A professionals look at the mindset

[Pogo]

Narcissism is a personal trait, Dumbass. You don't apply personal (which means singular) mental conditions to entire blocs of diverse peopel.

Here's the DSM-5 for NPD (meaning five of these symptoms must be present for diagnosis):

• Having an exaggerated sense of self-importance
• Expecting to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
• Exaggerating your achievements and talents
• Being preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
• Believing that you are superior and can only be understood by or associate with equally special people
• Requiring constant admiration
• Having a sense of entitlement
• Expecting special favors and unquestioning compliance with your expectations
• Taking advantage of others to get what you want
• Having an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
• Being envious of others and believing others envy you
• Behaving in an arrogant or haughty manner

---- that remind you of any one person? Hm?​

Usually the first hard core lefty to post a reply proves the OP correct. This one does not change that.

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

Gun play? You mean of course muslims and left wingers shooting at people by gun play right?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Narcissism is a personal trait, Dumbass. You don't apply personal (which means singular) mental conditions to entire blocs of diverse peopel.

Here's the DSM-5 for NPD (meaning five of these symptoms must be present for diagnosis):

• Having an exaggerated sense of self-importance
• Expecting to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
• Exaggerating your achievements and talents
• Being preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
• Believing that you are superior and can only be understood by or associate with equally special people
• Requiring constant admiration
• Having a sense of entitlement
• Expecting special favors and unquestioning compliance with your expectations
• Taking advantage of others to get what you want
• Having an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
• Being envious of others and believing others envy you
• Behaving in an arrogant or haughty manner

---- that remind you of any one person? Hm?​

Usually the first hard core lefty to post a reply proves the OP correct. This one does not change that.

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Shorter Pogo,

How dare you call us all the same while we march singularly with no other thoughts allowed to our great government solution to running our lives.

Engrish? Even "longer" Engrish?

How is your first engrish any shorter than the second one you spelled exactly the same?

 

[Pogo]

Narcissism is a personal trait, Dumbass. You don't apply personal (which means singular) mental conditions to entire blocs of diverse peopel.

Here's the DSM-5 for NPD (meaning five of these symptoms must be present for diagnosis):

• Having an exaggerated sense of self-importance
• Expecting to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
• Exaggerating your achievements and talents
• Being preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
• Believing that you are superior and can only be understood by or associate with equally special people
• Requiring constant admiration
• Having a sense of entitlement
• Expecting special favors and unquestioning compliance with your expectations
• Taking advantage of others to get what you want
• Having an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
• Being envious of others and believing others envy you
• Behaving in an arrogant or haughty manner

---- that remind you of any one person? Hm?​

Usually the first hard core lefty to post a reply proves the OP correct. This one does not change that.

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

No no, there ain't no "IF" --- you already made the assertion, I'm waiting for you to back it up.

You must already have these answers ---- mustn't you. That would be what you allude to. So --- where are they?

We sit, and we wait......

 

[P@triot]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

According to you - that is not "public health". You said it is drinking water, food, foods, and immunizations. How do firearms affect any of those things?

 

[miketx]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

Perhaps democrats should stop releasing criminals.

 

[miketx]

Usually the first hard core lefty to post a reply proves the OP correct. This one does not change that.

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

No no, there ain't no "IF" --- you already made the assertion, I'm waiting for you to back it up.

You must already have these answers ---- mustn't you. That would be what you allude to. So --- where are they?

We sit, and we wait......

We wait...but we wait for you to spin smoke and deny at anything provided.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Usually the first hard core lefty to post a reply proves the OP correct. This one does not change that.

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

No no, there ain't no "IF" --- you already made the assertion, I'm waiting for you to back it up.

You must already have these answers ---- mustn't you. That would be what you allude to. So --- where are they?

We sit, and we wait......

They aren't fucking questions that need an essay. A simple yes or no would suffice. There was no IF in my post. WTF are you talking about?

 

[Pogo]

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

No no, there ain't no "IF" --- you already made the assertion, I'm waiting for you to back it up.

You must already have these answers ---- mustn't you. That would be what you allude to. So --- where are they?

We sit, and we wait......

They aren't fucking questions that need an essay. A simple yes or no would suffice. There was no IF in my post. WTF are you talking about?

STILL waiting.....

While we're waiting let's re-run again exactly what it is we're waiting for...

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

We sit, and we wait.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Usually the first hard core lefty to post a reply proves the OP correct. This one does not change that.

It's the clinical criteria. I should have posted the link --- it's from the Mayo Clinic.

