The Psychology Behind G.W. Bush's Decision-Making
Related Topics
Doc Holliday rinaldo...@cs.com
Thursday, 12 April 2007, 4:00 pm Opinion: Guest Opinion A Terrible Secret The Psychology Behind George W. Bush's Decision-Making By John P. Briggs, M.D. and JP Briggs II, Ph.D.
When we feel inadequate about some aspect of our lives, we work to submerge those feelings with compensations and defenses. Evidence is that in the case of George W. Bush, deep feelings of inadequacy and powerful defensive behaviors employed to submerge them and cover them up cripple the decision-making process he needs for his duties as president.
The dynamics of the president's cover-up involve a vicious psychological paradox: because he secretly anticipates the humiliating failure he has experienced all his life, he behaves in ways that ensure that he will fail. He makes hasty, risky, ill-informed decisions in which he relies on his defenses rather than judgment.
When the decisions go bad, they reconfirm his inner feelings of incompetence and heighten his fear of being "found out." The feedback loop forces him into an ever deeper "state of denial" about the decisions and an ever-renewed tendency to make more flawed decisions.
If this dynamic is close to correct, then keeping the secret of his feelings of inadequacy has become a matter of life and death for the president. The stakes for him are higher than we can imagine because, by becoming president, he raised his expectations for the success he has sought for so long (the final escape from this secret fear), and he has inflated his worst fear to its grandest scale. He is a man working with all his resources to keep his sense of himself afloat--
and he is in danger of drowning.
The Secret History By applying to George W. Bush's well known history some basic principles of psychodynamics shared by different psychological and psychiatric schools, we can glimpse how incompetence came to be the central, driving issue for the 43rd President.
George W. Bush was born into a family environment where excelling was the quality most prized and the surest way to affection and attention.
(1) Young George's mother, Barbara, was the family disciplinarian, described by her friends as "sarcastic and mean," (2) while his father was the man on the rise, regarded within the family as successful and competent in everything he tried his hand at. The father was frequently absent during his son's early years. For the son, a resentment at those absences would have naturally competed with a desire for the approval of this distant, and therefore somewhat legendary, figure. We know that the elder Bush didn't go to his son's baseball games, for example. Coupled with the fact that, as a coach reported, the first son "wasn't that talented," this absence would likely have generated an early feeling in the young boy that he wasn't worthy of his father's time and attention, whether or not that was actually the father's sentiments. (3) The senior Bush had been a star baseball player in high school and college, a high-performing student, a war hero, and a successful oil man. When the son was sent away to Andover Academy in M***achusetts, he found himself surrounded by images of his father's prowess. George senior had been Andover's "Best All-Around" fellow of his cl***, captain of the baseball team, secretary of the Student Council, president of the senior cl*** and winner of the Johns Hopkins Prize.
(4) The elder Bush was a phi beta kappa at Yale. During the time the younger Bush attended Yale, his alumnus father was frequently celebrated in the student newspaper.
The son discovered early that he couldn't conceivably measure up to such accomplishments, and we can only imagine his despair. Young George received poor grades and was not outstanding at sports. Some see evidence he may have been afflicted with Attention Deficit Disorder and Dyslexia that impeded his learning. He was a C-average student-the genteel form of failing at Yale.
Jeb Bush put the matter bluntly to an interviewer at the time of the presidential campaign in 1999. Referring to his older brother, Jeb said, "There might be more to it for him than the rest of us, because he is the oldest and it is his namesake, and he more directly followed my dad's path....A lot of people who have fathers like this, or moms, who have lived such extraordinary lives, feel a sense that they have failed because they haven't reached the same level of just being a human being as their predecessor-and it creates all sorts of pathologies." (5) To compensate and defend against his feeling that he didn't measure up, George W. Bush began early to adopt the role of clown, the life of the party. In the prep school where the father had been a baseball star, the son ***umed the identity of a parody sports hero. He was "high commissioner for stickball" and presided over meetings in a stovepipe hat. At Yale he became the president of the hard-partying DKE fraternity and, in his senior year, publicly defended the grim DKE hazing ritual of burning young pledges on their backsides. He became a heavy drinker, probably at least in part, to narcotize his feelings of being the disappointment, the black sheep, who didn't fit the Bush family high-achievement profile. He didn't have the ability to attain his father's approval, a prize which would have gradually become equated in the young namesake's psyche with gaining his own internalized sense of self-respect and self-worth. A comment by a second younger brother, Marvin, offers a snapshot of the dynamics between father and son. Marvin said he realized that George junior could be easily provoked by their father into feeling that he alone had broken all the rules. "He would be made to feel that he had committed the worst crime in history." (6) Compare this to what the son had to say about Billy Graham in 1985, when he claims Graham "planted a seed in my heart" that led him to end his substance abuse and focused him on his family and Christ. Graham, he explained, was a fatherly figure, who "didn't make you feel guilty; he made you feel loved." (7)<end snip.........continued @.............http:// www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0704/S00200.htm Peace, Doc
mark marsupialm...@sbcglobal.net
arm chair shrinks. bet they vote dem also.
On Apr 29, 6:02 pm, Doc Holliday <rinaldo...@cs.com> wrote:
Doc Holliday rinaldo...@cs.com
If the didn't I bet they do now!
Peace, Doc On Apr 29, 5:43 pm, mark <marsupialm...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"d.b.baker" rth...@yahoo.com
The analysis is slightly flawed - Briggs & Briggs don't have what it takes to become president of the United States.
Doc Holliday rinaldo...@cs.com
Neither did or does George W. Bush! W's "Bush" legacy got him elected!
If he had to do it himself he'd been a bum living under some bridge if he'd even be smart enough to get out of the rain! The guy is a dunce!
These guys have him figured out and G.W. Bush is so dense and insecure he ain't got a damn clue. He's a mommas boy and in denial! Hell the Zionists have had him pegged for years. They are masters in psychology. What flag do you think is flying over our capital?
Peace, Doc On Apr 29, 6:18 pm, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
*elle* mbp...@gmail.com
Why are there always so many 'sour grapes' in this world? People love character ***asination. Must be the most favourite hobby among libs!
On 30 Apr, 01:08, Doc Holliday <rinaldo...@cs.com> wrote:
Biff jacobsenj...@sbcglobal.net
Doc, I don't think Bush is a dunce, but without the Bush legacy (and money), he would never have been elected Governor of Texas or POTUS.
This is true of FDR and JFK as well. In Shrub's case his advantages glossed over the flaws (for a US President), that he truly never developed leadership skills (Bush money always bought that), and that he allowed undue influence by especially Cheney and Rove, but the lesser lights as well. Did Shrub's father change his view on invading Iraq post 9/11?, we may never know. As late as 1998, Bush Sr. and Scowcroft published a paper that indicated an invasion of Iraq would be folly. Scowcroft publically opposed the invasion in 2002-03.
Shrubbie obviously chose the wrong crowd to hang with, and the US and world populace has had to suffer for it. Many said he wasn't qualified in 2000; those predictions proved exponentially true.
On Apr 29, 7:08 pm, Doc Holliday <rinaldo...@cs.com> wrote:
Biff jacobsenj...@sbcglobal.net
Whose quote do you want elle? Bush admin, O'Reilly, Coulter, Beck, Limbaugh, ad nauseum. Left leaners learned how nasty the Rabid Right can be since 1992, this is mild stuff. Doc is right though, Shrub Nuts is a flake.
On Apr 30, 3:37 am, *elle* <mbp...@gmail.com> wrote:
"lewc ...@aol.com" <lewc
Decisions?
Would Bush rather go for the WIN in War on Terror OR close his eyes and hope it will all go away or never existed in the first place?
Would Bush rather you keep more of your hard earned money for your own needs or does he think government can use it more wisely for its needs. You earn the money. That doesn't mean it is yours.
