What does abortion and psychiatry have in common?




One has to love the extremism of debates these last couple of decades, with the zealots of the Left/Democrats having no boundaries, and the zealots of the Right/Republicans wanting endless boundaries, and those in the middle, well, if you ain’t with either side, to hell with you, eh?!

Take abortion as a legitimate debate, if you walked into the argument from Pluto (which I think is still a planet by the way), you would have to chose whether abortion should be on demand as a form of birth control or convenience of the day, or refused as a procedure unless you were hemorrhaging to death on an ER stretcher, and even then the anti-abortionists would still be shouting “No” anyway.

Makes a rational, reasonable, realistic person who understands this is an issue that has shades of gray wonder how the hell this debate got hijacked by a bunch of characterologically impaired idiots who continue to have the floor.  And that is what drives many debates these days, a bunch of characterologically impaired idiots, who frame things as only right or wrong, “my way or no way”, and how ironic often “do as we say not as we do”.  Hypocrisy was perfected by the personality disordered, I am convinced until proven otherwise.  Not that all who are hypocritical are impaired, but the ones who practice hypocrisy on a day to day basis fairly much are impaired.

This Indiana debate about Religious Freedom, just makes me realize I am most likely correct, the Left/Progressives/Democrats are an antisocial lot, to frame one state’s law as an affront to LGBT needs is just a bunch of crap.  After all, when a group claims there should be complete tolerance and then be the most intolerant bunch of assholes screaming for complete ostracizing of an oppositional view, well?

And that to me fits the antisocial definition because of the lying, the lack of remorse, the disruption of others’ lives without concern meeting those three criteria that define ASPD.

Which brings me to how abortion is like psychiatry.  You have the intolerant, extremist zealot group of antipsychiatry having zero tolerance for any discussion or debate to any legitimate value to mental health care, just advocating that psychiatry should be eliminated and then brutally punished.  Then you have the equally moronic opposites of alleged leadership in Psychiatry and their equally questionable Key Opinion Leaders of influence in academia and Continued Medical Education just being shills for Big Pharma and medicate everything “abnormal”, and the APA/DSM 5 Rule Book to make any deviation of having a typical functioning day a psychiatric illness.  SO, what is a responsible and fair psychiatrist or genuinely ill patient supposed to do being squeezed by these impaired idiots driving the debate of what is right versus wrong care needs?

I’d offer to ignore them and hope they would go away once consistently viewed as irrelevant and useless, but, these personality disordered folk don’t have that ego strength to step back and wonder “why are we being ignored and dismissed?”

Nah, this is a group, both sides mind you as a collective who embrace the Glenn Close character in “Fatal Attraction”, and say both with glee and demonic delight “we will not be ignored!!!”  And thus why people with true needs and efforts to be supported are being continuously pushed to the edge of the cliff of being irrelevant, unnecessary, vile, and corrupt.

Gotta love the defense of projection, when it is fully apparent one who is being charged with offenses/wrongs that just do not fit, why is it the accuser who winds up being the most disgusting cretin on the planet seems to get away with the narrative so long?  Maybe a twist on that adage about the squeaky wheel, instead here we have “the screeching heel not only gets the grease, but gets to slime every one else with foul grease to dirty and disrupt the group.”

Just my imperfect opinion…

squeaky wheel gets pounded

Yeah, that latter proverb above, in America it is the nail of normalcy and reason which stands out from these zealot idiots that then gets pounded by these characterological cretins!



, ,

I am just curious with all of you out there, when does incompetence get put in its place?  I mean, so many out there who are critical or at least wary of Barack Obama and his assorted failures both domestically and in pathetic foreign policy, you all think it is just incompetence, but, is it?  And even if it is, why is it still be tolerated, being rationalized, being minimized?  When do you see you are just enabling the defenses of the characterologically impaired??

This isn’t simply Narcissism in some clueless politician anymore.

No, I think this is something far more insidious and destructive, what I call Traumatizing Narcissistic Treachery Disorder, aptly TNT, and it is explosive stuff folks, when narcissism becomes engulfed with antisocial agenda.

As what is going on in the Middle East now is just absurd, and when will the US Congress finally wake up as a collective body and call this lunatic masquerading as the Leader of this country on what he has and continues to be doing, destroying this country piece by piece?  Saudi Arabia attacking Yemen is not some inconsequential or coincidental matter.  No, Obama is so hell bent on making a deal with Iran to get some supposed legacy as being some bridge from the US to Iran, he is alienating every one else, Israel is just a start.  Attentive, responsible, concerned people who are NOT accountable to him have realized, Obama is not to be trusted, he is not be relied upon, he is not to be asked to set other country’s policies and needs.

Damn you people, he did not meet with the Heads of NATO today, what the hell is that saying?!  He’d rather appease Russia?!?!

And as I have said over and over, it isn’t the failure and hideous agenda by Barack Obama that is so startling, but that he has an entrenched following here in America that will support him even as their communities crumble from his destructive policies.  You think my prediction for 2014 about Martial Law being declared was so ridiculous an idea?  Yeah, I was probably off by a year.

It is time to impeach the President of the United States.  Before it is too late, and, maybe it already is.  More absurdity from me, I bet some readers here think that and just return to genuflecting to the White House.  I know when I see trouble, and it is happening as he has no one to appease to stay in office now.

If you have children, doesn’t that make you pause and reconsider a bit?!


This picture upsets people.  Yeah, glad the intent works!



