Not exactly a great judge of character

November 18, 2007

There are all kinds of important news items about Pakistan in the dailies this morning, including revelations about a heretofore secret U.S. program to secure the country’s nuclear weapons, a renewed interest in adding some oversight to the billions of dollars the Bush administration gives Pervez Musharraf for counter-terrorism efforts (which may not actually exist), and the fruitless efforts to convince Musharraf to declare a date for the end of his de facto martial law.

But the story that stood out for me was this gem about President Bush once again misjudging a foreign leader’s soul.

In the six years since Pakistan’s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, joined President Bush in the fight against Al Qaeda, it has been an unlikely partnership: a president intent on promoting democracy and a military commander who seized power in a bloodless coup.

Mr. Bush has repeatedly called Gen. Musharraf “a friend.” In 2003, the president invited the general to Camp David, a presidential perk reserved for the closest of allies. Last year, at the general’s insistence, Mr. Bush risked a trip to Pakistan, jangling the nerves of the Secret Service by spending the night in the country presumed to be home to Osama bin Laden.

But now that the general has defied the White House, suspending Pakistan’s Constitution and imposing emergency rule, old tensions are flaring anew. Mr. Bush is backing away from the leader he once called a man of “courage and vision,” and critics are asking whether the president misread his Pakistani counterpart.

You think?

It’s worth noting, from time to time, that among this president’s many glaring misjudgments is a stunningly weak capacity for judging characters. He looked into Vladimir Putin’s eyes and admired his “soul.” Closer to home, Bush was equally quick to embrace men like Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, and Dick Cheney.

I’m reminded of this Ron Suskind piece from 2004:

The president chose Bernard Kerik to lead the Department of Homeland Security because he was “a good man,” an intangible, gut-check standard that the president also applies to judicial nominees and world leaders.

After seven years of failures, one would like to think that perhaps Bush would start ignoring his “gut.” It clearly hasn’t served him well.

In Musharraf’s case, it’s one of the more dramatic foreign policy errors of Bush’s tenure.

They said Mr. Bush … was taken in by the general, with his fluent English and his promises to hold elections and relinquish military power. They said Mr. Bush looked at General Musharraf and saw a democratic reformer when he should have seen a dictator instead.

“He didn’t ask the hard questions, and frankly, neither did the people working for him,” said Husain Haqqani, an expert on Pakistan at Boston University who has advised two previous Pakistani prime ministers, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto. “They bought the P.R. image of Musharraf as the reasonable general. Bush bought the line — hook, line and sinker.” […]

Experts in United States-Pakistan relations said General Musharraf has played the union masterfully, by convincing Mr. Bush that he alone can keep Pakistan stable. Kamran Bokhari, an analyst for Stratfor, a private intelligence company, who met with General Musharraf in January, said the general viewed Mr. Bush with some condescension.

“Musharraf thinks that Bush has certain weaknesses that can be manipulated,” Mr. Bokhari said, adding, “I would say that President Musharraf doesn’t think highly of President Bush, but his interests force him to do business with the U.S. president.”

Funny, it looks like Putin would probably say the same thing.

I’m looking forward to a grown-up president in 2009. How about you?

We don’t know yet where this will lead, though.

But all of Bush’s pals are authoritarians, Cheney et al are authoritarians, why should this come as a surprise that they’re actually only cloaked in the language of Democracy and not its reality?

  • He’s never called anything correctly in his whole life. And yet, he claims he’s “heard the voices” and that the Lord speaks to him directly.

    Impeachment would have been a nice solution to Our National Embarrassment, but Pelosi’s thrown that powerful tool of check and balance away. How about having his sense of reality examined by a team of psychiatrists? Maybe it’s finally time for Dumbya (dumb us!) to enter a genuine rehab program.

    Who will finally brush Their Irrelevancies, Pelosi and Reid, aside and shout Cicero’s famous question of the power-mad Cataline? Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? Quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet? quem ad finem sese effrenata jactabit audacia? — How long will you, O Cataline, abuse our patience? How long is that madness of yours still to mock us? When is there to be an end of that unbridled audacity of yours?

  • After seven years of failures, one would like to think that perhaps Bush would start ignoring his “gut.”

    But then he’s have to use his brain. Where would we be then? Oh yeah, his “brain” just went to work for Newsweek.

  • After seven years of failures, one would like to think that perhaps Bush would start ignoring his “gut.” It clearly hasn’t served him well.

    Just haven’t figured out truthiness yet, have you, CB?

  • It’s worth noting, from time to time, that among this president’s many glaring misjudgments is a stunningly weak capacity for judging characters. He looked into Vladimir Putin’s eyes and admired his “soul.”

    I’m not sure Bush judges anybody’s “character”. Good character obviously isn’t his focus or something he gives a damn about. I think Bush truly believes that if he approves of someone or if he needs them for something, wants their cooperation, and makes that approval public with a “good” character-designation, everybody will believe it. Furthermore, he expects that the person so designated will do what he wants, thus confirming his “rightness”. And, of course, they must not embarrass him by being something entirely different than what he wants. He’ll support that person as long as he thinks he or she is still his toady or if the person doesn’t actually set the kitchen afire.

    Actually, it’s not so difficult to judge “character” by noticing somebody’s actions. For most people, this is the way you finally come to a conclusion about it.

    However — If you’re narcissistic, as Bush is, not only are you incapable of perceiving the character of others, but your approval of someone depends entirely on whether you’re convinced they’ll put you at the center of their universe, as you do.

    That’s what the PNAC-Cheney crowd did with their plans for America. They simply extended their own narcissism to its utmost reach and are demanding that all other sovereign nations put America’s interests (with the neocons in charge) before their own self-interests.

  • Bush “looks into the souls” of these evil bastards, and is attracted to them because he sees his own reflection.

    I’m no shrink, but here are the symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder from Wikipedia:

    1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance
    2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
    3. believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by other special people
    4. requires excessive admiration
    5. strong sense of entitlement
    6. takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
    7. lacks empathy
    8. is often envious or believes others are envious of him or her
    9. arrogant behavior

    (see also full list in DSM-IV-TR, p. 717)

    Nine out of nine. Not bad, eh?

  • Bush has lived a life without consequences. In every one of his failures, someone else has come in and cleaned up after him. 2009 will be no different.

  • Pingback: Not exactly a great judge of character at deschutesdemocrats.org

  • I think Anney is giving Bush too much credit for knowing what’s going on.

    Bush is like a rich, conservative version of your lazy cousin whose principal concerns are what’s on TV and what kind of salty snack is sitting in the chip-bowl. He’s keyed into business and politics (that is, he has a chance to run a big business, become a politician and know people who are big players) by virtue of being born into it, but he’s probably much more fun to watch TV with than he is to work on something serious with.

  • he’s probably much more fun to watch TV with

    Then again, not everyone who is stupid and likes to watch TV is fun to watch TV with. Some of them are just tiresome, and some really intelligent people who rarely watch TV are great TV-watching companions. Then there are dogs.

    Maybe there is something Bush does good, though.

  • Okie

    Apparently we are on the same page! I thought you’d read my post and were offering a more comprehensive description, but since they’re only a minute apart, you were obviously writing yours as I posted mine.

    I’ve two friends who are therapists, one more sympathetic to narcissists than the other. But the less-sympathetic friend described a narcissist’s inability to comprehend that others are real, with vital lives and interests that have nothing to do with the narcissist, as paper-doll players. Narcissists believe others are “nothing” in and of themselves and exist only to be moved around at their whim and with whatever characteristics the narcissist assigns them — others are always adjuncts to the narcissist’s world-view with the narcissist as the center. Narcissists live in a world where only they have actual reality.

    Many have noted Bush’s narcissitic character, his lack of sympathy or empathy for others, such as the vets coming home, his failures, his inability for self-evaluation.. They apparently don’t evaluate themselves, as well as others — in their world, there’s no need because they’re always right.

    There was a discussion about Bush on another forum where he was thought to be psychotic, with strong narcissistic characteristics.

    Anyway, most people won’t describe him from a psychological perspective but will rather conclude that he’s a lying, arrogant, warmongering scofflaw, who makes very dangerous decisions for the US! Same thing, different language.

  • Swan

    I think Anney is giving Bush too much credit for knowing what’s going on.

    I didn’t “give Bush credit for knowing what’s going on”. What on earth makes you think that?

  • Anney, your first paragraph sounded to me like you were saying Bush was manipulating the public’s perception of people he counted on as allies by publicly designating those people as “good” or implying it with the oblique “stared into his soul” type language. At least he was vouching for himself by cooperating with Putin, etc.

