Well said, CTL.

Leaders share visions. He wasn't afraid of friction. He didn't view his job as finding the center of gravity on every issue in order to encapsulate public opinion. He wanted to shape a new consensus at the risk of alienating those who suported the current status quo.

He focused on a few key goals. One of which was to confront Soviet expansionism.

He was upbeat and wanted people to believe in his leadership, their country, and themselves. He painted a picture of a better country and came up with the program to help get us there. He was routinely able to strike a balance between the visionary and attainable..

Finally, he had a graciousness about him and a guileless belief in human nature.

All qualities Reagan possessed and shared with us as President.

"The Soviets have admitted that his decisions led to the demise of the Soviet Union. Why can’t you?"

What are you talking about? I never said Pres Reagan wasn't influential in the demise of the Soviet Union. I said that he is not comparable to people like Mother Teresa or Ghandi or Martin luther King Jr.

"I don’t know why you believe that ardent anti-Communists like President Reagan, Prime Minister Thatcher, Pope John Paul II and others are not inspirational leaders"

First of all, the Pope is not known for being an ardent anti-communist, he is known for leading the Catholic Church. Secondly, I never said that Pres Reagan wasn't inspirational to some, but he certainly doesn't cross the demographics like MLK does. I'm happy that you respect the Pope, but we're talking about a pretty rarified stratosphere with some of the people we've mentioned. I don't think Pres Reagan or PM Thatcher qualify.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Vitus, i posed before CTLs post, so I hadn't seen his yet. Also, I never once made any argument for inclusion of Bobby Kennedy in the same category as MLK. I think I've made my argument for why I don't think Reagan fits.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

This doesn't fit the thread - but this is why I am no longer a republican. They have abondonded me. I want smaller government, less intrusion into my life, more local control on local issues.

Where this does relate - Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. are poor leaders in my humble opinion. So was Kerry.

First of all, the Pope is not known for being an ardent anti-communist

Actually, he is.

i posed before CTLs post, so I hadn't seen his yet. Fair enough.

Also, I never once made any argument for inclusion of Bobby Kennedy in the same category as MLK.

I know you didn't, but the original poster did. Are people like Reagan and Thatcher in the same category as Martin Luther King and Mother Teresa? Arguably not the same category, but that doesn't mean they weren't "inspirational leaders," which is of course quite a subjective category. Is Reagan likely to be canonized? No, but that doesn't mean he didn't inspire millions, or achieve great things, and from in that respect, I think it's not entirely unreasonable to include him on the list.

Would you consider Lech Walesa an inspirational leader?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

"Actually, he is"

Actually, although it is well known that he is anti-communist, that is not the thing he is known for. It is not the thing he has dedicated his leadership to. You say "Mother Teresa", you think of her charity. You say "Martin Luther King Jr." and you think of civil rights. Whe you say "The Pope" you don't think of anti-communism.

"Are people like Reagan and Thatcher in the same category as Martin Luther King and Mother Teresa? Arguably not the same category"

And that was my one and only point.

"Would you consider Lech Walesa an inspirational leader"

I hadn't considered him much, since I was thinking more in terms of people who hold more of a place in the minds of Americans, but without knowing all of his history, I'd say he fits more than Pres Reagan, but that's a pretty arbitrary categorization. He was more of the figurehead for his movement than Reagan was for any single "movement." He overcame a much greater degree of persecution for his ideas and efforts than any Pres could. Simply by job description, it is hard for a President to lead in the singular manner of a MLK or a Ghandi. Because he has to represent a greater cross section of the American public, he can't really be aligned with any one cause. Plus, they usually don't suffer much for their causes since they are generally pretty succesful people to begin with. As I said, no slight is meant against Pres Reagan by not putting him in that group. It's a pretty exclusive list.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Interesting take on the question.

How about Churchill?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I think I mentioned Churchill and FDR. If not, I meant to. Those two probably qualify simply because of the great scope of what they dealt with with WWII. FDR in addition got elected a bunch of times and led the most sweeping social program reforms in our history. I don't know. Every Pres has issues to deal with, but clearly some are more inspirational than others. Lincoln for example, did what he believed in even though he risked tearing the country apart. I don't know that Pres Reagan's leadership falls into that category. I don't know that he had the opportunity to exercise that kind of leadership.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

The GOP, telling families how to lay their loved ones to rest! telling doctors how to treat their patients! going where even the United States Supreme Court fears to tread!

You think Reps in Congress took up the Schavio thing to get Tom Delay's ethics mess off the front pages?

Perhaps I'm just too cynical.



Anyhoo....I'd get Colin Powell's name off that leadership list pronto. He is Rummies beeotch, the White House whipping boy, the man they sent to the UN with fake pictures of WMDs, the guy they hung out to dry, the guy whose phone calls never made it to the Oval Office.

Anyone with a shred of dignity would have told them all to go to hell and walked out....but Colin Powell took it like the career yes man that he is. Definitely not a leader.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

Is this all you know of Powell?

Ummm no its not, but its enough for me to make an informed decision.

Its not a national secret that he was treated with contempt by Bush's inner circle. Powell was nothing more than a figurehead officeholder because they knew he had popular appeal. Colin Powell was treated like dirt by the Bush White House and for whatever reason he kept coming back for more...heck he couldn't even quit right after the last election.

Definitely not the kind of qualities I look for in a leader.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

You have a very limited view of what it takes to be a leader.

As I've said before, when you take politics out of your thought process in assessing the qualities of a leader your viewpoint will grow a bit.

