Clinton: Bin Laden ad is about ‘leadership’
Apr 21, 2008 at 8:36 PM by David Pleasant
On Countdown tonight, Keith Olbermann asked Hillary Clinton about her fear-mongering Osama bin Laden ad. She said it was about "leadership."
Video to follow.
I really admire Senator Clinton’s audacity. Yes, she has leadership abilities but so does Senator Obama. So, what is the fundamental question? To say she has leadership abilities does not invalidate this quality in other people.
Whether the question is, Who has the rare ability to inspire others towards movement given all the known facts? To be a president in a democracy has more to do with getting others to follow (with regard to the common good) not dictating or scaring or ruling others.
Leadership by fear limits creativity and a considerable amount of energy is directed towards vigilance and self protection. On the other hand leadership by inspiration and faith in others, actually frees energy to the task at hand and allows for creative solutions in an environment that poses challenges.
So, the question is what type of leadership style is Senator Clinton espousing?
This ad does not address this fundamental issue but instead presents a number of disasterous events in history. We do know how Senator Clinton responded to at least one of these historical events. Senator Wellstone, not Senator Clinton, was one of the few who stood up against a flood of disapproval to say that this (with regard to 9/11) is the wrong course.
TR -
An extremely well reasoned and articulated comment. Not everybody truly understands “leadership,” but you obviously do.
I agree with your conclusion and the logic associated with it, but I would take exception with the premise that Hillary is a leader, per se.
My academic background may be a limiting factor. All of my “advanced” studies with respect to leadership have been primarily contained to business and theology curricula. Summarizing, in that focused environment, adherence and promotion of ethics, principles, values, and other similar traits/characteristics, are prerequisites, amongst others, for any leader.
There may be other disciplines that posit leadership without imposing the same criteria, but I’m not versed well enough in those areas to argue a solid case for leadership absent those characteristics. That’s not to imply I am ignorant in those areas, just a tad hesitant to assert a rather important claim that is contradictory to what that I have been taught and experienced.
Actually, I’m trying to think of something I might have read that would that would indicate otherwise, but today is not my best day for recall — not enough sleep last night.
Hence, the redux is how leadership is defined or viewed, as you aptly noted.
Two years ago I would have also said I admired Clinton for what she had achieved in life, especially with the perceived obstacles she faced along the way. However, my perspective has become tainted by what I have witnessed over the past one to two years. And I must say it is a disappointment.
Hillary may be a leader by certain standards or definitions, but I have a hard time viewing her as a successful leader, which in my warped thinking, must include achieving productive objectives for the “common good” through honorable and ethical means.
- - David