Did Liberals Forget About The Goldwater Rule?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree with you too.
Definitely opens a door for potential abuse.

There has to be a way to work it out. Not just one side either. Any and all who make it to a certain point should have to be evaluated.

Good luck keeping it fair and impartial though.
Can totally see a left wing doc flagging a right wing candidate as not sound or the other way around.

How to guarantee this does not happen

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So no independent psychiatric evaluation???

Saddened so much.... that ...that.... the simple words bring a tear to your eye - you blinked

a reply to: TinySickTears

Is there not some checks in place already for if the President goes crazy?

There must be.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The implication therein is that some citizens can have their rights suspended without probable cause.

Not really, its just saying that if you have progressive dementia or have suicidal tendencies, are prone to psychotic episodes or whatever then you are not going to be able to undertake the role of POTUS.

I think its quite sensible.

and opens the door for extreme abuse.

Don't you remember that we still have the CIA to deal with here? Its not like they don't have a known history of killing people then painting a picture that they were insane.

It does but not doing it also opens the door to having a country run by someone with progressive demential or who is prone to psychotic episodes.

Also their are existing system that are open to abuse and I am not saying I have the solution as to how this would work in practice but I think that any assessments would need to be fully independent and the findings fully corroborated.

but sure it could be open to abuse depending on what system you have in place. That would be a risk that would have to be taken into account.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Are you really trying to argue the validity of liberal accusations against President Trump by making your own?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The implication therein is that some citizens can have their rights suspended without probable cause.

Not really, its just saying that if you have progressive dementia or have suicidal tendencies, are prone to psychotic episodes or whatever then you are not going to be able to undertake the role of POTUS.

I think its quite sensible.

and opens the door for extreme abuse.

Don't you remember that we still have the CIA to deal with here? Its not like they don't have a known history of killing people then painting a picture that they were insane.

It does but not doing it also opens the door to having a country run by someone with progressive demential or who is prone to psychotic episodes.

Its not been a problem....legislating solutions to nonexistance problems may be a specialty of our congress, but not something I particularly approve of.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

They are actual doctors

Psychiatry " the non empirical pseudo science "

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: TinySickTears

Is there not some checks in place already for if the President goes crazy?

There must be.

25th Amendment, for starters.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

They are actual doctors

Psychiatry " the non empirical pseudo science "

Agreed

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

You criticize and hate in other people what you don't like about your own character.

If you don't think Republicans are just as bad as Democrats are you delusional.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: TinySickTears

Is there not some checks in place already for if the President goes crazy?

There must be.

25th Amendment, for starters.

Yes there are options if he was actually crazy and it wasn't just a left-wing pipe dream since the Russian collusion myth went nowhere.

a reply to: dfnj2015

You criticize and hate in other people what you don't like about your own character.

Does this apply to everyone? Because most of the criticism I see, especially about ones character, usually comes from the..

And by the way, I totally agree.

It's a lot easier to project your insecurities onto others instead of facing them yourself.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: TinySickTears

Is there not some checks in place already for if the President goes crazy?

There must be.

25th Amendment, for starters.

Yes there are options if he was actually crazy and it wasn't just a left-wing pipe dream since the Russian collusion myth went nowhere.

The OP asked if there was a means; I provided the constitutional means.

I didn't comment on whether or not it will, or whether I think it should, be used.

Thanks.

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler

Trump will be examined on Jan. 12 by Rear Admiral Ronny Jackson, the physician to the president, at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.

A Rear Admiral eh!
Well at least he should be the man who might find the President's brain/s

a reply to: Liquesence

I didn't comment on whether or not it will, or whether I think it should, be used.

Do you think the 25th should be invoked?

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: Liquesence

I didn't comment on whether or not it will, or whether I think it should, be used.

Do you think the 25th should be invoked?

Meaningless question.

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: Liquesence

I didn't comment on whether or not it will, or whether I think it should, be used.

Do you think the 25th should be invoked?

I'm not really sure. For one, it would be difficult without an evaluation/diagnosis.

So, at least, not until he has been professionally evaluated/diagnosed by more than one psychiatrist.

Trump is playing the libtards like a violin. You have to remember, they thought they really had something when they had Hillary, LoL. How insane must you be to support HRC?? Trump tweets and they just explode. These people think that they are entitled to have everything the way they want it, even if it is wrong, ridiculous, illogical, backwards or just a bold face lie. It matters not one bit to them, because it is what they want and they are entitled. So when they lose, and lose biggly (LoL!), and then have someone rub their noses in it, day in and day out, well, it is just a bit too much to take. But I must say, it is damn entertaining!

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

In brief it says it is unethical for medical professionals to diagnose any public official with any type of disease or mental disability, without checking them out first, or consulting with that specific public officials primary doctor.

Did you just say its wrong to say bad things about the gubment without first running it thru proper channels?

Sich Heil.

Funny that you're implying people are Nazi without realising you seem to be supporting old Soviet political corruption.

There was systematic political abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union,[1] based on the interpretation of political opposition or dissent as a psychiatric problem.[2] It was called "psychopathological mechanisms" of dissent.[3]

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: BelowLowAnnouncement

Funny that you're implying people are Nazi without realising you seem to be supporting old Soviet political corruption.

Too many languages and sources pf totalitarian state control to mention. Why don't you list them for me? Every body understands whats implied by the Nazi salute.

But do, do consider this a test. Name some empires, books, movies, authors etc, that also reflect on censorship and information control.

You go first.