Author: HEF Admin

  • Liberialism IS a mental disorder:

    Liberialism IS a mental disorder:

    Saturday, February 16, 2008

    WorldNetDaily Exclusive
    Top shrink concludes liberals are nuts!
    Makes case ideology is mental disorder


    WorldNetDaily

     

    WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

    “Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” “Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”

    While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to “the vast right-wing conspiracy.”

    For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

    Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

    “A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do,” he says. “A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.”

    Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

    · creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;

    · satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;

    · augmenting primitive feelings of envy;

    · rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

    “The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind,” he says. “When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”

  • 600,000 Signatures Demand Smacking and Child Abuse Referendums

    MEDIA RELEASE

    29 February 2008

    600,000 Signatures Demand Smacking and Child Abuse Referendums

    More than 600,000 signatures will be delivered to Parliament today demanding Referendums on the anti-smacking bill and tackling the real causes of child abuse.

    There are two petitions which required 285,000 signatures each, yet the anti-smacking petition alone has received approximately 330,000 signatures – well over the targeted amount.

    “That’s how strong the feeling is on this issue,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “NZ mums, dads, grandparents and families simply want policies and resources to tackle our unacceptable rate of child abuse in NZ. But they also know that a parent correcting a child with a smack on the hand or bottom is not child abuse, and their actions should not be criminalised.”

    “If kiwis can figure that out, why can’t the politicians?” says Mr McCoskrie. “NZ’ers are not ‘moving on’. They are refusing to lie down on this issue.”

    When Green Party MP Sue Kedgley presented a 39,000 signature petition last year calling for mandatory country of origin labelling on foods, and when United Future’s Peter Dunne presented a 42,000 signature petition last year calling on daylight saving to be extended by 3 weeks, they both said that the government must listen to the voice of the people.

    “These two petitions today each have almost four times the number of signatures of Kedgley and Dunne’s petitions combined.”

    “In response to Families Commission research earlier this month that found that 2/3’rds of parents say that the government doesn’t respect their role, they are going to spend almost $1m to tell parents that they do respect them,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    “Families don’t want an advertising campaign. They want a law change.”

    ENDS

     

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

     Bob McCoskrie JP – National Director 

    Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • More On Smacking

    From this blog:

    http://scottkennedy.blogspot.com/2008/02/more-on-smacking.html 

    More On Smacking

    I know this is turning into a smacking blog, but the issue is on my mind at the moment.

    Sarah and I went out collecting signatures again last night. Once again as per usual the overwhelming response was positive. The editorial in the Herald demonstrated how out of touch the ‘intellectuals’ are from the average New Zealander. People have not moved on. To put it bluntly people are pissed off. Sorry about the language but the expletives which are used about Helen Clark, Sue Bradford and the anti-smacking brigade when i go door to door are much stronger. We have not moved on.

    There are of course some people who do not support what we do. Last night I had one of those ladies. “I never needed to smack my kids. It’s wrong and good parents don’t need to.” Oh the supreme arrogance. With one sweeping statement she writes of 80 odd percent of parents as incompetant abusers. Please people. If you didn’t need to smack your children it does not follow that other people will have the same luck.

    Ok rant over. For now. But if you’ve got time, this is worth a read.

  • Commissioner Insults Generations of Parents

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0802/S00296.htm

    23 February 2008
    Children’s Commissioner Insults Generations of Parents and Grandparents

    Family First is shocked and disappointed by an astonishing attack on the intelligence of New Zealand parents by the Children’s Commissioner.

    The Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro has attempted to discredit the huge response to the two petitions asking for a Referendum on child abuse and the anti-smacking law by saying that previous generations of parents didn’t parent as positively and were less qualified in knowing how to raise their children than parents of today.

    “This is an incredible display of arrogance and intolerance from Dr Kiro,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ, “and shows the disrespect she has for kiwi parenting. Most parents I talk to often seek advice from their own parents and other parents and grandparents on effective parenting techniques. They acknowledge the wisdom and experience that older parents have.”

    “Dr Kiro has also labelled the hundreds of thousands who have signed the petitions as gullible and misguided, and simply puppets to a political agenda. Once again, this is highly insulting to the more than 300,000 New Zealanders who care about good parenting and have thoughtfully signed the petitions, and is also an insult to the almost 75% of NZ’ers who in a poll this week say that a smack is not child abuse and shouldn’t be a crime.”

    Dr Kiro also claims that police are not knocking on the doors of good parents because of the anti-smacking law, despite many cases to the contrary.

    “This latest outburst shows how hostile the Commissioner is to anybody who disagrees with her intellectual and superior insight on parenting and families, and confirms the irrelevancy of the office,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    ENDS

  • “Why the panic?”

    Comments from Ruby Harrold-Claesson after reading the article “A referendum? Why the Panic?”

    “Why the panic?” asks Barnardos CEO.

    I would also like to ask “Why the panic?” when the NZ parliament refused to listen to the overwhelming majority of the population that was against the passing of the anti-smacking law in every possible poll; I would also like to ask “Why the panic?” when the NZ parliament forced the MPs to vote according to party lines instead of their own consciences; I would also like to ask “Why the panic?” to pass the law instead of giving the NZ parliament the possiblity to examine the Swedish court verdicts that I presented at the hearing.

    Intelligent and caring people can’t think that it is acceptable to let this dangerous law work for two years and then review it. Who is going to clean up the damages done to children and their parents while the govt is waiting to review the law? Barnardos? The PM and her govt? Sue Bradford? Typically, they can make a mess, but they can’t clean up the mess they make.

    If this law had been passed in sound, democratic order and due process there would be no need for a referendum today. The PM, Sue Bradford and the other dictators are afraid of that there will be sufficient numbers for a referendum – there may be more than enough already – and most of all they are afraid of the result of a referendum on the anti-smacking law.

    Keep up the good work

    All the best
    Ruby Harrold-Claesson

    Sweden
    Attorney-at-law
    President of the NCHR/NKMR
    http://www.nkmr.org

    Comments based on this article:

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0802/S00258.htm