Pelosi Going to Syria Despite Objections

Baloney. Pure baloney.
I am sorry Stage 2...I was not aware that you had rewritten the standards of sociopathis behavior. I guess I should have said he demonstarted strong sociopathic tendency based on the criteria that was in place before you changed them.
 
When you start calling people sociopaths because you don't agree with their positions and nothing more, its baloney.
 
Actually it does. I'm also quite appalled that a qualified psychologist would violate their oath by passing judgement on a person without a clinical evaluation that THEY have conducted. Reading MSM reports, and attempting to bolster your OPINION (much less a bogus "diagnosis") with a discipline that teaches how disastrous such practices are, is evidence that should be presented to a Medical Review Board. Highly unprofessional.

There have been any number of Ambassadorships, and more minor positions granted to obviously unqualified people in the last 150 years. We ARE discussing the diplomatic system, or were until you ran out of supposition. Playboy Penguin has again branched out in his quest to spew as much hatred as he can onto these pages. Let's get back onto the subject, please.

You remember, Pelosi.........simultaneous trip to Syria.......... political posturing on both sides.
 
Actually it does. I'm also quite appalled that a qualified psychologist would violate their oath by passing judgement on a person without a clinical evaluation that THEY have conducted. Reading MSM reports, and attempting to bolster your OPINION (much less a bogus "diagnosis") with a discipline that teaches how disastrous such practices are, is evidence that should be presented to a Medical Review Board. Highly unprofessional.

"Frist"
 
It is my understanding that to talk to these middle eastern people is fine so long as you are willing and able to back up the talk with a positive show of force, greater than theirs, they do not respect idle threats but do respect a threat that is superior, and firmly made, their culture has no tolerance for idol speak from what I can perceive from history of the region.
If you plan to negotiate with them it must be done on an Eye, to Eye basis, and don’t blink!
 
Actually it does. I'm also quite appalled that a qualified psychologist would violate their oath by passing judgement on a person without a clinical evaluation that THEY have conducted. Reading MSM reports, and attempting to bolster your OPINION (much less a bogus "diagnosis") with a discipline that teaches how disastrous such practices are, is evidence that should be presented to a Medical Review Board. Highly unprofessional.
There is no oath for having an MS. There is also nothing in the oath physicians take that prevents them from giving an opinion on someone without a clinical evaluation. There is no medical review board that would have authority in something like this and it's not unprofessional.

Bolton fits the description of a possible sociopath. Many people do but his evidence is videotaped for the whole world to see.
 
Bolton fits the description of a possible sociopath. Many people do but his evidence is videotaped for the whole world to see.

Based on what. If we're going to start defaming people lets be specific.

If a person is a sociopath because they don't like the UN, the think the UN is corrupt, they think the UN is inneffective, and they don't feel that a nations sovereignty and security should be detemined by a bunch of other countries than I'd say that an overwhelming majority of memebers here are sociopaths.
 
It has exactly zero to do with the UN. It has to do with his history of being tagged a bully, his abuse of authority, and generally going ballistic and reputation for denigrating intelligence officers who disagree with him.. He's been described as out of step his entire career at state.
 
Reread the testimony given during his confirmation hearings.

Why don't you show me he ISN'T a sociopath?

Wait, do you even understand what a sociopath is?
 
Profile of the Sociopath

This website summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths.

Glibness and Superficial Charm

Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.

Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."

Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.

Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.

Incapacity for Love

Need for Stimulation
Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.

Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.

Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.

Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet "gets by" by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.

Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.

Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.

Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.

Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.



Lets see, glibness, shallow emotions, incapacity for love, lack of empathy. All incredibly subjective criteria and completely impossible to diagnose without actually sitting down and talking to the man. There is simply no way you can determine whether or not someone is sympathetic or empathetic to the plight of others by looking at their political stances.

Thus, the only things that are left are the objective standards. So, unless someone can show me that Bolton is a sexual deviant, had a history of behavioral or academic difficulties, or has a poor work ethic and just stumbled into his position (which even the most cursory glance of his career will easily dispell) you guys have nothing.

As a result, this is simply another example of "I'm going to slander you because I disagree with your views".

Show me where I'm wrong.
 
There is no oath for having an MS. There is also nothing in the oath physicians take that prevents them from giving an opinion on someone without a clinical evaluation. There is no medical review board that would have authority in something like this and it's not unprofessional.

