Perfect Madness, Indeed, Judith

The New York Times' Judith Warner (author of the book, "Perfect Madness") wrote a column on Buddhism, meditation, and "mindfulness" where she confesses to many things we at TMR have been saying:

Being part of a group that's bought into the current spiritual bullshit and laughs at thier own hypocrisy, instead of correcting it.

Being pretentious.

Being a tool of the SHAM (Self-Help and Actualization Movement).

Knowing David Foster Wallace killed himself by thinking like this.

Getting angry at her husband for pointing out she's become a silly "NewAge" person - with terrible taste in music (and being shallow enough to side with the silliness and bad taste against her devoted spouse - potential divorce material.)

Of "not being there at all" but foolishly claiming to actually "Be Here Now" - and thinking such self-imposed obliviousness has "charm".

Discovering she's actually been disconnecting from people - the exact opposite of what all this NewAge dribble claims.

Taking advice from people suffering from "depression and self-depletion" who "send,...silent good wishes to people all over the world who have problems exactly like my own." (I guess the rest of us don't matter or couldn't be of any help to anyone so troubled in the first place.)

We love this bullshit line: "I have no doubt that this meta-connectedness feels real, and indeed is real, in the abstract at least." Yea: in the abstract. Idiot talk of the highest order.

Another goody: "I’ve come lately to wonder whether meaningful bonds are well forged by the extreme solipsism that mindfulness practice often turns out to be." Right: solipsism will bring us together. Sure, dummy. Being wrong is a community organizing tool.

She acknowledges such people become evangelical in defense of their wrongness. The very thing they hypocritically hate Christians for.

Of course, selfishness, being self-absorbed - and boring - and inhuman.

Other than making her as ugly as all that, Judith Warner being a Buddhist is just the bee's knees.

And, now, multiply all that terrible nonsense by the millions - no billions - of selfish, pretentious, idiots believing in it, in our neighborhoods, college campuses, government, etc., and you start to get some scale of our problems.

Why does it seem, as the Boomers (who brought us this crap in it's modern guise) continue to assume the reigns of power, that we've "fallen and can't get up"?

This is why.

It's The March of the Lemmings - right over a cliff.

Why Women Get Beat Up (And No Man Helps Her) Or Why The Vast Majority Of Sluts Were Too Jealous To Ever Come To Monica Lewinsky's Aid

"The other night I dreamt of Barack Obama. He was taking a shower right when I needed to get into the bathroom to shave my legs,...

Many women — not too surprisingly — were dreaming about sex with the president. In these dreams, the women replaced Michelle with greater or lesser guilt or, in the case of a 62-year-old woman in North Florida, whose dream was reported to me by her daughter, found a fully above-board solution: 'Michelle had divorced Barack because he had become "too much of a star." He then married my mother, who was oh so proud to be the first lady,' the daughter wrote me."

-- Judith Warner, confessing the same disastrous-to-everyone-but-still-guilt-free ideas of adultery, cheating, and betrayal, one can always find in NewAge women (and a woman getting a sexual turn-on from the pain of a wife divorcing her loyal man because of his success - which, as a husband, is done mostly on the wife's behalf and many times just to make her proud - is a really nice touch as well: Love You, Too, Honey!!!) though we're more-than-a-little familiar with it, since such idiotic views can always be found in The New York Times.

Liberals: No Empathy, No Compassion.

“'Palin Power' isn’t just about making hockey moms feel important. It’s not just about giving abortion rights opponents their due. It’s also, in obscure ways, about making yearnings come true — deep, inchoate desires about respect and service, hierarchy and family that have somehow been successfully projected onto the figure of this unlikely woman and have stuck.

For those of us who can’t tap into those yearnings, it seems the Palin faithful are blind – to the contradictions between her stated positions and the truth of the policies she espouses, to the contradictions between her ideology and their interests. But Jonathan Haidt, an associate professor of moral psychology at the University of Virginia, argues in an essay this month, 'What Makes People Vote Republican?', that it’s liberals, in fact, who are dangerously blind.

Haidt has conducted research in which liberals and conservatives were asked to project themselves into the minds of their opponents and answer questions about their moral reasoning. Conservatives, he said, prove quite adept at thinking like liberals, but liberals are consistently incapable of understanding the conservative point of view. 'Liberals feel contempt for the conservative moral view, and that is very, very angering. Republicans are good at exploiting that anger,' he told me in a phone interview.

Perhaps that’s why the conservatives can so successfully get under liberals’ skin. And why liberals need to start working harder at breaking through the empathy barrier."

-- Judith Warner, on the hatred and emptiness at the center of liberalism's heart and head, which is why they like the New York Times.