Why Bill Really Wants Hillary To
Lose
Joan Swirsky
"Is it possible that Bill Clinton secretly or unconsciously is
sabotaging Hillary's campaign?" asks Thomas Lifson in The American Thinker,
adding that after all, nobody "has access to the private thoughts of the man…"
This is true, but private thoughts are not the criteria by
which people are, or should be, judged. The only empirical evidence we have of
the interior life of any person lies solely in his or her behavior. And
when it comes to behavior, Bill Clinton has told us for decades, and is telling
us now, everything we need to know about him and his motives.
Without repeating many of the issues I’ve already written about
the former president – his misguided policies, which compromised our national
security; his cringe-producing, lip-biting public appearances; and the
treasonous speeches he’s given against the current administration, on foreign
soil and often to our enemies – my intention here is to affirm Lifson’s
suspicions.
During his eight years as president, Bubba told us repeatedly
that:
· Lying to the American public was perfectly okay
· Serial adultery was none of our business
· Deeply embarrassing his wife, child, mother, and country was
"a private matter"
· Placing his entire cabinet in the untenable role of
supporting his lies was his imperial privilege
· Impeachment for perjury and being disbarred were mistakes of
our country’s century’s-old legal system
· The few journalists who wrote about his innumerable flaws and
failed policies were "unfair"
· Violating the sanctity of the White House’s Oval Office with
Monica Lewinsky was okay
· Misusing the Lincoln bedroom for campaign cash was okay
· Selling our most precious national-security secrets to our
enemies for cold hard campaign cash was also perfectly okay
All of these behaviors benefited one person and one person only
– Bill Clinton. Who acts like this? Who thinks like this? What kind of person
believes that anything he does or says or wants or needs trumps common decency
and, in Clinton’s case, national security?
Narcissists do! And malignant narcissists like Bill Clinton
lead the pack.
What Is Narcissism?
According to the DSM-IV, the bible of the American Psychiatric
Association, narcissism is described as both a personality and character
disorder, with the following symptoms:
· A pervasive pattern of grandiosity
· Self-centered, egotistical behavior
· An exaggerated sense of self-importance
· A lack of empathy
· Exploitative interpersonal relationships
· Taking advantage of others to achieve one’s own ends
· The need to be seen as special and unique and the expectation
of special treatment
· The need for excessive admiration, adulation, attention,
affirmation, deference, and praise
· The impulse to strike out in rage
· A sense of entitlement
· Lying without conscience
· Always blaming others
· Ignoring or denigrating the accomplishments of others
· Envy of others
Over the course of Clinton’s lengthy political career, hundreds
if not thousands of authors, journalists, commentators worldwide, and also
victims, have documented or testified under oath to all of the above, leaving no
doubt about the ex-president’s voracious appetite for attention, insatiable lust
for the spotlight, spectacular exploitation of everyone from his family to his
underlings to his girlfriends, as well as his liberal replacement of facts and
truth for whopper lies, to cite just a few examples,
But Clinton is no ordinary narcissist. I believe he is of the
malignant variety, which explains why he is working to make his wife president
while, at the same time, insuring that she never ascends to that
position.
What Is Malignant Narcissism?
This term was coined by psychoanalyst Otto Kernberg about 35
years ago and adds to the above list paranoia, a pervasive disregard for others,
as well as deceit and manipulation. It is a condition that psychoanalyst George
H. Pollock has described as "pathologically grandiose, lacking in conscience and
behavioral regulation, [and displaying] demonstrations of joyful cruelty and
sadism."
While most people suppose that such pathology is easy to
recognize and therefore avoid, quite the contrary is true of pathological
narcissists, many of whom occupy positions of great prominence – in politics,
medicine, the law, academia, the arts, Hollywood, industry, law enforcement,
even the clergy.
In fact, narcissists of both the ordinary and malignant variety
are very close to – and sometimes identical to – psychopaths. They specialize in
mimicking human emotions and portraying themselves as the very opposite of what
they really are. And they often "appear" to be "normal," even when they’re
telling bald-faced lies, acting emotionally infantile, and inflicting
unspeakable pain on those who they claim to care for.
Ironically, they are hopelessly dependent upon the very people
they have such contempt for, and so they gratify their unquenchable emotional
needs by affecting a faux personality that is so charming on the outside that it
eclipses the toxicity within.
With their natural-born charisma, this species inevitably
attracts fawning acolytes who – lacking the narcissists’ glow or power – are
willing to subordinate themselves and remain, in essence, both the narcissist’s
hapless cheerleaders and their scarred victims. As long as they remain in the
narcissist’s thrall, everything is fine.
But since narcissists, in their own minds, must always remain
superior to everyone – vis-à-vis their delusions of grandeur – they strive
continually to make everyone around them feel insignificant, which is fueled by
their pathological envy.
When A Malignant Narcissist Meets His Prey
In the early 1970s, then-homely-and-probably-dateless Hillary
met charismatic-but-innately-narcissistic Bill at Yale Law School. He wasn’t
looking for beautiful (he had plenty of those, with dozens to follow) but rather
a brainy leftist who could help him fulfill his mission in life, i.e., to
be important. He spun his web and she was willingly, thrillingly ensnared.
And so the Wellesley-educated woman whose feminist psyche was
forged by Gloria Steinem’s battle cry – "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a
bicycle" – abandoned her own grand plans for fame and fortune, married Bill, and
moved to Arkansas, where she proceeded to prove that malignant narcissists will
always have their Kool-Aid-drinking followers.
Hillary didn’t do much
in either Arkansas, where she failed at
reforming the state’s abysmal education system, or as First Lady in the White
House, where she failed at reforming our nation’s healthcare system. But in both
places, she did succeed in covering up and/or denying her husband’s serial
infidelities.
All this would lead most people to believe that Hillary is a
complete patsy and idiot, who sold out all of her feminist ideals to serve a
fish on a bicycle! Then again, you can’t sneeze at the privileged perks she
enjoyed as a governor’s wife or the immense luxuries she enjoyed as First Lady.
But clearly, underneath her decades-long subservience to Bill’s
needs, wants, expectations, desires, and demands, Hillary still maintained the
notion that she could have her own day in the limelight. With Bill’s time in
office finally over, her days of serving him were too. Indeed, she ran for a
senate seat in New York, and won a second term in 2006.
Right after this victory, she decided to run for the
presidency. Little did she know that the one person she counted on to support
her – just as she had supported him – would be her worst enemy!
And yet, Hillary is as much to blame for her crashing campaign
as anyone. That is because she willingly entered a folie à deux – a madness
shared by two – which is a rare psychiatric syndrome in which the beliefs of one
person (read, Bill) is transmitted to another (read, Hillary).
The Sabotage Factor
From Iowa to New Hampshire and from print to electronic media,
Bill has made himself – surprise, surprise! – the centerpiece of
Hillary’s campaign. As writer Jonah Goldberg has noted: "Bill Clinton has been
stumping for his wife [by] framing the election as a referendum on his
tenure as president" (my italics added).
Over the past many months, Bill has done the following to
sabotage Hillary’s aspirations. This is the short list:
· Hogged the spotlight, talking about his
"accomplishments" in office
· Lied about his stance on the Iraq War
· Lied about Hillary sending him out with George H.W. Bush to
undo the "damage" of the current administration
· Lied, as she did, about how "deeply involved in the Irish
peace process" she was. "How odd," Clinton expert Dick Morris recently wrote, "that Hillary forgot to mention her pivotal
role in Ireland just four years ago, when she wrote her $8 million memoir,
Living History. There, she told a very different story."
· Whined about less-than-adulatory media coverage
· Spouted his negative opinions about his wife’s
competition
· Blurted out his utterances in Tourette’s-like fashion, all of
which continue to take up entire news cycles about why he said
this-or-that or what he meant
· Invented the myth that Hillary is "the agent of
change"
The net result is that Bill, true to his insatiable
narcissistic desires, remains the center of attention, and that Hillary’s is
relegated to the one thing she really has "experience" in, i.e., cleaning up his
messes.
Of course, Bill knows the effect of his behavior. Narcissists
are nothing if not astute students of…themselves! He knows that embarrassing his
wife, forcing her into defensive positions, and burnishing her now-lusterless
image as a broom-toting hausfrau will injure her campaign, perhaps irreparably.
That is the irony! He wants to be president again but can’t,
and he’s damned if she’ll be!
As Hillary’s poll numbers in Iowa and New Hampshire devolve,
Bill – convinced the election is all about him – has become increasingly
unhinged and increasingly viewed as an albatross around wifey’s neck. In fact
this arch-symbol of encumbrance and burden was used not once but twice last week
in the titles of articles written by Victor Davis Hanson and David Limbaugh.
In referring to Bill’s attempt to stem Hillary’s plummeting
poll numbers, Hanson, in "The Clinton Albatross," writes:
But Bill’s not exactly a fireman. He may instead throw gasoline
on the fire. First, his vote-getting abilities are suspect. He never won 50
percent of the vote in a presidential election. Second, [he] often comes across
as a narcissist. He talks the longest and loudest about himself. It is almost
impossible for first-person Bill to praise Hillary without adding, "When I was
president" or "I had a vision." Third, Bill cannot always distinguish truth from
fiction. [And his] tendency to dwell on – and fudge – his own past earns splashy
headlines but takes attention away from his wife.
If Bill keeps this sloppiness up, some might almost wonder
whether he really wants his wife to win – and thereby have her overshadow his
own presidency by being both the first woman president and the Clinton who did
not suffer impeachment due to self-inflicted scandal.
In Limbaugh’s article, "Hillary’s Spousal Albatross," the
popular columnist writes:
It would be bad enough if only cynical sexists accused
[Hillary] of glomming on to Bill for power. But there will be no Hillary
presidency apart from Bill. He can't stay out of her business. He can't stand it
if someone else has center stage, especially his wife, who he will have put in
office. Even if he wouldn't vie for direct power – which is unlikely,
considering he's already lobbying for it – …it's inconceivable he wouldn't
always be trying to grab the headlines.
And without using the albatross metaphor, Wesley Pruden,
editor-in-chief of The Washington Times, referring to the now-sorry state of
Hillary’s campaign, said:
Hillary and Bubba can only wonder how things came to such a
sorry pass for a president who was inevitable. No one had ever imagined Bubba as
the gallant Lancelot, riding to the aid of a lady in distress since his instinct
is to put the ladies in distress…
If suddenly Hillary is not having any fun, Bubba, liberated at
last from irrelevancy on the velvet sidelines, is once more in the center ring,
even if in a supporting role. When he appears with Hillary, the loud applause is
for him, not her.
Unintended Consequences
According to an editorial in Investor’s Business Daily, the
"unintended consequences" of Bill Clinton’s entrance – I say intrusion – into
Hillary’s campaign have been:
· She looks weak depending on her husband… by hiding behind
[him] she kindles doubts about whether she has the starch to be a strong
president on her own.
· Hillary reminds us of the worst of the Clinton years. Their
dysfunctional marriage, his parsing of the language to dodge and weave through
controversy, his tendency to get down and dirty in fighting opponents are all
unattractive and do him – and her – no good.
Indeed, Hillary has played the victim card to death. Yes, her
putative constituents – as she sees them – are all "victims" of the capitalist
system she detests, and a few gullible of them may even vote for her.
But I trust that most voters will recognize that Hillary is an
essentially weak woman, incapable of resisting the charms of the malignant
narcissists on the world stage, who will make mincemeat of her, just as her
husband has always done and continues to do.