Dementia as well as being a malignant narcissist?

Shades of Reagan's Alzheimer's!

Malicious Malignant Narcissistic Liar

Trump.

He can't even fake it.

He doesn't know how.

In addition to the basic body language he keeps saying things like “Have a Good Time!” to people stranded in a shelter. Or, ‘it’s going great‘ to people who’ve just lost everything. Or, look at this huge turnout to people who … well, you get the idea. When it comes to acting human or compassionate it’s like the part of his brain governing that species of behavior has been removed. It’s like watching a person who has profound social awkwardness in a meet and greet situation at a cocktail party. It’s painful. But again, with Trump it’s not social awkwardness. It’s a basic, seemingly fundamental inability not only to experience but even to fake the experience of empathy or human concern. That additional part is what is remarkable to me.

How Trump got this way I have no clue. But it’s the behavior of a very damaged or emotionally stunted person.

Because strong men get all the attention

And life goes on

Weird things asked of librarians.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm... that's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov

How to deal with narcissists.

The gender bias of toys.

Getting the 1%.

Regulations for pissing on Dick Cheney's grave.

Police:  Explaining attitudes to Josh Marshall, explaining actions to a citizen of Nashville, getting an explanation of what Bill de Blasio talked about

Remind you of anyone?

Romney as a high school bully.... is like George Bush and his ... issues.








And what it means that Romney "can't remember".

Finally someone talks about the weird smirks

And fake laughs, the horrible shoulder shakes, the inappropriate chortles.


Bob Cesca of The Huffington Post cites several very bizarre actions by the preznit:

His uncomfortably ridiculous smirks and smiles illustrate his inadequacies as a leader: his fugacious attitude; his vacant stature; and, most strikingly, his apparent inability to grasp the reality of his decisions. It's all right there on the screen -- underlined by those tiny baby teeth.

To me the frantic head bobbing and shoulder shakes are made by a person who has no idea how to reach out to people but knows that these actions somehow make him seem more likable. He is truly a sociopathic personality:

Common characteristics of people with antisocial personality disorder include:^{[citation needed]}

• Persistent lying or stealing
• Recurring difficulties with the law
• Tendency to violate the rights and boundaries of others (property, physical, sexual, emotional, legal)
• Substance abuse
• Aggressive, often violent behavior; prone to getting involved in fights
• A persistent agitated or depressed feeling (dysphoria)
• Inability to tolerate boredom
• Disregard for the safety of self or others
• A childhood diagnosis of conduct disorders - this is not a symptom but "a history of"
• Lack of remorse for hurting others
• Superficial charm
• Impulsiveness
• A sense of extreme entitlement
• Inability to make or keep friends
• Lack of guilt
• Relentlessness^{[dubious – discuss]}
• Recklessness, impulsivity^[4][5]

People with a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder often experience difficulties with authority figures.^[6]

Don't forget this story.

Torture doesn't work

Bryan of Why Now? tells us what actually works:

I was a linguist and interrogator in the military, and I conducted interviews in criminal cases in law enforcement. I didn’t have to threaten anyone, hit anyone, abuse anyone, and I got people to tell me what I wanted to know relatively quickly.

If you don’t speak the interviewee’s language, you are wasting your time. You have to start a conversation. You have to create the environment in which the interviewee wants to talk, and you let them.

If you want to know how to conduct an interrogation, watch Bill Moyers, because he is one of the best interrogators in the world. That is what a trained professional interrogator is trying to do. That’s what works.

Oh, you always tape interrogations because taking notes can be distracting and the notepad is mainly a to do list and a prop. In a foreign language interrogation you also want another linguist to double check your understanding of what was said.

Exactly. This bizarre need to torture that the White House obsesses over does not come from any proof that torture works, it comes from being cowardly and craven and wanting to be the biggest bully on the block.

True interrogation means you have to listen and narcissistic sociopaths do not have that ability.

This is how all leaders of superpower free world countries eat, right?

Via TRex at Firedoglake, a quote from Draper's biography of Bush:

His hot dog arrived. Bush ate rapidly, with a sort of voracious disinterest. He was a man who required comfort and routine. Food, for him, was fuel and familiarity. It was not a thing to reflect on.

“The job of the president,” he continued, through an ample wad of bread and sausage, “is to think strategically so that you can accomplish big objectives. As opposed to playing mini-ball. You can’t play mini-ball with the influence we have and expect there to be peace. You’ve gotta think, think BIG. The Iranian issue,” he said as bread crumbs tumbled out of his mouth and onto his chin, (Ewwwwwwww-ed.) “is the strategic threat right now facing a generation of Americans, because Iran is promoting an extreme form of religion that is competing with another extreme form of religion. Iran’s a destabilizing force.”

