Why does John Boehner cry so much?

[dainthomas]

He never got over the sight of Augustus falling into the chocolate river and getting sucked up the pipe to the Fudge Room...

I lol'd

 

[Narmer]

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/14/does-boehners-crying-diminish-his-credibility/?hpt=T2

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
"Weeper of the House"... that's what Joy Behar dubbed the incoming Speaker John Boehner after his teary-eyed performance on CBS' "60 Minutes."
Boehner got choked up multiple times during the interview with Lesley Stahl, including when talking about the nation's children.
He also teared up another time toward the end of the piece with his wife, Debbie, at his side.
And this "60 Minutes" interview isn't the first time we've seen the speaker-to-be get choked up. On election night, when it became clear the Republicans had won control of the House, Boehner got teary-eyed talking about how he spent his whole life chasing the American dream.
Boehner describes himself as "a pretty emotional guy." No kidding. He told "60 Minutes" he's comfortable in his own skin and that people who know him know that he gets emotional about certain topics.
But not everyone is so comfortable. Barbara Walters said Boehner's got an "emotional problem." Others are now questioning the emotional stability of the man who will be second in line for the presidency. Of course, there are some stereotypes at work here.
In 2008, Hillary Clinton revived her presidential campaign when she started blubbering in a New Hampshire diner. Voters saw the tears as showing her human side. But if a man cries, typically it's seen as a sign of weakness.
When outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi was recently asked about Boehner's crying, Pelosi said she cries about a personal loss, "but when it comes to politics, no, I don't cry." Where Pelosi's concerned, it's the taxpayers who cry … but that's another story.
Here’s my question to you: Did John Boehner's crying on "60 Minutes" diminish his credibility?

HELL YES!!!

 

[werepossum]

if I had his last name my kid's first name would definitely be Constant.

I laughed out loud. I'd propose to Shelley Long, just to send out invitations to the Long-Boehner wedding.

Boehner's crying bothers me too. If a grown man cries, there ought to be a missing limb or a dead relative. At least a dead dog. Except maybe for that montage in "Up". And I'm freakin' sensitive. For a man anyway.

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm not attacking him for displaying emotion in general, I'm attacking him for overly displaying a particular emotion/act in public.

Did you take this up with your therapist? Your problem runs in many dimensions. In the first place you are attacking somebody. Mental problem number one. Next problem is that you are applying standards that were inculcated into you as a child as if they had objective reality. Thirdly, you set similarly artificial limits on where it is appropriate to feel.

In short, you have been brainwashed to believe what you believe and you do.

Just let go of all that shit and cry. You won't die, and you will know all about the folk who come along and make fun of you.

I cried so hard I died. And I still cry knowing how sad other folk are and don't know it because they live in a no crying cage.

 

[Moonbeam]

I lol'd

Me too.

 

[LegendKiller]

If Obama were to cry this much the righties would claim the tears are a Communist/Muslim/Kenyan plot to weaken this country through emotion, pollute our waters through pagan tears, and send secret messages to our enemies (5 tears is a "go" signal for the next mind-control attack).

On the other hand, if Boehner does it, it's nothing more than tears of joy from a patriot who is the Dudley-Do-Right of Congress (who will always look out for Joe-6-Pack). The tears are patriotic to our country and demoralizing to our enemies and contain Holy Water.

 

[Carmen813]

You are correct, our leaders are not Robots; however the vast majority have a handle on controlling their emotions in public.

But seriously..when you say something like "There's nothing inappropriate about having genuine emotional reactions to situations" I think either you fail to understand the concept of "Situational Appropriateness" or you are just being obtuse.

"Situational Appropriateness" is a term you've coined to describe your own beliefs about when it's appropriate for a male leader to tear up in public. It's based entirely on your own values, and very likely those values have been shaped by the family and social environment you grew up in. I have my own beliefs about such appropriateness, and frankly neither of us is right/wrong or better/worse than the other. We've all got beliefs and biases that shape how we perceive the world.

My point is that I think it's important to question "why" we think and believe the things we do. Sometimes that leads to change, sometimes that leads to us feeling more secure in who we are.

My hope was that through my posts people reading them might consider why the acceptable emotions men can display in public are so limited and to think about how these beliefs have hurt men as a whole by forcing them to deny a huge part of their existence.

I work with men everyday who are undergoing immense emotional strain and have been harmed significantly by these stereotypes. "Suck it up" "Be a man" "Boys don't cry" ...these are beliefs that nearly every American man internalizes, and at some point in their lives, it harms them a great deal. In worst case scenarios, it leads to death via suicide. Men attempt suicide less often than women, but are four times more likely to be successful.

Since for me this is a matter of live and death, yeah, I spoke up. I could have easily ignored this post. Given what I study and the field I work in that would have gone against my own personal code of ethnics and sense of integrity. It's easy to stand on principle when you have nothing to lose (and to be fair, this is just a forum, I have relatively little to lose publicly, this is more about my personal integrity). I know what I'm saying isn't popular and I'm sure I didn't change any minds, but that isn't really my goal. I felt that since I had a chance to elevate this discussion I should take that opportunity. I just want to spark some discussion and thought!

