Applewood's Blog

In this current time when we hear so many stating that they have the leadership experience to lead our country, I wonder if the definition of the word has changed.

My idea of a leader is a person who is accountable for their decisions.  This is a person who is capable of inducing others to do things in an efficient and orderly manner.  One who administrates a budget, makes decisions about how to administrate a budget and about how to hold others responsible for carrying out directives is a leader.  A leader is accountable for the results.

Governors, City Councils, Presidents, mayors, managers, and parents do this.  People in staff positions advise and provide information to those who make the decisions, they do not lead.

How is it that we have Senators touting their leadership experience based on their Senate records?  These records are not of leadership.  Senators do not administrate budgets.  They do not lead people or stand accountable for how a government is run.  They advise  and submit suggestions to the Executive Branch, and it is the Executive Branch that leads (gets it done).  An accountant's spouse is not an accountant, a lawyer's spouse is not an attorney.  If one such spouse suggested otherwise it would be laughable.

From what I can see, we do not have one candidate that is in the finalist tier that has any Leadership experience.  I have never seen a successful manager interview based on a person who applies for the job saying I know that I can do the job, just trust me.  How successful would a candidate for a managment job be if all that they could say is I'm qualified because I've been around managers all of my career?

The rhetoric that we are being subjected to is consistent across all of the candidates.  They are all promising to be successful at doing something that none of them has done, and that is leading.  None of them has ever been accountable for the results of their governmental decisions.  They are all masters at parrying the blame for things that didin't turn out so good and at taking credit for the things that turned out well.  In every case, however, someone else has had the job of getting things done.  Those someone else's are the leaders.

Whether it is Barak with his smooth sounding words, or Clinton with her "I've been everywhere the leader has been" message, or McCain with his senate record, none of them have leadership experience in government.  McCain at least does have military leadership experience, but that is a far cry from running the biggest business in the world which is the US government.

I do not care whether these candidates are left, right, conservative or liberal.  Their personal belief systems do not qualify them to lead.  Further, unless they are running for dictator their personal belief systems will not move the Congress to give them the tools to do what they want to do.  All of the palaver about who is a true conservative or who is the farthest to the left is off target at best.  Let's concentrate on who it is that can LEAD.  Which one is it that will stand up and willingly say, "the buck stops here." and mean it?