What's a terrorist to do?

[Valkenar]

Hmm... Maybe it was John McCain - a former POW - who convinced the prez that there was such a thing as torturing your own military and intelligence institutions. It's not like they hire stupid or undedicated people.

Or maybe nobody had to convince him. Maybe he actually made what you believe to be the right decision because he's a smart and capable leader. Perish the thought, I know. Heck, if this were about the EPA, I'm sure people would be on Obama's case saying "what's with these soft liberals who don't have the stones to fire anybody?"

[Bill Glasheen]

Maybe he actually made what you believe to be the right decision because he's a smart and capable leader.

You can believe that if you wish.

Personally I don't see the pattern, Justin.

• There was a consistent pattern of abusing the intelligence community up until the intelligence system failed. Failed? I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you! And his knee-jerk reaction was to kick butt and take names instead of fixing the system. That's not leadership.
• When on the teleprompter, he does fine. When speaking off the cuff, he competes with Bush for a demonstrated inability to think on his own two feet. That's not a display of raw intelligence.
• All that time as a constitutional law professor, and where are his publications? He left no legacy. He's no academic genius.

Reagan was similarly ridiculed for his inability to speak well off the teleprompter. It's well known that he wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed, and advancing Alzheimer's didn't help. But he had vision, and knew how to lead. He came to the office of the presidency with half the IQ of Jimmy Carter, and pulled the country out of crippling stagflation. Not bad!

- Bill

[Valkenar]

You can believe that if you wish.

Not saying I do or don't. The pattern I see is that you're generally quick to see the bad in a liberal with a law degree and I'm generally quick to see the bad in a conservative with a business degree.

From me perspective, holding the CIA accountable for human rights violations is a good thing. And holding people accountable is a good thing. Sorry if that hurts their feelings.

As for Obama's intelligence and academic credentials, he graduated magna cum lauda from harvard law school. I'm not sure what "all that time" you're referring to where he was at UofC and not publishing since he was a lecturer and not a professor, and busy practicing law as part of a firm. He did publish a book during that time period. I honestly don't know, is a non-tenure-track lecturer expected to publish?

As for your critique of his public speaking, don't make me laugh. Four words: "Can't be fooled again"

[Bill Glasheen]

From me perspective, holding the CIA accountable for human rights violations is a good thing. And holding people accountable is a good thing. Sorry if that hurts their feelings.

Hurting their feelings may stroke your feelings, Justin, but it is terrible leadership. That's the point.

I honestly don't know, is a non-tenure-track lecturer expected to publish?

As an academic I wasn't tenure track. But I managed 20 publications in 4 years. I guess my standards are higher.

Two of my 3 Uechi instructors were magna cum laude Harvard graduates. Neither of them would have been good presidents, although I'm fond of both.

As for your critique of his public speaking, don't make me laugh. Four words: "Can't be fooled again"

You lost me.

- Bill

[Bill Glasheen]

There's nothing here which advocates trashing the organization you are supposed to be leading.

Obama so far has suked badly as a leader of the intelligence community. And so far he's been a lukewarm commander in chief at best.

- Bill

Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent. Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership attributes, such as beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills. Although your position as a manager, supervisor, lead, etc. gives you the authority to accomplish certain tasks and objectives in the organization, this power does not make you a leader, it simply makes you the boss. Leadership differs in that it makes the followers want to achieve high goals, rather than simply bossing people around.

{snip}

Principles of Leadership
To help you be, know, and do; (U.S. Army, 1983) follow these eleven principles of leadership (later chapters in this guide expand on these and provide tools for implementing them):

1. Know yourself and seek self-improvement - In order to know yourself, you have to understand your be, know, and do, attributes. Seeking self-improvement means continually strengthening your attributes. This can be accomplished through self-study, formal classes, reflection, and interacting with others.

2. Be technically proficient - As a leader, you must know your job and have a solid familiarity with your employees' tasks.

3. Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions - Search for ways to guide your organization to new heights. And when things go wrong, they always do sooner or later -- do not blame others. Analyze the situation, take corrective action, and move on to the next challenge.

4. Make sound and timely decisions - Use good problem solving, decision making, and planning tools.

5. Set the example - Be a good role model for your employees. They must not only hear what they are expected to do, but also see. We must become the change we want to see - Mahatma Gandhi

6. Know your people and look out for their well-being - Know human nature and the importance of sincerely caring for your workers.

7. Keep your workers informed - Know how to communicate with not only them, but also seniors and other key people.

8. Develop a sense of responsibility in your workers - Help to develop good character traits that will help them carry out their professional responsibilities.

9. Ensure that tasks are understood, supervised, and accomplished - Communication is the key to this responsibility.

10. Train as a team - Although many so called leaders call their organization, department, section, etc. a team; they are not really teams...they are just a group of people doing their jobs.

11. Use the full capabilities of your organization - By developing a team spirit, you will be able to employ your organization, department, section, etc. to its fullest capabilities.

- Concepts of Leadership

[Valkenar]

Hurting their feelings may stroke your feelings, Justin, but it is terrible leadership. That's the point.

But there are more considerations than just the leadership of the CIA. Sometimes as a leader you're going to find situations where you have conflicting goals. The CIA's effectiveness is not the only parameter to consider.

As an academic I wasn't tenure track. But I managed 20 publications in 4 years. I guess my standards are higher.

Sure, but you were a scientist, no? Successful academic science *demands* publication. You did a good job practicing science. Obama may very well have done a good job practicing law, even if he wasn't a star of the academic world. Now if he was *only* pursuing law only in academia, then you'd probably be right in questioning his lack of output. As is, it might be nice if he had published as a non-tenure track lecturer, but far from obligatory.

As for your critique of his public speaking, don't make me laugh. Four words: "Can't be fooled again"

You lost me.

- Bill

Bush is not Obama's equal as an impromptu public speaker. But as you say, Obama is president and his superiority to Bush in this particular arena isn't relevant or especially interesting.

I've yet to be convinced that he hasn't met most of the criteria in that list. And I'm yet to be impressed with the idea that holding the CIA accountable is a bad thing. And to some extent, the president owes it to the public to make that accountability a public matter. Show me how he's really defanged the cia, or embarassed them without a good reason. The release of those memos was an excellent choice, in my opinion.

[Bill Glasheen]

Obama may very well have done a good job practicing law

You haven't shown that.

Obama is president and his superiority to Bush in this particular arena isn't relevant or especially interesting.

I'll agree with you on the "not relevant" part. Arguing the other part serves no purpose.

I've yet to be convinced that he hasn't met most of the criteria in that list. And I'm yet to be impressed with the idea that holding the CIA accountable is a bad thing. And to some extent, the president owes it to the public to make that accountability a public matter. Show me how he's really defanged the cia, or embarassed them without a good reason. The release of those memos was an excellent choice, in my opinion.

I take it you have no executive experience, Justin. Correct me if I'm wrong.

That's not necessarily a bad thing.

You know everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects

- Will Rogers


- Bill

[Valkenar]

Obama may very well have done a good job practicing law

You haven't shown that.

Correct, I have no idea if he was actually good lawyer or not. If I thought it was important, I could probably find out. What I have shown is that your critique of academic track-record is not salient. That is, we don't know that he wasn't a good lawyer. While, technically your only assertion was "he's no academic genius" the implication seemed to be that it's evidence against his being smart and capable. And that's not a conclusion you can draw from his lack of publications.

I take it you have no executive experience, Justin. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Define executive experience. How large of a group and for how long of a period and for how significant a subject? I haven't been a CEO of a major corporation. I have led small groups of people recreationally. How about we stick to the issues? If you don't feel like you can adequately explain your point of view, or simply don't want to, then say that. But unless you're preparing for something other than trotting out some tired variation of "You'll understand when you're older" this seems like a pointless exercise in ad hominem.

[Bill Glasheen]

How about we stick to the issues? If you don't feel like you can adequately explain your point of view, or simply don't want to, then say that. But unless you're preparing for something other than trotting out some tired variation of "You'll understand when you're older" this seems like a pointless exercise in ad hominem.

Justin, Justin, Justin...

It's time for YOU to do a little work in this thread. Please go back and read all the work I've done. And then look at your "Nuh uh!!!" responses. "I've yet to be convinced" doesn't cut it. That game gets old very fast. But nice try anyhow.

I wouldn't ask something of you if I didn't think it was important or I wouldn't care to have the same asked of me. If we're talking about leadership in an executive position, well experience seems important to me. Is that such a difficult concept? Am I really being unreasonable? I think not.

- Bill

[Glenn]

That's like saying engineering, statistics, and mathematical modeling are fads.

But they are! At least in academic social science. Positivism is passe, critiques such as postmodern and the like are all the rage now. I really should have finished the PhD back in the early 1990s, when quantitative methods were still popular. At least GIS is still marketable.

Sure the statistics behind Six Sigma are appropriate. By fad I was referring to the Motorola copywrited Six Sigma program that companies have to purchase, and the fact that it was the third or fourth such quality-improvement program the company bought (and then discarded) during the decade+ I worked there. Some companies jump from one sales-pitched improvement program to another like fads. And when they try to sell employees on the latest one, the meetings and e-mails are reminiscent of infomercials.

The basic premise of a six-sigma-based approach is that failure usually comes from bad process and not bad workers. Bad processes create the conditions for humans to fail. Fire the scapegoats or belittle your employees if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't make you a better manager, CEO, or leader. It's much smarter to address processes which invite human error.

And yet 'one strike and your out' tends to be the rule rather than the exception. A person makes a mistake and there is a clamouring for him or her to be fired, that's almost a daily news item in the media, but also common at places I have worked. Second chances seem to be a rarity.

[Bill Glasheen]

The basic premise of a six-sigma-based approach is that failure usually comes from bad process and not bad workers. Bad processes create the conditions for humans to fail. Fire the scapegoats or belittle your employees if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't make you a better manager, CEO, or leader. It's much smarter to address processes which invite human error.

And yet 'one strike and your out' tends to be the rule rather than the exception. A person makes a mistake and there is a clamouring for him or her to be fired, that's almost a daily news item in the media, but also common at places I have worked. Second chances seem to be a rarity.

I know, Glenn. It's maddening.

"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.”
-Albert Einstein

"A man's errors are his portals of discovery."
- James Joyce

"All men make mistakes, but only wise men learn from their mistakes."
- Sir Winston Churchill

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
- George Santayana

I guess that's why they keep us older farts around.

- Bill

[Glenn]

"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions"
- author unknown