the form of Buddhism and Sufism. I loved to read the Sufi poems -- I still do; I feel comforted by the poets' adoration of God. Buddhism also gave me a road to dealing with suffering, as well as some vague notions about what life was all about (as in, being awakened to the "truth," whatever that means).

But it's been only in the last couple of years of my life that I finally have a clearer idea of why we are here, and what this wondrous and brutal existence is all about. It took my whole world being tossed around like a pair of dice three years ago, and then thrown out there in a completely new configuration. Somehow, for reasons I'll never know, everything looks different.

And now I finally have some answers, because they are all contained in a book I'd never even seen before, called the Bible. Just like Dorothy in the Land of Oz and her ruby* slippers, the hidden jewel was there all along. I was just kept away from seeing it by a culture that detests and fears anything having to do with God.

I asked a friend the other day how often he ponders the meaning of life. He is a brainy Ph.D. who immerses himself each week in heady tomes. To my surprise, he answered, "Never."

Now, it is hard for me to fathom that people are alive on this earth and never ask themselves why. But I imagine that my friend's reaction is a common one, even around here, Berkeley, supposedly the enlightenment capital of the country.

It's no wonder people don't ask themselves the meaning of life. Without any answers, they'd feel as terrified as I did as a child. Instead, it's better for them to absorb themselves in Facebook, or sedate their brains with drugs.

Even though my life today is harder than it once was in all kinds of ways, I feel so grateful. I remember how sad it was to feel alone in the universe.

I see the doom and gloom around me in the vacant faces of all the lost souls. They have no idea what is going on -- not just with their idol, Obama, but with this whole strange existence.

A minority of them are starting to wake up politically, to realize that Obama is no savior of the oppressed. Instead, he's simply a puppet doing the bidding of people like Ayers, Soros, the SEIU, and God knows who else. Rather than transforming this country into a utopia, he's helping to make it a nightmare that no one can wake up out of.

Obama supporters are either starting to see the light or finding new people to blame: the Tea Parties, Perry, or Bachmann. Bizarrely, one random person I spoke to on the streets of Berkeley the other day blamed George Bush, which simply felt pathetic. I mean, exactly how long has Bush been out of the White House now?

Just to clarify things: it's Obama who's putting a sledgehammer to the economy; it's Obama who is aiding and abetting the uprisings in the Middle East; it's Obama who is sending out the signal that it's open season on Whitey. Not George and not Dick Cheney, but Obama, Obama, Obama.

But, of course, what's going on in the world transcends Barack and George and everyone else in the public limelight. What I've finally discovered, from that good book I avoided my whole life, is that our enemy is not of flesh and blood. And what I've also learned is that all this warring has been going on since before time itself, and it will continue until the very end, despite all the left's attempts to create a paradise on earth.

The faces change and the ideologies morph into this one and that one. But the war is the same one: It's the battle between good and evil, and I don't mean the Tea Parties and the left. It goes way beyond any human being or social movement.

We fight each other because we are pawns in a spiritual battle between good and evil. The most important decision of our lives is which side we are on. Will we choose God or evil? It's as simple as this.

If we choose God, this involves more apparent sacrifice, e.g. no more whoring around, tormenting conservatives, or, in general, being Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. But the rewards are so enormous that we, as humans, have not even an inkling of our great fortune.

Around where I live, most people have chosen to turn their backs on the only Force that will give them real hope, not the manufactured kind. Not coincidentally, I see mostly empty or frightened or angry faces around me.

And yet, the answer is so simple and accessible -- and it's been there all along, just waiting for them to open their eyes and look. They can do this at any time...just like the metaphorical Dorothy in the Land of Oz. They simply need to ask with all of their heart and all of their soul to go home again.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

Related Post: Robin of Berkeley - Faith Like Potatoes
Related Post: Robin of Berkeley - The Real Revolution
Related Post: Robin of Berkeley - Why Obama is Just Not That Into You

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - Jew versus Jew

Originally Posted on American Thinker

---

A split is developing among Jewish Democrats. Could it lead to a divorce?

Years ago, there was a popular movie, Kramer vs. Kramer, starring Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. It was heartbreaking flick, as these two spouses, once so in love, duke it out in court.