Would Bush rather put into place a REAL PLAN to help seniors pay for their drugs through Medicare OR talk about it for 40 years and give us meaningless promises if we would elect Democrats?
On Apr 30, 4:08 am, Biff <jacobsenj...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
pvfan jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com
mark, "Arm chair shrinks?" Huh, wonder what the initials "M.D. amd P.H.D.
behind their names stand for? Good old mark, dosen't even understand the message so he blindly attacks the messenger.
On Apr 29, 5:43 pm, mark <marsupialm...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Doc Holliday rinaldo...@cs.com
elle I never thought you would say such a thing about your boy Bush.
You surprise me!;-) George is certainly the cream of the crop and there ain't many better except for maybe Cheney. You did read the way Bush ******inates everyone around him and degrades their character by name calling and or naming his people to degrade their character didn't you elle? He is BTW president and everyone around him is certainly arse kissing SOB's or "Serving at the Pleasure of the President"! Right elle?
Peace, Doc On Apr 30, 3:37 am, *elle* <mbp...@gmail.com> wrote:
neoconis_ignoramus bellamac...@verizon.net
I always get a chuckle about sound-byte spewing nitwits repeating tired old lines without an ounce of thought behind them. It's lemmings like these that the chimp in charge and his republican party count on to vote for them without reservation, and they do, because what plays to this crowd are nationalism, xenophobia, plainspeak, and sloganeering. Phrases like the ones posted represent the finest examples of this type of pandering.
Too bad the phrases never really mean anything, or are grossly inaccurate, or entirely misleading. For example, let's disect the drivel: "Winning the War on Terror": please let us know who had credible evidence that Hussein was an imminent threat to the U.S. and/or that they had any part in the GROUP THAT ATTACKED US. Oh, you mean the answer is no on both fronts, and that invading Iraq, as predicted, has SPREAD the terrorist problem? Gee, doesn't sound like invading / occupying iraq is helping us win the war on terror at all. Where's bin laden, by the way?
"Keep more of your hard-earned money". As the chimpster and co. spend like drunken sailors, the U.S. borrows to finance the deficits created by the gap between revenues (taxes) and the spending. So, we can keep more of our "hard earned" money - while the debt am***es and we p*** of an exacerbated problem to the next generation. P***ing the buck -
it's what republicans do best. Even individuals keeping their hard earned money is debatable, since the wealthiest are the ones who got the biggest tax breaks.
Real plan to help seniors pay for their drugs? LOL, clearly the poster is clueless about the issue. I'm on my third healthcare company now (the other two were acquired), two of which focused specifically on Medicare enrollment. Medicare Part D (for nitwits like you, the prescription drug program) is really nothing more that a giveaway to pharma and to insurance companies, requiring little discounts on the drug purchases made and overpaying for those that are bought. I fyou don't think so, check out the ticker symbols for Humana, Cigna, United Healthcare in 2003 up until the MMA p***ed in November. Similarily, check out some of the drug firms. I do like, however, how your blind support for the pResident results in you cheering on what could only be considered a socialist program -
whether it's corporate or individual socialism being beside the point.
On Apr 30, 4:13 am, "lewc...@aol.com" <lewc...@aol.com> wrote:
"d.b.baker" rth...@yahoo.com
Well, the "chimp" managed to dupe everyone - from Hillary Clinton to grads from the MSM and Harvard.
Doesn't say much for a Marxist education, does it. Certainly not when a "chimp" in cowboy boots can trick so many deep thinkers and highly regarded coffee-clutch analysts - men and women of astounding intellectual substance - all fooled by a monkey.
That's what I call 'nuance.'
Doc Holliday rinaldo...@cs.com
Whose running this puppet show d.b.? Are you saying neither you or Bush ain't got a clue? LMAO Peace, Doc On Apr 30, 6:08 pm, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
pvfan jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com
d.b Only a true ultra-conservative would brag that HIS liar and cynical manipulator was the very best.
On Apr 30, 6:08 pm, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"d.b.baker" rth...@yahoo.com
No, I'm suggesting you find a party that can collectively outwit a "chimp." Because according to Hillary, Marx & Co, a "chimp" bamboozled every liberal on the planet.
Biff jacobsenj...@sbcglobal.net
1. Bush has made Islamic terrorism worse. Thre is no "War on Terror", just a bunch of White House yahoos trying to turn a primarily criminal threat into fear to increase their political power. That situation seems to be waning as more Americans wake up to the bullshit game Shrubbie and the Neowhacks are really playing.
2. Bush increases the national debt on Iraq alone at $1 Billion a week, You may think that is Monopoly money (pun intended), Besides I'm in the shrinking middle cl***. Bush's tax plan is great if you are in the upper 10% of wealth holders, otherwise his policies are pushing the other 90% wealth holders and real income down.
3. Someone else can respond to to drugs for Seniors plan, although with a Bush/Neocon plan I'd be shocked if there wasn't some windfall for the pharmeceutical companies in there.
On Apr 30, 6:13 am, "lewc...@aol.com" <lewc...@aol.com> wrote:
Biff jacobsenj...@sbcglobal.net
The best numbers Bush may have hit for approval of the Iraq invasion is 70%, so 30% of the American people thought this was BS going in, Hillary and much of the MSM (and all the neocon propaganda outlets) included. Hillary was trying to hedge her bets, and I hope she pays for it at the polls. Those numbers today? Bush may have a 35% approval rating, Cheney is lower. You can fool about 30% of the people apparently all the time. This forum is proof of that.
On Apr 30, 6:08 pm, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Biff jacobsenj...@sbcglobal.net
No deebee, actually he bamboozled about 40% of of the left leaners.
For those either disenfranchised or are non voters, that percentage drops. A Bush devotee would never exaggerate. I am curious how it feels to support the worst president this nation has ever had?
On Apr 30, 8:34 pm, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
neoconis_ignoramus bellamac...@verizon.net
You seem to forget, the chimp won with a minority in 2000 and won against what could only be considered a cadaver in 2004. In neither case was 'everyone' fooled. The cadaver got 48%.
I do remember plenty of people at protests at the start of the invasion of Iraq, and plenty of writers voicing opinions against it.
Funny how you would forget all of those protestations and think that everyone was fooled. What "deep thinkers" were misled by this bonehead? Not any I know....unless you consider Limbaugh, Hewitt, and the rest of the mouthpieces deep thinkers...which is funny in and of itself.
Extrapolating the spinelessness of democratic leaders onto the rest of the population is disingenious at best.
On Apr 30, 4:08 pm, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"d.b.baker" rth...@yahoo.com
We're talking "WMD." Every lib on the planet says the "chimp" fooled 'em - imagine, a "chimp," and a drunk monkey to'boot, yet he pulled the wool right over their childish eyes.
If you think the voters treated Kerry like a first-cl*** dimwit, watch what they do to a scrounging piker like Hillary.
"d.b.baker" rth...@yahoo.com
Keeping in mind that "deep" is strictly relative: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of m*** destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." --Rep.
Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. [BC - Before Chimp] "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of m*** destruction programs." --Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct.
9, 1998. [BC - Before Chimp] "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." --Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of m*** destruction... [W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein.
He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ...
He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of m*** destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of m*** destruction is real ..."
--Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
Doc Holliday rinaldo...@cs.com
He didn't fool anybody. He Lied! And he had plenty of help "PNAC" conspiracy and tyranny!
Peace, Doc On May 1, 1:57 am, "d.b.baker" <rth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"d.b.baker" rth...@yahoo.com
No, Saddam lied.
This should be your mantra: Saddam lied, Saddam died.
Meanwhile, this doesn't absolve all the Dems who now cry they were fooled - and by a "chimp" no less. If they can be fooled so easily by a "chimp," it follows they'll get their deflated heads handed to them by enemies of sub-primate intelligence.
| To Top |