Political analysis
Imperfect Presidents
- By Guest Writer
- February 01, 2007
More important than proving perfection on your parties side, is a willingness to seek out the mistakes and correct them; to improve; to monitor your integrity. In the face of the opposition bashing it away, it is tempting to deny any fault at all; but it is still weak to ignore potential improvement. For a leader to inspire confidence, he must maintain a balance between claimed efficacy and a willingness to examine and adapt. Not because the opposition is demanding apologies for not adhering to their views, (when their only cause is your destruction) and only when reason makes a strong case.
There are those so hungry for a disaster to blame on a president, nothing will prevent their finding fault with the opposition while their party’s errors are given a pass.
I’ve been reading 1776 by David McCullough. George Washington was a confident and optimistic leader in public however in his personal conversations and correspondence he admitted great concern for the Patriot Army’s success. He made several bad decisions in the defense of New York City; splitting his army against a superior force; picking the wrong leader for a post and then switching midstream. The changes confused soldiers prior to battle. Washington also overlooked a lesser used Long Island road which allowed the British to flank and surround his troops.
Fortunately for Washington he didn’t have a post battle press conference with reporters loyal to the enemy demanding he admit he was a failure. No, he had done his honest best and he and his troops learned and grew better eventually defeating Britain, which was considered the period’s military superpower. Though he made mistakes, he was still the best man available for the job. While modestly telling congress he felt inadequate (for the job), Washington put all into it’s success. The enemy made many errors as well, but if Washington had been dismissed for his lack of perfection, our history would be much different. Congress knew of his error’s but saw past them to his leadership and intelligence, rather than using every opportunity to improve their political positions.
Politicians today tend to look for anything that can tarnish the opponent, with no regard first for the facts, and no regard for damage to the country. The media plays along, amplifying the agenda to the detriment of the business at hand. More and more of us see through the shrill deceits of the knee jerk politicians. We see who is working for our safety and who is busy spouting whatever sounds good to their political circles. If they only knew how nutty, how empty their words are, how devoid of purpose and integrity they appear to the discerning public.
Author: Lee Goins A gardener, writer, musician and libertarian webmaster; Lee Goins’ political views can be found in
-
Rate it!
Let us know what you thought of this article. Your feedback drives the quality of our content. Plus, it’s easy!
Rate this article -
Socialize it!
We greatly appreciate you adding us to your favorite social network.
Spread the word
It would be nice to believe that George Washington was free from press scrutiny, unfortunately Washington was as vexed at the press as Presidents are today. In his book “INFAMOUS SCRIBBLERS” Eric Burns points out the press of that time was even worse than it is today.
During the Revolution, opposition “Tory” publishers were often run out of town or tarred and feathered. That didn’t stop criticism of our first President. His opponents dubbed him “King George” and other generals were not shy in criticizing him in pamphlets and letters.
The most famous fued in Washington’s administration was between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Adams secretively funded a newspaper to attack Jefferson, and Jefferson funded another paper to attack Adams.
The newspapers of the day regularly made up stories out of whole cloth. They really were political attack machines with no regard for facts that did not fit their portrayal of the politicians they supported.
699 days ago by James E. Fish
The press conference commentary here is particularly interesting. I was thinking just the other day what a disservice the media does to our military. I am not even referring to spin, but rather to information disclosure. Military leaders are routinely quizzed about strategic plans. The Iraqi evacuation issue is a perfect example. Isn’t it head on collision with a truck obvious that if you set an exit date, the opponent will lie low for awhile, waiting to re-emerge afterwards.
699 days ago by Bdub