192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:00 pm
@blatham,
Yes and No. I've travelled only a bit in BC (once took a ship into Esquimalt) , but found the area around and north of Vancouver quite beautiful. There's lots of dull ordinary stuff in the Bay area, but the headlands above the Golden gate are indeed beautiful. It was also an unusually clear, perfect day for it.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:03 pm
@georgeob1,
I bet Vancouver changed so much since my visit there several decades ago, I wouldn't recognize it - except Stanley Park. Enjoyed Gastown with their many restaurants.
My wife and I did a cruise from Vancouver to San Francisco.
0 Replies
 
catbeasy
 
  4  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:15 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
I believe you are attempting to read far to much into the mind and psyche of Mr. Trump and making speculations that reach far beyond any available evidence and which, perhaps conveniently, can't be verified

Yes, I am making pronouncements concerning Mr. T's psyche. And that they can't be verified? My God man, it doesn't take a psychiatrist..however, I do believe I am fully qualified to make a judgment on his mental state..I understand in the articulable sense what sort of primate he is. Into what category he belongs. I do hold that I could be wrong, but not bloody likely!

So, now you've told me that I'm full of assumptions, the picture you paint of Trump and his policies is full of them. When you make a statement like:

Quote:
encourage investment in new economic enterprises, and, possibly through some new, as yet undefined form of public private partnership, stimulate a major investment in public infrastructure; and finally take a stronger leadership role in our foreign relations.


you are defacto defining these things as positive. Who doesn't want to encourage investment in new economic enterprise? I sure do. Who doesn't want to stimulate a major investement in public infrastructure? I sure do. In other words, you aren't saying anything, you are repeating his rhetoric.

As for myself, when I say Trump has some serious psychopathology, what's my evidence for this? Well, the list could go on. Grabs them by the Pussy, his reference to women as fat and ugly. His law suits, his twitter crap, his not paying the folks who do work for him, the fact that he can and has and does and will continue to change his mind, backpedal on his statements he made not a day ago.

The latest being something he wrote about the German attack being about Islamic Terrorism before any facts were in. He then was asked about the statement by a reporter. Trump asked who said that?(????!!!!) The reporter replied You did Mr. Trump! Then Trump says it was just an act of terrorism..

I have heard time and again on this board and in the news people defend Trump on these things. It doesn't matter, words matter. They are the crux of our existence. Humans moved away from the physical as priority. It has always been true that the pen is mightier than the sword. The sword may work for a while, but it is always undermined, eventually by ideas. Dictators know this and is why political dissidents in bad countries end up in prison.

Lets be clear. I do not support either democrat or republican. Neither Hillary nor Trump, but Hillary's pathology is much less than Trump and hence less dangerous. Not not dangerous, just less so..
Frugal1
 
  -2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:21 pm
@catbeasy,
Quote:
The latest being something he wrote about the German attack being about Islamic Terrorism before any facts were in.


Most of America thought that exact thing the moment the heard about the attack, before Trump's Tweet. We all made an educated guess - we ALL got it right. cat, you are more dangerous than Trump, but nowhere near as dangerous as that nasty woman. America voted, and America got it right.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:31 pm
@catbeasy,
Trump's "pathological" means something different according to the following article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/13/pathological-definitely-doesnt-mean-what-donald-trump-thinks-it-means/?utm_term=.e0d8e46f00a6

Quote:
Donald Trump, who had three times as many statements fact-checked by PolitiFact, fared only slightly better than Carson: 76 percent of his remarks were rated either mostly or completely false. A whopping 16 Trump statements (22 percent) were called "pants on fire." And, like Carson, not a single one of Trump's assertions was judged to be true.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:39 pm
@catbeasy,
catbeasy wrote:

My God man, it doesn't take a psychiatrist..however, I do believe I am fully qualified to make a judgment on his mental state..I understand in the articulable sense what sort of primate he is. Into what category he belongs. I do hold that I could be wrong, but not bloody likely!
Here we simply disagree. We all have our impressions based onour casual observation. However, this isn't knowledge.

catbeasy wrote:

....When you make a statement like:

Quote:
encourage investment in new economic enterprises, and, possibly through some new, as yet undefined form of public private partnership, stimulate a major investment in public infrastructure; and finally take a stronger leadership role in our foreign relations.


you are defacto defining these things as positive. Who doesn't want to encourage investment in new economic enterprise? I sure do. Who doesn't want to stimulate a major investement in public infrastructure? I sure do. In other words, you aren't saying anything, you are repeating his rhetoric.
No. I am merely listing the major points of focus Trump has repeatedly emphasized in his statements and which appear to be confirmed (so far) in his appointments and preparatory actions.

catbeasy wrote:

As for myself, when I say Trump has some serious psychopathology, what's my evidence for this? Well, the list could go on. Grabs them by the Pussy, his reference to women as fat and ugly. His law suits, his twitter crap, his not paying the folks who do work for him, the fact that he can and has and does and will continue to change his mind, backpedal on his statements he made not a day ago.

