dayman Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Just curious...I'll maybe add some but don't have any now but just wondering...who does the board consider a modern day "statesman." Obviously tough to ask this question in an election year (let alone presidential election year) but the general thesis is that there aren't any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 GWB GHWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 25, 2012 Author Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) GWB GHWB EDIT: Active in politics today Edited August 25, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) EDIT: Active in politics today Jeb. But the reason I mention the others is they stay above the fray and actually, GWB is still engaged in good statesman like works. Edited August 25, 2012 by Oxrock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 25, 2012 Author Share Posted August 25, 2012 And btw also while I guess we could broaden the discussion to those "active" but not necessarily holding office (which would disqualify both Bush POTUS's...)...keep in mind "statesman" includes not just "I think this guy is patriotic" but that he's widely respected and most people hold that view (as well as him being somewhat wise/competent). I for instance do like W personally and while his presidency evolved into a disaster I'm not as hard on him as others...he couldn't qualify as a statesman...you don't need everybody to agree but at least most must agree on the subject. Obviously not many would dispute H.W. as a statesman (even those who don't like him) he's not active he's old and sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) And btw also while I guess we could broaden the discussion to those "active" but not necessarily holding office (which would disqualify both Bush POTUS's...)...keep in mind "statesman" includes not just "I think this guy is patriotic" but that he's widely respected and most people hold that view (as well as him being somewhat wise/competent). I for instance do like W personally and while his presidency evolved into a disaster I'm not as hard on him as others...he couldn't qualify as a statesman...you don't need everybody to agree but at least most must agree on the subject. Obviously not many would dispute H.W. as a statesman (even those who don't like him) he's not active he's old and sick. See post I put up aboves at nearly same time.http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2018791156_robinson30.html Edited August 25, 2012 by Oxrock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 25, 2012 Author Share Posted August 25, 2012 See post I put up aboves at nearly same time. Perhaps Jeb could be on the list. He's not the greatest of federal choices but I certainly (being a Floridian) would take him back in a heartbeat over Scott and honestly think he would stand a better chance at beating Obama than Romney. Anyone that has read a few of my posts know I like Clinton but we need not discuss that if you disagree I'm mainly searching for people I don't think about that I may see as a statesman. Jeb I think may qualify, I just think of him as local I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Perhaps Jeb could be on the list. He's not the greatest of federal choices but I certainly (being a Floridian) would take him back in a heartbeat over Scott and honestly think he would stand a better chance at beating Obama than Romney. Anyone that has read a few of my posts know I like Clinton but we need not discuss that if you disagree I'm mainly searching for people I don't think about that I may see as a statesman. Jeb I think may qualify, I just think of him as local I guess. Alright, we have to audit our simaltaniast (sp?) posting.http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2018791156_robinson30.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 25, 2012 Author Share Posted August 25, 2012 Alright, we have to audit our simaltaniast (sp?) posting. http://seattletimes....robinson30.html hehe, no need I get it I don't stop looking up just b/c I post again when it's quick posting...and like I said I respect both Clinton and Bush (W) but it's easy to be a "statesman" when you have 2 terms and are retired from politics I'm mainly thinking about those still involved be it in government or still active/could be in government soon...most people who know anything about W know his aids contribution is probably the most of any president and the Clinton intuitive and even Haiti efforts w/ both Bush's were noble etc...but generally speaking I'm leaning towards wondering about current active politicians or possible future players who really can be seen as statesman in the moment (no just presidents btw) EDIT: Actually oddly enough while controversial I think Hillary could qualify somewhat btw...now that I think about it...not on some ultra high level but her stock is high Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 http://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/2010/09/02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 hehe, no need I get it I don't stop looking up just b/c I post again when it's quick posting...and like I said I respect both Clinton and Bush (W) but it's easy to be a "statesman" when you have 2 terms and are retired from politics I'm mainly thinking about those still involved be it in government or still active/could be in government soon...most people who know anything about W know his aids contribution is probably the most of any president and the Clinton intuitive and even Haiti efforts w/ both Bush's were noble etc...but generally speaking I'm leaning towards wondering about current active politicians or possible future players who really can be seen as statesman in the moment (no just presidents btw) EDIT: Actually oddly enough while controversial I think Hillary could qualify somewhat btw...now that I think about it...not on some ultra high level but her stock is high nobody then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 hehe, no need I get it I don't stop looking up just b/c I post again when it's quick posting...and like I said I respect both Clinton and Bush (W) but it's easy to be a "statesman" when you have 2 terms and are retired from politics I'm mainly thinking about those still involved be it in government or still active/could be in government soon...most people who know anything about W know his aids contribution is probably the most of any president and the Clinton intuitive and even Haiti efforts w/ both Bush's were noble etc...but generally speaking I'm leaning towards wondering about current active politicians or possible future players who really can be seen as statesman in the moment (no just presidents btw) EDIT: Actually oddly enough while controversial I think Hillary could qualify somewhat btw...now that I think about it...not on some ultra high level but her stock is high Yeah...I've got to agree with ox, I don't think there is one. I can't think of a single active politician who puts country before party, which I think is pretty much the FIRST requirement for being a "statesman". And in the past twenty years...the closest we've come is Clinton or George W. Maybe Condi Rice, if you put a gun to my head and forced me to name a third. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) Nelson Mandela (sp) Though he is no longer active in politics. But I think he might be the last statesman the world has seen for a while. Edited August 25, 2012 by Bigfatbillsfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Nelson Mandela (sp) Though he is no longer active in politics. But I think he might be the last statesman the world has seen for a while. In June 1961, Mandela sent a letter to South African newspapers warning the government, that if they did not meet their demands, the Umkhonto we Sizwe would embark on a campaign of sabotage. The letter demanded the government accept a call for a national constitutional convention.[40] The demands were not met by the government and beginning on 16 December 1961, the Umkhonto we Sizwe with Mandela as its leader, launched a bombing campaign against government targets with the first action of the campaign being the bombing of an electricity sub-station.[41] In total, over the next eighteen months, the Umkhonto we Sizwe would initiate dozens more acts of sabotage and bombings. The South African government alleged more acts of sabotage had been carried out and at the Rivonia trial the accused would be charged with 193 acts of sabotage in total.[42] The campaign of sabotage against the government included attacks on government posts, machines, power facilities, and crop burning in various places including Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth and Durban. [43] Later, mostly in the 1980s, MK, the organisation co-founded by Mandela, waged a guerrilla war against the apartheid government in which many civilians became casualties.[37] For example, the Church Street bomb in Pretoria killed 19 people and injured 217. After he had become President, Mandela later admitted that the ANC, in its struggle against apartheid, also violated human rights, criticising those in his own party who attempted to remove statements mentioning this from the reports of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.[44] That's a statesman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted August 25, 2012 Author Share Posted August 25, 2012 In June 1961, Mandela sent a letter to South African newspapers warning the government, that if they did not meet their demands, the Umkhonto we Sizwe would embark on a campaign of sabotage. The letter demanded the government accept a call for a national constitutional convention.[40] The demands were not met by the government and beginning on 16 December 1961, the Umkhonto we Sizwe with Mandela as its leader, launched a bombing campaign against government targets with the first action of the campaign being the bombing of an electricity sub-station.[41] In total, over the next eighteen months, the Umkhonto we Sizwe would initiate dozens more acts of sabotage and bombings. The South African government alleged more acts of sabotage had been carried out and at the Rivonia trial the accused would be charged with 193 acts of sabotage in total.[42] The campaign of sabotage against the government included attacks on government posts, machines, power facilities, and crop burning in various places including Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth and Durban. [43] Later, mostly in the 1980s, MK, the organisation co-founded by Mandela, waged a guerrilla war against the apartheid government in which many civilians became casualties.[37] For example, the Church Street bomb in Pretoria killed 19 people and injured 217. After he had become President, Mandela later admitted that the ANC, in its struggle against apartheid, also violated human rights, criticising those in his own party who attempted to remove statements mentioning this from the reports of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.[44] That's a statesman? LOL only on PPP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 In June 1961, Mandela sent a letter to South African newspapers warning the government, that if they did not meet their demands, the Umkhonto we Sizwe would embark on a campaign of sabotage. The letter demanded the government accept a call for a national constitutional convention.[40] The demands were not met by the government and beginning on 16 December 1961, the Umkhonto we Sizwe with Mandela as its leader, launched a bombing campaign against government targets with the first action of the campaign being the bombing of an electricity sub-station.[41] In total, over the next eighteen months, the Umkhonto we Sizwe would initiate dozens more acts of sabotage and bombings. The South African government alleged more acts of sabotage had been carried out and at the Rivonia trial the accused would be charged with 193 acts of sabotage in total.[42] The campaign of sabotage against the government included attacks on government posts, machines, power facilities, and crop burning in various places including Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth and Durban. [43] Later, mostly in the 1980s, MK, the organisation co-founded by Mandela, waged a guerrilla war against the apartheid government in which many civilians became casualties.[37] For example, the Church Street bomb in Pretoria killed 19 people and injured 217. After he had become President, Mandela later admitted that the ANC, in its struggle against apartheid, also violated human rights, criticising those in his own party who attempted to remove statements mentioning this from the reports of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.[44] That's a statesman? Maybe. In the same sense that Arafat was a statesmen. But Pol Pot...hey, THERE was a true statesman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 How soon we forget the legendary Colin Powell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 How soon we forget the legendary Colin Powell Good choice. But he did lie us into a war, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 Good choice. But he did lie us into a war, right? DON'T YOU SAY THAT!!! DON'T YOU EVER F*CKIN SAY THAT!!! Colin Powell is a great man. A man of principle who NEVER strays from that principle unless it's convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 DON'T YOU SAY THAT!!! DON'T YOU EVER F*CKIN SAY THAT!!! Colin Powell is a great man. A man of principle who NEVER strays from that principle unless it's convenient. Of course. What was I thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts