So really it is just an opinion...based on distant observation and coloured by public disrespect. That poor man is damned if he does or damned if he doesn't. Carry on America.

According to Gallup, only 40% of Americans approve of Obama. If you subtract from that number the number of diehard Democrats and ultra liberals that are incapable of seeing anything he does as wrong, it doesn't leave much of a percentage of the US population who can't see the error of his ways.

No one is treating Obama. He is a public figure and open to all forms of public opinions and peoples judgement, good and bad. It goes with the turf.

well,this maybe helps!



. From 1975 to 1978, Krauthammer was a resident and then a chief resident in psychiatry at the Massachusetts General Hospital. In 1984, he became board certified in psychiatry by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology.[7] During his time as chief resident, he discovered a variant of manic depressive disease which he called "Secondary Mania".[8] He also co-authored the path-finding study on the epidemiology of mania.[9]WIKI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Krauthammer

So he actually has a Medical Degree in Psychiatry!

McGill University (BA)
Balliol College, Oxford
Harvard Medical School (MD)

yes, but remember (this is what irks me about 'experts' in trials too),, that the man has not actually done any official observation on the person he is speaking of

this is the opinion of someone who happens to be a psychiatrist,, and he is well entitled to it,,,


,,,keeping in mind,, psychiatrists have renounced their official stands on many things that were once considered illness(think sexual 'choices')

Krauthammer is not Obama's shrink, so he is not violating any ethics by expressing his opinion publicly on a public official. Shrinks use two indicators to judge a patient. The first is what the patient says. The voice is a window into the mind and Obama has expressed many opinions and statements which should give any shrink plenty to chew on.

The second, and more important, is what the patient actually does. A patient who cannot go in public, fly in a plane, take a bath, or tell the truth falls into certain categories for diagnosis. Here again, Obama has his public activities and actions for all to see.

Krauthammer has proven to be one of the most introspective of observers on the political scene and I look forward to reading his best selling book, "Things that Matter".

he has a personal opinion, stating it as such would be the reasonable thing to do in my opinion too Michelake


if stated as a professional opinion, unless he said specifically symptoms and what they specifically are common too,,,,it would be kind of 'tacky'


but in his and Fox news defense,, in case you aren't familiar with the mainstream culture and media,,,,

'tacky' gets ratings and support

actually you do have to treat them to DIAGNOSE them

and no one knows what anyone else is capable of,, ESPECIALLY not just from media snippets or rumor/gossip

This makes absolutely no sense. A quack is a quack no matter his specialty, and this quack even invented new mental diseases and still for some reason had to switch careers. Guess there was more money in lying to an unknowing public.

But to Odumbo, don't need to be a medical specialist to figure he is purely diseased. The only real question is how much is the disease of the mind and how much is the white powder he is rumored to so dearly love.

if you add back in the percentage that understand government is CONGRESS and POTUS,,, all the rest becomes irrelevant,,,

considering congress is rating at 14% approval,, seems this president is pretty consistent in his role alongside that particular , SIGNIFICANT branch of government

Actually not. Do you have some perverse link to back that claim?

Diagnosing Mental Illness

Psychiatrists and psychologists use specially designed interview and assessment tools to evaluate a person for a mental illness. The doctor bases his or her diagnosis on the person's report of symptoms -- including any social or functional problems caused by the symptoms -- and his or her observation of the person's attitudes and behavior. The doctor then determines if the person's symptoms and degree of disability point to a diagnosis of a specific disorder.

About standard, emotional and instead of analytical, based on the rights of entitlement.

I agree. But in the context that Krauthammer is a Psychiatrist puts this debate in a whole different light. Krauthammer should have distaned his opinion in the role of Psychiatrist in this debate. I have no problem with the other professions. I think he has every right to critize Obama. But not in the role as Psychiatrist. Because i think that is unethical.

Please give me a break. No matter which way you twist it, he is worse than the one before him and 6 years ago that was thought impossible.

It is only those that have some kind of axe to grind that denies Odumbo is a product of prejudice and innuendo. Based on his actual skills, he is unqualified to be elected dog catcher. But then most politicians are no more than marginally better, if not in the same class and that definitely includes what seems at this point to be the 2016 contenders for quasi-dictator.

which part

1. the man has not actually done any official observation on the person he is speaking of


2.this is the opinion of someone who happens to be a psychiatrist,, and he is well entitled to it,,,


or

3.psychiatrists have renounced their official stands on many things that were once considered illness(think sexual 'choices')


, I can reword any of the three statements if they are unclear.

ty, I corrected my error a few posts back,,

Well you would be mistaken. As a political commentator, unless he is derelict in his duty, he has many changes to observe the psychopath. But then if this was an opinion about George Zimmerman, he would be more than guilty. Funny how prejudicial thinking works. In this case Krauthammer probably even assigned a couple of new mental diseases which he'll put in his next book.

And as a trained mental health specialist, psychiatry, his observation would be more than an opinion considering all his years determining people were in the "fruit loop" category. As a Harvard man, he probably had his prescription pad out and rejoicing in all those rewards big pharma would bestow upon him. Just wonder if he took the supposed "coke" addiction into consideration. One thing for certain, Odumbo already has that "killer" instinct so he doesn't have to worry about being sued for the side effects of the drugs.

Lastly, I find this third excuse purely rhetorical, just what has any shrink renounced unless it is to reclassify the symptom to a much more serious "disease" that requires even more expensive treatment. And no, I never think "sexual" choices. That is just a pure cop-out on reality. Reality is the choice is made based on fear, fear with many faucets, but still fear. But if two consenting adults want to go that way, that is their choice and their right to make that choice, but still it does not mask reality. And so long as they are happy in their choice, then it is no one else's business as no one's rights have been violated.

So no matter what attempt you use to try and justify the position, it will never be clear, just a mask to reality. But as a layman I would prescribe that Odumbo definitely suffers from a "GOD" complex, he thinks he is Allah.

But then comes the "Goddess" and the "Devil", which will it be in 2016?

Was that post removed? I don't remember reading it?