Posted on 08/05/2014 5:31:22 AM PDT by Kaslin
I'm not a psychologist, but I'm intrigued by the work of those who study the mind and behavior, especially when it accurately explains why people do what they do -- or can't do what they would like or are expected to do. Case in point, President Barack Obama.
In 2008, I wrote a column titled "A Personality Profile of Barack Obama's Leadership." The warnings of mental health professionals then have come to fruition today. And other brain and personality experts, many of whom cast their votes for Obama at the ballot box, have since learned the nation appointed a man to the highest position in the land who cannot lead in or out of crisis, especially in the face of opposing forces.
Six years ago, I pointed to the research of the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, at St. John's University and the College of St. Benedict, which did a professional personality profile "for anticipating Obama's likely leadership style as chief executive, thereby providing a basis for inferring the character and tenor of a prospective Obama presidency." The study concluded: "The combination of Ambitious, Accommodating, and Outgoing patterns in Obama's profile suggests a confident conciliator personality composite. Leaders with this personality prototype, though self-assured and ambitious, are characteristically gracious, considerate, and benevolent. They are energetic, charming, and agreeable, with a special knack for settling differences, favoring mediation and compromise over force or coercion as a strategy for resolving conflict. They are driven primarily by a need for achievement and also have strong affiliation needs, but a low need for power."
Samuel Barondes, a leading psychiatrist and neuroscientist, explained in his 2011 expose of President Obama: "Obama's temperament, his combination of dispositional traits, is emphasized in psychiatrist Nassir Ghaemi's essay 'Maybe Washington Needs More Craziness.' As Ghaemi puts it in his opening sentence 'If President Obama stumbled in his handling of the debt crisis, in my view, it was because he is too normal: too rational, willing to compromise, a rule follower, conventionally wise.' And he then goes on to contrast Obama with Franklin D. Roosevelt whose greater success he attributes, in part, to Roosevelt's 'hyperthymic temperament ... such people have very high energy levels, and are extroverted, talkative, sociable, humorous, charismatic, productive, libidinous, and workaholic.' To Ghaemi the more moderate temperament of 'no-drama-Obama' keeps him from confronting his adversaries in the manner of FDR.
"Drew Westen, a psychologist with interests in both personality and politics, emphasizes Obama's sense of identity. In 'What Happened to Obama's Passion?' he raises the possibility that Obama hasn't figured himself out yet: 'Perhaps those of us who were so enthralled with the magnificent story he told in "Dreams From My Father" appended a chapter at the end that wasn't there -- the chapter in which he resolves his identity and comes to know who he is and what he believes in.' Later Westen suggests that Obama is conflicted about his identity and 'ran for president on two contradictory platforms: as a reformer who would clean up the system, and as a unity candidate who would transcend the lines of red and blue.' But in the end he concludes that Obama is really most comfortable 'consistently choosing the message of bipartisanship over the message of confrontation.' This, then, appears to be an essential element of what Obama stands for."
Obama's glaring and greatest weakness -- namely his inability to make hard decisions in crisis and lead opposing forces through or out of them -- has cost America on every front. It has further divided Washington and our nation and jeopardized our standing with the global community and even our allies, leaving us in a much more unstable place in our world.
Though most people in 2008 seemed to laud Obama's personality as a needed polar opposite to George W. Bush's, especially in an era that required the repairing of international relations, I posed to readers that Obama's personality pendulum swing was way too far to the other side. An "accommodating-agreeable-conciliator-favoring compromise" type of personality might be good for closing a used car deal when all parties are amicable, but it's not the one that can lead our country through war, divisive crises or emergency conflicts, which often require unpopular actions.
Obama's voting record as an Illinois state senator showed his inability to take a stand in a crisis. His own Democratic colleagues couldn't understand why he had voted "present" (instead of "yes" or "no") 129 times, including a number of noncommittal tallies on gun rights and abortion.
Gone are the days when strong leaders and personalities, such as House Speaker Tip O'Neill and President Ronald Reagan, reached across the aisle in order to lead our country. En vogue today are pitching polarities, demonizing your opposition and casting blame to justify one's own divisiveness and inability to bridge gaps.
But what we need now more than ever are leaders like those three decades ago who knew how to agree to disagree agreeably, confronted tough challenges together and advanced our nation forward despite their differences. That is particularly true of our president.
Hey, he did say he was flexible. More like jello. I wonder about his attitude in playing golf. Does he play to win or escape?
After checking to make sure it was actually THE Chuck Norris who wrote the piece I thought that it would be good if O took a course at the Hoover Institute under General Mattis who is writing a book on leadership and strategy. Mattis will at least give O a new vocabulary. Don’t know if Mattis’ view of leadership would include a section on asking Jarrett if it is okay to shoot.
More likely to escape. (responsibilities)
I think we agree that the analysts who cite incompetence rather than ideology and character flaw as the inciting fact explaining the Obama administration miss the mark and dangerously mislead the people. It is unfortunate because it leaves open the siren of the left, this time we have the right socialist to make it all better, in fact, we have a new Messiah to do socialism right this time.
This time the Democrats got the Messiah they wanted, they got the ideologue that satisfied their base, they had their Congress firmly under control, the media would have handed them the world merely for the asking, history had broken the economy for them, and Obama entered office with 68% support or better. Yet it has all turned to ashes in reality if not in the minds of the faithful.
You point out how difficult it is to get a message of reality out past the media barrier and with Barack Obama it has been doubly difficult because he has been so firmly protected by his race. After the staggering election losses of 2010, only an ideologue would have stood by policies that it cost him the House of Representatives as Obama did. Clinton, also a narcissist but not an ideologue, reversed course, at least superficially so. That the country would reelect Obama in 2012 demonstrates the truth of your observation of the difficulty in carrying the message against the media as well as the ideological fervor which animated Obama and his faithful.
Obama is dangerous because he is an ideologue. Such a man is not likely to get us into a war through inadvertence but through dedication to a calculus we do not share but which motivates him at his core.
The informed reader capable of dispassionately analyzing Barack Obama should see stunning overlaps between the list belos and Barack Obama’s background, personality, and behavior.
Factor 1: Personality “Aggressive narcissism”
Glibness/superficial charm
Grandiose sense of self-worth
Pathological lying
Cunning/manipulative
Lack of remorse or guilt
Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)
Callousness; lack of empathy
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Factor 2: Case history “Socially deviant lifestyle”.
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
Parasitic lifestyle
Poor behavioral control
Lack of realistic long-term goals
Impulsivity
Irresponsibility
Juvenile delinquency
Early behavior problems
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.
