Posted on 05/26/2008 9:30:06 PM PDT by Democrats hate too much
HOW COULD SHE GO THERE!? Hillary, Political Psychopath*
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/25/123312/547/223/522533
WHEN YOU SAY THE WORD "sociopath"most people think of serial killers. But although many serial killers are sociopaths, there are far more sociopaths leading ordinary lives. Chances are you know a sociopath. I say "ordinary lives," but what they do is far from ordinary. Sociopaths are people without a conscience. They don't have the normal empathy the rest of us take for granted. They don't feel affection. They don't care about others. But most of them are good observers, and they have learned how to mimic those feelings remarkably well.
WHAT DO THEY WANT?
... This is an interesting question. The answer is chilling: They want to win... whatever the game is decided to be. If they are in business, it is becoming rich. If it is sibling rivalry, it is defeating the sibling. If it is a contest, the goal is to dominate. If a sociopath is the envious sort, winning would be making the other lose, or fail, or be frustrated, or embarrassed.
A sociopath's goal is to win. And he is willing to do anything at all to win.
Adam Khan in "Common Everyday Sociopaths"
HOW COULD SHE!? Go there?
Because it was there. Merely another card in the strategic deck, a song in the repertoire for when the audience starts poking at the aspic.
You ask, "But didn't she REALIZE?"
HRC's remaining die-hards reply, "What-me-realize?" MSM spin. At our girl again.
You sputter, "Bu-but, what did she MEAN?"
HRC et al say, "Historic reference," you moronic misogynist!
Let Dr. Voberry explain.
She meant exactly what she said.
She said(Friday, May 23) to the editorial board of the Sioux Falls, SD, Argus Leader:
My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won
the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right?
We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.
I don't understand it.
Here is what she could have, but did not say:
My husband did not wrap up the nomination...somewhere in the middle of
June, right? And, likewise, Bobby Kennedy didn't secure the nomination in
California until then.
It still would have been a subject for speculation as to why she didn't reference other, less tragic contests to show that a team can upset another just before the buzzer, the turtle can suprisingly beat the hare. But note. She juxtaposes one example with another that is not situationally(and this is underscored linguistically) parallel to it.
In fact, because she leads with the first example, we would expect the second to be of like kind. And in watching the video, we see how deftly, how easily, in tone and manner, she segues from the first example to the next.
My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right?
We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.
I don't understand it.
This is lawyering at its best. This is not a slip of the tongue, but a practiced and smooth glide as it sticks itself out at the PUBLIC--having darted out for a few dry-runs two other times. This time is no rehearsal. Later? Got that covered too.
The lawyer and the politician, at this level of the game, are masters of ambiguity, skillfully planting a hedging-bets clause to blame the sucker who signed the contact for misreading it. If that fails, "I misspoke," "I'm only human," or "So what?"
Back to what she said(rather than HOW she said it) in terms of what she meant.
Literal translation: "I could still win. Bill didn't win until the middle of June. Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June. "
In other words: "I could still win because I could clinch this in June or Obama could be assassinated in June."
Ironically, in that she intentionally gave both examples an off-hand delivery, because she meant to slip the idea in there and later say it was all a slip, HOW she said it is exactly what creeps us out. Like a perp trying to out psyche a polygraph, she issued both examples in the same matter-of-fact, low key, unemotive, unblinking manner. She didn't miss a beat.
If she's going to say such a thing, how can she not betray a nano-second of emotion, a wince, a pained rise or drop in pitch, a sharp intake of breath?
Crisply and deliberately, she moves from an example of victory to a NATIONAL TRAGEDY, one engraved in the collective American psyche as profoundly and achingly as any other wound since the nation began. Indeed, RFK's assassination in l968 is such a resonant reference because history has come full circle. Who among us has not thunk it? Who among us, no matter our age, has not had the sense of impending horror as we watch history being made anew at the same time it is repeating?
Playing the ASSASSINATION CARD?
No one would do that in her right mind. No one would think she could get away with using our deepest sorrow as a calculated strategy. Does she think we are that stupid?
Yes.
Bu-but surely she KNOWS, she must REALIZE how people would view what she said, even if not intentional, that people would recoil in horror, she'd be seen as poison, she'd doom any chance at being vice-president even....
Nope.
She thought we wouldn't catch her out. She figured if we did she'd finesse as usual. She could not possibly connect up to us. She could not READ us. Thus, she did not think we could read her.
Herve Cleckley, who first explored what used to be viewed as a "moral defect" in the framework of psychology, in his pathblazing text, The Mask of Sanity, features a frontpiece quote to the effect that the wax rose is more beautiful, more perfect than the real thing. But the downfall of the sociopath, whether one born that way, or created by circumstances--perhaps by the nature of the game she must play--is this incapacity to estimate the true depth and implication of the psychological gestalt, that weave of memory, emotion, personal and collective experience, as it composes the inner reservoir of other people.