I was thinking that there's a similar type experience happening today within the Democratic Party. Just like when lovers start sparring, there's a battle going on among American Jews.

The reason is that there are two distinct groups of Democratic Jews, with almost nothing in common. They have coexisted peacefully for many decades, staying together for the sake of their "child," the beloved Democratic Party. But with Obama in office, the differences are starting to become irreconcilable.

One notable example of the coming apart of the once reliable Jewish voting bloc is the recent election in New York. Strangely enough, a Republican won handily for the very first time in almost a century. But even more bizarre, the winner of the Jewish vote is a Catholic and the loser a Jew, in the most heavily Jewish congressional district in America.

To add to the strangeness, the previous occupant of the House seat was also Jewish, that hunk-of-burning love, Anthony Weiner. And former New York Mayor Ed Koch, Jewish, lifelong bachelor, and liberal, endorsed the Catholic, Bob Turner, over the more experienced Jewish Assemblyman, David Weprin.

Clearly this election was about more than a House seat in New York. The Jewish voters were also making a statement about the Democratic Party's throwing Israel under the bus.

Obama's disdain towards Israel has been on full display from the beginning of his term. His first radio address was to the Arab nations. He and the left have whipped up insurrection in the Middle East, which has made once friendly neighbors, such as Egypt, turn hostile.

The fact that Obama dissed the Israeli Prime Minister likely wasn't lost on these New York voters. The constituents also aren't onboard with erecting an Islamic Center/Mosque at Ground Zero (which Turner opposes and Weprin supports).

Perhaps this New York district turned rightward for other reasons as well, such as being sick of politics of usual. Jewish liberals, in particular, may have grown tired of being taken for granted by the Democrats. By electing a Republican for the first time, they are sending a signal loud and clear that they want change, and not the hopey/changy type. And this "September Surprise" in New York could soon be happening all over this nation.

The recent election also illuminates a deep split within the Jewish community. In the days of old, the Democratic Party was garden-variety liberal. But the party has been taken over by radicals who want it to be more Mao than Mondale. And the biggest battle of all is around the fate of Israel.

The progressive wing of the party is an angry group: detesting capitalism, God, and, most particularly, Israel. The left is particularly venomous about this so-called "genocidal" state. They broadcast their contempt, far and wide, from university lecterns, the legislators, and the streets. Simply put, the Jews among them are not their father's Jews.

The question may arise: how on earth can Jews, even leftist ones, despise Israel, a Jewish state. The reason is that leftists sympathize with the Third World, not the First World. They view the US and Israel as the great oppressors of the world's noble peasants, with whom they identify.

Of course, progressives turn a blind's eye to the fact that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Hence, Israeli women are not enshrouded in a burqa, and gays are not stoned to death. But none of this is relevant to the leftists. If you're still scratching your heads to figure them out, don't bother. Progressivism is an inconsistent and illogical ideology.

While there are those noisy leftists, the majority of Jews are mild-mannered liberals. They are the ones holding regular-type jobs as accountants, engineers, physicians, shop owners. They actually make money the old-fashioned way, through earning it, not inciting outrage.

Most liberal Jews are passionate about the survival of Israel. And they are worried sick about the hatred toward Israel spreading like wildfire, which our government is helping to instigate. While most Jewish liberals still support Obama, they are becoming increasingly discouraged by his many anti-Israel signals.

Sadly, while there are more liberals than leftists, the Democratic Party has been seized by the leftists. This is what happens when the most influential leftist Jew on the planet, George Soros, decides to buy the party. But the good news is that liberal Jews are showing their displeasure by not automatically going with the program -- hence, the upset in New York.

Obviously, the Republican Party has a huge opportunity here. Liberal Jews have more in common with conservatives than they do with progressives, and not just regarding Israel.

For instance, progressives revile not just Israel, but the United States as a whole. In contrast, liberals care about this country. While they wish for a "kinder and gentler" America, they do not want it turned into a socialist nightmare.

Historically, liberal Jews have voted Democrat out of loyalty and habit. In addition, they have absorbed the mythology that the Republicans are anti-Semitic. While the Republicans have a huge public relations problem on their hands, they also have a chance to finally set the record straight.

What's happening among the Jews reminds me of what transpired a few short years ago with women. Hillary supporters, feeling burned by the Democratic Party, abandoned the party in droves. Perhaps the same thing is happening today with American Jews. We might be seeing the emergence of not just PUMAs, but JUMAs (as in "Jewish Unity My A__".)

These potential new JUMAs are feeling disrespected by the Democrats, who are forcing unacceptable, anti-Israel policies down their throats. These jilted Jews need to know that they can find respect and safe harbor within the conservative movement.

Because these days, if they want to align with the political movement that will protect Israel, it's not going to be the leftists in the media, at Columbia, or in the White House.

No, if liberal Jews are searching for pro-Israel, pro-America, people to vote for, they are going to have to look outside the Barbara Boxer box. They are going to have to turn rightward, as did the bold people of New York.

Because the truth is that the Democratic Party has abandoned liberals, particularly the Jews. And that's why a majority of fed-up New Yorkers chose a Republican instead.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - The Real Revolution

I was driving through a rough and tough part of Oakland this morning. I don’t generally travel there but was en route to a doctor’s appointment.

It was a part of Oakland under siege: with no businesses to speak of; where drive-bys are common, and drugs, gangs, and thugs rule the streets. As I drove down the busy avenue, I (as well as everyone around me) shut my windows tightly, locked the doors, and made no eye contact with absolutely anyone.

But when I stopped at a red light, I saw an unusual sight: a black man on the corner, bellowing something at the top of his lungs. Actually, this isn’t all that strange a sighting since the crazed and drug-addled will often start yelling, both in Oakland and Berkeley.

But this man was well-dressed, and he also had something rarely seen around here: a light in his eyes. Curious, I took the risk to lower my windows and listen to what he was saying.

Standing amidst the druggies and the passersby averting their eyes, he yelled, “I am different than you. I have God in me. I am a changed person, and you can be too. You can have all your sins washed away right now, just like that.”

Excited, I looked at him and smiled. Though there were hordes of people and cars around, we locked eyes. Although we were strangers, I recognized him, and he recognized me.

Speaking even more forcefully he shouted, “Don’t you want to be forgiven? Don’t you want the love and the hope that can only come from God? Come to God right now. Let Him deliver you.”

We locked eyes again, and I gave him a big thumbs up. Looking pleased, he returned with his own thumb’s up, and continued his message even stronger and louder.

When the red light changed to green, I slowly made my way up next to him. Now I had both my side windows wide open. I waved and he waved back; and he shouted to me with great warmth, “I love you!” My eyes filled up with tears.

Where in the world could you see such a sight, of a black and a white stranger communing in a dark, foreboding part of town? And where else would you hear a black man tell an unknown, white woman that he loves her?

There’s only one place — and that’s in God’s grace. There’s only one avenue for true unity and love, and that is God’s mercy. No other vehicle or channel exists.

It doesn’t matter how many White Privilege seminars are held, or how many social programs are created. Obama, Eric Holder, Michelle, SEIU. . they won’t bring people together. They want to split us into a million pieces.

The left’s philosophy of racial unity via billy clubs is criminal. Anyone who believes that Obama, et al. will usher in peace and prosperity is lying to himself. The true revolution will not come from flash mobs, or Facebook insurrections, no matter how many people lie bleeding.

Leftists confuse power for force. Force is easy; it’s the tool of cowards. But real power? True power only comes from God.

And that is why my brief encounter with the street preacher moved me so: because I saw in full technicolor, the power of God to change lives and to move mountains.

When God shines His light on us, He brightens the darkest part of town. Black and white and yellow and brown can unite as one, but only if the great conciliator is God.

Because, as the wise street minister preached: it is only God who can heal. It is God alone who can wash away our shame, guilt, grief and brokenness, and make us whole again.

So I say this directly to you: If anything I have written resonates, even a teeny bit, don’t ignore it. Don’t push what I’m saying under the rug. Don’t wait for a rainy day.

Because one thing is for sure: everyone on this planet will one day breathe his last breath. And we haven’t a clue when that moment will arrive.

We don’t have a minute to lose to restore ourselves before God.

And not just this: our world desperately needs as many bright lights as possible to illuminate the way during these dark times.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - Faith Like Potatoes

As a new believer, I’m starting to pick up on the language and the concepts; and I’m even, to my surprise, beginning to quote Scripture. But what is the hardest for me is cultivating faith.

This comes, I imagine, from growing up with parents who were serious control freaks. It’s no wonder given their harsh upbringing. Both of my parents were raised by Jewish immigrant parents from Poland who trusted no one. I received that message loud and clear: only rely on myself and don’t make mistakes. In essence, be my own Higher Power.

Of course, perfection is impossible and has led me to become a bit of a control freak myself (okay. . . a big control freak!). However, trying to be perfect has been an exercise in futility. No one is without flaws; we aren’t meant to be.

I’ve been thinking a lot about control and surrender, and the struggle to let go and let God, as the expression goes. And I’ve been especially pondering this after seeing an exquisite movie, Faith Like Potatoes.

I found the film in, of all places, the remainder section at Staples. I assumed it would be sweet, though a bit saccharine. I was wrong; it’s actually one of the most stirring and beautiful movies I’ve ever seen.

Faith Like Potatoes is the the true story of a white farmer, Angus Buchan, who, against all odds, successfully grows potatoes, and other crops, in South Africa. He and his wife and their gaggle of kids flee Zambia after a number of racially motivated murders. They arrive in South Africa to find the same dangers there.

Frustrated, angry, and drinking to excess, Angus is at the end of his rope. Though a staunch atheist, he agrees to attend a church service, where he responds to God’s Word.

Not only does Angus’ newfound faith transform his outlook, but he becomes a fervent evangelist. He travels around Africa, Europe and the U.S. to bring people to God, but also to try to heal the racial divide. (Incidentally, there’s a fascinating documentary about the real family in the Special Features section, which shows footage of a huge, healing event Angus conducted for South African whites and blacks.)

To me, what is most evocative about the film is how Angus’ conversion made him place his trust unconditionally in God. Consequently, he takes all kinds of risks because he believes that God is guiding him. One such risk is growing potatoes during a severe drought, where farmers are even losing their hardier crops.

Angus grew the potatoes not just for food, but also to demonstrate the power of faith. When farmers mock him for trying something so foolhardy, Angus explains that potatoes, like God, requires belief; since potatoes are well hidden in the soil, one must trust that the elements are working their magic.

I would love to experience this unwavering faith, though it feels alien to my life story. I wonder: Is it possibly to cultivate the steadfast faith of a person like Angus Buchan? I suppose that even asking the question is a display of emerging faith. Because, deep down inside, in a place that I’m just finding access to, I realize that God has been leading me and carrying me all along.

I will say of the Lord, ”He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust.” Psalm 91:2

Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, “Move from here to there,” and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” Matthew 17:20

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Robin of Berkeley - Stanley Ann Dunham and the Left's Exploitation of Women

Obama's mother, the oddly named Stanley Ann, died of cancer about fifteen years ago. There's little known about Stanley Ann, aside from the details provided by Obama and his handlers. Of course, the truth about Obama's past is shrouded in secrecy.

But what can be pieced together about Obama's mom from the information at hand? For one, Stanley Ann was given her strange name by her strange father, Stanley Dunham, who desired a boy instead. Dunham was a volatile, hard-drinking man, who was expelled from high school for punching his principal. Mental illness may have run in the Dunham family; as a boy, Stanley discovered his mother dead of an apparent suicide.

We can make some inferences about Stanley Ann's childhood based on how her parents raised young Barry. Stanley Dunham designated the purported Communist, bisexual pedophile, Frank Marshall Davis, as Barry's mentor. Not only was Barry left alone with Davis, but Davis and Dunham would booze and tell dirty jokes in the boy's presence. Given the poor judgment Dunham exercised, he likely raised his daughter in the same reckless manner.

 As for Stanley Ann's mom, Madelyn Dunham, she was the main breadwinner of the family; however, she, like most women of that generation, deferred to her husband. Thus, she allowed him to choose their daughter's peculiar name.

Madelyn also permitted Frank Marshall Davis to carouse and smoke pot with her husband, even to mentor the impressionable Barry. Of course, Obama demonstrated no warmth towards his grandmother whom he dismissed as a "typical white person."

What else can we deduce about Stanley Ann? There's conjecture that Stanley Ann was raised in a radical family with Communist leanings. She spent her adolescence on progressive Mercer Island; the left-leaning Unitarian Church they attended there was known as the Little Red Church, while the school board's chairman was a self-identified communist. Of course, the family's connection with Frank Marshall Davis lends credence to the theory of a radical childhood.

As the official story goes, Stanley Ann met Obama Sr. at college, and their relationship produced Barack. However, American Thinker's Jack Cashill has highlighted doubts about Obama's paternity, including the possibility that Frank Marshall Davis may be father.

If Obama Sr. were Obama's father, this is a troubling scenario since Senior was a married man, seven years older, with an apparent alcohol problem. But even more disturbing is the prospect of Frank Marshall Davis being Obama's father. Davis was decades older than Stanley Ann, and a purported pedophile. Davis penned a thinly veiled memoir celebrating his and his wife's sexual relationship with a 13 year old girl.[i]

It was highly unusual for girls in the 1950's to have interracial relationships, much less babies, with a man of a difference race. During this time, however, the Communist Party of the United States encouraged women members to use their feminine wiles to entice men, especially black men, into the movement, as well as to reward the ones who joined up. Did Communist brainwashing play some role in Stanley Ann's choice of partners and her subsequent pregnancy?

Davis himself boasted, "The number of white babes interested in at least one meeting with a Negro male has been far more than I can handle." If Frank Marshall Davis were truly Obama's father, was Stanley Ann one of his many conquests?

While there is no way of knowing, there are reasons to be concerned. The American Left certainly has a long history of exploiting women. For instance, during the 60's, Leftist girls were expected to, according to the slogan: Say Yes to Boys Who Say No [to the Draft].

Much of the Left's dirty laundry has been expunged and reconstructed, particularly regarding its treatment of women. But women have always been viewed as the movement's maids -- and their mattresses. In the 60‘s, radical girls were expected to serve the food, as well as service the men sexually.

Activist Stokely Carmichael articulated the general vibe in an infamous, and candid, response. When asked the role of women in the Students for a Democratic Society, Carmichael replied, "The position of women in the movement is prone."

Radical women were brainwashed to believe that they needed to sacrifice their bodies for the Revolution. The women of the Weather Underground, for example, were required to have sex with any male who asked for it.

If a woman balked and demanded equality, she was told that women's rights were secondary to liberating blacks and stopping the war. (Interestingly, the early suffragists were also instructed to put their needs on hold, which is why American women couldn't vote until 1920, 50 years after black men.)

On the rare occasion that a movement woman would protest, she'd face swift and harsh retribution. When SDS member Marilyn Webb dared to take to the stage and advocate for women, she was besieged with cat calls and obscenities. After the event, Webb received death threats.[ii]

The Left's use and abuse of women did not stop with the 60‘s, nor with the feminist revolution of the 70's, which was launched, in part, because of the misogynist Left. And the Left's misuse of women, the life-bearers, is emblematic of the hypocrisy and the heartlessness that is at the core of the progressive movement.

Today, we see the sad spectacle of a new female generation being manipulated just like their foremothers. Egged on by radical professors, young women are falling for the same propaganda.

The pressure to be cool, progressive girls -- along with the media's force feeding of hedonism -- is corrupting millions of young women. And the fallout has been far-reaching, not only in broken lives, but in a public health crisis of STD's, cervical cancer, and abortions.

Like robotic Stepford Wives, progressive women of all ages follow their mostly male leaders. Even women's studies departments have been hijacked by the Radical Left; feminist professors support Radical Islam, regardless of the honor killings, stoning, and genital mutilation.

When I think of the Left's sordid history, I recall another time and place, and another woman who stumbled upon a heavily concealed secret. Her name was Iris Chang, and she exposed an even more iniquitous period, the Rape of Nanking. In her landmark book, Chang revealed the mass violation of Chinese women by the invading Japanese troops during World War II.

Tragically, hearing the horrific details, and receiving death threats, proved too much for Iris Chang. She suicided a few years after the book's release.

