Prof. Althouse is defending Hillary's right to advance arguments that favor her cause with respect to the questions around the Michigan delegates to the Democratic convention. The reliably calm and thoughtful Andrew Sullivan is calling Ms. Clinton a "sociopath".
Sully's most amusing point is also his first:
How do you respond to a sociopath like this? She agreed that Michigan and Florida should be punished for moving up their primaries. Obama took his name off the ballot in deference to their agreement and the rules of the party.
Oh, poor, noble, long-suffering Obama, to be treated so badly after acting so well. Nonsense. Go back to the coverage at the time that some (but not all) of the Democrats took their names of the Michigan ballot, and it is clear to anyone who cares to reflect on it that Obama took his name off the Michigan ballot in pursuit of his own poiltical advantage.
How so? First, Obama was conceding a state he had no chance of winning:
Four Democratic presidential candidates announced yesterday that they would not take part in the Democratic primary in Michigan, all but ceding the contest in that major state to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who is ahead in the polls there and is staying in.
Second, it was a way to ingratiate himself to the good people of the great states of Iowa and New Hampshire:
The Democrats have been under tremendous pressure from Iowa and New Hampshire not to campaign in Michigan and Florida, which have violated party rules by moving up their primaries -- Michigan to Jan. 15 and Florida to Jan. 29 -- ahead of Feb. 5, when many other populous states vote.
Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as South Carolina and Nevada, are furious with Michigan and Florida, saying those two states have forced them to move their own voting dates up even earlier because they want to maintain their primacy in the nominating contests.
Mightn't Obama have believed that conceding Michigan later was worth the possibility of winning Iowa and/or New Hampshire right out of the box?
Finally, because four guys with no chance in Michigan dropped out, it diminished the impact of a probable Hillary victory there:
Debbie Dingell, a major Clinton backer in Michigan, said on MSNBC that she was ''furious'' with the other candidates. Their absence will diminish Michigan's importance in the primary process and probably deny her state attention from the candidates and the news media. Michigan has the nation's highest unemployment rate and has been eager for a spotlight on its woes.
Andrew really should re-connect with the explanatory power of self-interest, and not just as it relates to Hillary.
So is Bill, and Obama. Certainly Kerry and probably Gore, probably not Carter. Not Dukakis, neither Bush, Mondale, Reagan or Dole. Not McCain.
=========================
Posted by: kim | May 24, 2008 at 09:50 PM
Ann Althouse has apologized to Andrew for making fun of his claim that Hillary's a sociopath. Apparently she's come to share his opinion. (I do, too. But then Kim's list would be mine.)
Posted by: clarice | May 24, 2008 at 10:04 PM
To be clear, she's basing it not on the Michigan business but on Hillary's wacky statement on the RFK assassination.
Posted by: clarice | May 24, 2008 at 10:19 PM
These meterorites--where do they come from?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 24, 2008 at 10:45 PM
"reliably calm and thoughtful Andrew Sullivan"
What's the emoticon for irony? You must have forgotten to use it.
If you ever heard Hugh Hewitt's interview of Sullivan about Sullivan's book about J. Christ, you'd wonder how this guy makes it past his rice crispies every morning.
(I tried finding a link for the interview but ten minute with google just turned up dead links.)
