We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
MacDonald: The Frenzied Search for Racism. Elites bought Jussie Smollett’s story because it confirmed their cherished narrative about a hateful America.
The only hate I see in the US is from the Left. Consumed and blinded by hate.
Trump's mental health. Let me translate one piece of this. All presidents have a certain amount of narcissism - the names Bill Clinton and Barack Obama might also come to mind - but it is only Republicans that it becomes big news. I remember it being said of Bush 43 and of Reagan. I don't recall any about Bush 41 or Ford, but it could be so. When one reads more deeply into the reports, of what is actually meant by the word "narcissist," it is nothing more than "He thinks he's right, and won't change his mind when we tell him to. HE REFUSES TO AGREE WITH US EVEN THOUGH WE ARE OBVIOUSLY RIGHT. WHAT A PIGHEADED NARCISSIST."
The worst part is, this is not merely a cynical manipulation to try and sway people and influence the culture. They really perceive things this way. If you don't agree with them, you must not be listening. Ironically - or perhaps not, perhaps it is necessarily part of the same pathology - that attitude is a symptom of Borderline Personality Disorder, which is related to Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
#1
Assistant Village Idiot
on
2019-02-20 08:26
(Reply)
Good points, yet the right shouldn't fall into the assumption that egotism is narcissism. They're not the same thing and I think that of your list, probably only tiny Baraq realistically warranted the latter's label.
Further, the right also makes a big counter-tactical blunder when it defends against the left's reckless and psychotic charges against Trump. The right should encourage the unhinged left to declare Trump a substance-abusing Martian deviant and then use that to distinguish what the left really is.
"Trump's mental health", until such time it could somehow seriously and clinically be found wanting, is therefore a transparent leftist ruse and tactic. Let it be. This is the same batch of misfits that may have actually produced a MNPD, by most appearances.
Trump is perceptibly crude and unsophisticated. He's also courageous, eminently true to his word, and extraordinarily well-equipped for executive service. Honesty and courage are simply not the narcissist's traits, nor is selfless executive performance aimed at national restoration, the first such ideal manifest in many decades.
If ever there was a candidate for an armchair diagnosis of narcissism, it was Barack Obama - who upon hearing that he had received the Nobel Prize for doing, well, nothing - said to himself "Yeah, that seems about right" and gleefully accepted.
Imagine if they called you to inform you that you've just won the Heisman award, despite the fact that you had never played football in your life.
Any normal person would have graciously declined such ill-gotten gain.
Well, Rusty, he was "who we'd been waiting for". And something about seas subsiding and so on.
Seriously, the NPD as I understand it is covering for an identity lapse by reflecting whatever grandiosity s/he wants others to see him or her as. That Nobel Prize thing tends to confirm it - pose struck, identity cast, reputation made, legacy sold, and all in a split second after an almost completely uneventful life.
The best part of the Jussie Smollett ABC interview is when he blames it all on “fear mongrels”.
#4
Christopher M. Sullivan
on
2019-02-20 10:12
(Reply)
QUOTE:
Jussie Smollett Should Be Charged With A Hate Crime...
If there is probable cause, he should be charged with false reporting. It's not a hate crime under the law because, based on the allegation, he did it for personal profit, not racial animus.
QUOTE:
It must be hatred toward the demographic features of a particular person or group. But why should that earn more legal condemnation than personal hatred or universal hatred?
As history has shown, when someone is attacked for their race or religion, it is an attack against everyone of that race or religion. Burning a cross on someone's lawn is not just vandalism.
QUOTE:
When a white man was beaten, robbed, and stripped naked by a group of black people in Baltimore a few years ago, the culprits were not prosecuted under hate crime statutes.
Nor would they be. Robbing people is not a hate crime, even if they use racial slurs, unless you can show the victim was targeted for his race.
Hate crimes are political correctness crimes...they work a lot like "disparate impact" mandates. What is absolutely necessary is having the proper person in charge of the decision making.
#4.1.1.1
indyjonesouthere
on
2019-02-20 16:56
(Reply)
indyjonesouthere: Hate crimes are political correctness crimes...they work a lot like "disparate impact" mandates. What is absolutely necessary is having the proper person in charge of the decision making.
That is incorrect. Hate crimes do not work anything like "disparate impact". In order to bring an indictment as a hate crime, the government must have probable cause that the underlying crime was motivated by racial or religious or other protected status. They then must prove the underlying crime and the motivation beyond a reasonable doubt to a judge and jury.
For instance, four young African Americans were found guilty of a hate crime and imprisoned for an attack against a disabled person.
Of course it's not incorrect, Clownbot. The human you address with your autistic literalism is obviously referring to the concept or principle of a thing. Leave it to you to take a mighty pull on the 440v line and spout some irrelevant pedantry.
feeblemind: But was she stripped of her citizenship according to law?
Perhaps. Perhaps not. It will probably go to court. The U.K. has agreed to the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, which asserts that no one should be made stateless.
feeblemind: IOW if stripping her of her citizenship is legal, there is no reason to bring her back.
The reason to bring her back to U.K. is to face justice for her crimes. You don't get to skate because you left the country.
no, she did not become stateless.
The sole reason she could be stripped of her UK citizenship is because she had dual citizenship.
She still retains that other citizenship.
Of course if that other country has no law against making people stateless they might strip her citizenship as well, but nobody can blame the UK for that.
It's not a hate crime under the law because, based on the allegation, he did it for personal profit, not racial animus.
Are you really this intellectually dishonest? The whole purpose was to gin up hate against an entire class of people: Trump supporters. The media and many politicians, happily went along with the allegation, because they so wanted it to be true. Their hate for everything that resembles conservative policy, conservative people, is mind numbing. It is the very definition of a hate crime.
As Limbaugh so succinctly, put it yesterday: "But if this hoax had been caught on tape and played endlessly on every cable news network, you don’t even want to imagine — and that was the objective here, and that’s why the media’s disappointed. Because they were so hoping this was true and they were so hoping there was video of this. So why do they keep falling for hate hoaxes? They’re not falling for anything. This is what they think America is already!"
You only do this kind of hoax, unless you have an extreme amount of hate for people, people you don't even know. If this is not a hate crime, nothing is.
In any case, perhaps you know something we don't. We had seen reports that the alleged purpose was to generate sympathy to aid his career. Hate crimes are defined by motive and action.
B. Hammer: It is the very definition of a hate crime.
If the reporting is correct, then it is not a hate crime.
It must be hatred toward the demographic features of a particular person or [bold] group [/bold]. But why should that earn more legal condemnation than personal hatred or universal hatred?
As history has shown, when someone is attacked for their race or religion, it is an attack against everyone of that race or religion. Burning a cross on someone's lawn is not just vandalism.
Maybe you better huddle up with the rest of the group,get on the same page.
B. Hammer: Maybe you better huddle up with the rest of the group
Not sure what point you are trying to make. If you hate Abe, and assault Abe, it's an attack on Abe and Abe alone. But if you hate Jews, and assault a Jew simply because he is a Jew, then it's a threat against all Jews.
So, by your logic, you must agree, that an attack upon a Trump supporter, simply for being a Trump supporter, is an attack against all Trump supporters.
Hate: intense or passionate dislike.
Thus, it is even more egregious, that a premeditated hoax, designed to cast a dark shadow upon all Trump supporters, is indeed a hate crime. It is either that, or the invention of Hate Crime, was just another lawfare tactic, enacted and developed by the left, to get even with whitey. Which by the way, is a form of hate and is the furthest thing from Justice.
B. Hammer: So, by your logic, you must agree, that an attack upon a Trump supporter, simply for being a Trump supporter, is an attack against all Trump supporters.
Sure. If MAGA people are being attacked for being MAGA people, then MAGA people have reason to be concerned.
B. Hammer: Thus, it is even more egregious, that a premeditated hoax, designed to cast a dark shadow upon all Trump supporters, is indeed a hate crime.
Crimes are determined by law, and political groups are not protected under the Illinois hate crime law. In any case, hate crimes are defined by motive and act. If the motive is personal, then it isn't a hate crime. Just because a black person robs a white person, that doesn't make it a hate crime as defined under U.S. law.
In this case, the allegation was that the person reporting the supposed crime was trying to garner publicity, and MAGA persons were collateral damage.
B. Hammer: It is either that, or the invention of Hate Crime, was just another lawfare tactic, enacted and developed by the left, to get even with whitey.
Blacks are subject to hate crime laws, just like everybody else, and have been held to account for racially and religiously motivated crimes.
If you are Brit borg bots then you have a say but if you are not I think you have no say. This is for the Brits to decide and they have a decidedly civilized approach compared to what the islamists would decide if the roles were reversed.
indyjonesouthere: If you are Brit borg bots then you have a say but if you are not I think you have no say.
Making someone stateless is against international and British law.
indyjonesouthere: This is for the Brits to decide and they have a decidedly civilized approach compared to what the islamists would decide if the roles were reversed.
The civilized option is not to leave radicals loose in the midst of instability, but to bring them to justice no matter where they might be.
re Zachriel She should be returned to Britain and tried and punished according to law.
You are agreeing with TRUMP!!!
QUOTE:
President Donald Trump called on European countries to take back captured Islamic State fighters late Saturday as U.S.-backed forces in Syria closed in on the extremist group's final sliver of territory. "The United States is asking Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over 800 ISIS fighters that we captured in Syria and put them on trial," Trump said on Twitter
I've been seeing a lot on the news lately about the opioid epidemic, I went to Home Depot and got me a good drywall respirator that I now wear at all times so that, hopefully, I won't catch the opioids that are going around. Anybody sneezes or coughs around me, they better not have the opioids is all I'm saying.
It is actually fentanyl that is causing most of the deaths. And the fentanyl is there for one purpose only and that is to make the product stronger and cheaper thus more profit for the drug p pushers. Most of the fentanyl is made in China and imported through Mexico because of our porous borders. China isn't doing this by accident, it is intentional and malicious. Funny how these deaths are blamed on big pharma by the MSM and politicians. Why? They know the truth. Would it cause more Americans to want a secure border if they spoke the truth? Is that their motive for blaming pharmaceutical companies for this?
"fentanyl is there for one purpose" That's right: Pre-anesthesia. Every time I've had surgery, they give me Fentanyl and Versed before they wheel me in. I have to admit that it made me feel pretty good.
I have never had fentanyl that I know of and I have had my share of operations. My father in law had a fentanyl patch for three months while he withered away with cancers. My wife took care of him and a nurse came buy twice a week. Her warning was do not touch the patch even if it falls off. And she applied and removed those patches. It is very dangerous in such small amounts that it is literally impossible for the drug sellers to "cut" it into the weak overly diluted opioids they sell, safely. It could be done in a lab but not on the street. It is pure poison. A perfect biological weapon.
Opioid use is a behavior, not an epidemic. Likewise, suicide may or may not be a symptom of a mental illness, but if so, it is not a contagious illness and therefore not an epidemic.
Two points; 1. It is clear to any honest observer that Trump is mentally competent and this is nothing more than a disgusting attack on him.
2. But not only is Trump competent and smart he just might be the only president since Reagan who actually considers that the U.S. is his number one job and that the world and all of the special interest groups come in second or even further down the line.
I don't believe Obama even liked the U.S. or U.S. citizens. I think he actively worked to cause us problems and planned our downfall. Bush 43 liked the U.S. I'm sure but didn't put our interests first and often put other countries ahead of us. Bill Clinton only like Bill Clinton but at least he was a smart enough politician that he didn't overtly harm us. Bush 41 was I think a good man, a patriot but he was an elite NWO kind of guy and putting the U.S. first seemed wrong to him.
I honestly fear what will happen with a Democrat president and a Democrat congress. I think we are looking at the decline and fall of the United States. I think that best we can hope for is a bankruptcy/depression.
Anon: It is clear to any honest observer that Trump is mentally competent
Mental health professonals: “Just as suspicion of crime should lead to an investigation, the severity of impairment that we see should lead to an evaluation"
Lee, surely you can do better than that.
Dr. Lee is not a member of the American Psychiatric Association.
Further, “Doctor” Bandy X. Lee has no medical license
Per a press release by the APA on Jan 09, 2018...
"A proper psychiatric evaluation requires more than a review of television appearances, tweets,
and public comments…"
We know you loathe Trump, but relying on lunatics to support your claims is more than telling.
Hank_M: "A proper psychiatric evaluation requires more than a review of television appearances, tweets,
and public comments…"
Sure, which is why they are asking for a proper evaluation. Whether they are correct or not, Anon's claim was that Trump's mental competence was clear, while he seems to have a screw loose.
You'd be the last one to consult about normality, bot, and last I checked they don't submit potuses to mental health exams. Given the tools elected to the post over the last half century, obviously not.
As endlessly pedantic as you are, did your Google-fu somehow miss that point? No, seriously; with your endless barrage of completely irrelevant lecturing to folks an obvious intellectual level above yours, did you miss the fact potuses aren't subjected to mental health screenings?
I'm not even going to bother obliterating your equally bizarre claim down to the molecular level that Trump is unfit.
We agree again!! "...the severity of impairment that we see should lead to an evaluation" But not Trump's impairment but rather the Trump derangement syndrome and gross dishonesty of someone who would say this. If he is a health professional he should be investigated.
Photo from a reader: Ice castle in Dillon, Colorado, this week