GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has choked up lately when talking about soldiers killed in Iraq and his religion, Associated Press reported. But such displays of emotion are unlikely to hurt his campaign and may, in fact, help it by making Romney seem more authentic.
The same likely couldn’t be said if Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton got misty-eyed.
Guys have been tearing up all along and people think it’s marvelous,†said Pat Schroeder (in photo), who got grief for crying 20 years ago as she announced that she would not be a presidential candidate. But it’s still politically taboo for women politicians, particularly those running for top offices, to shed any tears.
And then people complain that Clinton seems too cold.
54 Comments
Storming Norman of Gulf war 1 fame admitted he would cry and real men do cry if it is certain subjects.
The problem Romney has is it genuine or another ploy? I mean like did he cry while witnessing he dad marching with M.LK? On one of his hunting trips? When he got his life time membership to the NRA?Hell I can tear up watching the pictures of the KIA from Iraq and Afghanistan, I see the faces of people that look like those I meet everyday. They could be the kid down the block that use to come pick up the sticks in the yard for a quarter. So yes thinking of all who have given it all for this country could make one cry.Crying if you are a man is no big deal, but crying to make one more deception is wrong.
Hillary would not cry in public, there are too many that would enjoy it.
I remember when Bill Clinton was yucking it up, and laughing, at a funeral, then — he saw the camera pointed at him and he got real serious, all of a sudden.
I also remember, on Normandy Beach, in an area with hardly any stones, he QUICKLY found enough little rocks to form a cross, on the beach.
Nice gesture, but obviously planned.
Yes, lets be genuine.
Bill doesn’t know how. But Bill is one of the best fakers ever to serve as President.
Hillary?
I just don’t believe she can win, with her negatives.
It was at Ron Brown’s funeral, where Bill Clinton was the big fake:
http://www.preventtruthdecay.com/mainmiscfuneral.htm
John Boehner, House Minority Leader has cried on the House floor several times. Can’t remember if John Vitter cried about using a prostitute . So men cry, big whoop. They are probably just going thru male menopause.
I don’t know if you can really compare Rommey’s crying with Pat Schroeder. Now if Clinton cried, then the Republicans would be all over it, not because she is a woman, but because it’s politics.
I don’t care if the President bawls as long as he or she does what she is supposed to do. And most men will spend some portion of our lives bawling. We might do it in the privacy of a bathroom because it is not manly to do so in front of others but we do in fact bawl sometimes. Sometimes a sad movie can make us bawl too. That is why I never watch a sad movie (remember Love Story?) in front of anybody else I know. So if a candidate bawls, it is normal but if it is a male he should try to do so in privacy so he does not appear weak.
Willard Romney could not get legitimately “choked up” over anything.
The man made his fortune gutting businesses for fun and profit. The only thing I MIGHT see about him as remotely “authentic” would be his reaction if he were suddenly on fire.
Oh and the only thing that chokes him up about his religion is the fear that people will look into it.
“It was at Ron Brown’s funeral, where Bill Clinton was the big fake:”
Posted by econ.
Ever been to a funeral econ? I lost my best friend to cancer a couple of months ago. All of us, at one time or another, were laughing remembering the good times we had with him. Funerals are not just about dying, but remembering, and if brings a chuckle, or outright laughter, that’s okay. I would rather honor my friend with an outright laugh, and save the tears for later.
But I expect you would frown on smiling at a funeral, either that, or you are being your usual liberal hating self.
I didn’t know Ken dolls could cry. Did anyone actually see tears? Being a presidential candidate is a lot like being a Hollywood movie – there isn’t anything that happens on-screen that isn’t planned and scripted.
Kev, you’re awfully sexist for a democrat. There isn’t anything wrong with men who cry. I”ll bet money every man alive has cried.Don’t feed into that macho stereotypical role- I’ll take a crying man anyday over one who acts so stoic he can’t show emotion. REAL men cry. DId anyone make fun of the firemen or anyone else who cried on 9.11? If that happened I’d like to beat whoever did.
I agree with Phillip, they would eat Hillary alive if she cried. Nobody should criticise Romney for crying over a soldier’s death.
“The same likely couldn’t be said if Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton got misty-eyed.”
We have “likely” and “if”.Can this paper get any weaker?
Modern day political appearances are productions. The producers are the candidates’ handlers and managers put in place by the respective party. Each appearance is episodic and the candidate-actors respond as planned when cued by the producers. The Academy Award is the Oval Ofice. I don’t get my shorts all up in a bundle watching or listening to pre-election script recitations. They have little to do with what will actually happen during the next administration.
REAL men cryby poliMom
Agreed! Real men are honest; girly men hide it and lie.
