[RightThinkinDood]

Just like Reagan, G.W. sets the direction and tone of his administration, recruited the best talent on the planet to sit in his cabinet, and has the confidence to let them do their jobs to carry out HIS policy

The difference is that anyone with half a brain or any knowledge of Bush's history knows Bush never had a policy that was his, he's a blank slate. He had handlers who made all his decisions including recruiting his team. Reagan like Bush didn't have depth of knowledge but did have his own policies and convictions and it showed. He was a leader. Bush does what he's told and it shows. He's a follower.

[Miss Marple]

I suggest you read the Washington Post series on the days following September 11. President Bush sets his policies and is very much in charge.

And here is a picture of a real leader, whose troops love him and will follow him into hell and back:

[Naked Lunch]

I understand what you are trying to say, and I agree with some of it. Where we differ, is that you call the sum of your characterization of the President a example of a "non leader" while I call it leadership of a different stripe. So he doesnt waffle back and forth while expounding the subtle pros and cons of every issue. He is good at the cheerleading, the motivating, the exhorting, the empathy, the exemplification of good. And at this period in time, this is what we have needed the most. How lucky for him and how lucky for us.

[Naked Lunch]

I understand what you are trying to say, and I agree with some of it. Where we differ, is that you call the sum of your characterization of the President a example of a "non leader" while I call it leadership of a different stripe. So he doesnt waffle back and forth while expounding the subtle pros and cons of every issue. He is good at the cheerleading, the motivating, the exhorting, the empathy, the exemplification of good. And at this period in time, this is what we have needed the most. How lucky for him and how lucky for us.

[Always Right]

Reagan like Bush didn't have depth of knowledge...

Boy that statement misses the mark on both counts, especially Reagan who was flat out brilliant on his depth of knowledge.

[Naked Lunch]

I understand what you are trying to say, and I agree with some of it. Where we differ, is that you call the sum of your characterization of the President a example of a "non leader" while I call it leadership of a different stripe. So he doesnt waffle back and forth while expounding the subtle pros and cons of every issue. He is good at the cheerleading, the motivating, the exhorting, the empathy, the exemplification of good. And at this period in time, this is what we have needed the most. How lucky for him and how lucky for us.

[okie01]

"The difference is that anyone with half a brain or any knowledge of Bush's history knows Bush never had a policy that was his, he's a blank slate...He's a follower."

You're not from Texas, are you?

And, if you are, you haven't been paying attention for the past eight years, have you?

[The Right Stuff]

knows Bush never had a policy that was his, he's a blank slate. He had handlers who made all his decisions including recruiting his team***

Wait....I'm channelling Alexander Haig.....this statement is verbatim UCLA Daily Bruin Talk Via 1982 (I wuz there!). Talking points, the same. Hmmm, must be a Vulcan Time Warp....

Yep, diagnosis complete, Captain. The Left never changes, they only rely on the ignorance (fostered by them, of course) of the masses. It's the Reagan/Bush Mind Meld - same talking points, different generation.

Can we hope that they will be as ignorant as the prior one?

[Jorge]

Bush does what he's told and it shows. He's a follower.

Actually it is Bush who has quite a following.

Tell that the the rest of the Sorelosermans who simply cannot stand the fact that Bush is proving to be a truly successful and great leader...and has the poll numbers to go along with it.
Must be very painful for you.