It began with the news wire headline of “big applause” from Congress – and the image of our wonderfully principled and intelligent leaders authentically applauding (that is, ritualistically striking their hands together at expected times to make sounds) – that got my eyes welling, and by the time I had taken in the hug – a televised embrace! the meaning of that! – of a Supreme Justice, along with another headline that let me know that President’s speech “renews audacity to hope”, I, like any good American, was truly affected! Then the planted child whose classmates usefully aspire to become career criminals . . . . . er . . . “congressmen like yourself” ! It was almost too much. But I allowed myself one more image – that of a young man or woman, inspired by President to pay their debt to their Country, an image of that young American in the deserts of Iraq or Afghanistan, there for us, as President has noted.

But why does the photo caption read, “Reality show child star has freakishly low voice” ?

Is that some kind of joke?

And anybody even questioning that obviously righteous position just proves how vile and immoral they are, at the same time confirming that our side has taken the moral high ground! Confirming that we are, actually, in spite of everything else going on, good .

That’s the ultimately disingenuous moral and political theater whose function is defense against inner distress generated by moral discrepancy and insecurity. It is the construction, with props, actors, and theatrics, of what is intended as an unassailably decent and moral position precisely because that standing is needed, to defend against its actual lacking. The theatrical construction, employing the vulnerability and innocence of a child, of – “How could anyone question the goodness of this position? See how moral we are?” – has meaning and purpose, is explained by a need to create an impression of moral standing.

To cover and distract from their global gratuitous killing sprees and domestic wars against the poor and powerless and addicted, the Repubs have abortion and Family Values. The Dems have Ty’Sheoma.

1. Yes it’s a lousy school and that is inexcusable.

2. Yes it’s in a socioeconomic environment that fosters family dysfunction and associated emotional and behavioral barriers for the kids.

3. Yes it’s transparently cynical political theater.

4. Joan almost seems disappointed that so few bit on the bait.

(and heavily masked by constructed doxa) – that, anomalies notwithstanding, it is inconceivable that any individual who has successfully risen up through hierarchies of power, material gain, and/or status in this culture could do so without the use, cultivation, reinforcement, and internalization of antisocial traits, i.e. of criminal thinking errors and behaviors. Observant adults see and know this. Over time, these traits and inner models for viewing and navigating in the world become part of personality. As part of personality, we expect to see them expressed in behavior.

The utterances, posturing, and alliances that the MSM and fine Americans take as admirable and winning signs of decency and goodness are, in fact, the typical defenses employed by antisocial types to cover and defend internally and externally against recognition of their sociopathic behaviors - the cultivated sheen of religiosity; the pathetically maudlin and false self-effacement and patriotism (“Everything I am I owe to my country”); the oh-so-touching reverence for Family, God and Country; even the not-quite-genuine winning smile and personality.

The signs were there (and dismissed, “He’s a politician!”) all along – the traits; the shady deals; the disingenuousness and unprincipled whoring for votes; addictive behavior; the troubling hints of narcissism; the associations with and willingness to cut deals with powerful criminals; and eventually the overtly unprincipled and we-are-above-the-law behavior.

We are at war with the Other, and our weapons must include killing, terror, secrecy, consolidation of power, deception, constructing reality as needed, intimidation, and whatever means are necessary – we are doing what we have learned to do.

This is what was chosen for leadership, these are the only choices System allows.

Like H. just gave permission to displace your anger on individuals who happen to be naturally attractive, have some self-discipline, and can maintain healthy body mass and tone.

You wish, venomous letter writers. She seems actually to have more to say about the judges, and their apparent need to aggress:

Which is awesome, because we lumpmeisters and Teletubbies and misshapen curly-fry enthusiasts at home love nothing more than seeing beautiful, slender young people mistreated, humiliated and dismissed with a careless wave of a delicate-boned, former-model-or-fashion-designer hand. We know that many of these long, tall Sallys have spent the better half of their short lives sucking in their ass cheeks and making their Zoolander faces in the mirror and snickering at the genetically inferior outcasts in their midst.

“We know . . ." Not!

OK, fine. They've probably been doubting themselves and scrawling lonely passages in their diaries and mooning over worthless crushes just like the rest of us have. But still, they looked really good doing it, and for that, they must pay! Because we looked good once, too, before we decided that being hot was exhausting and unnecessary, particularly when compared to the joys of eating Ho-Hos in bed while watching hot people suffering on TV.

Indeed, Dr. H., and it’s a good thing these televised targets for our displaced anger exist, no? Better that than someone’s kids? Maybe models serve an important social function after all.