I am not concerned at all about Boehner shedding tears in public, I am VERY concerned about his legislative agenda. I've said my piece and don't really have much more to add to this topic.

Narmer,
Do I cry in public? I don't have a very public life. The one public thing I've ever done was give a Survivor Speech for my undergrad university's Relay for Life (I'm a cancer survivor.) There were about 800 people there. I told them about my experiences with cancer. I honestly don't remember if I cried, but there was undoubtedly a great deal of emotion coming through what I said and I'm sure my eyes at least watered up.

I am a product of the same society and environment that most of the men on this forum. I learned at one point that crying in public means you are weak. Since I know I have that bias and have seen the harm it can cause, I am working against it. That is all I can do. I am not holier than thou.

 

[Narmer]

"Situational Appropriateness" is a term you've coined to describe your own beliefs about when it's appropriate for a male leader to tear up in public. It's based entirely on your own values, and very likely those values have been shaped by the family and social environment you grew up in. I have my own beliefs about such appropriateness, and frankly neither of us is right/wrong or better/worse than the other. We've all got beliefs and biases that shape how we perceive the world.

My point is that I think it's important to question "why" we think and believe the things we do. Sometimes that leads to change, sometimes that leads to us feeling more secure in who we are.

My hope was that through my posts people reading them might consider why the acceptable emotions men can display in public are so limited and to think about how these beliefs have hurt men as a whole by forcing them to deny a huge part of their existence.

I work with men everyday who are undergoing immense emotional strain and have been harmed significantly by these stereotypes. "Suck it up" "Be a man" "Boys don't cry" ...these are beliefs that nearly every American man internalizes, and at some point in their lives, it harms them a great deal. In worst case scenarios, it leads to death via suicide. Men attempt suicide less often than women, but are four times more likely to be successful.

Since for me this is a matter of live and death, yeah, I spoke up. I could have easily ignored this post. Given what I study and the field I work in that would have gone against my own personal code of ethnics and sense of integrity. It's easy to stand on principle when you have nothing to lose (and to be fair, this is just a forum, I have relatively little to lose publicly, this is more about my personal integrity). I know what I'm saying isn't popular and I'm sure I didn't change any minds, but that isn't really my goal. I felt that since I had a chance to elevate this discussion I should take that opportunity. I just want to spark some discussion and thought!

I am not concerned at all about Boehner shedding tears in public, I am VERY concerned about his legislative agenda. I've said my piece and don't really have much more to add to this topic.

Narmer,
Do I cry in public? I don't have a very public life. The one public thing I've ever done was give a Survivor Speech for my undergrad university's Relay for Life (I'm a cancer survivor.) There were about 800 people there. I told them about my experiences with cancer. I honestly don't remember if I cried, but there was undoubtedly a great deal of emotion coming through what I said and I'm sure my eyes at least watered up.

I am a product of the same society and environment that most of the men on this forum. I learned at one point that crying in public means you are weak. Since I know I have that bias and have seen the harm it can cause, I am working against it. That is all I can do. I am not holier than thou.

There is no harm in shielding certain emotion. Absolutely none. If God wanted men to cry in public everytime we would be doing it right now, left and right. But he left that to women and effeminate men because he felt strongly that it wasn't right. Can you imagine having a son and your son seeing you cry often? He will think his father is weak and there will be chaos in the home because the son will seek to replace the father as the head of the household. Likewise, there will be chaos in the general public if men started crying often and other men saw that as weakness and chose to usurp the existing order.

The men that you have counselled sound like they have mother issues. I think there may have been a lack of discipline in the home. Maybe, there was no strong father figure. That may be why they're so fucked up today. Nothing can be done about that. They are a lost cause.

 

[Lemon law]

Of course as a Dimorat, I already look forward to the election of 2012. As John the wheeper compiles a absolutely miserable track record as the worst sqeaker of the house in living memory. is forced to confront the fact that come the next congress of 2013, poor ole John Boehner will be no longer be the speaker of the House.

And folks, that is when the real John Boehner water works will really truly happen. As the SGT of arms of the house will have to cart an inconsolable wheeping John away.

Poor ole wheeping John, he finally gets to the big time on hype and propaganda, without learning he then has to deliver the bacon or else. As ole wheeping John discovers for the first time in his miserable life, that hype and propaganda will not feed a single bulldog.

 

[ericlp]

because he's from Ohio.

Tho the only people that will really be crying are the idiots that voted him in.

 

[feralkid]

"Situational Appropriateness" is a term you've coined to describe your own beliefs about when it's appropriate for a male leader to tear up in public. It's based entirely on your own values, and very likely those values have been shaped by the family and social environment you grew up in.

Hogwash.

It is not a term I "coined". If you don't understand the concept, I seriously doubt you have as much education in mental health sciences as you seem to imply.

Your boorish arrogance coupled with your hysterics further reinforce my suspicions.


