Watch Hillary's speech at Rutgers. Close your eyes a few times to feel her full impact. She's a classic example of a polarizing ONTO; you either love her or hate her. When someone employs this orientation, they are communicating from their belief system and using their own inner responses as their guide. Notice her dividing word choices and they way the PHYLO's they interviewed were so validated by her obvious attempts at pandering. This is a theme we'll see play out as her campaign continues...
Anyway, more on that later...we need to get your take, so RIFF ON THIS! We want to know...
a) Did you feel she was being genuine or a @#$% phony politician?
b) Did she connect with you on any level; intellectual, emotional, visceral?
c) Did you take away anything about her you didn't know or would want to remember?
To comment on these questions you must be a registered user.
Our next show is WED, APR 25th from 8-10pm.
For this week only, call our conference line at (712) 432-3900, then punch 2171799#
Listen back here to our April 25, 2007 show...
3 comments:
That's a BIG, FAT PHONY... In the beginning of the speech as she's addressing the right side of the room, you can see how her eyes move up to the right a lot. When she is addressing the left side of the room, her head turns but her eyes are not pinned up to the left-she's trying to remember what she's going to say-none of that came from her heart...it came from a speech that some lacky wrote for her about all the downtrodden who she will probably try to BS votes from come election time. That's a lot of lip service coming from someone who lives in Chappaqua, Upper Whitelandia, USA... pardon me while I hurl
I am a big fan of Hillary's. I really enjoy listening to her speak. To me, she just has a strong presence and gives me a good warm feeling about the power that women can and should have. Do I think she went to speak to gain votes? Yes, but overall, she did have a strong message for our society, whether she wrote it or not; she obviously feels the same way or else she wouldn't have used the speech. We need to fight for what we want and believe.
It's rare to see a politician at this level NOT be phony to some degree...any person who has been at it this long and is in a position to make a serious run a the White House has to pander to his or her audience or the show's over...like all ONTOs who are ONTOing, she is unwavering in her "rightness". She takes the position of leader and authority unequivocally, which draws in the PHYLOs who are looking to her as the authority and repels the ECOs, who are always looking to buck the system or rebel against the status quo...Hillary doesn't worry about this, because she knows,(not in the context of the 4 domains) that there are more PHYLOS than any other group, so she will continue to push her message to those with whom it resonates and who are looking to her for leadership.
Is she polarizing? You bet.That seems to be the way of politics these days, and who does it better than an ONTO? Does she connect viscerally? Yes. I am PHYLO and, in the moment, much of what she says and how she says it sounds good. Do I feel a visceral repulsion as well? Yes, because she is almost TOO certain of what is right, and that always makes me a little nervous. As a client said to me years ago in response to a "CERTAINTY" sign in my office... She said, "You know Hitler had "CERTAINTY"."
Not to equate Hil' to Hitler, no not at all, just that heavy dose of ONTO certaintly is tough to take sometimes.
Thanks for the thread.
Dr. J
Post a Comment