The latest being something he wrote about the German attack being about Islamic Terrorism before any facts were in. He then was asked about the statement by a reporter. Trump asked who said that?(????!!!!) The reporter replied You did Mr. Trump! Then Trump says it was just an act of terrorism..
All in the normal range of real (as opposed to proclaimed) human behavior based on my experience.

catbeasy wrote:

I have heard time and again on this board and in the news people defend Trump on these things. It doesn't matter, words matter. They are the crux of our existence. Humans moved away from the physical as priority. It has always been true that the pen is mightier than the sword. The sword may work for a while, but it is always undermined, eventually by ideas. Dictators know this and is why political dissidents in bad countries end up in prison.
I seriously disagree with you here. Words are not the crux of our existence: deeds are that. We've got someone in the White House now who thinks words, not actions are the essential thing, and that's hurt us badly.

Words and influential ideas are very different things. The latter requires not only persuasive words, but also concrete examples and sustained action to create the animating examples to make the associated ideas live. Academics typically forget that.

catbeasy wrote:

Lets be clear. I do not support either democrat or republican. Neither Hillary nor Trump, but Hillary's pathology is much less than Trump and hence less dangerous. Not not dangerous, just less so..
I assume that most effective leaders, from Napoleon to FDR, Harry Truman, Churchill, even Bill Clinton and relatively unknown but equally effective leaders like Adm. Hyman Rickover and many others had/have their pathologies too . Indeed I've never known anyone without a few, and pathologies are not simply a linear, "more or less" thing: they are highly varied and qualitatively different.

We apparently agree that Hillary would have been a lousy choice.
Frugal1
 
  -2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 07:42 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
We apparently agree that Hillary would have been a lousy choice.


Amen.
0 Replies
 
catbeasy
 
  4  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 08:11 pm
@tony5732,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply..
Quote:
Who you choose to sleep with belongs one paragraph up.

I don't think you can put this in the same category as choice. I believe doing so ignores what sexuality is and what the denial of its expression can lead to. Our libidinal energies are rooted far too deep in us, that for all intents and purposes, sex is not a choice unless it truly is a choice. Meaning, if someone is forced into making that choice due to social disapproval, their emotional state will take a huge hit. What kind and degree of a hit will depend on the energy and prior learning they come to that table with. The documentation and understanding of this is not in dispute (In fact, among religious people who have psychology degrees, you will find much more agreement with this sentiment - they understand because they know -it is a knowable subject).

As for your other points, first I take you at your word, for what its worth, that you are not racist or homophobic. I totally get that for some its an ideal.

So, on that ideal level, the kind of ideals you are espousing (largely libertarian), I do think there is some validity to that kind of thinking - but perhaps in a society with a different makeup. In this society we have chosen to not be libertarian (in its full ideal) and so while we are in a state that exercises central governance, I believe we have to be fair within that context. So, while I think that social welfare should be run completely different than it is, while we are in this kind of polity, I think that we continue to fund it - in fairness and as a necessary social support. What this translates to is being fair to all. So, if you are going to force people to serve black people, then gays should be served as well. Serve all or none. Its the ideal of singling a group out that more at issue. However..

There is more to this than simply taking a stand on one side of this issue. There is the general ideal involved as well. What kind of a state do you want to live in? What life do you personally live and, if you view it as exemplary, what's the best political way to extend that? In my opinion, too many people divorce their personal lives from the larger societal life. So they have one standard, but 'society' can have another. This I believe is largely due to the kind of political society that has been created. Due to the desire for wealth, for excessive power, for greed, on the whole, those who are engaged in planning societies with some digression, have disintegrated, atomized our life.

We see value in this independence and so strive to be as independent as we possibly can. We aren't supposed to care for the old lady across town who can't afford heat. We are supposed to be focused on the results of the Superbowl or our fantasy league etc*. We hate paying taxes when it should be a celebration (though yes, we hate it because we think that its misused - but not all of it is misused; there should be balance there). We create huge buildings where people literally, not just metaphorically, fall through the cracks. They are bastions of power, meant to be imposing, daunting, separating and impossible to conquer.