Perhaps you need to pull your head out of....the sand, and consider that perhaps any counselor worth his salt would be doing his clients a favor by helping them to actually deal with a world that may consider their behavior abhorrent; rather than trying to delude one's self by thinking the problem is the world around them.

 

[feralkid]

nm

 

[Howard]

He's letting his freedom tears flourish. Or his tears freely flourish. Whatever.

 

[Carmen813]

Hogwash.
It is not a term I "coined". If you don't understand the concept, I seriously doubt you have as much education in mental health sciences as you seem to imply.

Your boorish arrogance coupled with your hysterics further reinforce my suspicions.

Perhaps you need to pull your head out of....the sand, and consider that perhaps any counselor worth his salt would be doing his clients a favor by helping them to actually deal with a world that may consider their behavior abhorrent; rather than trying to delude one's self by thinking the problem is the world around them.

Wow. Feel better to have that off your chest?

For what it's worth, I did look and see if I could find out what you were referring to with "situational appropriateness." I searched online using Google and when that came up blank, I searched my universities library system for research articles that utilized it as a term. Nothing came up, other than a couple articles about alcohol use. It is, as far as I can determine, not a term that has any special significance in psychology or mental health counseling. I can certainly guess at what concept you are trying to convey, but I honestly would rather have you explain it me at this point. From the I can gather from your posts, you seem to believe that there are certain instances where displaying of emotion is appropriate, and others where it is not. My point, all along, has been that those instances where you believe displaying it is or is not appropriate are based entirely on your values, and that your values are shaped by the environment you matured in. My position is that if an individual is having a genuine emotional reaction and "hiding it" because of fear of rejection by others, than that individual is being harmed by being forced to deny a part of their selves. When this cycle repeats, it leads to massive mental health issues that could have been prevented in the first place. That is it.

Helping a client try to cope with a world that rejects them and assisting them in acknowledging the influence the world has on them are not mutually exclusive concepts. Any counselor "worth his salt" helps a client both cope with their situation and understand contextual factors that impact their presenting issue. In fact most of our research today shows that counselors who fail to address contextual concerns often harm their clients, or lead their clients to dropping out of counseling completely. Context is particularly important to deal with when working from clients from marginalized groups. I'm still early in the development of my theoretical orientation towards counseling, but I can already state that I strongly believe in advocating to change systems in the external world that harm the individuals I work with. That should be clear enough from my posts. There is a limitation to how much can be accomplished in the counseling room and when the client returns to the "real" world all of the work we do together can unravel very quickly.

As for arrogance, rudeness, or hysterics I will apologize for leaving that impression. It was not my intent. I was challenging you, but it stemmed from a genuine desire to debate these ideas. That is part of the difficulty for anyone posting on a forum like this, we lose a great deal of our ability to communicate non-verbally. This is why I think internet counseling is a joke

I will say this, and I mean this respectfully, but looking back at our interactions it does seem like there is a tendency to jump to the automatic "worst" possible interpretation of what I am saying. That tendency is going to make having this kind of discussion very difficult.

 

[Kirby]

"Are you surprised at my tears, sir?"

"Dude, fuckin' A!"

"Strong men also cry... strong men also cry."

 

[feralkid]

Wow. Feel better to have that off your chest?



I will say this, and I mean this respectfully, but looking back at our interactions it does seem like there is a tendency to jump to the automatic "worst" possible interpretation of what I am saying. That tendency is going to make having this kind of discussion very difficult.

---Yes, it is all about YOU being misinterpreted......


"I can already state that I strongly believe in advocating to change systems in the external world that harm the individuals I work with. That should be clear enough from my posts."


---That's your problem...you fail to recognize the need to deal with internal issues, instead you insist
upon blaming the world around you.

---Change comes from within.






Hubris.

That is why you fail.


The good news? A lot of us get over ourselves as we mature.

Good luck!

 

[feralkid]

nm

 

[Carmen813]

Well, at this point it appears that our discussion is over. As a general rule I try to avoid personal attacks in the majority of my posts and I feel as if I am being baited.

*Edit*
I see you took most of them out. I appreciate that. None the less, I've said my piece.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

This animated political cartoon sums it up nicely:

Johnny Cry

 

[manimal]

I wonder if he spent any time as an alter boy in a catholic school....

 

[Moonbeam]

There is no harm in shielding certain emotion. Absolutely none. If God wanted men to cry in public everytime we would be doing it right now, left and right. But he left that to women and effeminate men because he felt strongly that it wasn't right. Can you imagine having a son and your son seeing you cry often? He will think his father is weak and there will be chaos in the home because the son will seek to replace the father as the head of the household. Likewise, there will be chaos in the general public if men started crying often and other men saw that as weakness and chose to usurp the existing order.

The men that you have counselled sound like they have mother issues. I think there may have been a lack of discipline in the home. Maybe, there was no strong father figure. That may be why they're so fucked up today. Nothing can be done about that. They are a lost cause.

Please don't have any kids while you believe this shit.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

his constant blubbering is an embarrassment to this country. someone needs tell that fool to dry up or go home