<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=US-ASCII http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2737.800" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV>Visionaries:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rose Huskey</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Verdana size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10">"</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>