Strong, confident leaders need not be arrogant leaders.
Ah, that one. That, as I recall, came from the NYTimes editorial today. I was, of course, thinking of the negative case, not the positive cases. But I gather you wish me to answer the positive side.
Bush II is definitely not. He may become one but the first period of his administration does not bode well.
I agree about Clinton, though most likely for different reasons. I thought he caved to the Republicans much, much too often. I would have preferred he take his case to the public rather than, almost obsessively, seek compromises. He did head off, for a good eight years the kind of administration we now see. And that's good.
Still looking for the positives. Well, my favorites are the two Roosevelts, Truman, Lincoln, and Jackson. |