We've seen this behavior before, remember? Bush and Blair at the G8 summit?



Bush and Merkel? Bush and the press? Bush and the White House press?

The way the game should be played

According to Georgie:



Think I'm joking?:

"...Gail Sheehy wrote an article for the {Vanity Fair} magazine about W. that made this point: “Even if he loses, his friends say, he doesn’t lose. He’ll just change the score, or change the rules, or make his opponent play until he can beat him.”"

Has anyone told Georgie that there are no do-overs or changing of the 'score' in his Iraq War?

Remember this?

"...Gail Sheehy wrote an article for the {Vanity Fair} magazine about W. that made this point: “Even if he loses, his friends say, he doesn’t lose. He’ll just change the score, or change the rules, or make his opponent play until he can beat him.”"

Now read this: (my bold)

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials who say there has been a dramatic drop in sectarian violence in Iraq since President Bush began sending more American troops into Baghdad aren't counting one of the main killers of Iraqi civilians.

Car bombs and other explosive devices have killed thousands of Iraqis in the past three years, but the administration doesn't include them in the casualty counts it has been citing as evidence that the surge of additional U.S. forces is beginning to defuse tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

President Bush explained why in a television interview on Tuesday. "If the standard of success is no car bombings or suicide bombings, we have just handed those who commit suicide bombings a huge victory," he told TV interviewer Charlie Rose.

In other words, those bombs don't count cuz they are unfair cuz they give the evildoers an advantage. And Georgie always plays fair:

You know he's just dying to get in one

And drive it at the press corps...

Remember this one?

He thought it was so funny....

Laughing as he almost runs the press over

With this enormous Caterpillar tractor: (link via Mock Paper Scissors)

Does President Bush have it in for the press corps? Touring a Caterpillar factory in Peoria, Ill., the Commander in Chief got behind the wheel of a giant tractor and played chicken with a few wayward reporters. Wearing a pair of stylish safety glasses--at least more stylish than most safety glasses--Bush got a mini-tour of the factory before delivering remarks on the economy. "I would suggest moving back," Bush said as he climbed into the cab of a massive D-10 tractor. "I'm about to crank this sucker up." As the engine roared to life, White House staffers tried to steer the press corps to safety, but when the tractor lurched forward, they too were forced to scramble for safety."Get out of the way!" a news photographer yelled. "I think he might run us over!" said another. White House aides tried to herd the reporters the right way without getting run over themselves. Even the Secret Service got involved, as one agent began yelling at reporters to get clear of the tractor. Watching the chaos below, Bush looked out the tractor's window and laughed, steering the massive machine into the spot where most of the press corps had been positioned. The episode lasted about a minute, and Bush was still laughing when he pulled to a stop. He gave reporters a thumbs-up. "If you've never driven a D-10, it's the coolest experience," Bush said afterward. Yeah, almost as much fun as seeing your life flash before your eyes.

Kinda like blowing up frogs and demanding do-overs, huh, Georgie?
I'm reminded of this post:

"First and foremost, George W. Bush is a Narcissistic Personality Disorder. What this means, mostly, is that he has rather desperate insecurities about himself, and compensates by constructing a grandiose self-image. Most of his relationships are either mirroring relationships--people who flatter him and reinforce his grandiosity--or idealized self-objects--people that he himself thinks alot of, and hence feels flattered by his association. Some likely perform both functions. Hence his weakness for sycophants like Harriet Miers, and powerful personalities like Dick Cheney.

And this post:

"...Gail Sheehy wrote an article for the {Vanity Fair} magazine about W. that made this point: “Even if he loses, his friends say, he doesn’t lose. He’ll just change the score, or change the rules, or make his opponent play until he can beat him.”"

The neocons better hide their blue blankies

If they want to look like tough guys.

Glenn Greenwald takes them apart.

But the neoconservative attachment to and dependence upon their parents goes beyond mere exploitation of one's parents or other relatives for political career gain. So many leading neoconservatives end up following in their parents' footsteps -- remaining attached to them and becoming carbon copies of them -- to an extent that is quite unusual and clearly significant. To have the top level of an entire highly influential political movement be so dependent upon their parents for their careers and worldview seems, at the very least, to be worth some commentary.

[snip]

Many, perhaps most, of the leading neoconservatives don't seem to have arrived at their political worldview through much or any intellectual struggle or independence, nor do they seem to have had to make their own way in building their careers. Quite the opposite -- they seem to have been bred into their lives, and they just marched, like good little boys, along with their parents' views and plans for them. And they not only willingly accepted, but seem to have eagerly sought, all sorts of help from their parents in building their careers, all in exchange for fully embracing their parents' views almost without deviation.

