Bill Whittle explains how the administration gaslights Americans

I believe I’ve spoken here before about “gaslighting,” because it’s a stock technique for malignant narcissists and other sociopaths, two personality disorders I think characterize the Left generally and Obama specifically.  To gaslight someone is to. . . .

Never mind.  Why should I explain it awkwardly, when Bill Whittle can explain it wonderfully?

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. MacG says

    Gaslighting. At first I thought it was going to be about night time Jr High camp activity…
     
    I knew that Obama said that he’d have more flexibility after the election but it was not clear to me at least what he was going to be more flexible with.  When did we learn that is was our missile defense as asserted by Bill?  All I know about it is that he was going to be more flexible.
     
    The dude that made the video had outstanding warrants conveniently to quench the Muslim rage over the video and providing cover for not arresting him on ‘hate speech’.  
     
    Other than those two things I liked it.  

    • Matt_SE says

      - From memory: The conversation Obama had with Medvedev was in the context of promises made by the U.S. to Poland (and maybe others) about installing a missile defense shield to deter Russian aggression. Sometime later, the U.S. pulled out of the deal. Coincidence? Who knows?
      I believe this context was mentioned at the time.
      – The dude that made the video (Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) had some sort of previous parole agreement that he wouldn’t make films, or something. I don’t remember exactly, but the gist of it was something pretty minor. He apparently did violate this parole agreement, which is why nobody could defend him.
      But in response to this violation, a team of a dozen or so police were mobilized to arrest him at his home in the wee hours of the morning. Treatment rarely, if ever, seen for anyone else in similar circumstances. He was scapegoated, in that the incident was blown way out of proportion to demonstrate the results of incurring Obama’s wrath.
      Real banana republic sh*t, that.

  2. Matt_SE says

    As far as Bill Whittle goes, he’s correct. This is Obama gaslighting the U.S. public. Of course, he’s been aided and continues to be aided by a compliant, sympathetic media in that effort.
    But apart from the explanation of sociopathy, there is a formal, institutional explanation: fascism. Dictatorial/fascist regimes must divide people to keep them from rebelling against the autocratic regime. One of the well-known ways they do this is systematic disinformation, so that individuals are never sure that they aren’t “blowing things out of proportion.” They doubt themselves, self-censor and restrict their own actions.
    Normally, this is why dictators take over their country’s free press or shut down social media feeds. In the U.S.’ case, the media are willing co-conspirators in the process (thank God we still have the internet…though they’re continuing to try and subvert that, too).
    If restrictions are relaxed on freedom of association, or outside press is allowed to seep into the public consciousness, the façade falls apart. People talk to their neighbors, realize that perhaps a great many others share their views of the regime, and the result is what political scientists aptly term a preference cascade.
     
    So, apart from Whittle’s focus on the individual personality of Obama as explanation, there is also a case to be made that institutional support for fascism is being gathered.
    To quote LoTR: “He is gathering all the evil to him.”

  3. lee says

    I am not sure if this is the right place to share this, but I will anyway:
     
    Holder has reduced the “Justice” Department to ashes.
     
    Years ago, I had a friend who had just left the Justice Department for personal reasons. But she (and her husband, who had worked there, too), was still very much of what was THEN the Justice Department mindset: JUSTICE. I mentioned something to her about a guy I knew who worked for some useless government agency and some emailing he had been doing. The content of his emails were nothing special. But she was truly bothered that he was using his .gov email account for personal business, and told me to contact the IG for that agency. I didn’t. (Though I suspect she may have–he was, uh, “let go” not much afterwards.) She started working at the DoJ under GHW Bush, and worked into the Clinton years. She left in the mid-nineties. But my understanding was that she was fairly typical of the DoJ, especially they DoJ lawyers: rule of law is rule of law. (Her husband was that way, too.)  Good lord! Remember the kerfuffle over Alberto Gonzales? And that was SEVEN out of NINETY-THREE U.S. Attorneys! (Who are SUPPOSED to serve at the pleasure of the President!) Imagine what a housecleaning at the DoJ would be like!
     
    Because until the DoJ is back to being about JUSTICE and the rule of law, and NOT about partisanship, it will be a useless government appendage.
     
    Sigh…
     
     
     
    I cannot imagine that people like that stayed for very long under Holder. If there is a Republican elected as President in 2016, it is going to take one hell of a long lever to get the people who are there, and who have been nurtured under Holder, out. Once there is mass firing, the Dems in congress will have a hissy fit.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply