Quote:
|
Originally Posted by uncle_el
definitely agreed! i was just trying to see if perhaps that's where host was trying to go with the discussion.
|
Reading these was the newest reasons to start this thread topic:
Quote:
http://www.personalityinhistory.com/...cy_Project.asp
There appear to be eight distinguishable types of presidents.<a href="http://www.personalityinhistory.com/Types_of_Presidents.asp">http://www.personalityinhistory.com/Types_of_Presidents.asp</a>
A president’s character has no relation to how good a president’s historians judge him to be.
A number of personality traits and qualities do predict presidential success.
The ability to lie and deceive is an important quality for success in the White House, and presidents who are less straightforward typically make better presidents.
Despite his recent popularity and reputation for integrity, John Adams’s personality closely resembled Richard Nixon’s.
Presidents are much more Extraverted today than in the past and less intellectually curious than in the past. They may also be lower in character.
Jimmy Carter is the only modern president that much resembles Founding Fathers Jefferson and Madison and the greatest president of the 19th century, Abe Lincoln. Eisenhower is the only modern president much like Washington.
Franklin Roosevelt seems to be the template for modern presidents, with recent presidents showing high (Kennedy, Clinton) or moderate (LBJ) similarity to him. Reagan resembled his as well.
Modern Democratic presidents tend to be very Extraverted, achievement-oriented, ebullient, and sympathetic to the poor, but are willing to deceive and relatively unprincipled.
Modern Republican presidents tend to be less sympathetic to the less fortunate and much more inclined to rely on traditional sources of moral authority than average Americans.
George W. Bush appears to have fewer traits related to presidential success than most presidents. He most resembles Andrew Jackson and Ronald Reagan.
|
Quote:
<a href="http://www.psychohistory.com/reagan/rp36x50.htm">http://www.psychohistory.com/reagan/rp36x50.htm</a>
THE MAKING OF A FEARFUL LEADER
"Where's the Rest of Me?"
When Ronald Reagan wrote his autobiography in 1964, he entitled it Where's the Rest of Me? in order to indicate, he said on the opening page, that he had lived most of his life with the feeling that part of him was missing.............
|
Then I discovered that the OSS in WWII held psycho profiling in high enough
regard to devote the resources to psychoanalyzing Hitler from a distance
and then publish the results, and that the result that was predicted to be
the most probable outcome.....Hitler's suicide, is what actually happened.
Law enforcement also seems to rely on psycho profiling in high profile cases.
I want to separate rational thoughts, opinions, actions, from irrational ones,
or to conclude that the lines are so blurred that it isn't possible, or to
accept that the result isn't worth the effort.
Some examples of voters' decisions that don't seem rational are:
1.)1980 - Americans chose to replace Carter with Reagan as US President.
24 years passed, Reagan dies and is honored with a week long
eulogy of praise and a huge state funeral. Carter continues to be an
object of ridicule by many, but the extremes in public sentiment do
not mesh with the actual public records of the two former presidents.
2.) 2000 - Gore fails to carry the vote in his home state, Tennessee, a
comparatively poor state where the majority voted to deny Gore the
presidency, and depriving the state of the economic potential and
prestige that having a son as president will bring. Was it in the
interest of the people of Tennessee not to benfit from increased
tourism, political influence, and at the least, a future presidential
library and a retired president's residence? What did they gain to
offset their decision to vote against Gore ?
3.) 2004 - Bush wins a second term. Bush was an embarassment in the
televised debates. IMO, in his first term, as the assessment in the
first quote box says, "George W. Bush appears to have fewer traits related to presidential success than most presidents." Couple that with
his disturbing lack of candor, penchant for secrecy and anti bill of
rights policies and actions, taxing preferences in favor of the wealthy,
dismal fiscal and budgetary policies, alienation with the world community,
failure to exhibit a commitment to examine what went wrong on 9/11
or to hold anyone in his administration accountable for the failings,
and weak or non-existant arguments to justify the sentiments of
his supporters, aside from superficial partisan rhetoric.
What am I not getting ? Why is the majority not demanding answers and
accountability concerning the truth about what happened on 9/11, why
we went into Iraq and why we have spent so much in money and blood
for such a dismal (so far) result, why there is not outcry about the damage
Enron executives have done, and Worldcom, vs. the most signifigant prosecutorial result of Martha Stewart's imprisonment. The fact that the
Federal EPA and Interior Depts' administrations were replaced by Bush with
primarily former lobbyists and executives of the corporations whose interests these two agencies are supposed to protect us from, etc....etc.
If there are persuasive arguments with footnotes and references for these
and other irrationally appearing decisions and events, where are they ?
Please post them to see if they can stand on their merits. If not, is
mind control or mental health at issue here, influenced by manipulation of
religious ideology ? The Nasdaq 2000 stock index, just in Oct., 2002,
bottomed at 1106 points, after a blow off top of 5100 points in March 2000.
Except for NY attorney general Elliott Spitzer's enforcement efforts against
Brokerage and corporate executive misconduct, I see no investigation by
responsible federal agencies, and almost no public concern or outcry.
With no reform offered or implemented to "fix" the system, Bush proposes
sending nearly a third (4 percent vs. total 12.2 percent combined SS
payroll contributions) into "investments' in that same financial brokerage
system, and there is hardly a reaction from the media or the public.
Elliott Spitzer has also agreed to undertake a 9/11 investigation as a result
of an online petition started by the families of the 9/11 victims.
The lack of curiousity that I see endemic in posters on the politics forums,
even to check for themselves to find out how they come to "know what they
know", is especially interesting and disturbing, because they, among all
others, had enough interest to spend time here instead of in the porn and
sexuality forums, yet they still don't seem interested in separating the
shit from the shinola in order to act in the best interests of themselves and
their own families.