Posted by: Douglas Fletcher | May 24, 2008 at 10:46 PM
In this light, a fiction review ofsomething called "Rubicon" by Lawrence Altman, and no it's not the NY Times health reporter(referenced in the West Wing). First off, the blurb is by Gary Hart, who is known cites for making poor Roman Empire allusions
in the Huffington Post;to the nascent American Empire. That and articles like the one cited by Capt. Jason Steenwyck, where he suggested "AQ in Iraq" wasn't the same
as AQ. His last attempt at actual fiction, was a set of novels hw wrote under a pseudonym; John BlackThorne, which he suggested a former intelligence ordiplomatic
source about Post Castro Cuba; where the evil Americans are thwarted by compassionate
former Castro official turned politico who saves the country from American style democracy. Altman, is supposedly a former
congressional staffer, who seems to have absorbed all the BDS paranoia left over from the Bourne series, the Steve Alten truther novel "Shell Game" and the Manchurian Candidate remake. The main character a Senator by the name of Robert Hart, whose CIA father died mysteriously shortly before the whole 9/11 period. Hart, the 'white Barack Obama, '84 series, against Mondale, the Hillary predecessor sounds much like he sounded in the mid 80s when he sounded paranoid claxons to Sydney
Blumenthal, whose one time alliance with Phillip Agee makes me question his judgement. about the CIA and CREEP type effort by the White House against the candidate. Hart, the character, after choosing not to run for Senate is apprised by a German publisher friend of his father, that he was murdered; presumedly by the PNAC neocons for offering proof of Saddam's
compliance with WMD, or something to that effect. He also puts him in contact with another spy associate figure of his father; in Hamburg, who warns of a assasination plot
against a presidential candidate. He returns home, chats up the CIA deputy director; who dies in an accident. Before long, suicide bombers have taken out the leading Democrat nominee and his runner up
as well as the Republican nominee(who has a profile suspiciously like McCain;) yet he doesn't blame AQ; but this so called
"Rubicon" faction. who he later discovers through a former Gitmo detainee (shades of Capt. Yee)have been training said detainees to target political candidates; to further the incumbents:'rule by fear'. In the end the author doesn't implicate He who Shall Not be Named; but a former staffer, who made an old 9/11 contingency plan operational. This is an elaboration of what Lessing, that Huff Po poster painting Blackwater as triggerman, that aussie Phillip Adams, have sketched out in multiple posts.
Posted by: narciso | May 24, 2008 at 10:57 PM
I stopped reading Sullivan after I realized he simply posed as a conservative/libertarian to add a false impact to his decision to back Kerry. So, I’m uninformed about his rants. Nevertheless, using my very modest abilities, I pulled up the remainder of his quote:
“The way she is losing is so ugly, so feckless, so riddled with narcissism and pathology that this kind of person should never be a heartbeat away from the presidency.”
Obama has no history of acting on any principle except the one that advances him. I thought that the Sully quote worked quite well to describe Obama. Projection? Pathological?
I
Posted by: MarkO | May 24, 2008 at 11:06 PM
Guess what? For those idealists out there, only skilled politicians make great presidents. So there is no mistake in my meaning, let's go down the list. Consider these indisputably great presidents (based on results on their watch occasioned by their decisions):
Washington
Jackson
Lincoln
Roosevelt I
Roosevelt II
Reagan
And the near greats (i.e. better than "good" using the same criteria):
Adams I
Jefferson
Wilson
Truman
Eisenhower
Any one out there want to tell me why any of these men were not skilled politicians?
Let's not discount the talent for political life in our politicians.
BTW, I think McCain is the best politician in the bunch.
There, I said it. I am now ready to duck.
(Hit: The Bombay Martini was great tonight. Cabernet olives made the difference.)
Posted by: vnjagvet | May 24, 2008 at 11:13 PM
Andrew Sullivan has been a lying, intellectually dishonest sack of crap as long as I've known the little shit.
Posted by: L. Wieseltier | May 24, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Well, I haven't watched him for long, but before the Kerry fandango I thought him reasonably honest.
Posted by: clarice | May 24, 2008 at 11:40 PM
FYI, the Sullivan vs. Hewitt transcript can be found here: Link.
Very testy.
Posted by: SteveMG | May 24, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Obama took his name off the ballot in deference to their agreement and the rules of the party.
Posted by: he b | May 24, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Obama has no history of acting on any principle except the one that advances him. -MarkO
Great observation MarkO.
