Psychologist Worries ‘Erratic’ Obama May Not Be ‘Sane’

[Quick Karl]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2014/06/04/fox-biz-psychologist-worries-erratic-obama-may-not-be-sane#ixzz33zAPcjZn

DOBBS: The President hasn’t mentioned a word about Sgt. Tahmooressi held in a Mexican prison. Your thoughts on the distinction here between the two, in at least Obama’s mind?

Dr. LOUDON: You know, I will say to you, Lou, I am very, very concerned about the mental stability of this President at this point. Some of his behavior seems irrational to me. It seems beyond that of just a typical narcissistic, arrogant, sort of, ‘I’m a leader of a big country and I feel tyrannical at the moment’ kind of attitude. It really seems to me like this President is demonstrating behavior that is not only anti-American, but irrational and erratic and perhaps not exactly what we might want to deem sane.

Now, she IS a University educated "psychologist", so that automatically makes her right - oh wait, she's on the wrong team so, there must be something wrong and she stole her degree, or she's brain-damaged, and, and, and, MY GOD SHE MIGHT EVEN BE A CATHOLIC!!!!!

[NowhereInTime]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2014/06/04/fox-biz-psychologist-worries-erratic-obama-may-not-be-sane#ixzz33zAPcjZn

Now, she IS a University educated "psychologist", so that automatically makes her right - oh wait, she's on the wrong team so, there must be something wrong and she stole her degree, or she's brain-damaged, and, and, and, MY GOD SHE MIGHT EVEN BE A CATHOLIC!!!!!

You've confused the voices in your head about your last psych eval with a story about the President on Faux News.  It's okay, take your meds.  Go back to sleep.

[Juan]

What is "sane" when we're talking politicians?

[NowhereInTime]

What is "sane" when we're talking politicians?

Or, in that vein, when talking Qunt Karl?

[PB the Deplorable]

Our Manchurian Candidate president may have a few strings loose?

Wow, some real insight there.  But it's old news



The following is a reprint of a column from a therapist who was writing an occasional piece for The American Thinker at the time.  She lives and works in Berkeley, and is a lifelong Lib who finally woke up one day.  This is from June 2010.  Obama has only gotten worse since this was written.  Much much worse.  As she predicted.  I wonder what she would have to say about him now.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2532341/posts

[Juan]

How dare you cite The American Thinker and a freeper, PB.  Don't you know that the source is the important thing, not the argument?

[NowhereInTime]

How dare you cite The American Thinker and a freeper, PB.  Don't you know that the source is the important thing, not the argument?

I know you're going for snark here, and I yield a tiny giggle (   ), but, in fact, source does matter and more often than not, the argument doesn't.

[NowhereInTime]

Our Manchurian Candidate president may have a few strings loose?

Wow, some real insight there.  But it's old news



The following is a reprint of a column from a therapist who was writing an occasional piece for The American Thinker at the time.  She lives and works in Berkeley, and is a lifelong Lib who finally woke up one day.  This is from June 2010.  Obama has only gotten worse since this was written.  Much much worse.  As she predicted.  I wonder what she would have to say about him now.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2532341/posts

I love how you cons do this where you claim someone is a "lifelong" liberal who's magically seen the error of their ways and converted to cold, heartless conservatism.

1) Often these people are sandbaggers like SciFi Author, Albrecht, Unquenchable Angst, and others who overtly claim not to be conservatives, merely "objective" reviewers who suddenly, magically find themselves "persuaded" to fall at the Altar of Friedman.

2) The few genuine libs who "change over" are people (like Rob Lowe) who are pissed at the lib establishment for perceived slights and decide to try to stick it to them. 

In any event, its lame and holds no water.  Hell, Papes' teabag holds more water.

[PB the Deplorable]

I know you're going for snark here, and I yield a tiny giggle (   ), but, in fact, source does matter and more often than not, the argument doesn't.

Because the 'Progressives' can't or won't think for themselves, and need to be careful to get their 'info' and instructions from sources already vetted by other 'Progs'. 

Hence the fear of even hearing other views, and the need to always be demonizing Fox News and Talk Radio.

[NowhereInTime]

Because the 'Progressives' can't or won't think for themselves, and need to be careful to get their 'info' and instructions from sources already vetted by other 'Progs'. 

Hence the fear of even hearing other views, and the need to always be demonizing Fox News and Talk Radio.

Or, Paper*Boy, if those "other views" weren't always laden with derision, dripping with condescension, or filled with outright lies, we'd be happy to hear them.

Liberalism is still about open-mindedness.  Its the antithesis of the conservative bubble/unimind which you so admirably display in this post.

[PB the Deplorable]

I love how you cons do this where you claim someone is a "lifelong" liberal who's magically seen the error of their ways and converted to cold, heartless conservatism.

1) Often these people are sandbaggers like SciFi Author, Albrecht, Unquenchable Angst, and others who overtly claim not to be conservatives, merely "objective" reviewers who suddenly, magically find themselves "persuaded" to fall at the Altar of Friedman.

2) The few genuine libs who "change over" are people (like Rob Lowe) who are pissed at the lib establishment for perceived slights and decide to try to stick it to them. 

In any event, its lame and holds no water.  Hell, Papes' teabag holds more water.

Do you know why she goes by the pseudonym 'Robin of Berkeley'?  It's because when a person lives around here they quickly learn to either keep their mouths shut or be ready for a constant shit-storm from the thuggy Left who live under the rocks around here.  These tolerant, non-judgmental, open-minded, non-violent miscreants will do anything and everything they can to make people's lives miserable.  They will show up at their homes, try to get them fired, attack them on-line and through the Media. 

This is one of the ways we know the Left is NOT for Free Speech, or any of the rest of what they claim to believe in, and what the rest of us actually do believe in.

No way could she use her real name on her columns.


Anyway, here is one of her columns talking about her move away from the Liberal side of things.  She's taken down many of her columns, which is too bad - she has a certain insight.

http://www.robinofberkeley.com/2010/08/24/how-to/

[PB the Deplorable]

Or, Paper*Boy, if those "other views" weren't always laden with derision, dripping with condescension, or filled with outright lies, we'd be happy to hear them.

Liberalism is still about open-mindedness.  Its the antithesis of the conservative bubble/unimind which you so admirably display in this post.

That's an amazing post coming from someone who admits to being a strong supporter of Obama, and continues to be one to this day.

When the rest of us told you O-bots he was either a Muslim, strongly supported them, or had a blind spot about 'Jihad', you pooh-poohed it.  When we told you he was a hard-line Leftist ideologue, you ignored that.   When we said he was a shady character, hiding his past, rising to the top of the most corrupt political machine in the United States, and that he was thus very likely a world class liar and underhanded schemer, you said no.  When we told you his comments were those of a would-be dictator, you insisted that wasn't true.

It's all come to pass.  All of it.  On top of everything else, he's now officially a traitor - setting 5 top enemy commanders free.

How can we not be derisive, or not 'drip' with condescension towards those who enabled and continue to enable this person?  'Fundamental Change' as Ass-wipe referred to it.

Open-minded?  Please.  Try block-headed.

[NowhereInTime]

That's an amazing post coming from someone who admits to being a strong supporter of Obama, and continues to be one to this day.

When the rest of us told you O-bots he was either a Muslim, strongly supported them, or had a blind spot about 'Jihad', you pooh-poohed it.  When we told you he was a hard-line Leftist ideologue, you ignored that.   When we said he was a shady character, hiding his past, rising to the top of the most corrupt political machine in the United States, and that he was thus very likely a world class liar and underhanded schemer, you said no.  When we told you his comments were those of a would-be dictator, you insisted that wasn't true.

It's all come to pass.  All of it.  On top of everything else, he's now officially a traitor - setting 5 top enemy commanders free.

How can we not be derisive, or not 'drip' with condescension towards those who enabled and continue to enable this person?  'Fundamental Change' as Ass-wipe referred to it.

Open-minded?  Please.  Try block-headed.

Wow.  There's not one true thing in your entire post.  This is delusion (self-delusion?) at it's textbook best.

[albrecht]

Diagnosis so quickly and without actually seeing the patient is questionable but clearly this character Obama, or whatever name he is using this decade, has some major "issues," to use the trendy term. Consider the trauma, and outright oddness, of this character's childhood:

divorce parents

raised by a cross-dressing nanny in an Islamic country

alcoholic father

religious confusion (attending both Catholic school and an Islamic school)

very promiscuous mother (and father)

racial/background confusion as a mulatto (as frequently mentioned in his books)

drug addiction and abuse (his cigarette addiction shows an addictive personality still)

various and sundry radical "mentors" (Frank Marshall Davis, Rev.Wright, Bill Ayers)

possible sexual "issues" (Man's Country, Body-Men, frequent separate vacations from Michelle, etc)

And who knows what we don't know since so much of his history and life remains a closely guarded secret. But clearly anyone who write autobiographies (or has them ghostwritten) at such a young age (and an age in which he had not accomplished anything) has some narcissist personality; at a minimum.

[PB the Deplorable]

Diagnosis so quickly and without actually seeing the patient is questionable but clearly this character Obama, or whatever name he is using this decade, has some major "issues," to use the trendy term. Consider the trauma, and outright oddness, of this character's childhood...

And then there are his actual comments and actions to add to what we know about him.

[PB the Deplorable]

Wow.  There's not one true thing in your entire post.  This is delusion (self-delusion?) at it's textbook best.

There is definitely some self delusion going on, but not on my end.

[NowhereInTime]

Diagnosis so quickly and without actually seeing the patient is questionable but clearly this character Obama, or whatever name he is using this decade, has some major "issues," to use the trendy term. Consider the trauma, and outright oddness, of this character's childhood:

divorce parents

raised by a cross-dressing nanny in an Islamic country

alcoholic father

religious confusion (attending both Catholic school and an Islamic school)

very promiscuous mother (and father)

racial/background confusion as a mulatto (as frequently mentioned in his books)

drug addiction and abuse (his cigarette addiction shows an addictive personality still)

various and sundry radical "mentors" (Frank Marshall Davis, Rev.Wright, Bill Ayers)

possible sexual "issues" (Man's Country, Body-Men, frequent separate vacations from Michelle, etc)

And who knows what we don't know since so much of his history and life remains a closely guarded secret. But clearly anyone who write autobiographies (or has them ghostwritten) at such a young age (and an age in which he had not accomplished anything) has some narcissist personality; at a minimum.

"this character Obama" .

You guys are unbelievable.

[NowhereInTime]

There is definitely some self delusion going on, but not on my end.

In your fantasy world, we have fallen into a dictatorial miasma whereupon our benevolent leader is fast tracking us to doomsday.  And selling our country's ass out to Allah.  You need to escape your hovel from time to time and get some fresh air.

[West of the Rockies]

Oh, sometimes things are too funny.  Those of you who think Obama is some sort of radical leftist make me chuckle:  I think he is socially a little left of today's center (where a plurality now support same-sex marriage and such), but in most other ways, I see him as a right-leaning centrist.

I think it's the same as how those of us on the left saw GWB as a right-winger whereas conservatives called him a RINO.

We all have our filters.  On this particular Sunday morning, it just makes me laugh.

