36 Karat

Hmm, peace activist. Right. Which is why you extrapolate to no end in an effort to attack fellow posters. Nowhere in my post did I use the term "looks presidential".

You have a knack for putting words in others' mouths to better fit an argument you're trying to get at, and that's nothing new.

so·ci·o·path: (noun) a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Perhaps in trying to apply this term to Obama, you're really describing yourself E.H.

Oh well, regarding anyone that quick to label another a "pom pom girl", can only let them believe whatever they'd like to believe.

E.H. Munro

No, I'm not describing myself at all. I have a conscience and regard others as actual human beings rather than as supporting my players in my own life. Which is why I'm completely unfit to be a politician.

Your "lovable and swagalicious" president "so full of empathy" is literally, in the original meaning of the word, a terrorist. A person that deliberately orders the murder of civilians on the grounds that maybe a couple of terrorists will die in the process is someone that is completely and utterly without even a shred of empathy or conscience. In other words, a sociopath. But that shouldn't be much of a surprise as studies demonstrate that successful politicians tend to be sociopaths.

__________________
If everyone loves you you're doing it wrong.

"Opium is the religion of the masses." Fred Reed

The Power of 99 Press

"He thinks it's going to be fun being governor. It's only fun being governor of New York if you have money to spend, and I spent it all." Nelson Rockefeller on his successor, Hugh Carey.

Nimreitz

If I was in Congress I'd use Hollywood fundraisers to try and bang celebrities. They all think they're so political that I think a Democratic politician with game could really clean up in those circles, plus your position would get you into every party. Finally, celebs wouldn't let your sex get into the papers as long as you stay away from has beens and nobodies.

Diable

Where? When? Prove this bullshit. Hyperbole is one thing, this is just outrageous and flat out untrue.

__________________

Mr. Hobbes

It doesn't matter. Diable's war rhetoric is mirrored by the Al Qaeda, so that's not exactly progressive. It's not about who started it, it's how to end it. People have been trying to figure out that last part for about a decade now.

A country's leader has to sacrifice human lives for an end purpose, which is something that is quite difficult to do for anybody. Presidents probably aren't completely lacking in empathy; they just have to believe what they're doing is necessary. As an optimist, I think the president knows exactly how many people have died under his orders.

It's well documented that 4 years of presidency can make a man age by about 10 years. That kind of shit might wear on you.

__________________
don't edit me bro

Mr. Hobbes

Collateral damage and terrorism are identical.

__________________
don't edit me bro

36 Karat

Which is why you run around on the internet inciting others; quoting my statement of moving out of this country if Romney were elected, so entirely, and obviously a statement to be taken in humour.. and saying "OK, make that two positives to a Romney win".. yeah man, you're definitely in complete control of an empathetic conscience.

Actually the phrase from my post that you are citing, rather, attempting to cite was "an incredibly intelligent and empathetic man underneath it all" not so full of empathy like I'm trying my hardest to get oh just one lick of Obama's sack. Learn to quote people, and stop saying people said something when they actually didn't. E.H., what you just described could be applied to any and every American president. You've clearly got your niche of "adding" to a discussion by spitting out factoids and twists, jumping topic to topic to better fit yourself. In all reality, you're not advancing the conversation in any meaningful, mindful way. You're that kid in kindergarten who pokes someone when the teacher isn't looking just to start an altercation.

No, successful politicians tend to share traits with sociopaths. Rapists eat food. I eat food. Because I eat food, that does not make me a rapist.

36 Karat

I read this and now I can't stop thinking about Angelina Jolie.

E.H. Munro

The fact that you covered your eyes and yelled "nah nah nah I can't see them!" the last time I posted the links doesn't change the fact that humanitarian organisations and journalists have documented the US policy of using drone strikes against rescue efforts and on funerals and that there have been more than a thousand innocent civilians killed as a result of these policies. And the entire reason for these policies is to inculcate terror into the general population of Waziristan (in hopes of cowing them from reacting the way that oppressed minorities have been striking back for the last 35 years or so).

__________________
If everyone loves you you're doing it wrong.

"Opium is the religion of the masses." Fred Reed

The Power of 99 Press

"He thinks it's going to be fun being governor. It's only fun being governor of New York if you have money to spend, and I spent it all." Nelson Rockefeller on his successor, Hugh Carey.

E.H. Munro

Indeed I am. You're essentially the team blue version of the team red people that were freaking out when Obama won the presidency in 2008. And just as I joked then that I hoped that the team red dance squad would carry through on their threats to move to Canuckia, I'm going to equally poke fun at their opposite numbers.

"I didn't say that he was full of empathy I said he was incredibly empathic!!!! They mean completely different things!!!!"

Well, obviously, I would disagree, as would any native English speaker. And as for your second complaint there, try not referring to people as "swagalicious and lovable" if you want to be taken seriously.

Wouldn't American presidents be, by definition, the most successful politicians?

No. Psychopathy is a psychological disorder. The "traits they share" with sociopaths are the actual personality traits that comprise the disorder. To wit, extreme egocentricity, lack of empathy, lack of normal guilt response, shallow emotions, superficial charm, tendencies toward manipulation in interpersonal relations, a normal response of shifting blame for one's actions, and even tendencies towards parasitical behaviour and occasional criminality. In other words, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and acts like a duck, you rarely go wrong betting on its being a waterfowl.

On another note I think you're confusing psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder, and are rushing to defend your hero as a result. While psychopathy and ASPD are similar, they're also distinctly different in that the latter is marked by extreme violent tendencies beginning in childhood, while sociopaths aren't necessarily violent.

__________________
If everyone loves you you're doing it wrong.

"Opium is the religion of the masses." Fred Reed

The Power of 99 Press

"He thinks it's going to be fun being governor. It's only fun being governor of New York if you have money to spend, and I spent it all." Nelson Rockefeller on his successor, Hugh Carey.

36 Karat

Hahah, sure E.H. "There you go again".

I like how you visit this thread and respond, and then hours later come back with a response towards me completely repeating your methodology.

You just can't stop your cycle of labeling, can you? Obama is not my hero. You know nothing about me. I am not "team blue", by that logic I can equally turn, based on your position in this thread, and label you "team red". Stop using such idiotic terms if you wish to be taken seriously. As for "swagalicious and lovable", I apologize if my uncommon lexicon offended your rigid mindset. I understand how difficult it may be for your brain to accept anything it hasn't seen before.

That's a loaded question, not worthy of being dignified with a response. I will say 'A', and you'll be like "yeah but in 1198 King Richard I of England.." to which your cycle perpetuates.

And here, in a most robotic, expected response, you've just demonstrated to me your propensity to categorize people. You're a sad, sad man (edit: robot) E.H.

Making assumptions to validate your position.

This all began when you, out of the blue, suggested it'd be a positive thing if I were to leave the country if Romney were elected.

If you can use your empathetic conscience you so claim to harness to explain your reasoning for doing so, be my guest. Otherwise, quit with the circular logic.

In the words of Thomas Paine, “Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.”

Mr. Hobbes

Every 4 years a bunch of people swear they'll move to Canada. Never known anyone that has gone thru with it. They should mostly be ignored until after the election, which they promptly forget their vows.

Karat if you lived thru 8 years of Bush you can live thru 4 years of Romney. He's not going to drastically change this country. It's not like he's going to start another wartime occupation.

__________________
don't edit me bro

E.H. Munro

Firefox crashed on me the first time I answered you and I went back to watching The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.

Well, if you want to be taken seriously you should look back at that first post of yours and make a mental note to never write anything like that again. Not even in your diary. It was embarrassingly gushing. 17 year olds in love for the first time don't write about their girlfriends that gushingly. And you could claim that I was "team red" but you'd lose any remaining credibility you had. Ain't many peacenik, anti-corporate welfare, anti-national security state activists there. (In fact, the only one I can think of is Ron Paul.) Add in the fact that I was probably more critical of Shrubya than any seven people on this board, and that my biggest problem with his successor is that he's continuing the same gawdawful policies and your complaint here becomes even sillier.

No, that's the R-star complaint when I refuse to engage him in his favoured debating tactic of changing the subject. I stay on point and tend to illustrate them with pertinent examples.

In this case there's not even a debate. You're simply wrong. Scientific studies have established that political partisanship destroys empathy (and, ironically, "compassionate" team blue is even less empathic than team red in that regard, but people of both stripes lose normal empathic response when partisanship is involved) and that psychopathic personality traits mark successful politicians (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology September 2012). If you want to argue the point, argue with the scientific researchers that disagree with you.

Again, I think you're confusing psychopathy and ASPD, I know there was a stupid "research article" by a policeman that compared politicians to serial killers, but what they had in common were the personality traits shared by psychopaths and those suffering from Antisocial Personality Disorder. And that's not what I've been referring to, because the analysis in the article was rather poor. Very few politicians exhibit the sort of extreme violent tendencies that mark ASPD and very few serial killers suffer from psychopathy.

The sheer hilarity of this coming from you is triply amusing.

__________________
If everyone loves you you're doing it wrong.

"Opium is the religion of the masses." Fred Reed

The Power of 99 Press

"He thinks it's going to be fun being governor. It's only fun being governor of New York if you have money to spend, and I spent it all." Nelson Rockefeller on his successor, Hugh Carey.

Nimreitz

He's a smart guy. I suspect he has figured this out already and taken advantage of it in his post-presidency.

36 Karat

E.H., I'd respond to your response which included more meaningless attacks and failed to address what I put in bold but with rhetoric like this..

"And you could claim that I was "team red" but you'd lose any remaining credibility you had." -- you labeled me "team blue", false, and then feel wronged when I merely mention "I am not "team blue", by that logic I can equally turn, based on your position in this thread, and label you 'team red'"

"It was embarrassingly gushing. 17 year olds in love for the first time don't write about their girlfriends that gushingly." -- that's cute, you're attempting to be entirely, down to earth funny. I applaud your efforts.

You clearly feel, at any given moment, that you are in the right. And with a complacent mind like that, there is no possibility of debate. You're nothing more than an educated troll.

And the "sheer hilarity" of me invoking Thomas Paine's quote? E.H. you were exercising no amount of reason when you quoted my first post and chose to comment on the absolute last line of it, a pointless jab that addressed nothing of my actual post. No further discussion of the contrasts in the campaign, nothing. This entire discourse has been based on that fact. We are not debating my post. Rather, this has all been fallout from your abandonment of reason.

Which is why, from this:

As for the election, just to scratch surface level: Obama is overwhelmingly more qualified to be President, and realistically speaking that's not even up for debate. When looking at the trajectory of the Romney campaign, we've been seeing a man who is being coached to no bounds to emulate the complete command on body language and rhetoric that President Obama is so very renowned for, rightfully so. Thing is, Obama, as swagalicious and lovable as his personality so dictates, is, without question, an incredibly intelligent and empathetic man underneath it all. Obama has vision, Obama is a person. Romney has confidence, but I'm not convinced he's human.

You've gotten to this:

In this case there's not even a debate. You're simply wrong. Scientific studies have established that political partisanship destroys empathy (and, ironically, "compassionate" team blue is even less empathic than team red in that regard, but people of both stripes lose normal empathic response when partisanship is involved) and that psychopathic personality traits mark successful politicians (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology September 2012). If you want to argue the point, argue with the scientific researchers that disagree with you.

From this:

OK, make that two positives to a Romney win.

You just don't know when to stop, do you?