Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (8497)	4/12/2002 10:31:20 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 21057

The mark of a good con man.......

To: E who wrote (8497)	4/12/2002 11:00:53 AM
From: Poet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Yeah, I agree with you about Clinton. I thought, barring his highly-stupid sexcapades-- he was a good President. But his "I feel your pain" facial expressions seemed on the smarmy side-- like a snake oil salesman under a tent. I think many of the clues about his lack of sexual ethics and his feeling that was bulletproof (a/k/a "magical thinking") lie in his relationship with his mother., who appeared to dote on him in an unhealthy way. You know me, though: everything's up for a Freudian interpretaion.

To: E who wrote (8497)	4/12/2002 11:01:50 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Lest I imply I think that only the Bushes have revealing facial expressions Most people have facial expressions and habits of which they are completely unaware. I doubt many of us here could pass the test for physical perfection we seem to expect of our representatives. Imagine being scrutinized, examined, photographed upclose and personal constantly. The stuff of nightmares. My husband had Bell's Palsy at 26. (As a young litigator just starting out in a big firm, this was incredibly upsetting). He made a full recovery, but for months, he slowly trained himself not to smile or lift his eyebrow or make any really exaggerated facial moves. He still isn't much of a smiler, years later. In my son's BFA acting program, they tape and observe each other, looking for repetitive or meaningless mannerisms, ticks, facial and verbal habits. No one is really very aware of these in himself, most have no idea how they come across in performance. And of course, the interpretation of these is so subjective anyway. Like you, I hated that lipbiting thing of CLinton's, but I bet some found it very sincere and endearing (ugh). I do wonder how many of the presidents elected prior to the television age would have passed muster today, physically or verbally. Now we want either Harrison Ford or Bill Pullman. We want actors. People who have not only political acumen and knowledge and ability, but look really good as they tell us about it and look good every minute of the day.

To: E who wrote (8497)	4/12/2002 12:28:07 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

I remember when he was stone-walling with his "what does "is" mean", and the like. He had a thinly veiled mask of contempt. I don't believe he ever thought he was doing anything wrong. I don't believe he considered himself bound by rules out of any respect for them, but only out of a minimal fear...which his natural assurance and egoistic sense of power would allow him to minimize or discount. In this regard he seems little different than a common thief in the night. Some of them have no notion of the possibility of being actually caught. Juxtaposed with this almost pathological ability to rationalize, we have a brilliant mind with rare presentation skills. Even when his "foibles" were known, he retained a huge popularity, and he continued to be seen as a strong and powerful leader. His aplomb and self assurance gave many people the feeling that America was in competent hands, and that someone with big trousers was running the show--even if those trousers tended to slip off the odd time... I often felt repulsed by his speeches by what I felt was insincerity and manipulation; but at the same time, I often felt a grudging admiration. His very real skills, combined with a rare conceit, allowed him to ride a very high horse. Who could deny that he was manipulating and deceptive? But he had a sort of elan, apparent if not real. The response of many was to consider his "virility" as informing the power of his leadership. Even though his loins might be weak...his head and his hands were strong. He apparently captained the country in directions desired by a lot of people, and that is what democracy is about. History will likely see him as embodying both success and failure. But right now he is aparently being assessed only by the heart, and not the reason. People seem either to really hate him...or to really love him. As for me, I have some grudging admiration mixed with a fairly intense aversion. If life was only a game, then he was a master of it. But life is not merely a game; it is something much more. In that respect, "winning" is not the only thing that counts; and in that particular he is a great deal less than what he might have been.