Junior is mad--quite, quite mad

[Trial-and-Error]

Junior is ill

George W. Bush is ill. He has a psycho-spiritual dis-ease of the soul, a sickness that is endemic to our culture and symptomatic of the times we live in. It’s an illness that has been with us since time immemorial. Because it’s an illness that's in the soul of all of humanity, it pervades the field and is in all of us in potential at any moment, which makes it especially hard to diagnose. Bush's malady is quite different from schizophrenia, for example, in which all the different parts of the personality are fragmented and not connected to each other, resulting in a state of internal chaos. As compared to the dis-order of the schizophrenic, Bush can sound quite coherent and can appear like such a "regular," normal guy, which makes the syndrome he is suffering from very hard to recognize. This is because the healthy parts of his personality have been co-opted by the pathological aspect, which drafts them into its service. Because of the way the personality self-organizes an outer display of coherence around a pathogenic core, I would like to name Bush's illness ‘malignant egophrenic (as compared to schizophrenic) disease,’ or ‘ME disorder,’ for short. If ME disorder goes unrecognized and is not contained, it can be very destructive, particularly if the person is in a position of power.

This rather lengthy article reflects what many of us opposed to Junior's policies have intuitively already figured out; namely, that the man is psychologically seriously ill. Junior's enablers need not protest--it would be....well, too predictable.

[PocketRocket]

T&E: I am not by any stretch of the imagination a supporter of GWB. In fact, I have no use for the guy whatsoever. I believe the man's greatest contribution to the planet will be as fertilizer after he's passed away.

On this basis, I hope he is not cremated, as that would be a waste of good material.

But even I find this article to be a stretch. It's basically saying that Bush has a mental disease. A disease which has never been diagnosed, or even named, before, so the author basically comes up with some "symptoms", and proceeds to create a name for it to give it credibility.

Sorry. I can't buy into it.

That he may well be mad, I will not argue.

But this particular spin is just too far out for me.

[kimmy]

Indeed.

This person has invented a psychological ailment and proceded to diagnose Bush and 105,000,000 other Americans as having that ailment. Such presumption says more about the author than his subject, and might indicate some sort of megalomaniacal disorder of some sort.

Argue that Bush is stupid, ignorant, or uninformed. Argue that his policies are short-sighted or motivated by a hidden agenda. Argue that American voters have been conned or scared or that they're short-sighted. There's lots of great arguments about Bush and his policies to be made.

But don't make up a bunch of psychological mumbo-jumbo, unless you want to look like a complete fool. It makes you seem like a fruit-cake and trivializes the point you want to make.

-kimmy

[Trial-and-Error]

This person has invented a psychological ailment and proceded to diagnose Bush and 105,000,000 other Americans as having that ailment. Such presumption says more about the author than his subject, and might indicate some sort of megalomaniacal disorder of some sort.

Argue that Bush is stupid, ignorant, or uninformed. Argue that his policies are short-sighted or motivated by a hidden agenda. Argue that American voters have been conned or scared or that they're short-sighted. There's lots of great arguments about Bush and his policies to be made.

But don't make up a bunch of psychological mumbo-jumbo, unless you want to look like a complete fool. It makes you seem like a fruit-cake and trivializes the point you want to make.

Oh, Kimmy, a fool; no, no, a complete fool; a fruitcake too--Indeed. Is that what you think of me for posting that article by the dear doctor. My, my.

Do you really want to rationalize Junior's deeds by claiming he's stupid or uninformed, or short-sighted, or all of the above. Best you think about that one. He's none of those--honest! Get a grip.

Junior does, however, show severe signs of mental illness and the author was merely putting forward a theory of what it might be. As for those who support Junior, yes, dear soul, I believe they suffer from a form of mental illness as well. But way up on the mental illness list is Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and all who would senslessly support a man who is nothing short of a pathological liar and who is responsible for mass murder and torture. Stupid? Ill-informed? Short-sighted. Let's be serious. You'd better hope that the American public wake up pretty soon. Junior is dangerously ill.

Until such time as we breed out severe mental illness from the human race we are destined to destroy ourselves.

Let us dedicate the same kind of resources on studying the brain as we do in killing machines and killing. Let us dedicate more resources in trying to find our humanity.

[Guest eureka]

There was an interesting article on psychopathy recently in a Toronto paper. It gave the scores for Olson, Bernardo and a new one who scored a little higher than either of those.

It gave the factors that went into the scale - developed by Canada's foremost expert in the "disease."

