I'm not sure "sociopath" accurately describes all politicians. Certainly a large part of that population is comprised of narcissists with a sense of infallibility, but few are entirely without a sense of conscience. Our current President certainly seems to be unable to accept responsibility for failure, ready to accept acclaim for unearned successes, and feel unashamed for a lack of empathy (as in going for another round of golf immediately after witnessing the beheading of an American journalist). He, for one, does seem to meet the definition of sociopath.

SIDNEY BRUHL: Those little brushes with the authorities, in your infancy as it were--before you matured and settled down, so to speak--did any of the courts, the social workers, the shrinks--did anyone ever use...the...word...

CLIFFORD ANDERSON: What word, love?

SB: Sociopath. That is what it's called, is it not?

CA: Yes, that's what it's called. Does that word frighten you?

SB: No, no. It doesn't frighten me. It does, however, give me pause. Clinically it mean, as I'm sure you know, one who has no sense of moral obligation whatsoever. Now if--and I repeat if--I were to kick over the traces, and actually...engage in such a wildly adventurous collaboration, I wonder if...

CA: If what?

SB: I wonder if it wouldn't be a trifle starry-eyed of me to contemplate a partnership when I can count on no sense of moral obligation whatsoever.

CA: Are you trying to say that you don't think you can trust me?

SB: How clearly you put it.

-- from "Deathtrap" by Ira Levin

I've often wondered why there were very few admirable politicians, and those that are admirable are usually at lower state and local levels. In order to get good politicians we would have to assume that an individual would be interested in the 'public service' often after a life spent pursuing ones own private interest. The ideal would be a person who sees this service as a patriotic duty serving ones own self interest in another way. A rational, intelligent person would understand that some government is a necessity and the system we have set up does require elected officials. The reality is that so many are just so completely average people who find power in politics and use it to try to make themselves not so average. We live in a system where average people can get rich, money is easy to come by in the US, it has been for at least the past 40 years or so. Subsequently,average people have the money to spend on campaigns and the like. The more power and money you put into government, the more of these average, power hungry people you will attract. More wealthy second-handers + the pull of a powerful government with an unlimited budget = inevitable collapse. It's a logical progression.

Hello freedomforall,
It is rare, but not impossible to have a reluctant candidate.
"Most candidates, past and present, have fought hard for their party's nomination. Today, many politicians make this their life's work as they move from city, to state, to national office. This has not always been the case.
Many people don't realize that our country's very first presidential candidate, George Washington, was reluctant to accept the office. "I cannot describe, the painful emotions which I felt in being called upon to determine whether I would accept or refuse the Presidency of the United States."
Washington had fully intended to retire to Mount Vernon when the Constitutional Convention was over. But Washington's sense of duty to his new country outweighed his desire to withdraw from public life.
Washington was not the only candidate to feel reluctant about the presidency. James K. Polk accepted the party's nomination as a duty "neither sought nor declined."
Accessed 1.13.08 http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/ele...

http://www.eiu.edu/eiutps/campaigns.php

Respectfully,
O.A.

this got Maslow back into conversation -- Kaila Halling
will be glad!

the U.S. was set up to have representatives -- the
House, part-timers by popular election, and the Senate,
part-timers by State legislature selection -- work
for us in D.C. to maintain the nation. how have things
changed, over the years::: this Phoenix has crashed
and burned, and risen from the ashes as an Albatross
around our necks. -- j

RE: Esteem. There are two sources of esteem, internal and external. Individuals who think individually (Rand's characters) do not seek external validation; they are their own validation.

From Eric Hoffer:

"We all have private ails. The troublemakers are they who need public cures for their private ails."

"Our quarrel with the world is an echo of the endless quarrel proceeding within us."

"It is loneliness that makes the loudest noise. This is true of men as of dogs."

"A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding. When it is not, he takes his mind off his own meaningless affairs by minding other people's business."

And (because I can't find the quote) a paraphrase: "The desire to help is often a disguise for the desire to control."

Watch Thomas Sheridan on Psychopaths

Great article & eye opening. Thanks for posting.

Don't think sociopath is the word, though it is certainly possible, since altruism is largely absent.
This is why I support mandatory term limits of one six year term for senators and three two year terms for the house.

The corrupted system we mistakenly refer to as the United States (the US died in 1913) attracts the cream of the crap.

The only solution is to fix the system via Constitutional Amendment Repeal and Repair.
http://02f8c87.netsolhost.com/WordPress/...