Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 19 2017 02:43pm)

I mean, it's not a great thing to do, but since it's a public figure I'm not sure if we should be so restrictive on them giving commentary. Libertarians should definitely be against this, but I'm not sure if this is a regulation we should have at the federal level. It seems like something that would be more applicable to the specific organizations that certify the licenses.

Quote (Beowulf @ Feb 19 2017 01:39pm)

the 3rd and fourth look like they were written by TV doctors

they should lose their licenses for sounding like TV doctors

Quote

Charles M. Blow (column, nytimes.com, Feb. 9) describes Donald Trump’s constant need “to grind the opposition underfoot.” As mental health professionals, we share Mr. Blow’s concern.

Silence from the country’s mental health organizations has been due to a self-imposed dictum about evaluating public figures (the American Psychiatric Association’s 1973 Goldwater Rule). But this silence has resulted in a failure to lend our expertise to worried journalists and members of Congress at this critical time. We fear that too much is at stake to be silent any longer.

Mr. Trump’s speech and actions demonstrate an inability to tolerate views different from his own, leading to rage reactions. His words and behavior suggest a profound inability to empathize. Individuals with these traits distort reality to suit their psychological state, attacking facts and those who convey them (journalists, scientists).

In a powerful leader, these attacks are likely to increase, as his personal myth of greatness appears to be confirmed. We believe that the grave emotional instability indicated by Mr. Trump’s speech and actions makes him incapable of serving safely as president.

Quote (BiGBraD @ Feb 19 2017 12:58pm)

Quote (Goomshill @ Feb 19 2017 01:01pm)

If trump sued them, he'd lose. They're skirting the law by claiming they're making no actual diagnosis and merely commenting on general aspects of his psyche, while blatantly violating the ethics standards. Only the psychiatric association could hold them to account, not when theres no concrete evidence of actual malice like goldwater's case. You can read their full statement:



Proving libel is an extremely tall order

Quote (Beowulf @ Feb 19 2017 09:04pm)

the only news in trouble right now is the right wing fox news that is getting investigated CRIMINALLY for corporate money usage in regards to their dear leader sexually harassing everything with a vagina

you were saying?

Quote (Skinned @ Feb 19 2017 12:40pm)

Yeah, it is stupid to claim that dictators don't clamp down on free press. They've all had free press.

Quote (EndlessSky @ Feb 19 2017 02:28pm)

The real problem is that Democrats don't live in reality. Democrats want to get rid of free speech by labeling speech they don't like as violent.

OF COURSE all while the same Democrats enable violence, lies, and riots in supreme hypocrisy.

Quote (Master_Zappy @ Feb 19 2017 01:48pm)

I think it's a smucky thing to do totally unbecoming for licensed medical professionals , but ultimately I would value their freedom of speech rights over what is essentially irresponsible conjecture. The issue largely being that the public places in my view an unreasonable amount of trust with the "appeal to authority fallacy" argument which makes politics more divisive then it needs to be and erodes the trust of that institution.