Martha Stout Ph.d in her highly readable best-seller " The Sociopath Next Door", takes Dr. Robert D. Hare's seminal research( author of Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of Psychopaths Among Us) and relocates prison-based studies to a larger venue. Her emphasis on "garden variety," non-violent and often high-functioning sociopaths is very much in keeping with Dr. Hare and Cleckley's intent: to warn those most at risk of being victimized by sociopaths in their own midst. They knew what we need to.
Classic sociopaths ,and those somewhere on the continuum from mild to severe, are not found mostly in prison or even in psychiatrists' offices. And contrary to the opinions of many mental health professionals who have not studied character disorders intensively, and who have no background in forensic psychology, sociopaths can ascend the highest social, economic, and political ladders.
In fact, outside of prisons, we are likely to find our sociopaths in just such stratospheres. Charm, ambition, intelligence, and a gift to gain the authentic trust and confidence of others--these are the hallmarks of the over-achieving sociopath(sometimes overachieves by virtue of a parasitical relationship with one in power).
Then if they are so damned smart, how and why slip up?
Almost invariably they do.
Although Hare and other experts allude to the quirky and erratic nature of their balance between successful social mask and the impulsive and irrational character behind it, Stout takes on their seemingly inexplicable contradictions as we often encounter them--from next door, to the boardroom, to the
oval office.
What she says in essence is that not only do sociopaths view themselves as smarter--and as others including Hare have pointed out, through repetition and finessing become accomplished liars(also are grandiose enough to GO FOR IT and have a high enough emotional and neurological threshold to JUST DO IT) but they also really do not realize, do not understand, do not know down to their inner core, what others, in the most real way, FEEL. For they can not FEEL the same way.
The emotions and ethics, pathos and ethos, as they drive people to die for one another and their country, as they form that country's most palpable and vulnerable and yet eternally-beating and fighting HEART, are appeals to make to a jury, pawns to move in a game of politics; these core emotions and ethics can be PLAYED to, even mimicked, but not EXPERIENCED. This fact constitutes the main difference between the sociopath and the rest of us.
Martha Stout reminds us that sociopaths do not have dependable sensors, in that sort of primordial and intuitive way mothers do,for the deepest emotional self of others(or nations) and, other people's ability to read THEM. Here, I do not claim that HRC is a bad mother or does not have the ability to empathize with her friends, to sense her husband's concerns. A case can be made that the political game, played for the highest stakes under the most extreme and public conditions, desensitizes its participants, rewards them for behavior that in any other setting all would agree is sick, duplicitous. And, in the vise of ambition, having but seconds to overturn the game, could not the most sensitive woman find her powers of empathy, even her own ethical sense squeezed out of her?
HRC has been in the crucible of politics and the cross hairs of media for decades. But now, even by "Politics as Usual" standards, she seems to manifest a moral defect, a lack of empathetic understanding, that is verging on pathological, as the historian Douglas Brinkley suggested in a very sympathetic way. I believe she's been operating in a sociopathic way politically for many years, and that now, mirroring socipatholgy as it is expressed outside the political game, her mask of sanity is slipping.
When this happens, the classic sociopath has excuses at the ready. We accept the faintest of apologies and blame its being so tepid on the conditions that called for it--lack of sleep, lapse in memory, stress. We accept the apology for to do otherwise is to have to think the worst. We accept because the apology refocuses us on our own faults and on the poor, poor stressed out, sleepless, amnesiac whom we have forced to apologize in this humiliating way.
WHOA! Martha Stout's admonition is apropos at this juncture:
"If...you find yourself often pitying someone who consistently hurts you or other people, and who actively campaigns for your sympathy, the chances are close to one hundred percent that you are dealing with
a sociopath."
"Earlier today, I was discussing the Democratic primary history and in the
course of that discussion mentioned the campaigns that both my husband
and Senator Kennedy waged in California in June in 1992 and 1968, and I
was referencing those to make the point that we have had nominating primary
contests that go into June. That's historic fact. The Kennedys have been much
on my mind in the last days because of Senator Kennedy, and I regret that if
my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire
nation and particularly for the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I
certainly had no intention of that whatsoever." (ital mine)
George K. Simon calls the emotional manipulation sociopaths wield so expertly "covert aggression"(Psychopaths in Sheep's Clothing). Adapting his notion, and quoting from Fiona McColl's "Eight Ways to Spot Emotional Manipulation," the website "Psychopathy" in its discussion of Simon's book advises as follows:
There is no use in trying to be honest with an emotional manipulator. You make a statement and it will be turned around. Example: I am really angry that you forgot my birthday. Response - "It makes me feel sad that you would think I would forget your birthday, I should have told you of the great personal stress I am facing at the moment - but you see I didnt want to trouble you. You are right I should have put all this pain (dont be surprised to see real tears at this point) aside and focused on your birthday. Sorry."
IN CLOSING: even sociopaths aren't bad all of the time
I'll spare my readers Cleckley, Hare, and Stout's( et al) consideration of "the lightly taken debt, the shrugged off loan"( Hare)--and as Cleckly says "Not all(Ital mine) checks given by psychopaths" bounce. Rather, effective sociopaths, prodded to good conduct by the prize they seek, will have long runs of responsible behavior:
It is characteristic of them during some periods to...meet their financial obligations...they may apply their excellent abilities in business or in study for a week, for months, or even for a year or more and thereby gain potential security, win a scholarship, be acclaimed top salesman or elected president of a social club or perhaps of a school honor society(Cleckley).
And I might add, President of the--Sorry, couldn't help myself.
But you are right dear reader. This is no laughing matter. Wherever you stand on HRC, love her or hate her, we have been shaken by the elephant no one wanted to talk about trumpeting in our ears, and we are particularly sensitive because of the serious illness of a senator some of us love and almost all of us respect.
Regardless of how HRC's unfortunate reference impacts her electability, next is the May 31 meeting of the rules comittee to decide the fate of MI and FL. My own opinion is that, to give justice to the voters, delegates must be seated in some way. But if the issue of Clinton's prior stance on the rules comes up, I would point to,and will close with, Dr, Hare's admonition:
"They do not honor formal or implied commitments to people, organizations, or principles... their good intentions are written on the wind."
***************************************************************************************
DISCLAIMER: The diarist does not claim or intend to offer a professional diagnosis on which treatment must be predicated. She certainly does not purport to apply a lay person's analysis, or even that assumed in the professional literature cited, to Ms. Clinton's PERSONAL life and behaviors. She means anything in this diary to apply only to Clinton's actions in the political arena. The diarist writes much in the vein of other students and academics' application of "psycho-history" and "psycho-biography" to historical and current events, peoples, social and political movements.
TERMINOLOGY: Because in the early use of the term "psychopath," the general public and the media construed the term to mean a person with some form of psychosis, practitioners and researchers in this particular field of study and its settings, tend to use the word "sociopath." They can, and are, used interchangeably.
Sociopathology, in its current incarnation, predominantly influenced by Robert Hare's pioneering studies and research, and his development of highly reliable diagnostic tools, is the study of a psychiatric disorder that can be seen to include some of the features that DSM-IV lists under "anti-social personality." Many mental health practitioners do refer to this label for socipathy. In terms of the field of characterolgical disorders, narcissism is subsumed.
Proponents of character disorder theory, criminal profiling, and sociopatholgical theory and practice see these taxonomies as far as real-life applications as overlapping and their various traits as existing on a continuum.
THE DIARIST: Is a college English instructor whose graduate and undergraduate work included courses such as "literature and psychoanalysis" and so she easily assumes the role of amateur psychologist. Has been a candidate in two graduate psychology programs, one in Forensic Psychology, but finished neither. Did complete the requirements for a two year degree in "The Administration of Justice" and has been an intern in juvenile probation. She will always answer to "Dr. Voberry" with alacrity and great joy.
***********************************************************************************
This was the 3rd time since March she mentioned the assassination of RFK.
“This was the 3rd time since March she mentioned the assassination of RFK.”
It must be the non-sociopath in me, but my first thought when I read that she’d mentioned the RFK assassination wasn’t that she was hinting that the same thing could occur in June, it was that she was making a veiled reference that RFK was killed by a Muslim and trying to link Obama to that event by earlier (by birth) association.
"Email from Obama Supporter to Obama Listserver ################################## I think Hillary is having a nervous breakdown, and she has a following of supporters who don't even realize that she's having a break down. . . . ."
yitbos
I think my tagline says it all.
She’s been having a nervous breakdown since Lewinsky.
Bump for an important article on exposing Hilery, the Red Queen. Not the source too. Even Democrats are starting to wake up on the dangers of allowing her anywhere near power.
That wouldn't have been accurate.
I don’t think she slipped up. The Democrate party is one which votes for the next sociopath and plead innocence and hate if their cause for their Che, Castro or Hitler is not defended. They are the advocates of evil, and that is PC.
Since Hilary could not denounce those ways and thus Obama (one more radical than her), she could only show more radicalism than him via another way. She conjured up the witches which control and manipulate this election and probably asked for some advice. From her death-oriented point of view of the adult whore, ie. irresponsible yet feminist in authority of adult over “children” who should not question her, she has made an irresponsible statement as such adult.
She only slipped a little bit in form, but not in substance. She did not express well enough the “confidence” of the irresponsible whore who “humanisticaly” deserves her entitled feminist respect... and she is adored after all.
But that slip up is not so bad. Damage control is made by the leftist’s press false outrage, and it makes her look “clumsy” and cute at it almost.
