- The Washington Times - Friday, September 29, 2006

‘Narcissistic rage’

“‘You did your nice little hit job on me. … You came here under false pretenses. … You got that little smirk on your face, and you think you are so clever.’

“If you didn’t see Bill Clinton lose control and reveal his pain when asked a few legitimate questions by journalist Chris Wallace on Sunday, take a moment to get up to speed.

“Wallace’s interview could be used by psychology classes the world over as a teaching tool. …

“As we all witnessed, a narcissist will fight like a cornered animal when they believe their image has been impacted in a negative way. When a narcissist’s all-important image has been tarnished — like when Bill Clinton is faced with history — they will lash out like nothing you’ve ever seen. This is known as narcissistic rage. …

“Narcissism is a pattern of grandiosity, a need for admiration, and lack of empathy. A narcissistic individual is totally consumed with their image and has a fragile sense of self. …

“In an effort to create a false image, a narcissist exaggerates their achievements and talents.

“Because a narcissistic individual has a shifting morality — always ready to shift values to gain favor — any interaction with a narcissist is difficult. Lying is an integral part of the narcissist’s behavior and all self-reports are unreliable.”

—Rusty Humphries, writing on “A stained dress, a TV mini-series and a glimpse of narcissistic rage,” Monday in WorldNetDaily at www.worldnetdaily.com

‘Lost causes’

“Prophets as a species tend to specialize in bad news; they rarely return from the mountain reporting that the management has concluded that everything down below is just fine.

“[‘Ideas Have Consequences’ author Richard M.] Weaver was no exception to this rule. He made his reputation as a latter-day Isaiah, bearing admonitory tidings to an inattentive populace. Above all, perhaps, he was an acolyte of what he lovingly called ‘lost causes.’ The fact that a cause had lost, he argued, did not necessarily rob it of nobility. … It might serve not only as a reminder, but also as a model, a new goal. In the ‘longer run,’ as Weaver put it, what seemed lost might eventually prove victorious.”

—Roger Kimball, writing on “The consequences of Richard Weaver,” in the September issue of the New Criterion

Dictators’ pulpit

“Not the least unfortunate aspect of the United Nations is its habit of providing Third World despots with a prominent pulpit to speechify against the agency’s principal sponsor: the United States. Last week was no exception, as three worthy claimants to the title of most anti-American head of state — Iran’s millenarian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; Venezuela’s Castro protege President Hugo Chavez; and Bolivia’s Bolshevist President Evo Morales — descended on Turtle Bay to diabolize President Bush, denounce American foreign policy, and revel in the adulation of the U.N.’s correspondingly anti-American membership. …

“Leave it to the far left to cast this authoritarian rogue’s gallery as goodwill ambassadors and upgrade their hate-mongering to the status of cogent commentary. … ‘People who say these guys are just outliers are wrong,’ Mark Weisbrot, a Latin America specialist at the leftist Center for Economic and Policy Research informed the Wall Street Journal. ‘They are saying things that many other leaders only think.’”

—Jacob Laksin, writing on “The U.N’.s Dictator Tour 2006,” Monday in Front Page at www.frontpagemag.com


Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide