All Comments (14)

ANON - how about this observation??

'Bush is fallibility personified'

or this

'The personification of fallibility
can be found in the person
of George W. Bush'

or this one

'Seldom has a person been as fallible
as George W. Bush'

and finally this

'Never in modern times has a president
exemplified the traits of fallibility
and flawed personality as completely
as George W. Bush'

Word usage can be both fun and instructive.....

"Incompetentcy is an action and character is a current state of being, how does character "make" an action good or bad?"

Well, that was my point. It doesn't. But our president seems to think it does, which is why I would rather have competency over character since poor character can be addressed through oversight, but poor competency is usually addressed years after the fact.

"Did you expect that our current President was going to be "infalable?" Try not being so negative and look for the good in a person and you may be able to not let a "mistake" be prosonifide."

I never thought I would hear a president, after making so many glaring mistakes, say he can't think of one he made. No one is infallible, but this president believes he is. Maybe this president's incompetence results from his character. Maybe when you feel you cannot make a mistake, or if one happens not admitting it, makes it all better and leads to ignoring glaring needs, negligence, cronyism and just plain old apathy to your duties. I don't know.

But I do know that although Nixon had extremely poor character, leading to his nickname "Tricky Dick", he was not incompetent and led this nation, in some ways skillfully, during the cold war and domestically too. I hated the man for his actions in Vietnam, but I respected his ability to get things done, many of which were good for this nation such as ending that war, the war on cancer, opening up China, and his actions when the economy went much further south than ours today (maybe you don't remember stagflation but I do). You would not have had Katrina victims suffering for days without relief had Nixon been in charge, and he would have hauled off Brownie to a small corner of a room and unleash his fury, not patted him on the back.

So, though character may lead to incompetence, competency is much more important in a leadership position than character. I mean, when you are in a fox hole with bombs exploding all around you, do you want your general to have good character or be competent? And consider that historically the competence of a leader is weighed much more than their character. George Bush may have good character, but that is not what he will be remembered for and that is not what our nation will happy he left us with in January.

I don't Daniel as it happens I believe based on what his web site says and what I know of history that what he plans to do with his presidency is nothing more nor less than a disaster waiting to happen.

Hillary's plans differ only in detail from Obama's and are equally disastrous. Had I to choose between Hillary and Obama I would choose Obama simply because he relative paucity of experience would mean that he simply doesn't have much clout for arm twisting and doesn't know where enough bodies are buried and who put them there to get what he wants out of congress.

Character vs. Competence. This should not even be a decision. We are the U.S. of A. We deserve very high degrees of both. If we can not possibly get both, then we should at least minimize the risk by reducing the power of the office, dramatically. If we cannot trust that our military will be used wisely and effectively, for reasons of EITHER flawed character or incompetence, then why in the world would we leave the reigns of control to ONE PERSON?

OK let's try this again, "personafide." Thanks for your patience; a note left for you-home.

Sorry, my last post should read "personifide."

Fate wrote, "All you can do is try to undo an incompetent policy or action, which we have seen is not so easy when the incompetent believes his character MAKES the policy or action good.", May 8, 2008 8:46 AM

Incompetentcy is an action and character is a current state of being, how does character "make" an action good or bad? A mistake is a mistake whether it is made by a person of good or not so good character.

Did you expect that our current President was going to be "infalable?" Try not being so negative and look for the good in a person and you may be able to not let a "mistake" be prosonifide.

Integrity talk from a guy who counted Jews for Nixon. Is this the best the Post can do?

Colson wrote: "Having served one flawed president and known a number of others, I would, if I had to make a choice, far rather see character than competence."

Character is important but when you hand someone the reigns of the power of a nation you cannot expect good leadership without competence. You can keep a man honest by watching his every move and filing court briefs when he steps out of line, since shining a light on dishonest people tends to keep them honest. But there is little you can do to keep a man competent as we are finding with the current president. All you can do is try to undo an incompetent policy or action, which we have seen is not so easy when the incompetent believes his character MAKES the policy or action good.

"And a candidate's personal life, while privacy should be respected, is fair game because it informs us on matter of character and integrity."

I agree Chuck, "love starts within the home" if a person cannot love their family, neighbor,or friends, then they do not and cannot effectively "serve" the public.

It is personal character that enables us for public service. If our personal character is poor then our public character will be poor.

If you love at home you will love in public, it becomes a trait.

i think you are right but i hope charictar and competence could be found in one person....the thing we won't find ever and shouldn't look for is perfection from a human being... one of the greatest tools of the spiritual person is the ability to self examine ones self honestly and communicate honestly what they are thinking and why they think that way even if they know that not everyone wil agree with them. the why is sometimes more important a question and an answer than the what. an honest person admits an fixes thier mistakes or at least gets out of the way so other people can promptly fix what is going to have to be fixed and seen at some point anyway. the truth always show up. i think a leader has to have repsect for power and authority most people dont realize there is two kinds of power... absolute power only exist with God it is a myth and unobtainable on earth..butthe two that exist are personal power derived from ones walk through life and position power that is bestowed by a title. people who have actual done a good job running a business or a country know that personal power is the most important. i once walked into a resterautnt chain store that i used to manage.. it was running backwards nobody was getting thier orders.. i started telling the employees what to do and how to do it from the dining room. i was wearing cutoff jeans and a tea shirt.. they didn't know who i was i had no title but they did what i told them to do because they knew i knew what i was talking about the other customers actually clapped and i walked out of the store with a big grin on my face... that is personal power.. a man or woman with integrity and honest and reputation if they lose thier job they have not lost themselves. but a person who only has a title if they lose thier job and they werent actually doing it or doing it successfully they will have the knowledge of what is really important if they are trainable.. i used to train managers for a national company almost every one i ever trained went on to be a store magre or a supervisor. how a person handles adversity tell you about thier charictar and thier spirituality i think

GaryD

Why do you hate Obama so much?

And then you get Candidates like Barak Obama in which there is little to be known and the more you begin to learn as the campaign rolls on the less happy you become with what you do know.

The voter rules the country, therefore the voter has to be competent, or at least knowledgeable in all subjects related to ruling the country.
Otherwise, the voter's judgments, including the moral judgments, hang in thin air.