Fwd: Re: Fwd: [Vision2020] Leadership

[sean]

I don't think so.  I asked a few simple 
questions.  They were fairly clear.  That some 
readers do not wish to address them is 
understandable.  For my part I am trying to see 
what is agreed upon, and what is disagreed about.

To answer your implied question (before you have 
taken time to answer my pointed questions), I 
believe the choice largely reflected the two men 
who stood behind the flags (Grant and Lee).  Was 
the inclusion of the flag a poor decision?  I 
sure would not have included it.  But that is 
probably not what you are really asking.  Besides 
showing a symbol is not the same as touting it 
and hence its values.

What you probably are saying is Lee is not 
someone who should be cited.  Fine.  I would 
agree that the man's associations could distract 
from the central idea.  As it has.

Now, what leadership qualities are ones that Mr. 
Kimmel espoused that not desired in Moscow's 
community leadership entities?

s

BTW, I did not use a bait-and-switch tactic (see 
Websters for defn).  I responded to an existing 
topic.  I did not pose that topic only to lead 
off elsewhere.  I posed questions about an aspect 
of that topic.  That no one addressed my 
questions probably says more about their 
unwillingness to have open dialogue than anything 
else.

>
>Sean,
>
>Your initial post is a classic bait and switch 
>operation. The question that is critical to pose 
>and answer is not what makes a good leader but 
>why anyone today in Moscow, Idaho could believe 
>that use of the Confederate battle flag is an 
>appropriate symbol for use by the Chamber of 
>Commerce. In light of the very public 
>controversy initiated by Doug Wilson on slavery 
>and neo-confederacy and the subsequent undesired 
>attention bestowed on Moscow for the same, 
>please explain how the use of this powerful 
>symbol of intolerance betters the Moscow 
>community or its business leaders.
>
>Mark Solomon
>
>At 10:38 AM -0700 9/1/04, sean wrote:
>>Rose,
>>I am trying to understand the points you make 
>>below.  Are you agreeing that 1) Lee exhibited 
>>laudable character traits (e.g., brave, gentle, 
>>generous, noble) or 2) that those are traits we 
>>would desire in community leaders?
>>
>>Once again I do not see the questions posed 
>>being addressed.  While you may be employing a 
>>laudable tactical strategy for not confronting 
>>an aggressor, you might consider whether it 
>>benefits public discourse to never address the 
>>subject being set out for discussion.
>>
>>Your paraphrase misses (maligns?) the questions 
>>I posed.  If someone wishes to address them it 
>>would be worth rereading my first post, and 
>>doing so sans the lens of pre-judgement.  You 
>>may have heard the adage about parachutes and 
>>minds having some similar functional traitsŠ
>>
>>s
>>
>>>
>>>Visionaries:
>>>
>>>The question has been asked (paraphrased) what 
>>>failure of leadership did Robert E. Lee 
>>>exhibit that would preclude him for being an 
>>>excellent choice for the subject of a 
>>>leadership seminar. Setting aside his ability 
>>>as a tactician or strategist, which seems to 
>>>me to have no relevance in the daily life of 
>>>Moscow business folks - unless, unbeknownst to 
>>>the community the Pullman Chamber has declared 
>>>war on the Moscow Chamber and even as I type 
>>>are slinking over the Palouse to lay siege to 
>>>our fair town - it seems to me that the single 
>>>most important element in leadership is 
>>>judgment.
>>>
>>>I am clear that Lee's judgment to fight to 
>>>defend a way of life - that benefited few (and 
>>>those mightily) while exploiting millions of 
>>>others is not an exemplary example of clear 
>>>thinking.  Or, as I would argue, Lee's 
>>>thinking is transparent, and that is why many 
>>>Visionaries are objecting to his glorification.
>>>
>>>The laudatory character traits i.e. brave, 
>>>gentle, generous, noble, character in defeat 
>>>listed by "S." fall by the wayside when one 
>>>considers the human cost of Lee's desire to 
>>>sit at Arlington, sip mint juleps and listen 
>>>to his wife whine (a skill in which she 
>>>apparently showed considerable leadership 
>>>herself.)  Do you call a man brave, gentle, 
>>>generous and noble who owns and exploits other 
>>>human beings? I don't.
>>>
>>>Rose Huskey
>>
>>--
>>Thanks,
>>s
>>
>>
>>         * * * * * * * *
>>         Sean Michael
>>         .dwg


-- 
Thanks,
s


         * * * * * * * *
         Sean Michael
         .dwg