"I do think there is denial on Bush's part in his running of the war," says Kerry Sulkowicz, clinical professor of psychiatry at New York University Medical Center. "He seems unmoved by the extent of the evidence that things are far worse than he believes. The tip-off for denial is perpetual optimism, a pathological certainty that things are going well."
Bush could, of course, know full well that the United States cannot achieve its goals in Iraq. If so, then he is lying not to himself but to us (for reasons scientists would have a field day with, but that's another story).
Well this is completely fair, right? The author admits that the president might not be in denial--he might just be lying to us!
Diagnosing from a distance is surely not exactly proper analysis for the field of psychology, you might say. Well so does this article:
But while it's always risky to psychoanalyze a politician from afar, a few things in his past are consistent with the capacity for denial. When he was 7, his baby sister died of leukemia. Bush, while certainly not denying her death, tried to cheer up his grieving mother, saying everything would be OK.
Full speed ahead! We raised the problem of the very premise of the article without answering the objection, and so covered ourselves fully! On to the evidence from when George Bush was seven years old!
Yeah, that's fairly damning! Not that the article says the young president-to-be denied his sister's death. He just tried to comfort his mother. The little loony.
Oh, and the president admits to a drinking problem. That's the sum total of the evidence presented.
I guess we'd best not ask Senator Kennedy for any analysis on anything (and not just about bridge safety and pants-optional policies) since his past is fairly consistent with this supposed evidence of denial.
Look, the idea that 85% of the Iraqi population (Shias and Kurds), exercising their right to elect their own government, can't eventually defeat even a well-financed and exceptionally brutal terrorism campaign based on shrinking support in the shrinking 15% Sunni Arabs is just ridiculous.
The enemy is being defeated and after four years of terror and insurgency has actually gone backwards down the escalation ladder. They rarely operate in more than squad strength and mostly just plant IEDs ands use suicide bombers. This is not the record of an organization that is winning the war. The belief that we are losing this war--the belief that is necessary to declare that the president is denying the bad news--is not based on any knowledge of history, of the military, or of strategy. Insurgencies are difficult to quantify. Yet those who psychoanalyze the president from afar base their conclusion of presidential denial on the ill-informed assumption that we are losing the war and are doomed to lose it. That's a rather shaky foundation for building a case for presidential denial!
There is clearly some denial going on over this war. But it is not President Bush who is in denial.
These critics who don't understand history and misuse their own profession to claim the president is in denial or lying should look into another psychological term--it's called "projection."
Can we say clinician heal thyself?
UPDATE: Engram examines who is in denial over Iraq.
