
Leadership Crisis? Not so sure. But at least not strong leadership.
I really don’t understand the stock market or financial funds in deep to explain why all these events have been going on, or how can the $700 billion bailout can help to solve things up (If it happens to be approved). But to me one thing is clear: Leadership is based on credibility, and it’s sad to say it, but Mr. Bush doesn’t have enough credibility to support such a big endeavour. At least, not without negotiating. A strong leadership wouldn’t have had such big problems in moving the congress toward a “clear solution” without much hesitation. If the problem and solution were clear enough, the congress would really support the president in such a big issue, but that’s not the case yet.
It’s not rocket science, it’s just plain and simple common sense. If there’s lack of credibility, then there’s no leadership or no strong one. When you’re in command, there’s no problem you only give orders. But in this case, that can not be done to an independent power (as the congress is). You have to persuade or influence. A lot of people could argue that the issue wasn’t well exposed or even well defined. But then again, if that’s the case, then lack of strong leadership is the problem.
The fact is: Mr. Bush has to negotiate, or at least, reformulate the problem and/or the solution in order for the congress to “give him” the approval on the bailout. (by the way, McCain has asked to call it “rescue” instead).
What do you think?