It's rather ironic (and almost certainly not coincidental) that neoconservatives love, more than anything else, to strut around spewing tough-guy Chruchill warrior rhetoric and to sermonize on the virtues of self-reliance -- and are characterized in their political views by a total lack of empathy for the plight of others -- even though they have chosen extremely coddled, privileged lives feeding off the accomplishments and directives of their mothers and fathers. And quite significantly, the political Leader they found to represent their belief system, to personify their contrived warrior pose, and to implement their radical agenda -- George W. Bush -- is the most extreme version of that coddled and father-dependent personality one can find.

The embrace by the President of the "surge" plan of Kagan and Kristol -- father-controlled figures all -- is really nothing more noble or elevated than a petulant refusal to accept the consequences of their failure and responsibility for their actions. It's a foot-stomping exercise, whereby they feel entitled to satisfaction and personal vindication, and that personal desire trumps everything -- hence, their eagerness to ignore the damage they have wrought by inventing new war theories and fantasies to continue their wars that don't affect them in any way, for which only other people pay a price. It's the behavior of people who have developed an extreme sense of personal entitlement by virtue of allowing, even urging, their fathers and mothers to shape their lives far beyond what is normal or healthy.

Which makes me refer again to this post about George W. Bush and his Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

Ever wonder what Bush intended with Merkel's unwanted backrub?

Via Morse, and profmarcus, paul minot at Daily Kos discusses Bush and his obvious problems:

"First and foremost, George W. Bush is a Narcissistic Personality Disorder. What this means, mostly, is that he has rather desperate insecurities about himself, and compensates by constructing a grandiose self-image. Most of his relationships are either mirroring relationships--people who flatter him and reinforce his grandiosity--or idealized self-objects--people that he himself thinks alot of, and hence feels flattered by his association. Some likely perform both functions. Hence his weakness for sycophants like Harriet Miers, and powerful personalities like Dick Cheney.

Even as a narcissist, Bush knows he isn't a great intellect, and compensates by dismissing the value of intellect altogether. Hence his disses of Gore's bookishness, and any other intellectual that isn't kissing his ass. Bush knows that his greatest personal strength is projecting personal affability, and tries to utilize it even in the most inappropriate settings. That's why he gives impromptu backrubs to the German Chancellor in a diploamtic meeting--he's insecure intellectually, and tries to make everyone into a "buddy" so he can feel more secure. (Pathetic, isn't it?)

The most disturbing aspect about narcissists, however, is their pathological inability to empathize with others, with the exception of those who either mirror them, or whom they idealize. Hence Bush's horrifying insensitivity to the Katrina victims, his callous jokes when visiting greivously injured soldiers, and numerous other instances. The guy simply has no capacity to feel for others in that way. When LBJ was losing Vietnam, he developed a haunted expression that anybody could recognize as indicative of underlying anguish. For all his faults, you just knew he was losing sleep over it. By the same token, we know just as well that Bush isn't losing any sleep over dead American soldiers, to say nothing of dead Iraqis. He didn't exhibit any sign of significant concern until his own political popularity was sliding--because THAT'S something he can definitely feel.

[snip]

"Bush knows that things aren't going his way in Iraq, and he knows that it is damaging him politically. He also sees that it is likely to get worse no matter what he does, and in fact it may be a lost cause. However, he recognizes that if he follows the recommendations of the ISG, that Iraq will almost certainly evolve into a puppet state of Iran, and given his treatment of Iran he will completely lose control of the situation--and he will be politically discredited for this outcome. The ONLY chance that he has to avoid this political disaster, and save his political skin, is to hope against hope for "victory" in Iraq. Advancing the "surge" idea offers Bush two political advantages over following the ISG recommendations. One is that if it is implemented, maybe, just maybe, he can pull out some sort of nominal "victory" out of the situation. The chances are exceedingly slim, granted, but slim is better to him than the alternative (none). Alternately, if the "surge" is politically rejected, he gains some political cover, so when things inevitably go to shit, he can say "I told you so" and blame the "surrender monkeys" for the outcome. Most people probably won't buy it, but some (his core base) will.

Now, I know what many of you are thinking--is George Bush willing to risk the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands more American soldiers, on an outside chance to save his political skin, in a half-baked plan that even he knows probably won't work at all? Damn straight he is. Because George Bush is that narcissistic, that desperate, and yes, that sociopathic as well."

Update: 12/23 fixed quote.