Keith has a SURPRISE tomorrow AM

Keith Olbermann related topics. This Forum combines all Olbermann threads from KeithOlbermann.Org. KO.O.
User avatar
Marie
Certified Fan
Posts: 32292
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: In front of my computer

Keith has a SURPRISE tomorrow AM

Postby Marie » Wed Jul 20, 2016 9:51 pm

You find out what someone is really like in "battle," and Olbermann is who you want to be in a foxhole with, Patrick said. "On the air, we had each others' backs," said Olbermann.
-David Goetzl: "Keith Olbermann, Dan Patrick still brothers long after ESPN's 'Big Show'"; MediaPost blog, 4-6-2012


Image

User avatar
Marie
Certified Fan
Posts: 32292
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: In front of my computer

Keith - LIVE on video!!!

Postby Marie » Thu Jul 21, 2016 6:28 am

"Could Donald Trump pass a sanity test?" :lol:

Find it on Vanity Fair's website, HERE --
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/ ... anity-test

Transcript:
Could Donald Trump Pass a Sanity Test?
By Keith Olbermann
vanityfair.com
7/21/2016

SHORT ANSWER: probably not.

First, several important caveats. There is little worse and nothing cheesier than questioning the psychological stability of a public figure, especially a candidate for president, even in this case.

Except that in his year of campaigning, Donald Trump has called Lindsey Graham “a nut job,” Glenn Beck “a real nut job,” and Bernie Sanders “a wacko.” Trump has insisted Ben Carson’s got a “pathological disease,” and asked of Barack Obama: “Is our president insane?” He called Ted Cruz “unstable,” “unhinged,” “a little bit of a maniac,” and “crazy or very dishonest.” He also called the entire CNBC network “crazy.” He called Megyn Kelly “crazy”—at least six times.

Respectful reticence about aspersions and cliches and mental-health questions in a time in which mocking was seemingly slowly maturing into concern, died a long time ago in this presidential cycle—and it died at Donald Trump’s hands. Moreover, if the question is asked seriously and not gratuitously, just the examination might explain how Trump has seemingly survived dozens of moments that might each have been campaign-enders for almost anybody else. Why have we not asked if a given presidential candidate might be disqualified from office due to psychological reasons? Because we not only can’t see this forest for the trees, but each time we try, there are even more trees blocking our view. In the 24-hour news cycle, each successive John Yerkes Iselin moment is not registered cumulatively; it merely supplants the one from last week. Or yesterday. Or this morning.

This could also explain Trump’s seeming imperviousness to his own mind-bending campaign. Surely it must be exhausting to attack Mexicans (June 16, 2015), to attack John McCain (July 18), attack Muslims (December 7), attack the Pope (February 18, 2016), attack President Clinton (May 18), attack candidates who use a teleprompter (May 27) a day after you give a speech using a teleprompter (May 26). It’s got to be exhausting—unless, as the old joke goes, “No pain, no gain. And: no brain, no pain.”

Anyway.

The actual sanity test I found is called, by delicious coincidence, “The Hare Psychopathy Checklist.” Introduced by Canadian criminal psychologist Robert D. Hare in 1980, it is still in use, though with ever more diffuse and specific mental-health diagnoses, it is not without its critics. However, as a practicing therapist who walked me through it agreed, it serves as a kind of triage device to separate the injured from the tripping from the psychopathic.

And about that word. We seem to have completely muddied up sociopath and psychopath. Sociopath? Roughly speaking, think Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, living out there in his shack in the woods, feeling nothing for other humans and unable to interact with them, literally mailing it in. Psychopath? Think Ted Bundy, feeling nothing for other humans but having long ago learned how to expertly mimic relationships by being whatever he needed to be to whomever he needed to use, killing at least 30 women, serving as his own counsel and cross-examining a female witness, proposing marriage to her while she was on the stand—and getting her to say “yes.”

For each of the 20 items on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, you’re supposed to assign the subject a 0, 1, or 2. The highest and most dangerous score is a 40. In the U.S., the accepted minimum score for possible psychopathy is 30.

So. Those are the rules. Let’s play the Freud:

1. Glibness/superficial charm

I had interviewed Trump as long ago as 1983 and always thought him a horse’s ass, but after running into him when we both worked at NBC, and then in the lobby of one of his apartment buildings in which I lived, I was stunned to encounter a quiet, succinct, seemingly sincere co-worker and (in essence) landlord. In one role he described himself as an anti-Bush, pro-Obama liberal; in the other, he urged me to contact him personally with any problems or suggestions about the building. Then he got on the campaign stage and, boom! He was America’s newest Mussolini Impersonator.

For awhile I was flummoxed as to which of these mutually exclusive personalities was the act. Then I was reminded that it didn’t really matter which—that having multiple personalities should by itself preclude one from having access to multiple nuclear warheads.

I was explaining this on Bill Maher’s show last November when Bill suddenly got so ‘gee whiz’ that I almost didn’t recognize him. “Me too!” he exclaimed boyishly. Maher, cynical to such a degree that he makes me seem as earnestly faithful as a pope, said he had been just as convinced—and thus just as stunned—by the Hydra of Trumpian personas.

I can easily imagine myself being taken in by a con artist like Trump. I mean, Trump wrote me a fan letter once making me putty in his hands. But Maher? Who called me a corporate sellout in 1978 when I had to that point earned about $500 from all the corporations in the world combined? He fooled Bill Maher?

Glibness and superficial charm—but professional grade.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 2, out of 2

2. Grandiose sense of self-worth

“I feel like a supermodel,” he said on June 18 in Phoenix. “Except like times 10. It’s true. I’m a supermodel. I’m on the cover of these magazines—I’m on the cover of the biggest magazines.”

This was stated by the first Oompa Loompa–American to run for national office. He is bright orange. He is a 70-year-old man effecting a hair color and style that would’ve been rejected by the 80s synth-pop group A Flock of Seagulls. I served with supermodels. I knew supermodels. Supermodels were friends of mine. Donald, you’re no supermodel.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 4, out of 4
RELATED VIDEO: 32 Celebrities Struggle to Describe the Color of Donald Trump’s Hair

3. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

Acknowledging that a lot of us get a point or two here (I certainly do; not all of those job changes were their fault), let me first quote the introduction from Trump’s Think Like a Billionaire: “Don’t take vacations. What’s the point? . . . Have a short attention span. Most successful people have very short attention spans. It has a lot to do with imagination . . .”

Here are some of the wide-ranging businesses Trump’s short attention span has dragged him into: real estate, vitamins, rentals, books, condos, chocolate bars, golf courses, pro football, beauty pageants, steaks, board games, television hosting, bottled water, “universities,” men’s wear, professional wrestling, mortgages, airlines, fragrances, coffee, restaurants, energy drinks, vodka, search engines, urinalysis, and of course, bicycle racing: The Tour de Trump (in which contestants raced 300 laps around his ego).

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 6, out of 6

4. Pathological Lying

June 17, at the Woodlands, Texas: “If some of those wonderful people had guns strapped right here, right to their waist, or right to their ankle, and this son of a bitch comes out and starts shooting, and one of the people in that room happened to have it and goes boom, you know what, that would have been a beautiful, beautiful sight, folks. That would have been a beautiful, beautiful sight.”

June 20, on Twitter: “When I said that if, within the Orlando club, you had some people with guns, I was obviously talking about additional guards or employees.”

Can I stop here, or should I walk you through the hot-and-cold running lies alternating with the admissions of the times in the 90s when he pretended to be his own spokesmen, “John Miller” and “John Barron”? Or any of the 34 “Pants on Fire” recognitions awarded by PolitiFact to Trump for merely his most egregious lies only since he formally announced his campaign for the presidency?

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 8, out of 8

5. Cunning/Manipulative

I’m just going to assume this was how Trump got Paul Ryan to commit professional self-assassination. There are many different personality problems which include almost supernatural one-on-one manipulation skills (see “fools Maher” and “fools Olbermann,” above).

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 10, out of 10
RELATED VIDEO: Donald Trump’s Finest Fibs

6. Lack of remorse or guilt

Asked about his faith at the “Family Leadership Summit” in Ames, Iowa by moderator Frank Luntz in July 2015, Trump said, “People are so shocked when they find out I am Protestant. I am Presbyterian. And I go to church and I love God and I love my church.”

Luntz followed up with a softball of (literally) biblical proportions: Has Trump ever asked God for forgiveness for his own actions?

“I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don’t think so.

“I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.”

Trump then explained that Holy Communion sufficed. “When I drink my little wine—which is about the only wine I drink—and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed. I think in terms of ‘let’s go on and let’s make it right.’”

The art of the deal, indeed.

Trump picked up the thread with Jake Tapper last January. Again the subject was religion. “I like to be good. I don’t like to have to ask for forgiveness.”

Tapper then asked about a rival, presumed to be Ted Cruz, who was conducting field research into the efficacy of questioning Trump’s religious convictions. “He shouldn’t be doing that. Very unethical.”

Within a few weeks, Trump attacked Cruz’s religious convictions. On February 12, he tweeted, “How can Ted Cruz be an Evangelical Christian when he lies so much and is so dishonest?”

Not a week after, Pope Francis answered a question about Trump’s overall tone. “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.” Within hours, Trump slammed the Pope, fantasized about an ISIS attack on the Vatican that only he could stop, and concluded this remarkable circle of illogic by writing, “For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful.”

This was right after he’d questioned a person’s faith. After he’d twice admitted that his faith included the option to not ask forgiveness and not “bring God into that picture.” And just four months before he’d go back to the well and question Hillary Clinton’s faith.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score 12, out of 12

7. Shallow Affect

I had to have this one thoroughly explained to me by my analyst friend. In sum, it’s tone deafness when it comes to explaining relationships between people.

For instance, if somebody got up onstage—for the sake of argument, say it’s Billy Joel, at Madison Square Garden—and insulted you by sarcastically dedicating to you his song “The Entertainer” as a way of saying you weren’t a leader or a politician but merely an entertainer, you might take umbrage or at least recognize the dig.

Not if you are suffering from “shallow affect.”

“Thank you @BillyJoel,” Trump tweeted on May 27. “Many friends just told me you gave a very kind shoutout at MSG. Appreciate it- love your music!”

Another example of “shallow affect” would be a kind of approach to how people influence each others’ lives that could be diagrammed as “Event B follows Event A, therefore Event A caused Event B.” If, say, a prominent athlete ignored you or in some other tangential way interacted with you before failing or being injured, you might think in passing that you “jinxed” him (especially if you were still 9 or 10 years old), but you probably wouldn’t publicly claim it.

Not unless you are suffering from “shallow affect.”

“Derek Jeter had a great career until 3 days ago,” Trump tweeted on October 15, 2012, after the baseball player shattered his ankle during a game. “…when he sold his apartment at Trump World Tower- I told him not to sell- karma?”

The answer-this-chain-letter-or-many-ankles-will-be-broken theme was not some early passing expression of the now familiar syndrome we might describe as T.W.T. (Tweeting While Trump). Five days later:

“Derek Jeter broke ankle one day after he sold his apartment in Trump World Tower.”

And just to finish it off, another aspect to “shallow affect” would be an unwillingness to acknowledge reliance on others.

On March 16, Trump was asked about which foreign-policy consultants he was speaking to. “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain,” he said, apparently seriously. “I know what I’m doing, and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people, and at the appropriate time, I’ll tell you who the people are. But my primary consultant is myself, and I have a good instinct for this stuff.”

On June 24 in Scotland he again described his dream consultant, saying he spoke to “foreign policy advisors all the time. But the advice has to come from me.”

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 14, out of 14

8. Callous/lack of empathy

June 12, 2016, hours after the last shots were fired at the Pulse club in Orlando: “Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism, I don’t want congrats, I want toughness & vigilance. We must be smart!”

As a reminder, you cannot give 1,500 points for one item on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, even if that total is seemingly deserved.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 16, out of 16

9. Parasitic lifestyle

This is not, as I originally thought, living—materially—off Mom or Dad, or others, although that can be a minor component, especially if Dad gave you a million-dollar loan circa 1977 and you got a $9 million advance against your inheritance and ultimately you reportedly got about $40 million on your father’s death—and you considered all this just a small start.

It has more to do with taking credit for the work of others, to the degree of erasing all record of their contributions and slapping your name on their efforts, often in transactions in which you are literally renting out the use of your name as a brand and little else. You know, like Trump Palace, the Tour de Trump, Trump Steaks, Donald Trump the Fragrance, and of course, Castle Trumpula.

And just as in court, a wife cannot be forced to give evidence of “parasitic lifestyle” against her husband, despite Melania Trump’s convention-speech fiasco. Unless writer/English major/ballet dancer Meredith McIver turns out to be the evil twin sister of ”John Miller.“

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 18, out of 18

10. Poor behavioral controls

Well he had poor behavioral controls, but everybody agrees he’s going to dial it all back. This time. Right after he pivots. Pivots toward dialing it back.

Right, Judge Gonzalo Curiel? Right, Don King, Joel Osteen, Ben Roethlisberger, Pete Rose, or anybody else who Trump claimed had endorsed him when they hadn’t? Or the hispanic ABC reporter he called a “sleaze”? Or the losing Republican presidential hopefuls he mocked in a video the day after insisting he would unite the Republican Party?

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 20, out of 20

11. Promiscuous sexual behavior

When I was a young radio sportscaster, I was given the great opportunity to interview by telephone a famous athlete who had just been suspended from his sport because he had gone to work for a casino. The athlete—we’ll call him Jimmy Smith—was expecting the call. This, as near as I can remember it, was the transcript of the start of the call:

Ring, ring.

Voice sounding kind of like Hattie McDaniel, the Academy Award–winning actress from Gone with the Wind: “Mr. Smith’s residence.”

Me: “Hi, Milton Richman from UPI gave me Mr. Smith’s number and said he would be willing to give me a brief interview. May I speak with him, please?”

Voice sounding kind of like Hattie McDaniel, the Academy Award–winning actress from Gone with the Wind: “Who’s callin, please?”

Me: “My name is Keith Olbermann. From UPI Radio.”

Jimmy Smith: “This is Jimmy.”

As silly as the story of the whole fake Trump spokesmen was (of course he has invisible friends, and of course they’re P.R. flacks), lost in the laughter were three important details. Firstly, as my conversation with “Jimmy Smith” and his imaginary housekeeper suggests, people do do this. But secondly, when they do it, they usually try to disguise their own voice. Thirdly, rarely do they assume other identities in order to provide the second component to what we categorize as “promiscuity” (besides multiple partners): boasting about it.

In 1991, “John Miller” to Sue Carswell, then of People and now of Vanity Fair: “He’s somebody that has a lot of options, and, frankly, he gets called by everybody. He gets called by everybody in the book, in terms of women . . . I mean, they call. They just call. . . . He’s living with Marla and he’s got three other girlfriends.”

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 22, out of 22

12. Early behavior problems

When I was a kid—probably four or five—I twice hit a friend of mine in the back of the head with a metal toy. I remember shock, blood but no stitches, and family meetings. We talked, the folks got professional advice, they got me into organized sports and exercise, and I quickly realized that just because I was frustrated with somebody, that wasn’t a good reason to hit them.

Regardless, when I had my analyst friend run the Hare Psychopathy Checklist on me, I insisted she give me a point on this, because hitting a kid in the back of the head with a toy fire engine and later a magnet was, at minimum, an indicator of the potential for early behavior problems.

So, how many points would you give a child who attacked one of his teachers?

“I actually gave a teacher a black eye,” Trump wrote in The Art of the Deal in 1987, barely concealing his retroactive glee. He placed the assault in the second grade, likely making him seven years old. “I punched my music teacher because I didn’t think he knew anything about music and I almost got expelled.”

What kind of kid punches an adult?

In the face?

I mean, think back to being that age. The one universal I can recall was that no seven-year-old ever dreamed of trying to physically take on an adult for the simple and unavoidable reason that virtually any adult was several times your own weight. If you picked the wrong one, they might do more than just defend themselves. Even knocking an adult down could be an exercise in self-destruction (if he fell on you). The most reality-challenged of my classmates, the kid who ran headfirst into the side of a moving school bus for reasons that still remain unclear nine presidents later, would never have hit an adult.

There is a second version of the same story from a Trump biographer. He did indeed give the teacher a black eye, but not with a punch. He threw an eraser at him and hit him just right.

Because that’s way better.

Regardless, the version Trump tells is of the four-foot-tall edition of himself punching what was at least a five-foot-tall adult. In the eye. Hard enough to give the man a shiner.

The only argument against calling this “early behavior problems” is that the first word implies that it stopped at some point.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 24, out of 24
RELATED VIDEO: The Best Way to Insult Donald Trump

13. Lack of realistic, long-term goals

Here, the streak ends. So far Mr. Trump has theoretically aced our exam, but reality now invades our idyllic scene.

There could be a thousand things psychologically wrong with the process by which Trump ends up with a low score on this one. In the big picture you would have never thought Mussolini was less crazy just because he left Italy for Switzerland, in 1902, in part to avoid military service, and exactly 20 years later he became head of the Italian state and often dressed up in his military uniform.

But tests are tests, and if you say “this guy Trump so lacks realistic, long-term goals that he thinks he can become president,” and he winds up with the nomination of a major (for the moment) party, the long-term goals turned out to be not that unrealistic.

Still, he gets partial credit here because, once again, he boasts about having the very thing psychology says is a warning sign. In the preface to Think Like a Billionaire, Trump quotes author Richard Conniff: “Almost all successful alpha personalities display a single-minded determination to impose their vision on the world, an irrational belief in unreasonable goals, bordering at times on lunacy.”

By the way, I get a point here too (one of my four or five) because I’ve always thought I’d make a great prime minister of the United Kingdom. I’ve never even been to the United Kingdom.

Points Awarded: 1
Running Score: 25, out of 26

14. Impulsivity

Impulsivity is like the old judicial definition of pornography: you may not be able to define it, but you’re supposed to know it when you see it.

Even the Wall Street Journal editorial board, which seems not to have approved of anything newer than Napoleon, took it for granted that Trump defines the word. It wrote on June 1, “Mr. Trump needs to convince millions of skeptical voters that he’s more than an impulsive bully who poses too big a risk in the Oval Office.”

Yet, one man’s impulsiveness might be another’s recognition of the perfect moment to act. A former colleague of mine met a woman on a date, proposed to her a week later, and she immediately said yes. Were they being impulsive or just visionary? What about my other colleague who met a woman on a date, proposed to her the next day, and she took a day to think about it and said yes?

The first couple have now been married 32 years. The second couple got it annulled at about 32 hours. “Impulsiveness” as we laymen use it tends to be results based and devolves rapidly into 20/20 hindsight.

But in March, writing in Psychology Today, Dr. Glenn Geher offered a different definition of impulsiveness. It’s not necessarily the same as rashness or its positive twin, quick thinking. True impulsiveness usually leaves fingerprints of edgy though not automatically pernicious behavior. Rather it makes one do these things in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Like, as Dr. Geher was analyzing, discussing the size of your penis during a presidential debate.

He didn’t include the other examples where the context turns the behavior or the language from borderline to impulsive (you might appropriately bring up that topic in bed, or at a bar, or even at your tailor’s). Like saying a female presidential candidate had been “schlonged” in a primary. Like criticizing the face of one of your female rivals, during a speech. Like crudely referring to a network television figure’s menstruation—while on a rival television network.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 27, out of 28

15. Irresponsibility

This is another seemingly easy item that is actually difficult to nail to the wall.

What is irresponsibility? Not crediting John McCain’s heroism because he got captured, when you yourself avoided the military draft four or five times?

Is irresponsibility shown by taking a position on guns in nightclubs that’s so extreme that the legislative director of the National goddamned Rifle Association condemns it?

Is irresponsibility—at least to the millions of lost souls who actually think you’d make a great American president rather than merely the last American president—to even make a joke (if it was a joke) that if offered $5 billion to drop out, “I guess we’d have to think about it?” Is the word more applicable or less if it comes out the next day that during May your campaign spent at least $6 million at businesses you own?

The problem with this heading is that so much of what fits vaguely into “irresponsibility” (promiscuity, bankruptcy, punching out your teacher) fits like jigsaw pieces into the other categories. That doesn’t mean the examples are ineligible, just imprecise. But it does mean we have to score conservatively.

Points Awarded: 1
Running Score: 28, out of 30

16. Failure to accept responsibility for one’s own actions

Again, you can’t give more than two points in any category.

Both of my favorite examples here involve interviews with The Washington Post. On May 24, Trump was caught having not yet donated the money from the purported Veterans’ fund-raiser he staged as counter-programming to the January debate he bailed out of. The Post quoted his remarks at the fund-raiser—which was televised nationally: “We just cracked $6 million! Right? Six million.” Trump replied, “I didn’t say six.” The somewhat startled Post staffer said it was on tape. “Play it for me,” Trump replied, “because I’d like to hear it.” The Post reported that Trump then manipulated the conversation to another topic, precluding the playing of the video.

Eleven days earlier, the tape of him speaking in his own voice but pretending to be “spokesman John Miller” was revealed. When, during a phone interview, a Post reporter brought it up, Trump simply hung up the phone.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 30, out of 32

17. Many short-term marital relationships

This depends on numerical definitions. Despite the falling of religious barriers against divorce and the rise of the pre-nup, the mean is still around just 1.2 marriages per American, and the number of men who marry more than once is only about 15 percent. But Trump’s marriages still total only three, and their lengths (14, 6, and 11 years) are hardly in the annulled-by-sunset range.

Points Awarded: 0
Running Score: 30, out of 34

18. Juvenile delinquency

Not every student at Trump’s high-priced alma mater, New York Military Academy, was automatically the son of rich parents who had been afforded a choice not offered to the less affluent fellow troubled kids: military school or reform school. That would be a cliché.

But the one on-the-record firsthand assessment we have of Trump-as-child cuts through clichés and reputations. “He was a pretty rough fellow when he was small,” said Donald Trump’s father, explaining why he had to pull him out of a traditional prep school in their native Queens and ship him away to N.Y.M.A.

There are plenty of classmates at the military boarding school who paint a picture of a kid always throwing hands. On June 22, The Washington Post profiled Trump-as-N.Y.M.A.-inmate. “Struck with a broomstick during a fight, he tried to push a fellow cadet out a second-floor window, only to be thwarted when two other students intervened.”

The paper also quoted one of his pre-N.Y.M.A. teachers. “He would sit with his arms folded with this look on his face—I use the word surly—almost daring you to say one thing or another that wouldn’t settle with him.”

The Post quotes a younger neighbor named Dennis Burnham. “Once when she left Dennis in a playpen in a backyard adjoining the Trumps’ property, Martha Burnham returned to find Donald throwing rocks at her son. “She saw Donald standing at the fence,” Dennis Burnham said, “using the playpen for target practice.”

This is the sort of stuff that would make a bully flinch.

Plus, we have the boast from little Donnie Trump at about seven blackening the eye of an adult. Do we have records of the police being called? No. Nor does the category heading ask for them, and that becomes of critical importance as we come down the home stretch.

Points Awarded: 2
Running Score: 32, out of 36

19. Revocation of conditional release

Don’t be worried if this confuses you. Confusion only means you’re not a parole officer. This is legal lingo for getting your parole revoked or, say, your probation converted back into jail time because you were just caught doing that illegal thing that had gotten you in trouble in the first place. It is very specifically a criminal-record issue. Having to repeatedly delete offensive tweets, then tweeting an image of Hillary next to a “Star of David” atop a pile of money, then deleting that, then claiming there was nothing wrong with the tweet, doesn’t count.

Points Awarded: 0
Running Score: 32, out of 38

20. Criminal versatility

The psychological professional and I got into a big debate about this one. She argued that “criminal” is not necessarily meant literally here, that if you scammed charities, stole money from grandmothers via a phony university, and directed about 20 percent of your campaign’s monthly spending toward companies you own and the reimbursement for travel by your children, it all qualified.

My point was that the word “criminal” is used. Not “dishonest,” not “unethical,” not “nefarious.” Capital-C “criminal” and the perp walk or multi-million-dollar fine and restitution that that implies. Not that that couldn’t be the end result of “Trump U” but it isn’t, not yet.

Points Awarded: 0
Final Score: 32, out of 40

So, there you have it. He peters out toward the end there, but with 30 points being the marker at which professionals could present a diagnosis of psychopathy, the implications are clear. Our Trumperor’s New Clothes media rightly sees the latest Trump “event”—whatever it is this time—as one of the most unbelievable developments in American political history. But the simple mechanics of following, reporting, and writing the proverbial “new high in low” every single day means that they could be missing one overriding truth about the health of the most remarkable presidential candidate since at least 1864.

In short, our amateurs’ exercise with the very professional Hare Psychopathy Checklist suggests that if you were betting on it, you’d probably want to bet that Donald Trump couldn’t pass a sanity test—open book.

And now, having slogged through this inventory of the Citizen Kane Storage Unit of bizarre presidential candidate conduct, go look at Twitter. Because in the time it took you to read this, he’s probably just done something new to raise his score.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/ ... anity-test

-Marie-
Last edited by Marie on Thu Jul 21, 2016 1:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You find out what someone is really like in "battle," and Olbermann is who you want to be in a foxhole with, Patrick said. "On the air, we had each others' backs," said Olbermann.
-David Goetzl: "Keith Olbermann, Dan Patrick still brothers long after ESPN's 'Big Show'"; MediaPost blog, 4-6-2012


Image

User avatar
Slfriend79
Site Admin
Posts: 9978
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: In The TARDIS Or At U.N.I.T. Headquarters
Contact:

Re: Keith has a SURPRISE tomorrow AM

Postby Slfriend79 » Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:48 am

Vanity Fair posted it on YouTube. [smilie=pdt_piratz_19.gif]

" I'm not scared of Hell. It's just Heaven for bad people." Peter Capaldi As The Twelfth Doctor - Heaven Sent

User avatar
scifibird
Certified Fan
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:47 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Keith has a SURPRISE tomorrow AM

Postby scifibird » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:04 pm

Huffington Post has it on the front page http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/donald-trump-keith-olbermann-sanity-test - I am so thrilled to see Keith again getting into politics but it makes me miss him even more, if that's even possible!

Linda

User avatar
Marie
Certified Fan
Posts: 32292
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: In front of my computer

Re: Keith has a SURPRISE tomorrow AM

Postby Marie » Sat Jul 23, 2016 4:31 pm

Finally listened -- just listened -- to this w/ my DH. Keith has kept his chops, he sounds beautiful.

Come back, KO!

-Marie-
You find out what someone is really like in "battle," and Olbermann is who you want to be in a foxhole with, Patrick said. "On the air, we had each others' backs," said Olbermann.
-David Goetzl: "Keith Olbermann, Dan Patrick still brothers long after ESPN's 'Big Show'"; MediaPost blog, 4-6-2012


Image

User avatar
Marie
Certified Fan
Posts: 32292
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: In front of my computer

Keith: LIVE discussion 5pm today on Facebook

Postby Marie » Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:39 pm

I'll be joining @VanityFair & @VFHive for a Facebook Live feed at 5 PM EDT today to discuss the DNC and [sanity test]
https://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/stat ... 2393464832.


UPDATE: Watch it here:
https://www.facebook.com/VFHive/videos/ ... =2&theater
Image

-Marie-
You find out what someone is really like in "battle," and Olbermann is who you want to be in a foxhole with, Patrick said. "On the air, we had each others' backs," said Olbermann.
-David Goetzl: "Keith Olbermann, Dan Patrick still brothers long after ESPN's 'Big Show'"; MediaPost blog, 4-6-2012


Image


Return to “Keith Olbermann”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests