Sarah Palin’s Narcissism Feeds Her Constitutional Incompetence

By Bob Cesca

The only thing more insufferable than a high profile idiot is a high profile idiot with raging narcissism. That’s Sarah Palin.

Immaculate Misconception We can’t know for sure whether or not she recognizes how unserious and unintelligent she is, but, in Palin, we can plainly see a reality show celebridoof who seems to believe that national office doesn’t require the widely accepted prerequisite of “knowing things” — especially things that squarely relate to the national office she has sought in the past and the one she will likely seek this year. Only people with clinical personality issues, well beyond the reasonably normal purview of ego, believe they can achieve the most prestigious elected offices in the United States without, at the very least, knowing basic information about the universe of those jobs.

Ego isn’t new to politics. In fact, it’s almost as necessary as intellectual heft and leadership experience. Anyone who believes they possess the rare potential to be elected by an entire nation to the office of the presidency requires ego beyond that of, you know, everyone. The self-affirmational refrain “I can be the president” is an exceptional thing, so completely exceptional that only a handful of people out of 300 million dare to run for president every four years.

Sarah Palin’s ego, however, is way beyond just about anyone we’ve observed in modern politics. Purely narcissistic.

Psychologist Glen Gabbard divided narcissists into two subtypes: the “hypervigilant” shameful type, and the “oblivious” shameless type. Palin’s narcissism naturally falls into the latter end of the diagnostic spectrum. Shameless and oblivious. She appears to be so thoroughly clueless — so blinded by her self-importance and ambition that her syllabus of mistakes are ignored and left uncorrected, and so she arrogantly repeats the same mistakes over and over, and accompanied by, Winning!

There’s no other analysis or diagnosis that more adequately explains Palin’s ongoing problems with the U.S. Constitution.

During the 2008 election, she repeatedly and utterly failed to accurately describe the constitutional (or otherwise) role of the vice president. The very serious job she was seeking, by the way. Not only did she fumble the response once, she fumbled it at least three times. She couldn’t do it in the vice presidential debate against Joe Biden, she couldn’t do it during a post-debate softball interview on Fox News Channel and she couldn’t do it when interviewed by a third-grader. The answer that eluded the Republican vice presidential nominee is readily found in the Constitution. It’s not difficult to find or to read, at least for anyone with a internet access and a pulse.

Here’s the line from Article I, Section 3:

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

Here’s how Palin answered in attempt number two during a post-debate interview on Fox News:

Uh. That thankfully our founders were wise enough to say we have this position and it’s constitutional — vice president will be able to be not only the position flexible, but it’s gonna be those other duties as assigned by the president. A simple thing.

No, no. The actual constitutional language is “a simple thing.” Instead, what Palin delivered here was — yeah, I have no idea what that was.

Read More

Advertisements

13 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. WakeUpAmerica
    Mar 03, 2011 @ 20:16:09

    “…Instead, what Palin delivered here was — yeah, I have no idea what that was.”
    That pretty much sums up her entire political-and I use this term loosely- “career.”

    Reply

    • AFM
      Mar 04, 2011 @ 18:47:46

      LOL, but I bet she can tell you how to put that makeup on and how to lift those boobs and wear those cloths and shoes and the topper put on those fake fingernails.

      She can tell you where Russia is looking out her back door.

      Reply

  2. sallyngarland,tx
    Mar 03, 2011 @ 20:36:38

    Palin has now released a statement through Daily Caller to “clarify” her tweet about Westboro per a tweet by ramansour. She wouldn’t have to clarify if she knew what she was talking about to begin with. I can’t believe there are people who would vote for this woman for President.

    (can’t post a link from my IPod.)

    Reply

  3. akbatwoman
    Mar 03, 2011 @ 22:24:50

    “Oblivious” and “Shameless”. I think that guy knows what he’s talking about.

    Reply

  4. Jolly Roger
    Mar 04, 2011 @ 01:19:07

    I can’t decide which POS is worse-Mansour or Mama Grifter. They both stink so damn bad they make my eyes water clear over in the eastern half of the US.

    Reply

    • Syrin
      Mar 04, 2011 @ 14:49:23

      I have such a problem wondering WHY? HOW? can these people not see what I see? I had some words with Mansour in the past.. Don’t know where these people came from or what they think they will acheive, giving up the TRUTH- their faith and integrity for a lie- Palin. Remember, they are for the most part active GOP members representing a Christian Conservative.

      Reply

  5. majii
    Mar 04, 2011 @ 08:03:07

    This reminds me of something Andrew Halcro said about Palin when he was running against her for governor. He stated that she was amazed that he knew so much about the topics which were being debated at the time, and that she didn’t seem to think it was necessary to KNOW information about the issues which were very important to the welfare of the state and its citizens. This also reminds me of Gingrich’s third wife who stated in an Esquire interview that when she asked him whether it was important that his actions match his words, and he replied that people just wanted to hear what he had to say. IMHO, the real problem is the number of voters who vote for candidates not based on what they know but on whether they “like” them and/or “like” what they are saying.

    Reply

    • Syrin
      Mar 04, 2011 @ 08:38:04

      Thank you majii for jogging my memory… Read it and weep! I did!

      As governor, Palin responded, “I will make sure that we are fulfilling our constitutional, mandated provisions there, that are laid out for us. Again, (those are) education, basic solid infrastructure, public safety — in public safety is health care — so it’s a matter of priorities.”

      Halcro told the crowd: “Well, again, I mean, this is political gibberish. … To hear candidates talk about, ‘Well, we’re going to prioritize,’ that’s like saying, ‘Oh, we’re going to embrace efficiencies.’ I mean, that it means absolutely nothing …”

      The remark drew applause.

      Halcro said Monday that Palin appears to read her comments from notes at the almost daily debates and forums the candidates attend. Halcro, in comparison, often tells the crowd that he never relies on notes.

      As a candidate, Palin’s heard the criticism about experience before. Her Republican opponents, Murkowski and John Binkley, questioned her readiness during the primary. Binkley ran an ad featuring musher DeeDee Jonrowe, with a message that successful mushers need a few trial runs before the big race.

      Last week, the Knowles campaign also pointed out Palin’s cancellation of a meeting with Alaska Native corporation chief executives Oct. 3, asking if she’s only attending events she’s comfortable with.

      Palin said Friday it wouldn’t have been appropriate to attend the meeting out of respect for the audience.

      “I didn’t know enough about tribal government and we did not have time to do all the research” she said.

      Read more: http://www.adn.com/2006/10/17/217752/experience-a-question-in-election.html#ixzz1FeXSNNEY

      Reply

      • Lidia17
        Mar 05, 2011 @ 04:02:35

        I think this is the more famous citation:

        —————
        “On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.

        “Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I’m amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, ‘Does any of this really matter?’ ” Palin said.”

        http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/1001/p09s01-coop.html

  6. Kevin
    Mar 04, 2011 @ 10:37:39

    Notice how the negative evaluations of Palin have slowly changed, as she is no longer given the benefit of doubts that no longer exist. First, it was said that she was inexperienced, but maybe she could learn on the job. Second, she showed herself not only inexperienced, but ignorant, but maybe she could hit the books and catch up. Third, as the public gradually became aware that not only was she was not learning anything more than talking points, she had lied repeatedly, she had engaged in unethical conduct, and her family’s values did not look like “Christian family values,” even those who shared her publicly-proclaimed world view stopped rooting for her. Now the word is spreading that she is not merely uninformed and dishonest, but her political career has been driven by a personality disorder.

    Obviously, different portions of the public are at different stages along the road. The next step, if there will be one, will come when the public’s focus shifts from this woman’s morbidly fascinating personality to the un-fascinating people she has hurt in the course of her career, when she will come to be perceived, not as ignorant, not as sick, but as a criminal.

    But I hope — and here I am as guilty as anyone — that we Americans do not let our fascination with the “tabloid” aspects of this particular person’s life distract us from the lessons we need to learn about ourselves and the subtlety of evil.

    Reply

    • Syrin
      Mar 04, 2011 @ 14:36:07

      Kevin.. There has not been a more decerning and truthful statement made about Sarah… well, since I was posting on ADN political blog… 🙂

      Love your comments….You’re my HeRO!!

      Reply

  7. NJfan
    Mar 04, 2011 @ 14:23:08

    This article really nails Palin and I absolutely agree with Kevin’s comment.

    Reply

    • Syrin
      Mar 04, 2011 @ 14:38:46

      Yes he did!! Entry into this whole mess!!
      This sums it up..
      …..Palin engaged in unethical conduct, and her family’s values did not look like “Christian family values,”

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Syrin From Wasilla’s Stats

%d bloggers like this: