Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Should Presidential Candidates and their VP's Have To Pass a Psych Screening?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 07:55 AM
Original message
Poll question: Should Presidential Candidates and their VP's Have To Pass a Psych Screening?
Police have to pass one.
Some private sector jobs require it.
Why do we allow insane people to literally have the power of life or death over us and we do not ask for a simple psychiatric evaluation prior to becoming a candidate?

No, I do not believe that Dubya would pass a psych screening test because after watching him for the last 7+ years that man has no conscience - That goes for Cheney too.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Avalon6 Donating Member (206 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. Are we going to ask them to take a lie detector test also?
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 07:57 AM by Avalon6
There are only three requirements for being president under the constitution. Any other requirement would be unconstitutional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. That's what amendments are for
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 08:02 AM by Gilligan
when Jefferson was writing the Constitution, psych screening was not available.

Lie detectors are not good at catching sociopaths -
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #2
19. Jefferson didn't write the constitution
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. oops
Madison.

Sorry. I knew that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Your getting warmer
Madison had a major inflence, but he didn't "write" the constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guidod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
12. So electing someone with Alzheimers
disease is OK with you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
3. The people's power to vote for whomever they choose is one of the few near-absolute powers...
they have. I wouldn't be in favor of limiting that power further.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. So...
a person who would not be given a gun and a badge because they are considered dangerous would be okay?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Of course not. The people have the power to vote for all sorts of non-okay folks....
I'm just not in favor of taking away their power in order to solve the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
6. No! it would be fraught with misuse and is subjective
Psych evals are largely subjective-- once you get past frank psyhcosis.

Come on---big brother screening candidates on behalf of the people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. frank psychosis
I went to school with that guy!
:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #15
31. Isn't he the boyking now? ooops. Maybe we should screen? n/t
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 11:33 PM by bluedawg12
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hisownpetard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
7. In order to be in the running, Repubs have to *fail* a Psych test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
8. Just how would that work?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #8
14. How do they
screen police?

I had to have one years ago. It is generally how one responds to questions and reacts to situations.

(yes... I passed. Amazing huh?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cloudythescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
9. Who is doing the screening? A "screening" only as good as the objectivity & standards of appliers
Obviously, this sort of thing merely puts psychiatrists in a role in politics that they really have no business exercising. Their power is grossly misused as it is -- and I don't see how screening would likely screen OUT the folk like the Bush dynasty, McCain, or Reagan, if the prevailing standards of the profession are applied in an arm-length way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
weezy2736 Donating Member (314 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
10. No love for the first other? Shame...
I'd say that it should be an active tool, kind of like a debate or town hall meeting, where it's not required, but it happens anyway. I think putting it into law shouldn't be necessary, but if a politician were to not submit, we would learn still learn a lot from that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
11. speaking realistically, though, any doctor can be bought/intimidated.
into giving a "clean" bill of mental health.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. You sound like
you know something.... personal.

Just kidding lerkfish.

I imagine voting machines can be made to do weird stuff too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #17
24. ?
you're going to have to spell that out a bit more I guess.

"something personal"?

:shrug:

If a yellow cake document can be faked, so can a doctor's report, frankly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklynChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
13. I think it's a reasonable expectation that a psych evaluation is part of your overall health
screening, so yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
16. Take one yes, passing is subjective.
However, allow the public to interpret the results.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
18. Those Evaluations Can Be Gamed By A Reasonably Intelligent Person
~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. So that
means Dumbya would have flunked.

hands down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
21. No - consider how it could be manipulated
Who chooses the tester? Consider what a Republican could have done in 2000 or 2004. Both Obama and Kerry, seem to be very stable, emotionally healthy people, who have long histories of working well with others. Both have an unusual ability to remain calm. But (and the reason I included Kerry) imagine a jaundiced evaluator.

In 2004, NYT writer, Jorie Wilgorin, called Kerry a "social loner". When forced to defend it - she said that was her impression after speaing to 20 life long friends. Social loner is NOT a psychological term, but it sounds like one and that was why it was used. (I know I don't have 20 life long friends - and that is the minimum Kerry has - as maybe Wilgorin did not speak to all of them. Kerry was part of rock band and was elected as the head of the Yale political Union for his Junior and Senior years - even though Seniors always won and he was a Democrat in a school with a Republican majority. Not to mention many Navy reports commented on how loyal his crews were.) Meanwhile the frog killer, Freshman brander was not described in negative terms - he was bizarrely described as likable by NYT reporter, Brumiller (who seemed almost a Bush groupie) - which might be true if you are masochistic and like bullies.

Now, I am citing reporters, but it would be worse if it were politically biased Psychologists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QueenOfCalifornia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. I think I am
a social loner.

I think you make very valid points.

Much appreciated!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
25. Man those photos are creepy.
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
26. No, gives too much power to the tester (n/t)
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 11:32 AM by harun
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seasat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
27. You have to be a little psychotic to subject yourself to what they go through.
You have to have a huge ego so that you don't get beaten down by all the crap thrown at you. You have to have multiple personalities so that you can appeal to several different types of people. You have to be paranoid so that you don't get caught by a Tim Russert in a slip of the tongue. I'd screen them and if they weren't a little off, I'd reject them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
29. Their star chart should be studied first. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demokatgurrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
30. No, I don't want to go down that slippery slope...
before you know it, regular folks like me will have to go through psych screening.

Unfortunatley I am only half kidding. I see it coming, thanks to the "Health" big brothers, along with BMI and cholesterol screenign and nicotine testing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC