2006-12-22 21:38:52 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Don't be ridiculous. Bush is.
2006-12-22 21:42:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nah. He is more like the one with the least integrity ever. Some would call that weakness. John Major was weak. Tony Blair is contrivingly cunning in making sure he never has to work another day after he leaves politics. If he would choose to do so.
2006-12-23 00:08:37 · answer #2 · answered by Part Time Cynic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The definition of a political leader has changed to that of a manager in the past decade, and it is as a direct result of the added expectations of the public for honesty, accountability, accessibility etc. while at the same time not wanting to do the job themselves, The result is a coached, Managing Director style leader who accepts the blame for any failures solely as 'an elected representative of the people', and with no PERSONAL responsibility for anything. We get the leaders we deserve, as a result of our own action / inaction.
2006-12-22 21:59:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you talk of him as the weakest leader,how would you rate the leaders in Africa.
No he is not the weakest for everybody has its weak points and links.
2006-12-23 00:10:47 · answer #4 · answered by cajadman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neville Chamberlain must surely get a mention and even Major was pretty poor. Blair is weak because he was desperate to punch above his weight on the international stage and prepared to come to Bush's heel when called to do so. still, he has authority in thgre cabinet that major and callaghan didn't.
2006-12-23 00:10:24 · answer #5 · answered by Boring 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tony Blair you are the weakest link GOODBYE and Bloody GOOD RIDDANCE
2006-12-22 22:11:15 · answer #6 · answered by reggie 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There haven't actually been that many strong ones. Thatcher was one, now whether she was right or wrong in her decisions she did what she wanted. Churchill obviously. I can't really think of anymore, Chamberlain was notably bad ( the whole negotiating with a meglomaniac thing, if he had of remained in power I think we would have lost the war).
2006-12-25 13:17:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Started well but started to falter after a few years and has definitely slipped to a very low point. He is weak, ineffectual, dishonest and very very shifty. Gordon Brown I think will be strong if he makes it but I fear that we the public will suffer even more in our pockets with him at the helm.
Have a happy Christmas.
2006-12-22 21:43:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Like George Bush, he is an elected puppet, orchestrated to reach that point by the hidden mandarins who really run the country.
They both have excellent reading skills, and the ability to read aloud.
What more do these hidden mandarins want for goodness sake?
If you want a LEADER to run the country, I have it good authority that a good role model was Margaret Thatcher -
a) She's female
b) She carried out what she said she was going to do... particularly when it came to backing her best asset - the Military Service personnel. !
2006-12-22 21:50:05 · answer #9 · answered by Hello 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
NO he is not.
he is lovely just like Bush
2006-12-24 08:21:35 · answer #10 · answered by arya 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, he's a very able politician.....that's the trouble.
He's not weak: just very, very wrong headed.
2006-12-24 04:56:51 · answer #11 · answered by musonic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