Obama's web site (barackobama.com) is full of carp that the media refuses to ask him to defend or explain. Here's an example:
Barack Obama's Plan
Ending the War in Iraq
Humanitarian Initiative: Obama believes that America has a moral and security responsibility to confront Iraq's humanitarian crisis – two million Iraqis are refugees; two million more are displaced inside their own country. Obama will form an international working group to address this crisis. He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find a safe-haven.
That is just a taste. If we don't ask any questions, he can advance himself anyway he wants.
Posted by: Ann | May 25, 2008 at 12:16 AM
This is just Sullivan being his usual excitable self.
What Hillary really did was go back on her word. Its not sociopathy, or if it is, half of washington is filled with sociopaths. and Sullivan is the biggest one, who turned against everything bush stood for because Bush stood against gay marriage. Give me a break.
Posted by: A.W. | May 25, 2008 at 12:22 AM
I posted on this a couple of days ago. Sullivan's lost it over Obama.
Posted by: Americaneocon | May 25, 2008 at 12:47 AM
I never thought I would defend Hillary but her point about Bobby Kennedy was absolutely correct. It WAS June and the race was still going strong. She wasn't commenting about how glad she was that he was assassinated. After all, anyone who would wiretap MLK is a champeen Democrat, a Democrat all Democrats would love to emulate. She was commenting on the fact that except for the Pundits, it's still an open race.
Obama has won in mostly red states where he will lose in November. Hillary has won in the states that a Donk must win to have any chance at all.
I don't care who wins, three Democrats running, all three of them could have their legs grow together for all of me, Hillary, Obama and McCain.
Posted by: Peter | May 25, 2008 at 01:07 AM
Humanitarian Initiative: Obama believes that America has a moral and security responsibility to confront Iraq's humanitarian crisis – two million Iraqis are refugees; two million more are displaced inside their own country. Obama will form an international working group to address this crisis. He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find a safe-haven.
And they're going to do it all without any military security. riiigggghhhhhtttttt.
Not to mention, is anybody gonna ask him about all the people Saddam displaced internally to keep power?
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 25, 2008 at 02:10 AM
I am starting to get pissed for Hillary more and more. Why are they demanding she quit the race? It's so close, why should she quit?
As to her wanting FL and MI to count, I don't know why everyone is calling her pathological over it. It wasn't her idea to begin with and everyone went along with it back then because no one could predict that it would matter. Half the time the primary is over on the first week. But now that it is so close, why shouldn't the people of those states have their say, if it can make a difference. The important thing is making sure the people are heard, not that some silly rules are followed. It's only reasonable of her to say so. If it is still close after the remaining states play out, I think it is only fair that they should take a revote.
And I agree with TM's point that Obama took his name off the vote in MI on his own volition- hardly an inclusive gesture from him to the people of MI. He knew it would be to his advantage - but he's not self-serving right? I admire Hillary and her guts in this case.
Posted by: sylvia | May 25, 2008 at 02:17 AM
But speaking of sociopaths or psychopaths- I find degrees of that type of personality to be very common among people, in my own observation. Luckily most of them don't possess strong violent streaks or we'd have a lot more serial killers out there.
Any time someone lies a lot, and does it to manipulate people, and does it in a way that they seem to enjoy it, like they enjoy "getting away with it", that to me is a redlight, like - ah hah! psychopath. Those same people are also particulary adept at fooling the group, where lots of people think, "gee what a nice person." Work and relationships are the best places to see them reveal their true colors. And there are lots of them. I would guess one out of 10.
Posted by: sylvia | May 25, 2008 at 02:30 AM
So, to argue that the toil and moil of this extended primary battle won't divide the party irreparably, Clinton cites the Democrats' experience in 1968.
Ut si.
Posted by: Elliott | May 25, 2008 at 05:02 AM
was that really leon wieseltier of the new republic who posted at http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2008/05/hillarys-a-soci.html#comment-116291804
Posted by: non | May 25, 2008 at 05:39 AM
Sociopath isn't quite right,the term over controlled psychopath fits many politicians.Indeed many business men,lawyers and surgeons.
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 06:28 AM
I'm speechless, so I'll simply say Good Morning.
Posted by: Jane | May 25, 2008 at 07:17 AM
Morning,Jane..PUK there's something unnatural about such wit so early in the morning.
Posted by: clarice | May 25, 2008 at 07:56 AM
Clarice,
It's lunch times here ,but is probably something to do with the "top grade,strength four Arabica coffee,grown on co-operatives on the foothill of the Andes,in the Huila region of Western Columbia" Sweetened with "natural dark Muscavado unrefined cane sugar",along with black cherry jam on fresh crusty bread.
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 08:16 AM
PUK,
Unless you are reading that off the label, that recall is just wrong.
Posted by: Jane | May 25, 2008 at 08:21 AM
Well, you could share it PUK. Now there's a topic for a good feature article--the florid description of foods on labels and menus.
Posted by: clarice | May 25, 2008 at 08:26 AM
Jane,
Yes,straight off the label.I neglected to mention Marks & Spencers Freetrade.
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 08:30 AM
I forgot to mention,you need a pint mug,but if I'm sharing I'll get out the silver coffee pot.
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 08:35 AM
Great. I have the pint mug already and warm..I'll add some yummy basque cheese to the feast.
Posted by: clarice | May 25, 2008 at 08:38 AM
The approximate evolution of the terminology has been from psychopath through sociopath to, presently, borderline personality. The condition is unamenable to treatment, as is that of the child lovers. A characteristic cry is "I hate you, don't leave me"
==================================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 09:03 AM
Why not start using menu descriptions for candidates,
Obama is obviously in the "Dew fresh,dawn picked mushroom", category.
Hillary,"Seasoned Mutton marinated in wine with a tangy cheese sauce"
McCain,obviously the "Well aged port and mature Stilton".
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 09:23 AM
McCain is Colonel Tigh with side of Six.
Well that's not actually a dish, but Six is.
Posted by: boris | May 25, 2008 at 09:27 AM
Sunday brunch coming up here: cornbread custard with maple syrup, smoked sausages, grapefruit & arugula (!) salad w. mustard vinaigrette. Dressing it up in florid language would be a real challenge -- I'd settle for making it sound like something you'd actually look forward to eating, but it's serious comfort food. Then there's the pitcher of fresh squeezed orange juice....
Monsanto once ran an amusingly pointed ad with a photo of a perfect orange and a list of its chemical "ingredients" that read like it would kill you on the spot.
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 25, 2008 at 09:29 AM
When I think of Marks and Spencer I think: underwear.
JMH that sounds fabulous. We are doing Memorial Day the old fashion way - hamburgers, keilbasa, sausage, chicken and my famous red bliss potato salad with garlic and mint.
Posted by: Jane | May 25, 2008 at 09:41 AM
More homes are wrecked by the daily menu than by the 'Other Woman'.
H/t Ford Naylor.
=============
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 09:44 AM
"The approximate evolution of the terminology has been from psychopath through sociopath to, presently, borderline personality."
Kim, I think you mean antisocial personality.
Posted by: JB | May 25, 2008 at 10:05 AM
"When I think of Marks and Spencer I think: underwear."
Just doesn't cut it as a breakfast drink.
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 10:09 AM
HEH!
Fresh caught leaping trout from the wild river which flows past our front door with home churned sweet butter ,sliced crisped almonds and a hint of parsley hache, served with golden yukon potato fingerlings (plucked by gorgeous, stooping virgins from our own verdant fields)then baked in our clay oven and buttered . Nested alongside them are haricot verte steamed with a touch of cumin along with Ethiopian sea salt both of which are daily transported to our establishment by Bactrian camels of impeccable pedigree .
Posted by: clarice | May 25, 2008 at 10:11 AM
Mornin', Jane. Mornin', all.
Saw a fascinating discussion--I think it was the Fox All-Stars--on what might constitute an effort by Hillary to "force" her way onto the ticket. She says, "announce me as your VP right now and I withdraw immediately, and you and I do the unity/victory dance and trash McCain together. Otherwise, I keep on trashing you right up to and including the convention, where my supporters will place my name in nomination for vice president."
(Nobody said "nah--she'd never stoop that low.") Problem with that scenario is, I can't see her doing it if Obama names his running mate in advance of the convention.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 25, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Apes are serving me grapes on ivory utensils.
============================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Thanks, JB, the most acute ape just sotto vocalized that I approximate the two, regularly, and obnoxiously.
=======================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 10:26 AM
I have taken out the Vermeil and nacre,French Empire cheese knives circa 1825 in readiness for the cheese.
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 10:35 AM
"nah--she'd never stoop that low."
I read that as,"She'd never stoop that high".
Posted by: PeterUK | May 25, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Later. The pool calls and then company. Happy Memorial Day all.
Posted by: clarice | May 25, 2008 at 10:41 AM
Bon appetit et memoire.
================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 10:52 AM
Jane: Great potato salad is a real achievement! It's hard to come by and hard to beat it when you do.
Clarice: LOL! My Sunday Brunch clearly needs claricification. When I sell my house, will you write me up a description for the real estate page?
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 25, 2008 at 10:55 AM
I have never met a potato salad I didn't like; nor a meatloaf.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Donald Boudreaux has some fun explaining to Hillary the logic of her sexism complaint:
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | May 25, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Say, PUK, without revealing your location, how far are you from Clapham or Battersea in London, where my sister lives?
My brunch was fresh crusty bread and a cup of fresh-brewed, loose tea from Harney's with milk, sunshine, and a view of the placid lake out the window. Oh, and you guys, too.
Posted by: sbw | May 25, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Who is Andrew Sullivan?
Posted by: PrestoPundit | May 25, 2008 at 01:09 PM
Sorry, PP, Andrew was not worth looking up the bio for.
Posted by: sbw | May 25, 2008 at 01:31 PM
Obama has no history of acting on any principle except the one that advances him.
Bullshit. Absolute and profoundly stupid bullshit.
So is Bill, and Obama. Certainly Kerry and probably Gore, probably not Carter. Not Dukakis, neither Bush, Mondale, Reagan or Dole. Not McCain.
Like Sullivan and Althouse, you are too stupid to understand anything you write.
Posted by: Mike | May 25, 2008 at 02:10 PM
He said 'jump'!
And they said 'how high'?
And then he said 'just kidding'.
Does anyone else see the joke he played on the press? Soon he will be known as the boy who cried wolf.
Posted by: EyesOpens | May 25, 2008 at 02:15 PM
In re: the trenchant observations of one calling himself Mike.
From this great mind we learn that there is not merely “bullshit,” but “absolute” and even “profoundly stupid bullshit.” One cannot find this level of enlightenment even on, say, MSNBC. We also learn, if we apply ourselves, that this is an all-purpose retort, vying with “same to you,” as the ultimate in argument ending exchanges. I, for one, am not longer looking for old-fashioned evidence to support an argument. Now I understand there is no need for anything except some form of bullshit to support Obama.
Moreover, Mike deigns to inform us that some writers are “too stupid to understand anything [they] write.” These writers, obviously possessed by demons, have no idea what they have written and no comprehension of its meaning. Close reading reveals the clever cross-reference by using the word “stupid,” which applies not only to bullshit, but to certain writers.
Let us now join with this brilliant observer and worship the Young Prince. Remember, it’s not racist to vote for Obama because he is black. It is praiseworthy.
Posted by: MarkO | May 25, 2008 at 04:43 PM
Well, so far, by all evidence, what you write, Mike, is no shittier than a fart.
======================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Didn't Michigan and Florida move their primaries up precisely to give Hillary an early lead?
Posted by: Molon Labe | May 25, 2008 at 07:09 PM
This may not be a label out of DSM-IV, but it's as descriptive of BHO as any other:
"Jive turkey was a derogatory slang word in African American Vernacular English, used to refer to someone who was unreliable, made empty promises, or who was full of bluster."
Of course, I'd probably be accused of racism for using it, yet which part of that does not apply?
Posted by: JB | May 25, 2008 at 07:33 PM
Not racist, JB, it's been around long enough to enter the mainstream. And in my DSM, it's a subset of the antisocial borderline.
======================
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 07:59 PM
Hillary’s speech sounds psychotic and hollow not simply because it’s overt pandering for a chance to stay relevant, but because she’s blaming an enemy who doesn’t exist. (well, the enemy exists, and it is she) Invoking the Florida debacle of 2000 is tantamount to blaming President Bush for the DNC’s decision to ostracize Florida in 2008. It’s nutty. Although I suppose it does play to the generally held theory that Karl Rove controls the universe.She's nuts, all right, but not for that reason
Posted by: Marvino Guardino | May 25, 2008 at 09:52 PM
I'm getting the sense that people are rejecting Andrew's point because they object to his use of the word "sociopath." Surely that is a bit of hyperbole, you are probably saying to yourself.
Sadly, the word is pretty much on the mark. The layman's definition of the word now carries many connotations that it does not carry in the world of clinical psychiatry. I should also point out that "sociopath" isn't really used much anymore; instead, it is said that the patient is suffering from "anti-social behavior syndrome."
Simply put, the diagnosis is made when one engages in behavior that is abusive or damaging to others, without any regard for the feelings or welfare of others. These people often lie compulsively, steal, get in fights, etc. Also (and this is very important), the anti-social patient sees himself as totally normal; it's everyone ELSE that has the problem.
Operating under the true definition of sociopath, then, Andrew Sullivan's point is well taken.
Posted by: Jim | May 25, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Ooh, nice link, Marvino.
==============
Posted by: kim | May 25, 2008 at 10:10 PM
She's quite insane.
Question - why is it that everyone says she appologized for the RFK assasination reference? She didn't, she only expressed regret that people misunderstood her and took the comment our of context. I tried that once - after a heated argument I told my wife (Melinda - we'll see you a week from Friday by the way) that I was sorry she was upset. She tried to hit me!
Posted by: barry | May 25, 2008 at 10:56 PM
Sullivan is ridiculous. He just has a big crush on Obama. He will do anything to get Obama to whisper sweet nothings in his ear.
Posted by: thecandypoem | May 26, 2008 at 01:33 AM
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Hillary Clinton is running for president.
Posted by: Kudzu Fire | May 26, 2008 at 03:40 PM
The only way to truly honor Michigan's vote is to look at exit polls, because Obama did the right thing and removed his name from the ballot.
Exit polls show that if Obama had been on the ticket, Clinton would have received about 271,000 votes, and Obama 206,000 votes. Put these into the vote totals, and Obama still leads the popular vote.
By ignoring these figures, Clinton is becoming numbingly akin to George Bush in her stance of boldly stating what she wants people to think repeatedly, loudly, and without any wavering, so that her preferred positions can be echoed round the media, and have a chance of becoming acceptable premises.
Even more akin to George Bush is the fact that Clinton's statements only make sense when you figure in complicated strategic calculations or hidden agendas. Otherwise you have to think she's deluded.
As we see from McClellan's new book, the answer in George Bush's case is that he was deluded. Maybe this is the answer for Hilary Clinton as well. Maybe we should call it as it looks.
Posted by: elp | May 29, 2008 at 07:03 AM
Clinton grade ambition is delusory.
=====================
Posted by: kim | May 29, 2008 at 08:07 AM