100 Daze

Everything I read about Clinton indicate that he was a very very smart man and could wrap his brain around pretty much anything. RR had the other characteristics but lacked the intellectual ability.
You obviously are too young to have lived through both of those presidents. Dont believe everything you read and watch from the MSM.
 
Where did Garfield state he watched MSNBC or MSM or any news outlet? Many have questioned whether RR views were his own and Garfield presented a valid argument.

Garfield comes from a little different place in that he wants his crew of Lumberjacks led by someone who has actually cut and stacked cord wood as opposed to someone who got a degree in Forestry.

Put another way you can put a cowboy hat, boots, chaps, spurs, give them a horse on a man but until he can take his PHD (Post Hole Digger) and lay in the fenceposts the full 36' he ain't no cowboy.

Because he always starts off "by what I read" as somehow will lend itself credibility (which is absent of any real life experiences).
 
Garfield comes from a little different place in that he wants his crew of Lumberjacks led by someone who has actually cut and stacked cord wood as opposed to someone who got a degree in Forestry.

Really? Sure had me fooled. :blink:
 
Freedom,

Never had the opportunity sit sit down face to face with a sitting or former POTUS or any other head of state for that matter. So I, like most of the rest of the world must go on what we read and hear in speeches.

How many face to face conversations did you have with RR or any other head of state for that matter?

I am not going to address the issues of friction and focus because as I stated previously, I have no issues with his honor, or the fact that he was willing to go against the grain.

What I do take issue with is the Don't confuse expertise with leadership. As I argued, I do not believe one can be a leader with out the other.

If you believe that being a leader does not require a certain level of expertise and intellectual prowess then we obviously have different definitions and there is no further need for discussion.


Piney,

Very well put. Thank you.
 
Freedom,

Never had the opportunity sit sit down face to face with a sitting or former POTUS or any other head of state for that matter. So I, like most of the rest of the world must go on what we read and hear in speeches.

How many face to face conversations did you have with RR or any other head of state for that matter?

I am not going to address the issues of friction and focus because as I stated previously, I have no issues with his honor, or the fact that he was willing to go against the grain.

What I do take issue with is the Don't confuse expertise with leadership. As I argued, I do not believe one can be a leader with out the other.

If you believe that being a leader does not require a certain level of expertise and intellectual prowess then we obviously have different definitions and there is no further need for discussion.


Piney,

Very well put. Thank you.

A good leader puts those people that are highly effective, in their respective areas of expertise. How do you think Bill Gates got to be where he was today? As a highly effective leader he hired people that were smarter then he in those areas of expertise.

Case closed.
 
Does Mr. Gates have any computer knowledge? Do you think if I put a box of computer parts in front of him he could build a PC? How about basic or even more advanced programing?

I do not believe from everything I have read and sen about RR that he had the equivalent expertise.
 
Does Mr. Gates have any computer knowledge? Do you think if I put a box of computer parts in front of him he could build a PC? How about basic or even more advanced programing?

I do not believe from everything I have read and sen about RR that he had the equivalent expertise.

Spin, spin, spin, thats all you seem to do when you fail to back up your baseless, factless, assumptions.
 
Case still open. You're NOT a moderator.

Leadership comes in many styles. RR had a certain style as did General Patton. Were they the same?
You need to confer with our favorite puddy tat on that one. Hes the one having problems comprehending differences like those.
 
right now he is a celebrity in a leadership role and it will be at least another year or more.. before its finally determined..

1) if he is a leader..

or

2) people made the right choice..

I still have a feeling its..

3) probably none of the above.
 
Spin, spin, spin, thats all you seem to do when you fail to back up your baseless, factless, assumptions.


You asked why Gates was successful. Had he not possessed a solid background in computers he would more than likely not have been as successful if at all. You are the one who has not come up with his own definition of what a leader is. You are the one who is not addressing the issue.

I have a different standard for what I believe a leader is. I require experience as will as the other personal characteristics. You apparently do not.
 
You asked why Gates was successful. Had he not possessed a solid background in computers he would more than likely not have been as successful if at all. You are the one who has not come up with his own definition of what a leader is. You are the one who is not addressing the issue.

I have a different standard for what I believe a leader is. I require experience as will as the other personal characteristics. You apparently do not.

I didn't ask anything. I told you plain as fact. Feel free to twist your logic as you see fit. If your only requirement is experience, then our current president has failed that miserably.

Of course you will probably think different. :lol:
 
I didn't ask anything.

Yes you did.
How do you think Bill Gates got to be where he was today?

Do you see the "?" thing at the end of the sentence? It's called a 'question mark" for a reason. I'll let you guess why. If you meant it as a statement you should have said something to the effect of "Gate was successful because ..... ." and ended it with a period (.) or a exclamation point (!). If it was retorical, I have no way of knowing that due to the fact that you failed to say that no answer is required.



If your only requirement is experience, then our current president has failed that miserably.

What part of "as well" are you not familiar with?
I require experience as will as the other personal characteristics.

Just in case you are not comprehending what I am saying. I believe a leader must have experience AND the other charateristics outlined by Piney and vaguely by you. By that standard, I do not believe RR was a leader because he had very little if any understanding of economics, law, history or culture.
 
Yes you did.


Do you see the "?" thing at the end of the sentence? It's called a 'question mark" for a reason. I'll let you guess why. If you meant it as a statement you should have said something to the effect of "Gate was successful because ..... ." and ended it with a period (.) or a exclamation point (!). If it was retorical, I have no way of knowing that due to the fact that you failed to say that no answer is required.

And I answered for you. As a highly effective leader he hired people that were smarter then he in those areas of expertise.


What part of "as well" are you not familiar with?

Just in case you are not comprehending what I am saying. I believe a leader must have experience AND the other charateristics outlined by Piney and vaguely by you. By that standard, I do not believe RR was a leader because he had very little if any understanding of economics, law, history or culture.

And yet he was able to pull the country out of the mess left by the 1 term joke of president "Peanut Farmer".
Believe it!