CPAC HISTORY REVISITED - RISE OF THE MANIPULATORS

Lobbying and arm twisting are their forte. Getting rid of informed and honest, strong personalities is their backup plan. They did it possibly with Susan Rupert and definitely with Richard Clausi, Esther Thur, Henry Regier and myself. There probably have been others that I don't know about both earlier and since.They do it through scheming and manipulating behind honest people's backs. To your face their behaviour is polite and respectful while at the same time they are working diligently behind your back to weaken your reputation and support. They are self-serving and egotistical. They look for weaker areas and attack them when you don't even know they are doing so, until it's too late. They are sneak attackers. They are sociopaths and lying cowards. Their purpose is power, control and self aggrandizement. Of course I am also speaking about leaders of political parties. They literally keep their heads down, their egos in check and wear their humility on their sleeves. Until the time is ripe. It's an immense character flaw but at least in politics the vast majority of people around you are in no moral or ethical position to criticize.

The world is full of them albeit they are a very small minority. It takes a real piece of work to be scheming against a loyal friend
and colleague who is supporting you and the cause at the same time as you are planning to harm them behind their backs. To be successful this kind of sociopath must be clever. I wonder how happy they actually end up. Does each successful sneak attack and "victory" build on their thrill or diminish it over time and further such nasty "successes"?

This has come up due to a recent history lesson from a friend and colleague. He sent a ten year old report to CPAC members plus a few others. This report was a detailed comment upon the events at CPAC a decade ago. His report is dated November 19, 2007. Independent reports like this one are one of the things that manipulators can not control. Yes the manipulators may have survived their impact a decade ago because other voting members were to busy or lazy to pay attention, but these reports have a life of their own. They can come back to haunt and bite guilty parties in the butt. I expect that this is but one that will do that. It will be included in my book about Elmira which is yet a considerable way down the road.