12/28/2023

Migrant crisis has US taxpayers on the hook for up to $451B, House GOP report says.

WHAT IS THEIR PLAN?

The Biden administration is replete with former Obama staffers. As confirmed by “USA TODAY,” Biden isn’t the only member of this administration who saw how things were done during JihadBarry’s tenure. About three-quarters of his top 100 aides previously worked in the Obama administration, with a majority of key staff representing his design on “equity.” That’s despite the fact that Biden has insisted his White House is not a continuation of Obama’s, “This is not a third Obama term!” In reality, instant replay!

A vote for Biden is a vote for JihadBarry.

ttps://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/16/most-bidens-top-white-house-staff-worked-obama-and-female/7706857002/#from%20Al%20Gore%20to%20Joe%20Biden%20and%20Back:%20Chief%20of%20Staff%20Ron%20Klain

ttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/illinois-naacp-president-is-suspended-after-branding-rapists-and-savages-who-are-taking-resources-from-black-and-homeless-people/ar-AA1mafrC?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=690bd5c615504f39bdc650f447f623d0&ei=12

Why Some People Will Never Admit They’re Wrong

Psychological rigidity is not a sign of strength.

Posted November 3, 2018 

KEY POINTS

• The typical response to discovering one is wrong is to admit it, either fully or partially.
• Some people refuse to admit they’re wrong, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, due to a fragile ego.
• If one cannot psychologically handle being wrong, they may deny facts to defend their actions or beliefs.
• We all make mistakes, and we do so with regularity. Some errors are small, such as, “No, we don’t need to stop at the store; there’s plenty of milk left for breakfast.” Some are bigger, such as, “Don’t rush me; we have plenty of time to get to the airport before the flight leaves.” And some are crucial, such as, “I know it was raining and dark, but I’m sure that was the man I saw breaking into the home across the street.”

No one enjoys being wrong. It’s an unpleasant emotional experience for all of us. The question is how do we respond when it turns out we were wrong—when there wasn’t enough milk left for coffee, when we hit traffic and missed the flight, or when we find out the man who sat in jail for five years based on our identification was innocent all along?

Some of us admit we were wrong and say, “Oops, you were right. We should have gotten more milk.”

Some of us kind of imply we were wrong, but we don’t do so explicitly or in a way that is satisfying to the other person: “We had plenty of time to get to the airport on time if the traffic hadn’t been unusually bad. But fine, we’ll leave earlier next time.”

But some people refuse to admit they’re wrong, even in the face of overwhelming evidence: “They let him go because of DNA evidence and another dude’s confession? Ridiculous! That’s the guy! I saw him!”

The first two examples are probably familiar to most of us because those are typical responses to being wrong. We accept responsibility fully or partially (sometimes, very, very partially), but we don’t push back against the actual facts. We don’t claim there was enough milk when there wasn’t, or that we were not late to the airport.

But what about when a person does push back against the facts, when they simply cannot admit they were wrong in any circumstance? What is it in their psychological makeup that makes it impossible for them to admit they were wrong, even when it is obvious they were? And why does this happen so repetitively—why do they never admit they were wrong?

The answer is related to their ego; their very sense of self.

A Fragile Ego Leads to Attempts to Distort Reality

Some people have such a fragile ego, such brittle self-esteem, such a weak “psychological constitution,” that admitting they made a mistake or that they were wrong is fundamentally too threatening for their egos to tolerate. Accepting they were wrong, absorbing that reality, would be so psychologically shattering that their defense mechanisms do something remarkable to avoid doing so—they literally distort their perception of reality to make it (reality) less threatening. Their defense mechanisms protect their fragile ego by changing the very facts in their mind, so they are no longer wrong or culpable.

As a result, they come up with statements, such as, “I checked in the morning, and there was enough milk, so someone must have finished it.” When it’s pointed out that no one was home after they left in the morning, so no one could have done that, they double down and repeat, “Someone must have, because I checked, and there was milk,” as though some phantom broke into the house, finished the milk and left without a trace.

kommonsentsjane