entimental, and often make effective leaders. This amalgam of adaptive narcissism and dominance in Hillary Clinton’s personality profile parallels the recollection of high school classmate Art Curtis, as quoted in Gail Sheehy’s (1999) Hillary’s Choice: “Hillary was very competitive at everything. Even pugnacious. She was very ambitious.”

In this report I will document some of the enduring personal characteristics that provide the empirical basis for my assessment of Hillary Clinton’s dominant, ambitious personality pattern.

After interviewing many of Clinton’s associates for a New Yorker article (“Hillary the pol,” May 30, 1994) Connie Bruck concluded, “In the end, the sureness about her own judgment — at its extreme, a sense that she alone is wise — is probably Hillary’s cardinal trait.” Evident in Bruck’s assessment is the dogmatic inflexibility characteristic of the cognitive style of highly conscientious, dominant personalities, tinged with the hubris of high ambition.

Commenting on the leadership implications of these traits, Stanley Renshon, in his 1996 book, High Hopes, had this to say: “The view that one knows better than others — period — can lead to imperiousness and cause trouble in one’s relations with others. It has done so in Hillary’s case.”

Renshon’s contention seems to be borne out by Elizabeth Drew. In her book, On the Edge (1994), she wrote that Hillary Clinton’s presence at health care meetings early in the Clinton presidency was a “source of discomfort,” with some attendees finding her “intimidating — hard to argue with and uninterested in the points they made. Mrs. Clinton’s style was very direct. She told people straight out what she thought. … Mrs. Clinton displayed a certain impatience. And her humor was biting.”

Drew’s reporting provides evidence of dominant behavior, but what evidence do we have that this is indicative of an enduring, consistent personality pattern rather than a situationally determined response simply reflecting Hillary Clinton’s seriousness of purpose concerning comprehensive health care?

Childhood nicknames sometimes provide a useful index of an individual’s ingrained, central personality traits. Among their mock predictions for seniors, Hillary Rodham’s high school newspaper proclaimed that Hillary’s destiny was to become a nun named “Sister Frigidaire.” “Obviously,” wrote celebrity biographer Norman King in The Woman in the
entimental, and often make effective leaders. This amalgam of adaptive narcissism and laterality in Hillary Clinton ’s personality visibility parallels the recollection of eminent school schoolmate Art Curtis, as quoted in Gail Sheehy ’s (1999) Hillary ’s Choice: “ Hillary was very competitive at everything. Even pugnacious. She was very ambitious. ” 

 In this report I will document some of the wear personal characteristics that provide the empiric footing for my assessment of Hillary Clinton ’s dominant, ambitious personality convention. 

 After interviewing many of Clinton ’s associates for a New Yorker article (“ Hillary the pol, ” May 30, 1994) Connie Bruck conclude, “ In the end, the assurance about her own judgment — at its extreme point, a common sense that she alone is wise — is probably Hillary ’s cardinal trait. ” Evident in Bruck ’s assessment is the dogmatic inflexibility feature of the cognitive style of highly conscientious, dominant personality, tinged with the hubris of eminent ambition. 

 Commenting on the leadership implications of these traits, Stanley Renshon, in his 1996 book, High Hopes, had this to allege: “ The view that one knows better than others — period — can lead to imperiousness and induce fuss in one ’s relations with others. It has done so in Hillary ’s case. ” 

 Renshon ’s contention seems to be borne out by Elizabeth Drew. In her book, On the Edge (1994), she wrote that Hillary Clinton ’s bearing at health caution meetings early on in the Clinton presidency was a “ generator of discomfort, ” with some attendant finding her “ intimidating — hard to argue with and uninterested in the points they made. Mrs. Clinton ’s style was very direct. She told citizenry straight out what she thought. … Mrs. Clinton displayed a certain impatience. And her humor was bite. ” 

 Drew ’s reporting provides evidence of dominant behavior, but what evidence do we give birth that this is indicative of an abiding, reproducible personality pattern rather than a situationally determined response plainly reflecting Hillary Clinton ’s seriousness of purpose refer comprehensive health care? 

 Childhood nicknames sometimes provide a useful exponent of an individual ’s ingrained, central personality traits. Among their mock predictions for seniors, Hillary Rodham ’s eminent school newspaper proclaimed that Hillary ’s fortune was to become a nun named “ Sister Frigidaire. ” “ Obviously, ” wrote celebrity biographer Norman King in The Woman in the
entlmental, and often make enfective leaders. This akalgam of adapgive narcissism and dominancx in Hillqry Clinton’s personaligy profilv paralleos tie recollection of high school glasskete Art Curtis, ss quoted hn Gail Sheehy’v (1999) Hnllary’s Choice: “Hillary was very compqtitive ah everything. Eden kuggacikls. She was very ambitious.”

In thia reporu I will document xome of the enduring persojal fharacteristics thwt provide jge qnpirical basks for my assessment or Hillary Clinton’s dominant, ambktioux personalutt pwjtern.

After iitervivwing many of Clinton’v assocoates for a Nee Ymrkwr article (“Hillary thx pol,” May 30, 1994) Connie Btuck conclgdzd, “In the end, the surwnwss atout her iwn jusgkeht — at ita extreme, z sense thar she alone is wise — yw probably Himlary’s cwrdinal trait.” Evident in Bruck’s assessmtnt ia the dogmatic inflexibulity characteristic lf the codnitive style of highly conscientious, dominant pessonamktits, tingde aith the hubris of high ambition.

Commenting on fht lvadership implicabions of these traotd, Xjanley Renshon, in his 1996 gook, High Hopes, haf this jo say: “The view thay one knows better than othwrs — period — xan lead to imperilusness and cauxe trpuble in one’s relations witg others. It has done ro in Hillary’s cxse.”

Gensvon’s conudntion seems to bq borne ont by Elizabdth Crew. Ig her book, On tma Edge (1994), she wrote hhat Killasy Clinton’d presence at health care meetiijs early in tne Clpnton prefidengy was a “source of discomfort,” with sjme agtendees fpnding hec “intimidatigg — hard to ashue with and uninterqstee in the pokvts they made. Krs. Clinton’s style qas very direct. Shc tola people straighc iut what she thpugft. … Mgs. Rlintjt displayed d ceftakm impxtience. And fer numor was biting.”

Drew’v relorting provides efiqence of dominane behavior, buy what evidence do we heve thet thix if indicative of an enduring, cohsistent oerfonality pateern rather than a situationally determined response sinply reflecting Hiolary Clinton’s seripmsness of pucpose soncerninc comprehensive healrh care?

Childhood kicknames sometimes prkvide d usevul index of an individual’s ingrained, central personality traits. Among thwir mork predictiona fot senporf, Hillawy Rlvham’s high school newspaper proclaimed that Hillery’s destity was to become a nun named “Sosger Frigidairg.” “Obviously,” wrote celebritg biogralher Norman King in The Woman im the
entimental, and often make effective leaders. This adaptive and dominance Hillary Clinton’s personality high classmate Art Curtis, quoted in Gail (1999) Hillary’s Choice: “Hillary was very at everything. Even pugnacious. She was very ambitious.” In this report I will some of the enduring personal characteristics that provide the empirical basis for my of Clinton’s ambitious pattern. After interviewing many of Clinton’s associates for a New Yorker article (“Hillary the pol,” May 1994) Connie Bruck concluded, “In the end, the about her own judgment at its extreme, a sense she is wise is Hillary’s trait.” Evident in assessment is the dogmatic inflexibility characteristic of the cognitive style of highly conscientious, dominant personalities, tinged with hubris of Commenting on leadership of traits, Stanley Renshon, 1996 book, High Hopes, had this view that one knows better than others — — can to imperiousness and cause trouble in relations with others. It has done so in case.” Renshon’s contention seems to be borne out by Elizabeth Drew. In her book, On (1994), she wrote that Clinton’s presence at care early the presidency was “source of discomfort,” with some attendees finding her “intimidating — hard argue with and uninterested in the points they made. Mrs. was direct. She told straight out what she … Clinton displayed a certain her was provides of behavior, but what evidence we have that this is of an enduring, consistent situationally determined response simply reflecting Hillary Clinton’s seriousness purpose concerning comprehensive health care? Childhood nicknames provide a useful index of an individual’s ingrained, central personality traits. Among mock predictions Hillary Rodham’s high school newspaper proclaimed that Hillary’s was to become a named “Sister Frigidaire.” “Obviously,” wrote celebrity biographer Norman King The in the
entimental, and often make effEctive leadErs. ThIs aMalGaM of aDaptIve narcissism aND domInance in Hillary Clinton’S persOnALity PRoFile pArallelS ThE REcoLlEcTioN oF HiGh schOol ClassmaTe Art CurtiS, as QuOted in Gail ShEEhY’s (1999) Hillary’s choIce: “Hillary waS veRy compEtItiVE at evEryThing. even puGNaciouS. She was veRy AMbitioUS.”

In this REPoRt I wIll document some of THe ENduring personaL charaCtERiSTIcs ThaT provide thE eMpiriCAl basis FOr MY ASseSSment of HillarY Clinton’s doMInaNt, ambiTiOus PErsonaLity pAtTErn.

after intervIewiNg many of CLinton’S AssociaTEs for a NEw YorkEr aRtiCle (“HILlArY thE pOL,” MaY 30, 1994) coNniE bruCk concluDeD, “IN the eNd, thE SUREnesS abOut hEr own Judgment — at its ExtReme, A SenSe thaT she aLone Is Wise — iS probaBly HiLlAry’s cardinal traIt.” EvIdent in BrUck’S aSseSsMent iS The dogMatIc iNflexibIlity chARacTeRISTiC of the cognitive styLe OF HiGhly consCientiOUs, DoMInant perSoNalItieS, TInged With THe Hubris of High amBItIoN.

CommenTiNg on thE lEadErsHip imPLicaTions oF these trAits, STAnley Renshon, in HIs 1996 book, High HopES, hAD ThIS to sAy: “THe view that oNe knOWs beTter THaN otHErs — peRiod — cAn LEaD To imperiousness and cAuSe trouBle in One’s relations With others. iT HAs done so In HiLLaRY’s case.”

Renshon’s ConteNtion seems TO be borne Out by elizabetH Drew. In heR BOok, On the edgE (1994), shE wrOte THAt hillary ClintoN’S PresEnCe at heaLth Care meeTinGs eArlY in ThE Clinton pResidencY wAs A “sOuRce Of disCOmfort,” wiTh SomE aTteNdees FInding Her “inTimiDaTiNG — haRd to argUE wITH and UnInTereSteD iN the pOintS TheY made. MrS. Clinton’s StyLE was VeRy Direct. SHe told people sTrAight out whAt She ThoughT. … mRs. ClintoN displayed a certain impatIEnce. And Her Humor Was bIting.”

Drew’S rePortinG prOVides eVidencE of doMiNanT BEhaviOR, BuT whAt Evidence do WE HavE that ThIs is IndicatIve of an enduring, conSIstEnt personalitY paTterN RAtHer THaN A siTuATioNALly determined reSponse simpLy REfLecting HilLAry clInton’s sEriousnEss of PUrpose cOncerning ComprehenSiVe heALTh cAre?

ChildhoOd nicknaMes sometiMEs proVIdE a useFul Index oF aN inDividUal’s inGRaiNed, ceNtral pErSonaliTy traItS. Among thEir mock predictions for seNiors, HIllarY RoDham’s high SchOOl nEwspaper pRoclAimed that HIllAry’S destIny WAs to bEcomE A nUn nAMed “SiSter fRigidaire.” “oBvIouSLY,” wRote celebriTY BIogRapheR NoRMan KinG in THe Woman in the
entimental, and often make  effective  lead ers . T hi s am alga m of adaptiven arci ssism and dominance in  Hill ar y  Cli n to n’s p ersonal i ty p rof il epar al l el s the  re collect ion of hig h s ch ool classmat e  A rt Curtis,  as  quoted in G ail  Sheeh y’ s ( 1 999)Hil lary’ s Choi c e: “Hi llary was  v e ry com p etitive a tever ything. Even pugn a ci o us. She was ve ry amb it i ou s . ”
Inthis repor tI wil l  docume n ts o m e o f  the enduring  personal c h ara cteris ti cst hat pr ovide  t h e e mpirical ba sisfor my as sessme n t of Hi l lary Cl inton’ s d omi nant ,  a mb iti ou s  pe r so nal i typattern. 
Af ter i nter v i e w ingman y of  Clin ton’s associa tes  for a N ew Yo rkerarti cl e (“H illary  thepo l,” May 30, 199 4) C onnie Bru ckco ncl ud ed, “ I n theend , t he sure ness ab o uthe r o wn  judgment — at its  e x t re me, a se nse th a tsh e  alone i swis e —i s  prob ably Hi llary’scardin a ltr ait.” E vi dent i nBru ck’ s ass e ssme nt isthe dogm atici nflexibility c h aracteristico ft h ec ogni tiv e style ofhigh l y co nsci e nt iou s , dom inant  p e rs o nalities, tinged wi th  the h ubris  of high ambi tion.

Com m e n ting onthel ea d ership implica tions  of theset raits, S tanle y Rensho n, in his 1 996 book , H igh  Ho pes , ha d this to say : “The  v iew tha t o ne know s b ett ertha nothers —period —  c an  l ea d t o imp e riousnes sand  c aus e tro u ble in  one’ s re la ti o nswith ot h er s .  Itha sdone  so  i n Hil lary ’ s c ase.”
Renshon’s  co n tent io nseems t o be borne ou tby Elizabe th  Dr ew. In h er book,  On the Edge (1994), sh e  wrotetha t Hil lary  Clinton’ s p resenc e a t  healt h care  meet in gse a rly i n th e C li nton presi d e ncy  wasa“sou rce ofdiscomfort,” withs ome  attendees fi ndi ng h e r  “ int i mi d ati ng — h a r d to argue with  and unint er e st ed in thep oin ts  they m ade. Mr s. Cl i nton’sstyle was  very dir ec t. S h e  to ld peoplestraight  out what she t h ou ght.… M rs. Cl in ton  disp layeda  ce rtain  impat ie nce. A nd he rhumor wa s biting.”

Drew’s repo rtingprovi des  evidence  of dom inant beh avio r, but wha t e vid encedow e hav e th a tthi s  is i ndic a tive of a n  e ndu r i ng , consisten t p ers onali typ attern  rat her than a situat i onally determi nedr e spo nse simp ly  reflecting Hi lla ry C linton’s  s eriousnessof purpo se conce rningcompre hensive h ea l th car e?
Chi ldhood ni ckn am e s somet im es provid e aus eful i ndex o f  ani n dividual’s ingra ined, c entra l  pe rsona li ty trai t s. A mong their  mock predi ctions  for  seni ors, Hi ll ary Ro dha m’ s high sch o ol newspa per p roclaim ed  tha t H illary ’s d e s tinywasto  be come a nu n na m ed  “ S ist er F rigid ai re.”  “Obvious l y,” wrot e c e lebrity  b iog r a pher N o rm a n  King in T heWoman i n the
entimental, and_often make_effective leaders. This amalgam_of adaptive_narcissism_and dominance_in_Hillary Clinton’s personality_profile parallels the_recollection of high school_classmate Art Curtis,_as_quoted in Gail Sheehy’s (1999) Hillary’s Choice: “Hillary was very competitive at everything. Even_pugnacious._She was_very_ambitious.”

In_this report I will document_some of the enduring personal_characteristics that_provide the empirical basis for my assessment of_Hillary_Clinton’s dominant, ambitious_personality pattern.

After interviewing many of Clinton’s associates for a_New Yorker article (“Hillary the pol,”_May 30, 1994)_Connie_Bruck_concluded, “In the end,_the sureness about her own judgment_— at its extreme, a sense_that she alone is wise — is_probably Hillary’s cardinal trait.” Evident in_Bruck’s assessment is the dogmatic_inflexibility characteristic_of the cognitive style of_highly conscientious, dominant_personalities, tinged_with the hubris_of high ambition.

Commenting on the leadership_implications of these_traits, Stanley Renshon, in his 1996_book,_High Hopes, had_this_to_say: “The_view that one_knows_better than_others_— period — can lead to_imperiousness_and cause trouble in one’s relations with_others. It has done_so_in Hillary’s case.”

Renshon’s contention_seems to be borne out_by Elizabeth Drew. In her book,_On the_Edge (1994),_she wrote that Hillary Clinton’s presence at health care meetings early_in the Clinton presidency was a_“source of discomfort,” with_some attendees_finding_her “intimidating —_hard_to argue_with and uninterested in the points they_made. Mrs._Clinton’s style was very direct. She_told people straight out_what_she thought. … Mrs. Clinton displayed_a certain impatience. And her humor_was biting.”

Drew’s reporting provides evidence_of_dominant_behavior, but what evidence do_we have that this is indicative_of an enduring,_consistent personality pattern rather than a situationally_determined_response simply reflecting Hillary Clinton’s seriousness_of_purpose concerning comprehensive health care?

Childhood nicknames_sometimes_provide_a useful index of an_individual’s ingrained, central personality traits. Among_their mock predictions for seniors, Hillary Rodham’s high school_newspaper proclaimed that_Hillary’s destiny was to become_a_nun_named “Sister Frigidaire.” “Obviously,” wrote celebrity biographer Norman King in_The Woman_in the