The Presidents Speech

[Colleen Thomas]

Agreed.

Sheer stubbornness, however, is not an effective quality in a leader.

And to score between the top 5-10% IQ among those who took the standardized tests makes him merely average among presidents. And that has always been one of my difficulties with him.

It's an act, isn't it? The good-ol-boy jargon, the joking references during commencement speeches about his poor grades, his facade of understanding what the "common" folk in this country are having to deal with these days.

In many, many situations, and by his own choice, I don't believe he has a clue.

Sheer stubborness can be a very powerful quality in a leader.

Churchill, refused to consider a deal with Hitler, even when everyone, including the US envoy to the UK felt the Germans would win. they had every advantage, save only the advantage in seagoing firepower of the Royal Navy's home fleet.

Similarly, the Japanese wa plans counted on the US seeing things their way once theyhad consolidated their gains, they hoped to bring the US to the negotiating table. For all his sophistication, FDR had a stubborn streak and so we kept fighting when our navy was hopelessly outnumbered and all indications were that the Japanese were unstoppable.

Israel was born of stubborness in her leaders. There are many other examples.

Stubborness is not neccessarily a detrimental quality in even a statesman.

IN GWB's case though, you aren't talking about stubborness. You are talking about a rigid, inflexible, inability to empathize and seek compromise.

He lacks common sense, but has the common touch. He dosen't need to be intelligent, he has handlers to think for him. He does need to seem approachable, human, understandable. In those things he has succeeded marvelously. Knowing all I do about GWB, I'd still rather have him as a dinner partner than John Kerry. I believe he was selected to run precisely because he was a failure at being a bussiness man. People can relate to someone who hasn't had it all his own way. Even if his failures were always accompnaied by the golden parachute of the Bush name.

I don't think his manner is an act. I don't think he's a moron. I think he is one of those people who simply thinks very few thoughts, sees things in black and white and acts on those very few thoughts that percolate down through his brain.

 

[Wildcard Ky]

Agreed.

Sheer stubbornness, however, is not an effective quality in a leader.

And to score between the top 5-10% IQ among those who took the standardized tests makes him merely average among presidents. And that has always been one of my difficulties with him.

It's an act, isn't it? The good-ol-boy jargon, the joking references during commencement speeches about his poor grades, his facade of understanding what the "common" folk in this country are having to deal with these days.

In many, many situations, and by his own choice, I don't believe he has a clue.

Stubborn ness isn't always a bad thing. It can come in quite handy when you have a mission or goal with a single objective.

To be average among presidents is still to be well above average compared to everyone else. It's not just intelligence that matters though. Persona and perception are a big part of being president. Bush's persona is that of being a regular guy. He's good at portraying that. Clinton was the same way. Both can come off as ordinary people.

Think of it this way: Clinton defeated Bush Sr, Perot, and Dole. Whom would you rather have a beer with? Clinton, Bush Sr, Perot or Dole?

Bush Jr. defeated Gore and Kerry. Whom would you rather have a beer with? Gore and Kerry came across as blue blood elitists. Bush is probably in the same financial ball park with both of them, but he can come across as the ordinary guy.

You asked if it's an act. Sure, most of it probably is. But it's an important part of politics. People want someone they think can relate to them. He likes baseball, he likes beer, he has a ranch with horses, he likes to fish. Common folk relate to that, much the same way they related to it in Clinton. I don't doubt at all that he really does enjoy those things. I also don't doubt that he does what he can to play up that image. It's a valuable political tool.

 

[Pure]

bon mot

Colly on GWB: I think he is one of those people who simply thinks very few thoughts,....

I've met a few of those. It's a quality more appreciated in a sack partner or bar buddy than one's leader.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly on GWB: I think he is one of those people who simply thinks very few thoughts,....

I've met a few of those. It's a quality more appreciated in a sack partner or bar buddy than one's leader.

I don't know Pure. People like that tend to be very very sure of themselves and as a result very decisive. In the right situation, a leader like that is very good. Bull Halsey comes to mind.

I don't personally think much of GWB, but you must give credit where it is due. He is self assured and decisive. It can be argued he is pig headed and inflexible as well. I guess which adjectives you use and how you view his resolution has a lot to do with where you stand on the issues his policy touches upon.

 

[Seattle Zack]

And, apparently, forty years ago, an apostrophe wasn't necessary to convey a posessive.

Let this be a lesson to you children: You can blabber all you want, but an illiterate rant is still an illiterate rant. Unless you learn proper spelling and grammar, no one will take you seriously.

 

[Guest]

And, apparently, forty years ago, an apostrophe wasn't necessary to convey a posessive.

Let this be a lesson to you children: You can blabber all you want, but an illiterate rant is still an illiterate rant. Unless you learn proper spelling and grammar, no one will take you seriously.

Been hittin' the sauce again, SZ?