[Yorkshire pud]

Diagnosis so quickly and without actually seeing the patient is questionable but clearly this character Obama, or whatever name he is using this decade, has some major "issues," to use the trendy term. Consider the trauma, and outright oddness, of this character's childhood:

divorce parents

raised by a cross-dressing nanny in an Islamic country

alcoholic father

religious confusion (attending both Catholic school and an Islamic school)

very promiscuous mother (and father)

racial/background confusion as a mulatto (as frequently mentioned in his books)

drug addiction and abuse (his cigarette addiction shows an addictive personality still)

various and sundry radical "mentors" (Frank Marshall Davis, Rev.Wright, Bill Ayers)

possible sexual "issues" (Man's Country, Body-Men, frequent separate vacations from Michelle, etc)

And who knows what we don't know since so much of his history and life remains a closely guarded secret. But clearly anyone who write autobiographies (or has them ghostwritten) at such a young age (and an age in which he had not accomplished anything) has some narcissist personality; at a minimum.

Phew, the first non perfect President with imperfect parents and imperfect friends and acquaintances. And to cap it all 'possible sexual issues'...No??? Say it isn't so.. Maybe he should do some real man love and dress in cammo gear each weekend and shower in the woods, where real men hang out...so to speak.

Desperation never read so...desperate.

[wr250]

I think it's the same as how those of us on the left saw GWB as a right-winger whereas conservatives called him a RINO.

thats cause GWB was right of your stance, thus a rt winger ,to you. the the right-wingers, he is left, and thus a RINO. tp me he was just another dumbass politician, with his finger up in the political breeze. we have GWB to thank for no child left behind, 2 "wars" (undeclared by congress), the patriot act, and countless stupidity, which oddly enough, 0bama has continued. the left never says anything about these things, other than nowhere in time.

[West of the Rockies]

Well, hell, I'll throw in with NiT on that... Yes, Obama is continuing much of what GWB began or himself inherited.  I think they both answer to oligarchs to a large degree.  I am under no illusions that those on the left operate only out of desire for peace and goodness.  Follow the damn dollar!  I DO think that Republicans more vigorously protect wealth.

[albrecht]

Phew, the first non perfect President with imperfect parents and imperfect friends and acquaintances. And to cap it all 'possible sexual issues'...No??? Say it isn't so.. Maybe he should do some real man love and dress in cammo gear each weekend and shower in the woods, where real men hang out...so to speak.

Desperation never read so...desperate.

I'm simply replying to the concerns that many people have regarding this character Obama's mental health using facts from his own auto-biographies. Any single one of those I've mentioned could, and often does, cause emotional problems for a child that can carry over to adulthood. But to have a person that experiences so much trauma, and bizarreness, in his childhood it is no surprise that psychologists, and others, are concerned about his mental and emotional health.

[Quick Karl]

Well, hell, I'll throw in with NiT on that... Yes, Obama is continuing much of what GWB began or himself inherited.  I think they both answer to oligarchs to a large degree.  I am under no illusions that those on the left operate only out of desire for peace and goodness.  Follow the damn dollar!  I DO think that Republicans more vigorously protect wealth.

So, you're saying you would rather live in a country with no job opportunities, as opposed to some job opportunities?

It's a rhetorical question. I do not support the super-wealthy-plutocrats that are pulling the strings of the Democrat party, any more than I do the ones that support the Republicans.

But so long as the country is infected with the cancer of nitwits, our battle is with the cancer, not the symptoms of the cancer...

[Yorkshire pud]

I'm simply replying to the concerns that many people have regarding this character Obama's mental health using facts from his own auto-biographies. Any single one of those I've mentioned could, and often does, cause emotional problems for a child that can carry over to adulthood. But to have a person that experiences so much trauma, and bizarreness, in his childhood it is no surprise that psychologists, and others, are concerned about his mental and emotional health.

I suppose that makes him no different to the other 310 million he shares the country with then. You're suggesting (and patronisingly) that by some bizarre algorithm he's mentally unstable because of his  childhood? It's really telling how when a known criminal is mentioned on these pages and his childhood mentioned, that isn't seen as a sufficient grounds to justify his fall in adult years. Presumably it doesn't make any difference and there's no excuse then?