I did a little playing with the score for Bush. Of the forty factors, I could only asses a few ( amateurishly, of course) and Bush was at the level of a low grade psychopath on that after just a few.

[kimmy]

Oh, Kimmy, a fool;  no, no, a complete fool; a fruitcake too--Indeed.  Is that what you think of me for posting that article by the dear doctor.  My, my.

"The dear doctor"? Have you checked out "the dear doctor's" credentials? "The dear doctor" isn't even a witch-doctor, let alone a doctor of any art or science. His credential, from his own website, is that he had a psychotic break from reality. Seriously.

I believe that "fruitcake" is a technically accurate description of "the dear doctor".

Watch for future articles that cite Orgone Accumulators as the answer to America's energy problems, and declare Meditation and Power Crystals as the key to peace in the Middle East.

Do you really want to rationalize Junior's deeds by claiming he's stupid or uninformed, or short-sighted, or all of the above.  Best you think about that one.  He's none of those--honest!  Get a grip.

Blaming Dubya's actions on mental illness is a rationalization.

Debating Dubya's actions as stupid, uninformed, short-sighted is called critical thinking.

Let us dedicate the same kind of resources on studying the brain as we do in killing machines and killing.  Let us dedicate more resources in trying to find our humanity.

You know, I do agree with that part. I'm auditing a course at my local university about the workings of the human brain, and I've found it is an astounding instrument. But reading "the dear doctor's" biography, I wonder if perhaps I'm taking the hard way. Perhaps I should just roll a huge joint, get blasted, and proclaim it a "spiritual awakening". Then I could declare myself a "healer" too.

-kimmy

[PocketRocket]

  Perhaps I should just roll a huge joint, get blasted, and proclaim it a "spiritual awakening".  Then I could declare myself a "healer" too.

-kimmy

I'm on board with Kimmy.

Hell, if that's the qualification I'm ready to heal ALL the world's ills.

[cgarrett]

the man does not have a mental disease! his problem are those horns growing out of the front of his head!

the man thinks nothing of killing thousands. whether in retaliation or for fun. american or otherwise.

one cannot be denied in any way... that more people have died in the world while junior has been in power since... well, the last republican president!

[paranoid joe]

Im with Kimmy too. Its one thing to disagree with someone (with GWB I encourge it as i dont really like the guy), but it is absurd to say that he has a mental illness. (imagine if this was being said the other way around)

[Guest eureka]

Actually, there is nothing absurd about it at all. A very high proportion of senior executives and politicians are classifiable as sociopaths. That has been the conclusions of much study of the phenemenon.

It is also true that most of those function quite well in the world and that the manifestations of their illness are confined to attitudes towards their "business" that are, strangely, often a measure of success.

It becomes a problem when those sociopaths began to think they are real and unanswerable to any but themselves. When that happens it becomes dangerous. When it is allied to a deep pathology, it is more so. When it occurs in the occupant of very high and powerful office, it brings Napoleons and Hitlers.

I believe it has now brought us Bush.

[Trial-and-Error]

Blaming Dubya's actions on mental illness is a rationalization.

Dunno so much that I was blaming Junior. One doesn't generally "blame" someone for having a mental illness. Well, maybe in Alberta they do. No, dear kimmy, I was saying that Junior's horrific actions are the manifestations of a mental illness.

Debating Dubya's actions as stupid, uninformed, short-sighted is called critical thinking.

Gee, can you spare a minute to run that one by me again, Kimmy. Am I to understand that you are citing a definition? Let me quickly re-phrase what you said so you can go back and think about it again. Critical thinking is the act of debating Junior's actions as stupid, uninformed, or short-sighted.

Kimmy from Alta again!

I'm auditing a course at my local university about the workings of the human brain, and I've found it is an astounding instrument. But reading "the dear doctor's" biography, I wonder if perhaps I'm taking the hard way. Perhaps I should just roll a huge joint, get blasted, and proclaim it a "spiritual awakening". Then I could declare myself a "healer" too.

Why just auditing, Kimmy? No, that's okay. Auditing is a good beginning inasmuch as you have now discovered the human brain is an astounding instrument. Run with that, kimmy. And don't stop until you learn to recognize some of the signs of mental illness. Start with Junior.

Gee, I think you're going to have to change your attitude if you plan to derive anything out of that "brain course." Maybe for you rolling a huge joint is the only way to get through it. But if that's the case, I think you have to go one step further and smoke it.

Sometimes, kimmy, I like to debate this subject but most of the time I just like to throw in my opinion. I've just done too much thinking about the subject of Junior having spent an incredible amount of time listening to him, watching his body language, and taking note of his mouthings and his proclaimed beliefs juxtaposed to his actions and I have concluded the man is seriously deranged.

If you wish to put Bush's actions down to simplistic terms of just being short-sightedand/or being uninformed and/or stupid be my guest. Dealing with a guy of that elevated world level on your terms is just a waste of time--for me that is.

I will, however, concede the author is not a doctor--not even a witch doctor. My oversight. But damn, I like what he has to say--notwithstanding your take on him.

[Trial-and-Error]

Actually, there is nothing absurd about it at all. A very high proportion of senior executives and politicians are classifiable as sociopaths. That has been the conclusions of much study of the phenemenon.

It is also true that most of those function quite well in the world and that the manifestations of their illness are confined to attitudes towards their "business" that are, strangely, often a measure of success.

It becomes a problem when those sociopaths began to think they are real and unanswerable to any but themselves. When that happens it becomes dangerous. When it is allied to a deep pathology, it is more so. When it occurs in the occupant of very high and powerful office, it brings Napoleons and Hitlers.

I believe it has now brought us Bush.

Although it brings me little peace, I concur fully with what you say.

[kimmy]

Blaming Dubya's actions on mental illness is a rationalization.

Dunno so much that I was blaming Junior. One doesn't generally "blame" someone for having a mental illness.

I didn't say you were blaming him for having a mental illness. I said you were blaming his actions on mental illness. There's a key difference between the two. You seem to wish to come across as some sort of intellectual; if that's the case you might want to read more carefully. (and learning to operate the "quote" tags might help, too.)

Well, maybe in Alberta they do.  No,

Ooh, zing!

dear kimmy

Don't patronize me.

I was saying that Junior's horrific actions are the manifestations of a mental illness.

Yes, I gathered as much.

Debating Dubya's actions as stupid, uninformed, short-sighted is called critical thinking.

Gee, can you spare a minute to run that one by me again, Kimmy. Am I to understand that you are citing a definition? Let me quickly re-phrase what you said so you can go back and think about it again. Critical thinking is the act of debating Junior's actions as stupid, uninformed, or short-sighted.

Critical thinking: The disciplined ability and willingness to assess evidence and claims, to seek a breadth of contradicting as well as confirming information, to make objective judgments on the basis of well supported reasons as a guide to belief and action (etc)

Evaluating Dubya's actions on their merits would be an example of critical thinking.

Dismissing Dubya's actions as "crazy" on the basis of some half-baked article by a self-described kook would be an example of the opposite.

Kimmy from Alta again!

Ooh, zing again!

Why just auditing, Kimmy?

Because I'm immensely brilliant in so many areas of human endeavor that before I choose my path in life, I wish to look at all my options to see what suits me best.

Or because I thought it would be interesting.

Gee, I think you're going to have to change your attitude if you plan to derive anything out of that "brain course."  Maybe for you rolling a huge joint is the only way to get through it.  But if that's the case, I think you have to go one step further and smoke it.

That was weaker than a baby kitten. But keep trying.

If you wish to put Bush's actions down to simplistic terms of just being short-sightedand/or being uninformed and/or stupid be my guest.

So, weighing Dubya's actions on their merits (or lack thereof) is simplistic, but filing them under "crazy" is bigtime sophistication? I think you might have that wrong. Dismissing things that you don't agree with as "insane" is about as simplistic as it gets.

How many times have you heard the 9/11 hijackers described as "madmen"? Thousands, probably. Insightful? No, the opposite. Dismissing the hijackers as "madmen" ignores that there are complex causes of the situation. Filing their actions under "crazy" does a disservice to the cause of understanding of the world we live in.

Likewise, blaming the American response on some kind of mental illness (a fictitious one, yet!) is entirely simplistic. It does not further anyone's understanding of the issues at stake. It's looking for an easy answer when the real answers are difficult.

Dealing with a guy of that elevated world level on your terms is just a waste of time--for me that is. 

I guess you're just on a higher plane.

I will, however, concede the author is not a doctor--not even a witch doctor.  My oversight.  But damn, I like what he has to say--notwithstanding your take on him.

That's not my take on him, that's his own take on himself. He had a psychotic break from reality: that's his own description of how he became "spiritually aware". You're certainly free to put as much stock as you like in "the good doctor's" views; just be aware that he's probably not going to be published in the New England Journal of Medicine anytime soon.

-kimmy

[caesar]

That's not my take on him, that's his own take on himself. He had a psychotic break from reality: that's his own description of how he became "spiritually aware".

Well then, that is credentials for diagnosing Bush's psychotic break down. Remember the old saying: "It takes one to know one" One doesn't need to be a doctor to recognize mental deficiencies.

[kimmy]

That's not my take on him, that's his own take on himself. He had a psychotic break from reality: that's his own description of how he became "spiritually aware".

Well then, that is credentials for diagnosing Bush's psychotic break down. Remember the old saying: "It takes one to know one" One doesn't need to be a doctor to recognize mental deficiencies.

This is somewhat like arguing that stupid-people are uniquely qualified to run the school board.

-kimmy

[Trial-and-Error]

Ya know, kimmy, I wasn't going to trouble myself by responding to your last post because to do so seemed like an exercise in diminishing returns. But plug away I must--at least for one more go-around--com'on, how often does one get to dialogue with someone who lays claim to brilliance. For lack of evidence, I didn't know--but not to worry. Do a Junior. Repeat, repeat, repeat your claim and you, too, can garner a following. Remember, the great unwashed aka human sponges will believe just about any proclamation if it is repeated often enough. The technique works, so stick with it, kimmy. By the way, how brilliant are you?

That you, personally, feel that Junior is sane is not particularly important but I fear that there are so many "out there" who believe as you do--alas, alas.

You see I don't buy your theory that Sonny's crimes against humanity are due to his intellectual shortcomings (among many), or his ineptitude, or his inability to surround himself with a team who is capable of giving him good intelligence; or his proclivity for exercising poor judgment; or his ignorance. That's where you make your mistake and its an egregious one at that. Junior is fully aware of what he is doing--but his demented mind lacks the ability to feel remorse, to empathize, to self-reflect. Junior's crimes against the human race are predicated on his delusions of grandeur and hunger for power--at any and all cost so long as payment is exacted from all but himself.

Add to the mix his past--use of hard drugs and alcohol; his callous treatment of helpless animals; his disregard for human life (when asked by someone what he thought Karla Faye Tucker might say to him, Junior responded in the most chilling, mocking tone, "Please don't kill me."); his quick, seemingly premeditated response to the horrific events of 911; his use of DU weapons which are and shall continue to have devastating effects on all those who managed to survive the initial bombings; his cowardly behaviour during the Vietnam years but his unconscienable willingness to expend the lives of his own countrymen--shall I go on? Together, these are signs of a seriously troubled mind.

At the very least, he needs to undergo a psychiatric assessment before he goes on to be responsible for more acts against humanity.

The United States of America has over the years sentenced to death thousands of people (many of whom were actually guilty) for acts of inhumanity much less devastating than those committed by Junior. I would venture to say that the vast majority of them if not all suffered from one form of insanity or another. But as a would-be Texan, I bet you believe murders in general are committed by people who are simply greedy, vindictive, or whatever--or perhaps under the influence of the devil. That the workings of their brains coupled with their life's experiences could result in mental illness is perhaps for you beyond the pale. And that's precisely an earlier point I made, the brain is the last frontier of discovery--not space. The vast majority of people can recognize a broken arm but cannot detect a broken mind. That's precisely why there is no public outcry for mega monies to be spent in brain research--the obvious has escaped you. Get beyond the symptoms; identify the problem. It's nothing short of mind boggling that man knows so little about the workings of the brain even though the brain is the heart of humanity.

But back to Junior who has chalked up 100's of thousands of deaths and wounded--psychologically and physically. He has sent many young men and women half way around the world to perpetrate the most wicked acts of injustice upon a people they don't even know--a people who were already sick, starving and utterly deprived--and all at the direction of a man who is clearly deranged, unashamed, and dedicated to heady power. There are no redeeming features to this unwarranted, illegal war. None. Junior was able to initiate this quagmire by pathologically lying to the American people who having been propagandized over the years to believe that they are god's chosen went along with the bareface lies. As for the whorish media, they are for all purposes anethema to the public good.

And so the WH's mentally challenged boy gets away with genocide because people like you don't see him for what he his--deranged. You, instead, want to rationalize his errors on the most ludicrous basis which I won't again repeat and cause you further embarrassment. The leader of the free world as a result of his pyschosis has metamorphised into a full blown war criminal.