After so many years of being married to a serial rapist,
From Bill (tab, what is owed)
That is way too funny. Really causes me to wonder about what you’re hiding by hyberbolizing so radically about others.
(Jimmy broke the vase((while I stole your car)) )
Can anyone say Dr. David Hager, boys and girls?
Why is it the news media like crying so much; and they should talk about candidates. So many times I see news reports with men and women crying over tragedy, so why should politicians be any different. Of course no Hillary care. Another editorial not even worth commenting on, but I did.
Ghoti,If Bush could have cried, maybe he wouldn’t have felt so compelled to smash other people’s countries.
stumperOn the Clinton, Ron Brown funeral laugh:Hey, I have seen every bit as much death as you, I would guess.Yes, “Gallows Humor” is often a healthy thing.Also, at more than one funeral, I have been to, the church was invited to remember the happy times we had togother.That is not what Bill Clinton did.
It is not his laugh that bothers me.
It is the faux expressions, when he realizes he is on camera, and the very fast change in expression. Those who are with him do not catch on, and continue to laugh.
Ghoti,If Bush could have cried, maybe he wouldn’t have felt so compelled to smash other people’s countries.
Posted by: Jed
Anyone not knowing we’d be back in Iraq if Bush were elected the first time should have their voter’s registration revoked.
“That is not what Bill Clinton did.”
Ya, I know, you were there, listening to his every word, and found him wanting.
BS . . . a camera can only capture expressions, and that is what the camera did there. It did not capture his words, his thoughts, his tears. For anyone to look at that and tell me Bill was indiscreet for laughing then wiping his eyes shows me you have no clue whatsoever.
But he is a Liberal, so I suppose you can do no better than put a conservative spin on it. I expect no better from you. And if your link isn’t a total tin-hat sight, I sure don’t know what is. Sure you can’t point me to a site where Liberals assasinated Kennedy, or maybe Benazir Bhutto? I’m sure they’re out there (literally).
Ghoti,”Anyone not knowing we’d be back in Iraq if Bush were elected the first time should have their voter’s registration revoked.”
I certainly knew he wanted desperately to go get the family jewels back from Saddam that his daddy supposedly left there, which is why I never voted for the SOB.I also noted the numerous weasel words in his run-up to the Iraq invasion, which caused me to doubt not only the existence of those awful WMD’s, but Bush’s stated belief that they did. It was no surprise to me that they didn’t find them, nor does it surprise me that the conservatives still try to scam us that Iraqi WMD’s do exist. Once they lied to us, they had no choice but to continue lying. They’re not about to admit to the lie. Even at this late date, they’re hoping that something will happen to pull their nuts out of the fire they built.
Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton did more than just “mention” WMD’s.
I believe that the two of them used the term “weapons of mass destruction” more often that Bush Sr. And George W. put together!
Now, THERE is a “double standard” if there ever was one!
I can’t believe all the Clinton defenders on here today. The Ron Brown funeral incident was probably one of the most obvious indicators of what a total phony and fraud the 42nd Reprobate and chief really was. He was caught plain and simple in an unguarded moment and his true self was revealed. That is why Hillary’s handlers work 25 hours a day to make sure she is never found in a situation that they don’t control totally. That is the real double standard. The media will always cover for her, while Republicans will be castigated for every little slip they make.
Paul – they mentioned the need to be sure Saddam did NOT get WMDs and that we get inspectors in. We did. And, ever since Saddam lost his supplier, Saddam has not gotten or developed WMDs.
Chris – it is common at funerals – at least in the South – to reminesce and laugh about memories of the deceased. In many ways it is an outgrowth of the old Irish wake.
Pall,”Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton did more than just “mention” WMD’s.”
Which is why I don’t support Hillary for the nomination. If I saw Bush’s weaseling, surely she could have, and probably did, but she plays politics too.
“I can’t believe all the Clinton defenders on here today.”
posted by Chris from Mac Town.
Defending Clinton? How about using a camera view to put neo-con spin on a funeral event? Since only his person was recorded and not his conversation, laying that crap in it is in itself, your “true self was revealed.”
It’s so good, though, that you seem to be able to read minds. Read this: ___________!
Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton did more than just “mention” WMD’s.
I believe that the two of them used the term “weapons of mass destruction” more often that Bush Sr. And George W. put together!Posted by: econ101 | December 31, 2007 at 12:45 PM
And it turns out that all 4 were wrong about WMD.
The key difference among the Clintons and the Bushes, though, is that while all 4 thought there were WMD, only Augustus Stupidus bought Iraq over it.
stumper”Bill Clinton is a very good liar”
Who said that?
Hint, it was NOT a Republican, much less a “neo-con”.
You are ridiculous.
Ben, It was not the laughing that made him out to be a phony. It was the almost instant change from jovial backslapping laughter to grieving teary eyed mourner. It was just too obvious. The other factor not mentioned here to for is that Ron Brown had died under a cloud of mystery. He had information on some of the Clinton scandals that could have brought down the Presidency and had reportedly told the Clintons that He would not be their fall guy. It was also reported by one of the first US soldiers to reach the crash site that Brown was strapped into his seat with no apparent injuries except for what appeared to be a large caliber gunshot wound to the top of the head. His body was brought home and buried without an autopsy. If it had been a funeral for somebody who died under normal circumstances, nobody would have thought anything about the Presidents demeanor while leaving the funeral. However, as with so many things about the Clinton Years, nothing can be taken at face value.
“stumper”Bill Clinton is a very good liar”Who said that?
Hint, it was NOT a Republican, much less a “neo-con”.You are ridiculous.”
Yep, that sure has everything to do with the funeral. . . NOT!Hell, eCON, name one politician who wasn’t a liar? Short list, huh.
Me? Ridiculous? Evidently, you shave without a mirror.
“Ron Brown had died under a cloud of mystery”
posted by chris.
O boy, here comes the conspiracy theories from the wingnuts.
Here, I’ll save you the trouble of listing the wingnut sites:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/BROWN/brown.html
http://www.geocities.com/happy1215us/
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40678
Go get em, dude. I’ll be watching football on a tv, made in china by 6 year old kids paid $1 a month, that I bought at walmart.
Yea Chris – because the rightie talking heads say so makes it a cloud.
StumperWell, since you bought your TV in China, at least you helped support the Clinton political machine, in your own way.
“StumperWell, since you bought your TV in China, at least you helped support the Clinton political machine, in your own way.”
I guess I’ll have to make it obvious when I use sarcasm. It seems some have no sense of humor:-)
To econ 101. I believe the answer to the question you posed to stumper at 1:20 is former Senator Bob KerryD. Nebraska
ChrisCongrats.Since Stumper told me that I was “off topic” with that question, I am guessing he already knows the answer.Lots of Democrats don’t trust the Clintons.
“Lots of Democrats don’t trust the Clintons.”
Wow, intelligence! Gosh, how many republicans don’t trust Bush?
Was there some kind of connection to the funeral in your “question”, or was it your usual prattled nonesense.
I think you and chris have made fools of yourselves enough this year. Take the rest of the year off: it’s on me.
stumperLet me see if I can draw you a picture, so that you can understand.The question or topic is “emotion” in general, and genuine emotion compared to fake emotion fits well into that topic.
The opening of this thread claims some kind of sexist or partisan “double standard” which is just silly.
When Hillary speaks to a Black crowd, with a fake accent, that is wrong.
If she showed real emotion, I think we would accept such.
Not sure if she knows how.
Hey “thumper”. I think you have been thumped in the head one to many times. I’ve watched for over six years now while idiots like you have accused President Bush of everything but the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. All the while though, you defend President Clinton who’s crimes and corruption set a new standard even for Democrats. If even ten percent of the accusations were true, it would make his administration the most corrupt in history and believe me, a lot more than ten percent was true.
When a dem. takes over the WH, and the Senate is solidly dem., there won’t be too many dry eyed Repub. men in kansas.
Phant,Since those dewy-eyed Kansas repubs fell solidly for Bushllit, their tears will all be of their own making.
When a dem. takes over the WH, and the Senate is solidly dem., there won’t be too many dry eyed Repub. men in kansas. Posted by the Phantom.
Lets see. Where have we heard this before? Oh yeah. In 2000. “There is no way Al Gore can lose the WH.” After all Bill Clinton was so loved by the American people.
Then there was 2004. “Bush will be a one termer just like his daddy”. John Kerry can’t help but win.
Just remember Phantom, what looks like a sure bet on Dec 31st can be totally different in November
Chris from Mac,I just remember how shocked all you repubs were when you lost both the House and Senate, just over a year ago. This next election you might do well to brace yourself.
“Let me see if I can draw you a picture, so that you can understand.”
Posted by econ.
No thanks; I’ve gone way beyond coloring books.
“If even ten percent of the accusations were true, it would make his administration the most corrupt in history and believe me, a lot more than ten percent was true.”
Posted by chris.
You are, of course, referring to the current administration.
But he is a Liberal, so I suppose you can do no better than put a conservative spin on it. I expect no better from you. And if your link isn’t a total tin-hat sight, I sure don’t know what is. Sure you can’t point me to a site where Liberals assasinated Kennedy, or maybe Benazir Bhutto? I’m sure they’re out there (literally).
No more spin than the stupid spin neoliberals put on stuff.
When a dem. takes over the WH, and the Senate is solidly dem., there won’t be too many dry eyed Repub. men in kansas.
Posted by: The Phantom
The Dem dont want a solid senate, then they wont be able to blame the repubs for anything.
“If even ten percent of the accusations were true, it would make his administration the most corrupt in history and believe me, a lot more than ten percent was true.”
Posted by chris.
You are, of course, referring to the current administration.
Posted by stumper
Not even close stumped.You surrender monkeys may have developed amnesia over the past seven years but the rest of us have not. The eight years of the Clinton co-dependency presidency will go down as the most scandal ridden administration in history. The Arkansas mafia that followed Clinton to Washington and was made up of dried up old hippies and corrupt lawyers was so sleazy that it was shocking even by Washington DC standards. Even today the stench left behind by them permeates our government. The Manchurian presidency funded by Red Chinese money is hoping to resurrect itself for another eight year run. God help us all if they succeed.
I’m no great fan of the Clintons.
But I bet you this. They are and will continue to be FAR better thought of and respected than george bush.
hunky dorky, you is an idiot. Go play with yourself.
Hell of a diatribe, chris. If the clinton admin was corrupt, the bush admin is criminally insane. How many soldiers has he sent to their deaths in iraq? I don’t recall clinton sending soldiers to their deaths. your hero is stained with the blood of men. and we got boys like yourself apologizing for him. You will vote a red ticket for no other reason than you’ve been brainwashed by neocon lies. conservatives a party of peace? go tell that to the mothers and fathers and children and husbands and wives of the soldiers killed in iraq. then go fill up your car with gas you so desperately love so all the proceeds can go over the the middle east to support terrorism. you know, the same terrorism we supposedly went to war with iraq over after no wmd were found and that “reason” fell by the wayside.
right . . . happy new year and keep that red in your veins. the blues sure as hell don’t want you. . . . you’re too stupid.
The Arkansas mafia that followed Clinton to Washington and was made up of dried up old hippies and corrupt lawyers was so sleazy that it was shocking even by Washington DC standards. Even today the stench left behind by them permeates our government.
Posted by: Chris from Mac Town
And the current administration has taken those lessons to heart, learned them very well, and has now surpassed the Master?
Get off the rhetoric. Granted, there as been corruption, idiocy, war-mongering, and rights-suppression in most of the administrations, of ANY party, in our history. This administration hunted for the worst of EVERY administration in our history and strives to emulate it.
(That’s how you exagerate your point into non-existence, Chris O’Mac)
hunky dorky, you is an idiot. Go play with yourself.
Typical neolib response. You are as brainwashed as the neocons you so hate and just as in denial as them.
My comment still stands. How can you blame the Reps when the Dems have solid control? You cant. Right now you blame the Dems lack of control on not having 60 votes in the Senate. Well, the Reps did not have 60 votes in the Senate so they must not have had control during the 94-06 period either. You cant have it both ways, but you neolibs try and convince yourselves of it.
At some point in the near future, the moderates will give you neolibs and neocons your due. Or worse, Bush does declare dictatorship and you are stuck with him. That would be an ironic poetic justice, but we would all have to suffer those consequences, and unlike you and yours, I dont wish ill on my opponents. I dont revel in the downfall of my opponents and I dont belittle their triumphs. Unlike you, I dont stoop to name calling since it shows how weak your argument is, even if you do have a valid point.
“Unlike you, I dont stoop to name calling since it shows how weak your argument is, even if you do have a valid point.”
Posted by hunky dorky.
So you agree: you are an idiot.
“”"Willard Romney could not get legitimately “choked up” over anything.
The man made his fortune gutting businesses for fun and profit. The only thing I MIGHT see about him as remotely “authentic” would be his reaction if he were suddenly on fire.
Oh and the only thing that chokes him up about his religion is the fear that people will look into it.”"”
Maybe he should get choked period about the way he treated his poor dog!
“”"Kev, you’re awfully sexist for a democrat. There isn’t anything wrong with men who cry. I”ll bet money every man alive has cried.Don’t feed into that macho stereotypical role- I’ll take a crying man anyday over one who acts so stoic he can’t show emotion. REAL men cry. DId anyone make fun of the firemen or anyone else who cried on 9.11? If that happened I’d like to beat whoever did.
I agree with Phillip, they would eat Hillary alive if she cried. Nobody should criticise Romney for crying over a soldier’s death.”"”
Like the old man used to say “men don’t bawl in front of other men. If you wanna bawl do it in private or I will give you something to bawl about”.
“”"Chris – it is common at funerals – at least in the South – to reminesce and laugh about memories of the deceased. In many ways it is an outgrowth of the old Irish wake.”"”
Funerals are rough. I try to avoid them if I can but if I must go I always wear very dark sun glasses to hide my tears. I don’t want people seeing me weep. Men don’t weep.