I agree that evaluations should be left to experts. If anyone should have their mental health evaluated (potential soldiers go through a psyche evaluation before they take the oath), it should be the person who could be in charge of the military. Is it out of bounds to question the mental health of any leader or potential leader? (Especially one who is repeatedly asking about using nuclear weapons during foreign policy briefings?) This is someone who, at the very least, consistently demonstrates a callous disregard for the lives of others, from Hillary Clinton to Muslims and Mexicans and anyone else he pits himself against. He advocates violence against others, talks about doing or wanting to do violence against others, suggests “2nd amendment people” remedy the Hillary Clinton threat to his presidency, etc. I would suggest ‘crazy’ is the perfect way to describe his behavior, though perhaps not the formal, first use of the word without an official diagnosis.
Meanings of ‘crazy’, according to dictionary.com:
1. mentally deranged; demented; insane.
2. senseless; impractical; totally unsound: a crazy scheme.
3. (Informal.) intensely enthusiastic; passionately excited: crazy about baseball.
4. (Informal.) very enamored or infatuated (usually followed by about)
5. (Informal.) intensely anxious or eager; impatient
6. (Informal.) unusual; bizarre; singular
7. (Slang.) wonderful; excellent; perfect
]]>