Kansas professor goes viral

[Overlander]

I see.
The key is to be an Uber-Macho liar.

You know, the kind that instructs a crowd to beat up a woman…

[Sparko]

I see.
The key is to be an Uber-Macho liar.

You know, the kind that instructs a crowd to beat up a woman…

I see that you have been thru advanced studies at the CC. Wisdom.

[Overlander]

No, it seems I finally see the light.

O.P.P. IS the answer to all that ails us.

He masks his brilliance with his buffoonery.

He literally IS playing 3….no, 4D chess.

If you think about his plan of cutting taxes to the wealthy….INCREASING student debt….piling on tariffs to drive prices up….


Ah shit, I am wasting my time explaining it to such low IQ individuals.

[twocoach]

I think Marshall, like many others out there, overreacted and, as often happens, that overreaction cost someone their livelihood. If I had access to Marshall, I would have told him to leave it alone and let KU handle their employee internally rather than grandstanding and feeding the oUtRAgE mill. It’s just sad and silly beyond words.

Fair enough; no thoughts on whether whether the grandstanding that led to loss of livelihood would or should be considered unethical?

So Kamala is dumb and unintelligent? On what observations, data, facts do you base this opinion? You seem pretty emphatic about this. Being a Doctor I would assume you base this opinion on evidence.

I am part of the HR process, and have interviewing a lot of hugely educated people for decades. Listening to Kamala and looking at her resume, she would be offered a job if I was interviewing.

But your education provably gives you a different perspective, maybe better insights into human behavior.

I’m not a medical doctor; I’m a Ph.D., so I couldn’t speak intelligently to medical ethics. Shirley would likely have a good handle on that. I would guess that Marshall could successfully argue that he was acting in his senatorial capacity, not as a medical doctor, even if there was an issue.

Intelligence is multifaceted. I wouldn’t argue that her inability to speak without a teleprompter points to low verbal intelligence and that her struggles to speak to policy without written prompts speaks to poor analytical skills. I’m guessing she is higher in intrapersonal measures, but high staff turnover would point to low interpersonal intelligence. No guesses as to mathematical or spatial reasoning skills. Overall, I think she’s ill-equipped to be POTUS.

Trump has proven to be an incoherent, babbling mess whether he uses a teleprompter or not and never speaks of policy because he doesn't have any written down yet.

So both of your tests that make her disqualified are even worse for Trump.

Sorry, but I prefer someone who shows that they actually consider their time speaking to people to be important and stays on the topic being discussed and who actually has some plans that relate to helping citizens and not just Trump's plans to help himself.

[Overlander]

Funny when Trump begs his “crowds” to love him for not needing a teleprompter, while clearly staring directly at a teleprompter.

And they hoot and cheer like drunken hyenas fighting over a sealed pack of pepperoni sticks.

[zsn]

Funny when Trump begs his “crowds” to love him for not needing a teleprompter, while clearly staring directly at a teleprompter.

And they hoot and cheer like drunken hyenas fighting over a sealed pack of pepperoni sticks.

Who are you going to believe? Your own eyes or The Orange Felonious Monk?

They’re rubes for a reason

[Overlander]

Me? Definitively Dear Leader Poopy Pants.

[JKLivin]

Psych is a pretty good diagnoser.

He can do a full psychoanalysis through message board banter!

Some people make it pretty obvious. They can’t help themselves, it seems.

Clearly!
I am still in awe of your prowess in the art.

I’m just here to help.

[Overlander]

Some people make it pretty obvious. They can’t help themselves, it seems.

Clearly!
I am still in awe of your prowess in the art.

I’m just here to help.

Up past bedtime to soil another thread? Don’t you have young minds to poison tomorrow?

[JKLivin]

Clearly!
I am still in awe of your prowess in the art.

I’m just here to help.

Up past bedtime to soil another thread? Don’t you have young minds to poison tomorrow?

If there’s even a tiny chance of a lightbulb going on in that brain of yours, it’s worth the lost sleep.

[japhy]

You were asked awhile back for a link to a definitive view of Kamala's eyes showing dilation in support of your diagnosis of her benzos abuse. This seems to be in your area of expertise/practice/experience. Were you ever able to find an image of her during the debate that supported that? You seemed pretty sure of that previously.

Psych is a pretty good diagnoser.

He can do a full psychoanalysis through message board banter!

Some people make it pretty obvious. They can’t help themselves, it seems.

I can see now why you might be reticent to say in public too much more about your claim that Kamala is on benzos.

When you started that line of statements I thought of "The Goldwater Rule".

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basi ... water-rule

But you are not a Doctor as you said earlier, you are a Phd. Important clarification, "Doctors" are held to higher standard of ethics and you clearly feel untethered to such restraints.

You are a licensed counselor it seems and that has different standards and codes of ethics and legislated restrictions based upon State statutes.

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/fi ... ychiatrist

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basi ... -counselor

I know a psychologist, she helped my daughter cope with our divorce. Neither of my kids have seen a counselor so I wasn't sure of the distinction between them myself. The psychologist is one of the nicest humans I ever met. She restricts activities with me as a friend because she doesn't want to breach the client/patient relationship she has with my daughter even though she hasn't seen my daughter in 10 years. I have to send her videos of my daughter's concerts because she considers that there could be an ethical breach if she were to go to the concerts in person. Pretty strict ethics, I do respect that in her. But she does seem to love seeing how my daughter has bloomed over the years.

Which brings to mind another question, would a counselor making a diagnosis be practicing as a psychologist without a license? I am sure you have addressed such things being a professor of counseling and I would assume there is a class on ethics.

Religious schools have different ethics than regular colleges, I am only familiar with Oral Roberts, we have hired some grads from there. I read their student handbook once, I found their culture interesting. Anyway, in there were admonitions against gossip, slander and unethical behavior all biblically referenced. I would assume the college you work at has a similar ethical code.

Do you feel your statements about Kamala's drug use might have crossed an ethical line with your employer or profession? More than likely Lowcock crossed a line in that regard, that made his release by the university a done deal. He made a statement advocating violence (get out of the way or get run over....just popped into my head) and the university let him go.

You are lucky that you don't have a Dr. Roger Marshall or Jerry Moran amplifying your statements on X and asking your school's administration embarrassing questions. I truly hope you never have that happen, it seems cruel.

There but for the grace of internet anonymity go I.

I do appreciate your consideration and written thoughts on my questions Phd. Benzos.

[JKLivin]

Psych is a pretty good diagnoser.

He can do a full psychoanalysis through message board banter!

Some people make it pretty obvious. They can’t help themselves, it seems.

I can see now why you might be reticent to say in public too much more about your claim that Kamala is on benzos.

When you started that line of statements I thought of "The Goldwater Rule".

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basi ... water-rule

But you are not a Doctor as you said earlier, you are a Phd. Important clarification, "Doctors" are held to higher standard of ethics and you clearly feel untethered to such restraints.

You are a licensed counselor it seems and that has different standards and codes of ethics and legislated restrictions based upon State statutes.

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/fi ... ychiatrist

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basi ... -counselor

I know a psychologist, she helped my daughter cope with our divorce. Neither of my kids have seen a counselor so I wasn't sure of the distinction between them myself. The psychologist is one of the nicest humans I ever met. She restricts activities with me as a friend because she doesn't want to breach the client/patient relationship she has with my daughter even though she hasn't seen my daughter in 10 years. I have to send her videos of my daughter's concerts because she considers that there could be an ethical breach if she were to go to the concerts in person. Pretty strict ethics, I do respect that in her. But she does seem to love seeing how my daughter has bloomed over the years.

Which brings to mind another question, would a counselor making a diagnosis be practicing as a psychologist without a license? I am sure you have addressed such things being a professor of counseling and I would assume there is a class on ethics.

Religious schools have different ethics than regular colleges, I am only familiar with Oral Roberts, we have hired some grads from there. I read their student handbook once, I found their culture interesting. Anyway, in there were admonitions against gossip, slander and unethical behavior all biblically referenced. I would assume the college you work at has a similar ethical code.

Do you feel your statements about Kamala's drug use might have crossed an ethical line with your employer or profession? More than likely Lowcock crossed a line in that regard, that made his release by the university a done deal. He made a statement advocating violence (get out of the way or get run over....just popped into my head) and the university let him go.

You are lucky that you don't have a Dr. Roger Marshall or Jerry Moran amplifying your statements on X and asking your school's administration embarrassing questions. I truly hope you never have that happen, it seems cruel.

There but for the grace of internet anonymity go I.

I do appreciate your consideration and written thoughts on my questions Phd. Benzos.

1.) The Goldwater Rule would refer to someone acting in their official capacity, i.e. if I were being interviewed by the media or testifying in court. Goofing around on an Internet bored would not be an appropriate example.

2.) Consistent with the title of your link, the source you cite is very basic/general. In reality, all QMHPs (Qualified Mental Health Professionals) are legally equipped and qualified to offer official and legally-binding diagnoses. This includes Professional Counselors, Marriage and Family Therapists, and Social Workers in addition to Psychologists. These days, there is little distinction among them, save the emphases in training. For example, a psychologist would have much more training in formal testing than a marriage and family therapist, but would also not be well-equipped to do couples counseling or family therapy. A corollary would be a family practice MD being licensed and equipped to prescribe psychotropic medications, but a psychiatrist having more training to deal with complex cases. In turn, a psychiatrist could diagnose and treat high blood pressure, but a family practitioner might be more up to date on better methods.

3.) Per ethics: again, a formal diagnosis carries legal and ethical obligations; goofing around on a message bored and speculating does not. One has serious implications, the other means very little.

4.) This sounds a lot like a threat and a lot like doxxing. I'll just leave it at that except to say that I have never made statements as to my name or my school affiliation whereas Dr. Lowcock was a) physically in class on the KU campus, b) acting in his official capacity as an employee of KU and the State of Kansas, and c) representing himself and his school specifically. You have no idea who I am or where I work, unless you have been inappropriately accessing information for purposes of threatening or harassing me. I'm sure that's not the case.

[japhy]

Here I guess is where we differ on ethics, maybe is just my profession and how I feel about the gravity of it. Any time I am discussing my profession or affiliated professions I try to hold the same ethics in play. Even on social media. In some States ethics code have been updated to include social media statements. If people know I am a registered engineer, which I have said on here, my words hold a different weight than some random person who is messing around on the internet. You have said you were licensed and I was curious as to how the Goldwater Rule applied to other affiliated licensed professionals and possibly by extension to educators.

No threat implied. No intention of doxxing anyone. I sincerely apologize if you took my words as such. I feel that it would be unethical on a personal level for me to do so. This was a thread about a professor who got doxxed, I followed that train of thought. How your contention that Kamala was a bentos abuser played into this scenario. I thought about that the first time you mentioned it, and again when you mentioned you were licensed. I was merely curious was to how you felt about all of this personally. And wondered if it cause you to have any personal reflection?

[KUTradition]

victimhood is fun

[Overlander]

Having spent a decent amount of time around him, I can say without hesitation that Japhy is about as good as people get.

[JKLivin]

victimhood is fun

Well, keep it up then, I guess.

[KUTradition]

victimhood is fun

Well, keep it up then, I guess.