, ,

From The Lancet, Vol 2, March 2005 issue (www.thelancet.com/psychiatry for those who want to peruse further…)

personality brief pg1 personality brief pg2


By the way, if interested, anyone with an expertise or personal background with this issue, when is it appropriate for Methadone clinics to condone the use of benzodiazepines for active Meth patients, especially those above 70mg a day and be on Xanax specifically as a primary drug of target?

Am I the only provider on Earth who sees this as contraindicated for 95% or more of patients legitimately on Meth?!

An issue about to force my resignation from the current Locum assignment…

burn out redefined

Slum Psychiatry, the perfect link, and a 1960s ending.


, ,

First of all, I am so tired of this current Locum assignment, I work in two offices that really are in the heart of different parts of Baltimore that really are slums, and in the past 6 weeks I have come to realize that I am just practicing what I hideously have to deem “Slum Psychiatry”.  Yes, that is potentially insulting and demeaning to some of the patients, but, it fits if you read this book:

life at the bottom


This is a great book, as it was written by a British psychiatrist, and he really lays out how the pervasive poverty isn’t just about money, but also spirit, soul, and class.  At the end of the forward he wrote this:

“In what follows I have tried first to describe underclass reality in an unvarnished fashion, and then to lay bare the origin of that reality, which is the propagation of bad, trivial, and often insincere ideas.  Needless to say, a true appreciation of the cause of underclass misery  is desirable in order to combat it, and even more to avoid solutions that will only make it worse.  And if I paint a picture of a way of life that is wholly without charm or merit, and describe many people who are deeply unattractive, it is important to remember that, if blame is to apportioned, it is the intellectuals who deserve most of it.  They should have known better but always preferred to avert their gaze.  They considered the purity of their ideas to be more important than the actual consequences of their ideas.  I know of no egotism more profound.”

In other words, the liberals and progressive who think they are so better and can tell the rest of society how to live, how to think, and how to vote, is just so pathetically projecting at the end of the day.  Again, how Democrats are moreso Antisocial these days with their agendas so disruptive and divisive.  But, I have to be done with this point, I get it!

Next, to that perfect link, thanks to Dinah Miller in her column:


There is just so much in here to appreciate, I can only ask readers to read it in full and then realize why it really sucks to be a psychiatrist these days, because she lays it out fully:  intrusions, micromanagement, redundancy, and just sheer lunacy to make doctors do anything else but provide care.  It is what it is, and frankly, as more psychiatrists like me contemplate getting out, I honestly and truly feel for those patients who seem to be dwindling in appreciating number who not only need our compassion and empathy to be providers, but appreciate we as honest and true doctors are totally tired of this bullshit of bureaucracy gone mad!

Next, I give you one of my most favorite lines from M*A*S*H, from Dr Sidney Freeman, the resident psychiatrist on the show:

only a 15 second sound bite, and hope you enjoy it!

So, if you haven’t figured it out yet, I am taking a sabbatical from writing here, and yes, I have said this before and rarely stayed away long enough to legitimize it as a break, but, the pervasive antisocial idiocy going on in so many facets not only in this country but throughout the world has burnt me out beyond hope for now.

Jesus, the scum in Ferguson Missouri alone, why do the police even care to provide services for these assholes?

And Clinton’s disingenuous dishonest denials, not that one would expect anything less, but the disgusting support for her from people of alleged influence and leadership, my god, it is logarithmic!

So, to those of you older than 50 years old, you will appreciate this ending, as it has been on my mind the last 24 hours and feel it is the best send off for what I hope will be a long duration away from lame, laborious reading:

off the air

more deals to follow

(Not an ad for bid tv, but, for mental health care elsewhere…)

Ask a staunch Democrat supporter why illegal immigrants and people without health insurance are more important than legitimate citizens and people who pay for their own health insurance!



Mark Levin, a conservative talk show host, said this in a speech he gave to a CPAC audience almost 3 weeks ago:

“We are not a nation of immigrants we are a nation of citizens. A nation immigrants who have become citizens. We are a nation of citizens and I’m sick and tired of the American citizen being demeaned and treated as a second class citizens while anyone who crosses the border is treated as the most virtuous human being on the face of the earth.”

Then today, another conservative zealot, Michelle Malkin, wrote this piece at Townhall.com, a conservative political site:


In there, this:  “Poor Krantz still believes the ultimate solution is “single payer.” But another liberal who encountered 1095-A hell has seen the light. San Francisco resident and former Obama supporter Melissa Klein exposed her ordeal with Covered California last week. The state exchange botched her 1095-A and then insisted she had never enrolled despite invoices she showed them documenting her premium payments. After hours in OPH, her case remains unresolved, and she can’t file her taxes. How is it, she wondered, that “Amazon can ship something to NYC in an hour,” but the White House and Covered California “can’t create a health care system that functions”?

Klein concluded, better late than never: “I no longer believe that the government should mandate health care. … A great idea is just an idea if you can’t execute. And the government has proved time and time again, it can’t execute.”

Oh, government can execute, just in ways that conveniently avoid being charged with murder!  And their legion of acolytes know it!

So, if you listen to the liberal stalwarts who literally at times shout down any dissenters to Obamacare as just selfish bastards, if not racists (and where the hell the racism card has any application, well, the last refuge of the personality disordered scoundrel to me!), the middle class is to be extremely inconvenienced so people who allegedly do not have any health insurance coverage can have it.

Maybe some can challenge me this agenda is not fitting of the definition of “antisocial”, but, it sure as hell is beyond unfair, it is blatantly unAmerican in at least a few facets.  Goes back to what I have been saying here for a couple of weeks now, are the Democrats who are mostly the party of the liberals and progressives pushing for illegal immigration be completely acceptable and people lose their health care coverage if not be put at extreme economic risk, is this party overtly Antisocial in agenda and goal for the country?

So, the next time you are in a public venue or party and hear someone extol the virtues and benefits of these two Democrat driven plans, ask them not only clearly, but loudly, do these people hate American citizens and think that in order to provide people services that others have to be sacrificed for such benefits?

Prepare for the show, pull up a chair, and maybe have a pen and paper to document the pathetic defenses that will be spewed at you:  denial, then projection, then deflection, minimization, and at the end, if there is time, the ugly and indefensible rationalization that some have to be harmed for the good of the many.  Really, having heard that last one more than enough, why aren’t these insensitive jerks expecting others to be sacrificed instead at the front of the line to give for the good of the many?

You know why, because Hillary Clinton is their god, and what a shameless, fallible and insensitive slime that god is!  Come at me, partisan hacks!!!

Maybe those Democrat pushers will toss you supplies on the way down!?

Maybe those Democrat pushers will toss you supplies on the way down!?

Art imitates life.



remember this scene, well, those of you over 45 years old at least?

At the end of the day, who really wins in a nuclear war?

Per the computer:  NONE!

So, while it is not a good idea to see Iran get a nuclear weapon, I don’t think even the Iranians are that stupid to think they could launch a weapon, or gleefully support a fringe element they sponsor set one off without serious repercussions for their own country.

Check out Pat Buchanan’s column today from Townhall.com:


He ends with this, and it seems fairly rational:  “Why would Iran test and build a nuclear bomb, when this would set off a nuclear arms race across the Middle East and put Iran in mortal peril of being smashed by the United States, or by Israel with a preemptive strike?

Right now, Hezbollah dominates Lebanon. Assad is gaining ground in Syria. Iraq, thanks to “W,” is Iran’s ally, not the mortal enemy of Saddam’s day. The Houthi have Sanaa.

The Shiite majority in Bahrain, where the U.S. Fifth Fleet is berthed, will one day dominate that Gulf state. And the Shiites in oil-rich northeast Saudi Arabia will one day rise up against Riyadh.

Why build a bomb, why get into a war with a nuclear-armed superpower, when everything’s going your way?”

It isn’t on the Net yet, but I caught a bit of Marie Harf on Blitzer’s The Situation Room tonight (March 10 2015) and when Blitzer asked her why won’t Obama tie in asking Iran to stop supporting terrorism as part of the deal with eliminating the pursuit of nuclear weapons, well, her comment is just the usual idiocy of Obama and his acolytes.  I hope to find it from a source tomorrow and post it as an addendum, because as far as I am concerned, that is at least as big a need to control, and Obama, well, he doesn’t.

What is his agenda with his deeds?  Think about it.


One year later.



Remember Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 from 1 year ago to this date?  Well, what have we learned in a year?  I think this article does a nice job summarizing what is likely, and not:


How the article ends:

“And then there is the issue of the investigation. Nobody I have spoken to in the industry is happy with the way this is going. The protocols for the conduct of an investigation seem far from clear. To be sure, there is no precedent in the history of commercial aviation for the task facing the investigation into Flight 370, combining such a great loss of life with the absence of any physical evidence for this long. As one expert said to me: “We will not know what happened here to a high probability until and unless we get real and conclusive data from actual key parts of the aircraft.” 

Not having that data is no justification for the continued lack of transparency from the investigation – after a year we should really be told, at the very least, where the primary focus of the investigation is headed. This transparency should reflect the strong public interest in understanding what has so far emerged and the implications for future passenger safety. In the absence of reliable information this has been fertile ground for speculation and conspiracy theories, all of which damages public confidence in air travel. 

The parties to the investigation include Boeing, Rolls Royce, Malaysia Airlines and Malaysian police and regulators as well as investigative teams from the U.S., Europe, Asia and Australia. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has restricted itself to regular technical reports on the underwater search and the science behind the choice of search area. After over-optimistic statements by the Australian prime minister and other Australian officials, the drift toward foot-in- -mouth disease was halted. None of these parties is talking or, it would seem, is aware of the outrage of their silence.”

Interesting how the author talks about Occam’s Razor to what made the most sense, and how I noted that as well in my post about the incident last year:


in there this:  “Woods talks about the concept of Occam’s Razor, which I will link to below after finishing this paragraph.  It really is about exhausting the most obvious and realistic theories and outcomes before you start railing away about absurd and outlandish ideas.  Besides, where is a good honest and true spy to get leads, I mean, there really isn’t a real life James Bond-type sleuth out there to unearth the real info for something like a Boeing 777 disappearing during what seemed to be a routine flight to China?”

And then I had an addendum with an article by Chris Goodfellow, written just 10 days after the “crash”:


So, what do we know today, March 8 2015?  Pretty much nothing, a plane is gone with hundreds of lives lost, most likely dead, and just the politics and finger pointing of personal interests misdirecting and confusing.

Hmm, sort of more antisocial BS at the end of the day.

Unhappy anniversary to all involved still alive to grieve and wonder what the hell is going on when planes disappear…

MH 370 still missing


The real miracle is getting people involved who not only care, but know truth trumps personal interests and gains.

Antisocialism is the big movement in America, and it is pervasive, count on it!


, , , , , ,

antisocial illustration

Oh, I could go in so many directions with this perspective, but, let’s start where it is front and center with most, sports.


As a Maryland fan, no love lost with seeing a program like Duke being exposed as yet another college shown that winning is more important than protecting the public, and, fuels my theory that one wrong can f– up a lifetime of rights, so , Mr Krzyzewski, welcome to what happened to Joe Paterno.


“Under Pennsylvania law of the time, any state employee who learned about suspected child abuse was required to report the incident to his immediate supervisor. In the case of the 2002 incident, McQueary reported the incident to his immediate supervisor, Paterno. In turn, Paterno reported the incident to his immediate supervisor, Curley, and also reported it to Gary Schultz, who oversaw the campus police at the time. For these reasons, Paterno and McQueary were not implicated in any criminal wrongdoing, since they did what they were legally required to do.[35][86][87][88] However, once the incident came to light, Paterno was criticized for not reporting the incident to police, or at least seeing to it that it was reported.[89] Several advocates for victims of sexual abuse argued that Paterno should have faced charges for not going to the police himself when it was apparent Penn State officials were unwilling to act.[90]

Antisocial agendas are screwing up so many facets of society, and they count on you, the ignorant, naive, and complicit public to just either look the other way, or buy into the immature and pathetic defenses of denial, projection, deflection, and ugly rationalization at the end.  And so many in this country don’t hesitate to participate as asked.

Oh, we could spend days, if not weeks talking about the pervasive antisocial agenda going on in politics, but, I don’t have the time nor strength to note all the disgusting behaviors of your politicians who are out to screw their constituents, and forget Bill C literally screwing them, I am talking about figurative here!

Frankly, let’s end part 1 of this post with Hillary C showing the women out there what women have fought for to gain equality in this country:  yes, women can be as big if not bigger scumbags than their male counterparts these days.  And, she will be the Democrat nominee for President next year, because I think the Democrats have taken antisocial agenda even lower than their Repugnocant counterparts have in the past 20 years.

Not so sure the best source to illustrate Clinton’s slimy history, but a start:


More to come the next few days, think about coming back during the week?


Part 2, March 8 in the AM (beginning written March 7 in PM):

This part has two sections, first, the growing idiocy leading to antisocial agendas by the youth of this country.  First, why are American youth interested in joining ISIS, I mean, if you hate this country so much, then I am glad you are leaving, but to then join an organization or country that wants to destroy your home, wow.  Wow, as people like me will support you being taken out, as even if the premise is not flagrant treason, then at least if killing other Americans is one’s life mission, we hope it is short and very painful.



But then this morning I wake up to this story:


“It sounds like Mr. Guevara could have a future career in community organizing or the Democratic party.

“The American flag has been flown in instances of colonialism and imperialism,” he bemoaned. “Flags not only serve as symbols of patriotism or weapons for nationalism, but also construct cultural mythologies and narratives that in turn charge nationalistic sentiments.” “

later was this as a rebuttal:

“Zomorrodian said he wants the American public to know that UC Irvine is a patriotic campus.

“Only six people voted for this,” he said. “We have 22,000 undergrads here. Six people made this decision. The UC Irvine has made huge contributions to bettering this country. This is an elected body that made a decision for the whole and will suffer the consequences of making that decision.”

Mr. Zomorrodian sounds like a very nice young man who understands what the American flag represents — and I hope he musters the votes necessary to rehoist the Stars & Stripes.

As for the handful of un-American rabblerousers who’ve brought shame upon the campus of UC Irvine – I would offer these gentle words:

If you have a problem with the flag and what that flag stands for and the brave men and women who died for that flag – then you are more than welcome to pack your bags and haul your ungrateful buttocks across the border.”

Yeah, but that is how the antisocial agenda gets in, it is a select few who rise to the top of a stew left unstirred, and they prey on those who feel lost or spurned, and then offer ideas that would make anyone with half a brain stop and say “wait a minute, that isn’t making things better!”

This disgust of America by Americans bothers me even more than people wanting to join ISIS, because this is the basic premise to true treasonous thinking and behaviors.

watch this video, just 3 minutes long, but try to listen fully:

When I first heard this, it resonated in me, mostly with the politicians we have in place, both Democrap and Repugnocant, and this line:

“…he [the traitor] rots the soul of a nation…”

and then, “…a murderer is less to fear…”

The traitor is the plague.  Here is the full quote, by Cicero, if you don’t want to watch the video, but again, hearing it is powerful to me:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”

And then to the second part of Part 2 here today, our politicians and their legion that just deteriorates the souls of those who think independently and autonomously.  After watching this morning’s Fox News Sunday and listening first to Lanny Davis just pathetically defend Hillary Clinton using her own personal email while Secretary of State

[addendum March 8 PM:  thanks to realclearpolitics.com:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/03/08/lanny_davis_vs_chris_wallace_did_clinton_break_the_law.html ]

, and then following Davis’ pep talk for Hillary, some lackey idiot on the panel

[Neera Tanden, and here it is again per realclearpolitics.com:


starts around 2 minute mark, you have to listen to the sheer bullshit defense by this lackey who then goes on the shameful rant to Will’s comment at the 5:30 mark]

who served on Hillary’s staff while she was Senator,  just act incredulous and outraged by other panelists calling out Clinton as doing something outright illegal, well, who the hell are these defenders and apologists, and why do we have to hear them on shows that don’t excuse illegal behaviors!?  Hey Clinton shrew, go on MSNBC and spew that crap, and they will cheer you on!!!

This is what the antisocial does so well, and so many either won’t or can’t see the agenda and actions that are at times outright offensive and detrimental to society as a whole.  The Democrat side show that followed Benjamin Netanyahu’s  speech on Tuesday, deriding him and defending Obama’s agenda to have a pact with Iran, again, wow, if you are jewish and support the Democrats, just slash your own throats now and allow us the ability to focus on those who have a clue!

Yeah, the above comments are harsh and rude, but, so is the antisocial agenda going on in this country in metastatic fashion.  Part 3 either tonight or tomorrow, I’ll see what I can endure to write further.

Hillary Clinton lying

I can’t stand even looking at her anymore of late!  So, I hope to share my pain with you all now with the above shot from the Benghazi hearings 2 years ago.  Yeah, what difference does that make now, HILLARY!?!?

addendum to here:  Oh, this is great!


Lots to read, but this excerpt is perfect:

“There is, of course, a bitter paradox in the fact that Clinton, as a young staffer on the House Judiciary Committee, actually worked on Nixon’s impeachment. Yet to Clinton’s critics, comparisons between the two flow — easily. Rep. Pete Roskam (R-Ill.), a member of the select committee on Benghazi, issued a statement declaring, “The last time we saw a high government official seeking to edit their responses was President Nixon,” adding – with dubious historical accuracy – “and at least then he enjoyed the benefit of executive privilege.”

addendum #2:  Ah, the Antisocial in Chief at his usual dishonest, disingenuous self, I mean, come on!


Remember, you surround yourself with like minds, Valerie Jarrett, what is she, the spawn of Satan and this is her pet project, Barry?

“White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Friday that a few officials noticed Clinton wasn’t using a .gov email address. However, he did not say when they noticed and if it raised any red flags. Earnest also brought up the notion that he would not be surprised if Obama learned about it from “newspapers.”

Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarret told Bloomberg News Friday morning she never received an email from Clinton’s private address and did not know if Obama or any other official did either.”

Pay attention to this in the same link:  “His [Obama’s] comments came as Politico.com reported that Clinton’s staff made the decision to keep the news of the emails quiet after the White House, State Department and Clinton’s personal office learned in August that House Republicans had been given information showing that Clinton used a private email account to conduct official government business.”

Umm, August was about 8 months ago to this revelation this week.  Incredible what we have as leadershit, er, leadership in this country.

Addendum # 3:  SNL always for the laugh:


watch the video!!!

Addendum #4:  The grand slammer, and baseball season hasn’t even started yet, but, clears the bases for me!


First base:  “My more liberal friend says everyone in the Obama administration knows that Iran is a terrorism-exporting regime, that it cheats on nuclear inspections, and that it has called for Israel’s destruction. But he says tougher economic sanctions against Iran or negotiations that humiliate the regime will only cause Iranians to walk away from the talks and build atomic bombs in secrecy. He also believes Netanyahu lacks a plausible plan to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions—short of war.

I was inclined until last week to give the White House the benefit of the doubt. That’s no longer true, but not because of anything Netanyahu said last Tuesday. What convinced me to distrust the Obama administration on this question is the Democrats’ own behavior before, during, and after the Israeli prime minister’s speech.

For years, unnamed Obama administration officials have denounced Netanyahu to reporters with a variety of personal insults. The most off-putting were the aspersions passed along to journalist Jeffrey Goldberg that Netanyahu is a political “coward” and a “chicken____.”  That’s sketchy on a couple of levels. First of all, Bibi was a captain in the special forces, known for leading commando raids into enemy territory and being shot and wounded in action. And the idea of a Washington political hack who has probably never been in a fistfight, let alone a war, calling him gutless from behind the protective cloak of the anonymous quote exceeds parody.”

Rounding second:  “Then there were the five dozen congressional Democrats who boycotted the speech on the grounds that only the president of the United States, and not the House speaker, should invite a foreign leader to speak to Congress. These touchy souls fancied themselves defenders of Barack Obama’s honor. Perhaps they should worry more about the Constitutional doctrine of separation of powers—and the prerogatives of their own branch of government.

The petulance preceding the speech wasn’t a lapse, it was a calculated strategy apparently directed out of the White House. It included Obama’s claim that he wasn’t going to watch Netanyahu— Tuesday at 11 a.m. being such an important hour and all. During the speech, literally, White House aides and Capitol Hill political operatives began circulating the Democrats’ talking points, the main three being: (1) “Nothing new here, folks.” (2) Bibi is offering no specifics. (3) His approach will lead to war.

Coming into third and hard charging:  “Pelosi pronounced herself “near tears throughout the prime minister’s speech,” on account of what she termed its condescending tone. She also characterized herself as “saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 + 1 nations.”

That was a reference to five members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, but Washington jargon wasn’t the only curious aspect of Pelosi’s syntactically tortured reaction. Let’s start with this one: Why demonize the leader of an ally because he has a fundamentally different perception about ongoing negotiations? Netanyahu is obviously sincere, even if he is misguided. Why not have Obama or Kerry answer his objections, or if they don’t want to go that far, just politely ignore his speech? Obama and his loyalists didn’t want him to talk, suggesting they are afraid of his arguments. If they have that little confidence in their own position, why should the rest of us believe it?

Or perhaps they don’t trust the American people to understand it, which would make Nancy Pelosi’s assertion about insulting the nation’s intelligence all the more discordant. One problem is that Democrats in power in Washington these days see everything through a political lens. Netanyahu’s motives? In the Democrats’ telling, he was pandering to his conservative base in Israel’s upcoming elections. In psychology, assigning such motives to other people is called “projecting.”

Nice touch there at the end noting the pathetic immature defense of projection by the characterologically impaired.

And sliding into home when the ball was out of the park in the first place is how the article ends:

“I’d respectfully suggest that many statements have been proffered during the Obama era that an objective observer would characterize as much more insulting to the intelligence of the American voter than anything said by Netanyahu. Many have come from prominent Democrats. Here are seven examples.

— “I don’t think there’s any ill intent in this,” Pelosi’s fellow San Franciscan, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, told the New York Times in response to revelations about Hillary Clinton’s parallel email system at the State Department.

— “People have different ways of communicating,” added Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin. “I have a granddaughter who does nothing but text.”

— “What matters is that my political opinions have never affected my work.” That’s former IRS official Lois Lerner, claiming her liberal ideological views had nothing to do with her hassling of conservative nonprofit groups.

— “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed.” That’s Obama, discussing the across-the-board budget cuts first offered by his budget negotiators.

— “If you like your doctor and your health care plan, you can keep it.” That’s also Obama, of course, drumming up support for the Affordable Care Act.

— “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes. … Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.” So said MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, explaining the administration’s strategy for getting Obamacare through Congress. He continued: “Call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

— “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.” That’s then-speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi five years ago this month.”

And one wonders why I ask outloud if there is a strong antisocial element in the Democrat party these days.  Remember this little point, if the party was so wonderful and had the public’s interests so much more at heart than those bastard Republicans, then, why did the party lose control of the House after just 2 years as a majority party with the White House Democrat controlled as well??

Real bitch to have to think about it, eh, Democrat lackeys!?!?!?!?!


Part 3. and last of this post March 9 in PM:

I was going to write mainly about the flagrant antisocialism of the racist and race baiters after all the BS still going on with what was closed about the Ferguson shooting per Officer Wilson and the findings about the Ferguson police department behaviors in general, and then what I find to be a bit disingenuous by some using the 50 year anniversary of the Selma march to relate it to life now in 2015 America, but, we all know that tune!

Then I was going to again take on the pervasive antisocial behaviors of so many in psychiatry, not just the leadership and KOLs and other influence peddlers, but the grunts in the trenches who have no clue to advocacy and responsible care interventions, but, again, we all know that tune too!

So, as I was driving home tonight, I thought I would share some simple observations to what I see in my daily travels outside the office that is insidious, pervasive, and while petty also equally pathetic and tolerated examples of antisocial acts that just grow in number:

1.  The driver who after he/she cuts you off in traffic, gives you the finger and then slows down to either entice you to react, or just be even a bigger prick than the reckless near sideswipe a half mile earlier.

2.  The person in the 12 item or less line who has easily 20 items or more when the store is busy, who is incessantly chatting away on the phone having a conversation that would make a manic patient scream in agony, and then when such loser catches your disgusted look of this blatant disrespect for holding up an express line, says in such a cold tone “what the fuck you looking at!?”

3.  A patient who just got free health insurance is standing outside the ER waiting room door, smoking a cigarette and asking people walking by for money while a friend is standing next to him talking about scoring some more dope, says in an exasperated tone “Damn lady, let me finish my smoke” when the nurse comes out the door exclaiming “the doctor has been looking for you to finish the exam!”

4.  The 10th grade student who is talking on his cell phone in class is just shocked when the teacher comes up and takes it away, telling the kid “you’ll get it back at the end of class”, but, this ‘student’ gets up and grabs the teacher from behind and then cold cocks him in the back of the head, knocking him to the ground and then picks up his phone and walks out of class.

5.  Someone as a prank waves an ISIS flag outside a college building and shouts out slogans why ISIS is a reputable organization and should have its rights and freedoms respected, and no one even seems to notice, but when the same guy the next day waves an Israeli flag, numerous students shout out epitaths and even one threatens to shoot him right there.

6.  At a birthday party, while the guest of honor is giving a thank you speech, someone in the crowd shouts out “wrap it up” and then throws some food at speaker’s face, and some in the crowd not only laugh, but say under their breath “nice move”.

This is America folks, and if you want more, I give you the three best places to really see what truly are the bowels of society these days:

WalMart, any Post Office line around lunch time, and any Motor Vehicle Administration office for usual vehicle needs like getting a license or renewing your tags.  Really, just lean against the wall of any of these places and listen for about 20 minutes, and you’ll see them, the insidious antisocials, who actually might seem just like you, but, hopefully don’t act like you but instead like the people they reelect for public office every 2 years.

We get the electorate we deserve, and as George Carlin so sarcastically said in his political rant from 1996, it’s not the politicians who suck, but, the public.  So, if you read the whole post, are you really happy to contemplate we have a growing antisocial element in this society?

And if you are annoyed and angry, why do you put up with the crap that allegedly represents you in your state and federal halls of political offices?  Think about it!

And, end of line…

Why are physicians at higher risk for suicide? There is no ONE answer, but…



So, in the February issue of Clinical Psychiatry News, the front page story is:

“Medicine grapples with Physician Suicide”, by Doug Brunk, and here is the link, albeit from another periodical:


I will be candid, I was very distraught and a bit hopeless the end of last year being unemployed for 5 weeks for reasons mostly not my fault, but, I was able to keep it together and finally found something to keep me afloat.  However, that said, I think the growing intrusions, micromanagement, and frank dismissal of the needed role for physicians not only disempowers caring and invested docs, but, Obamacare is going to f— health care over so much, you as patients won’t realize how much the lost role of physicians really is needed to be restored.

Once again we turn to the quote by Ann Rand in “Atlas Shrugged” when the physician character says this: (from a June 21 2014 post of mine)

“I have often wondered at the smugness with which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscience, to stifle my mind—yet what is it that they expect to depend on, when they lie on an operating table under my hands? Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce. Let them discover, in their operating rooms and hospital wards, that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man whose life they have throttled. It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it—and still less safe, if he is the sort who doesn’t.”

It has been over 16 years since I first read that, still applicable to this day, and should be the rallying cry of invested and concerned doctors needing to refute the insidious destruction of medicine by the Democrats and their crony cohorts who just want to control society, and oh, destroying the institution of medicine that prides on independence and autonomy is a bonus.

Hey, if Hillary Clinton is the poster child of the Democrat Party these days, well, her antisocial agenda is front and center, hence validating my post last week.  But, remember, 30+% of the electorate would vote for her reflexively even if she was caught red handed saying in so many words, “the public, what difference do they make?!?!”

We already know how reflexive the Republicans are, gee, how is that majority with John Boehner and Mitch McConnell worried solely about keeping their jobs, not doing them, working out for the Republican faithful?

Idiots, we are surrounded by idiots, and the rulers depend on the status woe.  The American Scream, er, Dream…

Hope and faith, so eloquently trashed by the Obama crowd.  And true to form, he now strokes the racist fires of police policies with the spotlight on his failed Iran policy so bright by Netanyahu and others who understand the dire issues at hand.

Politics certainly can make us feel suicidal, but who wins with that outcome?  Only the antisocials and their clueless, naive supporters win with people quitting who could make a real difference.  End of line.

Deja Vu all over again: what happens when extremists and zealots try to dictate debate.




I know, I know, regular readers here will ask me “why do you read and participate at sites that end up being annoying and wasting your time?!”  Well, perhaps a bit of a glutton for punishment could be one explanation, but, I read at some blogs to see if fairness and reason will pervade, however, some sites not only attract extremism and lack of moderation, I think they encourage it, if at least not calling out the zealots for their complete lack of ability to show some respect to not generalize with comments like this, from an “Anonymous”:

“So let’s be candid. The only reason every single psychiatrist that I know justifies involuntary psychiatric incarcerations is because their existence goes hand in hand with the the flow of money to psychiatry and psychiatrists. Without coercion (which implictly means that the opinion of psychiatrists is legally binding in many cases), government would not invest a single dime in organized psychiatry or psychiatrists. So while many psychiatrists make a living without receiving public money directly or indirectly, it is the fact that psychiatry functions as a tool of government sanctioned “social control” that makes psychiatry relevant in society.

We live in a “theocracy”, in which the Bible or the Khoran have been replaced by the DSM, as far as the US government is concerned. This is not an exaggeration since the DSM is explicitly mentioned in state “mental health” laws as to who can be at the receiving end of involuntary psychiatric incarcerations and other abusive forms of coercive psychiatry.

So indeed, I believe that only individuals who are “seriously disturbed mentally speaking” would want to be part of such profession. Every interaction that I have with a psychiatrist, including the ones in this thread, reaffirms my belief.”

Oh, where is this coming from, my bad, here is the link to the blog post and the ensuing thread that I contributed to in several comments:


You have to read the whole thing to understand what crowd was attracted to the thread, but, I think the author of the post is trying to make sense of why there is a pervasive population out there who is just outraged that psychiatry has the gall to have to involuntarily hospitalize people.  People who are a danger to themselves or others, or are so incompetent to care for themselves that the status quo will be a hellacious status woe for both the patient and those around such individual, they need something that eventually will be seen as a sanctuary.

Although I don’t really understand Dr Miller’s thought of trying to empower or encourage the patient involuntarily hospitalized by having some type of ceremony or celebration when the patient is discharged.

This is what Dr Miller wrote in the blog piece:  “So would it help when people left a psychiatric hospital feeling badly, violated perhaps, and certainly shamed because this is something we hear over and over even if the patient did nothing shameful at all, if we listened, acknowledged how difficult it can be to get treatment and participate in it, to let people know what a tremendous job they’ve done in getting through such a difficult time (even if it wasn’t all graceful)?  Would it help to have a celebration when someone was discharged –even if just pizza or cake or something a little healthier, but to bring in family and print up a certificate to be read aloud and not make this all about shame?”

I think the same “Anonymous” quoted above wrote in the last comment dated today before Dinah signed off on her contributions there this as an endpoint?:  “With all due respect, with your license to practice psychiatry, you are dangerous to the well being of other people. As long as you don’t see this, you will remain tone deaf to the issue of involuntary psychiatric incarcerations.”

Again, I encourage readers who are not already participating there to read the whole thing, and pay attention to the detractors of involuntary commitment who lump all of psychiatry as villains and violators of rights akin to countries of dictators and tyrants.  Which is why I end up commenting when I come across these threads of hostility and venom that takes the term “overgeneralizing” to new lows.

But, I wish I could attempt to direct this post to something more productive and positive in regards to hospitalizing people of impaired insight and judgment.  I really don’t think this post can go that path, but, I want reasonable and fair readers to ponder this:  forgetting those 5-10% who are legitimately being victimized by some outside person or force that is using psychiatric care as a punishment, those approximate 90% of people who are genuinely in need of some support and sympathy, what are alternatives to care or intervention?

As I tried to note at the thread, is it just incarceration or burial that impaired individuals have to turn to for hope and faith?  Or, are we as psychiatrists trying to make the proverbial lemonade from the lemons that bring in these people who are hurting, or ready to hurt others without care or regard to consequences?

These alleged advocates for appropriate alleged alternative interventions that should never consider involuntary care, well, read between the lines to their vitriol.  I am sure that some have been mistreated in their inpatient experiences, but, to extrapolate that every one else in similar circumstances have the exact same outcomes is just characterological in premise until proven otherwise.

As I said in the thread, who are the most outraged and offended people who leave care from an involuntary admit status?  Yeah, I have seen them in my travels, and often one of a basic three categories:  the entrenched Axis 2 disorder without any ability to step back and discriminate who cares and who is careless;  the entrenched addict (often with at least addiction added personality disruptions) who won’t accept recovery is any option to their future; and, while this one with some hope for intervention, the entrenched hostile psychotic who’s paranoia and distrust of all of society will not be altered by inpatient care options unfortunately jaded by the involuntary process in the first place.

If not said by the same anonymous commenter already quoted above, I am just baffled how these folks want us, psychiatrists, to be involuntarily hospitalized to know their pain and traumas, but, none of them to my knowledge have taken me up on my rebuttal:  how about trying to be a psychiatrist for a few days and taking on the responsibilities of having to care for people who seem to have few if anyone in their lives to provide the needed stability, sympathy, and support that could prevent the need for involuntary care.  (here is how I originally worded it in comment at the thread: “You want us to walk in your shoes and be involuntarily hospitalized, why don’t you seek out a way to be a psychiatrist for a few days or week and see what is on our shoulders?! Easy to be critical, but not so easy to take responsibility for other peoples’ lives, eh?”)

I’ll share my most likely reason they won’t reply, and it is harsh and abrupt, but, so are their comments in the first place:  their struggles to be appropriately supportive, sympathetic, and stable are very apparent in their comments at blog sites that are trying to open these caring and encouraging doors for consideration and access.

Dinah will never say that, nor should she if she can’t call these folks on their repetitive, pervasive efforts to demean and disrupt.  But, I can and do because the anonymity of the Internet allows this crap to go on without challenge by those who are preyed on by the extremists and zealots out to bash psychiatry into oblivion.

Frankly, I don’t think this arrogant or presumptuous, but take this ending however it fits your narrative:  I write what I post and comment on at other sites to allow the Drs of other sites to eventually depend on the likes of me to take the heat by these extremist zealot detractors who only think a dead psychiatry is a good one.

So, to my colleagues who continue to hope that reason and negotiation will prevail, good luck with that premise.  Even if it isn’t an antisocial population behind much that is going on here at the Net, it certainly is not a moderate, negotiable group much of the time, and to let them go unchallenged with some harsh rebuttal, well, review history when overtolerance seems to rule.

Thank you for reading this bit of a rant, but, hopefully it provides a perspective to allow the reasonable and objective readers to pause and reflect where the dialogue of debating care options should travel hereon…



Hope it provides a bit of a smile or laugh!

Addendum March 3rd:  as written in the thread here today by Cat Lover:

“It seems to me that you [Dr H] often heap vitriol onto people criticizing psychiatry (overgeneralizing) just as bad as they heap vitriol onto psychiatry. Why? Been treated like crap by too many of them, probably is why. Well, I was treated like crap by some mental health providers. I try hard not to generalize.”

Yeah, but so many in the antipsychiatry legion write these far reaching overgeneralizations that ALL psychiatry is guilty and complicit of wrongs and demonizations simply because of being a psychiatrist, and then those like you, maybe not Cat Lover personally, say NOTHING to distance or deride the over generalizations.  So, being silent is being complicit, and that is said about us when not voicing the legitimate attacks on the antisocial psychiatrists out there, so why the hypocrisy?!

Plus, let’s be beyond candid, let’s be brutally honest and bold, people like me really are threatening to the antipsychiatry lobby because I don’t tout the “party line” of we as professionals have to be held to this faux standard we have to be kind and fair while being attacked mercilessly.  Gee, like what the Islamic lobby is demanding as ISIS and Iran try to destroy free thought and independence?!

Well, I find that the endless attack without exceptions is rigid and inflexible zealotry that does not deserve kindness nor compassionate understanding once it is more than obvious there is no negotiation, there is no honest and fair debate, just the bold exclamations of, how did the comment from March 1 from “anonymous” comment here at the thread say it ? :

“My value system is aligned with the first proposition while clearly, all psychiatrists who support coercive psychiatry (in my own experience 99.999% of psychiatrists) align themselves with the second, which is why they are psychiatrists in the first place!”

This anonymous commenter is not an exception to the rhetoric, just the most recent of the pervasive ones who write this way whenever they can get away with it.  So, to the Cat Lover dissenters of psychiatry, your silence and lack of challenge only validates it with those who are using you, the alleged more moderate dissenters, as full allies to the extremist  mission.

Ironic that when I write a post about antipsychiatry, the views jump logarithmically in number, and when the spotlight fades, so do the mob.

Onto the next torch and pitchfork rally for these folks, eh?

Sorry to Cat Lover, respect and kindness is earned, not demanded, and certainly not used as a vise to minimize the clout of our rebuttals.  You want a one sided shout down, go back to Shrink Rap, 1boringoldman, and the other overtolerant folks who think they are having discussions, not veiled rants interpreted as being possibly therapeutic by such blog authors.

And I am never nasty at moment one, that just gets lost in the skewed narrative of the zealot.  But, to Cat Lover, thank you for being more engaging and respectful.

Note how Anonymous is now going after BYH who was being supportive to the point about possible benefits of involuntary admissions.  Can’t have people support the psychiatrists, what the hell next, meds might actually help some people!?!?


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 93 other followers