Trash's Disease of Mental Deterioration

[Spurtacular]

... and to answer your question: There isn't a test for Iran/North Korea. That is irrelevant to whether we should. Do you think our government should be as bad as everyone else's, or better?

No, where was the test that was gonna stop Obama/Clinton from enabling Iran/NK nuclear weapons programs? Where was the test that was going to stop Hillary from giving twenty percent of our uranium to the Russians? You don't give a about that. Your sanctimony drips off you, bro. And if Obama was murdering people around the world where is the morality test that stops him from having nukes? You didn't advocate for that, did you? You just want your dog and pony show this time around.

[boutons_deux]

And you put such trust in what medical professionals think.

scepticism is essential

whom do you trust?

[rmt]

scepticism is essential

whom do you trust?

I think we'd all be better off eating a healthy diet, exercising and forgiving/forgetting than going to the doctor, following their advice and popping their many pills (eg. my primary couldn't tell me why I should take Metformin when 4 months off it (completely drug free), my a1c was 5.1 (lowest ever since diabetes) and fasting glucose 90 (100 is start of pre-diabetes level). If it were left to me, doctors would only be seen when I have an infection and need antibiotics or if I have a tumor/cancer and need surgery/chemo.

[tlongII]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?



Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?





I don't really give a what happened in the past. I'm asking you what should be done now and going forward. I will be asking my congressperson to do so.

Yet you can't answer the question. That is what dishonest people do when they don't want to admit something.

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

So you think this change in procedure should occur immediately.

[koriwhat]

So you think this change in procedure should occur immediately.

right? lol! never concerned prior but the leftys are in the fetal position these days and just want to clear their tears for a minute.

[RandomGuy]

And you put such trust in what medical professionals think. My take is that they are just as biased, just as prejudiced (like some of these judges, FBI agents, etc) and can be just as wrong as the ordinary person and you want the power of removing a president elected by millions of Americans to rest in their hands. Well, just like these medical professionals advise NOW to expose, expose, expose instead of avoid, avoid, avoid allergens YEARS AGO or just like it's okay NOW to have dental procedures without antibiotics if you have a heart murmur but it wasn't okay for 2 DECADES BEFORE - they can change their minds and what was good advice then might not be now. And I already explained about the 2 psychologists who tested my son and their very different diagnoses. And can you listen to that televised meeting yesterday and really say that Trump has Alzheimer's?

"science gets thing wrong, so don't trust science".

Evidence based medicine is the only thing to reasonably trust. If you don't think so, please start drinking raw water, or trusting homeopathy for your cancer. I would almost add "or just stop treating your kid with medicine and use prayer only", but I won't even joke about that .

I think Trump is about at the age that serious cognitive decline starts in human beings generally.

I trust people with training, education, and experience, to generally get things right. I do not think anyone is infallible.

It would be fairly easy to make the survey anonymous and double-blind, and all parties would be motivated to make sure it was. Congress should have some oversight of the process as a check/balance.

Nuclear arsenals are too important to trust to faith. Faith sucks ass.

[RandomGuy]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

[dodge #1]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

[dodge #2]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

[dodge #3]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

[dodge #4]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

dodge #5: So you think this change in procedure should occur immediately.

Dodge, dodge, dodge, smh. As long as the current occupant has the magic "R", that is all you seem to care about, and people like you will make any excuse for him. You are the rot at the center of our country, party over country in all things, right?

Fine. Wait until the next president, if that will allow you the slim moment of honesty and integrity it takes to answer such a simple question. As I stated before, I don't care what party the president is.

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

[RandomGuy]

No, where was the test that was gonna stop Obama/Clinton from enabling Iran/NK nuclear weapons programs? Where was the test that was going to stop Hillary from giving twenty percent of our uranium to the Russians? You don't give a about that. Your sanctimony drips off you, bro. And if Obama was murdering people around the world where is the morality test that stops him from having nukes? You didn't advocate for that, did you? You just want your dog and pony show this time around.

Fine. Wait until the next president to implement it. I think it is a huge, foolish risk to wait that long, but it would take away this laughably stupid rationalization/excuse from you.

You have already answered the question. You would give our nuclear weapons to any insane clown that wants them, without testing them at all, even Hillary Clinton doesn't need to be tested, you would give her the football, without hesitation about her mental state.

Congrats.

[Spurtacular]

Fine. Wait until the next president to implement it. I think it is a huge, foolish risk to wait that long, but it would take away this laughably stupid rationalization/excuse from you.

You have already answered the question. You would give our nuclear weapons to any insane clown that wants them, without testing them at all, even Hillary Clinton doesn't need to be tested, you would give her the football, without hesitation about her mental state.

Congrats.

Think about this rationally, dude. You complain that the Russians stole the election. You think that countries won't buy influence to subvert our ability to deploy nuclear capabilities if you tried to implement this utterly re ed test? You're letting your Trump Derangement Syndrome do the thinking for you.

And I would not have given Hillary access to nuclear weaponry because I would have impeached her from federal office long before she had a chance to run.

If you don't like that Trump is in office, then stop supporting a-holes based on ideology. When Americans see better examples, they'll seek higher choices. And I don't say that as any major slam on Trump. He's doing a good job all things considered; but I just believe there a impeccable choices out there that'll never sniff the presidency because they don't play the game (in which they'd no longer be so great).

Congrats.

[Blake]

And I don't say that as any major slam on Trump. He's doing a good job all things considered;

the shield

[RandomGuy]

the shield

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

[RandomGuy]

Think about this rationally, dude. You complain that the Russians stole the election. You think that countries won't buy influence to subvert our ability to deploy nuclear capabilities if you tried to implement this utterly re ed test? You're letting your Trump Derangement Syndrome do the thinking for you.

And I would not have given Hillary access to nuclear weaponry because I would have impeached her from federal office long before she had a chance to run.

If you don't like that Trump is in office, then stop supporting a-holes based on ideology. When Americans see better examples, they'll seek higher choices. And I don't say that as any major slam on Trump. He's doing a good job all things considered; but I just believe there a impeccable choices out there that'll never sniff the presidency because they don't play the game (in which they'd no longer be so great).

Congrats.

Geez. That is more text than I have ever seen you write on anything.

I ask a general question about whether ANY president should be mentally evaluated as part of an annual physical exam, and you talk about anything but that general question.

Even when we set aside any consideration of testing Trump, giving your Dear Leader a pass, and wait until next president, and it still doesn't occur to you that it might be a good idea, no matter who is president.

Talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome. Any hint of anything wrong with Dear Leader, and you go into full blown excuse mode. No one should get tested because that might mean that Dear Leader should be tested. Can't admit any weakness, no matter how small.

[Blake]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

Eh, I think there should be a better system of checks and balance before nukes are authorized.

[Spurtacular]

Geez. That is more text than I have ever seen you write on anything.

I ask a general question about whether ANY president should be mentally evaluated as part of an annual physical exam, and you talk about anything but that general question.

Even when we set aside any consideration of testing Trump, giving your Dear Leader a pass, and wait until next president, and it still doesn't occur to you that it might be a good idea, no matter who is president.

Talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome. Any hint of anything wrong with Dear Leader, and you go into full blown excuse mode. No one should get tested because that might mean that Dear Leader should be tested. Can't admit any weakness, no matter how small.

Just gonna bore me with blather to try and win this one? It's all good; I sufficiently put down your weak already. Cheers.

[RandomGuy]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?

Eh, I think there should be a better system of checks and balance before nukes are authorized.

I would be happy with that as well, but the reason that we allow presidents to launch is that there may not be time for those checks and balances. If you can think of a check/balance that takes less than 12 minutes guaranteed, then it might be worth talking about. Any ideas?

[RandomGuy]

Just gonna bore me with blather to try and win this one? It's all good; I sufficiently put down your weak already. Cheers.

declaring victory after running away from addressing anything I post. Gotta admire the chutzpah.

Sure, whatever makes you happy. Any hint of anything wrong with Dear Leader, and you go into full blown excuse mode. No one should get tested because that might mean that Dear Leader should be tested. Can't admit any weakness, no matter how small.

[Pavlov]

I think we'd all be better off eating a healthy diet, exercising and forgiving/forgetting than going to the doctor, following their advice and popping their many pills (eg. my primary couldn't tell me why I should take Metformin when 4 months off it (completely drug free), my a1c was 5.1 (lowest ever since diabetes) and fasting glucose 90 (100 is start of pre-diabetes level). If it were left to me, doctors would only be seen when I have an infection and need antibiotics or if I have a tumor/cancer and need surgery/chemo.

What does this have to do with anything?

[Blake]

What does this have to do with anything?

Lol

[Spurtacular]

declaring victory after running away from addressing anything I post. Gotta admire the chutzpah.

Sure, whatever makes you happy. Any hint of anything wrong with Dear Leader, and you go into full blown excuse mode. No one should get tested because that might mean that Dear Leader should be tested. Can't admit any weakness, no matter how small.

I trust Trump more than the swamp. You like the swamp; that's your thing. I don't have to declare victory when that's where you're at.

[Blake]

Should the person capable of launching nuclear strikes be required to be mentally evaluated periodically?



I would be happy with that as well, but the reason that we allow presidents to launch is that there may not be time for those checks and balances. If you can think of a check/balance that takes less than 12 minutes guaranteed, then it might be worth talking about. Any ideas?

Where'd you get 12 minutes from?

How do we get a purely objective mental evaluation?

[RandomGuy]

Anatomy of a chicken dodge:

You would give our nuclear weapons to any insane clown... without testing them at all, even Hillary Clinton doesn't need to be tested...

Here, the statement that someone who Spurt-y Mcbrownnoser hates should be given access to nuclear weapons without testing is made, pointing out to him what "no testing" actually means.

Spurty ain't having any of it though. Flailing desperately to avoid having to admit his was wrong, he changes the subject and digs deep into his elementary school debate toolbag. "nu-uh" he says.

I would have impeached [Hillary] from federal office long before she had a chance to run.

Forgetting for a moment that the definition of "impeached" includes being in some sort of office, and it is kind of hard to "impeach" someone from an office they don't have.



You outdid yourself here. Keep doing your victory dance if it makes you happy.

[Blake]

I trust Trump more than the swamp. You like the swamp; that's your thing. I don't have to declare victory when that's where you're at.

Trump drained the swamp of toads and filled it with re ed gators which many leave after a few months on their own or from scandal.

[RandomGuy]

Where'd you get 12 minutes from?

How do we get a purely objective mental evaluation?

Time after detection of incoming ICBM and prep for counter strike is somewhere around 12 minutes if memory serves. Also worth looking up, but the standard should be something that happens with enough time to launch a counter strike. It is a matter of minutes, but I will see if I can find the bit, if you want.

[Blake]

Time after detection of incoming ICBM and prep for counter strike is somewhere around 12 minutes if memory serves. Also worth looking up, but the standard should be something that happens with enough time to launch a counter strike. It is a matter of minutes, but I will see if I can find the bit, if you want.

That's fine, no need.

I'm not fine with a civilian having that kind of responsibility. I'd hope the appropriate generals are on constant alert as well to put in their quick 2 cents writhin that 12 minute time

[RandomGuy]

That's fine.

I'm not fine with a civilian having that kind of responsibility. I'd hope the appropriate generals are on constant alert as well to put in their quick 2 cents.

They are, if they feel the order is illegal, but Congress gave the president a huge amount of leeway during the cold war, in a way that would never fly today, but is still in place. Also worth looking up.