Video: Body language expert examines Carter’s reaction to caller
posted at 7:53 pm on December 6, 2006 by Ian
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Body language expert Tonya Reiman explained what Jimmy Carter’s body movements and facial expressions meant when he was called a racist and anti-Semite on C-SPAN this weekend. Reiman said she can see the look of sadness and concern take over his face after his smile goes away. She also said his tongue protrusion is a sign of anxiety and looking down often means he wants the subject to change.
TONYA REIMAN: That was a very harsh interview. Initially, you can see he’s smiling. That looks like a real smile, the minute he starts hearing exactly what’s being told, you see a look of sadness cross ride across his eyebrows.
BILL O’REILLY: Is it anger or sadness?
REIMAN: No, It’s sadness. It’s a look of concern and sadness. Suddenly he realizes what’s being said and the eyebrows come down, pointed. That’s a look of sadness. That is genuine sadness that this is being said about him. I also notice at a certain point he does what’s known as a tongue protrusion, which is a sign of anxiety.
O’REILLY: Letterman did that all the time when I talked to him.
REIMAN: He also tends to look down a lot … then he shifts his body language as well. Which is another way of saying I’d like to change what’s going on, I’d like to change the conversation.
O’REILLY: But he didn’t get angry?
REIMAN: No anger whatsoever. He handled this very well. If you look at his body, there is no movement in the legs. His hands have not changed. He is very calm during this interview, which is surprising because it was a very harsh interview.
O’REILLY: That tells you he has confidence in his positions, as misguided as they are.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Sorry if I don’t feel bad for this POS Ex-Pres, I’ll save my sympathy for the Israeli people.
lowandslow on December 6, 2006 at 8:00 PM
I’d like to have seen Carter’s body language on November 4, 1980.
Bryan on December 6, 2006 at 8:04 PM
What? I thought that meant anger, and eyebrows going up meant surprise or sorrow.
>:-( Anger
Sad
EFG on December 6, 2006 at 8:12 PM
Sad
EFG on December 6, 2006 at 8:12 PM
Dang it!
EFG on December 6, 2006 at 8:13 PM
EFG on December 6, 2006 at 8:13 PM
Guys, I’m sorry, but for some reason, the HotAir comment screen won’t let me post a “sad” emoticon.
Hence my thrashing about like a flounder here these last few comments…
But I hope you all see what I’m trying to say.
EFG on December 6, 2006 at 8:15 PM
I’d like to have seen Carter’s body language in motion as he fought off the rabit.
Christoph on December 6, 2006 at 8:24 PM
It could be worse. We have Carter, the UK has Galloway.
What bothers me is that for some reason, a HARD HITTING discrediting of Carter will never come from the MSM.
When was the last time we saw a review of his history, with the un-qualified revelation that the Palestinians LIE, CHEAT, KILL?
Carter can say whatever he wants. Worse, he can believe what ever he wants. That he does not see it as antisemitism is the great shame.
The American people need a history lesson.
Agrippa2k on December 6, 2006 at 8:35 PM
Interesting how the weasel, Terry Moran, of ABC news got a complete pass for his disrespectfulness of Bush. After all, he was just asking the tough questions on all Americans’ minds, right? It seems to depend on who the questioner is and who is being questioned.
thedecider on December 6, 2006 at 8:51 PM
So this proves he was uncomfortable being called an anti-semite? He showed anxiety and sadness that his work is being construed in such a manner?
GregH on December 6, 2006 at 9:24 PM
Well, I’d be sad too, if someone told the absolute truth about my worst sins and stupidities where the whole world could see.
LegendHasIt on December 6, 2006 at 10:00 PM
Worst President ever.
CanaryinaCoalMine on December 6, 2006 at 10:12 PM
I hate to state the obvious, but I think theres a difference between aggressive questioning and calling someone an anti-semite and racist…thats not even questioning its name-calling…
crr6 on December 6, 2006 at 10:12 PM
He’s sad because Jo Shmo citizen viewer called in and made it apparent to him that someone out there has him figured out for the inept anti-American jew hater that he is.
I wonder if it’s remotely possible that he “protruded his tongue” in order to lick his lips because he’s thirsty. Maybe he looks down in concerted concentration trying to hear and absorb what the caller is saying since there’s no way to make eye contact. Maybe this body-language lady is a quack sympathetic to Carter/Liberals. Who knows.
If Carter had scratched his ass and picked his nose as the caller spoke she might have called it suicidal thoughts… too bad he didn’t scratch his butt and go diggin’ for gold.
SilverStar830 on December 6, 2006 at 10:13 PM
I would love for you ’state the obvious’, unfortunately, you failed. If the argument is about being disrespectful to the office of the President, then it doesn’t matter in what manner the disrespect is displayed – questioning, or name-calling. Disrespect, is simply disrespect. That much should be obvious to everyone.
thedecider on December 6, 2006 at 10:22 PM
/_
\- [ sad…?
CliffHanger on December 6, 2006 at 11:12 PM
no… ugly.
CliffHanger on December 6, 2006 at 11:12 PM
Wait a MINUTE – Jimbo is 80% brain dead – does this analysis take that into consideration? Carter is pathetic – not SAD! My Dog Dubya saw him on TV and attacked the screen.
I think O’Reilly hired Larry Kings producer. What a (**(**&^*& segment.
iam7545 on December 6, 2006 at 11:40 PM
…”body language expert”…what’s O’Reilly gonna have on next, a palm reader? Someone who interprets tea leaves? Someone who’ll do the Feng shui of filmed interviews to find out which politician has the most bruised chi?
What does his body language reveal about Mr. Carter? It tells me that he’s a washed up, hate filled, miserable, worthless pile of steaming horse dung (apologies to horses and to clover for the comparison) who would trade away his country’s honor for a Nobel prize, his wife’s knickers to get back at the Reaganites who dissed him in ‘80, and his weight in peanuts for the good opinion of any Third World dictator who might amble by.
…hmmm…maybe I could get a gig on O’Reilly….
Puritan1648 on December 6, 2006 at 11:47 PM
Worst American ever
Buzzy on December 7, 2006 at 12:25 AM
(Please read in southern drawl)
Look, I’m no big city lawyer… *collective gasp* but I think he was saying to himself “he’s on to me” and then “holy crap, they need to fire that screener”
x95b10 on December 7, 2006 at 12:34 AM
right, asking a president aggressive questions is just as disrespectful as calling him a racist and anti-semite? It must be tough to argue that position.
crr6 on December 7, 2006 at 12:49 AM
His work? You make it sound like he’s feeding the poor in India or something. He runs around certifying phony elections (Yasser Arafat, Hugo Chavez) and before Arafat went to his much deserved reward, he was Carter’s best friend in the middle east. What kind of ‘work’ is that? Thug enabler? Terrorist Boot licker? I think I’d rather push a mop on a p*rn set before I do the kind of ‘work’ Jimmy Carter does.
austinnelly on December 7, 2006 at 1:14 AM
Every TV Newscaster, every liberal trash Media outlet personnel had the most wonderful hang dog look on their faces…just priceless.
Apparently because we had not a suffered national collapse, some work was (left) undone.
Ronald Reagan was the light at the end of the tunnel and liberals were in meltdown.
I think the Gipper would have a few words for our faux Repubs now though.
Speakup on December 7, 2006 at 1:39 AM
He was sad, uncomfortable, anxious and wished the subject matter would change? WE NEED AN EXPERT TO TELL US THIS?!?
S. Weasel on December 7, 2006 at 9:07 AM
So pretty much anyone who doesn’t want to nuke Muslims out of existence is anti-American and anyone who doesn’t believe Israel should accept some resposibility for the situation in the middle east is an anti-Semite. That sounds about right.
JaHerer22 on December 7, 2006 at 10:23 AM
Carter is responsible for starting the chain reaction in POTUS inaction leading to 9/11.
Black Adam on December 7, 2006 at 10:41 AM
The point that you and gregh are missing is that it was the caller, not the interviewer, who made the statements regarding Cartuhs not-so-latent-antisemitism.
Barntender on December 7, 2006 at 11:00 AM
I do think it is over the top to call Carter “anti-Semitic” as I have seen no evidence of that. There is abundant evidence, however, that Carter is virulently anti-Israel and making such a charge on a C-Span program is entirely appropriate. Carter should welcome the opportunity to clear up any misapprehension that he is anti-Israel. However, I think the facts speak for themselves.
ptolemy on December 7, 2006 at 11:24 AM
I’m not a middle eastern expert, but I’d like to believe that there is some middle ground between nuking the middle-east and kissing the man responsible for the intifada.
Furthermore, to my knowledge, no one on this thread has called Carter ‘anti-American’. Washed up, horrible/worst president, anti-semitic, anti-israel…..yes…..he’s been called all of those things on this thread. But, unless I missed it, no claims of anti-American.
And yes, I do believe a good argument could be made for Carter being (at least) anti-Israel. Generally, when you pal around with the leader of a group that has officially stated as it’s goal that it wants to wipe Israel off the map, the argument can be made that your anti-Israel.
As for Israel accepting some responsibility, I believe they have, consistently, accepted responsiblity. They’ve pulled out of Gaza completely. They’ve pulled out of Lebanon. They tore down settlements. They (prior to Hamas taking power) were one of the biggest contributors of aid to Palestinians. Furthermore, unlike the neighboring Arab countries (excluding Jordan), Israel does not keep the Palestinians living within it’s borders in refugee camps. All Palestinians that remained in Israel after it became a nation are considered Israeli citizens (even without the military service that all the other Israli’s must perform for citizenship).
So claiming that Carter is being vilified only because he thinks Israel deserves some of the blame rings a bit hollow.
The fact remains that if the Palestinian people stopped launching rockets, sending suicide bombers, and otherwise terrorizing the state of Israel, that in short order, the wall would come down and there would be two countries living peacefully side-by-side. While you can complain about some of the tactics that Israel uses to defend itself, you must admit that defense would cease to be necessary if the people mounting the offense would cut it out.
JadeNYU on December 7, 2006 at 2:48 PM
I couldn’t vote yet – but I watched in fascination all night, for the first time, ever, an American national election. Mrs. Carter’s ‘body language’ was way more precious than Mr. Carter’s.
Best was when ABC’s Frank Reynolds said “It’s a rainy night in Georgia”.
Entelechy on December 7, 2006 at 2:55 PM
I was a small business man during Carters administration.
I remember,
21% interest rates.
13% inflation.
He “invaded” Iran with 3 choppers and having final word on the invation, it was a disaster.
My pappy told me when you want advice, don’t go to a failure, go to a person with success.
I think that is still good advice.
navy1946 on December 7, 2006 at 3:16 PM
navy1946
I was around too and do not forget that Carter started Ted Koppel’s career with the Nightline program ever night reminding America of day 200 of the hostage crisis in Iran ect.
Jimmy Carter was one of the biggest traitors to ever hold the office of President of the United States.
Not only did he start the Middle East crisis he gave away the Panama Canal which will bite us in the ass when China decides to use it against us.
ScottyDog on December 7, 2006 at 4:02 PM
ScottDog, 200 was nearly half of the number, tragically.
There also were loooong lines to fill up our tanks, sweaters versus coats, dim-your-
mindslights and “malaise”. Oh, that malaise! He never realized that he contributed so much to it…Entelechy on December 7, 2006 at 5:20 PM
Sorry ScottyDog, I bodged your pen name :(
Entelechy on December 7, 2006 at 5:20 PM
Carter: http://www.worth1000.com/entries/283500/283895mRTQ.jpg
Mazztek on December 7, 2006 at 5:32 PM
That’s ok I knew what you meant. I was just giving day 200 as an example of what we had to hear every night on the news because Carter was appeasing the enemy.
ScottyDog on December 7, 2006 at 6:04 PM
Comment pages: