🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2932@jeff.mdavcr.mda.ca> randy@mdavcr.mda.ca (Randy Armstrong) writes:
>what I can't figure out is why the marital fidelity of presidential hopefuls
>in the US is such an issue. Very few people would argue that Winston 
>Churchill was a bad leader unfortunately he was also one of the worst debauchers
>of his time. If someone has vision and knows how to lead a country then
>everything else is (and should be) irrelevant. It is unfortunate that the
>media insists on reducing things down to the lowest common denominater.   

And the Brits dumped old Winnie with unseemly haste as soon as the war
was over. The populace will tolerate debauchery in wartime much more
readily than in peacetime.

More to the point, however, countries rarely need "leaders". What they
need for a CEO is a competent *manager* who is honest and trustworthy.
Policy should be set by the board of directors after through debate.
What the US desparately needs is a new board of directors (Congress).
It's long past time that the concept of the man on the white horse, 
the *leader*, was put on the scrap heap of history. We've had our fill
of Hitlers, Stalins, Mussolinis, Perots, FDRs, and Churchills this century.

Gary