What she did is perfectly logical. She is bringing more death, and, just like the Monica scandal made it all so “proper” and “good looking” to lie in court and betray sexualy people around, it has fed further the fantasies of such psychologists who fantasize of maturity and of intellectual untouchability, moralization status entitlement and “irresponsible ‘cool’ like adult” attitude.
The world will learn that God and the Bible is no fantasy and not childlish, and, guilt is not either feeding much of fantasies. Look at the log in your eye before you remove the speck in the other’s, indeed.
Hmmm. So it's just about the abstraction known as Clinton's political persona? Not the entire person? In that case, it certainly isn't a diagnosis, it's more like a metaphor or a smear.
It's no fun having to defend Clinton, but really now, why spend all that time and ink depicting her as a sociopath if you don't really want to be on record as believing it, and if you disclaim your own words in the end?
There are no part persons. If she's a sociopath, she's not just a political sociopath successfully compartmentalized by a normal person. Or if she is, why not go with the older metaphor and call her possessed?
Proponents of character disorder theory, criminal profiling, and sociopatholgical theory and practice see these taxonomies as far as real-life applications as overlapping and their various traits as existing on a continuum.
Oh, I see! There's a continuuuuuum. And she is at milepost number what?
With a continuuuuuum, you can label...er, taxonomize anyone! You don't have to prove anything, or even be precise, because everything's "overlapping." Just affect the objective, scientific style, wield the language of science, and you can change minds. Or whatever they now call minds, and I'm certain it's imaginative.
THE DIARIST: Is a college English instructor
Nuff said!
whose graduate and undergraduate work included courses such as "literature and psychoanalysis" and so she easily assumes the role of amateur psychologist.
Ok then, forget it --
Has been a candidate in two graduate psychology programs,
Really, I get it now
one in Forensic Psychology, but finished neither.
Stop, you're killing me!
Did complete the requirements for a two year degree in "The Administration of Justice" and has been an intern in juvenile probation.
Bwahahahahaha!!
She will always answer to "Dr. Voberry" with alacrity and great joy
is a typical marker for fuzzy feely liberalism. It's in the standard diagnostic manual; no special page, rather somewhere along a continuuuuum of the manual.
DISCLAIMER: Just sayin'.
The BEST thing about this is that NOW Obama will NOT BE ASSASSINIATED!! There was a strong chance before because they will do ANYTHING to win, but she exposed it, so now Obama is safe from the Clintonistas!
The truth is the democrat party, is and always has been, Machiavellian at it’s core. Their party has never been concerned about the clinton’s pathology because they kept winning but the charm of their ‘golden couple’ has finally worn off.
The democrats are now asking themselves is this all we have?
The clinton’s have become pathetic, old and past their prime, actors, in constant need of ‘cosmetic surgery’. Even their publicist, the democrat’s Main Stream Media, are finding it harder and harder to promote a positive image of the clinton’s and have finally given up to create a new and improved alternative.
The democrats are grasping at the final straw by going with Obama, an American of African descent, because they have no option left to them, they have been the only people who have been blindly loyal to the party.
The difference this time is the Obama’s have no allusions about the white power brokers of the party, they know they have been used and abused for generations and, in the end, the democrats will lose the control over their most important base.
Not “successfully deceived”, “willfully ignorant”, emphasis on “willfull”.
Example, remember the feminists, who probably wouldn’t willinging come within 10 feet of any male genitalia, declaring that they should all be on their knees for Bill Clinton for “keeping abortion legal”?
Then old (I will mind my manners here) Teddy Kennedy uprooted her New York Senator — Bobby Kennedy 1968 campaign “I can do it better” by anointing Obama as the reincarnation of the former JFK totally ignoring Hillary's campaign.
There is no doubt that Hillary is the epitome of many well known high IQ masterminds but this was NOT a political gaff as being portrayed... Old Teddy got some bad news and Hillary sent him a get well message.
Quotes for the other two?
Rational people with common sense may refer to others who stayed in the race, but those actually in the race justifying why they’re still in the race don’t make references to the horrific reasons WHY those others finally dropped out. It’s called “tact”, and those without any usually don’t have other traits needed for the job of POTUS. It’s precisely the need for “well, strictly speaking she’s correct” (I’ve given it too in her defense, to my surprise) as a defense that’s indicative of the problem: such tangential implication are obvious to most people, and a viable candidate WON’T say such things because they know the meaning will be lost behind the innuendo.
I tend to agree with you. One thing I'm certain of is that Hillary is exhausted. When she was here in PA, she hit EVERY area and went to places I've never seen, even though I've lived here most of my life. Somedays she does 3 speaking engagements. I hate defending her too, but it's incredible how the media has turned on her and her husband. Evidently the media resents having to defend her and Bill all those years during the scandals...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.