Politicians

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

A ridiculous sentiment by itself, as if forcing someone who doesn't want the job would somehow be better idea, but it's made worse by your misquote.

What Gore Vidal actually said was that any American who is prepared to run for President..., not just wants to be President.

Who said anything about Gore Vidal?

To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
-Douglas Adams

Those who seek power are not worthy of that power.
-Plato, The Republic

After all just about everybody has toyed with the idea of being the President at some point if only for a few minutes (takes pull off of beer and says "If I were the President i'd..."). THAT should be a dis-qualifier? Who does it leave?

I guess you didn't stop to read my closing statement.

On the other hand not everybody is arrogant enough to publicly state that they are actually prepared for the job of President. While it still not a dis-qualifier in itself it is a rather bold statement to make and is what I think he was getting at.

I guess you also failed to recognize a little spot of humor.

[August]

I see you're up to your old tricks Steve. Let me reply in kind.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Who

Who?

said

Is "said" really accurate, given that we are "discussing" something that you "wrote"?

anything about

Anything? Well not "anything", just that thing really.

Gore Vidal?

Yeah, you know the Okie dem that you were channeling. Mad google search skillz though...



Oh hell, playing your silly pick apart game is well, silly.

I guess you didn't stop to read my closing statement.

...
I guess you also failed to recognize a little spot of humor.

And I guess that you failed to recognize that I was talking about the concept behind the cliche and not about you. But of course when your intention is to irritate then you can't miss any chance to be snarky about it, or do I fail to recognize your intent here?

[mapuc]

From the experience I have made throughout the decades is that:

A Voter don't want to take responsibility for the action he or she make/take/do at the voting station-He or she don't want to feel this burden on their shoulder.

They will however have the right to complain.

My Danish and Swedish friend do complain a lot and sometime I say to them

Don't forget a politician wouldn't be where they are if it wasn't for people having put they vote on them.

So in the end we can only blame our self for this situation Sweden and Denmark are in.

I myself haven't been voting since 2006, I came to conclusion that I couldn't blame others for the voting I have done since 1983.

That how I see it.

Markus

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by August

I see you're up to your old tricks Steve. Let me reply in kind.

Who?

Is "said" really accurate, given that we are "discussing" something that you "wrote"?

Anything? Well not "anything", just that thing really.

Yeah, you know the Okie dem that you were channeling. Mad google search skillz though...

Oh hell, playing your silly pick apart game is well, silly.

And I guess that you failed to recognize that I was talking about the concept behind the cliche and not about you. But of course when your intention is to irritate then you can't miss any chance to be snarky about it, or do I fail to recognize your intent here?

Chill man I hear pot is legal in Massachusetts now

As for the OP's query about politicians ...

One word they are just "lawmakers"

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by August

I see you're up to your old tricks Steve. And I guess that you failed to recognize that I was talking about the concept behind the cliche and not about you. But of course when your intention is to irritate then you can't miss any chance to be snarky about it, or do I fail to recognize your intent here?

August, sometimes I just don't see where you get these ideas. Steve showed that he wasn't channeling that Okie dem you are fixated on but you have your blinders on again. In a way you are just like Trump at times.

Peace and BB's

[August]

Yeah yeah believe what you want.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by August

Yeah yeah believe what you want.

I believe what I observe.

[August]

Oh yeah, well then observe this. A person who does not want to be President cannot become President, so in light of Vidals (or Platos if you prefer) statement then who is left as a viable choice? Nobody. It's completely unrealistic to think a persons desire to take a leadership position should be a dis-qualifier.

That's why I think so little of the concept and I don't care if you agree or not.

As for Steve his habit of breaking down his targets posts into tiny little bits is deliberately irritating. So going forward if I give him a little guff for it when he does it to me then you'll know why.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by August

That's why I think so little of the concept and I don't care if you agree or not.

As for Steve his habit of breaking down his targets posts into tiny little bits is deliberately irritating. So going forward if I give him a little guff for it when he does it to me then you'll know why.

Obviously, you do care.

As for Steve breaking down a post, I guess it would be irritating having the holes in an argument exposed.

[Skybird]

Ein Satz mit X, August: das war wohl nix.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Steve showed that he wasn't channeling that Okie dem you are fixated on but you have your blinders on again.

I did? Actually I'm totally confused. What in the world is an "Okie dem"?

[Buddahaid]

OK, sorry Steve. It just irks me when you get attacked for being petty when I know it's not the case.

[Sailor Steve]

I appreciate it, and I only brought it up in response to your post rather than his because yours was last. I must be overly obtuse, but I really don't know what you guys are talking about.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

I see you're up to your old tricks Steve. Let me reply in kind.

Old tricks? I pick things apart when someone addresses several different thoughts in one paragraph, or sometimes even one sentence.

Who?

You brought up Gore Vidal. I had no idea he had said anything of the kind. I just heard the phrase a long time ago and thought it had some little grain of truth in it.

Is "said" really accurate, given that we are "discussing" something that you "wrote"?

My original comment was not aimed at you, which makes me curious as to why you took it so seriously,

Anything? Well not "anything", just that thing really.

Not really. As I said, I had no idea that Gore Vidal said that, so you accuse me of misquoting him when I wasn't really quoting him at all.

Yeah, you know the Okie dem that you were channeling. Mad google search skillz though...

No, I don't know. I don't even know who you're talking about. As for Google, I simply queried a part of the sentence. I felt the need to know what I was supposedly misquoting. Douglas Adams and Plato came up automatically, since they had said something similar.

Oh hell, playing your silly pick apart game is well, silly.

As I said, I only pick things apart when someone touches on several different subjects in the same post. Would you rather I wrote one huge post addressing all those subjects?

And I guess that you failed to recognize that I was talking about the concept behind the cliche and not about you. But of course when your intention is to irritate then you can't miss any chance to be snarky about it, or do I fail to recognize your intent here?

If I took it personally and it wasn't meant to be, then that's my mistake and I apologize for it. As for being intentionally irritating or snarky, that is never my intent.