Obama's Malignant Pathological Narcissism

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatorplank, Sep 2, 2014.

  1. mutz87

    mutz87 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    Messages:
    23,118
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Well enough. :)

    Being eminently qualified to make that observation is a dubious affair if one is not also striving to have some objectivity. His credentials are pretty meaningless without it.

    OTOH, I am not all surprised or even think it extraordinary that someone who ran and is president to be at least somewhat narcissistic. After all, we are talking about the presidency. And no one need an MD to recognize the likely correlation.
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2014
  2. chompalot

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,343
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It would be quite easy to get someone else who is "eminently qualified" to completely refute what Krauthammer says. In other words, what Krauthammer says only persuades gullible people to believe Obama has narcissistic personality traits that have more of a detrimental affect than a positive one. I take his comments in context of what he is, a political commentator who gets paid to throw dirt on Obama. He's no different than a expert witness who gets paid to distort the truth. IMO, rather pathetic, to tell the truth.
  3. secgator

    secgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,884
    Likes Received:
    372
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Kinda like witnesses who...(some folks)...felt were in the Zimmerman case?:p
  4. lacuna

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    9,162
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Even Cheney doesn't have that sort of power, but I agree - Cheney does have issues.
  5. chompalot

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,343
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Krauthammer opinion should be an anathema to the Psychiatric profession, a profession that is based on seeking the truth. He's a political commentator, ugh.
  6. lacuna

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    9,162
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Not to minimize your feelings, but the people who made these observations and expressed their opinions were not coerced into doing so. They did so of their own free will.

    The voting public is entitled to know the moral and mental fiber of any person who places himself as a candidate for public office. Most especially an office as supremely important as POTUS. This isn't the first time a person who holds a national office has been scrutinized and found wanting. In 1972 George McGovern selected Senator Thomas Eagleton to be his running mate. It was a desperation choice. Eagleton's medical history was not adequately investigated and he was not forthcoming about his bouts of depression. He had received shock therapy on several occasions. McGovern consulted with psychiatrists, including Eagleton's own doctors, who advised him that a recurrence of Eagleton's depression was possible and could endanger the country should Eagleton become president. McGovern replaced him with Sargent Shriver on the ticket.
  7. mutz87

    mutz87 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    Messages:
    23,118
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The voting public has a want to know, not necessarily a right. How far should we go?
  8. jimgata

    jimgata Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,245
    Likes Received:
    281
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If anyone could not recognize Obama ,from early on, of who he really is, has deficient people skills.
    Most of Obama voters could not care less of his background or personality.
    Anyone who will be the most powerful person on earth, needs to be fully vetted, including anything and everything about his past.
  9. lacuna

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    9,162
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    If '"it would be quite easy to get someone else who is "eminently qualified" to completely refute what Krauthammer says,"' why has this not been done? Obama supplies his own evidence through countless hours of candid video where his guard is down and his true self is exposed.

    We can further discuss gullibility if you wish but I think you are placing that shoe on the wrong foot. The American voting public was offered inferior products to choose from - by both the Republicans and the Democrats - the last two elections for POTUS and chose to elect the worst of the candidates.

    While searching for other mental health professionals - not political commentators - who have 'observed' and publicly commented on Obama's state of mind, I came across comments from Robert W. Godwin, PhD. He's an experienced psychologist with the expertise that qualifies him to make the sort of observations pertinent to this discussion.

    They were e-published on this site http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2463844/posts but I don't know when or where Godwin first made the comments.

    http://www.barringtoncenter.com/experts/robert-w-godwin

    http://barringtoncenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/RGodwin2.pdf
    secgator likes this.
  10. dynogator

    dynogator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,878
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Obama in a nutshell. How can there be any doubt? Better get the corpse dogs over to the Rose Garden.
  11. lacuna

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    9,162
    Likes Received:
    410
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    I presume this is a response to what I wrote above:

    "The voting public is entitled to know the moral and mental fiber of any person who places himself as a candidate for public office."

    Sure, a discerning electorate wants to know. But more importantly, we do indeed have a right to know what sort of person is being entrusted with the responsibilities of the office.