Bolton fits the description of a possible sociopath. Many people do but his evidence is videotaped for the whole world to see.
Redworm is online now Report Post

If you wish to practice as a psychologist, which is being done, you need a license to do so. There most certainly IS a provision in the oath that physicians take to prevent this type of misconduct. It's usually referred to as "First, do no harm." A psychologist, or a person claiming knowledge of the discipline via degree, makes all diagnosis via their opinion. This isn't possible without a qualified interview of the subject. It also holds weight. A doctor who would claim that someone had cancer without any diagnostics would be sued for malpractice, and brought before the Medical Review Board. A psychiatrist who makes public a diagnosis of sociopath is doing the same thing. A person with a degree in psychology, announcing that degree as a basis for his opinion, would then be guilty of operating without a license.

Please, try to do a little research before rewriting a post in all negatives. Just for this post, you have quoted that evidence is videotaped for the whole world to see. That, until you can produce some true medical summary, is scurrilous slander. There isn't a shred of evidence being presented, just a flurry of insulting sounds. None of this has anything to do with the post any longer.:barf: :barf:
 
If you wish to practice as a psychologist, which is being done, you need a license to do so.
Giving an opinion on an internet forum is not practicing psychology.

There most certainly IS a provision in the oath that physicians take to prevent this type of misconduct.
No doctor has ever taken an oath that says they can't pass an opinion on someone without examining them. A neurologist overhears a person in the supermarket complain about numbness in his extremities, that neurologist can tell her friend "that guy probably has some form of neuropathy, possibly from MS" without violating any oath she's taken. This is no different.
It's usually referred to as "First, do no harm." A psychologist, or a person claiming knowledge of the discipline via degree, makes all diagnosis via their opinion.
An opinion and a diagnosis are two very distinct things.
This isn't possible without a qualified interview of the subject. It also holds weight. A doctor who would claim that someone had cancer without any diagnostics would be sued for malpractice, and brought before the Medical Review Board.
Your doctor neighbor can say you have cancer because he doesn't like you but you can't sue him for malpractice unless he's actually your physician and has done something wrong. Also, "the" medical review board?
A psychiatrist who makes public a diagnosis of sociopath is doing the same thing. A person with a degree in psychology, announcing that degree as a basis for his opinion, would then be guilty of operating without a license.
A license to practice medicine requires a doctoral degree, not a masters. I work with a neuropsychologist that says Nancy Pelosi is a crazy bitch for going to Syria. He's not violating his oath by merely giving an opinion.
Please, try to do a little research before rewriting a post in all negatives. Just for this post, you have quoted that evidence is videotaped for the whole world to see. That, until you can produce some true medical summary, is scurrilous slander. There isn't a shred of evidence being presented, just a flurry of insulting sounds. None of this has anything to do with the post any longer.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=john+bolton&search=Search

For the record: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

Yeah, the shoe fits.
 
Nancy demonstrated her personal dhimmitude status. With her leading the House of Reps, we will all see our women wearing head scarfs, and bowing down to the muzzies.
 
Nancy demonstrated her personal dhimmitude status. With her leading the House of Reps, we will all see our women wearing head scarfs, and bowing down to the muzzies.

You mean like W holding hands with our Saudi friends (that call us occupiers)?

Seriously, when the decision is to put on a scarf or offend someone's religion, your criticism is way off target. A diplomatic mission must be diplomatic.
 
I seem to remember her talking about 200 years of struggle for womens rights and getting the vote and Bla Bla Bla when she became speaker and then shes over in Syria wearing a burka. Isn't wearing that thing like a sign of submission in their culture. But if that is the case she kinda sold herself short and the rest of the American women in the equality area. The other thing I don't get is the way most of the middle east treats women, Why she would want any part of those people is beyond me.
I know one thing if she hasn't already watch her try to act as if she had something to do with getting the British sailors released. I could be wrong, But we will see.


From Wikapedia:Many Muslims believe that the Islamic scripture, the Qur'an, and the collected traditions, or hadith, require a woman to dress and behave modestly in public. However, this requirement, called hijab, has been interpreted in many different ways by Islamic scholars (ulema) and Muslim communities

I think the key word is REQUIRE. Definitely submissive.








http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burka
 
So a scarf is a burka now? Oh, and gosh, she only wore that for one pic as far as I can tell. Her actual sit down with Assad showed she had no ornamentation at all, she was in a pink skirt-suit.

You go to someone's temple, you put on a hat.

Speaking of diplomacy regarding the 15 British sailors, Tony Blaire did a fantastic job. No loss of face, peaceful resolution. He didn't even apologize. Dialog is in no way showing a lack of strength.

The other thing I don't get is the way most of the middle east treats women, Why she would want any part of those people is beyond me.

I've felt the same way about mormons for years.
 
Back
Top