Character in Leadership: Does it Really Matter Anymore?

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/weblogs/mohler/1224042.html?view=print ^ | October 8, 2003 | R. Albert Mohler, Jr.

[stuartcr]

Sure it matters, but history has shown that it doesn't happen all the time. What we want, and what we end up with, are unfortunately, not always the same.

[miloklancy]

I think character is leadership does still matter. With respect to the incredibly erroneous charges leveled at Governor-elect Schwarzenenegger, it really bothers me that some conservatives all of the sudden believe word for word a liberal bastion of the news media, the L.A. Times, when it was clearly engaged in an 11th hour smear campaign against Schwarzenegger by the Davis camp. Before we accuse anyone of sexual misconduct or immoral behavior, we need to have objective sources and recognize whether or not a person is contrite about any past offenses. Conservatives are usually better consumers of information than this.

[CyberAnt]

"Americans seem to be saying that character is important, and that Clinton's sexual liaison with a White House intern was completely unacceptable, but that he should nevertheless not be removed from office"

It wasn't "Americans" who didn't want Clinton removed - IT WAS DEMOCRATS - who aren't necessarily related to the word Americans.

[gore3000]

Character is important. What I see in the California election by the Demos was not only to try to keep Arnold from winning, but also to make a comparison with Clinton and be able to call Republicans hypocrites.

[gore3000]

No

Sad

I am not that pessimistic. I think it matters a lot to Republicans, and that is why they tried to use it against Arnold. I think it also matters a lot to many who are 'swing' voters. Davis's rejection shows that many were totally appalled by his low-life tactics. It also needs to be remembered that most of the stuff against Clinton came out after '96 and the country could not take any more of that man.