I also note in another one of your posts that you believe that the majority of sane people do not believe in any conspiracy theories regarding 911. Well, kimmy with no "dear", it is the "official" story that IS the conspiracy theory. Do yourself and the rest of us who are not buying your take on 911 a favour--google 911 and read, read, read. Here's a site to get you started and do please report back to us when you discover all the answers. I have an open mind--you may go down in history as the genious who was able to prove the official version to the exclusion of all others.

One more thing, just like I don't buy the package of any one political party, I also don't buy all the statements contained in the various "conspiracy" theories. Nevertheless, I can tell you many of the so-called conspiracy theories contain a good deal of information worthy of serious consideration. The point is that until such time as Bush (a proven inveterate liar) is willing to substantiate his official version, it is fully suspect and cannot by any rational individual be taken as the truth.

Hell, here are a few more sites

Questions

More Leftist Pennings - Horrors!

Anyone for Revisionism?

War Crimes(War crimes)

How about Voting Fraud - Conspiracy Reigns

[Tawasakm]

By the way, how brilliant are you?

I respect kimmy's thoughts.

That you, personally, feel that Junior is sane is not particularly important

The logical corollary is that it is of no particular import that you, personally, think GW is insane (which, incidentally is a legal concept not a psychological one). Of course that attitude gets us nowhere. Why don't we take the view the for the purposes of debate on this forum that the thoughts of contributing posters are all important.

You see I don't buy your theory that Sonny's crimes against humanity are due to his intellectual shortcomings (among many), or his ineptitude, or his inability to surround himself with a team who is capable of giving him good intelligence; or his proclivity for exercising poor judgment; or his ignorance. That's where you make your mistake and its an egregious one at that. Junior is fully aware of what he is doing--but his demented mind lacks the ability to feel remorse, to empathize, to self-reflect. Junior's crimes against the human race are predicated on his delusions of grandeur and hunger for power--at any and all cost so long as payment is exacted from all but himself.

Interesting paragraph. Your theory that Bush is demented and lacks any ability to feel remorse, empathise or reflect intrigues me. I am sure you can back that up with something more substantive in the way of evidence (no psychotics this time). I would lean away from that argument because his history in office would seem to support more conventional theories - that he is operating out of self interest (all those old business connections), a misplaced ideology (which, to me, appears somewhat genuine), and a lack of perception in anticipating consequences. Thats my take anyway. No doubt in my mind that things would have been run better if Al Gore had been in office. Nevertheless I don't see anything that seems to indicate a mental disorder. I have an advantage in this in so far as I don't require scientific evidence to make that claim. To claim the he, definitely, has a mental disorder does require medical/scientific evidence.

At the very least, he needs to undergo a psychiatric assessment

I personally believe that any head of state should undergo a psychiatric assessment as a matter of course before acceding to the position.

I would venture to say that the vast majority of them if not all suffered from one form of insanity or another.

You are, again, misunderstanding the concept of insanity. It is a legal concept and NOT a psychological one. To quote from Psychology The Adaptive Mind "insanity - A legal term usually defined as the inability to understand that certain actions are wrong, in a legal or moral sense, at the time of a crime". While the opinions of experts is sought and taken under consideration it is only a court that can find someone insane and therefore innocent by reason of insanity. Very few people are found insane because very few people can really be found to be unaware of the 'wrongness' of particular actions. In fact as a defence it is rarely attempted.

You may postulate that many convicted criminals suffer from mental disorders but I think that may be a bit of a leap. Particularly if you then want to establish that so many of these individuals would also have diminished responsibility. Remember, also, that having a bad childhood and/or being unhappy, while unfortunate, is not a mental disorder.

Get beyond the symptoms; identify the problem.

Syptoms are necessary for diagnosis...

It's nothing short of mind boggling that man knows so little about the workings of the brain even though the brain is the heart of humanity.

It is a difficult area to explore. Technology is only now progressing to a point where a brain can be oberved in real time while operating and responding to stimuli. Relax - there is a great deal of competent research occuring.

You, instead, want to rationalize his errors on the most ludicrous basis which I won't again repeat and cause you further embarrassment.

It is hardly ludicrous. But if you disagree please pursue the issue with all vigour. I see no reason for kimmy to feel embarrased for presenting her views in a structured and rational way. The fact that she disagrees with you holds no shame at all.

Incidentally, just to be sporting, I should let you know that with the symptoms you are attributing to Bush you could make out a case for him being schizophrenic. To be diagnosed with that disorder you must possess at least two symptoms (there is no one universal symptom- its a complex disorder). Delusion is a postive symptom of schizophrenia while his lack of emotion (as you call it) could be a negative symptom of schizophrenia (negative symptoms are reduction of normal behaviour - such as emotion). Of course I think you are wrong in attributing these symptoms. But why don't you try and go with this one?

