Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisnaholic
^ Not the most important part of their job, of course, but it's still expected of a head of state. Any time there's a tragedy that impacts a whole nation, the head of state steps up to speak for the people, expressing sorrow or sympathy.
|
I understand that it's expected, I just don't find it necessary or beneficial. The president can act nice and feel sorry for those involved in an incident, but neighbours, family, friends, and the media have that very much covered.
Quote:
|
A frivolous analogy might be the way the boss of a workplace makes a speech at a retirement party.
|
Lol I see that as an unnecessary injection of oneself into someone else's business. Then again, I just work with a lot of people like that so maybe the analogy comes off differently for you.
Quote:
|
It's also a chance for heads of state to learn a bit of humility by meeting, honouring and talking, both to and about specific ordinary citizens, regarding them as more than just voters to be wooed. It's a real showcase of a President's charisma and empathy as well, and they get it wrong at their peril, as happened when the Queen misjudged the public mood after Lady Di was killed. She had to endure some of the worst headlines of her entire reign. The only one I still remember said, "Show us you care, ma'am" which is pretty ludicrous at one level, but that's how many people felt at the time: cheated because they didn't have a mourning figurehead on tv.
|
That's still not something that I find necessary in a leader, but even if I did, wouldn't a president consoling victims of a tragedy because they feel compelled to very much be treating those victims like voters?
Quote:
^ At last the rivalry between Chula and Frownland is getting down to fundimentals: it's all about who has the biggest penis. 
|
Yes, I remember when that really came to a head in the member picture gallery and a load of posts were deleted.