lf2

Open letter to Huma Abedin: You’re married to a sociopath

Huma Abedin

Huma Abedin photographed for Vogue in 2007

Dear Ms. Abedin,

People are perplexed. Your husband, Anthony Weiner, has humiliated you again. Yet at a press conference last week, you continued to support him, and his candidacy for mayor of New York City. “I love him. I have forgiven him. I believe in him,” you said.

Why would you do this? Speculation by media pundits, New York City voters and average citizens usually follows three themes:

  1. You want to keep your family together at all costs.
  2. You believe you can help your husband overcome his problems.
  3. You are a political animal and will do anything to get your husband elected.

Read: Why does Huma Abedin put up with Weiner?, on CNN.com.

I don’t know you personally, and what I know of your situation comes only from watching you and Weiner in televised interviews and from media reports. But what I see and read is uncomfortably familiar, so I think there is another explanation for your actions.

Your humiliation

Anthony Weiner was once a congressman from New York. But in 2011, less than a year into your marriage, he sent a photo of his crotch to his 45,000 Twitter followers. It was a mistake, because he meant to send it to a woman with whom he was having an online affair—while you were pregnant with his child. First he claimed his Twitter account was hacked. He finally had no choice but to admit the truth—it was him. He did it. Weiner resigned in disgrace from Congress on June 16, 2011

Then, he did it again.

Last week, Sydney Leathers, a young woman from Indiana revealed that she had an online affair with Weiner. According to TheDirty.com, Leathers first started talking to him in July 2012 after he resigned from Congress, after you had forgiven him and after he sought therapy. By August your husband was having regular phone sex with the girl—telling her that he loved her and would buy her a condo in Chicago. By November 2012, the relationship “began to fizzle out.”

Leathers wasn’t the only one. At another press conference last week, Weiner admitted he sexted three women after he resigned from Congress. Why would he behave in a manner that is not only disrespectful to you and your marriage, but downright stupid?

Ms. Abedin, your husband has a problem that won’t be solved by therapy. He has a personality disorder. He is a sociopath.

Sociopathic behavior

If you’re like most people, you may think that a sociopath is a serial killer. This is occasionally true, but in reality, most sociopaths never kill anyone.

Sociopaths have enormous egos, inflated self-esteem and an unbelievable sense of entitlement. They are smooth talkers, and prolific liars. They are sexually promiscuous. They are aggressive, impulsive, reckless, and when caught behaving badly, defiant. Does this sound familiar?

Sociopaths blame others for everything, including their own bad behavior. Your husband did, after all, blame his sexting on “a rough time” in your marriage. In other words, it was your fault that he was forced to seek companionship elsewhere. This is, I assure you, typical sociopathic justification.

You are the perfect target

You may think that the people who are exploited by sociopaths get in trouble because they aren’t very smart or suffer from low self-esteem. Again, this is occasionally true. But research by Dr. Liane Leedom shows that women who love sociopaths share three distinctive traits:

1. Extraversion. Extraverted women are competitive, outgoing, action-oriented, curious, ambitious, excitement-seeking and sometimes impulsive. They like men who have the same qualities.

2. Invested in relationships. Personal relationships are very important, and the source of great satisfaction. These women are sentimental and attach deeply to the people they care about.

3. Cooperativeness. Cooperative women are empathetic, tolerant and value getting along with others. They are willing to compromise their own interests for the big picture including the ambitions of their mates.

Again, I don’t know you personally, but from what I’ve read, I’ll bet that these traits describe you.

The seduction

Sociopaths are exploiters. They look for people who have something that they want. You certainly had plenty that a man with unbridled political ambition would want. Not only are you smart and beautiful, but as an important assistant to Hillary Clinton, you have access to power. Real power.

Once Anthony Weiner set his sights on you, he probably followed the sociopathic playbook to win you. Typically they engage in love bombing showering you with attention and affection, wanting to be with you all the time, engaging in over-the-top displays of devotion.

Maureen Dowd reported, “Weiner wooed Huma assiduously, showing up at the Westchester airport in the wee hours to pick her up when she came back from trips with Hillary.”

I imagine that Weiner also painted a glowing picture of your future together, how successful the two of you would be, and all the wonderful things he could do for the public, with you at his side. I heard a similar story from my sociopathic ex-husband.

Here’s one of the most insidious ways in which sociopaths snag you: They find out what your dreams are, and then promise to make them come true. Except they can’t, and eventually it all comes crashing down.

Asking for forgiveness

After the first sexting scandal, I assume your husband put on quite a show of sorrow and remorse. He probably apologized profusely, perhaps with tears rolling down his cheeks. He had some plausible but lame excuse maybe the fact that you were pregnant. He promised to seek therapy. He swore he would never do it again.

You, being your own woman, were furious. But as a woman invested in relationships, and with a child on the way, you probably felt like the right thing to do was believe that your husband would keep his word and stay in your marriage. You worked through your anger for the good of your family, and for both of your careers.

While my ex-husband was burning through all of my cash and credit pursuing his dreams of entrepreneurial success, I asked myself, “What kind of wife leaves her husband because his business plans aren’t working out?” So perhaps you asked yourself, “What kind of wife leaves her husband because of stupid texts?”

The texts are not the problem, they are a symptom of the problem. The real problem Anthony Weiner’s personality disorder cannot be solved.

Trust is gone

I imagine that by now, your trust in Anthony Weiner is gone. As it should be.

I imagine that Anthony Weiner pressured you into appearing at that press conference with him. (By the way, Jim McGreevey did the same thing to his wife, Dina, when he gave his “I am a gay American” speech.  McGreevey  is not gay. He is also a sociopath.)

I imagine that once again, Anthony Weiner is doing everything he can to make sure you don’t leave him. He is displaying over-the-top love and affection. He is begging your forgiveness. He is promising  that with you at his side, he will be elected, and then the two of you will do so much to make life better for the citizens of New York City. He is appealing for your help to overcome his character flaws.

Ms. Abedin, there is no rehabilitation for a sociopath. Your husband will never be honest, forthright, caring and monogamous.

I am so sorry for the embarrassment you have suffered. I hope this information helps you to decide what is best for you to do now.

 



Comment on this article

64 Comments on "Open letter to Huma Abedin: You’re married to a sociopath"

Notify of

Donna…WELL Said!! Eloquent, lucid and accurate.
Your angst at the fact that this beautiful accomplished lady has been victimized after being deliberately targeted comes through clearly. Wish I could somehow get this piece in her inbox….
My heart hurts for her….
When our LF readers say we can empathize boy do we ever mean it!!!!

Every word of this may be perfectly true. Sadly, whether Huma Abedin is willing to believe it of her husband is another matter entirely!

“You may remember the old Persian saying, ‘There is danger for him who taketh the tiger cub, and danger also for whoso snatches a delusion from a woman.’ There is as much sense in Hafiz as in Horace, and as much knowledge of the world.”

Some readers may recognize this line from Sherlock Holmes. In this particular tale, Holmes had discovered that the man who was wooing his female client had been deceiving her. Holmes dealt with this scoundrel in person, but unusually for him, he did not reveal to his client what he had found out about her suitor. This could have left Holmes open to the charge of failing to fulfill all his duties to his client. However, he explained this omission to Watson with the line quoted above, implying it would be futile to enlighten the lady because

“If I tell her, she will not believe me.”

This truth is reflected time and time again in real life. Countless people have found that when a person—not just a “woman” either; men are much the same—is “in love” with someone who is “no good” for one reason or another, that’s the last thing they want to hear about their beloved! The well-meaning friend who tries to open their eyes to reality is likely to find himself or herself very unpopular.

Hafiz implied more than mere refusal to believe, and that the unwelcome messenger was likely to be “shot” as well. This is a fate that Holmes may also have been anxious to avoid. That story of course was fiction, but this particular peril was reflected in real life by the experience of Dr. Robert Hare for one.

In Without Conscience, Dr. Hare related how a woman he knew became enamored with a man she’d met at that most respectable of venues, her church. This man appeared just as respectable himself, boasting good business skills in addition. The woman was contemplating a large investment in one of his business ventures. But as luck would have it, this man claimed to have graduated from the same university as Dr. Hare. When Hare met him and tried to share experiences of that hall of learning, he began to suspect that the man had never been there. A swift check revealed not only that his old alma mater had never heard of the fellow, but that he was a swindler wanted in several countries.

Finding his cover blown, this bunco artist did a rapid exit stage left and was last seen heading for the tall timber. Nobody will be surprised at the disillusionment felt by the lady he’d been romancing. However, anyone might reasonably have expected her to feel grateful to Dr. Hare for saving her from what was demonstrably a disastrous mistake. On the contrary, the good Doctor reported that she was angry at him for “destroying her fantasy world.”

Conan Doyle was right. There is indeed sense in Hafiz, and all too often no good deed goes unpunished.

Robert M. Sapolsky suspects Weiner is a sociopath as well. Sapolsky is a professor of biology and neurology, so he has relevant expertise. Here’s his article from last Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, 27 July:

The Appeal of Embarrassment

Hello all,
Donna, this is an excellent letter. It systematically breaks down each facet of the situation and the anticipated responses by a man who is most certainly a sociopath. I think that your comments about understanding the reason ie: personality disorder, shows an integral part of healing through acceptance and understanding.
Redwald points out another interesting element- denial. It does seem as though some victims turn the other way when they have plenty of information to come to a conclusion on their own, and there are probably many reasons for wanting to continue the ‘fantasy world’ they have created. Maybe, as chaotic and crazy as their world appears to everyone else, to the victim, there may be a sense of comfort in the familiar. And the fear of the fallout and unknown repercussions may be greater than those of their predictable (albeit tremendously unhealthy) world.
And maybe I can introduce a third possibility. What we see in the news is a collection of evidence compiled in a tidy package meant for greatest shock value, but in my experience, I received information more like a slow leak that was easily ‘cleaned up’ and rationalized bit by bit. As dramatic as the events may have been, it seems sociopaths can talk their way out of anything when they are one-on-one, face-to-face with someone they know intimately. When each piece has been put in a place that the mind accepts, it actually takes a lot to bring them all back together to see the big picture. Maybe Huma Abedin is still seeing things through the warped reasoning of her husband. If he can get up in front of the cameras and nonchalantly suggest there will be more photos coming out, so don’t be surprised, as if he’s doing a good thing by forewarning, as if the pictures aren’t of him, imagine how he can twist and manipulate the woman who is most vested in the relationship and the mother of his young child, no less.

My psychologist gave me an assignment, he wanted me to dissect a post by the latespath line by line. It took me 5 days of work to write him back. I have never felt such pain and hurt as I did, doing this. I got physically sick, nauseous, light headed, actually on the verge of tears ( I have not been able to cry in decades).

It forced me to see the latespath, as he saw himself, line by line. To accept or contradict his every word.

I had to be honest, I couldn’t bury my head in the sand any longer. Deny what happened. I had to face the misery I am living because of his actions.

It was similar to what Donna did in this post.

It would be a very positive thing if Huma Abedin would read the post and then write her answer to Donna’s post line by line. She would be forced to see Anthony for what he is, to realize how he is destroying her bit by bit. To see the truth word by word. To see the fantasy that he is constructing and welcoming her to live in.

Donna right on! Thank you helping, even after almost 5 years, I still need it.

Today’s Daily News has a chilling interview with Anthony Weiner. The photos of Weiner are just as disturbing.

He talks about bring dishonor on his wife, how his sexting was a distant event.

More importantly he dismisses his actions in terms of the voters, saying that they don’t care about him as a person, only as a politician.

Yep, definitely a spath. Please Huma, open your eyes. While all of this is in the public, that is not a reason. You have your own life, live it for you, not rationalizing, making excuses.

In my opinion people are taking the Weiner situation FAR TOO SERIOUSLY!

A lot of adults “sext;” at present Weiner isn’t an elected official so if he’s performing these activities without the knowledge and consent of his wife then that is a private matter between the two of them; assuming he has not been in contact with anyone under age eighteen.

He was an elected congressman and resigned due to the fallout from the first sexting in 2011. It’s a repeat pattern.

When you run for elected office, your entire life becomes an open book available for the scrutiny of the public.

Privacy and secrecy are things that many spaths depend on. As long as they feel secure that no one will expose them (no pun intended), tattle on them, they feel invincible and act accordingly.

Donna, is it possible he’s a narcissist and not a sociopath? I know the dividing line is blurry here, but do we really know enough about their relationship behind closed doors to suspect that he’s a sociopath?

I agree with moonwave.

One more thing: There was an interesting article in July 22’s New York magazine (published before the other sexting scandal came out) where he says he “feels like a character in Blue Velvet” which I thought was a very bizarre thing to publicly say for someone who is running for political office. I know New Yorkers are open-minded, but hey…

What a hoot! I don’t suppose Weiner said WHICH character in Blue Velvet he had in mind? (I’m thinking “Frank,” naturally!) 😀

He could be right. “Things” do have a habit of popping unexpectedly out of the closet and hitting him publicly in the face, so to speak… threatening to put paid to his career!

No mention that this is culturally acceptable Muslim behvior for a man and a wife is taught to expect it and accept it.

This is not true. Islam is as good (or as bad!) as Christianity so please stop posting ignorant comment and read something about the history of Christianity and Islam. In their darkest ages, Muslims never thought about manufacturing “Chastity Belts” to keep their wives from having sex with their neighbors.
If we judge by what is going on in the “Christian” political arena, your comment makes more sense if you substitute the word Christian in place of Muslim but Wiener’s behavior (and his wife’s reaction to it) has nothing to do with religion.

Agreed…my first husband, of 13 years, a sweet Muslim man, would NEVER have behaved this way. Neither would his friends, or the men in his family.

That Muslim men are egotistical, misogynistic, cheaters is a naive stereotype.

Thank you for clarifying one of the many stereotypical misconceptions. A man or a woman has the same desire to be respected and treated with dignity but they do override this fundamental human characteristic when their minds are clouded by their emotions. This is where psychopaths or sociopaths (I prefer to use the word psychopath as defined by Dr. Hare) turn the loving and innocent into tools for satisfying their wicked desires and sick personalities. That is the real issue. No culture or religion condones such abuse. To say otherwise is to hide our heads in the sand.

What troubles me about Weiner is that he has sent photos of himself to people who did not request them and by subsequent comments, did not want them.

This isn’t sexting. This is exhibitionism. Exhibitionism is sometimes, not always, a gateway behavior to rape.

I am baffled that hasn’t been pointed out in the press.

She’s hard to read. She could be a victim, or she’s just as messed up as he is, on a different scale. If she’s standing by him in a quest for her own power, then she’s going to be doing this over and over again. Once a narcissist knows that they can get away with something, especially with virtually no consequences, it’s a green light for them.

Wow. I’ve been thinking this for days, that Weiner is a sociopath. I knew I was right. Been reading Lovefraud long enough to be able to pick them out! Had no idea mcgreevy wans’t gay and was just a sociopath though…..great heads up article. I feel saddened for her, but the best thing she can do now is GTFO with that baby of hers and leave him flat on his ass!

Huma Abedin is not only married to the man – she also married his political career. Political wives have roles they are expected to play, regardless of what side of the aisle or what ideology their spouses embrace. There have been so many of these “stand by your man” appearances by spouses at press conferences in recent years – the only one who hasn’t is Mark “Hiking the Appalachian Trail” Sanford’s wife, who later kicked him to the curb and filed for divorce. It’s what these ladies do, until they decide they can’t do it anymore.

Coming from the same political bent as the Weiners are, I can say without any reservations that he was an outstanding congressman and represented his constituency and the country admirably. That’s what was so utterly confusing about personal life to me, and probably to her as well. I definitely did see Human Abedin as a victim the first time he got busted. I forgave him for his indiscretions and wished him well. I wasn’t even certain that that photo and the resulting scandal merited his resignation because it had nothing to do with his professional life. Now I don’t have any doubts. He doesn’t belong in office, and I don’t think his wife would consider herself a victim. She made choices, knowing what she knew, and she still stands by him politically.

What a wonderful open letter with great points. My additional thoughts to those well written already are related to working on the self as the woman and the Mother of the child. When evaluating what can I do about such a situation as this- that Huma finds herself now in- Ask the question in this way- I know my husband is sick- that is for certain. SO, what is wrong with me that I would have chosen to be with such a sick person? THIS HARD BUT HUGE QUESTION PROMPTS one to work on yourself to gain that answer and heal your heart and soul, that GIFT of healing yourself is the best one for you and your child. Spend the energy and healing path work on you and your life- the only one you can control and change. I promise that therapy WORK- AND IT WILL BE HARD WORK- will bring you much happiness for you and your son.

^ Why should “She” work on herself? Mr. Penis should work on himself…why should it be looked on as “her therapy” to work on herself? We as women just need to watch out for creeper’s like him! Just have a heads up when somebody is love bombing you….ask yourself, “Why is this person so nice?” Why is it my fault as a women that picked such a jerk? I say, pick yourself up, dust yourself off and learn from that mistake…or try to

If we assume that Huma is a victim she has a long and hard road ahead of herself to regain her self esteem, herself. That doesn’t happen over night. Even if she acts like she is in control, eventually the damage, the hurt, the pain will come down on her like a ton of bricks.

Therapy is not a painless magic bullet.

If we accept that Anthony is a sociopath no amount of work, nothing will actually help him, although he could probably fake it for a while.

Ellen, I don’t know how long you were a target or how much you lost. I was married to the latespath for 33 years (divorce was not an option for safety reasons)and knew him for 47. Financial damage close to 2 million dollars, none of it his money. In the last week of his life he out and out stole between $150,000.00 and $200,000.00 worth of irreplaceable jewelry-none of which he bought. His behavior destroyed 4 generations of my family.

He stole my life, at the beginning-no, but from 1986 to today. No way to get those decades back or forget they existed. I am no longer 30, I am almost 60. Love bombing never happened; he was just what I believed a safe choice, very smart, neighborhood guy. That all started to change when he was 25.

There is no way to ‘brush it off’ and start again. It’s hard some days to just ‘brush off’ the covers and get out of bed.

I agree that it is much more complicated than just picking up and moving on. She needs to work on herself to see why she was susceptible in the first place, in the very least. I don’t think many people question nice behavior, especially if it’s done in a way that fits the needs of the recipient. That’s what con artists do so well. And what may seem obvious to others, is not as clear when your standing in the middle of it and your life has been turned upside down. No matter what happens, she has been hurt, lied to, publicly humiliated, and has to deal with this man for the rest of her life because of their son. It isn’t her fault that she was targeted, but just as Lost commented, therapy won’t help him, but it will make her stronger than him, and then she can pick herself up and learn from her experience- hopefully.

Dear Huma,

How much humiliation can you take? will you take? I know, I’ve been there, but suffered humiliation in a very different way – little of it public. Please get out, and get healthy. You don’t deserve this. If politics is what you like- you can do it yourself. Personally, I think Hillary Clinton would’ve had a lot better chance at becoming President if she had dumped Bill. He also humiliated her. You, Hillary, ANY woman will be seen so much more favorably for standing up to these dirt bags. He is a scumball. And even more, he can’t stop.

He pretends to be the victim. Remember how he lied in the beginning. He said his account was hacked. LIE. He is addicted to internet sex. He is a coward, a liar, a weak weak man.

Dump him. You are better than this.
Donna – you nailed it. Big Fat Huge Spath.

There is a very plausible explanation for why Huma is sticking to her man. She’s caught in the toxic glue of a betrayal bond.

Unfortunately, the unmasking of her husband’s foibles came about as hormones were heightened in her body during pregnancy. Folks who encounter betrayal can easily become addicted to the perpetrator as the neurotransmitters that provide trust and pleasure grind to an abrupt halt. Shocking emotional pain can produce this result and make the victim addicted to the person they should be running away from. Having this happen during pregnancy exacerbates the problem.

Just as an alcoholic strives to recreate the chemical balance that numbs their pain, betrayal bond sufferers will hold onto the means that created their brain’s internal “pleasure” chemistry. It’s not something that she is likely to be consciously aware of, but driven by none-the-less.

She needs a therapist who is familiar with betrayal bonding in order to break the addiction. Or one day, an even more brutal or devastating blow may force her to face reality.

Psychopaths don’t pick on other psychopaths. They go after people who have the “trust and forgiveness molecule”. It’s the neurotransmitter oxytocin and it’s lacking in psychopaths. That’s what makes US human and why we think of THEM as the lowest form of life in the animal kingdom.

While we might think our emotions are simply manifested by our experiences, they are molded to a great degree by our brain chemistry. Huma’s is very broken right now. Betrayal bonds can start in an instant and may never go away. She will find herself caught in a vortex between loving and being repulsed by this man and it will be very difficult for her to maintain any trust or a sense of normalcy with him. Without help, however, she may not become capable of walking away.

jm_short,

Great post, explaining why Huma is unable to break free of her husband. I feel badly for her, knowing that her husband’s behavior has been very hurtful, confusing, etc. Hopefully, she can find the strength to do what’s right for herself.

I imagine the reason Huma does not choose to leave her husband is the same reason many of us took so long… she does not yet understand the magnitude of his behavior and what it means.

I know when my exhusband first seemed out of character, I made excuses. I wasn’t perfect, I had times of thoughtlessness, of being shorttempered. (although I didn’t blame others when I was out of sorts, I was accountable.)In fact, as bad as things got, and devolved into a nightmare, I did not truly see my husband with mask fully off until near “the end” of our marriage (I quote the end b/c I found out there was NO beginning, it was a fraud from day one!) Until then, I was ambivelent, thinking I married for better or for worse and that even thinking about ending my marriage was the cowards way out.

Or…. since Huma plays in political circles, maybe she’s just another political animal in the game of exploitation and using others. I hope that’s not the case, but I can’t rule it out. Washington seems to have that effect on people, turning them into the souless.

P.s. Great Letter Donna, tough but compassionate. I hope SOMEBODY reads it to her.

I am reading and identifying with so much of what has been shared under this post. DawnG spoke of Huma’s marriage to “the politician”. The glue that kept my marriage together was my husband’s contribution as “the theologian”. Just as Weiner has something to contribute politically, my husband has something of theological significance to give. I believed, and still believe, in my husband’s message as it pertains to the science of religion (Christian doctrine). Just because a person is a sociopath, doesn’t mean that they are devoid of talent, devoid of creativity, or lacking in ability. It saddens me that the piece of Christian theology he could have contributed was buried by a severe character disorder. Does my husband have true religious convictions? Does Weiner have true political convictions? Or do they just know how to play the game. I know that as his wife, I was committed to clarifying Christian doctrine even as Huma is probably deadly earnest concerning politics. Leaving my husband meant that i would decrease his credibility as a Bible teacher. If Huma leaves, her husband’s credibility as a politician will suffer. Neither of us wants to hinder our respective messages.
Ultimately, the wives don’t save or destroy the husbands’ work. They are all to eager to self-destruct and the responsibility lies with them.

I am not convinced that Weiner is a Sociopath. A Narcissist — yes. Prone to compulsive behavior — yes. Unfit for public service — yes.

Keep in mind that Narcissistic Personality Disorder is a Cluster-B PD just as Sociopathy, or Anti-Social PD if you prefer. Anyone with any Cluster-B Disorder is toxic and at certain times, distinguishing between PDs can be very difficult, even for professional having personal contact with the individual.

My belief that Weiner is not a Sociopath is primarily based upon his lack of anger and other personality traits. For example compare Weiner to Lance Armstrong, who has a second career as Sociopathy’s poster boy. Armstrong lashes out at all accusers with a taken no prisoners style. He lies, cheats, manipulates and is prone to odd actions when he looses control.

Other than perhaps manipulating his wife, and relatively benign lies to cover his behavior, I see no other overt Sociopathic traits in Weiner.

All sociopaths are superficially charming but their charm is unique — engaging but cold. In fact, the best description I ever read about a Socioapth is that they are “charming, but with an overall cold demeanor.” Since this description fit my x-spath to the letter, perhaps I place too much emphasis on its validity, but this description also fits Lance Armstrong but does not fit Weiner.

In addition, Weiner does not seem to attack accusers and has not demonstrated any odd outbursts. Compare him to Newt Gingrich — http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/21/republican-debate-why-newt-gingrich-s-performance-should-disqualify-him.html

I fail to see the benefit in labeling specifics from a layman’s perspective. The umbrella of Antisocial Personality Disorder covers multiple dysfunctionally cruel people, but is not determinable without specific testing.

Not all Sociopaths or Psychopaths exude a coolness. They exude whatever will enable them to cozy up to their victim. The difference between Sociopathy and Psychopathy has more to do with the origination of the condition than its affect. My ex could be very warm and engaging. His Psychiatrist labelled him a Psychopath.

I see Weiner’s behavior toward his wife as far more than manipulation, although he does succeed in manipulating her. It was betrayal. While she may not feel it (yet), there is far more to her story, and why she fails to do so, than what we are capable of analyzing.

Narcissists throw others under the bus to make themselves look good. Self aggrandizement is what they’re after at any cost. I fail to see Weiner’s “sexting” as self aggrandizement. In fact, I see it as just the opposite; acts that I think he believed would never become public.

He seems to have fetishes that are testosterone driven and no boundaries which reflect a lack of oxytocin. If we’re giving out labels, he exhibits two motivators that stick him in the Sociopath/Psychopath category.

But the debate is kind of on the order of whether the person was run over by an elephant or a mammoth. Either way, they got crushed.

JmS

So typical a sociopath to use one lame excuse for another. He twittered his gonads, and explains they where meant for the women he was messing around with. Which is the lesser evil. Sociopaths cannot distinguish. That’s the hard lesson I learned in life.

Website for network ABC New York just post a story about Weiner and sexting: “I’ve been stunned at how some people have been very mean to Huma and the idea she’s being criticized for working hard to keep this marriage together and being kind to me. She’s a decent person. She did nothing wrong. She didn’t deserve any of this,” Weiner said. http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/politics&id=9193748

I really liked this passage, it shows, while ostensibly feeling pity for the ‘poor’ treatment of Huma by the ‘people’, he is also saying that he realizes that the ‘public’ is openly criticizing her for staying loyal to him. Is he afraid she will eventually see the reality, and agree with the ‘people’?

He, as well, uses the statement to focus in the things Huma is doing; working hard to keep the marriage, being nice to him. He says nothing in this message as to what he is doing for her.

While saying nothing about himself, he does say ‘she did nothing wrong’. To the best of our knowledge, she is not sexting. If she was doing/had done something that was politically damaging, his opponents or allies, democrat, republican,liberal,conservative(yes NYS has an active and strong Conservative Party, it endorsed Lhota)would have found and either exposed it or damaged controlled it, by now.

I know all about spath ‘tweak speak’. The latespath always blamed me in his posts, emails, texts, for his life in the escorting world. He said I was the one that chose not to have sex with him (true), he also said it was for a few years not the 22 (1986) it actually was. He never once said why I made that choice. Just one example. As ‘homework’. my therapist has me dissect many of the latespath’s writings. Much of what he wrote is true, but incomplete, tweeked just enough. Read by the escorting world they say one thing; read by the real world, those same words say something very different. When ask what he did for a living by the escorting world his response was “gainfully unemployed”; what he was actually saying was ‘I don’t work, I steal and hide it very well’.

Like the actions of the latespath, Mr Weiner your behavior put her in the position she is in now; just like the latespath did to me.

People outside the NYC area may find this interesting. Eliot Spitzer is the former governor of NY forced to resign over an escorting scandal and currently running for controller of NYC.

Fellow candidates: El, no, we don’t cheat
By SALLY GOLDENBERG and YOAV GONEN
Last Updated: 3:25 AM, August 3, 2013
Posted: 1:50 AM, August 3, 2013
Eliot Spitzer seems to be the only major candidate in New York City who can’t say no.

None of the mayoral hopefuls polled by The Post yesterday hesitated when asked, “Do you have a girlfriend?”

“No way! I’ve been happily married to Lorraine for 40 years,” exclaimed long-shot Democratic contender Sal Albanese.

Public Advocate Bill de Blasio joked, “Yes, her name is Chirlane,” referring to wife Chirlane McCray, who is featured prominently in his campaign.

Republican candidate George McDonald quipped, “Call me old-fashioned. I don’t tweet naked pics of myself, have a girlfriend or engage in human trafficking,” a clear dig at candidate Anthony Weiner, whose campaign is coming undone by further revelations that he sexted and shared naked pictures with online girlfriends.

Weiner, married to longtime Hillary Rodham Clinton aide Huma Abedin, simply replied, “No,” when asked if he has a girlfriend.

Democratic Comptroller John Liu, who is running for mayor, answered through spokeswoman Sharon Lee, “Unequivocally, no. John and Jenny Liu have been proudly married for 18 years and she is the bedrock of their beautiful family.”

Republican Joe Lhota and Democrat Bill Thompson, two other mayoral candidates, replied, “No.”

Lhota’s rival, GOP candidate John Catsimatidis, said, “Yes, my wife Margo.”

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who wed longtime partner Kim Catullo last year after New York state legalized gay marriage, responded, “No. I am happily married to the love of my life.”

Independence Party contender Adolfo Carrion said he’s in the same happy boat.

“I’ve had a girlfriend for the last 20 years. She also happens to be my wife,” he said.

Spitzer’s Democratic opponent in the city comptroller’s race, Scott Stringer, said through a representative that he’s faithful to his wife, Elyse Buxbaum.

“No, he has a wife,” spokeswoman Audrey Gelman told The Post.

Stringer and his wife have two young sons Max, 19 months, and Miles, 10 weeks.

Thursday, Spitzer, who is married to but living apart from Silda Wall Spitzer, would not definitively say whether he has a girlfriend when pressed during a campaign stop in Brooklyn.

The Post reported last week that his wife plans to file for divorce later this year, which Spitzer has not denied.

In an interview to be aired tonight on WPIX-11 news, Spitzer tells “Closeup” host Marvin Scott that he’s not answering the girlfriend question “because we will not respond to every rumor and scandalous innuendo that is circulated out there.”

See, Eliot, it’s not that difficult a question to answer:

Q: “DO YOU HAVE A GIRLFRIEND?”

Anthony Weiner: “No.”

Bill de Blasio: “Yes, her name is Chirlane” (his wife).

Bill Thompson: “No.”

George McDonald: “Call me old-fashioned. I don’t tweet naked pics of myself, have a girlfriend or engage in human trafficking.”

Adolfo Carrion: “I’vehadagirlfriend for the last 20 years. She also happens to bemywife.”

John Liu: (through a spokeswoman): “Unequivocally, no. John and JennyLiu have been proudly married for 18 years and she is the bedrock of their beautiful family.”

Christine Quinn: “No. I amhappily married to the love of my life.”

Sal Albanese: “No way! I’ve been happily married to Lorraine for 40 years.”

John Catsimatidis: “Yes, my wife Margo.”

Joe Lhota: “No.”
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/fellow_candidates_el_no_we_don_cheat_xMhRaNIgzofURiybacc9FM

Spitzer is another confusing character. He spent his earlier years doggedly fighting crime on Wall St and was probably one of the most despised and feared men in New York because he was such a champion of justice. Then he obtained higher office and was exposed as a complete douche in his private life. Impulsive, reckless, and stupid.

It’s tough to grasp the mentality of people like Spitzer and Weiner, and even Bill Clinton. They were utter failures as husbands yet perform admirably in their professions. It’s especially confusing when one understands that their political party’s platform rests on empathy for the less fortunate, and all of these men seems to have genuinely worked towards achieving those goals.

Guess nobody told “the Spitz” the old adage:

“Me thinks thou doth protest too much.”

JmS

Huma Abedin is cast right out of vogue magazine I wonder had she a belly, hair loss like myself if she would have even got near him. To me this is the indicative narcissism that can be seen in Washington today.

Hi burning,

I agree, the picture of a wife in a mess her husband put her in, makes her seem oblivious, aloof. Why not a ‘current, everyday’ picture.

Forget about physical attributes, I would have not had enough confidence to pose for photo like that since very early 1991.

No cosmetician, hair stylist, or wardrobe master/mistress would have helped; nor would the addition of a master photographer with a superior knowledge of photo-shop.

The first thing a sociopath attacks is their victims’ self confidence. A person full of self doubt, in my opinion, could never do a photo spread that looks so perfect.

If you wanted to see photos of the other potential first ladies of NYC here is a link: http://www.cityandstateny.com/the-return-of-the-first-lady/

These, obviously, are all posed shots, not candids. It’s a study in contrasts between Huma and all the rest. None of these gals could ever be confused with the cover of a romance novel, nor should they.

I’m afraid I don’t quite see the connection here. That Vogue picture was posed way back in 2007, as the caption states. Huma Abedin wasn’t even married to Weiner until 2010. Here’s the original Vogue article from August 1, 2007, long before any of this trouble ever blew up. They had no reason to portray her as any kind of “victim”; in fact, they called her

Hillary’s Secret Weapon: Huma Abedin

My point exactly, Why use this picture. This is not the picture of a victim. Why use it with a story about a ‘possible’ victim.
If you want to show her before as a strong individual, great but show her today as well.
Don’t use a before picture when addressing the disaster she is living.

Try enlarging the Abedin photo in your browser and see, she’s so thin, she looks like a little girl, not a woman!

This was a very interesting article which brings me to write and request assistance. I have an eye issue and am seeing an eye doctor that specializes in his field. He is well thought of and I really like him. He and I have bantered back and forth for a year with flirting, talking about life, family, etc. Well, I finally got the nerve up to ask him out and he accepted. We had a really nice afternoon/evening and it was innocent. We did not talk for a week only until my next appointment. I asked him how he was feeling about our doctor/patient relationship and he ‘dissed’ me, would not answer any of my questions and since then he has been extremely distant, abrupt and nearly rude.

I know that I did not do anything consciously to jeopardize him in any way – professionally and personally. But with my lousy track record in picking men……is he another nut-bag sociopath? I want to make right decisions, but I am constantly second guessing myself as I really really like this guy.

I have to see a surgeon on Monday and had to return to his office 3 times this week. With each visit, he became more and more distant to where he can barely speak with me.

Can anyone possibly explain what is going on?

Wow, if you’re a patient of his you shouldn’t be seeing one another romantically at all. As a doctor he could get in a lot of trouble over that. Could he have misunderstood your intentions when you “asked him out,” and thought you were just going to be friendly in a purely platonic way? Then perhaps when he realized your interest in him was decidedly romantic, he frantically backpedaled to maintain a proper, “professional” distance.

Fear of being sued for sexual harassment rather than sociopath. I doubt either of you did anything ‘wrong’. You were just on different pages.

Plenty of people, both male and female, will ‘go out’ with their doctor, lawyer, accountant, or other professionals in their lives,for a meal, fishing, or other ‘time out’. But that’s all it is, a break with a client/patient; no underlying agenda. I am quite sure that’s exactly what your doctor took the invite to be.

In the 7 years my mom needed an unreal amount of medical attention for what became a variety of problems, I met many doctors, nurses, therapists, etc. There were months where she had over 30 appointments, many days with more than one appointment. I got to know many of the professionals very well and they me. There were medicals that would home visit my mom and stay for a coffee. One doctor, who had been our family specialist in his field for over 20 years, would walk me and my mom out of his examination room and announce to the waiting room that ‘I was his prom date, way back, and he found me again’, which he certainly was NOT, and give me a smooch. This doctor’s personality is a bit of a ‘wide and crazy’ guy. Since he knew me for decades, he knew I would not get insulted. His actions made me smile, they took my mind off my mom’s problems for a few short minutes. He knew when I was feeling sad or overwhelmed. His, if you will, ‘bed-side manner’.

He might see that your feelings have compromised your position as a patient and his a your doctor. Many people’s reactions is to distance themselves from uncomfortable situations. Your physician’s actions, probably are nothing more than putting distance between the 2 of you so as to not encourage or have you misinterpret in any way, anything he does. Sexual harassment is a very real fear in today’s world.

Perhaps you should ask him or his staff, for a recommendation to see another doctor. You might also feel more comfortable with a new doctor, no more questions about his personality and you would not have to be in a position where you would have to rely on someone you have some feelings for.

Redwald: I don’t know. I asked him about the patient/doctor relationship and explained that if we continued to see each other that the decision would be clear. But, during the ‘date’ he wanted to hug me so to speak and I did, but I made no overtures toward him at all. That is what is so confusing.

He won’t engage me in any conversation at all.

I appreciate you answering. It makes no sense to me and he could have easily said no. I am confused and so upset. I like him a lot, but since he won’t talk to me, I can’t get any specific clarification.

I agree that he crossed the line of professional ethics in going out on a date with a patient. Way over the line. Doctors do not go out with current patients, period.

Why is behaving so strangely? He’s an assclown, that’s what’s up.

Professionals do it all the time, and always have. Golfing, tennis, any sports or sporting event, drinks, free meals or to have meals not eaten alone. It’s how further business is generated or future recommendations are made. He was simply doing what professionals have done forever. The only thing that changed over time is that there is a greater mixing of the sexes on both sides.

It’s very possible he didn’t see it as a date, just business.

Doctors are taught in med school not to cross professional boundaries. They don’t “connect” with current patients and invite them to their homes to divulge intimate details about their lives, etc. It just isn’t done for the very reason we see here. Our shelby is confused by the doctor and her relationship with him because the lines have been badly blurred, and he certainly isn’t clarifying just what the relationship is. Personally, I’ve never known a doctor who behaves in such a shady way. They’re usually strong, take charge characters and there is no ambiguity about just where you stand with them.

The fact that he refuses to clarify the status of their relationship, if for no other reason than to protect himself from a complaint, is a pretty strong indication to me that he did knowingly cross the line into romance/intimate relationship. If he felt that shelby had mistakenly formed a romantic attachment to him, don’t you think he would act, i.e. terminate the doctor/patient relationship and send her to a different doctor?

No, IMO, there’s much more to it than shelby mistakenly forming an attachment to him.

This is on him, not shelby. He’s the professional, and he’s the one who allowed the lines to be blurred.

onmyown: Whew…………thank you. He told me he had a moral compass and that he was sensitive. I figured that he would be able to discern, to me, that should we continue that we would separate professionally. I believed him.

After breaking up with a true s-path, this was so refreshing to hear his modis-operandi. But, his behavior has not reflected anything of the sort.

You didn’t do anything wrong. This is all of his own making.

He’s either second-guessed the lack of ethics and is afraid of your reaction, or he’s one of those assclowns that runs hot and cold, never truly engaging or disengaging, and keeps women on the hook indefinitely while they wait for something, anything to happen. These types are never honest in their feelings or their dealings with women. Either way, it doesn’t have a thing to do with you as a woman or as a prospective partner.

Throw this one back in the pond and call it a day. He’s not a keeper.

onmyown: Thank you. Your insight is most welcomed. I wish I had the talent to understand human nature, but my benchmark is skewed. I thought I was being strong, but as usual, am off the mark.

The signals were clear from him and I acted on them. Now, it is totally the opposite.

Anyway, time to move on. Thank you again for taking the time to advise me.

It’s easy when you’re on the outside looking in to make assessments about relationships. Not so easy when you’re in the middle of confusing behavior. Don’t be hard on yourself – you already had the gut feeling that something was very wrong and his actions didn’t match the words he used. That’s excellent. I think the hard part is learning when to try to work it out and when to walk away. You tried to work it out. You did your part.

Just keep reminding yourself that normal, well-adjusted people are NOT this complicated.

What I have not explained is that he invited me to his home. He told me things that he has not told anyone. Granted – I can see that he may have some reservations about this, I am not the type to gossip. He told me these things because he trusted me.

But the fact that I did reach out to him, twice this week, to clarify this relationship, whether it be strictly professional or otherwise, he refused to divulge his intentions or feelings.

Instead, he chose to disengage, disassociate and make me feel like pond-scum.

This is what I don’t understand.

A professional’s relationship with a client/patient is a very intimate one, not in the sexual definition.

Doctor’s are people first. I have been in my/ my family’s doctor’s homes since the 60’s. I have been told, by both male and female doctors anhd other medical professionals, about their marriages, divorces, children and their always not so nice antics, dates, purchases of cars and homes, academic weaknesses and lousy relatives.

Some people want more than a professional relationship with the people they hire/go to, some don’t. I, personally, would not be comfortable with a professional that wasn’t a person first.

The latespath, was an Ivy League lawyer, he never had the ability to ‘be a person’ with clients. He alienated many long term clients of 2 firms, no matter how well he spoke and how knowledgeable he was But then again sociopaths are not real life people.

Hi Shelby,

What you’ve said about this doctor does put a different complexion on the matter. I’m hearing that he himself has been making overtures to you—then suddenly chose to pull back for reasons that aren’t clear. That’s understandably very confusing.

What alternatives are we left with? It’s possible that he was tempted at first to pursue a romance with you, but then thought better of it, whether for professional or for any other reason. So he chose to “cool it.” But if that’s the case, why would he have to be so rude about it? Even if he’d changed his mind for a purely personal reason, the doctor-patient relationship could still serve as a polite excuse for not taking things any further. Why couldn’t he just apologize and say “I don’t think it’s a good idea for us to do this while you’re my patient”?

A second possibility is that something happened on your date that he interpreted as a “rejection” from you, and reacted by getting all huffy about it. But that seems unlikely. Surely you would have noticed some unexplained change in his demeanor on the date itself.

In any case I’d be suspicious of this doctor’s ethics if he was making romantic overtures to you while you were his patient. And if other alternatives are ruled out, I’m forced to the conclusion that “onmyown” is right: this doctor has been playing games with you.

“Onmyown” called him an “assclown,” and I guess that’s one word for it! However, I hope it will help to add some more explanation. If this guy is indeed playing games with you, it’s entirely understandable that you’d feel confused and wondering what, if anything, you must have “done wrong” to “make” him react that way, as if you’d somehow “offended” him. The answer, as “onmyown” pointed out, is nothing! You haven’t done anything wrong at all. This is all about him!

The reason this has to be so confusing to anyone in your position is that it’s so hard to see what other motive he could possibly have for acting the way he did, for being so cold and distant. Even when someone is a psychopath (or “sociopath”) with no conscience, we still expect them to act out of motives that we ourselves can understand—whether that’s greed (swindling someone out of their money), lust (maneuvering someone into bed), jealousy (acts of spite and revenge) or some other motive that “makes sense” to us. Since you like this guy so much and have always been nice to him, anyone has to be asking themselves why on earth he would choose to be so cold and hostile toward you. Why would he return evil for good? Does it make any sense at all? If it doesn’t, if there seems to be no explanation, anyone in your position is stuck wondering “What could I have done wrong to cause this?”

But the fact is, you didn’t do anything “wrong.” And some people, perhaps like this doctor, do have motives that “make no sense” to us.

For one thing, some people, whether they’re psychopathic or not, have “triggers” from their past that arouse angry, fearful, or otherwise hostile feelings in them. If we happen to accidentally remind them of someone who habitually abused them long ago, especially in childhood, they may start feeling irrationally angry or hostile toward us for something that wasn’t our fault. That’s something we have no way of knowing about. A rational person may recognize their own triggers and realize when they’re reacting unfairly toward someone who unwittingly triggered them. But other people may just “act out” their hostile feelings toward someone who triggered them, while the luckless target is left wondering “what on earth did I do to cause that?”

However, you’re dealing with a specific scenario where, as far as anyone can tell, this doctor seems to have started by engaging in some mutually gratifying flirtation, luring you on—then unaccountably turned around and rejected you. And he never even got you into bed!—even though he might have done. What on earth could he be “getting out” of all this?

One man who answered that question half a century ago was Eric Berne. Though he never talked about psychopaths or sociopaths as such, Berne, in his 1964 classic Games People Play, discussed many of the interactions some people engage in for sick, pathological motives, which he called “games.” One game in particular he described under the title of “Rapo.” The game consists of encouraging a would-be admirer, then slapping them with an unexpected rejection. That sounds like precisely what this doctor did to you.

Berne called the game “Rapo” because he described it chiefly as it was played by females, who have natural sexual power over men. However, he made it clear that males were equally capable of playing the same game, and significantly, the male examples he described were played by men in positions of power. He called those variants “Casting Couch” (where a movie producer screws the starlet but doesn’t give her the part she was angling for) and “Cuddle Up” (where a boss seduces his secretary and then fires her). It wouldn’t be surprising to find a doctor, also in a position of power, playing the same game with a patient.

It’s easy to see how in those examples anyone might mistake the “player’s” only motive for a sexual one—to get the woman into bed—and he just doesn’t care what happens to her afterwards. But Berne made it clear that if the game of “Rapo” does reward the player with sexual gratification, that’s incidental to the main motive, which is something else entirely.

Berne described “first degree,” “second degree,” and “third degree” forms of “Rapo,” though the “third degree” form need not concern us here. In the “first degree” form, the player initiates a flirtation, but when the target confirms that he (or she) is interested, the player “cuts it off.” In “first degree Rapo,” the player may do this politely, because his or her motive was chiefly to “make a conquest” and obtain the ego gratification that brings with it. The player never has any intention of pursuing a real relationship with the target.

It’s when we move to “second degree Rapo” that things get nastier. As Berne explained, typically the player here leads the target into a “much more serious commitment than the mild flirtation of First Degree ‘Rapo’ and enjoys watching his [or her] discomfiture when she [or he] repulses” the target. Berne pointed out explicitly that in “second degree Rapo,” any satisfaction the player derives from being admired by the target is secondary to the main aim of the game: the gratification the player gets from rejecting the target. In his analysis of the game, Berne stated its main aim as “malicious revenge.”

Why should anyone like yourself be the target of “malicious revenge”? I’m sure you never deserved any such thing! One possible answer is that you happened to be a convenient target—a “tin can to kick,” so to speak—when this doctor was quietly venting his rage against the world, or against the opposite sex. Who knows why he acted the way he did? Maybe his mother abused him in childhood, and he’s been revenging himself on the entire female sex ever since.

If he is a psychopath, with a typical psychopath’s “charm,” even that is not the only possible explanation. He could be just literally “playing” with you. I mean in the sense that we “play” with objects around us, just to see what they will do. Psychopaths, having no “feelings” for people in the way that the rest of us have, do treat people as “objects,” often “playing” with people in the same way that the rest of us play with “things.” A good parallel is the classic example of a small boy pulling the wings off a fly. He’s not necessarily doing that “to be cruel,” only to see how the fly will behave when “reconfigured.” There doesn’t have to be any malice in the act. To the player, the fly is merely an “object,” and pulling the wings off is no different from pulling a wheel off a toy truck to see how it runs on three wheels instead of four. Many psychopaths “play” with people in just the same way. What they do to people is cruel and hurtful, yet there isn’t always malice in their behavior. Doing things to people and watching them react is just their sick way of “entertaining” themselves.

Whatever his motives, I imagine you’d be best to steer clear of this doctor, both professionally and personally.

Thanks for the excellent interpretive summary Redwald!

“Rapo” seems the equivalent of a “What-the-fuck moment”. Any WTF moment at all, is a personal alert that tells me I must immediately flee and have no further contact with that person. That books sounds interesting. Thank you for mentioning it! S

Not only can Huma not depend on Weiner as a human, she can no longer count on his skills as a politician. She can no longer use his political savvy as an excuse to stand by him. The mask slips and eventually spaths lose their human skills and lash out.

At an AARP-Univision mayoral forum this morning, mayoral contender Anthony Weiner pulled out the age card to taunt his most vocal challengers, 69-year-old Doe Fund founder George McDonald. Weiner is 48.

Before the debate, Weiner put a hand on McDonald’s back and said hello, prompting McDonald to reply: “I would appreciate if you would never touch me again.”

Weiner retorted: “What are you going to do about it, grandpa?” according to two sources.

The feud between the two has been simmering since last week.

At a debate in Laurelton, Queens on Thursday, McDonald called Weiner a “self-pleasuring freak.” He said he was embarrassed to tell his 10-year-old granddaughter why Weiner was famous. Weiner replied then by calling McDonald a candidate “chirping at the fringes,” which only fanned the flame of the GOP candidate’s temper.

But Weiner’s remarks today are sure to hurt him with older voters ”“ votes he has been courting by campaigning at numerous senior centers.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/weiner_hurls_grandpa_remark_during_ykXKq6vgYTPw6mP0lDHHpN

=================

The day before Thanksgiving, she stood me up – sent me a text message that her overnight from the night before wanted

another 24 hours! I could not begrudge her that – it translated into a significant chunk of cash for her. But I was

hurt – and she knew – and she called me on Thanksgiving Day which she was spending with relatives a hundred miles

upstate and said “Come into Manhattan tomorrow – I am taking a train down to the city.” And we had an indescribable

afternoon.

She was here again in mid-December – another strange afternoon, and now we find ourselves making plans for ….. No,

I can’t get into that yet, not even with you, Jack. Suffice it to say that we may be spending time soon in a place

other than hotels. And the feelings of affection that she and I have had for a long time do seem to be changing into

some much, much deeper – on both sides of the equation. Like I said – maybe frightened is the word.

Anthony Weiner Gets Into It With George McDonald, Calling Him “Grandpa”
BY ERIN DURKIN
Tensions boiled over between Anthony Weiner and the rival who has been most critical of his sexting scandal, Republican George McDonald, as the two got in a heated confrontation before a candidates forum Tuesday morning.
BRAWL NEW LOGO.jpg
The dustup culminated in Weiner calling his 69-year-old opponent “grandpa” – at a forum on senior issues hosted by the AARP.

McDonald got angry after Weiner approached to greet him and touched his chest. “I said keep you hands to yourself. Don’t put your hands on me ever again,” McDonald said in the confrontation caught on camera by New York 1.

“What’s going to happen if I do?” Weiner taunted in response. “You have anger issues.”

“I don’t have any anger issues,” the Republican replied.

“Yes you do, grandpa,” snapped Weiner.

The pair have had bad blood since at least last week, when McDonald called Weiner a “self-pleasuring freak” at a Queens forum.

It wasn’t the only drama to take place before the debate even started – Green Party candidate Tony Gronowicz was dragged out by cops after showing up uninvited and refusing to leave. “I’m the bona fide Green Party candidate,” he insisted. “I’m on the ballot.”

McDonald did not let up on Weiner during the debate, slamming him as a “glib narcissist” who “is only interested in himself” – and getting booed by the crowd.

“I would contrast my values with Anthony Weiner’s values any day of the week,” McDonald said, before being drowned out by boos. “OK, you don’t want to allow me to talk – that’s just more time for this glib narcissist.”

He later went on the attack again, pleading, “I ask you for just 30 seconds without booing me.”

“Believe me, it’s not nice to talk about. I didn’t have a nice conversation with my ten-year-old granddaughter about why one person is so much more famous that you, grandpa. What did he do? Why don’t you do what he did?” he said.

“Why do you want to ignore a person’s character and judgment?” he told the hostile crowd. “Believe me, you’ll be very disappointed if this person gets elected mayor. He doesn’t have any executive experience, never has anybody that works for him longer than three weeks, is only interested in himself and not your best interest, that’s for sure.”

Weiner did not hit back at McDonald’s broadsides during the debate, but did whack the Republican candidates as a group, after they all said they supported immigration reform.

“It is fascinating to listen to my friends here in the Republican party talk about immigration reform. It’s their party, it’s their candidates that are standing in the way of us having reform. It’s the Republicans that are demonizing people who came from other places,” he said.

Meanwhile, Weiner claimed to have Mayor Bloomberg’s vote in the bag.

“I think that the mayor, were he a Democrat, would vote for me in the primary, and I expect him to vote for me in the general,” he said in responding to Bloomberg’s speech on the budget – boasting that he’d get Bloomberg’s vote because he’s the only candidate with a plan to control healthcare costs.

Bloomberg has tried his best to avoid commenting on Weiner’s run, but referred to his behavior as “reprehensible” without naming him Friday.

Weiner, after presenting a proposal to reduce alternate side parking, also claimed he enjoys it when voters heckle and curse him out, as they did at a campaign stop in Brooklyn Monday night.

“I go to these subway stations because I kind of want to hear what people have to say. If they want to yell, if they want to ask me questions, if they want to yell at each other, I like that stuff,” he said. “I’m cool with that.”

He also insisted that despite his foibles he would not lack the moral authority to tell New Yorkers what to do or discipline misbehaving city employees – saying that authority comes from winning an election.

“That’s where you get the authority to govern from. It’s up to the voters to make that decision,” he said.

Update: AARP spokesman David Irwin said of Weiner’s “grandpa” comment, “It’s unfortunate, and AARP doesn’t think that age should ever be a factor when someone’s running for political office.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2013/08/anthony-weiner-gets-into-it-with-george-mcdonald-calling-him-grandpa

Oh gee…let’s all vote for jerks and creeps now.

The jerks and creeps aren’t doing well. The candidates leading the latest polling are Joseph
Lhota (R) and Christine Quinn (D), both relatively non-scandalous (and non-sexting) individuals. 😉

Unfortunately, most of the world has no concept that folks with disordered moral reasoning have no moral compass. They have the expectation that they can be immoral in their private lives, but moral in their public lives, as if they are two distinctly different people. It’s totally amusing when you think of it, except that lack of awareness puts immoral people into public offices.

And although Weiner is not doing well in the pols, thank goodness, we can’t say the same for Elliot Spitzer, our disgraced past Governor who resigned over his sex scandal and is now running for Comptroller of the City of New York. In the opinion of many New Yorkers, we should put someone who can’t keep his pecker in his pants, and could easily do something stupid enough to get himself blackmailed, into a position of trust where he watches over the entire fiscal input and outlay of the City?

I’m hoping my book, Carnal Abusive Deceit, When a Predator’s Lies Become Rape, will shed some light on the reality of the psychopathic mindset. I’ve placed it on http://www.indiegogo.com to raise some funds to promote it. If you’d like to support the publication please log on and enter “Carnal Abusive Deceit” as the keyword.

JmS

This letter is dead-on. And one more thing: she now has a child with this sociopath, so is now more vulnerable to him. S-paths use their children as leverage to keep control over their victims. I am thankful she has powerful friends–maybe this will be a situation where the s-path miscalculated his victim’s vulnerability.

Not only is she in a vulnerable place where he could manipulate her through the child, but the child may be at risk for a pre-disposition to Weiner’s disordered moral reasoning.

Modern neuroscience has made the connection between high levels of testosterone and low levels of oxytocin affecting one’s moral development. An individual’s brain chemistry is genetically based.

JmS

Send this to a friend