The Psychological Assessment of Political LeadersTaking ResponsibilityAdmitting error does not come easily to Clinton. While he is some-
times able to simply claim it is his responsibility when something
goes wrong, this is by far the exception to a more general pattern.
That pattern, evident in the marijuana, draft, and fidelity controver-
sies during the 1992 campaign, consists of denying; avoiding; blam-
ing others; and misrepresenting or not fully disclosing information
that, if disclosed, would put a different and less benign cast to his
behavior.
During the 1992 campaign when he was first asked whether he
had used marijuana, his response, not quite forthcoming, was that he
had not broken the laws of this country. It then turned out that he
had experimented with marijuana while in England, thus his answer
was accurate while simultaneously unresponsive and evasive. He fur-
ther tried to downplay what he thought would be a damaging
admission by claiming that, while he had tried marijuana, he had not
inhaled. This effort might have been more amusing than troubling
had it been an isolated incident, but it was not: that pattern repeat-
edly appeared in the course of his presidency.
A president who sees his own behavior in a somewhat idealized
manner, who believes that he has been unfairly held to high or incon-
sistent standards, and who wants to be publicly validated for his
accomplishments would have difficulty acknowledging his mistakes
in a direct and straightforward way.
In responding to the mishandling of the White House travel office
investigation, Clinton said, "I had nothing to do with any decision,
except to try and save the tax payers and the press money.... that's
all I knew about it" (1993^ 942). In this statement President Clin-
ton both takes credit for the investigation and disclaims responsibil-
ity for the event itself. Later he said, "Ultimately, anything that hap-
pens in the White House is the responsibility of the President"
(Friedman 1993a, 1993^ Ai). In the absence of a more specific
statement, that aphorism, meant to recall the political courage of
Harry Truman, is at once both an acknowledgment and a disclaimer.
Even when he appears to take full and unequivocal responsibility
for a problem, further information sometimes emerges that casts a
different light on his behavior. For example, in discussing his deci-
sion to pull the controversial nomination of Lani Guinier, President