Trump's Disappointing Choice for Opioid Crisis Point Person

When I first saw this news, I thought it was a joke. Unfortunately, it's not. It's real. The Trump administration has chosen Kellyanne Conway to be the point person for their opioid crisis efforts.

From a Newsweek article: 

"She has no formal experience in drug policy or law enforcement. Conway has a law degree and started her own polling company, The Polling Company, in 1995, often consulting on consumer trends....

"In the past, she has shared [Attorney General Jeff] Sessions and Trump's view on defeating drug abuse: Strict prevention programs. 'The best way to stop people from dying from overdoses and drug abuse is by not starting in the first place,' she told Fox News in October."

My personal opinion: We've been down the whole "Just say no" road before, and it didn't work. There's no reason to believe that same approach will work now. We are in the midst of a horrible epidemic of opioid addiction and it is a killing machine. I fear that many more people will die because of who Trump has selected to oversee this crisis. He should've chosen someone with drug policy and/or law enforcement experience. Or someone with deep knowledge of addiction, treatment, etc. I can think of dozens of people who would've been a better choice than this queen of "alternative facts."

You can read the entire Newsweek article here.
  • 20 Commentsby Likes|Date
  • i agree @DeanD ; she's not the best candidate for that role..... 
  • Welp, looks like I am going to argumentative again and disagree somewhat with you @deand.

    Concur, there are probably better choices out there. While her lack of experience might, on the surface, seem like a detriment, it could be a benefit. Her lack of experience might bring a fresh perspective to the situation. Someone with a lifetime of experience with drug law enforcement, medical treatment, or addiction support just has a lifetime of seeing one failed policy after another. While one could boil her comments down to, "just say no" and state that it didn't work, her experience with polling might allow her to find and attack a root cause for the situation. Polling is a lot about asking or determining "Why?", so that might allow an inroad into why this epidemic is occurring, and thereby treat the disease, not the symptom.

    The concept of stopping before it starts, is, in my opinion, a great philosophy. If I never started drinking, I never would have become an alcoholic. I can say that I was always terrified of consequences like liver damage or a DUI when I was drinking, but I couldn't stop. I will say though, that all the billboards about what meth does to someone, and the details of cocaine's and marijuana's negative affects resonate quite well with me. If the only solution offered is, "just say no", then I concur, that will leave a lot of people hanging out to dry. But focusing on treatment after addiction will result in an endless cycle of getting addicts stabilized just in time for the next crop to be admitted to rehab. I think a strong push for not starting is a good one, backed up with treatment for those who have to try it anyways, despite all the danger.

    Let's say I am cautiously optimistic?

    I'll also call out the swipe Newsweek took at her with the "alternative facts" comment. Not digressing into a political mudslinging round, but the press hasn't exactly been angels and beyond reproach when it comes to the facts either when it relates to the administration. They have been more than culpable with pushing their own "alternative facts" oft, repeatedly, and through a variety of outlets.
  • @Leaker... Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And in this case, I would like nothing more than to be completely wrong. That said, my friend David Sheff, who has written two amazing books about addiction--Beautiful Boy: A Father's Journey Through His Son's Addiction and Clean: Overcoming Addiction and Ending America's Greatest Tragedy--called this decision "Scary, pathetic, evil, lethal" today on Twitter: 

    I hope he's wrong, too. Unfortunately, I don't trust the president or his administration one bit.
  • @deand, and that is the scariest part of the whole current situation. There is a huge part of the US population that simply doesn't trust the administration, and probably never will, so any action is instantly met with resistance to a varying level. Everything it seems, both the good and the bad, is getting drown out by the distrust and people on both sides screaming without communicating.

    There was a segment that didn't trust any thing the last administration said, and saw every move and political appointment as a political ploy or power grab. Revelations now seem to indicate that mistrust wasn't entirely misplaced. The difference is, I think, that the major media outlets are outright hostile to the current administration, so their instant and incessant criticism is impossible to escape, making it difficult to build any kind of trust. But, for an effective government, that trust needs to be there for more than just the people who voted for Trump.
    As for the appointment, another benefit of appointing a non-expert is that if they are smart, they recognize their limitations and surround themselves with experts. This leads to multiple opinions, and, in theory, a decision based on consensus rather than one person's fiat. Of course, there are a lot of key things that need to happen for all that to work properly.

    You have a friend that you respect, has some deep personal connections
    to the issue, and has used that for good by sharing that experience.
    I'll wager that there is someone else that has had a similar experience,
    and has come to a completely different conclusion.Hopefully whatever action is taken is the result of consultations with both people like Mr. Sheff, and others with similar but varied experience.
  • @Leaker... Like I said, I hope I'm wrong. Honestly, though, I believe this president is mentally unstable. So much of what he does/says/tweets is just so alarming. *sigh*
  • @deand, sorry, I can't let the thread end with another statement that is opinion, but not a healthy or productive one. Especially when it is coming from someone a lot of people look up to and respect (that's you). I really don't want to be argumentative, but I also feel compelled to give alternatives to spur thought and conversation when I see the same standard lines thrown out. I don't want people to think, well, if deand thinks it, and I don't, then I am wrong. In addition to the lack of trust, I see a lot of people just not debating. Someone says something, and either everyone accepts it, or no one offers either proof or a counter argument (other than the aforementioned screaming and rhetoric). I'll be a linking machine here, not be a jerk, but just to try and back my statements up a little. I also don't intend to change your mind or your totally valid opinion, but just spur a little debate or thought on the matter.

    True, there was a letter signed by several psychologists, as well as a recent(ist) demonstration by psychologists demanding Trump's removal from office. Unfortunately, that is in violation of their best practices and code.;; The gist of all that is the importance of working WITH a patient to make any kind of diagnosis. So while the psychiatrists parade across the screen saying they have studied Trump's tweets and mannerisms and made a diagnosis, unless someone has sat down and done the patient interview, they are another flapping mouth with no real authority on the matter.

    My opinion is that Trump's statements are blunt and to the point. Personally, I like that. Obama said mean things too, he just hid behind eloquent and obtuse language that allowed him plausible deniability if someone called him out for it. Obama was never shy about taking swipes at the media (his feud with Foxnews), or name calling, one just had to pay closer attention to see it. True, a lot of people claim to find Trump's statements politically incorrect, but most people also think people need to grow thicker skin

    I searched for "Trump's most offensive quotes", and for fairness, I took the first return: That top one, yikes! That's a terrible one, and with good reason, pretty famous. Inexcusable, even as, "locker talk from 10 years ago". A lot of the other ones though, as an opinion, I wouldn't say is indicative of a mental illness. Rude, yes. Crass, yes. Mean spirited, yes. But if that is criteria for mental instability, I think probably 80-90% of the country can be diagnosed with whatever Trump has. So claiming he is unfit or has some kind of mental illness is, in my opinion, not really valid.

    Thanks for reading all that. As I said, I hope it wasn't taken as combative.
  • Duly noted, @Leaker. And I didn't take it as combative. It's all good.
  • So true about the "mentally unstable" person (I'll just use @DeanD's definition here)who Trump is.Not to offend the American President and American people who elected him but the man has as much problematic behaviour as it can get for a person in power.He shows so many typical traits of a narcissistic personality disorder that it is scary he is in the most powerful  and responsible position in the world.Not a full-blown narcissist maybe but with a lot of the problematic behaviour of this disorder.Narcissism is also on a scale-they can range from full narcissists to lower-level ones.
    The problem for me is right there— he acts like a child in an adult body,which what the typical narc is.Sulking like a child when he doesn't get what he wants,throwing tantrums ( or tweets,to be more exact) ,threatening like crazy to take actions (but almost never taking any action),blaming everybody else for his mistakes,changing his opinions, like,several times a day,calling people names (when you listen to the conversations between the North Korean leader,as if you are  listening to two immature children arguing over whose toys are better) .It's ridiculous!I can't believe this is even happening in the 21 century!I NEVER expected him to win the elections!It was such a surprise for me!
    The dangerous thing about Trump is ,apart from the fact that he doesn't know what he is doing at all,he doesn't own any accountability for his actions,doesn't have ANY idea WHERE he is going with his decisions.He doesn't even make any decisions,just makes certain statements one moment and the next moment says the complete opposite:)He totally lacks any grip of reality.He lives with an illusionary vision of himself and his own abilities and achievements,changes real facts to fit his own "reality" ,which usually serves his best interest.It's not clear what he aims at, how he plans to get there or what the final result will be.Just pompous,over-the-top grandeosity and dillusional expectations!Which is what typical narcissist do— look for advice from others and then blame them for giving them the wrong advice.:)
    It's so amusing to watch— like you have a front-row seat for the most famous show on earth.The scary part is he is not just a stand-up comedian who after a couple of hours comes out of his role and becomes normal again.His pattern of inconsistency and not a clear vision as to where he is going and why he does what he does is what the problem is,I think,not just the people he hires.But the possibility of hiring the wrong people with such emotionally-stunned people is higher for sure. If anyone voted for him,I'm just expressing an opinion here.Don't be angry with me!
  • Oh, I keep trying not to get a political debate going. I saw the bias of the thread topic, and the forming of an echo chamber with the initial concurrence, had a great exchange with Mr. deand, and tried to walk away...

    I think one has to be very narcissistic to want the job of US president. One has to want the highest authority in the US, and to get it they have to believe, with their heart and soul, that they know what is best for the entire country. The previous administration (I keep referencing it because for a lot of people use that is the gold standard that they keep comparing the current one to) had a lot of the same narcissism criticism thrown at it, but it wasn't carried by the major networks. ( It is the media's job to report the facts, but the numbers seem to indicate that it isn't exactly fair and balanced. Whether Trump deserves the negativity shouldn't be decided by the media, I think, it should be up to the people to decide based on fair and impartial reporting of the facts. Obama also did a lot of talking too. That's what the US president does, it's how the US system is set up. The President (largely) can't rule through fiat. Obama tried with his Executive Orders, but there was extreme criticism of those, and the critical flaw in them has been revealed as Trump makes the decision to repeal them in droves (for better or worse).

    Trump has taken action along those same ways, but a lot of those actions are being blocked by the courts. One side says the courts are right, one side says it is activist judges that are ruling based on politics as opposed to the law. One Federal judge can make a decision that halts the order for the entire country. If one looks at how the Supreme Court ruled on the appeal of one of those decisions, it was clear the lower court was wrong. Not mentioned in the article (I'll let people decide why...) is that the SC voted 9-0 on the case. They'll hear the full case this week I think.

    As for the name calling, it's unpresidential. But, I am of the attitude that if you don't want to be called a loser, don't be a loser. Or, fire back in some meaningful way. I tell all my people that, "success is the best revenge" so if someone wrongs you, work so hard that you make them look like a fool.

    In terms of the job Trump's doing, I'll just push out some numbers. For unemployment, it was 4.8 in January 2017, now at 4.1 (using the BS statistic that allowed the previous administration to claim the 4.8 with the largest number of people out of the workforce since WWII) The DOW is at record levels (but that doesn't effect most people, bubbles burst, etc), but manufacturing is up. Well, down from record levels... and the GDP is up 3.3% Did Trump do all that? Not personally, but business seems optimistic, and that is a reflection of their expectations on policy.

    The world's a mess. It's burning, but it has been for decades. The Middle East, especially Syria and parts of Africa, continue to be a sucking chest wound of violence and suffering. North Korea continues to get closer to landing a nuke somewhere in the US or Europe. Name calling doesn't solve that, but neither does making speeches and making hashtags like #bringbackourgirls. Does Trump have the answer? So far, no, but then again neither has any US President in about the last 60 years. He has made inroads with China to start enforcing sanctions and possibly getting meaningful change out of North Korea, but there are a lot of factors at play. Expecting a magic wand wave is unrealistic, and expecting him to keep doing the same things that haven't worked in the past is also not too realistic, especially when only 35% think the US is on the right track. Of note, that is up from the ~20% it hovered at in 2016...

    Domestically, I think this thread started as an indication that things are a mess. Drug use is rising, people are dying. There is rioting in the streets. Despite those numbers indicating things are looking up economically on the national scale, there is still widespread economic trauma for millions of families. People think it is ok to walk up to a police officer and murder them. There is massive distrust on both sides of the political aisle, and both sides seem unwilling to have the conversations and do the research to come to some kind of an agreement. Does Trump have the answer? For a large portion of the population, he never will.

    I find it funny. People hate him with a fiery passion, yet the blast him for not solving their personal problems, like drug abuse and addiction. Make him look like a fool. Prove that he's worthless. Find a way to take care of your own problem with the help of places like, AA, and other resources, not waiting for the highest office in the land to figure it out.
  • @Leaker,

    I don't know about other people but I don't hate him at all,I just find him amusing to watch and study! :)

    One has to be very narcissistic to want to have ANY position of POWER.Because POWER is directly related to narcissism,it's what they feed on,it's like a DRUG for narcissists,that's where they get their narcissistic supply from.The more power,the better.Power,control,manipulation,gas-lighting - all these are basic tools in their game.(there are a lot of politicians out there who show a lot of narcissistic traits).

    I actually didn't follow Obama's presidency close,just something here and there from time to time but not paying special attention to such news all of the time.So I can't say I'm being biased here,just Trump is such a unique creature and he is always heading for a crash and when you know there's going to be a crash,you tend to watch to see the final result!Boy,is he sensitive to criticisms from his opponents,doesn't take negative feedback well,I guess he has still a lot to learn about leadership and self-awareness:) Plus, he fires, dismisses etc people every other day.You tell me how are people supposed to form a good team when they don't know who is going to be on the team the folowing week(not a very good relationship management on his side,wouldn't you agree:)I

    'm not so sure about  the" loser" comment,though.I'm afraid that if you are dealing with problematic people, even if you work harder and harder,they can still deny or make you doubt your own achievements,or sanity for that matter.You can't control what others tell you,people will do what they are gonna do,but you can control how you respond to it,whether you let it get to you or you know your worth and are not bothered by any such comments.It's just the way things go,some people will call you a loser to make you work harder -especially  narcissistic bosses who want to make your life miserable.Even if you are a high performer,they will find ways to make you FEEL like a "loser"!But I agree with the phrase "The best revenge for a narcissist is for  you to "live a happy life".They can't stand to see you happy,they are envious of somebody else's success and happiness.

    I really don't want to put up a fight over Trump and his administration,he is not worth it,seriously.I don't want to upset you any further because you seem to take it too much to heart,too personal:) 

    BTW,my son was convinced Trump would win and he still supports him and thinks he is doing a great job and is the best American President there is:) I've had enough of arguments over Trump,so......We'll see what happens.

    Hope everything is good! 

  • Concur, this administration is an interesting one to watch and study. It is certainly different from the previous ones, but based on the number of people who want something different (based on who thinks the US is going in the wrong direction), they sure got it. If the desire for power is narcissistic, why is Trump unique in being so harshly criticized for it? As I mentioned before, the previous administration didn't take criticism well either, but they had less to deal with. If you look at Teddy Roosevelt's Citizen in a Republic speech, one can see his thoughts on critics. From that, the constant picking by these critics would frustrate anyone, I think. I know I'd get fed up when anything I did was wrong, or analyzed for what I said without saying it, and even things I didn't do were reported and speculated on. There is a theory that is developing that Trump's "spontaneous attacks" aren't so spontaneous. Since the critics are so predictable, he supposedly uses them to shape the narratives, or draw fire away from other things. He repeals a hot issue Executive Order, but the media is too busy reporting on what he said about a congressman. It's an interesting theory, not sure I buy it.

    Trump's had problems with his team. He's had to fire some people. Some really deserved it. Others, who knows? Maybe they couldn't take the criticism. Maybe they didn't want the scrutiny. Maybe they displeased Trump and he fired them. Maybe they displeased others on the team. It's not good to know if one is about to be fired, but it is equally bad to have a poisonous member on the team. Trump has build many teams over the years as a businessman, and he is trying to build a team to run a government. While they do seem similar, they are vastly different, and that is probably showing with some of his team shuffles.

    I'm not totally 100% behind Trump, but I hear the same sort of statements made here all the time in other places. Rather than let them go, I am challenging them, but being real careful since this isn't the place, and man can we get into some real bad places real quick if someone loses their cool. So far you, dean and I, I think we are doing great with the off forum intent topic discussion. The links I threw out all took less than 30 seconds to find, and none were the Right Wing xerox machines, so it seems to me people form an opinion (or are told it), most likely from incomplete or skewed "reporting" and don't look to dig into the issue to challenge the opinion. Both Trump supporters and detractors. He isn't your president @changeyourself, so that's totally understandable. But it doesn't take too long to look and see that the situation isn't so black and while.

    The other big complaint I have is people complain about his name calling, then call him names. Huh? It's a great way to take the high road, but instead let's call him insane or label him something. My point in a previous post was that even the pros aren't supposed to diagnose someone's mental state until they interview the person. I would also say that at a place like this, where people have, and are struggling with real, diagnosed mental problems, or know someone who is, they wouldn't throw around the insane commentary.

    Ultimately, I think that writing him off as insane is a dead end. He's probably not going anywhere for 3 years, and how can one change their perception if they look at everything through the goggles of, "He's insane"? Any mistake, issue, or misstep confirms the diagnosis, everything good is overlooked as "a lucky break" or "there he goes taking credit from someone else; typical narcissist". I'm not looking to change opinions, just challenge them. Take a look at some of the other issues. Do a comparison between this administration and others. Hey, I might be totally off base and need to change my assessment. So far, I haven't seen anything compelling enough to do that through. If one constantly challenges their own assumptions and opinions ( a key factor to recovery, I think), then their opinion is that much stronger and overall better. Not just for the president, but for all kinds of issues out there that are facing the world.
  • @Leaker,
    I'll tell you where the big difference between me and Trump is,however— the huge difference is I am comfortable admitting I have issues to deal with and struggle to overcome and be a better "me",I don't hide the fact,that's why I am here (aren't we all) while he gets offended when people tell him he has issues,will deny it right away and blame shift the whole thing on the people who are challenging him and say they are the ones with the issues,woudn't you agree:) ?
    And that's exactly what narcissists do— it's ALWAYS somebody else's fault,never their fault. They never get better because they are simply not able to admit their problem and look for help,see?They are not self-aware enough to know they have a problem ,just don't see they have a problem and should  look for help.That's why it's so dangerous for them to be in top positions,they are totally unprediictable and act upon the spur of the moment,just like little children don't think much before they act! I might be dealing with issues but then again I am not running for a president of anything,I am self-aware enough to know I wouldn't make a good one,not at this particular moment anyway.Maybe when I am a healthier person in my behaviour, then I'll consider it....:)
    Have a nice evening!
  • @Leaker,
    Oh,one more thing comes to mind now.Running a country is not the same as running a company,which most people insist he knows how to do but I'm not one of them.With company managers ,they can fire people all day long and there will still be enough people waiting in the line because people need the job and the money to pay their bills.But when it comes to politics,you cannot fire the leaders of the countries you don't get along with and put your people there,don't you think?:) Otherwise he would have fired the North Korean leader a long time ago to solve the problem there!And not just him!Because he lacks the skills to be a politician,he is like an elephant in a china shop in that respect!It's both sad and funny to observe! :)When it comes to beauty contests,though,he seems to have a lot of experience there and is proud of it! :)
  • @Leaker,
    He is "the one being harshly criticised "maybe for one because he is NOT supposed to show how much he wants power.He brags about it all the time,which is what narcissists do— brag about how good they are,how people should somehow be grateful for such luck having a president like him.
    What's more,he feels so entitled to be in this place and no - one before(or even after) him has done or will ever do such a a great job(aren't you all lucky to have such a man as president),if you have never given it a thought,he'll tell you how great he is.Just like a narcissist thinks he is the best among others,always and everywhere they go.Have you ever heard another US president telling you how great he thinks he is (as if you need him to tell you that,but just in case you haven't noticed the difference between great people and the greatest of them all)?:) Do you remember that rhyme from The Sleeping Beauty? What does the narcissistic step-mother ask the mirror:"Mirror,mirror on the wall,tell me who is the prettiest of them all?"The same with Trump.I wouldn't be surprised if he practises a similar ritual every day to assure himself of his worth,what do you think? :)
  • @changeyourself, good points all around. And there are some areas where we overlap a lot on our thinking (like differences between running a company and running a country). You analogy breaks down a little because the president of one company can't fire the president of another company either. They either have to work together, or through a power of wills decide which company will be the top. That's that whole, "I know how to negotiate!" boast that Trump loves to throw out.

    I concur, the bragging and the showboating can be concerning. But if he doesn't say it about himself, who will? I know from experience. I had an older brother who would, every day, tell me I was a loser, had no life, no friends, and would die alone. Every day. From about 3rd grade until even college years. So, I shut down. I built all kinds of walls around myself to try and keep some semblance of focus on what I wanted to do with my life. Every failure confirmed my brother's statements, every success, well, the next failure wasn't too far off (don't worry, I got better and fixed myself in those regards...mostly). I can see how another route would have been giving myself pep talks, and talking about how great I was. Celebrate the successes and not worry about the failures. So, in those regards, I see the president constantly assaulted on all sides and instead of doing what I did and shutting down, he goes the opposite and blasts out his greatness. Besides, can you imagine the feeding frenzy that would result if Trump admitted he could improve on anything, or that he did something wrong? "TRUMP DECLARES HIMSELF INCOMPETENT" would be the sort of headline I would expect to see.

    There's a hidden message of the economic numbers I posted. In the US, business hates uncertainty.  It makes it difficult to set pricing and investments. However, there are a lot of indicators, like some of those numbers I linked, that despite the constant screaming of doom and gloom from flapping mouths on TV, the business world is feeling pretty good about things. Maybe they are trying to make some money before it all collapses, or they simply anticipate more favorable policy from Trump. But if they, the educated titans of industry, believed that the US was led by an unstable narcissistic buffoon incapable of running the country and was irrational and going to ruin everything at any moment, I would expect the US economy to be showing signs of trauma, as opposed to the pretty decent growth status. 

    I could push back on a lot of the other points with more examples and statistics and charts, but I realized what is going on. I'm pushing statistics, and charts and facts, and thinking that it is "proof" for my arguments. However, you are pushing your feelings, experiences, and observations and using them as your  "proof". I can push all the charts I want, but it won't do anything to sway you because I fail to address the emotional side of things. You make the observations of behavior and feel there is something wrong. There is no real way to bridge the gap between these two ways of thinking, is there? I think this is something that is going on all over the US, and probably the root of the screaming without communication.
  • @Leaker,
    You may have a point there about two presidents of two companies (in the same country) not having the right to fire each other but we are talking about people of different nationalities,different traditions, different outlook on life here,different way of life.Besides, if the president of one company does not get along with the head of another one (they can always go for a game of golf and talk it over:) or if this doesn't work can look for connections to the Senate or The White House and the President.Because big business is ALWAYS connected to a higher power not just in the USA but all over the world.While with the leader of another country you cannot do it so easily.He may think he knows how to negotiate but where financial interest is the issue.With foreign policy it's not always about the money but about cultural differences,way of life etc.A lot of places around the world have a different way of life and a different outlook on life!About such things he knows nothing,doesn't care or consider them important to know.He seems very narrow-minded and shallow.Just so full of himself.
    And the essence of his business isn't exactly what, I would call meaningful,right?He wants to sell that image of a winner,the post of a US president being,for me,the jewel in his crown.He just looks so vain ( even about his appearance, remember how he got his hair grown),it's obvious he has problems with aging and looks(narcissists typically have such problems).It shows he has a lot of insecurity in him,and not just this fact.His talk is quite superficial and very often lacks any sense.You just get confused as to what is this man trying to say(another typical trait of narcissists,you get confused because they want you to be so and forget what the conversation was about in the first place).The minute he opens his mouth I know he's in for the next pompous,non-sensical speech (or the minute he grabs a gadget to start tweeting right and left).I start wondering:"Wait a minute,I thought we were discussing A,but the conversation is all about B with references to C,D etc.  all the way down to Z."And you just go: "What?You've got to be kidding me!":) 
    Come on,he didn't even go to live in the White House.I guess,he is too cool to do that!The way he redecorated it,oh boy,looks like the interior of a cheap hotel!He may be a billionaire or whatever he is but he lacks class,totally!
    You know what comes to mind now,a phrase from a recent video on narcissists,how to tell if someone is a narcissist. When they tell you: "But I'd better stop talking about myself!What do you think of me?":) Just listen to the content of his speech,it's me,me,me and then we,we,we,which includes me.:) This man has a huge,inflated easily injured ego that gets in the way all the time.Narcissists never listen to what you have to say,not interested at all but quickly shift the conversation back to them.Just listen to the way he talks ( and the words).When I look at him and his administration,I start thinking :"The circus act has arrived in town,led by the circus clown,minus the red nose."
    Maybe you relate somehow to him with what happened to your brother.Sorry to hear about that!
    They say he also had a brother who died of alcoholism if I remember correctly.So,he himself doesn't drink or smoke or do drugs,which is good but doesn't automatically make him a healthy individual,either.My guess about your way of thinking and behaving as the winner,working harder and harder, will be that maybe you want to constantly "challenge" as you say opinions to prove to yourself you can supply better, more convincing facts to support your point of view,can do better than the other person,maybe it's a kind of competition with your own self,not with the person you are talking to.But that can be really exhausting and doesn't help in any way because the minute you have" proven " your point,someone else shares their opinion and you go at it again to "prove" you can do better etc.Narcissists always play to win,you know.Just keep that in mind.
    I'll be back in a few minutes because I see on the TV screen MJ's video "The way you make me feel"!Awesome!I just ADORE his music!
    Now,here I am again.What else was I about to say about the current US president?
    Oh,yes.I believe he totally lacks empathy,if you listen and watch how he talks about or responds to news about natural disasters,it's mind-blowing the ease with which he brushes off such issues quickly, blames someone else  for the ineffective steps to deal with the situation and then taps himself on the back for a job well-done!
    Another narcissistic trait—a huge discrepancy between words and actions,they never follow through with their plans.Sounds familiar?He doesn't need to tell others how great he is.Actions speak louder than words,people will see and feel the positive changes in their own daily lives,you don't need to tell them what they have to see and feel!
    You are right about the "go with your feeling" part.I heard about this in a you-tube video and thought:"That's it,that's why I feel this way!"I think it's very true.You should always go with your gut-instinct,follow your intuition and how you feel about something or somebody.If you feel something is off,it's generally because it IS off.Even if you try to find reasons to convince yourself that maybe your feeling is wrong,you know,saying to yourself"Well,maybe it's just me being paranoid!",no,it turns out in the end your instinct was right.And there is scientific proof to support this,it's not just an opinion or a theory.
    You are absolutely right about the statistics and the feelings.I for real can't deal with statistical numbers,documents,charts,graphs etc.I get bored quickly and look for body language,gestures,facial expressions,manner of speech (noisy,loud,bragging or soft,reassuring, kind),words used,how the words feel.Rude words,harsh comments can give me a splitting headache almost immediately and make me withdrawn very quickly.
    Feelings,emotions make us who we are,no matter what kind of job we do,we should do it following our feelings.Shutting down,disconnecting from your emotions can lead to problematic,unhealthy behaviour,can lead to addictions,to both physical illness or personality disorder.There are a lot of people who live with disorders,never look for help,don't admit or believe they have a problem and consider themselves " normal".Also a valid comment I heard in a video and find so true— what people usually consider "normal" is usually different levels of dysfunction.So the more appropriate term will be "healthy" people and relationships.If you start digging into the reasons for each person's addictions,you'll inevitably come the root of the problem—  unresolved issues from earlier in life,emotions that were not allowed to surface and be experienced the way they should be,fear to feel and show insecurity or vulnerability.That's what it is.As simple as that.

