Being psychotic and being a psychopat are two very different diagnoses.
It would take an incredible effort for a psychopath to pretend to care enough about people to get enough of a following to become president. I think the correct diagnosis is “Politician”.[/quote]
Nonsense. Psychopaths are masters at imitating emotions and manipulating others. The OSS psychological profile of Hitler came to the conclusion that he was a psychopath. Psychological profiles of Stalin and Nicolae Ceausescu have come to the same conclusion about them. [/quote]
Are you referring to Murray’s or Langer’s report? Either way, the diagnosis for Hitler from them was grim, to say the least. And prescient. It’q quite the read.
Both Murray and Langer were well-respected pioneers of psychological profiling. Where are the detailed reports with similar diagnoses and from similarly-respected psychologists regarding Obama?
I suspect you haven’t read the report itself. Otherwise, you wouldn’t hide behind the chickenshit excuse that examples of Obama’s pathology don’t lend themselves well to written descriptions. They certainly did for Murray and Langer regarding Hitler. There’s all sorts of examples of Hitler’s behaviors and the psychosis that might have been underscored by such behavior.
Where is it with Obama? You must be well-versed in psychology if you feel confident in making a diagnosis without ever interviewing the subject or any of his associates. If you are that well-versed in psychology, then providing examples of Obama’s behavior that might explain specific aspects of his assumed pathology shouldn’t be an issue at all for you.
Or is it possible that you are simply talking out of your ass about a subject you know very little about? That would be a shame because I’d love to continue the discussion with you, since political psychological profiles happens to be an area of particular interest to me and is what I spent a large amount of time studying while earning my history and political science degrees.