Q: Looking at the big picture of what's the whole foreign policy of this Administration - you come out of the academic tradition so I think it's fair to ask, what kind of grade do you give yourself and this Administration on foreign policy?

RICE: Oh, I don't know. It depends on the subject. I'm sure that there are some that deserve an A-plus and some that deserve a lot less. ... We've left a lot of good foundations.

Let us assume, for the sake of discussion, that the allegations (or at least the gist of them) against Madoff are true.  One of the most central is that at least one competing investment firm had analyzed his returns (the boss wanted to meet or beat Madoff) and concluded the only way Madoff could have been doing it was as a Ponzi scheme.   They then reported him to the SEC, which went nowhere.  But it was what is called "Due diligence" on their part.

The question has then to be "why did people invest with him?"  They didn't do their due diligence but just handed the money over....

Reasons come up - "Status", "respectability", "exclusivity" to start.  My favorite (sadly, I've only seen it noted once): "they did some due diligence and decided it had to be either insider trading or a Ponzi scheme.  They wanted the profits and didn't want to ask too many questions - or secretly got off on the idea of benefitting from insider trading while keeping their hands clean."  We'll leave these folks out - they knew what they were getting into, more or less, and have no one but themselves to blame.

The first three all belie a weakness of character - a need for the approbation and approval of others, and the public recognition of it.  It is, in essence, no different from buying the big expensive show-off car, the showy house, the trophy mistress(es).  Another way of saying it is that they are just plain insecure and judge themselves as inadequate.

Madoff and those like him are attuned to pick up on those weaknesses, and use that skill to further their own scheme.  It's no different than the guy or girl who can walk into a room and pick out someone they can (and will) seduce for the night - they are attuned to recognize the signs and act on them.  Or, for that matter, a lawyer who "knows" when a witness is lying or hiding the truth.

A lot of times, the person operating these skills may not even be conscious of it and, if you ask them, they might just claim a knack for it.

Madoff was able to do what he did because he not only accepted a lot of seemingly-high-status people's money, but because he also rejected some.  He made himself and his outfit all the more desireable by those who would seek the status of investing with him, by letting it be known he didn't accept just anyone.  No different from a potential lover playing a bit of hard-to-get.

So, no, I don't have too much sympathy for those Madoff victimized;  they were pretty soft-minded and saw only what they wanted to see.

But I also have to admit that I look forward to Obama's inauguration with a surprising degree of hope and good cheer.

For one thing, there will be the invocation, delivered by Rick Warren.

It's important to note that the snide pleasure of being an @ss is more important than aligning yourself with the civil libertarians in your party, aka the only ones who believe your party has a future.