But if what you're saying is true; It seems it should be mandatory to vet anyone psychologically before they're made President? Or let's extend that down to Governors, and Zone commissioners, Mayors?  Anyone who applies for a driving licence, anyone who wishes to buy booze, or buy a firearm? See what their childhood throws up that might cloud their judgement..

No doubt you'll find some transgression of some amendments there...well, more than one. 

[albrecht]

I suppose that makes him no different to the other 310 million he shares the country with then. You're suggesting (and patronisingly) that by some bizarre algorithm he's mentally unstable because of his  childhood? It's really telling how when a known criminal is mentioned on these pages and his childhood mentioned, that isn't seen as a sufficient grounds to justify his fall in adult years. Presumably it doesn't make any difference and there's no excuse then?

But if what you're saying is true; It seems it should be mandatory to vet anyone psychologically before they're made President? Or let's extend that down to Governors, and Zone commissioners, Mayors?  Anyone who applies for a driving licence, anyone who wishes to buy booze, or buy a firearm? See what their childhood throws up that might cloud their judgement..

No doubt you'll find some transgression of some amendments there...well, more than one. 

For sure. Personally, I think nobody is so-called "normal" or if they are they must be very, very boring people that lead a very, very boring life. However, when it comes to people getting their financial support from the tax-payers and have so much influence over our lives, businesses, etc we should know about their health (mental and psychical.) Generally, this stuff should come out in the debates but if a candidate, especially for Pres, has had some serious mental issues in the past (or has some currently) the public has a right to know. I think we've "evolved" enough that they wouldn't necessarily mean that they are a bad candidate. (Recall McGovern's running mate scandal.)
Re: driver's license, booze, guns, etc for "crazy people". Those laws are already on the books (at least in my state). Though, I'm guessing, unless you are really acting whacked-out you can probably pass your driving test and get a license since I doubt the clerk is a mental health specialized though if you were actually "certifiable" maybe there is some system database that would flag you?

[Quick Karl]

You're suggesting (and patronisingly) that by some bizarre algorithm he's mentally unstable because of his childhood?

Aren't you proof of that premise?

[PB the Deplorable]

... It's really telling how when a known criminal is mentioned on these pages and his childhood mentioned, that isn't seen as a sufficient grounds to justify his fall in adult years. Presumably it doesn't make any difference and there's no excuse then?...

It's not a license for anti-social behavior, it's an explanation.

Not everyone with problems chooses crime, or violence, or turns their anger against society in general - and against the country as an extension of that.  But many do.  That's what Occupy and the other anti-Western 'demonstrations' are about.

... But if what you're saying is true; It seems it should be mandatory to vet anyone psychologically before they're made President?...

Yes, Obama should have gone through the normal vetting process.  It's the job and duty of the Media, and they failed completely.  In fact they sheltered him from it.

[Yorkshire pud]

Aren't you proof of that premise?

Ha ha.. you're the man qunt. Remind us again how you opened a thread supporting the 'American spring' but later distanced yourself from it because it was a 'Democrat plot' apparently. Is that your rational side coming out? 

[Unquenchable Angst]

There are people here sharing information right or wrong and then there are some people that seem to make statements that are purely attacks as if attacking someone else makes them the last authority on the truth. Especially if they have no refuting evidence but the attack makes them right in a rain of invective juvenile hatred and judgmental attacks on another. It is tiring the name calling and petty snarky attacks and vindictive attempts at mind control. It appears to me that the 'liberal' is only interested in the truth or the source only so they can meet out punishment to those that refute their overall control freak nature. So it seems from the usual two that attack people here and the clingers-on that agree with them. Seems a lot of the people that had  some good thoughts have been run off from this 'Gab'  and their humor is missed. There are those that are alarmed at the growing tyranny and then there are those that are tyrants on there own and useful idiots of the impending tyranny.