Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (136700)	6/15/2004 11:13:23 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Thanks for adding a couple of well- chosen "cents"<g>. I am gratified by your response....We went to the beach for a week, then puttered around the house for a week (for example, going to the National Gallery). I spent a lot of time watching various ceremonies. I contributed a lot to the WWII memorial, but didn't get tickets because I had no living GI to bring. (My late father- in- law was the chief of the clerical staff at SHAEF, a personal aide to Eisenhower, and received a Bronze Star for meritorious service in his managerial capacity). So I watched a lot, some before leaving. Then, when I got back, it was time for the D- Day commemoration. (Meanwhile, at the beach, I caught a couple of movie's, such as "The Longest Day"). Finally, I had to watch the various ceremonies for the Gipper. I was afraid of getting ill in the long, hot lines, although one of my brothers made it to the Rotunda, but I saw just about everything. Thatcher had a great tribute, of course.........

To: carranza2 who wrote (136700)	6/15/2004 11:38:11 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<<< Instincts, judgment, and wisdom can't be measured in tests, are not handed out with Ph.D.'s, and don't always come out of Yale and Harvard. In fact, I suppose a case can be made for the proposition that the opposite is true. Like another great President, FDR, Reagan was reasonably intelligent. Their path to greatness lay in possessing first class temperaments.>>> There is a lot of truth in what you say, but I would think that the bar has to be raised for people getting into elective office. The qualities of our Presidents in recent years are nowhere near the levels of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. In everything else that is measureable there has been tremendous improvements. Particularly in sports, you can see the level of improvement. If you look at films of earlier heavyweight fighters like Sullivan and Corbett and compare them to Lenox Lewis, there has been tremendous improvement the sweet science of boxing. The same can be said of every sport. In basketball, if you look at early pictures of George Mikan and compare them to present day seven footers, there is no contest. But in politics, not only has there been no improvement, it looks like the quality has gone down considerably. Especially now, when the world is far more complex, we need people of vastly higher caliber. Instead, we are settling for less than mediocrity. With 300 million people to choose from, we should not settle for anyone who is not diligent, does not have enough discipline to prepare for the job, not be able to keep his/her pants up (at least during working hours). More than that they should have a extremely high IQ, be able to speak and think on their feet, and be able to communicate their vision for the future. I am sorry, but with 300 million people to choose from, I don't think we have to settle for people who while in school had only C averages. We need people who are educated - people who actually attended class and did well in their studies. I am sorry that it would exclude people like me. The Job of PROTUS is too important to gamble on some one who may not be prepared. From people who have made the above cut, we than can choose amongst those for the intangible qualities like wisdom, integrity, etc.