Is there any bag of foul wind fouler than that hypocrite Dr Phil McGraw? Dr Phil, TV3, Tuesday 17 November 2015
sanctimoniousadj. showing or marked by false piety or righteousness; hypocritically virtuous.
The TV3 programme notes on this show billed it like this: “Two young women accuse their father of physically and verbally abusing them.” #blamingdad
The dad was pretty much the model of what Bob McCoskrie would call a perfect father. He protested to Dr Phil: “I ain’t the greatest dad in the world, but I ain’t no ogre. I spanked them and I slapped them but…”
But all the protestations in the world cut no ice with Dr. Phil, that supreme moral arbiter, that exemplar of core American values, that upholder of all that decent and right in the world. Dr Phil sternly lectured him that violence and shouting had no place in his relationships with his daughters, no matter how old they were.
So what WOULD that dad have had to do to earn praise, rather than censure, by Dr. Phil? Well, he might have tried shooting hundreds of people, including women and children, in another country…
Of course he was right to upbraid him about hitting his daughters.
The point of my post was to note how odd it was for him to take that stance, in view of the fact he had, earlier this year, called a notorious mass murderer “a modern-day American hero”.
Click on the links from my first post, and it will be quite clear. But, briefly, my objection to Dr Phil pronouncing about anything is this:
Earlier this year he claimed that the notorious Chris Kyle, the American sniper who killed hundreds of men, women and children in Afghanistan (the Department of “Defense” officially confirmed he had more than 160 victims) was “a modern-day American hero”….
The life and death of Chris Kyle has captivated millions. He risked his life fighting for this country. He miraculously survived the most dangerous combat zones …. a modern-day American hero.”
In the light of the depravity of his endorsement of Kyle, I don’t think Dr Phil is a fit and proper person to make a judgement on the character of anyone.
Sorry, still don’t know what you are on about. The first link isn’t that clear, the second two are identical and going on about an Imperial Wizard. If you want me to answer your question you’re going to have to make your point in plain English that doesn’t require 10 mins of further research to understand what you are on about.
1. Chris Kyle was a mass murderer. He was praised by Dr Phil earlier this year as “a modern-day American hero.”
2. Dr Phil, who praises mass murderers as “modern-day American heroes”, has the temerity to upbraid someone for yelling at his daughters and spanking them.
3. I don’t approve of spanking, but then I don’t approve of mass murder either. I think I am entitled to lecture someone who spanks his daughters to desist.
4. Dr Phil doesn’t approve of spanking, but he DOES approve of mass murder. I don’t think he is entitled to lecture ANYONE about anything, because he is a moral imbecile.
5. Now please read my original links, because it’s all perfectly clear.
“1. Chris Kyle was a mass murderer. He was praised by Dr Phil earlier this year as “a modern-day American hero.””
Citation for Dr Phil ‘praising’ Kyle. The link you provided implies the programme is about Kyle’s parents discussing his mental illness and that he wouldn’t have murdered people if he’s gotten the help he needed. Presumably if Phil did praise Kyle, it wasn’t for the murders. Did Phil praise Kyle for his pre-murdering life? I’m betting it wasn’t for his murdering life.
“2. Dr Phil, who praises mass murderers as “modern-day American heroes”, has the temerity to upbraid someone for yelling at his daughters and spanking them.”
Lots of people have relative morality. Myself, I think context is important.
“3. I don’t approve of spanking, but then I don’t approve of mass murder either. I think I am entitled to lecture someone who spanks his daughters to desist.”
I’m not in a position to judge you on that.
“4. Dr Phil doesn’t approve of spanking, but he DOES approve of mass murder. I don’t think he is entitled to lecture ANYONE about anything, because he is a moral imbecile.”
Citation needed that Dr Phil approves of mass murder. Pretty sure you are making shit up now.
“5. Now please read my original links, because it’s all perfectly clear.”
As mentioned, I tried and I’m not going to attempt that dog’s breakfast of a comment because I’m guessing it’s full of the same illogic as this one.
The life and death of Chris Kyle has captivated millions. He risked his life fighting for this country. He miraculously survived the most dangerous combat zones …. a modern-day American hero.”
Now what part of that do you not understand? He is praising a U.S. Army sniper who is “credited” officially with more than 160 kills.
You can vapour on all you like about how he is praising him for his “pre-murdering” actions, but nobody will take you seriously.
I would be offended by your allegation that I am “making shit up”, but it’s quite obvious you have basic problems in comprehension, as well as a history of hostility towards me. I have humoured you this evening, but I haven’t forgotten how credulous you were a couple of years ago in swallowing all that government black propaganda about Julian Assange, and how you continued, in spite of the allegations being conclusively refuted, to defiantly traduce not only Assange but anyone who dared to support him.
You can resort to all the ad homs you like Morrisey (and more lies), but when you say “but he DOES approve of mass murder.” I believe you are making shit up. There is a large difference between being able to see someone’s contribution to their country and approving of mass murder. What’s not believable is that Phil McGraw approves of what Kyle did. You are grossly misrepresenting his position for your own argumentative gratification.
I think any reasonably intelligent person would interpret these words as endorsement: “He risked his life fighting for this country. He miraculously survived the most dangerous combat zones …. a modern-day American hero.”
The person he is endorsing is a sniper who picked off women and children from positions of almost complete safety.
I am not going to waste any more time with you while you play your endless game of feigned incomprehension.
no, most people would understand that it’s possible to appreciate a soldier’s former life and not approve of them murdering multiple people. There is nothing in what you have posted that supports your assertion that Phil McGraw approves of mass murder (your words).
“He risked his life fighting for this country. He miraculously survived the most dangerous combat zones …. a modern-day American hero.”
There is only one google hit for any of that quote (your comment), so I’m guessing you transcribed it from the video. Given your transcriptions are shall we say loose at the best of times I’m going to assume that you have grossly misquoted McGraw out of context. I’ll also hazard a guess the McGraw was introducing Kyle when he used those words and the implication is that he was a modern-day American hero for his work as a soldier not for his later mass murder.
I’m not surprised you are giving this no more time because you can’t answer the challenge to your argument.
Dr Phil, TV3, Tuesday 17 November 2015