The War on Rationality -Bush clearly has Borderline Syndrome

by **4911** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:15 pm

vid here: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15147009/">www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15147009/</a> "Yesterday at a fundraiser for an Arizona congressman, Mr. Bush claimed, quote, “177 of the opposition party said, ‘You know, we don’t think we ought to be listening to the conversations of terrorists.’” The hell they said that. President Bush hears what he wants. Tuesday, at another fundraiser in California, he had said, “Democrats take a law enforcement approach to terrorism. That means America will wait until we’re attacked again before we respond.” This is all classic Borderline Syndrome behaviour - being unable to look at yourself but finding mistakes in everyone else. Denial of own mistakes. Another trait is painting everything in Black & White, because people who suffer from this illness have great difficulty in discerning shades of grey - emotionally and mentally. That is why all activists are now considered terrorists. That is why "Your either for us or for the terrorists". Does the White House have its own therapist? Can congress (or anyone) give this therapist an order to examine the president or send in a psychologist? I mean lookit - HE was the one to fire the terror experts Clinton left him with. HE was the one to drop the Plan to get OBL that Clinton left. Yet either way, he sat on his ass for an hour as america was attacked. HE is clearly to blame, whether MIHOP, LIHOP or FUCKUP. The man is clearly suffering from a Psychosis. Im not saying this to insult, Im calling what I see. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=4911>4911</A> at: 10/11/06 1:38 pm

by **DireStrike** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:40 pm

It's also called partisanship.

by **4911** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:50 pm

It goes beyond that. Its more than partisanship. Another symptom is flying into rages. Most of us read the CapitalHillBlue accounts of Bush's raging. I wonder if anyone can move him to blow a fuse and really freak out and call the democaratic party a terrorist organization. The man is very obviously destroying democracy whilst claiming to serve it. Destroying yet calling it nurturing is another strategy employed by sufferers of the disease. The people who suffer from this illness are frequently so called "high functioning Borderliners" - people who can seemingly hold a job/relationship for a few months but inevitably get fired/dumped, usually for raging and freaking out. They seem normal. They seem rational. A closer inspection however makes visible that they are deeply disturbed. Most people never get a chance to look closer at them so they shrug and assume these people are simply a bit aggressive. Theres more to it than that. There is no logic to these peoples actions on the long run. They are vindictive, they are violent, they are highly manipulative, they are completely incapable of dealing rationally with criticism.. but they themselves cant see that. They believe they are normal like everyone else. Thats what makes it so hard to diagnose. It is a condition somewhere between a psychosis and a neurosis. It is also a condition often suffered by alcoholics, and recovering alcoholics. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=4911>4911</A> at: 10/11/06 1:33 pm

by **4911** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:42 pm

Are there any trained psychologists, therapists, psychiatrists reading this thread that can either confirm or deny this? Please?

by **dbeach** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:04 pm

"They are vindictive, they are violent, they are highly manipulative, they are completely incapable of dealing rationally with criticism.. but they themselves cant see that. They believe they are normal like everyone else. Thats what makes it so hard to diagnose. It is a condition somewhere between a psychosis and a neurosis" and they are criminally competent and great actors

by **chiggerbit** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:51 pm

<a href="http://www.toad.net/~arcturus/dd/narc.htm">www.toad.net/~arcturus/dd/narc.htm</a> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 10/11/06 5:20 pm

