SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: one_less who wrote (586362)6/29/2004 2:01:57 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
lol... tejek the smitten...

"To be charismatic means you have substance.......you and I both know that. There are not such good looking guys with charisma who can keep up with the best looking of Hollywood actors. Charisma is special; it means you think, you're aware and you're alive. "

In and of itself it means only that you have engaging charm and a silver tongue. Which most people agree is a characteristic of bill clinton. It may or may not mean that you have something substantive to present. b. clinton clearly understands and presents the left wing platform substantively. That, however, was not the question.


I have never met a charismatic person who did not have substance. Being charismatic is not a genetic trait like green eyes or red hair that's passed down.......its earned.

In any case, even if Clinton were not substantive, his resumé reads very well.....Rhodes scholar, phi beta kappa etc.

We were asking why in the face of all that could be lost to the women's movement and the left wing agenda by continuing to support b. clinton inspite of the tremendous amount of corroborative evidence that he had been treating the very women of his inner circles in a vile and abusive manner, did women still flock around him. I look at what has happened since 1998 and make a direct connection to this fact. He could have stepped down and bowed out gracefully and let Gore pick up the reigns. The momentum of the left wing would have continued for the last two years of his tenure.

Excuse me......if he had "stepped down" as you suggest, I would have been furious. I don't think anyone should cheat on their spouse but when has that become grounds for a resignation or firing? You're over the top with this stuff.

I wondered about this at the time and just kept hearing fears related to roe v wade. I even asked women what if this happens or we find out b. has done other more serious things and they said then they would withdraw their support. But as more and more was uncovered they changed their minds and continued in their support until the left wing machinery was virtually dismantled. And N.O.W. was first and formost in the midst of it all. They are as you discribed them, as a direct result of this.

I'm afraid you have an overactive imagination. Like I said, most younger women don't feel NOW is in touch with their POV.

Whether that's true or not, blaming the org.'s slow sunset
on Clinton is just plain ridiculous.

Some people (you apparently are one) care not to see beyond the smooth talk of b. clinton. And I have met many who have no better excuse than they like the smooth way he presents himself ... mostly women.

Knowing Clinton's background, I feel very confident that there is more to the man than a smooth talker. And the women I know say its more than his smooth talking that makes them hot.

And, like I said, when I ask a strong woman of principle, I get the same answer ... he's a disgusting pig.

Like anyone else, they are entitled to their opinions.