[Trial-and-Error]

Tawasakm - will try my darndest to address your post later this evening--if not tonight, some time over the weekend. I'm certain you'll be looking forward to it.

[Guest eureka]

I rather think, Tawasaksm, that you are looking more to the area of crominal insanity where Bush may fit in the criminal part while not quite approaching the threshold of insanity for Court purposes.

Bush seems to me, as a layman, to exhibit the syptoms of a "Borderline Personality Disorder." He may weel know right from wrong but does he care?

I would agree with the assessment that all criminals have some degree of mental disorder and that diminished responsibility should apply to every case. With the possible exception of those who commit certain types of property crime in order to survive and given a society that has a reasonable degree of social responsibility built into its systems.

[Trial-and-Error]

"The logical corollary is that it is of no particular import that you, personally, think GW is insane (which, incidentally is a legal concept not a psychological one). Of course that attitude gets us nowhere. Why don't we take the view the for the purposes of debate on this forum that the thoughts of contributing posters are all important."

For a pollyanna, your statement will do just fine. The point I was trying to make is that I wasn't concerned that one person (in that instance, kimmy and in this instance, you) didn't share my view that Junior is insane but that there is a consensus reflecting the same view which causes me concern. But, I like to be up front, so yes, there was also an intent to deliver a wee dig. My advice to you would be to bypass perceived or real "slights." Surely we're all sufficiently grown up here that we can take a few on the chin without becoming so sanctimoniously defensive. But never mind, kimmy will undoubtedly appreciate that you respect her views. And that's a good thing.

By the way, your definition of "insane" is only one of many; nevertheless, I'm heartened that you possess a legal inclination. However, for purposes of this argument your definition is neither here nor there since we are unfortunately not trying Junior in the courts. If and when that day comes (hope springs eternal, no?) we can revisit your definition vis-a-vis Sonny. By the way, here's another use of the word, insane, in connection with the mad, raving insane Bushites.

Insanity

You may postulate that many convicted criminals suffer from mental disorders but I think that may be a bit of a leap. Particularly if you then want to establish that so many of these individuals would also have diminished responsibility.

Remember, also, that having a bad childhood and/or being unhappy, while unfortunate, is not a mental disorder.

Why would I remember such a statement for any other reason than it stands out as one of ignorance? Brains are constantly changing and in flux, which is precisely why we are able to learn. Most of us are fortunate to be born with genes that give us the beginnings of normalcy. However, as we age and we gain more experience, our brains change accordingly. I guess it's safe to assume that most of us "normal" individuals are raised by "normal" parents who in doing the best they can for us provide us with many more positive experiences than negative ones.

However, there are those far less fortunate who from the day they are born are subject to physical and/or mental abuse. Depending on the degree they are battered and neglected, their brains will undergo the kind of change that can turn them into adolescents and adults who are to put it mildly not very nice.

Having gotten a raw deal as children but having miraculously reached maturity, society takes over and gives them another punch in the solarplexis. "You're old enough now to know better." Hogwash. You don't arrive at the age of majority "knowing" what's right and what's wrong. Hell, if that were the case, we could let our own little darlings raise themselves knowing that when they become of age they'll just instinctively know that NOW and henceforth, they will be model and productive citizens. Right! And yet our justice system is built on just that kind of assumption.

Take a look at the prison population. Discounting anomalies, it is not comprised mostly of individuals from advantaged homes, nor is "advantaged" necessarily mean "monied" either. Again, it's all plain common sense. This is not rocket science. But the maddening crowds wallow in their barbaric thinking, rehashing the same old, same old and then wonder why there's crime in the streets and why wars continue unabated. In many ways, we still keep drawing on the biblical stuff (and "stuff" is what I consider it) that we're all born sinners. For sure, we focus more on revenge than rehabilitation. Someone has to pay--kinda like Junior, the Born Again Christian, who in case you've forgotten has been responsible for slaughtering.....well, you certainly must remember the stats--in the name of "name your poison--it doesn't appear to matter."

Junior needs to be relieved of his duties; sent to a mental institute and studied, as should all mass murderers.

Syptoms are necessary for diagnosis...

Great, so what's your diagnosis?

Relax - there is a great deal of competent research occuring.

I must assume that you're merely being flip. I don't happen to look at mass murder in such a light-hearted way. In fact, you are part of the problem. Until such time as the general public can actually visualize what it must be like to be the subject of Junior's insanity, we shall continue to be relaxed and lax. I don't happen to be on that side of the fence.

Incidentally, just to be sporting, I should let you know that with the symptoms you are attributing to Bush you could make out a case for him being schizophrenic. Of course I think you are wrong in attributing these symptoms.

What kind of double-talk is that? How could I possibly convince you that Junior is schizophrenic when you deny that Junior displays any signs of being delusional and/or unfeeling.

Junior is responsible for hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan/Iraq/USA who have died horrendous deaths and suffered unspeakable injuries. I can't top that for signs of being "unfeeling".

Having no proof that the people of Iraq would welcome Junior's bombs so that he could give them "democracy," yet going ahead and mercilessly attacking an already "under-sieged" people on a whim I think might be considered "unfeeling" among other things.

That he is in contravention of the Geneva Convention; i.e., he claims he can (and he has) with impugnity order the torture and inhumane treatment of those his forces have captured might be considered a sign that he is both barbaric and delusional. Certainly sends up a red flag for me. And how about the fact that he believes God is on his side? How delusional is that?

Put any spin on it you like, the man is a raving lunatic as are all the neocons and anyone else who supported the illegal invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq. Until the mindset of the public is changed, the slaughter of war shall continue. It seems that only when it reaches you, kimmy and others will you begin to understand the insanity of it all, including the perpetrators. Just kind of sit back and think of more sane ways to spend 300 billion dollars

[August1991]

Dear T&E,

I didn't really read your long post, skipped through it, yadda-yadda, bla-bla, then I see this at the end:

Put any spin on it you like, the man is a raving lunatic as are all the neocons and anyone else who supported the illegal invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq.

So, apparently half the voting population of the US is insane?

Do you think sensible debate occurs when you describe people as insane if they don't share your opinion?

You're a caricature of an American liberal: "Bush lied, kids died."

[Tawasakm]

By the way, your definition of "insane" is only one of many

My definition of insanity comes from Psychology The Adaptive mind which is, basically, a primer for psychology students in Australia and the US. I know not about Canada. I like to quote from it because it gives excellent basic definitions. Now according to that book (which is used to teach psychology students) insanity is not a psychological concept but a legal one. That definition is as I stated. The link you provided for your definition is one individual giving an opinion. My definition is the accepted definition within 'the industry'. Sorry but I am going to run with that. Since you claim my definition is one of many I looked it up in the dictionary. The results are here. Please note that the only definition which is not legal is no longer in scientific use

Brains are constantly changing and in flux, which is precisely why we are able to learn.

Tsk tsk. Do you really believe that brains constantly change. Our level of knowledge and interpretation of events may change but our brains don't. Not past a certain age anyway. When we are born our brains are at 25% size. At age two thats 75%. This is probably not due to the addition of new neurons but rather due to an increase in complexity and the addition of glial cells. I'm not going in to this too much since I feel you will ignore it. Do you actually really have any idea, scientifically, how it is that people learn or are you using 'common sense'?

However, there are those far less fortunate who from the day they are born are subject to physical and/or mental abuse.

This will not necessarily cause antisocial or abusive behaviour in an individual. There are plenty of adults around who grew up in such a situation and are balanced happy adults. Conversely there are people who grow up with 'normal' loving parents and will still become abusive.

The causes of such behaviour are not subject to such easy analysis. Yes it appears that people from a certain background are more likely to end up in jail but the first rule of statistical analysis is that correlation does not equal causation. If you can't get past that then theres no point in debating causes with you. Additionally the scientific method demands testing of hypothesis. This is much more reliable then 'its common sense'.

This is not rocket science.

No its not science at all.

Syptoms are necessary for diagnosis...

Great, so what's your diagnosis?

No that was a comment directed at you telling people to get past the symptoms. Which was actually contradictory to what you are trying to achieve.

I must assume that you're merely being flip. I don't happen to look at mass murder in such a light-hearted way.

I must have missed the bit where I condoned mass murder... No, hang on, thats right - I didn't condone mass murder! How interesting. So what was it I said? Well in response to you saying this

It's nothing short of mind boggling that man knows so little about the workings of the brain even though the brain is the heart of humanity.

I said this

It is a difficult area to explore. Technology is only now progressing to a point where a brain can be oberved in real time while operating and responding to stimuli. Relax - there is a great deal of competent research occuring.

No matter how hard I try I can't find any reference to mass murder in there. No what I seem to be saying is that technology is now allowing us to observe a functioning brain in real time which is a relatively recent thing and a critical break through.

What kind of double-talk is that? How could I possibly convince you that Junior is schizophrenic when you deny that Junior displays any signs of being delusional and/or unfeeling.

I gave you something which actually exists and fits your purported 'symptoms'. I thought it might be fun for you to work with something real instead of making things up with your 'common sense'. If you prefer your common sense approach then, by all means, don't let me stop you.

Junior is responsible for hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan/Iraq/USA who have died horrendous deaths and suffered unspeakable injuries.

Even accepting that figure as absolutely accurate and accepting the full attribution of blame toward Bush that still does not directly attribute a lack of feeling. One can only conclude that an action, or series of actions, by George Bush has caused a reaction, or a series of reactions, which have resulted in loss of life. You are only guessing at this feelings which are, it appears, based on your own feelings.

Put any spin on it you like, the man is a raving lunatic as are all the neocons and anyone else who supported the illegal invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq.

Now that is going too far. I may not have agreed with the invasion of Iraq but that doesn't mean that I think all those who disagree are lunatics. There are a variety of different perspectives and arguments which would support such an action. While I mostly disagree with them it does not mean that they are not rational.

It seems that only when it reaches you, kimmy and others will you begin to understand the insanity of it all, including the perpetrators.

Condescending rubbish. Which leads me back to the start of your last post.

For a pollyanna, your statement will do just fine.

My goodness what a telling blow!

Surely we're all sufficiently grown up here that we can take a few on the chin without becoming so sanctimoniously defensive.

Well if we're all grown up here then we can behave respectfully toward all posters in a mature and adult fashion.

[Guest eureka]

Insanity i defined in legal terms only in modern times. It is defined in law only to protect citizens from abuse.

The definition of insanity is, unquestionably, a psychological one woth norms that are established through psychological analysis to met a threshold test that the law has accepted.

It is better than Bedlam.

[Trial-and-Error]

What dictionary are you using again? Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary states the following: "insane - mentally disordered: exhibiting insanity 2: used by , typical of, or intended for insane persons" (as in insane asylum) "3: absurd"

"insanity - a deranged state of the mind usu. occurring as a specific disorder...and usu. excluding such states as mental deficiency, psychoneurosis, and various character disorders b: a mental disorder 2: such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility 3 a: extreme folly or unreasonableness"

So if it's all the same to you, I still consider Junior insane. We can mince words until hell freezes over and your "knowledge" of psychology, which of course you know is not a true science, seems impressive enough. Still, I'm afraid it provides me with no information to explain mass slaughter of civilians and other war crimes by Junior and his administration. As for "common sense," I find that in the absence of scientific explanations, it works like a tinker's dam--besides which I'm naturally quite intuitive.

That you expect that we should all respect one another's viewpoints--sorry, but that ain't happening any time soon. But, hey, I think I have exercised a degree of decorum in my responses. I'd like to think that I've been civil.

Having said that, I won't be responding to the remainder of your post as it would be an exercise in futility. But if you'd care to take another swing at me and have the last word, go for it. I'll read it--of course--I couldn't resist--but I won't be replying. It's time to move on.

[Tawasakm]

Eureka,

Insanity i defined in legal terms only in modern times.

Admitting again that I don't know the case in Canada I will reiterate to you that in the US and Australia psychology students are taught that insanity IS NOT a psychological concept or term but only a legal one. Any properly qualified clinical pyschologist in the US or Australia will deal with the concept only through legal processes occuring in a court.

Dictionaries have been updated to reflect this. Here is a definition taken from Dictionary.com which has been properly updated to reflect this reality:

Persistent mental disorder or derangement. No longer in scientific use

So while the term continues to float around and enjoy common use the reality it is that it is no longer used within the psychological community.

The definition of insanity is, unquestionably, a psychological one woth norms that are established through psychological analysis to met a threshold test that the law has accepted.

The definition accepted within the community is:

A legal term usually defined as the inability to understand that certain actions are wrong, in a legal or moral sense, at the time of a crime.

Now somebody is found insane if through mental disease they are unable to know right from wrong. Hence the opinions of experts is sought. The determination lies with the court however. The same text provides an example of a criminal with extreme psychologicial problems who is found to be perfectly sane. Isn't there a contradiction it asks? No is the answer because insanity is ONLY a legal term/concpet not a psychological one.

Trial and Error,

Having said that, I won't be responding to the remainder of your post as it would be an exercise in futility.

If that is the case I'll break off.