100 Powerful women

I figured Opray & Melinda Gates would make the list. I had no idea about the others.

I had no idea about the others.

Nor I.

Sorry

From that list it is obvious that america's powerpoint is the entertainment business.

She
USA is a land of entertainment with unfullfilled DREAMS

On the contrary..that list shows how in USA AT LEAST 100 women have fulfilled their dreams beyond their wildest expectations.

Took me a few days to read every one, or at least skimming every one. Very educational. I have a tendency to skip a bit with corporate big wigs (at the same time the glass ceiling has been pretty far up there for a long time), but some of them are interesting too.

They aren't all from the USA in the article, Ragman, but I'm not sure if you meant that.

No, I didn't mean that they're all from USA, of course; however 11 out of the top 21 were from USA. It's very heartening to see how well these women have done in USA in spite of the 'glass ceiling'.

Yes, I found it all fascinating. Plan to read next year's list too...

How do you know it was beyond all of their wildest expectations?

Would you have made the same statement if this had been a list of men?

I imagine some of this women are exactly where they aimed to end up, or might be asking "what's the next step up?"

Of course... I would have made the same comment if it were men. And, why not?

I assume that those listed people had at least above-average expectations and ambitions when they started out...BUT in my estimation, to be listed as one of the '100 Most Powerful' could be beyond their wildest expectation when they started out their careers. That is my assessment based on my observation of human nature. If that is offensive or some objectionable to you, I'd be curious.

Well, when I first was going through the list, I saw person after person who was, say, 48, or 53.... and not until I kept reading did I see an accumulation of 63's. 2007-63=1944..... post war baby boom. I, as one example, am older than that, if just by a few years.

The crux year was 1964. People in school after that civil rights year had more clues that they could ever expect to break through any ceiling.

I've written about women accepted in med school in the US in 1962 in, I think, a MSAT directory for med schools of the time. Incredible difference between then and now, but a big part of the difference happened in the late sixties. Wasn't so reasonable to have expectations in the seventies either.

I don't believe for a second that if this list had been the names of the 100 most influencial men you would have made the above statement. That is my assessment based on my observation of you.

You revised your statement already from "how .... at least 100 women hae fulfilled their dreams beyond their wildest expectations" to "could be beyond their wildest expectation when they started out their careers"

Make up your mind.

This doesn't anger, or offend me, and what's the use of objecting? You've already said it.

It amuses me how assumptions are made, and when pointed out, the statement both changes and given forth like it was an equal opportunity statement.

You can't even assume the listed people had at least above-average expectations and ambitions.

anyway.....

I'm not familiar with most of the names there, like osso, I'll take a few days to read about them.

I think (it) was within dreams with post '64 era women; lots of women got into law school/med school not too long after that, but as the years have passed, the dreams have gotten more realistic. Even some of us pre-64 people had dreams and some broke through, some even before '64. Relatively few re the plethora now, believe me.

On (it), most of those women hoped for a career in whatever, science or law.. and probably a few hoped for some power in the field. That has grown.

You may believe or disbelieve what you want, but that still doesn't make it any less true.

After some consideration after this and other threads, I will invite you to NOT respond to my responses to threads. However, you have chosen in this thread an another in the past on A2K to take me on (and unfairly so). I wish this weren't the case, but it clearly is.

Within this thread you asked me a question and I answered it honestly and directly. Now you are calling me a liar as I didn't respond as you expected. Why ask the question?

The fact that I changed my wording to 'could'...is proof of what exactly?
that I didn't edit as carefully as I would have liked. The fact is that you chose to pick apart my wording in this manner is an indication that you have a need to get a life.

Based on my observations of this and other threads on A2k on which we have both been involved, you have demonstrated some sort of emotional problem. You are turning this distortion of what I write into something beyond what is written and meant by me.

The only modification I made to my statement was to include the phrase "when they started their careers". I don't see this is as wavering or an indication of being the slightest bit indecisive whatsoever. Does anyone else? Does anyone else have an issue with what I wrote? Please let me know.

I wish you well, but perhaps just scroll past my responses in the future as you seem to distort them into something opposite of what I write. I suggest getting some professional help.

you're funny.

and, you responded exactly as I expected.

Speaking of powerful women, I wonder what will happen to Condy Rice (#4 on this list) once Bush leaves office? What will her future in politics be? Is she a Republican? If so, I wonder whether or not she will run for elective office?

Hmm?..Speaking of women in powerful positions, how about running Condy Rice on McCain's Prez ticket as VP? Or better still, why not wait 'til 2012 and run for Prez herself?

Ragman
I beg your pardon.

this thread i had presented is something to do with my critical views..

Would you mind to explain your views.
I have three sisters well informed and fully satisfied.