[wku man]

Well, you're probably right about Morris. I can't stand him, Rove, or any other political advisor because they seemingly don't have souls. They have no concept of what's right or wrong, only what makes political sense. I want leaders, I want statesmen, not politicians who make their decisions based on which way their advisors tell them the wind is blowing.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[Ohioan]

Well, you're probably right about Morris. I can't stand him, Rove, or any other political advisor because they seemingly don't have souls. They have no concept of what's right or wrong, only what makes political sense. I want leaders, I want statesmen, not politicians who make their decisions based on which way their advisors tell them the wind is blowing.

Yes. A leader who is a statesman does not flow with the breeze, he finds a way to persuade others to the course that is right. The most compelling demonstration of the inadequacy of both Kerry and Bush is that neither of them even saw fit--or felt adequate--to actually address a mass TV audience on election eve, to give a comprehensive presentation of their philosophy of Government. We were bombarded with slogans--30 second spots--but no efforts to actually persuade to a course that is right, but not necessarily previously popular. The statesmen who gave us the America we are losing, were made of better stuff!

Put another way, there are an almost infinite number of approaches to any issue, if you really care about what is right. A statesman would have addressed the people, not as a fawner appeasing yesterday's opinion polls, but as one who understands what America has been and can be, with the spirit of the Fathers rekindled. With that intent--driven by a sense of what is right--he would have adopted the best approach to correct popular errors, not endorse them. Reagan did it. So did the Founding Fathers.