  • And now Trump is fully endorsing an accused child molester for a spot in the United States Senate. Just another day in America.
  • So, I could keep pushing back and citing examples and precedent and facts and stats, but as I discussed, continuing to do so would just keep this topic on the trending board. Plus, me continuing to cite figures would be just as effective as someone trying to tell me that the impression or feeling that they get is just as valid as the facts when it comes to issues like nuclear war, the economy, the rule of law, and the lives of billions. So, instead I will just wrap up what I have with two points. Not as a mike drop, because I don't for a moment think it will change anyone's mind or impressions, but it might be helpful in evaluating and confirming those valid, but differing viewpoints.
    1. Be careful with your assessments, and stating opinion or rumor as fact. As noted before, when even the professionals are cautioned against making a mental health diagnosis without an in-person interview, one should be very careful about looking at public statements and making a determination of someone's mental state and what is really going on in their nugget. There are also a lot of accusations made, some valid, and some not. It is for the court, not the wailing mob, to decide guilt or innocence. For example, the US is currently going through a very painful process as people who, in the public eye, looked to be the very model of decency and pillars of integrity and champions of women's rights, are appearing to be, in private, horrible perverts. (Weinstein, Lauer, Franken, Conyers, Moore). The key there is "appearing", since there are a lot of allegations, and the truth must be determined. See 12 Angry Men for an example, albeit a fictional one, of that point. I'll also note that there is a difference between being accused of something, and being CONVICTED of something, that difference being something some people should review, apparently, before stating inflammatory accusations like they are facts.
    2. The other topic is to challenge one's assumptions and stances in order to increase their validity. Mr. Carl Sagan wrote in The Demon Haunted World, Science as a Candle In the Dark (a very good book by the way) about the value of being a skeptic. He wrote about the need for everyone to have a "Baloney Detection Kit", to be used for determining the validity of arguments and opinions. He also stated that the more we WANT to believe something, the more we FEEL something should be true, the more skeptical we need to be, so as to avoid confirmation bias or some "baloney" fooling us. The emotional involvement in something can cloud judgement and lead to accepting false arguments, or opinions as facts. I know I am guilty of that, but I try and get better at it every day. So, in practical terms, don't instantly and blindly believe the sounds bites, the headlines on your newsfeed, the flapping mouths on TV, or what your friend said. Do the research on your own. More importantly, read the dissenting opinions, as infuriating as they may be. You might come back to your same conclusion as at the start, but if something passes your baloney detector, then it is that much more powerful, and you are that much better off for the journey.

    Of note, I think both those two topics are extremely important not just for political debates, but also for taking those first meaningful steps towards addiction recovery. Be careful with assumptions and labels, and challenge your assessments rather than just accepting them because it is easy, or it "feels" right.
  • @Leaker,

    I don't agree with your example about supplyiing hard facts,numbers,statistics etc only as evidence to support your point.Don't you know statistics can be faked ,too? :) Dry facts turn the conversation or discussion into a "dull exchange of words,that is void of human emotion,something like what a computer can do if you feed it  the necessary data and at the end of it all ,you can print out the graph,chart or wha ever it is with the final conclusion.

    "Baloneys" cannot fool us because there are no feelings there and after some time I know they are faking it because ,unlike them, I am in tune with my FEELINGS enough to know it.So,no worries about that!

    Luckily,we ,as humans,have the ability to feel,the gift of emotional response and emotional intelligence that prevent us from turning into maybe insensitive robot-like creatures that are afraid to feel and relate to each other based on this.Your point breaks when you mention things like convicted ,guilty,innocent etc as if we should think in terms of court trials before we come up with an opinion  which I don't need to do..

    But even if I need to,I have such an example tp prove my point. I'm just going to point out A FACT from the second trial MJ went through and why the jury actually decided he was innocent.He was found innocent - that's A FACT which,however, has nothing to do with hard facts as evidence or something that contributed to it,though they had plenty of them,too.I heard one woman from the jury say that she didn't like the way the mother of the boy snapped her fingers at her,she thought to herself :"Don't snap your fingers at me,lady!",another one said the mother kept staring at her and it made her FEEL very uncomfortable.

    A third woman on the jury said she just FELT sorry for MJ because he looked so sad,it was so hard for him to listen to all those things being said,there were even tears in his eyes at one point.She saw the EMOTION behind it all.And if somebody says he was all acting it out,it means this person pushes away judgement based on feelings and intuition,and also shows a lot of cynicism ,which is also a mask for insecurity and fear of showing emotions.MJ was declared innocent not because of all those facts they had as proof(though,like I said,they had plenty of  those ,too) but because the jury thought the family were not credible witnesses,they lacked credibility and turned out to be con-artists who were looking for money.

    The jury also thought that the boy didn't LOOK like a victim,didn't TALK like a victim and didn't BEHAVE like a victim at all.So,no hard facts or statistics there,just FEELING something is not right.To be honest, I feel sorry for people who lack the ability to relate to others based on their intuition.It shows they've disconnected from their emotions and feel fearful of expressing or trusting them.They somehow deny their human nature.Even in courts there are people,not robots without feelings or sensitivity.You can't forbid the judge or the jury to be human ,have emotions and feel in a certain way.And in a lot of cases  this is what decides the case,not hard evidence,but intuition.Plus,ypu should know that a narcissist can pretty easily pass a lie-detector simply becaouse he is convinced he has done nothing wrong,see.That's why they are so convincing when they are lying and a lot of people believe them.But if you ask the victim,that's another story.If someone close to you tells you they have been a victim of molestation will you tell them :"Prove it first,then we'll talk!" or maybe :"It was all your fault, you were asking for it,so don't complain about it now!" 

    And though MJ was proved innocent in court of justice,there are people who still say he was guilty of it.Don't they read court documents?Don't they trust facts and evidence?Obviously,not.And yet there are people who knew he was innocent from the beginning,didn't need a court trial to be convinced in that.Can you see my point here - people who believed he was innocent,didn't need to see him in court to know that but those who said he was guilty didn't change their opinion even after he was proved to be by the court!So,what's the use of the trial then?Didn't change the situation much,did it?The same with statistics,numbers etc.They provenothing unless you are inclined to believe them and not trust your own judgement of the situation!

    The US is going through a "painful process" in your words because there are a lot of problematic,narcissistic people in high power,the so-called "pillars of society" who like typical narcissists have a double life -on the one hand,the "perfect family" who say it's all a lie because people want to harm them and not get him elected,let's say and the young girls he is interested in, on the other hand.It's just so sick!!!.Such a person is personality disordered and he is dangerous to be in an important job.They feel entitled to doing whatever they want to do,know that because others consider them "pillars of society" would never believe the so=called "rumours" because the victims don't or cannot supply "hard evidence or facts" such as maybe calling someone to witness the rape or molestation  so as to convince them of the crime.These people know that power protects them from being accountable and for a lot of them accountability is not on their radar at all.:"It's my word against the word of a nobody,guess who would  people  believe?",though a lot of them think they don't even own accountability and don't feel any remorse or guilt.A typical narcissist never feesl guilt or remorse,that's why they do what they do.

    I am ALWAYS careful when I make an assessment or state an opinion because I don't want to hurt other people's feelings and that's the reason why I NEVER spread rumours or express a rumour as a fact..There is no need to warn me about it.The rumour and gossip are things used by people that have problematic personality or personality disorder. 

    As for Trump,I don't need statistics to know the man is a joke and there are no facts convincing enough to make me change my mind!. He is out of his mind and proves it every day!For those who want and care to see it!

  • All... I'm going to close down this thread. Not because of anything anybody said, but simply because I think it's gotten a bit off-topic. When I made my original post, maybe I should've stuck to simply stating facts instead of bringing my opinion into it. I did not intend to spark a debate about President Trump. I was merely expressing my disappointment with the person chosen to oversee the United States' opioid crisis. Do I like this administration's approach to the addiction problem in the U.S.? Not at all. Do I think they will be successful in combating the problem? No. But I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong.
This discussion has been closed.