And again, it's patently absurd to armchair-diagnose an entire political philosophy as all having the same personality trait, no matter what that trait is. That ain't even negotiable.

Nosmo nailed it to the wall in post 9: "a worn out tactic that serves only to alienate and divide". That actually describes virtually all of the OP's droppings.

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

No no, there ain't no "IF" --- you already made the assertion, I'm waiting for you to back it up.

You must already have these answers ---- mustn't you. That would be what you allude to. So --- where are they?

We sit, and we wait......

There is no "we".

There is solely you and your delusions of grandeur.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

And where would that be? Link? Quote?

I recognize you're trying to deflect an inconvenient point but go right ahead. Show us this "philosophy of big gummint". The whole word's watching.

Which reminds me of another funny.

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Got that ? Anything over, let's say, a size 6¾ government is "liberal". Under that is "conservative". Seriously. No wonder he had to change his name. And now here he is stepping in it again, trying to pin a personality diagnosis onto an entire political spectrum.

Does the government owe you a minimum wage, healthcare, retirement plan, college? If so then yes the shoe fits you.

No no, there ain't no "IF" --- you already made the assertion, I'm waiting for you to back it up.

You must already have these answers ---- mustn't you. That would be what you allude to. So --- where are they?

We sit, and we wait......

They aren't fucking questions that need an essay. A simple yes or no would suffice. There was no IF in my post. WTF are you talking about?

STILL waiting.....

While we're waiting let's re-run again exactly what it is we're waiting for...

Yet your entire philosophy of big government taking care of you fits right in with the rest of the democrats. Doesn't sound that unreasonable.

We sit, and we wait.

Answer the four questions I asked and your suspense can end. I'm not all that worked up like you are. I know the answers you just don't want to type out.

 

[Nosmo King]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

Gun play? You mean of course muslims and left wingers shooting at people by gun play right?

Why excuse every other irresponsible gunman? What noble purpose does that serve?

 

[Nosmo King]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

According to you - that is not "public health". You said it is drinking water, food, foods, and immunizations. How do firearms affect any of those things?

Why should I define public health to you? Don't you understand, or are you a literalist unable to plumb the depths of an argument?

 

[Nosmo King]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

Perhaps democrats should stop releasing criminals.

Perhaps,Republicans should take some responsibility for leadership.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

Gun play? You mean of course muslims and left wingers shooting at people by gun play right?

Why excuse every other irresponsible gunman? What noble purpose does that serve?

Oh I'm sorry, did I not mention all of the various left wing groups individually? Or is your goal to actually make everyone an irresponsible gun owner?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

According to you - that is not "public health". You said it is drinking water, food, foods, and immunizations. How do firearms affect any of those things?

Why should I define public health to you? Don't you understand, or are you a literalist unable to plumb the depths of an argument?

I jumped both feet into the depth of your rantings. The bottom of one shoe almost got wet.

 

[Nosmo King]

Public health assures clean drinking water, immunization research, pure foods and drugs.

And firearms effect "clean drinking water", "immunization research", and "pure foods" how?

Firearms effect public health. All too often, innocent members of the public are wounded or die as a result of gunplay.

Gun play? You mean of course muslims and left wingers shooting at people by gun play right?

Why excuse every other irresponsible gunman? What noble purpose does that serve?

Oh I'm sorry, did I not mention all of the various left wing groups individually? Or is your goal to actually make everyone an irresponsible gun owner?

You also forgot to mention the Right Wingers shooting doctors.

And everyone discharging a firearm and wounding or killing fellow citizens is, in fact, an irresponsible gun owner.

 

[P@triot]

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Actually...that never happened. But what did happen was that Homo claimed dozens and dozens of times that progressives (and I quote) "don't exist anymore". Then, while the entire thread was laughing their ass off at this dumb shit, someone posted a recent video of Hitlery Clinton calling herself a "progressive".

Pogo's response? It didn't count because conservatives call Hitlery a "liar". You can't make this shit up. Here everyone - enjoy for yourselves...

Progressives: Despicable Liars

 

[Pogo]

Buttsoiler (the OP) under his previous name actually sat on this board and tried to tell me the difference between "liberal" and "conservative" amounted to "how big the goverment is".

Actually...that never happened.

Actually that DID happen, and it was one of the most funniest patheticest cluelessest posts I've ever seen on this site. A classic. As I said ---- small wonder you had to change your name to run away from your own history. What, did you actually think nobody would notice?

And you just did an equally stupid OP here, actually trying to foist single personality disorders onto millions of people at a time so ---- history repeats. This one may be even more patheticer.