    As it's not likely necessary for the general public to know the specifics, I think the details of a traumatic event in a person's life should probably remain confidential between the person displaying personality disorders and his/her medical/mental health professional. But the public most certainly has the right to know how certain personality disorders or other mental / emotional problems might affect how a potential office holder will execute his or her duties. Oh, yeah.
  12. chompalot

    chompalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,343
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It's on FNS and is all political and not worth the trouble. But it might have been some decent fodder for Jon Stewart to use to make fun of Krauthammer. After all, he dished out a psychiatric opinion while holding the position of a political commentator. I give him credit, though. He got his audience to believe that his observation has merit and is not tainted by political motivation.
  13. mutz87

    mutz87 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    Messages:
    23,118
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It was :)

    I should probably clarify. Of course we have a right to know some things, it's in our interest and simply part of the expectation for getting hired for the job. And well, the public will decide what its rights are in this context regardless what I might think. But I question just how far we should or have a right to go. If a candidate suffered bouts of extreme depression or showed violent tendendies throughout their life, we'd probably agree that we have a right to know.

    But what if that candidate suffered anxiety or anti-social personality traits as a child/teen, or that the mental health issue occurred in the immediate aftermath of losing a close loved one as an adult? Is it really our right to know such things? My overriding worry is that we are tearing down important barriers to privacy (even for public office holders) and increasingly creating an ideal that just isn't possible to achieve, and together, they have implications well beyond even running for the highest office in the land.
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2014
  14. vertigo0923

    vertigo0923 night owl mod VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    40,418
    Likes Received:
    4,036
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    sec country
    exactly what i said earlier in this thread. a person has to have some elements of narcissism to run for office.
    i figure that politicians and actors/entertainers equally demand narcissism as a personality trait for success.

    (hmmm. what does that say about ronald reagan?)

    :D
  15. dangolegators

    dangolegators Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    8,006
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Why should it have to be done? Should Obama submit himself to psychiatric evaluation to prove to you that he is not a narcissist? Or should some 'expert' declare from afar that Obama is not a narcissist, as if that would be good enough for you? As if you wouldn't say, 'how can that guy diagnose Obama without having ever actually even spoken to him in person'?
  16. mutz87

    mutz87 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2014
    Messages:
    23,118
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Bumped him up to the Top 15

    Presidential Narcissism

    1. Lyndon Johnson

    2. Theodore Roosevelt

    3. Andrew Jackson

    4. Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    5. John Kennedy

    6. Richard Nixon

    7. Bill Clinton

    8. Chester Arthur

    9. Andrew Johnson

    10. Woodrow Wilson

    11. George W Bush

    ***
    15. Ronald Reagan

    21. Jimmy Carter

    22. George Washington

    26. George Herbert Walker Bush

    ***

    31. Gerald Ford

    32. Abraham Lincoln

    33. James Garfield

    34. William McKinley

    35. Rutherford B. Hayes

    36. James Madison

    37. William Howard Taft

    38. Calvin Coolidge

    39. Ulysses Grant

    40. Grover Cleveland

    41. James Monroe

    42.Millard Fillmore
  17. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,321
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yah the jumping onto the word "feel" is a bit much here. I could have just as easily used the word think. Let's not get into the game of over-psychoanalyzing each other's words. It doesn't end well for anybody.

    The people who made these observations were not coerced to do so. That doesn't make what they said any more ethical (in fact, I would argue that it makes it less ethical).

    While I also have ethical concerns about what happened to Eagleton (doctor/patient confidentiality and all of that), it is a completely different situation. He was properly diagnosed by mental health professionals. The difference between that and an opinion from a political pundit with a background (but no practice) in psychology is a pretty wide gulf. As I said, much of this seems not driven by proper mental health diagnostic procedures, but rather on attempting to label somebody with opposing political beliefs "mentally ill" in some way. And that is a grave injustice to the people who actually struggle with mental illness and is a ridiculous tactic in politics.
  18. g8orbill

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    74,981
    Likes Received:
    5,604
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    in my life time I think obama is in the top 3

    along with LBJ and RMN
  19. tim85

    tim85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    312
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    I think what often seems like something is more or less not at all what it is. It doesn't matter what it seems like, you're essentially claiming to have knowledge from a far that multiple people, experts within their own field, are all calling him a narcissist for the purpose of political fodder. How could you presume to know that intention?

    I mean, even if that's what it seems like - it's significantly more likely that the people calling him a narcissist are calling him that simply because they truly believe is, not because of some vague ulterior motive to turn the political opposition into the mentally ill. Especially Krauthammer, who while you may disagree with his views, is generally respected as a somewhat even-keeled fellow unlikely to do something so dubious as to dishonestly try to convince folks that people are mentally ill who aren't actually mentally ill.
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2014
  20. reformedgator

    reformedgator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,997
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Krauthammer can run circles around most of the rebuttals on here & that seems to be real burr under the saddles of some.

Share This Page