The Dangerous Case Of Donald Trump

[rav3n]

Trump made a gaff a few days ago claiming that Hurricane Dorian would negatively impact on Alabama. Instead of admitting to his gaff, he doubled down and attempted to negate meteorologists' predictions. And now, he's showing a sharpie altered Hurricane Dorian map. I'm torn between laughing and cringing. This man isn't right in the head.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/vide...69d0e1-e5dd-4445-9476-62dec2b34eaa_video.html

 

[Maou]

Okay, time to get this thread back on track

You guys do know that for something to be considered mental illness, or a disorder. It has to negatively affect a person's life and give them mental distress. Far as I have seen, people just get mad at Trump, while he laughs at them.

Also, there is a huge difference between having narcissistic traits, and narcassistic personality disorder. Which has by the way, been almost removed from the DSM iirc.

 

[The Cat]

Now that's comedy.

 

[Coriolis]

Okay, time to get this thread back on track

You guys do know that for something to be considered mental illness, or a disorder. It has to negatively affect a person's life and give them mental distress. Far as I have seen, people just get mad at Trump, while he laughs at them.

The fellow in the asylum who firmly believes he is Christopher Columbus is probably in no mental distress, especially if everyone around him caters to his delusions. Few people would question that he is mentally ill, though, unless they have some agenda to be served by the pretense.

 

[The Cat]

No sane man can be happy, for to him life is real, and he sees what a fearful thing it is. Only the mad can be happy, and not many of those. The few that imagine themselves kings or gods are happy, the rest are no happier than the sane.

 

[Maou]

The fellow in the asylum who firmly believes he is Christopher Columbus is probably in no mental distress, especially if everyone around him caters to his delusions. Few people would question that he is mentally ill, though, unless they have some agenda to be served by the pretense.

The line between genius and madness is pretty thin.

In all seriousness, a YUGE majority of people on the TV have an almost required amount of Narcissistic traits. Its common in celebrities, marketing, etc. This doesn't mean its a mental disorder in every case. Otherwise, everyone is bonkers that is a celebrity.

No sane man can be happy, for to him life is real, and he sees what a fearful thing it is. Only the mad can be happy, and not many of those. The few that imagine themselves kings or gods are happy, the rest are no happier than the sane.

We're all mad here apparently.

 

[The Cat]

The line between genius and madness is pretty thin.

In all seriousness, a YUGE majority of people on the TV have an almost required amount of Narcissistic traits. Its common in celebrities, marketing, etc. This doesn't mean its a mental disorder in every case. Otherwise, everyone is bonkers that is a celebrity.




We're all mad here apparently.

If only you meant it.

 

[Tellenbach]

There does seem to be an odd dissonance among those who advocate for "smaller government" advocating the continuance of a government bureau such as ICE.

National defense is a legitimate role for government; it's spelled out in the Constitution. Medicare, Social Security, etc. are not spelled out in the Constitution.

 

[Tomb1]

National defense is a legitimate role for government; it's spelled out in the Constitution. Medicare, Social Security, etc. are not spelled out in the Constitution.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

 

[Peter Deadpan]

Burn.

 

[Tellenbach]

The definition of "general welfare" has been bastardized in the 20th century but it is what it is. I share the Madisonian perspective on "general welfare".

" It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,’’ amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases." James Madison

The Madisonian view is that "general welfare" refers to the enumerated powers already defined in the Constitution.

 

[Tomb1]

The definition of "general welfare" has been bastardized in the 20th century but it is what it is. I share the Madisonian perspective on "general welfare".

" It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,’’ amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases." James Madison

The Madisonian view is that "general welfare" refers to the enumerated powers already defined in the Constitution.

Madison's view was found to be baseless back in '36 when Supreme Court undertook thorough investigations into the Article's history:

"Since the foundation of the Nation sharp differences of opinion have persisted as to the true interpretation of the phrase. Madison asserted it amounted to no more than a reference to the other powers enumerated in the subsequent clauses of the same section; that, as the United States is a government of limited and enumerated powers, the grant of power to tax and spend for the general national welfare must be confined to the enumerated legislative fields committed to the Congress. In this view the phrase is mere tautology, for taxation and appropriation are or may be necessary incidents of the exercise of any of the enumerated legislative powers. Hamilton, on the other hand, maintained the clause confers a power separate and distinct from those later enumerated, is not restricted in meaning by the grant of them, and Congress consequently has a substantive power to tax and to appropriate, limited only by the requirement that it shall be exercised to provide for the general welfare of the United States....This court has noticed the question, but has never found it necessary to decide which is the true construction. Mr. Justice Story, in his Commentaries, espouses the Hamiltonian position.....Study of all these leads us to conclude that the reading advocated by Mr. Justice Story is the correct one. While, therefore, the power to tax is not unlimited, its confines are set in the clause which confers it, and not in those of § 8 which bestow and define the legislative powers of the Congress. It results that the power of Congress to authorize expenditure of public moneys for public purposes is not limited by the direct grants of legislative power found in the Constitution."

SPENDING FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE | U.S. Constitution Annotated | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[Tellenbach]

Madison's view was found to be baseless back in '36

Like I said...the 20th century. This is the same court that ruled in favor of interning Japanese Americans without due process.

 

[Lark]

This may sound simply biased but I think that Boris Johnson in the UK, some of the other developments within the UK generally, with UK politics and government specifically, make me think the situation here and Boris is more dangerous than Donald Trump.

Some of the language that Boris has used lately, how he seems to act under pressure, is all very incendiary.

I'm pretty sure that Boris and a bunch of other extreme elements could use the referendum result, which I dont think is valid any longer anyway, as a pretext for bedtime for democracy in the UK.

It'll be sold as the most democratic thing possible, just like the various "People's Democracies" globally, when something becomes increasingly sacred in theory you can bet its getting more and more remote from reality.

 

[Lark]

Like I said...the 20th century. This is the same court that ruled in favor of interning Japanese Americans without due process.

Dont forget McCarthyism.

Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party Tellenbach?

 

[Lark]

National defense is a legitimate role for government; it's spelled out in the Constitution. Medicare, Social Security, etc. are not spelled out in the Constitution.

The enemies of America (some might say the english speaking world) want you to carry on labouring the point Tellenbach, so long as the market failures which mandate those things you've got the dislike for can be ramped up for long enough no defence is going to be possible no matter how much money you shell out on WMDs.

The lower than low intensity warfare of today is such that its fought through hysteria, triggering, deadly misinformation like the anti-vaxxers cancelling out the potential gains from basic modern medicine and public hygiene.

Arms races between states have been used to strategically bankrupt nations in the past but there's never been a risk of that in none militaristic state spending priority. In that respect its neglect that does the unnoticed until its too late harm. The rationale for neglecting it so has been a long time in the making/perfecting but the consequences are going to be devastating.

Its the same as how the various pop liberal causes, promoting abortion, euthenasia, normative homosexuality, all have a single major demographic result, ie depopulation. Death. Though its an easy sell on a population that you've spent long enough demonizing its past, history, heritage, conventions in such a way that it can be used as a useful bogeyman, encouraging virtually anything so long as its not it.

 

[The Cat]

 

[rav3n]

Confirmed. Trump was that one who drew on the map with a sharpie, to include Alabama in Dorian's trajectory. Trump's behaving like someone with serious mental health deficits. This act is not only illegal, it's something a child would do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...597606-cfe7-11e9-8c1c-7c8ee785b855_story.html

It was Trump who used a black Sharpie to mark up an official National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration map, which he displayed during an Oval Office briefing on Wednesday, according to a White House official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

“No one else writes like that on a map with a black Sharpie,” the official said of the map, which added Alabama into the hurricane’s potential pathway inside the loop of the marker.

 

[Lark]

Confirmed. Trump was that one who drew on the map with a sharpie, to include Alabama in Dorian's trajectory. Trump's behaving like someone with serious mental health deficits. This act is not only illegal, it's something a child would do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...597606-cfe7-11e9-8c1c-7c8ee785b855_story.html

I keep thinking of the madness of King George.

I wonder if this is a test of a certain kind of constitutional democracy or republicanism, how does it cope with a mad leader.

Or his mad followers. The guy does remain ever the populist. It resonates with public mood of at least some people.

 

[rav3n]

I keep thinking of the madness of King George.

I wonder if this is a test of a certain kind of constitutional democracy or republicanism, how does it cope with a mad leader.

Or his mad followers. The guy does remain ever the populist. It resonates with public mood of at least some people.

Trump's not a populist. Every one of his and the GOP's policies, benefit the extremely wealthy.