    This sentence:

    I think Bush truly believes that if he approves of someone or if he needs them for something, wants their cooperation, and makes that approval public with a “good” character-designation, everybody will believe it. Furthermore, he expects that the person so designated will do what he wants, thus confirming his “rightness”.

    You make the language sound like part of a conservative strategy to deal with people.

    I see Bush as less in control of himself and what’s going on around him.

    I guess that paragraph can support a different reading, but that’s just the way it looked to me.

  • ‘At least he was vouching for himself by cooperating with Putin, etc.’

    should be

    ‘At least he was vouching for the validity of his own cooperation with Putin, etc.’

  • ‘I see Bush as less in control of himself and what’s going on around him.’

    That is, not employing intentional strategies, but rather just dickily assuming he can trust the people he’s dealing with.

  • And to think this whole mess started with a nation misjudging the character of some guy from Texas – twice!

    “He didn’t ask the hard questions, and frankly, neither did the people working for him,”

    Bush likes to refer to himself as the guy who likes to make the “hard decisions.” Unfortunately he doesn’t understand the decision-making process and Haqqani busts Bush on that. Bush likes the thrill of making decisions upon which the lives of others hang. He just doesn’t understand the mental rigor that it takes to make those decisions with wisdom.

  • I agree with anney. Bush is a narcissist. He is the center of the universe, and all the players in it are cardboard caricatures to serve at his pleasure. He is of infinite selfishness, and has no depth, no understanding of reality as something outside and independent of himself.

    Sometimes I’ve gone with sociopath, as opposed to narcissist, but I think he really hasn’t the brains to be a good sociopath. He’s so childish and transparent in his manipulations. And I don’t think he’s quite evil enough, either. He’s more like a child than a scheming, evil minded person. He engages in evil acts because he’s so childish, and doesn’t understand the consequences of his actions. It’s not because he deliberately sets out to do something bad.

    He really believes he’s brought freedom and democracy to Iraq, through a heroic struggle against a despot. He is that shallow and naive. He’s incapable of seeing all the damage and destruction he’s responsible for.

    Bush is childlike simple. We fail to understand him because we insist upon seeing him as an adult and a normal human being. You have to think four-year-old child to grasp what makes him tick.

  • They said Mr. Bush … was taken in by the general, with his fluent English and his promises to hold elections and relinquish military power.

    …

    Experts in United States-Pakistan relations said General Musharraf has played the union masterfully, by convincing Mr. Bush that he alone can keep Pakistan stable.

    Awww. Poor wittle pwesident, the nasty bwown man twicked him!

    See, I’m picky and expect my leaders to THINK and not to be “won over” by the fact a foreign leader speaks more than one language fluently. I’m really getting sick of the idea that Bush is just a well-meaning, trusting soul who is prey to wily foreigners. As other people have already said, he’s a self-absorbed, lazy, arsehole and is attracted to brutes of a similar stripe.

    The only reason he cares about what’s happening in Pakistan is because no one has been able to spin this into a good thing and assure him it will be all right. It may also be dawning him that he looks a complete fool, a thing your common or garden sociopath can’t stand. I bet he’s wishing he hadn’t pulled so many troops out of Afghanistan. And who wants to bet Musharraf took the condition of our military into account when he started plotting Coup 2007?

  • Bush certainly is a narcissist, but a lazy one. He doesn’t ask hard questions because he doesn’t know how, evidently doesn’t expect his subordinates to, and ultimately doesn’t care much about the answers. Loyalty is the key, and if he’s convinced, or someone convinces him, that a certain person is “good”, and will be loyal, then that’s all Bush wants to know. Guiliani said Kerik was OK. Someone said FEMA’s Brownie was OK too. It should be perfectly clear by now that Bush is not interested in governing. He feels entitled to rule, and he’s thinks ruling is governing, and he obviously believes people should accept his judgments and appointments simply because he makes them.

    The last year of Bush’s rule is likely to be quite frightening as he does or doesn’t come to terms with the end of his power. At some level of consciousness he must be aware that the perks will disappear, he won’t be the center of attention anymore, and some war-crimes chickens may come home to roost. For well-balanced people the transition to a more private life after eight years of stress and highly orchestrated and scrutinized living would be welcome. For someone with a weak mind and a messianic viewpoint it could easily seem a crisis requiring strongman-style decisive action. We should really all be quite frightened.

    If we’re lucky, Bush, like Reagan, will essentially disappear after his successor is sworn in, if that happens, and become again the non-entity he so richly deserves to be. But also like Reagan his damage will live long after him assuming it isn’t permanent.

  • Rich at #20 said:

    The last year of Bush’s rule is likely to be quite frightening…..We should really all be quite frightened.

    Especially when you factor in the unknown entity of what Bush considers his unfinished business we could be in for quite a ride.

  • Rich

    I don’t want Bush to disappear. I want him prosecuted, convicted, and paying the consequences for his war crimes. You probably do, too, and mean that you want him to disappear from having any kind of authoritative say in government or receiving any kind of honor.

    Here’s just one soldier, Ty Ziegel, who paid a ghastly price for Bush’s war:

    His high school sweetheart married him last year:

    When you SEE what Bush’s illegal murderous war has done to just one American, it’s crazy-making. But he’s done it to thousands of Americans and has killed what some say is close to a million Iraqis as well as thousands of American troops. There’s absolutely no forgiveness in my heart for him.

  • Certainly Bush’s infuriating self-satisfied smugness fits in nicely with Anney’s (#6) views and Okie’s (#7) rules for narcissistic behavior. But, correct me if I’m wrong. Don’t those rules also neatly define most of the behavior of the right-wing? The rules are great for understanding luminaries such as Rush, Bill’O, and the rest of that apoplectic crowd.

  • In other words, is far-right ideology just another form of narcissistic mania? (Shoulda said this before—it’s been a long Sunday).

  • -jayinge-

    I really believe that some rightwingers operate out of fear and their self-righteousness is a mask, but certainly Cheney, who’s in the most authoritative position of any of those PNAC lunatics, has extended the “personal” narcissitic pattern into politics and world affairs. I know he’s a jerk, but we see very little of him personally, just his handiwork through GW, so I find it hard to read him. Many narcissists DO operate out of a conviction that they are all that matters. They don’t make their moves with fear in their deepest hearts but rather a will to make the world conform to their expectations because of those fears.

    I know the religious right-wing does this, and I think that for many, beneath it lies an utter terror that they’ll fail at the impossible standards they’ve adopted if other people don’t toe their line and make it easier for them. It must be scary and maybe even angry-making to see people not toeing their line and receiving no punishment, as they believe they’ll receive were they to do likewise. Odd, isn’t it, that progressives feel a similar outrage at Congress’s or Bush’s depredations…But Bush and Congress, of course, have the power and authority to devastate millions, while the average rightwinger has no more personal power or authority than the next person, and we can defend ourselves against them.

    I’ve had religious fundamentalists say to me, “But what if you’re wrong? You’ll burn in hell. Do you want to take that chance?” I’ve always understand that as their fear for themselves at its base.

    So I guess I’m saying I agree with you about some rightwingers, but maybe not all. Either way, fear or arrogance seem to accomplish the same end.

  • They don’t make their moves with fear in their deepest hearts but rather a will to make the world conform to their expectations because of those fears.

    Sorry, that should be

    They don’t make their moves with fear in their deepest hearts but rather a will to make the world conform to their expectations because of the fear they instill in others. The narcissist needs either fear or a willingness to pander in those around him/her to be able maintain his bloated sense of self

  • Don’t those rules also neatly define most of the behavior of the right-wing? The rules are great for understanding luminaries such as Rush, Bill’O, and the rest of that apoplectic crowd.

    I think a lot of that crowd are opportunists (I include TelEvangical ministers in this group). They found a niche and that niche contains a lot of cash. Imagine what would happen if Flush’s producers told him his ratings were flat line and he was down to one sponsor, but if he’d start trashing Neo-Cons they could get him a really sweet gig sponsored by Viagra.

    Do you think Flushie would throw the offer in their faces?

    Now imagine if Bush were sitting in a jail cell and his lawyer tells him that if he’ll plead guilty to 12 of the counts brought against him, they court would drop the other 36. Do you think he’d take the deal? I don’t because admitting guilt would be equal to admitting he was wrong.

    Say what you like about the loudmouths on the radio and tv, they’re only remoras.* Bush is a shark.**

    tAiO

    * No offense to remoras.
    ** Or sharks.

  • Prilosec could help that gut feeling Bush has. I think we all should be very scared until after the next inaguration takes place. I am afraid he will pull a “Musharraf “and not go. Even Putin doesn’t want to leave…..these men are really dangerous.

    • Comments are closed.