savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 07:49:48 AM new
Interesting article in the New York Time on how the world sees our election.
The first is from the German daily Die Tageszeitung, On Tues " the most self-absorbed and least politically interested people in the world are going to elect the most important government in the world".
Another is a quote from James Bryce a longtime British ambassador to Washington.
"Europeans often ask and Americans do not always explain, how it happens that this great office, the greatest in the world - unless we accept the Papacy - to which anyone can rise by his own merits is not more frequently filled by great and striking men."
To me this points out the most amazing history of how our method seems to choose the most mediocre and banal of leaders. Is this the best we can do? Are these men the best our country has to offer? I am ashamed sometimes to be an American.
|
netlawhopeful
|
posted on November 6, 2000 08:09:08 AM new
I'll try to put this nicely, but in dealing with many Europeans at my business school and on business trips abroad, I feel that they have very little understanding of how anything operates in the U.S., and when this gets filtered through the popular press the result is even worse. America has its faults but it's actually a pretty good system.
A leader is someone who can build consensus, get people to agree and get the job done. The leader is usually not the smartest or most visionary person in the group, but the one who reconciles the ideas of the smart and the visionary with the more plodding expectations of Joe Average. The true mark of a leader is not that s/he is brilliant but that s/he surrounds self with brilliant advisors, reconciles their viewpoints, and working with a team comes up with a solution that works.
I do not find any of the candidates running to be particularly exciting, but they all have considerable political experience and I am sure that any one of them could handle the job of running the country's business. That's what really matters, and only history is able to really evaluate how great the leader was in retrospect.
I am sorry you are ashamed to be an American. Although I realize that the U.S. is not perfect, I am very proud to be one myself. I don't see any other country where I'd be better able to "be all that I could be".
________
I never had one, and I didn't want one, and I don't, so now I do...
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 08:16:25 AM new
netlawhopeful
[i]but they all have considerable political experience and I am sure that any one of them could handle the job of running the country's
business[/i]
Surely you're joking!!!!!!!!!
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
abingdoncomputers
|
posted on November 6, 2000 09:01:52 AM new
A leader is someone who can build consensus, get people to agree and get the job done. The leader is usually not the smartest or most visionary person in the group, but the one who reconciles the ideas of the smart and the visionary with the more plodding expectations of Joe Average. The true mark of a leader is not that s/he is brilliant but that s/he surrounds self with brilliant advisors, reconciles their viewpoints, and working with a team comes up with a solution that works.
Comment #1: You just described Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
I am ashamed sometimes to be an American.
Comment #2: I have never been ashamed to be an American. In fact I feel quite blessed.
[ edited by abingdoncomputers on Nov 6, 2000 09:03 AM ]
|
calamity49
|
posted on November 6, 2000 09:29:12 AM new
WELL SAID, Netlaw. 
You just gave away the secret of America.
Calamity
|
Meya
|
posted on November 6, 2000 10:10:15 AM new
While our political structure may be skewed at times, I would never be ashamed to call myself an American. It is always easy for someone on the outside to pick apart something, whether it be a Government or a person. If American is something to be ashamed of, why do so many from all over the globe wish to come here?
This is the greatest country in the world, (no offense to our friends across the pond or to our north) worts and all. As far as the Presidency not being filled more often by "great and striking men", who decides who is great and striking? We have had some terrific leaders in our history, and will have more in the future.
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 11:16:30 AM new
Well, perhaps embarrassed is a better word than ashamed. Although there have been times when ashamed was more appropriate. When over 800,000 people were murdered in Rwanda and we never lifted a finger to stop this, or when we became the world largest deadbeat in the United Nations not to mention the genocide committed against Native Americans.
Finally, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush as great leaders????????? Yeah right.
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on November 6, 2000 11:44:02 AM new
Oh shoot, I wasn't going to get into anymore of this fruitless bickering but I just can't help myself!
REGAN was a great President???!LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Skewed perception must be nice. The man was an actor for goodness sake! His wife ran the country most of the time [thank goodness she had her astrology friends or who knows where we'd be now! LOL]I agree that he and GW are much alike. They are both idiotic bumblers.
We were lucky that foreign leaders liked Regan. Don't think they will feel the same about Lil' George.Doesn't anyone remember all the little wars Regan and Bush got us into?
I have been voting for Presidents ever since Nixon ran. I have never seen my taxes go down or the government get smaller.I have never seen one government program go away without another appearing in its place. For internal matters like those the congress and the senate and the house are the most important. A president can promise anything but without the backing of those institutions nothing can happen!
A president is important mostly in foreign matters and supreme court nominations. The rest of those guys we elect to Washington DC have much more to do with the rest of the stuff.
I vote accordingly.
sometimes I wish I didn't know where the reply button was....oh,well. FLAME ON
|
sgtmike
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:03:25 PM new
Doesn't anyone remember all the little wars Regan and Bush got us into?
?????????????
No, list them.
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:07:19 PM new
Hi Sgt Mike! So glad I could draw you back in! Long time no see.
Well just off the top of my head I would mention Grenada- that was a real important little war no? Somalia? That was done just to give the Democrats something to do when they got into office! Ha!
This is all just my own opinion. Take it as you wish.
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:15:33 PM new
Panama - Ringing any bells yet?
I call these "little wars"- my own term. Maybe skirmishes would be better? Not a military type.
|
sgtmike
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:21:11 PM new
Granada was a rescue mission and the initial mission in Somalia was to protect and rescue the "bleeding heart" relief workers.
|
krs
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:21:29 PM new
savoyking,
Do you have a country in which you feel that you would not be embarrassed?
Do you realize that if you have food in your refrigerator, clothes on your back, a roof over your head and a place to sleep, you are richer than 75% of this world?
That if you have money in the bank, in your wallet, and spare change in a dish someplace, you are among the top 8% of the world's wealthy?
|
sgtmike
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:25:33 PM new
Panama! You saying that the Panama invasion was not justified?
Now list the missions Clinton the coward has committed our military to and justify them (missions).
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:25:50 PM new
rawbunzel
Reagan was more than just a bumbler. He had an amazing ability to confuse reality with fantasy. He touchingly recalled his feelings visiting a liberated concentration camp during the war when in fact had never been overseas. He merged the newsreels with his own experiences. He talked of his walk in the woods alone with Brezhnev (please forgive my spelling here) where they spoke grandfather to grandfather, except he spoke no Russian and Brezhnev no English.
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:27:53 PM new
the "bleeding heart" relief workers.
Yeah, famine relief is for sensitive wimps.
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:32:44 PM new
KRS
Are you saying this country can do no wrong? That there aren't things that we as a nation have done that disturbs you? Are you one of those "my country right or wrong"? Can Germans be ashamed of there history during the Hitler years or the English for there repression of the Irish, etc. Are we so pure and perfect that we can do no wrong? If I as an individual have done things of which I am ashamed then certainly the collective we as a nation can do the same.
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
Linda_K
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:34:44 PM new
Clinton almost got us into an undeclared war with East Timor within his last term....no justification I can offer.
As far as how the Europeans and Germans see America and our ways, I'd suggested that maybe since they had a WW fought on their home land, they don't think we take all this seriously enough. I know I'd personally feel a lot more comfortable with a military president like Ike.
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:39:36 PM new
Panama justified? No, I don't think so. Noriega's incarceration has done nothing to stop the flow of drugs. People died. Not enough justification for me.
The others had some justification but then it is easy to come up with justification for just about any action, no? Timing of Somalia was a bit odd don't you think? Could have left the decision up to Clinton since he was just about to take office.Unusual for a lame duck to get us into something like that right at that time. It had been going on a long time, why then?
I do not consider Clinton a coward. Why don't you list his little wars? I listed the others [and there are more than the ones I listed you know!]
SAVOYKING, I was being nice
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:42:22 PM new
rawbunzel
And I was agreeing with you. We share the same opinion of Reagan.
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
krs
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:42:26 PM new
savoyking,
My position in this is not at issue since I've made no statement here concerning any position I may have but have asked YOU a question, repeated for you here:
Do you have a country in which you feel that you would not be embarrassed?
|
krs
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:48:17 PM new
Rawbunzel,
Refer to: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/gilboa.htm.
George Bush had to invade Panama, who's actions had been supported or at least sanctioned by both the Reagan and Bush administrations, because he didn't like being called a wimp. It was a sort of presidential playground thing.
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 12:56:25 PM new
KRS
I actually said "sometimes"!!!!!!!!!!!
This means that I find the current and even the past crop of leaders embarrassing, so what? It also means that I am ashamed of several actions that have taked place here, so what? There is no perfect country, at least none that I am aware of (maybe Iceland). People from other countries have to worry about themselves and their mistakes, I am concerned with ours. If I have not answered your question to your satifaction, so what? The point of my post was the embarrassing quality of our political leadership not whether we as a people are so perfect that we can not criticize ourselves.
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
krs
|
posted on November 6, 2000 01:02:22 PM new
So then, with that post, filled with "sometimes" and "so what", I'll find my own answer to be, savoyking, that you are voicing your objection to the clash between the country's biege leadership and the shade of your own biege opinions.
|
savoyking
|
posted on November 6, 2000 01:08:25 PM new
KRS
Such a smarmy reply. You remind me of sgt Mike. Perhaps you get some thrill from that. Is your life so empty that flaming is your major recreation. You make me laugh at your self importance.
Humanity I love; it's people I can't stand
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on November 6, 2000 01:08:54 PM new
KRS, Interesting article. Don't have time to read the whole thing right now but will later. Skimmed it,[GORE] interesting stuff.
My real opinion is it doesn't matter what I think.We will get who we get, the majority does not rule in most[GORE] elections anyway [its the electoral college that does] .
Just as long as who ever it is is entertaining! Clinton was at least that! Other[GORE] countries did not consider his sexual escapades nearly as serious as we did here. Nothing to be embarrased about for that! Indeed most other countries[GORE] wondered why we would make such a big deal of it!That was the real embarrasment! They just don't understand[GORE} our brand of politics!
please pay no attention to the subliminal message being placed in this post. simply let your mind go and accept it! HaHaHaHaHa!
|
RainyBear
|
posted on November 6, 2000 01:12:30 PM new
Why do I suddenly feel the overwhelming urge to vote for [GORE]?? 
|
sgtmike
|
posted on November 6, 2000 01:35:51 PM new
Because it (feeling a need to..) is a result of genetic coding. Liberals tend to make decisions based on emotions, conservatives use their intellect. Rush Limbaugh said so.
|
RainyBear
|
posted on November 6, 2000 01:48:13 PM new
Well if Rush said so, it must be true. 
My parents always say, "If you're not a democrat when you're young it shows that you don't have a heart. If you're not a Republican when you're older it shows you don't have a brain." (They are, of course, Republicans.)
|
