OMG: "How to spot a psychopath at work" ... applies to Bu**sh** so well!

[eppur_se_muova]

"There's lots of evidence that people who are highly motivated, highly successful - particularly in finance and business - have some of these psychotic traits.

"These are people who are extremely focussed on achieving their goals, and who are not too concerned about other people's feelings.

"There are other people who have very narcissistic traits; they want to be centre-stage and their needs have to be put first."

He added: "People do say that you're a psychopath if you're violent and a successful businessman if you're not."
***
more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3579402.stm

Hmmm ... but Bu**sh** was never a successful businessman ... should we worry more, or less? (I completely reject the second sentence of the complete article.)

[sandnsea]

1. Interesting

So does it follow that the real problem of the poor is that they aren't psycopaths? And what does this say about all these rich people who insist people are poor because they just don't work hard enough?? Hmmm.

[Lisa]

2. ... plus the fact that they feed off other people's efforts

This part isn't emphasized as much in the article, but based on personal experience, I suspect that some psychopaths actually benefit from the stereotype that they really know how to get the job done -- "highly motivated and successful" -- there is a mystique surrounding ruthless people who have fearsome reputations.

Which may or may not be true. I know of situations where the psychopath's abilities are exaggerated, and much of the success is actually due to the invisible folks who cover for that person out of fear, or a hope that they will benefit eventually, or just because everybody else would suffer if the work isn't done (plus there'd be one angry and resentful psychopath to add to the stress).

Personally I think Bush is too lazy to be a really top-notch manipulator. (He fails even at that!) We know he can intimidate people (he was his dad's campaign enforcer), but he's not as cunning as Karl Rove, and doesn't work at it -- prefers to delegate even that, I guess. He does have a lot of the traits mentioned by Dr. Hare and the other researchers, but since I don't think he'd have attained his present position on his own, I believe that Dick Cheney is actually a better fit. (For example, the way he managed to manipulate the search committe into choosing him as VP ... and other times when he "just happened to be around" to influence the situation in a way that would benefit him.)