toke
|
posted on August 26, 2001 11:21:01 AM new
saabsister...
I was being facetious.  I would think that Condit would soon be moving out of DC, save for the glaring fact that Chappaquiddick Teddy is still routinely elected in Mass...
|
gravid
|
posted on August 26, 2001 11:33:35 AM new
"At some point he needed to say, "I blame myself." Why didn't he? "
Well actually I can see that if he really did not have anything to do himself with her disappearance why should he feel his affair made whoever grabbed her do it?
It could easy be that her relationship with him had NOTHING at all to do with what happened to her. That does not make him a saint by any means - he is a snake and a liar - but he may just be in the spotlight by coincidence.
But I ask you seeing how he asnwers these questions and how much he has to keep private. Would you hire the man into a position of fudiciary responsibility? Would you sponser him into your country club? Would you invite him to a dinner party for friends?
Would you give him as a character referance?
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on August 26, 2001 11:37:46 AM new
A big problem is how he keeps protesting how forthcoming he's been when only an idiot would believe he's been forthcoming. Granted, he could have just said from day one "I'm not going to be forthcoming to anyone because it's none of your business" but instead he's chosen the "I've answered your questions dozens of times!" route when he hasn't answered anything.
|
toke
|
posted on August 26, 2001 11:53:46 AM new
I wonder if he's simply a little dim, rather than actually trying to hide anything of substance.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on August 26, 2001 11:59:14 AM new
What questions do you think he didn't answer, and what questions that weren't asked, do you think should have been?
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on August 26, 2001 12:05:34 PM new
He didn't answer anything at all. No one made him sit for that interview but since he chose to sit he could have answered some questions instead of laying out the tired old "my lawyer advised me blah, blah" and "the Levy's asked me... (which they did not)" answers. He came across like a guy who is hiding lots of things. He could have copped to the affair -- or denied it. It was his chosen opportunity to clear the air and spin some goodwill for himself and instead he spent a half an hour answering nothing about anything and insisting that he was answering everything and furthermore, that he's been answering everything from day one.
|
toke
|
posted on August 26, 2001 12:07:52 PM new
He certainly should have volunteered anything and everything he knew to the DC cops...as soon as it was discovered she was missing. He didn't, and his best opportunity to help her was lost. His major concern seems to have been to help himself...not Chandra.
Kraft...
What do you think of his behavior so far?
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on August 26, 2001 12:52:43 PM new
This interview with Connie Chung was the only time I've ever seen him speak, toke.
Part of the problem (with me) was the way Connie tried to ask him the same question 3 billion times and ways. IMO he was pleading the 5th with his 'pat' answers, which frustrated Connie. I thought he maintained his composure during that prosecution-style questioning period, but I got so annoyed with Connie's badgering that I didn't watch much more.
It seems like the fact that he's probably cheated on his wife, is really what he's on trial for (with the media).
|
toke
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:11:30 PM new
I don't agree, kraft. I think he's on (public relations) trial for his behavior throughout the investigation. That's why he asked for the Chung interview...to try and repair his badly tarnished image. He totally failed, IMO. I sure don't care about his sex life...and I doubt if many do, or even care to contemplate it.
It's his apparent total disregard for Chandra (who knew her boundaries) that I find completely reprehensible and disgusting. Not to mention his cavalier attitude toward the truth...
|
shoshanah
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:31:27 PM new
Strange, but sometimes it seems that the PERSONA has to fit the CRIME (or indiscretion.. )
Mr. Roosevelt was not "fried" for his...indiscretions...Mr. Kennedy was not either....Even Mr. Clinton, who came VERY CLOSE to being fried, and did get a little burnt, was finally forgiven by the gemeral public. There was something in them which is lacking in Mr. Condit. Somehow, Mr. Condit does not have the type of charisma needed to be "forgiven"...a piece of the puzzle is missing in his personality make-up...Just my own opnion. (And no, being "forgiven" does not mean their actions were OK. What the others have done is also wrong...)
Krafty {{{}}}}
********
Gosh Shosh!
My "About Me" Page
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:33:03 PM new
Shoshana, it's his hair.
|
saabsister
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:38:04 PM new
yes, james, it makes me think of Bart Simpson.
|
krs
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:43:10 PM new
He's not on trial-never was, and his AND Chandra Levy's 'indescretions' are no one's business but their own. They, if they occurred, are certainly not the business of shrews across the country out to take their vengeance upon any man they perceive as having left an opening, a weakness. Certainly none of his demeanor is the business of anyone but those close to him and of those who have elected him to office. Whether he is re-elected or not is none of the business of anyone outside his district either.
Go watch a movie. Read a harlequin novel.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:43:44 PM new
Hi Shosh - Many presidents, congressmen, etc have had affairs. The difference in this case is that one of their (Condit's) current lovers is missing.
|
toke
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:49:46 PM new
And it's true...he does have bad hair.
Interesting...Charlie Rangel thinks they should convene a grand jury. Maybe that would stop some of this endless speculation.
|
shoshanah
|
posted on August 26, 2001 01:52:33 PM new
Linda Yes...I just did not want to type that, because it might "imply" I am judging him guilty of a crime  but yes, Chandra's disappearance does not help matters...
I just see him as lacking charisma...
James...Yea! Talk about "bad hair days..."!
krs You are correct. Mr. Condit is NOT on trial. People are only expressing opinions of him, based on gut-reaction to his statements and actions or lack thereof...
And, more importantly: What in the world is a Harlequin Novel????
********
Gosh Shosh!
My "About Me" Page
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on August 26, 2001 02:14:56 PM new
........did he really love me, I asked myself? Then Fabio took me into his arms and whispered softly in my ear, "I can't believe it's not butter".
Same to you Shosh x a million!
|
toke
|
posted on August 26, 2001 04:01:17 PM new
Oh. I can't imagine how I could have overlooked your post, krs.
As a matter of fact, Condit is on trial...in the court of public opinion. That is why he's done the media extravaganza...to attempt to excuse his behavior. He unwisely chose this course...doesn't seem to have worked out the way he'd hoped.
When he asked for, and gave, the national interviews...he made his actions everyone's business. He can't have his privacy and a soapbox, too.
It goes without saying that it's up to his constituents and the Democratic party, whether or not he will be re-elected...or keep his seat for the current term, for that matter.
When Charlie Rangel believes they should convene a grand jury on this matter...and Gephardt speaks ill of him...he's in a lot of trouble within his own party. It's hardly a matter of nosy citizens trashing a poor misunderstood congressman's private "affairs."
|
bunnicula
|
posted on August 26, 2001 05:33:43 PM new
Shoshonah: the difference is that a growing faction in this country that believes that a politician's private life shouldn't be. Couple that with the fact that in the past the press would never have thought to demand access to that private life...
|
Microbes
|
posted on August 26, 2001 06:06:19 PM new
something in them which is lacking in Mr. Condit. Somehow, Mr. Condit does not have the type of charisma needed to be "forgiven"...
LOL OJ did have that charisma, there are lot's of people that have "forgiven" him.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on August 26, 2001 06:07:20 PM new
bunni - imo, you and krs have been so right about this all along, and I wonder too why there are some people who think that it's their right to know everything about another person, especially if they're in politics. What if a prospective employer would only hire me if my sexual history was unblemished? (Of course in my case I would be hired on the spot...) But what if that was the norm on a resume?
|
gravid
|
posted on August 26, 2001 06:43:17 PM new
Perhaps there are some jobs somewhere that are so unimportant that it really does not matter what the character is of someone doing them.
I am not sure what that would be. I want the kid flipping my burgers to be honest enough he does not deop one on the floor and just put it back on the grill. I want him nice enough not to spit in my food or pour rat poison on it because he had a bad day and wants to hurt someone. I sure want a good honest valet parker who I entrust a $30k car to. We see from the news how important a pharmacist or technician is.
Well here is a fellow who makes our laws - decides if the nation should go to war and has a hand in deciding how you will be taxed and how it will be spent.
I am supposed to say - Hey if he is a cheating liar and a slime ball that has nothing to do with his public life and job and is none of my business?
Get real - he is a snake at home and changes hats and discharges his public office
by a different set of standards? Never happen boys and girls. If the man has no morals he will be doing to his constituants what he was to Levy - just a little more subtle.
|
shoshanah
|
posted on August 26, 2001 07:17:40 PM new
krafty: ........did he really love me, I asked myself? Then Fabio took me into his arms and whispered softly in my ear, "I can't believe it's not butter".
Oh! Romance books! I have never read one in my entire life. I DID start one, years ago, by Daniele Steele, and felt ill after about 4 pages...Went back to Ancient Greek and Roman History...
Fabio IS the dude with the beautiful (died)(or is it dyed?) blond hair, is he not?
WHY OH WHY would such a hunk do such a dumb commercial... Well, on second thought...his "acting" ability leaves a lot to be desired...********
Gosh Shosh!
My "About Me" Page
[ edited by shoshanah on Aug 26, 2001 07:19 PM ]
|
gravid
|
posted on August 26, 2001 08:16:07 PM new
shosh - It's the adult version of closing your eyes and saying "I believe, I believe"
to save Tinkerbell. Ye of little faith.
Embrace the mystery - the magic - the deep dodo over your boot tops!
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on August 26, 2001 08:31:09 PM new
I'm laughing so hard at your last post Shosh, I think I herniated a lung!
|
bunnicula
|
posted on August 26, 2001 08:42:58 PM new
gravid: so if, as you were about to drop your car keys into his palm, you discovered that the restaurant valet attendant was having an affair...you would declare "you, sir, are not to be trusted with my car" and toss them instead to another attendant who, presumably, is unblemished?
|
julesy
|
posted on August 26, 2001 08:46:14 PM new
Wasn't it Condit who wanted to hear every lurid snippet about Clinton's personal relationship with Lewinsky while Clinton was under the microscope? Didn't he mention something about needing to air out every detail?
Condit set the bar, along with everyone else who did the same. Time for him to be an adult and deal with the monster he helped to create.
|
shoshanah
|
posted on August 26, 2001 09:03:48 PM new
Gravid...Thanx for clearing things up for me...I am afraid I know little about the "escape world" of romance novels
krafty...It's all your fault! You started it all up with your margarine commercial  ...
********
Gosh Shosh!
My "About Me" Page
|
krs
|
posted on August 26, 2001 09:33:34 PM new
I don't see how anyone could be so obtuse as to think that that interview was done as his initiative. He's been hounded and pestered since the beginning to give the public something, anything, that he had no choice at this point when the investigation as it pertains to him is over. That he waited until that point is to his credit, for anything prior WOULD have appeared to be an attempt to muddy the investigation of him.
No, he did not want to hear every detail of Clinton's derring-do, he is on record as having asked that the republicans, rather than bringing out details of inquiry little by little, accept the full amount of any information in one fell swoop so that the entire mess could be dealt with and done with however it would be. Condit attempted to put an end to the gleeful dragging out of the (so-called) impeachment hearings by asking that it all be placed on the table by the investigators at one time and finally. Had that taken place the whole stupid show would have been over in weeks rather than the years in took. Much less of the governments's time would have been taken up by it and many fewer of the taxpayer's dollars would have been wasted.
|
