NP? somebody has to say it

[Michael Kenny]

--- David Morris <fqmorris at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >From: "s~Z" <keithsz at concentric.net>
> >
> > >>>Jefferson didn't like to give speeches and wasn't
> known as a good 
> >public speaker.  He liked to write.<<<
> >
> >How many of those being led, and how much of the world
> population, ever 
> >heard Jefferson speak?
> 
> Yes, that is the relevant fact in this bad comparison. 

I agree.  It's not a good comparison on my part.  Perhaps
Truman or Eisenhower?  I believe both had reputations as
poor public speakers.  They existed during a time of mass
media.  Do you think they were good leaders?  If not, can
you think of anyone who isn't well-spoken but is a smart
person?  A good decision-maker?

My main argument is that it is possible to be a good leader
without being a great speaker.  Similarly, Gore was
criticized for being robotic, or for his shifting style of
speaking in the three debates.  Chris Matthews pointed out
he couldn't picture Al Gore's face to the sun.  He couldn't
picture him speaking with charm and emotion to the workers
at ground zero.  To him, these were important elements to
being a leader.  Are they, though?  I don't think so.  Can
Gore identify problems and set policies in place to solve
them?  That was my standard for judging him.

> This is the age of 
> TV, and one of the president's main jobs is PR for his
> policy choices.  
> Shrub isn't very good at that job,

During the elections I had a fair idea of what Bush stood
for.  As much as I did for Gore, who doesn't have the
reputation for poor speaking Bush has.

> and I suspect its
> because he's been 
> artificially elevated to the post by his father's old
> cronies.

What is the evidence of that?

--Mike
 
> DM

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com