Friday, June 11, 2010

American Thinker:

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

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.

15 comments:

revereridesagain said...

Same impression I have, this guy is set in stone and is not going to "learn", "adapt", or acquire the necessary common sense and honesty to think outside his ideological box, which probably functions for him much like, say, Islam functions for a correspondingly damaged Muslim.

Unknown said...

Hi Guys.
Who would have guessed such a brilliant mind.Just NUTS!lol

Anonymous said...

sounds about right.

Pastorius said...

I think it is very likely Obama has had a head injury:

http://www.thepowerhour.com/news4/obama_scar.htm

christian soldier said...

just don't want anyone to turn him into the "poor little victim" --

I've noticed that 'victims' are always dangerous..
C-CS

Mark said...

"Apparently, young Barry was left in the care of Communist Frank Marshall Davis, who admitted to molesting a 13-year-old girl."

"Dreams" does not indicate that Obama was ever left in the care of Davis. Davis never admitted to molesting anyone. He only "admitted" to writing a novel whose characters have sex. A novel is fiction.

Pastorius said...

Mark,
I believe you, because what you say jibes with my memory of that story.

But, could you provide some links, please?

Josephine said...

What's wrong with Obama? He's a capitalist-hating, leftist, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, pro-Islam, America-hating socialist/communist.

Who cares who his biological father was or if his great-grandfather committed suicide? It doesn't matter if his mother dropped him on his head when he was a baby (even if she did it repeatedly).

All that matters now is voting someone else into power at the next election. I'm still disgusted that the failure of so many Americans to vote allowed this man to take power in your country.

I'm Canadian so I have nothing to brag about except my current government's pro-Israel stance but I always expected more from my American cousins. And I will still expect more in November.

Prove me right, America. The world needs you.

Anonymous said...

US President Mr Hussein has strong identity of a black Muslim, and he does not feel himself to be American.
He doesn't feel angry when Iran's roadside bombs kill American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. He doesn't feel concerned about the havoc caused by oil spill along US coast. He is hand in glove with US enemies. He is conspiring to let Iran have nukes. He is half crazy half mischievous, and incompetent.

Mark said...

Frank Marshall Davis undeniably wrote a scandalous memoir-novel under the pseudonym Bob Greene, one chapter of which is devoted to fictional character Bob Greene and his wife having sex with a thirteen-year old girl. This fact was as accurately reported on August 24, 2008 by Toby Hamden on a British website
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html).

From this kernel of truth, however, forensic deconstruction may reveal that Hamden and others skillfully built a slanderous house of cards in framing Davis as a pedophile based solely on his novel. To wit:

1. FALSE ATTRIBUTION: According to Hamden, "Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences."

a. Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not author Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden's travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that Davis said the events actually occurred in his own life.

b. Casual readers of Hamden's story may not have noticed this sleight of hand (fallacy of equivocation) when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. In this one maneuver, Hamden cleverly shifted the identity of subject "he" from Greene to Davis, thereby indicating that Greene's fictional story actually happened to Davis in real life. This deception, however, reveals Hamden's intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

2. ESCALATION #1: On the same day (August 24) Hamden’s report was published, so-called "Accuracy In Media" (AIM) published a new report citing Hamden’s story. (AIM had already published numerous reports defaming Frank Marshall Davis starting in February 2008.) AIM now reported that Edgar Tidwell, an "expert in the life and writing of Davis," confirmed that Frank Marshall Davis wrote "Sex Rebel: Black" as a semi-autobiographical novel. Despite Tidwell's expert opinion that the novel was SEMI-autobiographical, AIM escalated accusations against Davis by claiming he was a sex pervert (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-was-a-pervert/) based on Hamden’s same-day report. Kincaid falsely attributed the "pervert" claim to Hamden’s report.

3. ESCALATION #2: On 14 October, AIM again escalated the charges by falsely claiming Davis was an "admitted child molester"
(http://www.aim.org/aim-column/was-a-communist-obamas-sex-teacher/).

4. SUMMARY: Evidence strongly suggests that Hamden and AIM worked together on this story before either post was published on August 24: AIM’s post referenced Hamden’s story although both were published the same day. Further, AIM’s false attribution of the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s story suggests AIM referenced Hamden’s draft rather than a final version.

"Truth is generally the best vindication against slander."
- Abraham Lincoln

Mark said...

The issue is rather simple: Either you literally attribute fictional characters' stories to their authors' real lives, or you accept that fictional characters' stories are fiction. By definition, even semiautobiographical novels are fictionalized accounts of their authors' own lives. Research should reveal that ALL fictional narrators of such novels claim the events are true, although their actual authors make no such claims!

Here we have redbaiting, race-baiting, and now crime-baiting, where Davis is misrepresented as an avowed communist, racist, and criminal monster, in the creation of a straw man through which Obama is easy to attack through guilt-by-association. This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation.

This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," in which targets are smeared through deliberate misrepresentation. In both cases master propagandists falsely claimed that works of fiction were authentic accounts of their targets, in order to provoke further attacks.

Both cases depended upon gullible members of the general population, who were predisposed to believing such disinformation, and who could be counted upon to spread such smears even further. In the absence of credible evidence, both cases fail miserably under close scrutiny. As cesspools of slander, innuendo, and trumped-up charges, such unsubstantiated accusations reflect the perverse nature of their accusers more than their targets.

"Have patience awhile; slanders are not long-lived. Truth is the child of time; erelong she shall appear to vindicate thee."
- Immanuel Kant

Pastorius said...

Mark,
Your literary criticism is strong. You're right. If it is a fictional character saying he is writing fiction, then it is fiction.

But, Frank Mashall Davis was a Communist.

And, to compare the opinion piece posted here to the Protocols is exaggeration.

Mark said...

Thanks for your response.

I'm wondering, though, why you consider my comparison to be an exaggeration. Which of these identified similarities do you disagree with:

1. Both targets smeared through deliberate misrepresentation?

2. Fictional accounts claimed as authentic accounts of their targets?

3. Both cases depend on gullible members to spread smears further?

4. Both cases lack credible evidence and fail under scrutiny?

Of course there are many differences, but do you disagree with the similarities I have outlined?

"The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat falsehoods is with truth."
- William O. Douglas

Pastorius said...

Because, this article is not a smear. It is an attempt to understand. The only part that is wrong is the part you pointed out (and I'm taking your word on that, because I don't remember the particulars about Davis' book, and I don't much care, being a fan myself of writers like Ginsburg, Bowles, and Burroughs).

And, even if this article were a smear, it is not a racial smear against a whole group of people, and it has not been used to encourage genocide (as the Protocols were used in Germany, and are still used in much of the Arab world). Instead, this article, if it is a smear, is a smear of ONE PERSON.

That's why I thought your statement was an exaggeration.

Unknown said...

Stunningly well done article and analysis.