by **Seventhsonjr** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:02 pm

I work with kids and adults who have such diagnoses and can say a coupla things; 1. All such diagnoses are highly subjective and prone to abuse by the "system" 2. However, pathologies (i.e. some sort of psychiatric illness) are very visible via observation of behavior. 3. I don't generally buy into the idea of pigeonholing diagnoses such as this. Labelling generally is detrimental to children and adults - there are so many factors at work that to label any individual in a subjective simplistic way as "BPD" actually is counterproductive. usually it results for most folks in a medical intervention with highly experimental and usually dangerous medications which do not heal the person but may reduce their actions to "manageable" conduct. But since the conduct is viewed as almost solely chemical - the underlying pathology is not ever addressed. It is alike putting a bandaid on a bloody nose: you don't see the blood anymore but the underlying cause is not addressed. I am of the opinion that Bush is pathological in many respects. If he was a kid in the juvenile justice system his behavior would probably carry a diagnosis much more serious than borderline syndrome. He would be locked uup as a danger to the community and to himself. Frankly he might get life for the murders he is responsible for. If I had to pigeonhole Bush with a diagnosis I would suggest calling him a "Psychopath". Wikipedia has a nice entry on this condition which also gets a pigeonhole as:"dissocial personality disorder" or antisocial personality disorder. There is more at the link but I think this really is what we have in this man: Psychopathy wiki info: Psychopathy (pronounced /ˈsaɪkoʊˌp©¡¥èi/ in General American) is a term derived from the Greek psych (soul) and pathos (suffering), and was once used to denote any form of mental illness. These days, psychopathy is defined in psychiatry as a condition characterised by lack of empathy or conscience, poor impulse control and manipulative behaviors. Though in widespread use as a psychiatric term, psychopathy has no precise equivalent[1] in either the DSM-IV-TR, where it is most strongly correlated with antisocial personality disorder, or the ICD-10, where it is correlated with dissocial personality disorder. In current, clinical, use, psychopathy is most commonly diagnosed using Robert D. Hare's Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). Hare describes psychopaths as, "intraspecies predators who use charm, manipulation, intimidation, and violence to control others and to satisfy their own selfish needs. Lacking in conscience and in feelings for others, they cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations without the slightest sense of guilt or regret."[2] To the layperson, the term psychopathy can take on broader meanings, often being confused with psychosis, particularly by the use of the abbreviation psycho. People commonly take "psychopath" to be interchangeable with their personal perception of an evil person. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy</a>

by **Seventhsonjr** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:12 pm

Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) This is a clinical rating scale with 20 items. Each of the items in the PCL-R is scored on a three-point (0, 1, 2) scale according to specific criteria through file information and a semi-structured interview. A value of 0 is assigned if the item does not apply, 1 if it applies somewhat, and 2 if it fully applies. The items are as follows: Glibness/superficial charm Grandiose sense of self-worth Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom Pathological lying Conning/manipulative Lack of remorse or guilt Shallow affect Callous/lack of empathy Parasitic lifestyle Poor behavioral controls Promiscuous sexual behavior Early behavioral problems Lack of realistic, long-term goals Impulsivity Irresponsibility Failure to accept responsibility for own actions Many short-term marital relationships Juvenile delinquency Revocation of conditional release Criminal versatility The items are then summed in order to obtain a total score. The cutoff for psychopathy is 30 points or greater (25 in some studies). from the wiki link

by **DireStrike** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:13 pm

Something is wrong with bush. Clearly. I'm not qualified to diagnose it. "LET ME FINISH!" Oh wow, look what I just found: The Health and Medical History of President George W. Bush <a href="http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g43.htm">www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g43.htm</a> I remember an odd quote from a doctor after his '04 physical, put off for months, that seemed to suggest he wasn't allowed to fully examine bush. I'll post it if I can find it... it's proving impossible thanks to bush dodging his physical in '72. Oh well. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=direstrike>DireStrike</A> at: 10/11/06 5:28 pm

by **4911** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:45 pm

Hi sevensonjr, you mentioned "1. All such diagnoses are highly subjective and prone to abuse by the "system"" I cant read a definite meaning from that sentence, could you please rephrase it? "3. I don't generally buy into the idea of pigeonholing diagnoses such as this. Labelling generally is detrimental to children and adults - there are so many factors at work that to label any individual in a subjective simplistic way as "BPD" actually is counterproductive." Oh, what I think to know about BPD is that its not a "pure" disease, rather that its made of varying amounts of a whole long of disorders. I dont see how it could be counterproductive to ascertain a character of an illness as it points to a certain nature of the subject, and thereby gives one a better look at the psychological framework of the person one is communicating/dealing/confronted with. this from <a href="http://www.bpdcentral.com/resources/basics/main.shtml">www.bpdcentral.com/resour...main.shtml</a> BPD may coexist with: Post traumatic stress disorder Mood disorders Panic/anxiety disorders Substance abuse (54% of BPs also have a problem with substance abuse) Gender identity disorder Attention deficit disorder Eating disorders Multiple personality disorder Obsessive-compulsive disorder then you said: "usually it results for most folks in a medical intervention with highly experimental and usually dangerous medications which do not heal the person but may reduce their actions to "manageable" conduct. But since the conduct is viewed as almost solely chemical - the underlying pathology is not ever addressed. It is alike putting a bandaid on a bloody nose: you don't see the blood anymore but the underlying cause is not addressed." Which I found interesting. Thanks for the info.

by **4911** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:05 pm

Also, is there a PCL-R test that you know of which is online? It would be interesting to take from the perspective of his behaviour. But I guess due to the nature of the environment he does his job in, you could never really see whats really going on inside him. Would such a thing even be doable? You cant really diagnose someone mentally ill according to what they do in public life, can you? Well...hmmm.. tricky question. A guy who looks you in the eyes and smiles a big smile saying "Theyre tryin to kill your family" with a reassuring emphasised nod and never breaking that smile or eyecondact... dude that guy aint right. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=4911>4911</A> at: 10/11/06 6:27 pm

by **Seventhsonjr** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:36 pm

"1. All such diagnoses are highly subjective and prone to abuse by the "system"" I cant read a definite meaning from that sentence, could you please rephrase it? I think I explained it further on in the post, but basically what I am saying is that psychiatric and social work "business" - as institutions - use classifications like these to justify a class analysis of conduct of persons who are actually victims of the "racist" and sexist and classist system we live in. The medicalize trauma for profit and classify the oppressed for profit. The trauma I am speaking of is environmental and societal. Now, granted, I think Bush is to some extent a victim too of these systems. Franz Fanon in "The Wretched of the Earth" described the damage which oppressors suffer in their own oppressive system as well as the suffering of the oppressed. Personally I see the body -including the mind - as an ecosystem which has been damaged by radiation, chemicals, brainwashing (the media and "culture" run by the oppressors) and many other factors - but principally the above three. Bush's sister died of leukemia in 1953 --- most probably a victim of the same nuclear testing which we all were exposed to since 1944-5. Or maybe chemical from the petrochemicals in her environment. The dubya was exposed to these same environmental elements (as were his parents) which can damage the brain. Thus his condition may be partly biochemical/genetic damage. In any event --- two more quick thoughts before I try to respond to the other issues you raise: I work in a system where kids get labelled and it fucks up their lives when, from my perspective, dealing with this on a professional basis, their conditions are not easily pegged except that under one of the DSM categories they can be "labelled" and thus the "problem" is defined (instead of identifying the outside factors which caused the problem behavior to begin with). This harms society and the world. It also ignores the true causes of the problems and makes the staus quo "not to blame". Usually it benefits the oppressors to do this in profit or status. ("They're SICK and we rich folk are normal") As far as an online "test" I think I cited one in my post and there are links to this test at the wiki entry on psychopathy.I imagine their is a more in depth one but this seems to be the main one generally. If we apply this "test" to Bush I think we would mostly find he falls way above the high numbers indicating psychopathy. (I scored him in at least the 40's) I think too that the characterization of folks for borderline syndrome is way overbroad and describes most of us at one time or another whereas psychopathy is really a definition which fits the kind of sick conduct of the dubya. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=seventhsonjr>Seventhsonjr</A> at: 10/11/06 9:56 pm

by **Seventhsonjr** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:03 am

Bush is way OVER the borderline and since borderline disorder is so overbroad and thrown around like rice at a wedding in the criminal justice and mental health systems covering just about anybody with normal or serious problems - it is just not as useful as narrowing the diagnosis down to one which is narrower and more accuratley drawn. I think psychotic and psychopathy nails Bush's mental illness most accurately. Most of us on this board (or DU or PI or many others for that matter) could easily get classified by a neocon psychiatrist or fundy social worker/psychologist or even just a regular one as "borderline" under the right circumstances. I don't like most of these labels and feel they are sonmehwat harmful in gerneral use. Clearly bush has a Lot of the symptoms of mental illness of a genetic, environmental (and cultural) or biochemical nature just like most nazis and their ilk.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:31 am

That well describes the CIA and its ilk. Oh, and corporations.

by **Avalon** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:45 am

You should understand that any mental health professional who is willing to give their professional name and identifying details and offers an online diagnosis of someone like Bush whom they have not clinically examined, is in clear violation of their professional ethics. If Bush is their patient, it would be a violation of patient confidentiality rules. Like the codes in the Geneva Conventions, these ethical guidelines are meant to shield us from bogus psych diagnoses as much as it might shield someone like Dubya from politically biased online diagnoses. Sometimes you have to let a few of the guilty go free in order to protect the rights of the innocent.

The War on Rationality -Bush clearly has Borderline Syndrome

The War on Rationality -Bush clearly has Borderline Syndrome

re

Re: re

Re: re

Re: re

Re: re

experience

Re: The War on Rationality -Bush clearly has Borderline Synd

Re: experience

Re: experience

Re: experience

subjectivity and abuse by the system

I think what I mean to say mostly is this:

Re: Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R)

Re: Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R)

Who is online