And why?
Only one of the three. I think people will tend to want to say lead and serve, but they are mutually exclusive. A leader directs the path of the country, while a servant enforces the will of the people.
Honest opinions, please, and no name-calling or slander.
2006-09-27 13:10:08 · 16 answers · asked by corwynwulfhund 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Seriously people, in my question I clearly defined lead and serve, and how they were mutually exclusive. If you are leading, you are telling the people how to live. If you are a servant, you are doing what the People are telling you to do.
2006-09-27 13:26:12 · update #1
eman...what you said is true about what our constitution allows, but when you look at what's going on right now, that is being ignored. Many conservatives are pushing for new laws giving sweeping new powers to the Executive Branch. Like the whole "Unitary Executive" concept (which basically means "Dictator with a puppet Congress).
2006-09-27 19:52:11 · update #2
I think the President by Constitutional grounds is really suspose to be not much of anything. He really is just suspose to be leader of the military and fix disasters and thats about it. Amazing on how much the President has powern now vs. the original purpose.
2006-09-27 13:13:36 · answer #1 · answered by Jason 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In our current system of government, we have three separate, but equal branches of Government. (Legislative, Judicial, and Executive.)
The president is the leader of the executive branch, and is responsible for enforcing laws, commander-in-chief of the Arm forces, and signing the laws when they are passed by the legislative branch.
A president may suggest a law, but it is up to the legislative branch, to create it, word it, and ratify it, before the president can sign it into law. If the president doesn't sign it into law, the legislative branch, (I can't remember if it is the house or senate.) can with a two thirds majority vote, overturn the veto, and the law goes into effect.
The reason for this long civic discourse, is to bring up my opinion. The president, doesn't really have the kind of power that you suggest he has.
Now to actually answer your question. I really like the term public servant. Our system of government, is powered by "We the People." Our vote dictates who gets into office, and who leads us. It is up to "We the People" to vote our hearts and elect the people we feel will best represent our voice, and views. In the case of the president, he needs to be both. He needs to be a visonary, and direct the path of the goverment, at the same time, he needs to be aware of the views of the people, and find a way to make that happen. In my opinon, it is the hardest job in the world to do.
2006-09-27 20:27:47 · answer #2 · answered by eman12343567 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As you said a good leader will lead the people and serve the people at the same time. Ruling the people is what Bush Co. does.
2006-09-27 20:13:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Definately not rule. I would say lead by serving the people. This is an elected office earned , hopefully, by the vote of the people. The majority of people will put a President in office who has spoken with conviction of the way he/she chooses to handle office of the presidency.
2006-09-27 20:17:02 · answer #4 · answered by To Be 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The President is just one of the people, not a king. He was elected to Serve the people.
2006-09-27 20:36:54 · answer #5 · answered by Kwan Kong 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A president represents the people. The president cannot rule the people that would be absolute power. The president can lead the people in good example. If you are Conservative the president maybe more like a father figure and you will protect the father figure in return you will receive comfort from fear.
2006-09-27 20:17:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The president is elected to lead & serve. Serve does not alway mean he gives the people every thing they want. He is like a father who says NO once in awhile.We elected him to lead & if you dont like how he leads then dont vote for him. He must have been doing ok because he was reelected.This is my honest opinion& i am NOT a Republican but a Independant.
2006-09-27 20:20:53 · answer #7 · answered by BUTCH 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The president ideally serves the people, but during a time of crisis, he or she is called upon to lead.
either way, hopefully they are moral enough to do what they should rather than what is expedient.
kind of like a police officer and their weapon. You hope they never have to use it, but it happens.
If the job truely called for leadership first, then the term would be longer than four years, with only one re-election
2006-09-27 20:56:45 · answer #8 · answered by aka DarthDad 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Do the opposite of what Bush is doing,neglecting the people. All the People...the Soldiers,the families of 9/11 and the people of Iraq. He is after money and power,and neglecting what the polls show the people think or want makes no difference for him...He is a war monger. It has gotton him NOWHERE.
2006-09-27 20:18:26 · answer #9 · answered by Holly 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A president must serve the peoples best interest. Government is in place to serve the best interest of its people.
2006-09-27 20:19:50 · answer #10 · answered by GloryDays49ers 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