It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Liberals Forget About The Goldwater Rule?

page: 9
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
ROFLMAO... whatever. perhaps it's time for you to go outside smoke, or whatever else you do and chill the hell up...


I come on here and rile up the cuckflakes.




posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

I come on here and rile up the cuckflakes.


LOL... oh boy... Please keep going...



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: Liquesence

He/she didn't debase his/her self.

When you have a point, he/she will maybe listen if you/it can articulate it properly and without intentional spin.

Did you have a point somewhere?


Oh really?... you claim "you don't want to debase yourself with partisan mud slinging" but at the same time you don't want to listen to people who have a different opinion than yourself... That's the very definition of "partisan mud slinging" when you want to dismiss other people for their opinion which differs from yours...


Maybe read my reply again.



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
LOL... oh boy... Please keep going...


Sometimes I needle the snowtards too.



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   

This may be the Mud Pit.....


Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

Sling Mud....but what is NOT allowed:

generally hateful, bigoted, mean-spirited or gratuitous personal attacks on fellow members. It's also not exempt from the usual forum expectation of remaining on topic.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!



posted on Jan, 8 2018 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

nah they should have their reefer money rolling in soon.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

To be fair I am not even saying it has to be made public but the healths of both candidates was a big part of the last election and I think in general it should be mandatory that they are of sound mind and body to carry out the duties of being POTUS.

But if you disagree that’s fine, I can understand the other side of the argument.

I also think though it’s someth else Trump could do to end some of the speculation around him just now


Candidate health is always a smear used in elections. The fact is, their medical condition is none of our business. I know we like to make up ridiculous reasons to believe we have a right to know....but we don't. They are citizens, and have a right to medical privacy.

If humans didn't tend to be rather simple minded little beasties, our electoral process could be far more rewarding and enlightening for our country. Unfortunately, they aim for the middle, which means we get either Trump or Hillary. From there it can't really improve...and as we see, it can really only devolve.

If the cries of "mental illness" were simple ad hominem, it could be shrugged off. But its not. Now we have politically biased professors violating their own ethics, and making people think that valid questions are being raised. Again...because the average person just isn't bright enough to understand stuff like the ethical rules professionals act under, and because (after swigging down some Brawndo), they think overturning our nation to support a political rivarly makes sense.


Very well stated. It is clear that this is entirely agenda driven, and equally clear that pushing that agenda is more important than the collateral damage to the psychiatric school of medicine and its very specific classification within the rules of HIPAA with regard to sensitive protected information. More important than setting a precedent in which their own future candidates would be held to the same standard based upon nothing more than the opinion of people who see ONLY what the media allows them to see of our POTUS, just like everyone else in America, and disregard medical ethics in order to bolster the narrative that he is somehow a danger to us all and loony as hell or has dementia or possibly all three.

You can't even send a FAX with anything related to patient information obtained during a psychiatric evaluation or any related care. That information can land you in prison if you give it out over the phone. Why do people suppose that is? Because your mental health status can be used as a weapon against you in a scary variety of ways. Such as this latest ridiculous attempt at convincing America that the POTUS is unfit for office, for an excellent example.

And the people yammering on about how we have a right to know any American citizen's protected health information would be the first ones crying if their own were held up for public display. Guaranteed. But most of those folks simply don't think. They just hear something they think sounds plausible and react. It's not completely their fault...they're brainwashed. But they choose to be, so they're willing targets.

I wonder if it has occurred to them, either, that their relentless attacks on this man and the idiocy of sensationalizing stupid # like what time he starts his work day or what he likes to eat, etc., to paint this awful picture of a sitting US President, is actually making people previously on the fence start running the opposite direction TO his side of the court rather than away.

I don't like him. But I definitely feel sympathy for him and find myself rooting for him, more and more as this obvious agenda persists. Because these people are clearly unhinged and are operating in exactly the opposite of the best interests of everyone in the country. And they seem to be fully embracing their inner second graders all the while, bless their silly little hearts.

But they're not doing it because they care about America. They're doing it out of vicious spite, for their own ends. Who would just blindly follow that nonsense? A disturbing amount of people, apparently.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 05:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: tigertatzen


I don't like him. But I definitely feel sympathy for him and find myself rooting for him, more and more as this obvious agenda persists.




You and i are paddling in the same boat.

Fantastic post.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 07:03 AM
link   

edit on 9-1-2018 by wheresthebody because: nevermind



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Dude it doesn't matter how many threads anyone makes we can choose not to read or partake and that goes for everyone
.


I never said anything about having a problem with participating in the thread or having a rant about the number of threads.

My question is for those who storm onto every thread I write to tell me about how I am “obsessed” with Trump yet give the guy whose been hear only 2weeks and posts 2 or 3 threads a day on Trump yet gets a free pass.

Why are they not calling out the OP for this?

its really quite simple, they are not calling him out because they agree with him. trolls dont attack other like minded trolls.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

The Goldwater rule is for psychiatrists not democrats or republicans.

“Section 7, which appeared in the first edition of the APA's Principles of Medical Ethics in 1973 and is still in effect as of 2017,[8] says:

On occasion psychiatrists are asked for an opinion about an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media. In such circumstances, a psychiatrist may share with the public his or her expertise about psychiatric issues in general. However, it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.[1]”

en.m.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

Im sorry....is the Yale professor of psychology not a psychologist?

Fwiw, psychiatry and psychology arent the same thing. One is pharmaceutically and biologically based (science) while the other is about counseling and talking (liberal art). Both are valuable in their own way, and both are easily weaponized unethically



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If the professionals choose to break their own code, it must be serious.
Politicians, dem or rep, have personal opinions all the time and name calling. Especially the president.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
As has already been explained to you on previous threads.....


The Goldwater rule clashes with the duty to warn, many mental health professionals believe that Trump is a danger and as such the public deserve to be warned of this.

They have not yet made a absolute disagnosis but dementia is the leading thought.

Apparently many "professionals" need to seek help from valid professionals to treat their TDS . Well , along with certain non-US citizens that seem to suffer from the same malaise....



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

Its the subject of this thread: a Yale professor of psychology asserts that Trump is crazy and could kill us all

So why the need to delineate beyond the topic?


Apologies....i see where your comment comes from
edit on 1/9/2018 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 08:19 AM
link   
Ha ha that was real funny, still it does say profesionals so if you are not, you are free to say and think what you like. As long as its PC.a reply to: intrptr



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Well, he’s a professional who’s breaking the Goldwater rule. Liberals can’t bresk a rule they never signed up for.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 08:34 AM
link   
nvm
edit on 9-1-2018 by EvidenceNibbler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Wrong. It states that only APA members should not diagnose politicians without seeing them.


Humm...so you actually agree with the democrats, and others in the left trying to label "political opponents" as "mentally unstable" or giving them some other labels to stop political opposition?...

"It seems that you might be on the opposite side of the force my padawan" ;P


These are the same people that claim it's undemocratic to try to prosecute your former political opponent for crimes, as if losing an election makes you exempt from US law.



posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: ancientthunder
Ha ha that was real funny, still it does say profesionals so if you are not, you are free to say and think what you like. As long as its PC.a reply to: intrptr


'Professionals' are the ones screwed things up so bad.




top topics



 
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join