Perhaps someday, someone with Chang's courage (and the resources for personal bodyguards) will write a similar-type book about the Left's abominable treatment of its women. The narrative should include Diana Oughton, a once ebullient and lively woman who morphed into an emaciated zombie after she joined the Weather Underground. Oughton was killed in a botched bombing plot.

There are so many other women, like the nameless, anonymous readers who have emailed me, sharing their stories, sometimes for the first time. Many of these women were Leftists who turned conservative because of harrowing experiences in radical movements.

Was Stanley Ann Dunham one of them; was she a brainwashed victim of a Communist upbringing? Or was she simply an independent thinker, who willingly and happily forged her life's path?

I don't presume to know. But I do know that millions of American women have been hoodwinked by those sweet-talking progressives. And each new day, another young woman falls under their hypnotic spell.

Robin of Berkeley

---

[i] Davis has confirmed that his novel, Sex Rebel: Black, with its description of sex with a l3 year old girl, was autobiographical. Davis also described himself as "a voyeur and an exhibitionist," with an interest in group sex, sadomasochism, water sports, simulated rape, and bondage.

[ii] From: A Conservative History of the America Left, by Daniel Flynn.

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Robin of Berkely - Why Do Liberals Bleed?

Originally Posted on American Thinker - June 2009

---

I've been thinking about learning how to fire a gun, maybe even buying one. Now if you are a lifelong conservative, Red State dweller, and NRA member, you might be thinking, "Big yawn. What's next? She'll be telling us what she had for breakfast?"

So let me try to convey to you the enormousness, the Alice in Wonderland quality of my even posing the question, something I've never, ever considered in my life. No one I know owns a gun. I've never seen a gun (well on a holster of a police officer but I never wanted to get up close and personal with it). I have given lots of good money over the years for gun control. Learning to fire a gun seems as ludicrous as deciding to take up brain surgery.

But, I am rethinking absolutely everything. There is not a single thing that I believed, that I held absolute and holy, that is not up for grabs. My brain is in a tizzy 24/7 and I don't know if up is down, or if east is west.

And the thought about a gun just came to me last week when I was listening to talk radio. A caller related how an armed citizen in the South stopped a take over robbery in a fast food restaurant. A light went on in my head. Suddenly I realized that the Red States may be on to something: the police are strongly supported, the citizens have guns, and, therefore, the gangsters may be a little reluctant to take over the local Burger King.

Contrast that to the Blue States where few liberals own guns and the police are being emasculated. You may have heard of the horrendous case in Oakland where four cops were killed by a known felon, on a parole violation for child rape. But the powers that be in Oakland sent out the message to the police to make nice and not scare the populace, so the officers never drew their guns when approaching this felon. (Anyone else notice how the Left is slowly but surely disarming the police and military, situation-by-situation?) When I expressed my heartfelt grief to a friend about the deaths of these brave officers, he said, "The man who shot them was a human being too."

(I'd like to say that, as a psychotherapist, I responded in a sophisticated and psychologically crafty manner. No such luck. I almost blew a gasket, turned bright red, and said with barely contained anger, "He lost his claim to be human when he raped a child." To the friend's credit -- and perhaps some fear on his part -- he shut up.)

So what I realized during the talk show is that in places like Berkeley, only the criminals have the power. Not only do they have the power of guns, they are supported by several thousand brainwashed zombies who give the green light to criminals because they are the victims of someone else's "privilege" and "supremacy" and "imperialism." (Although I was a leftist until recently, I was the rare exception: I never excused crime because of the bad guy's race, creed, age, sex, or daddy being a meanie.)

I recall vividly what a Berkeley police officer once told me:

"Berkeley is a city of victims. You try to understand the street people and the criminals and sit down and talk to them and then they hit you on the head and steal your purse. The police come and then you refuse to press charges. The criminals know this and prey on you."

And he's right: almost everyone I know has been a victim of some awful crime, from being in restaurants during takeover robberies (not uncommon here), to being robbed at gunpoint, to being assaulted for no other reason except a thrill for the assailants. A neighbor, who had lived all over the world, once said to me, "Berkeley is the most dangerous place I've ever lived." Her husband was robbed at gunpoint as were almost all her friends. She couldn't wait to get out of here.

I wish I could say I'm an exception to the victim rule. But several years ago I was coming out of a restaurant in a decent area and was mugged. As Gavin de Becker states in his seminal book, The Gift of Fear, (which I, unfortunately, read after the fact), victims generally sense when they're about to be victimized but ignore the signs in order to be nice and not judgmental. This was my situation exactly. I could tell right away that the guy looked sinister. But it was a major street, at high noon, and I didn't want to seem racist, so I turned the corner a few feet to reach my car, and a minute later, had my purse stolen as well as all my feelings of being safe in the world.

I'll spare you (and me) the horrible details, but the incident ended with my having a broken nose and two black eyes, and needing surgery for the nose several days later. People wrote bad checks and stole rental cars in my name for a year afterwards. I developed a fear not only of people, but of the phone and the mail, as every day was another reminder of what happened.

Witness the response of a left wing friend, Judy, when I told her I was mugged. She said, and I quote, "I don't think what you went through was so bad. And anyway he was a victim too." (Maybe it's a good thing I wasn't armed back then.)

So I'm asking myself whether I should become armed, and I'm also wondering why so many "educated" people (I might have just answered my own question) put up with crime infested streets? Why are the biggest protests against the cops? Why are the innocent viewed as guilty, and the guilty innocent? Why is no one up in arms about liberals literally bleeding?

Then it occurred to me: Stockholm Syndrome, the same brainwashing that turned Berkeley resident Patty Hearst into Tania the bank robber. She was tortured, sexually abused, and kept in isolation by the far left group, the Symbionese Liberation Army (kissing cousins of Bill and Bernadine's Weather Underground). Successfully brainwashed, she joined their twisted and sick "army."

In the real Stockholm, the hostages were locked in a vault for days, came to "love" their captors in that perverted way that an abused woman loves her husband, and refused to testify against them in court. One even became engaged to her captor.

SS (good acronym, huh?) is rooted in a basic, primordial instinct for self protection in the wake of extraordinary trauma and terror. To survive, the victim identifies with the captors and merges psychologically with them. But SS takes on a life of its own when victims stop seeing their own humanity and want only to serve the abuser.

Living in places like Berkeley, being force fed propaganda, with police afraid to protect you, your friends unsympathetic, and no one armed, SS can spread like a virus. What starts out as compassion morphs into complicity. Occasionally there may be someone, like me, who snaps out of the trance they've been in for decades. After all, Tania woke up and became Patty Hearst again and, interestingly, married her bodyguard. (I bet that they own a whole lot of weapons.) But she had to leave Berkeley for a leafy, sheltered life elsewhere to do this.

But then again, I never bought into the notion of collective guilt, that groups of people are guilty because of the color of their skin, and individuals are exonerated because of some protected victim status. I'm the rare bird. In Berkeley, most people are so over identified with their ideology, that their logical, questioning minds have flown the coop along with a God-given knowledge, possessed by every 5 year old, of right and wrong.

As a good, loyal liberal, I always expected others to take care of me. If I gave my unqualified loyalty to the system, I could sleep well at night. But now, with victims left bleeding, a dangerously naive government, and sheep like masses, I see the absurdity of my thinking.

I heard a philosopher once say that one of the biggest existential tasks of life is giving up the fantasy of the ultimate rescuer. Liberalism reinforced this fantasy for me, as it does for so many others. Now I see the truth: We come into this world alone, and we will leave it alone. When we live our lives in the back seat of the car expecting Daddy to drive us, we only have a child's view of the world.

On that very dark day in November years ago when I became an object of someone's evil and inhumanity, I glimpsed a truth I never wanted to see: that there really is no protection, not in the way I had always thought, not by other flawed humans. I didn't know what to do with this insight until 1 1/2 years ago when I discovered that there were others out there like me, that there was something called conservatism, and now slowly but surely the pieces are coming together for me, one by one.

As I continue on the path to independence and personal responsibility, perhaps looking to myself for protection is another step on my journey.

Robin of Berkeley

---

Robin is a recovering liberal, and a licensed psychotherapist who lives in Berkeley, California. The above information is intended for entertainment and educational purposes, rather than to offer any kind of definitive diagnoses.
Visit Robin’s blog.

---

Related Post: Crimestrike - The Action Plan
Related Post: Massad Ayoob - All Women Shooting Match

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---