What I am saying is that the historical record shows that some pretty a-moral (or imoral if you prefer) men have become president and managed to be effective world leaders despite their character flaws.
I am convinced that ythe converse is also true; that some presidents, while fait6hful and/or faith-based men, didn't quite make it as national executive or leader of the free world.
Originally Posted by ICU 812
So men of morals are soft and poor leaders right?
If you're looking for a-moral strong leaders, most of the Charlie Manson's out there are locked up! (Of course there are still some that are floating around - and some facing for indictments in 90 plus felonies). The vast majority of leadership in public businesses, are not a-social law breakers. They are typical narcissists who see only through a singular lens, but there are also ppl who gain consensus through bringing sides together w mediation and dialogue. That has left Congress. If you're not alarmed by that, you should be. It's the biggest failure of the people that have been elected into these offices. When we start holding people accountable on both sides, that's when things will start to improve. Electing either of the dumbasses running right now won't do that.
.... Then, we'll know for sure.