Yet, this individualizing process runs counter to our nature as a social creature. It carves us up, isolates and damages. Some of us through good genes, energy, social circumstances can function well despite this effect**, but there is a lot of waste along the way. There are no easy answers either. Your concern of being forced to do something is valid. Its on the table. It should be discussed, but in its proper context and using like standards to ensure fairness. We are exquisitely attuned to fairness as well - but often blind to it when it doesn't affect us. It is no surprise that many republicans with gay family members do not espouse the stereotype of being anti-gay. They love their kids too..but again, that extension and standards thing..

*I'm not immune from it.
**The ability for many to thrive despite this compartmentalization is actually a testament to how strong this is to how strong that social inclination is.

catbeasy
 
  4  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 08:27 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
All in the normal range of real (as opposed to proclaimed) human behavior based on my experience.

Who said it wasn't 'real'? Just because its 'real' doesn't make it any less pathological. And yes, it is knowledge. Its based on what he says and his body language. If he indicates he like to grab women by the pussy, this by itself defines pathology. Or if you want to go colloquial, defines him being an asshole. We as humans can and do make these judgments and as long as they are in good faith and comply with our own standards are most certainly real knowledge. Its one of the few areas where we have real knowledge - it exists because of what we are..primates, it comes with the package.

Quote:
I seriously disagree with you here. Words are not the crux of our existence

When I say that words are the crux of our existence, I mean they under-pine it all. Trump would be the first to admit this nay? He got where he is because of words. We grow to use this plane of existence - actually out of physicality - its how we settle things and in politics, it means everything. This doesn't mean that deeds don't matter, that's why I said, its the crux of our existence. not the only thing. I don't disagree that actions are necessary as well.

When asked to describe someone (whose not in a police lineup!) we never go physical, we understand what someone is asking for and its not that they are 5'10" and weigh 185 pounds..

Quote:
I assume that most effective leaders, from Napoleon to FDR, Harry Truman, Churchill, even Bill Clinton and relatively unknown but equally effective leaders like Adm. Hyman Rickover and many others had/have their pathologies too . Indeed I've never known anyone without a few, and pathologies are not simply a linear, "more or less" thing: they are highly varied and qualitatively different.

Yes, they are, fully agreed, not linear..personally. However, the larger question which this statement presupposes isn't about that. It is brought to bear because of the relative damage they can cause. So, yeah, Hitler and FDR may have differing levels of psychopathology, but one of those guys is capable of a lot more damage.

I don't agree that Hillary was the worse choice. A lousy choice, yes. I have no faith that Trump will do anything better than what has gone before, indeed, I think it worse. I hope I'm wrong, but not bloody likely..
RABEL222
 
  1  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 08:41 pm
@tony5732,
But she is 10 times smarter than you.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 08:48 pm
@ehBeth,
Tony is a conservative. He dosent believe in science. He believes in magic welded by tRump.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 09:03 pm
@blatham,
All eagles have U S citizenship. There on the Great Seal of the United States. Very Happy Razz Rolling Eyes
Kolyo
 
  3  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 09:26 pm
@RABEL222,
Even the eagle on the Mexican flag has the legal right to live and work in the United States if it wants to. It's a dual citizen.
0 Replies
 
tony5732
 
  -1  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 09:47 pm
@catbeasy,
"I don't think you can put this in the same category as choice. I believe doing so ignores what sexuality is and what the denial of its expression can lead to. Our libidinal energies are rooted far too deep in us, that for all intents and purposes, sex is not a choice unless it truly is a choice."

So what about pedophiles? There are lot of things in a brain I would prefer a person not to express. Homosexuality isn't one of them, but not holding someone responsible for their own sexual preference would in essence be the same as not holding someone personally responsible for being a pedophile. I am CERTAINLY not ok with that.

As far as emotional state goes, we can probably help that by pushing society in a direction where everyone is not a slave to society, and the government then dictates that society.

We should push for a tolerant society, one where you are encouraged to walk grandma down the street. However, the concepts and ideals should be freely encouraged by people like you, through example and free speech, not forced by government and enforced by law suits.

If I want to allow my theoretical business to accept everyone (and I would, because I like money and love people), then my business kicks ass and will be fun and make money. If someone else's business is going under because half of their potential customers aren't allowed, then they will learn on their own to change the plan, or they just get washed away.

There's nothing wrong with doing it ourselves. There is a need for a centralized government, but it's function should be focused on economic expansion, defense, getting to Mars, etc. Dictating society isn't something I really appreciate our government doing, and every time I watch the news I see the government doesn't do a very good job doing it.
tony5732
 
  -1  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 10:00 pm
@RABEL222,
I don't know much about how intelligent she is... That also had NOTHING to do with what I said.
0 Replies
 
tony5732
 
  -2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 10:06 pm
@RABEL222,
Tony doesn't need Rabel to speak for Tony. You can speak for Debby law.
0 Replies
 
tony5732
 
  -2  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 10:10 pm
@catbeasy,
By the way, are you a psychologist? Just curious.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -3  
Wed 21 Dec, 2016 10:31 pm
@catbeasy,
catbeasy wrote:

Quote:
I believe you are attempting to read far to much into the mind and psyche of Mr. Trump and making speculations that reach far beyond any available evidence and which, perhaps conveniently, can't be verified

Yes, I am making pronouncements concerning Mr. T's psyche. And that they can't be verified? My God man, it doesn't take a psychiatrist..however, I do believe I am fully qualified to make a judgment on his mental state..I understand in the articulable sense what sort of primate he is. Into what category he belongs. I do hold that I could be wrong, but not bloody likely!


So, now you've told me that I'm full of assumptions, the picture you paint of Trump and his policies is full of them. When you make a statement like:

Quote:
encourage investment in new economic enterprises, and, possibly through some new, as yet undefined form of public private partnership, stimulate a major investment in public infrastructure; and finally take a stronger leadership role in our foreign relations.


you are defacto defining these things as positive. Who doesn't want to encourage investment in new economic enterprise? I sure do. Who doesn't want to stimulate a major investement in public infrastructure? I sure do. In other words, you aren't saying anything, you are repeating his rhetoric.

As for myself, when I say Trump has some serious psychopathology, what's my evidence for this? Well, the list could go on. Grabs them by the Pussy, his reference to women as fat and ugly. His law suits, his twitter crap, his not paying the folks who do work for him, the fact that he can and has and does and will continue to change his mind, backpedal on his statements he made not a day ago.

The latest being something he wrote about the German attack being about Islamic Terrorism before any facts were in. He then was asked about the statement by a reporter. Trump asked who said that?(????!!!!) The reporter replied You did Mr. Trump! Then Trump says it was just an act of terrorism..

I have heard time and again on this board and in the news people defend Trump on these things. It doesn't matter, words matter. They are the crux of our existence. Humans moved away from the physical as priority. It has always been true that the pen is mightier than the sword. The sword may work for a while, but it is always undermined, eventually by ideas. Dictators know this and is why political dissidents in bad countries end up in prison.

Lets be clear. I do not support either democrat or republican. Neither Hillary nor Trump, but Hillary's pathology is much less than Trump and hence less dangerous. Not not dangerous, just less so..



I am eminantly qualified to make a psychological evaluation of you by your post in as much as I noted that you used the word "I" nine times in the above post.

I believe that you are self centered and suffer from a border line personality disorder. Furthermore it is my belief that you are bipolar and have a schizoaffective disorder. Lastly, it is apparent that you also suffer from Female Sexual Arousal Disorder.

Where should I bill you?

blatham
 
  3  
Thu 22 Dec, 2016 05:55 am
@tony5732,
Quote:
So what about pedophiles? There are lot of things in a brain I would prefer a person not to express. Homosexuality isn't one of them, but not holding someone responsible for their own sexual preference would in essence be the same as not holding someone personally responsible for being a pedophile. I am CERTAINLY not ok with that.

Your attraction to the opposite gender is innate. You didn't choose it. It's a near certainty that you also are attracted to healthy women rather than those who are not. You don't choose that either. You aren't responsible for these innate aspects of your mind.

There's a confusion in what you said that conflates innate desires and conscious actions/behaviors that fall out from those desires. While you or I are not responsible for our attraction to the other gender, we are for how we behave as a result of that preference. Some heterosexuals rape. It is the act for which he is responsible, not the attraction to the female he rapes.

And we really should note here that same-gender sexuality is seen frequently across the animal kingdom and certainly in mammals. It is a natural phenomenon.
farmerman
 
  3  
Thu 22 Dec, 2016 06:05 am
@catbeasy,
Having a son who has been dealing with ADHD (and succeeded) and have been among the first of a generation whose own dealings with it allow me to cast some comments that are from my own observations

Trump has several of the ADHD spectra issues, many of which are apparently lwft without treatment because its been a prsonal "AID" to his lifestyle.
1. Hes very impulsive
2.Hes got no "filter' for his speech patterns
3.Hes quick to abandon projects rather than learn to successfully deal with challenges (His own Atlantic City bail outs were a result of imposed management by a bankruptcy court)
3.Hes fanatically interested in lots of things but he doesnnt appear smart enough to overcome and master all these areas.

When you look at his campaign, you see tens of really smart qnd analyticql folks who did a huge a mount of his planning. (nd supported"fixing" his major failings)

Ive done work for the Trump organization and was quite disgusted at his own involvement which included his reported" failure to pay" as an MO of his whole early successes(until people, learned how to deal with him by "up front " activities)




 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/07/2025 at 06:25:58