Many times people judge leadership by how high they reach in stature. Powell certainly didn't seek that out for personal gain. He sought it out of the desire to be a public servant.

I listed Powell as a great leader despite the reasons you list as being a pawn in the Bush administrations Cabinet. In fact, Powell felt obligated to serve out his term out of a deep sense of duty he felt called to do.

He's one of the very few leaders who has served as a soldier, a diplomat, a civic leader, a statesman, and a patriot.

He was born in the slums of the Bronx during a time when race relations in America weren't very good.

He graduated from an ROTC program and rose to the rank of four-star General and eventually became Joint Chiefs Chairman and National Security Adviser.

After retirement, he founded an organization called America's Promise, which provides resources to youth to get them started on the path to a successful life.

Again he was called to public life and served as Secretary of State.

Those qualities are certainly indicative of true leaders. One that goes from being a military general...to founder of a civic cause...to Secretary of State.

If those aren't the qualities you look for in a leader than you might want to revisit the definition.

I wonder if those same leaders were present today, if the press would focus on their leadership and achievements or their mistakes in their personal lives? Certainly with the names you've listed I have often heard of reports of "womanizing". Most of is it hush-hush because [1] they are dead, and [2] everyone liked them.

Kinda like how pro athletes' private lives are all over the newspapers ... unless you were Mickey Mantle.

IMO, with today's media ... there would be just as many media members looking to "take them down" as there would be "build them up". The media seems to have shifted from reporting the news, to making the news. When I watch the news, the stories are at least 20:1 negative over positive.

We are at the media's mercy when trying to judge who is or is not a great leader. We simply don't have first-hand knowledge.

---

=======================
-- Every morning brings opportunity;
Each evening offers judgement. --

While I can certainly be wrong, I believe the original post implied not only JUST leaders, but GREAT leaders. I think that may be why you and slowguy are butting heads so much, he's speaking of people he considers great leaders, and you possibly just leaders. Although my read is that you think Reagan was a great leader.

I also think politics of any leader have to be considered. What you are speaking of is removing one's personal political predispositions and judgements. While related, those are separate.

I somewhat agree with your assessment.

I do think Reagan was a great leader. At the same time, I think Powell has great leadership characteristics. I don't seek to compare the causes that leaders envision and undertake and use them to assess whether or not that person was a "great" leader.

Many times, assessment of public figures will be colored by the political biases of those who evaluate him. That's why I attempt to assess leadership without tainting it with ones political affiliation.

John Kennedy had great leadership potential and vision. Eisenhower and Roosevelt...the list goes on....

I do not think that most people separate the leader from the cause/vision. I personally view leaders this way because while Hitler demonstrated many great leadership characteristics, no one on this board (I hope) would say he was a great leader. A less extreme example (for me) would be Jack Welch. He made GE a lot of money, demonstrated many great leadership qualities. As a stockholder one would have to say he was a great CEO. But I can't view him as a great leader because I don't consider making GE and GE's stockholders' money to be very noble. I personally reserve spots on my great leader list (which I keep on a dry erase board in my kitchen and update on a bi-monthly basis) for those who championed great causes, potentially even if they failed.

And political affiliation/views will always play a part in determining on a personal basis whether someone's cause was noble.

Again he was called to public life and served as Secretary of State.



He wasn't called to be Secretary of State, he was called to be the Administration whipping boy. Any boy did they whip him gooooood. And he took it every day without complaining like a good yes man.

I was an admirer of Colin Powell for a long time, but lost all respect for him when he took all the crap that Bush and Rumsfeld dealt out to him and never said a word. Powell was respected throughout the world but after his United Nations charade he is now just a bad joke.

A real leader would have told them to stick their job and find someone else to lie for them.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

Unfortunately your viewpoint is on the minority on his stature as Secretary of State. Many foreign leaders respected his service and leadership while serving in that position.

Paint a picture of the man in whatever fashion you want but in the end you're the only one who will get the meaning of that picture.

I have a lot of respect for Powell, and I think he's a great man and has dedicated his life to public service. But I wouldn't call him a great leader.

---

_______________________________________________

I'd be interested in knowing why you wouldn't consider him a great leader?

Well he certainly wasn't a leader within the Bush administration.

I guess it depends again on semantics - the initial list in this topic are seems like people who were visionaries and/or mobilized a sginificant number of people to a new cause. Powell doesnt really fit this bill, although clearly he has leadership skills. I just wouldn't include every 5-star general, or head of a civic groups as a "Great leader" in the same way that MLK was, for example.

That in no way is meant to diminish Powell's character or dedication to public service.

---

_______________________________________________

I totally agree with your viewpoint.

He wasn't a leader within the Bush admistration. In fact, the administration never really took full advantage of his qualities. However, the position of SecState is a bum job. You have to go and sell the administration's policies to the rest of the world whether you agree with them or not.

My point echoes yours. He clearly has leadership skills and if he had the desire could easily make a good run for President.

However, the position of SecState is a bum job. You have to go and sell the administration's policies to the rest of the world whether you agree with them or not

Tell that to Kissinger ;)

He clearly has leadership skills and if he had the desire could easily make a good run for President.

I wouldnt mind seeing that, though I think it's never going to happen.

---

_______________________________________________

Dude...I'm a Leader and have a few other family members that fit the bill...but you're talking political/conscious/human rights/etc leaders...well I could fit that bill if need be but at least I have the namesake!

---

_______________________________

Good athletes train when they want to, great athletes train when they don't......