Replies

Sarah Palin is honest, but not an intellectual powerhouse, either.

Franklin Roosevelt was not an intellectual powerhouse either. He definitely wasn't honest. One doesn't have to be an intellectual powerhouse to lead.

I'm currently reading "Winston's War Churchill 1940-1945" by Max Hastings. One of the more apt observations in the introduction by Chilton Foliat was :

It is a common mistake to suppose that those who bestrode the stage during momentous times were giants, set apart from the personalities of our own humdrum society... we should instead see 1939-45 as a period when men and women not much different from ourselves strove to grapple with stresses and responsibilities which stretched their powers to the limit. Churchill was one of a tiny number of actors who proved worthy of the role in which destiny cast him."

Given the state of the United States finances and momentum towards deconstructing the Constitution to something more "modern", the need is for a warrior who will strive to the limits of their ability to reform this country towards it's original ideals.

Palin, at the moment, seems to be the warrior who is "not much different from ourselves", putting herself out front, in the middle of the fight, and who is striving to keep America American. The most immediate step is the November elections and she is working on that as effectively as any other.

Of course, it remains to be seen how the struggle will progress.

Well, I certainly would agree that FDR was no brighter than many of his contemporaries, but he was an experienced executive, unusually articulate (as is Obama, superficially) and, in spite of his Progressivism, he loved America and did not flinch in her defense when called upon to lead. In large measure that meant sacrificing his domestic agenda in pursuit of defeating a common and dangerous enemy.

Could Ms. Palin could be trusted to lead the nation under such dire circumstances? One would like to think so. The present occupant of the Oval Office offers me no such comfort.

Sir Winston Churchill on the other hand, was in a different league entirely. Even a cursory reading of his six-volume history of the Second World War (and especially "The Gathering Storm") reveals a searching and powerful intellect, informed (as is rare) by both logical discipline and creativity. His extemporaneous speeches on the floor of Commons in 1940 were both eerily prescient and articulate in a way one never hears today, ever, from anyone in public life.

Yes, Sir Winston drank a great deal and smoked even more, and he's my hero for all the reasons adduced above, including the last.