Desmond Morris says that men make better artists because they are greater risk-takers; on the other hand, he thinks that women are better organisers and diplomats and more suited to become politicians.
The entertainment person gets a certain credibility, and the politician gets a certain notoriety. I'm against it.
One of my rules is I generally don't talk to elected officials. It's kind of a firewall. I'll talk to staff if they have something of interest. I try to avoid talking to politicians altogether. I mean, to be honest, I don't really find them that interesting. If I want juicy information I talk to staff of the politicians.
Every form of anti-Semitism, every form of xenophobia plays on the fear of the unknown, and unfortunately there are all too many politicians who know how to manipulate that. The dumber people are, the more they feel the need for a broad set of shoulders they can lay their head against.
The Washington establishment does not like the Tea Party. Don't you love all these politicians that run around and campaign as outsiders, anti-establishment, 'I'm not part of that Washington culture.' Well, then join the Tea Party, 'cause that's who's really anti-establishment, that's who's really a bunch of outsiders is the Tea Party. But you don't see those politicians who want to be considered outsiders joining or embracing the Tea Party, do you?
Henry Kissinger appeared on Dynasty. Have you had any celebrities outside of the film or acting realm that have said, "You know, I'd love to do a bit part or something," a sports star or a politician or?
I think I've had a long, distinguished career in public service. It just goes to show you what some politicians will do. They'll say or do anything to get elected. I know all these people. They all claimed to be friends of mine up until their mayoral campaigns. They'd call me on the phone and ask for information or come over here and sit in this chair to get briefed.
I never think of the word legacy. It doesn't mean anything. You do the right thing, in my judgment, and things will work out. That's what drives me. I'm not looking for legacy or history books or whatever. I know what we've done here has saved a significant number of lives. The burden is not on me. It's on the politicians who made the decisions to limit what we're doing. They're the ones who are going to pay a price, in my judgment, if crime significantly increases.
Abraham Lincoln did have intellectual instincts, a tremendous curiosity on a broad range of subjects, and a near-photographic memory for what he read. He was, at the end of the day, a politician: politics were his heaven, said William Herndon. But Lincoln did take comfort in ideas and books, more so than almost any other president, and he went to books and ideas in moments of perplexity to sort things out. Philosopher, no, but thoughtful and "surprisingly well-read" for his day.
You cannot teach somebody to write a masterpiece, but you can certainly teach them how to improve their writing skills. And you can teach them that they can make their own voices more effective by being able to communicate more clearly and forcefully. It makes people feel more capable when they can write - for instance to make a request - of a politician - and when they are able to receive a reply.
I think, unfortunately, many opinion leaders in Germany - including government officials, politicians, social service bureaucrats and so forth - they are in the private system, and they get paid the private insurance by their employer. So for them this is the best of two worlds: They have some more expensive and privileged access, but they do not have to pay for it themselves. This is a system which is both inefficient and unfair at the same time, but it is defended by those who profit from this system, and this includes many opinion leaders and many politicians.
There's a separation of church and state. If you want the perks that churches have traditionally received, then abide by the rules. If you're going to be involved in the political process, even in soft ways, then surrender the privileges. Let ministers pay income tax on all of their income. Let churches pay income tax, let them pay property taxes. They can't have it both ways. You can't pat the politicians on the back, break the rules, and then get all these perks.
Remember, success for a politician is 50% plus one. You don't have to have everybody on board.
Politicians have available a very nice EAP [employee assistance program]. There are psychological services available. All they have to do is pick up a phone. All the parties encourage them to do that. There are very few politicians who, once they're elected, take the time to rest and recover, whether you look at John Tory's schedule or Kathleen Wynne.
Change can only come from local citizens and politicians - it cannot be imposed by well-meaning foreigners - not least because a society like Afghanistan or Iraq is suspicious of outsiders and often resistant to change. I am not going to get drawn into the ethics of intervening in other countries. My concern is the practical question. Can you actually achieve change in this way? My guess is we can stop wars sometimes as in the Balkans and topple regimes - but that the other stuff - such as corruption is not within our power to effect and alter.
I thought Donald Trump once again just missed a whole bunch of opportunities to bury Hillary Clinton, and he missed them because he's not a politician, and he's not instinctively oriented toward the ideological explanations that undergird Hillary's policies.
Churches can easily bring together, in a short period of time, a substantial number of people, and politicians have to assume that these folks have the potential to vote. Although there's supposed to be a separation of church and state, they want to go to these churches to say hello to the people, and they assume their hello might turn into votes.
A contemporary politician has to be cognizant of things that are going on.
Politicians often like to suggest that their policies come about through objective thinking, but if you look at British fascists, for example, what you see - what I see - is a group of people coming to the decisions they came to because something happened to them when they were nine-years-old, or because of some deep prejudice that formed in them subsequent to that.
This is something that Randi Weingarten said to me when I interviewed her once, which I think I quote in chapter nine. She talks about how only 7 percent of private sector workers in the American economy are in unions. So all the protections that teachers have that are due to collective bargaining - including generous pensions, generous health plans, limits to what they can be asked to do after school and in the summers - all of those things are sources of resentment to the public. And I think that politicians have played off of that quite effectively.
I'm not saying Donald Trump voters are a cult at all. I'm saying the attitude of implicit trust, people don't trust politicians like that, and yet a lot of people will profess blanket trust of Trump.
The overwhelming majority of Puerto Rico is completely, completely alienated from the political structure. Colonialism is really, really strong and alive in Puerto Rico. And the politicians have taken full advantage of that. We have a debt of $74 billion, caused primarily by the system and the political structure that exists in Puerto Rico.
Some politicians are scared of Putin and some are extremely apologetic, actually. And I feel very sorry for this because some people who are like my friends from the left flank, they praise Putin because they see him as the fighter against American imperialism, which he is not. You know, why would you select between American imperialism and Russian imperialism? To my mind, it's exactly the same thing.
Ronald Reagan, and before him, Richard Nixon, and before Nixon, a slew of conservative politicians going back through American history, have played to the idea that the great majority of poor people are somehow "undeserving," and being undeserving, merit at best very limited, oftentimes deeply coercive and humiliating, government interventions to better their finances. That narrative isn't about to disappear overnight; but it strikes me as being like a weak gruel - there's no sustenance in it, no heft behind the argument.
To really tackle poverty, politicians, activists, academics will all have to think outside their boxes, will have to start developing much more integrated approaches to these problems. And a large part of this will involve working out ways to push for living wages. Partly this will involve re-empowering the union movement, which has been massively weakened in recent decades. Partly it will involve a willingness to restructure tax codes to penalize companies that don't provide basic benefits and decent wages to employees.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: