Like this do you mean?
Posted on 02/26/2005 6:55:39 AM PST by Pokey78
Like this do you mean?
He will after his work is done in 2009.
Your 2d point--that US military could not sustain an offense against communism-- is just wrong. But you appear to want to think that so I am not going to argue it here.
"You know, I'm going to start thanking
the woman who cleans the restroom in
the building I work in. I'm going to start
thinking of her as a human being"
"my entire generation lived its active productive life in the context of the Cold War"
you would have preferred a physical one?
Good point regarding being a follower. I don't know if it's legend or not, but I remember a story about someone who once asked the mother of George Washington how she taught him to be a leader. Supposedely she said, "I taught him to FOLLOW."
And on this topic, when I hire someone, I give them a handout that I have on followership and explain to them that this is what I expect out of my employees. It doesn't matter what position I am hiring them for. It is a culture that I'm trying to create in my business.
I don't want "yes men" (or women) when it comes to making the best products and services. At the same time, my employees need to "know their role". Disagreement is one thing, being disagreeable is entirely another thing. I'm all up for debating an idea. No problem, do it in respectful terms and, most importantly, have a solution (I don't want to hear people yammer on about the problem; most of the time the problem is self evident, it's usually a quality solution that's the trouble).
That said, the final decision (as the owner of the company) rests in my hands. It is my name on the shingle, not theirs. And when the final decision is made, my employees have 2 options: be part of that solution or not.
And, if they don't have anything nice to say, then they need to keep their trap shut...or, they can go find somewhere else to work. If the decision I make is a poor one (hey, it happens!), then that will become evident because the problem/issue that we were trying to solve will still be there. And, we will look for the solution again, only this time we will have simply learned one more way that didn't work.
Simly put, good ideas don't die, no matter how many times you try to kill them. They will keep bubbling up, going, "Look here, you shmuck! I'm the solution you are looking for!" Having employees that help you recognize the solutions is the key; followership is a critical component of the process.
And, most of my employees find that refreshing. They know what is expected of them and they know when the decision is made, it's over. And, besides, I really don't look get bothered if something doesn't work. If we deploy a new product/service and it flunks, it flunks. It sucks to have invested time and money on anything that is a dud, but sometimes that happens. You can't let that drag your purpose down.
In my company, I have clearly outlined Vision, Goals, and Strategies. These 3 elements are the critical elements for a business understanding their purpose. The other 2 key elements to a successful business --Tactics and Project-- often need work. But, if everyone knows the Vision, the Goals, and the Strategies, then their tactics while working on various projects nearly take care of themselves. They have a clear definition on where the ship is headed, so any individual decisions that they make can be made in that context.
It is also the reason that when the decision is made, my employees already have a very good idea about what it will be because they already know where we are trying to go.
...and how does that related to Dick Cheney and his situation?
Well, the President seems to have that precise attitude: a setback isn't a setback (no matter how hard the NY Times tries to make it). Why?
The President has a very clearly outlined Vision of what he's trying to accomplish. And, even though I have several key areas where I think his Vision is flawed (immigration and the Medi-care spending, to name two), it is pretty clearly defined.
His Goals for Iraq and the Middle East are well known, to the dismay of the kooks on the left and all the "haters" out there.
And, generally, he has outlined the Strategies by which he is trying to complete all this "stuff".
The tactics and projects will move around...as they should.
Projects are used to fulfill Tactics; tactics are part of a broader strategy; strategy is employed to accomplish 1 or more goals; and achieving goals is directly tied into move toward a grander vision.
And, for those who recognize this, this is pretty standard fare when you are getting an MBA. Besides understand what value really is, the thing that you learn when getting an MBA is these 5 levels of leadership. And, as has been noted, the President is the first president with an MBA.
So, the President might be a bumbling fool at times. So he isn't going to win the "Silver Tongue" award. He doesn't care about any of that because that has little (if anything) to do with accomplishing his Vision.
Anyway, didn't mean to ramble. But, I think that Dick Cheney's ambition (or, more precisely, lack thereof) is one of the critical pieces of the President being able to focus and pursue his Vision.
Good stuff.
You shrunk my point about leaders into a "politicians". Unless you expand the way you approach these problems, we will just be in an endless loop. OK?
<< you would have preferred a physical one? >>
That's a fraudulent question given that the correct 1945 choice would have ensured that neither a cold nor a physical war occurred.
That said, however, if confrontation of Stalin had involved the threat of military action and he had not backed down from the enslavement of Eastern Europe, then my answer has to be an unqualified: "YES!"
Better to have dealt with that manifestation of evil in 1945 than during the subsequent 44 years -- and millions of Gulag dead!
Unfortunately, now, as then, we are unable to do everything for everyone.
I randomly picked on your post.
Cheney, Rice, whomever are bad choices for 2008. I am a strong W supporter. We need a new choices for 2008. I LOVE Jeb, I'd only vote for him as president in 2008 if Hitlery were the only other option. The RNC needs new blood for 08. I don't want a Bush/Clinton legacy to run our country from 1989 to 2016.
Besides, the thought of her as president is horrid.
<< we are unable to do everything for everyone. >>
Sure.
That doin' "for" can be a bummer.
But just as long as we are able to continue to do what needs to be done TO the right amount of [Bad] folks, we'll be OK.
Oh my you got me laughing this morning.
It is strange how so few conservatives understand this point.
You are 100% correct.
George Bush probably got 2% more vote than John Kerry because John Kerry was so downright ugly.
In 1992, George Herbert Walker Bush came to the presidential election with more credentials than any presidential candidate in history (CIA Director, Congressman, UN Ambassador, China Envoy, President, Vice-President, et al.) and lost to the lying Scumbag, Bill Clinton. Credentials and experience mean nothing to most voters.
George H.W. Bush's wife had white hair--Hillary was younger. Bill Clinton blew the saxophone on TV and was younger than George H.W. Bush. The voters Hollyweird mentality helped vote Clinton in and the old farts out in 1992.
There are hoardes of women voters who vote according to who looks yonger and is more sexy.
I happen to think the world of Cheney, so much that I believe he is more straight-up than Ronald Reagan. If Cheney says he served his naiton and it is time to go fishing, he means it. He does not do this for the money, for God's sake. He is a multi-millionaire. He does not serve for fame and legacy.
Cheney and Rumsfeld are unique among politicians. They are wealthy and do not serve for fame and cocktail parties. They serve the nation because they love the nation.
Like you said, Cheney would be defeated because he is old, has white hair and is not a Hollywood type. If Jesus Christ ran for president, but the opponent on the Democrat side was more handsome, younger looking and had a better looking spouse, and even if this opponient was a lying two-timing piece of Shi'ite, Jesus Christ would lose the election to the RAT.
American voters are too ignorant and too glazed over by Hollywood to vote for the best person for Commander in Chief. Conservatives need to be thankful that Laura Bush is more attractive than that skank John Kerry hangs around with, and need to be thankful that George Bush is more handsome than that ugly Herman Munster look-alike John Kerry. If not so, Kerry would be president today, Swift Boat Vets or no Swift Boat vets.
Even better, how about eliminating a few departments? Education would be a good place to start, since it has been proven that throwing federal money at it does nothing to improve it (though it does enrich some administrators).
television i fear has changed american politics for the worse.
read a half dozen books on any subject and then mention your reading to a tv-addicted friend. their reactions will be: you made that up or i saw that on the discovery or history channel . then they will proceed to tell you that they know more about the subject than you.
that's how convincing television is to most people. it is "reality" to many americans.
you are correct. bush 41 was most experienced.
but tv viewers, especially women, were intrigued by the guilty confession of bill, and the "i'm a victim of a male" rap of hillary.
never forget that 60 minutes of don hewitt interceded with this interview in february of 1992 when no democrat front runner was yet apparent. the same people that brought us the dan rather photocopies.
finally, a russian jewish emigre to southern california bought a filling station near me and i bought gas there and talked politics with him. one day he blurted out:
"your television is controlled!"
i said, thanks for noticing! who else but a refugee from the soviet union would notice that our television is controlled?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.