My sons were born in Canada, yet are eligible to be U.S. President.
(Hint: the Constitution says you have to be American by birth, which is not the same thing as being born in the U.S.)
On second thoughts I don’t even think he’s a good speaker. He’s far too theatrical, tries way to hard. He’s just too earnest, too sincere, too caring. I can’t believe he’s real. It’s like watching a bad actor. I’d have far more respect for him if he’d toughen up a bit and give the impression he doesn’t care too much whether we like him or not. He tries far too hard to make us think he’s just a ordinary, nice guy. He comes across as just smarmy.
[hijack (sorry)]
Has anyone else noticed that the Americans on this thread seem to want politicians who can answer questions concisely, speak intelligently, etc., whereas the Brits don’t like Bliar for his actual actions.
Style vs Content I suppose, fascinating.
Sorry, carry on.
[/hijack]
Well, I’d really like a leader who NOT ONLY could speak effectively, but who also took effective action, and who, well, was a leader. Where is Winston Churchill when we need him?
I find it very enlightening to hear what some of our UK friends like & don’t like about Mr. B. Of course here in the US we only see the occasional public speech, and he sounds good. Of course, we have had Presidents who SOUNDED very, very good, but were later found lacking in other desirable leadership qualities.
Lyndon Johnson, from most accounts, was a boor and a bully. But he got an awful lot of things accomplished. Jimmy Carter is a decent, honest, caring and moral individual who did not seem to accomplish very much at all.
Pardon my ignorance, but was Mr. Churchill widely held in high regard in his own time?
Yes and no. Held in high regard as a wartime leader, failed in peacetime. His style was just not appropriate for post-war austerity and welfarism.
Blair comes across as an articulate, intelligent leader with a firm grasp of the policies at issue largely because he is actually a quite talented man. But Thatcher or that current Tory leader fellow, or even John Major would debate circles around most American politicians as well (exception: Major vs. Clinton-- yikes!) because they have been, IMO, much more thoroughly prepared in critical thinking, logic, reasoning and have been educated to a greater depth and breadth, all-in-all, than Americans.
I always love watching Blair (or any GB PM for that matter) standing up before Parliament with his big book answering genteel, but stern questions about his policies. Faced with this crucible, any person desiring to be PM had best be well prepared.
But it isn’t just the rows in the House of Commons: recently I saw Blair talking face to face with children and teens in a sit-down, televised chat. He treated the kids with dignity and respect and they sensed that. They in turn held his feet to the fire and had the wherewithal (again, the fruit of an educational system vastly superior to the American one [IMO]) to pose difficult questions that he found, apparently, impossible to be fielded any other way but straight on. How wonderfully refreshing.
Can you imagine G.W. Bush facing the House of Commons? Or even a teenaged British MTV audience?
It would never happen–
'cuz he’d be shredded.