Sunday, September 30, 2012

      In January 2012, Mitt and Craig Romney did a small rally in Plymouth, Iowa.  At that rally, Mitt Romney admitted he tripped his daughter-in-law, who had just given birth, in order to win a family race.  
    CRAIG ROMNEY: ...And it was down to my wife and my dad over here.
    ROMNEY: I tripped her.
    CRAIG ROMNEY: And it was kind of in the home stretch in the run there. And she had a slight lead on him. And he said that in that moment, he decided he was going to win that race or he was going to die trying. And you see this fight to the finish, and he went for this -- he gave it everything he had. He gave it a good kick and he beat her in the end. And he did almost die trying, by the way.
    He passed out in a lawn chair and we didn't see him the rest of the day. He barely made lot of life. But it's that type of hard work, it's that type of determination, I think, that we need in the White House.
The Atlantic Wire, January 31, 2012
      That's nice, an old man trips his own daughter-in-law to win a foot race ... hmmm ... well, at least he didn't impersonate a cop this time like he did when he was in college.
       Was Mitt 'kidding' when he volunteered on stage that he tripped his daughter-in-law in a foot race to win?  hmm ... I seem to recall the family laughed when the story first broke of Mitt driving 12 hours with a dog on the roof of his car ... then they stopped laughing.  But, in their defense, Ann Romney has told us that the dog loved being placed on the roof for 12 hours.
       In June 2012, the rightwing blog Daily Caller wrote that Mitt Romney would often impersonate police and pull drivers over.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was once quite the prankster. Apparentlyhe was also somewhat of a felon.
Reporter Joe Conason writes in an article published by The National Memo that Romney routinely impersonated police officers by sporting a cop uniform that he owned.Romney would show off his uniform, apparently a gift from his father, to friends.
One of Romney’s college friends, Robin Madden, claims the former Massachusetts governor “told us that he was using it to pull over drivers on the road.”
“He also had a red flashing light that he would attach to the top of his white Rambler,” Madden said.
“We thought it was all pretty weird,” recalled Madden’s wife, who also attended Stanford University with Romney. “We all thought, ‘Wow, that’s pretty creepy.”
Daily Caller June 2012
Fast Forward to General Election:
    Buzzfeed reports that Romney's Hispanic Steering Committee Chairman Rudy Fernandez coordinated the Univsion Hispanic Forum in a way that allowed Mitt Romney to "cheat" and break the rules that both the Romney Campaign and Obama Campaign had agreed to.
    [A]fter exhausting the few conservative groups on campus, the Romney camp realized there weren't enough sympathetic students to fill the stands on their night ... Rudy Fernandez, the university official charged with coordinating the forums ... allowed [Romney] to bus in rowdy activists from around southern Florida in order to fill the extra seats at their town hall.
    But, according to Buzzfeed, President Obama's campaign stuck to the original deal.
Obama's campaign, meanwhile, stuck to the original parameters and allowed a large chunk of the tickets to be distributed to interested students on campus. The result was a quiet, well-behaved crowd
    Oh, and let's not forget about those Murray Energy Coal Miners who forced to contribute to Romney's campaign, forced to attend a Romney Rally and then docked pay for attending the rally -- but hey -- at least Robert Murray forced his employees to makeup the work-time they lost by attending the rally.
     On August 28, 2012, Raw Story reported that Robert Murray Energy forced their coal miners to attend a Romney Rally.
    A group of coal miners in Ohio feel they would have been fired if they did not attend an Aug. 14 event with presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney andcontribute to his campaign — and to make matters worse, they lost of day of pay for their trouble.  
Raw Story August 28, 2012
     Raw Story quoted a Murray Energy Coal Miner as saying
    “Yes, we were in fact told that the Romney event was mandatory and would be without pay, that the hours spent there would need to be made up my non-salaried employees outside of regular working hours, with the only other option being to take a pay cut for the equivalent time,” the employees told WWVA radio host David Blomquist.
     “Yes, letters have gone around with lists of names of employees who have not attended or donated to political events.”

       On August 28, 2012, Ohio Newspaper "The Plain Dealer" reported that the Romney campaign did not return calls regarding the forced attendance of the coal miners.
A Romney campaign spokesman did not respond to a request for comment from The Plain Dealer Monday afternoon.
The Plain Dealer, Ohio News, August 28, 2012
     Less than a month after the Romney Campaign refused to respond to questions about forcing employees to 'pack' a Romney rally, the Romney Campaigned used those same coal miners in a campaign ad.
       Politico reported on September 20, 2012, that the Coal Miners were pissed that they were used in the Ad.
Coal miners ad: Mitt Romney spot leaves workers fuming
     If some of the coal miners standing with Mitt Romney in his new campaign ad don’t look happy, it’s probably because they’re not.
      The campaign pulled the footage for its new “War on Coal” spot from a recent Ohio rally that some coal miners complained they were forced to take a day off without pay to attend.
      The Romney campaign did not respond to several requests for information on where the ad was filmed
Politico Sept 20, 2012
   Then there are the "Pants On Fire" pathological lies that Romney, Romney's Campaign and Romney's talking heads spew and admit they are going to continue to spew in spite of Fact Checkers calling them liars.
The Romney campaign has been rebutted by many fact-checking organizations over inaccuracies in the claim, and during a panel discussion today, Romney pollster Neil Newhouse responded to the criticism, saying,
We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”
   Yes, I know, politicians lie and create visual illusions to con voters with ... but ... the point to this Diary is to underscore the Romney Family ideology that cheating at everything, including tripping your own daughter-in-law, is a good quality.
     Mitt and Ann Romney have raised their kids to believe that 'severely' lying and cheating is equal to, as Craig Romney said: "hard work" and according to the Romney family cheating and pathologically lying is the "type of determination, that we need in the White House."
      The last time America elected a President and Vice President who were pathological liars, we got Bush and Cheney ... and the Iraq War ... and the melt down of the US Economy.
      It is my opinion that the Romney Family are ass holes.
      Some people in the comment section think that because Mitt laughed when he said he tripped his daughter-in-law that means Mitt was 'kidding' - I disagree.  I remember Rachel Maddow saying Mitt's "Tell" is laughter.
      Remember when Mitt laughed about strapping his dog to the roof of his car for 12 hours.  Remember Ann Romney laughing at the fact that the dog had diarrhea?  Here is an interview where both Ann and Mitt laugh about the dog -- are they kidding in this segment?

     How about the time Mitt laughed about the time he pinned down a classmate and cut his hair while the young man was crying and begging Mitt to stop.  (Mitt laughing starts at timestamp 1:03)

     My point to showing these videos of Mitt laughing at his bizarre behavior is meant to illustrate that when Mitt laughs at the inhumane things he has done in his life, that doesnot mean Mitt did not do that bizarre thing.  In fact, historically, Mitt's laughter, "tell," would indicate he did do that inhumane thing.
     I do not think Mitt was kidding when he said he tripped his daughter-in-law.  The mere fact that Mitt laughed when he told the story, does not equal the story not being true ... at least not when you're talking about Mitt Romney.

 He is, without question, a sociopath. (7+ / 0-)
DSM: Sociopath, defined under anti-social personality disorder.
3 from column A:
   1. Failure to comply to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest.
    2. Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure.
    3. Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated
Repeated physical fights or assaults.
If you don't think he qualifies for any one of those:
- consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations
- impulsivity or failure to plan ahead.
- reckless disregard for the safety of self or others.
B. Individual is at least 18 years of age
C. There is evidence of Conduct Disorder before age 15.
   - our information starts in high school.  I don't know how old he was.  This is a minor detail
D. The occurrence of antisocial behavior does occur only during the course of Schizophrenia or a manic episode.
Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

Agreed (1+ / 0-)
A Sociopath is incapable of feeling empathy or most other emotions. There is something broken in their brain chemistry. They are many behaviors that go along with the sociopath personality type but there is no way to diagnosis somebody as an actual sociopath from afar. It would be fair to say that he exhibits many of the traits associated with being a Sociopath - far more then anybody else on the national stage. However, there is noway to know what he is, and I personally find it highly unlikely that somebody as successful as he is and who has made it the age of 65 without cratering is a clinical sociopath as it is a mental disorder that gets in the way of functioning in the world.
I think his public persona is extremely unlikable, but that doesn't mean he is mentally ill. There is more then enough in his pubic record to take offense.

 Don't forget these (7+ / 0-)
Sociopaths also, among other things, lie and mistreat or torture animals.
If not a sociopath, truly a pathological liar, as he seems to beincapable not only of telling the truth, but recognizing it as well.
The GOP leadership, and the Romney campaign, are simplebullies, as evidenced by their forcing the miners to attend the rally and still docking them pay for their time at the rally.
Romney is Bush on steroids, when it comes to foreign affairs.  Bush and Cheney started the Iraq war, illegally.  Romney is looking to start two wars of his own:  one in the middle east, between Israel and the Palestinians.  The other between the USA and Cuba.  Now that Fidel is no longer in charge down there, and the Cuban people more than ever want to reestablish friendship with the USA, Romney stated that he would take a hard line with the Cuban government.
Romney is not humorous; he's dangerous.  Only by exercising our right to vote, and stopping the disenfranchisement, can we actually send him the best message of all - a complete defeat in the Presidential Election.

    Hmmm (2+ / 0-)
    I'd say narcissistic in the clinical sense as in a personality disorder but DSM gives politicians a pass on Narcissistic Personality Disorder because the traits are common to politicians, like grandiosity, wanting to only associate with high status people, unable to tolerate assaults or perceived assaults to one's ego, etc.
  •  He may not be a textbook sociopath, but (9+ / 0-)
    some of the traits that Mitt displays are cause for concern.  You could argue psychopath vs sociopath vs antisocial personality disorder or any nuiance thereof, but the more we see of Mr. Romney, the more he falls into one of those classifications.  At minimum, he exhibits behavior that is disturbing (at least to me), and warrants notice.  Compare what you know about him to these traits, and decide for youself (or google if you are not comfortable with this checklist).  Also, contrast that to what you know of Obama (which after 4 years, you should have seen some indications).
    - Glibness and Superficial Charm.
    - Manipulative and Conning.
        They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
    - Grandiose Sense of Self.
        Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
    - Pathological Lying.
        Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
    -  Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt.
        A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
    - Shallow Emotions.
        When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
    - Incapacity for Love.
    - Need for Stimulation.
        Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
    - Callousness/Lack of Empathy.
        Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
    - Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature.
        Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
    - Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency.
        Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet "gets by" by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.
    - Irresponsibility/Unreliability.
        Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
    - Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity.
        Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.
    - Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle.
        Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
    - Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility.
        Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.
    ---------< eo checklist>-----------------------
    If Obama can be accused of being a Kenyan Muslim, I feel it is my right to examine Mitt against psycological profiles.  Actually, it is our duty to assure that only a stable person be trusted to fire nuclear weapons.  (hyperbole, -maybe, maybe not).
    Thanks for listening.
    •  You're missing the context (1+ / 0-)
      While Romney has demonstrated some pretty heinous behavior, let's remember we're talking about people in politics. I can name half a dozen current or former members of Congress that easily surpass Mitt in meeting the criteria you pasted.
      Start with this guy
      Grifters. Mitt just happens to be the country club version, but beneath the surface Mitt, like many pols, is just a successful grifter.
      •  I Think My Context Is Just Fine, Thank you. (0+ / 0-)
        What you are presenting as justification for giving Mitt a pass on his character, is an association fallacy.  Essentially, you are saying:
          Persons a,b,c and d are dishonest/corrupt (insert favorite description),
          Persons a,b,c and d are politicians
          Therefore, all politicians are dishonest/corrupt/..,
        Unfortunately, that fallacy is used a lot.  But fortunately, it is still remains a fallacy.
        By pushing the premise that all politicians are crooks, you do a great disservice to those who do have integrity.  For each of the half dozen you can name, I can come up with dozens and dozens that honestly try to make this country better.  They may have different ideas on how to get there, but they are acting based on best intentions for the people in total.  If you want to lump all politicians together as corrupt, should we also include Washington, Lincoln, JFK, actually, all of them?  I would go to bat for all of the modern presidents (Even Bush, although it hurts) as being well intentioned, and not even close to the dysfunctional character of Mr. Romney.  (I only say modern because I am relatively ignorant of the prior ones, not because I question their integrity).  And that is only using presidents as an example.  For every Joe McCarthy, there have been ten William Proxmires, Russ Feingolds, (guess where I was raised) and Joe Bidens.  You slander all of them by calling them grifters, I look at history, and call the overwhelming majority of them loyal Americans.  The results prove I win.
        It is popular to bash politicians.  It always has been, and probably always will.  But in the end, this country is proof that the system works.  The checks and balances operate, both within the government, as well as outside it (e.g. media, the internet, free speech in all forms).  And it can only work it there are honest, thrust worthy people in office and in the general public.
        One final point, the system is self-correcting.  (or at least it would be if Republicans would use logic rather than being swayed by hateful rhetoric. I know, a cheap shot, so sue me).  The blatantly corrupt (like “this guy” above) tend not to be reelected.  Even if they are corrupt, they better improve things for their constituents, or else they are out.  But in all cases, the country recovers from the errors because there are honest people to govern and lead.  What bothers me, is that I don’t know if we –could- recover from a Romney/Ryan administration, but one thing is sure, the price would be steep, very steep.
        Sorry for the long rambling post,
        Thanks for listening.
        •  Strawman (0+ / 0-)
          I never said they were all dishonest, etc.  Just that there are quite a few who show more egregious behavior and ethics than Romney,
          In my opinion.
          No, I'm aware there are good ones. As a wee lad I volunteered in my local Congresscritter's office. Got a copy of the Constitution from that summer. The cover is stamped, "Courtesy of Congressman Leo J. Ryan"
          I've thought about sending it as a gift to Jackie Speier, to commemerate her decades of public service. But it might just raise too many painful memories.
          •  Sorry, I read too much into your reply. (0+ / 0-)
            Your line about "but beneath the surface Mitt, like many pols, is just a successful grifter." just hit a nerve, and I over reacted.  
            I'll blame it on spending too much time on yahoo fighting the hoards of mouthbreathers, or being old, or bald, or grouchy, or missing 10%.  The comment just resembled the common "they all do it" excuse and I jumped on the nearest soapbox without questioning if what I had read was really what you had written.  I'll remind myself that I'm on an enlightened, educated site the next time I consider replying, and try not to jump to conclusions.
            Again, sorry for the rash reply friend.
  •  I hate to break it to you (5+ / 0-)
    But the fact that he has not been publicly evaluated and cleared of the possibility on the record by his own psychiatric team is in no way evidence that he is not a sociopath. On the contrary, it merely means there is no clearcut proof either way.
    It is perfectly reasonable to casually speculate, and we all know how meaningless that is. It is not at all reasonable for you to declare you he is not a sociopath. Because you simply do not have any evidence to support that claim you are making.
  •  Yes, well... think of the lives he has ruined (10+ / 0-)
    without the slightest regard for the humans who had them.
    Think of the bullying, without the slightest trace of empathy for the victims.
    I mean, you may prefer some tag like "malignant narcissist," I dunno. But the fact is that he seems to have no capability for empathy at all, and he has a lifetime record of small and large acts of cruelty and disregard.
    Lover, fighter, dreamer

 cc you might want to add this to your diary (6+ / 0-)
of the many incidents of Mitt's weird, selfish, at times even cruel behavior
In case you missed it, Chris Wallace joined the Romney's for a pancake breakfast.
I guess this is the "Moose Burger-like" Fox presentation of "getting to know a candidate.  And, like the Palin Moose Burger show with Greta, the candidate once again was exposed as......oafish and odd.
No matter where, when, or what setting, a candidate can't avoid or help being....well, themselves.  Watch the segment below.
First of all, how weird that Romney can't stop eating during the interview.  Classy, NOT
But go to minute 2:30 to learn just how selfish and impatient Mitt Romney is, in his son Tagg's own words:
About the word OAF
It's difficult to be happy knowing so many suffer. We must unite.

No comments:

Post a Comment