Post by Emperor AAdmin on Jan 9, 2008 12:47:41 GMT -5
Bellow article is a clear example of how people (being part emotional and part rational in true nature) are easily susceptible to possible manipulation via their emotions. As this appears to be the case then that would nullify any true value of people's democracy and it would bring up as only functional democracy the original idea of Plato of 'Philosopher kings'. Is vast majority of people simply put far too gullible to make such important decisions such as what direction will humanity take in the future? And if they are too gullible and essentially ignorantly unaware (of actual reality versus their, at least partially, emotion-based perception of the world) then could humanity be heading towards a disastrous end game (one that is not that clearly visible today but shall become as the time progresses)?
----------
A Show of Emotion That Reverberated
By JODI KANTOR, The New York Times
(Jan. 9) - It was not that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton teared up. It was all the times she did not. Even in low moments, Mrs. Clinton has been a picture of steely public composure. She has rarely, if ever, seemed to let herself go. Not when her health care initiative failed. Not the first time the world found out about her husband’s marital misconduct. Not the second time either.
In contrast, Mrs. Clinton’s challengers for the Democratic presidential nomination have been emotionally accessible. Senator Barack Obama wrote about his absent father in “Dreams From My Father” and about quarreling with his wife in “The Audacity of Hope.”
John Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina, is the star of a long-running, heart-rending family drama: he lost a son in a car accident and has a wife with incurable cancer and he discusses all of it with seeming ease.
In contrast, Mrs. Clinton has meted out her inner life one teasthingy at a time: a suggestive line in an interview here, a hearty laugh there.
So on Monday, when she choked up during an appearance at a New Hampshire coffee shop, making a nakedly emotional plea for her candidacy, Mrs. Clinton prompted one of the most fiercely debated moments of the presidential campaign to date.
“If she is breaking down now, before winning her party’s nomination, then how would she act under pressure as president?” Mark Mayfield, 52, a sales manager in Nashville and a supporter of Mr. Obama, wrote in a post on nytimes.com.
As if in reply, Katha Pollitt wrote on thenation.com that the spectacle of Mrs. Clinton misting over brought up “the oldest, dumbest canard about women: they’re too emotional to hold power.”
All the usual television and radio commentators discussed it on all the usual outlets: on his radio show, Rush Limbaugh mocked Mrs. Clinton with waaaahhing noises, while the ladies of “The View” on ABC mostly defended Mrs. Clinton on Tuesday morning.
On a day with more campaign news — results from the New Hampshire primary were not due until Tuesday evening — or in a pre-YouTube era, the reaction might have ended there.
But instead, Americans from across the political spectrum played and replayed the clip, pausing on every flicker of expression on Mrs. Clinton’s face, and asking questions like: After a political lifetime of keeping her emotions secret, why was Mrs. Clinton finally letting her guard down? Was it a spontaneous outburst or a calculated show? Was Mrs. Clinton using her gender to win sympathy, or was she the victim of a double standard that allowed male candidates to cry — several have on the trail — but not female ones?
link
----------
A Show of Emotion That Reverberated
By JODI KANTOR, The New York Times
(Jan. 9) - It was not that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton teared up. It was all the times she did not. Even in low moments, Mrs. Clinton has been a picture of steely public composure. She has rarely, if ever, seemed to let herself go. Not when her health care initiative failed. Not the first time the world found out about her husband’s marital misconduct. Not the second time either.
Do you think Clinton's show of emotion helped her win in New Hampshire?
Yes 71% / No 29% / Total Votes: 34,435
Do you support Clinton's presidential bid?
Yes 48% / No 43% / I'm undecided 9% / Total Votes: 37,163
In contrast, Mrs. Clinton’s challengers for the Democratic presidential nomination have been emotionally accessible. Senator Barack Obama wrote about his absent father in “Dreams From My Father” and about quarreling with his wife in “The Audacity of Hope.”
John Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina, is the star of a long-running, heart-rending family drama: he lost a son in a car accident and has a wife with incurable cancer and he discusses all of it with seeming ease.
In contrast, Mrs. Clinton has meted out her inner life one teasthingy at a time: a suggestive line in an interview here, a hearty laugh there.
So on Monday, when she choked up during an appearance at a New Hampshire coffee shop, making a nakedly emotional plea for her candidacy, Mrs. Clinton prompted one of the most fiercely debated moments of the presidential campaign to date.
“If she is breaking down now, before winning her party’s nomination, then how would she act under pressure as president?” Mark Mayfield, 52, a sales manager in Nashville and a supporter of Mr. Obama, wrote in a post on nytimes.com.
As if in reply, Katha Pollitt wrote on thenation.com that the spectacle of Mrs. Clinton misting over brought up “the oldest, dumbest canard about women: they’re too emotional to hold power.”
All the usual television and radio commentators discussed it on all the usual outlets: on his radio show, Rush Limbaugh mocked Mrs. Clinton with waaaahhing noises, while the ladies of “The View” on ABC mostly defended Mrs. Clinton on Tuesday morning.
On a day with more campaign news — results from the New Hampshire primary were not due until Tuesday evening — or in a pre-YouTube era, the reaction might have ended there.
But instead, Americans from across the political spectrum played and replayed the clip, pausing on every flicker of expression on Mrs. Clinton’s face, and asking questions like: After a political lifetime of keeping her emotions secret, why was Mrs. Clinton finally letting her guard down? Was it a spontaneous outburst or a calculated show? Was Mrs. Clinton using her gender to win sympathy, or was she the victim of a double standard that allowed male candidates to cry — several have on the trail — but not female ones?
link