A compelling argument for guns rights.
Gun History
After reading the following historical facts, read the part about Switzerland, twice.
In 1929, the
Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929! to 1953, about 20,000,000 dissidents, unable to defend
themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1..5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany estab lished gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend
themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated
------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56,000,000!!!
------------------------------
It has now been 16 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms
to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first
year statistics are now in:
Australia-wide: Homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide: Assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide: Armed robberies are up 44 percent..
Victoria-wide: Homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, so criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey are unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
You won't see this data on the U.S. evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding
citizens..
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are 'citizens.' Without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends and relatives
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and
skill is more important than either. No weapon can be properly used or wielded without the brain.
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT TO WHOM
THEY ISSUE A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN-RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER, FOLKS!! DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET OR WORSE, A CHALK OUTLINE.
I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment!
If you are too, please forward this note. Just consider how powerful our government is getting!
OUR GOVERNMENT THINKS THESE OTHER COUNTRIES SIMPLY DIDN’T DO IT RIGHT. WELL, LEARN A LESSON FROM HISTORY!!
Monday, July 5, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Noah’s Long Wait
By: Dale Weckbacher
After the fall of man in the garden and the murder of Abel by Cain, the human race became more and more corrupt. At the height of this corruption, we see the grief of God and God’s decision to completely wipe out the human race.
Gen 6:5-7
5 Now the LORD observed the extent of the people's wickedness, and he saw that all their thoughts were consistently and totally evil. 6 So the LORD was sorry he had ever made them. It broke his heart. 7 And the LORD said, "I will completely wipe out this human race that I have created. Yes, and I will destroy all the animals and birds, too. I am sorry I ever made them."
NLT
In the midst of this dire situation for mankind, we see one man, Noah who found special favor or grace with the Lord.
Gen 6:8
8 But Noah found favor with the LORD.
NLT
Verse 9 of Genesis 6 tells us why Noah found this favor with God.
Gen 6:9-10
9 This is the history of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, the only blameless man living on earth at the time. He consistently followed God's will and enjoyed a close relationship with him.
NLT
God knew he could depend on Noah so he proceeds to give instructions to Noah on what to do to protect himself and his family.
Gen 6:11-22
11 Now the earth had become corrupt in God's sight, and it was filled with violence. 12 God observed all this corruption in the world, and he saw violence and depravity everywhere. 13 So God said to Noah, "I have decided to destroy all living creatures, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. Yes, I will wipe them all from the face of the earth!
14 "Make a boat from resinous wood and seal it with tar, inside and out. Then construct decks and stalls throughout its interior. 15 Make it 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. 16 Construct an opening all the way around the boat, 18 inches below the roof. Then put three decks inside the boat — bottom, middle, and upper — and put a door in the side.
17 "Look! I am about to cover the earth with a flood that will destroy every living thing. Everything on earth will die! 18 But I solemnly swear to keep you safe in the boat, with your wife and your sons and their wives. 19 Bring a pair of every kind of animal — a male and a female — into the boat with you to keep them alive during the flood. 20 Pairs of each kind of bird and each kind of animal, large and small alike, will come to you to be kept alive. 21 And remember, take enough food for your family and for all the animals."
22 So Noah did everything exactly as God had commanded him.
NLT
120 years after God’s decision to wipe out mankind and instructing Noah to start building the ark, the flood came. How do we know this much time passed? The answer is in Genesis 6:2-3
Gen 6:2-3
3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not put up with humans for such a long time, for they are only mortal flesh. In the future, they will live no more than 120 years."
NLT
Some might interpret this passage to mean that the lifespan of man in the future would only be 120 years, but we do observe men and women living longer than 120 years after the flood.
Gen 11:10-26
10 This is the history of Shem's family.
When Shem was 100 years old, his son Arphaxad was born. This happened two years after the Flood. 11 After the birth of Arphaxad, Shem lived another 500 years and had other sons and daughters.
12 When Arphaxad was 35 years old, his son Shelah was born. 13 After the birth of Shelah, Arphaxad lived another 403 years and had other sons and daughters.
14 When Shelah was 30 years old, his son Eber was born. 15 After the birth of Eber, Shelah lived another 403 years and had other sons and daughters.
16 When Eber was 34 years old, his son Peleg was born. 17 After the birth of Peleg, Eber lived another 430 years and had other sons and daughters.
18 When Peleg was 30 years old, his son Reu was born. 19 After the birth of Reu, Peleg lived another 209 years and had other sons and daughters.
20 When Reu was 32 years old, his son Serug was born. 21 After the birth of Serug, Reu lived another 207 years and had other sons and daughters.
22 When Serug was 30 years old, his son Nahor was born. 23 After the birth of Nahor, Serug lived another 200 years and had other sons and daughters.
24 When Nahor was 29 years old, his son Terah was born. 25 After the birth of Terah, Nahor lived another 119 years and had other sons and daughters.
26 When Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran.
NLT
The correct interpretation of Genesis 6:3 is that the men living at that time were only going to live 120 years more. God could have destroyed them immediately but in his grace he was giving them time to come back to him. These people would have seen Noah building the ark for 120 years. Most likely, they would have asked Noah what he was doing. Noah, a righteous man of faith would have shared the truth with them and since none of these people joined Noah and his family in the ark, we can assume they did not believe what Noah told them.
Noah had to wait 120 years to see God fulfill his promise to him. The question we must ask ourselves is how long would we be willing to wait for the fulfillment of God’s promise to us?
Just as Noah’s faith was rewarded and his family was spared the destruction that God brought upon the earth, our faith in God’s fulfillment of his promises to us will also be rewarded. We live in tumultuous times and it often may seem that God has forgotten his promises to us. My word of encouragement to you is to remain faithful for God is true to his Word and he will reward our faithfulness to him.
After the fall of man in the garden and the murder of Abel by Cain, the human race became more and more corrupt. At the height of this corruption, we see the grief of God and God’s decision to completely wipe out the human race.
Gen 6:5-7
5 Now the LORD observed the extent of the people's wickedness, and he saw that all their thoughts were consistently and totally evil. 6 So the LORD was sorry he had ever made them. It broke his heart. 7 And the LORD said, "I will completely wipe out this human race that I have created. Yes, and I will destroy all the animals and birds, too. I am sorry I ever made them."
NLT
In the midst of this dire situation for mankind, we see one man, Noah who found special favor or grace with the Lord.
Gen 6:8
8 But Noah found favor with the LORD.
NLT
Verse 9 of Genesis 6 tells us why Noah found this favor with God.
Gen 6:9-10
9 This is the history of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, the only blameless man living on earth at the time. He consistently followed God's will and enjoyed a close relationship with him.
NLT
God knew he could depend on Noah so he proceeds to give instructions to Noah on what to do to protect himself and his family.
Gen 6:11-22
11 Now the earth had become corrupt in God's sight, and it was filled with violence. 12 God observed all this corruption in the world, and he saw violence and depravity everywhere. 13 So God said to Noah, "I have decided to destroy all living creatures, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. Yes, I will wipe them all from the face of the earth!
14 "Make a boat from resinous wood and seal it with tar, inside and out. Then construct decks and stalls throughout its interior. 15 Make it 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. 16 Construct an opening all the way around the boat, 18 inches below the roof. Then put three decks inside the boat — bottom, middle, and upper — and put a door in the side.
17 "Look! I am about to cover the earth with a flood that will destroy every living thing. Everything on earth will die! 18 But I solemnly swear to keep you safe in the boat, with your wife and your sons and their wives. 19 Bring a pair of every kind of animal — a male and a female — into the boat with you to keep them alive during the flood. 20 Pairs of each kind of bird and each kind of animal, large and small alike, will come to you to be kept alive. 21 And remember, take enough food for your family and for all the animals."
22 So Noah did everything exactly as God had commanded him.
NLT
120 years after God’s decision to wipe out mankind and instructing Noah to start building the ark, the flood came. How do we know this much time passed? The answer is in Genesis 6:2-3
Gen 6:2-3
3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not put up with humans for such a long time, for they are only mortal flesh. In the future, they will live no more than 120 years."
NLT
Some might interpret this passage to mean that the lifespan of man in the future would only be 120 years, but we do observe men and women living longer than 120 years after the flood.
Gen 11:10-26
10 This is the history of Shem's family.
When Shem was 100 years old, his son Arphaxad was born. This happened two years after the Flood. 11 After the birth of Arphaxad, Shem lived another 500 years and had other sons and daughters.
12 When Arphaxad was 35 years old, his son Shelah was born. 13 After the birth of Shelah, Arphaxad lived another 403 years and had other sons and daughters.
14 When Shelah was 30 years old, his son Eber was born. 15 After the birth of Eber, Shelah lived another 403 years and had other sons and daughters.
16 When Eber was 34 years old, his son Peleg was born. 17 After the birth of Peleg, Eber lived another 430 years and had other sons and daughters.
18 When Peleg was 30 years old, his son Reu was born. 19 After the birth of Reu, Peleg lived another 209 years and had other sons and daughters.
20 When Reu was 32 years old, his son Serug was born. 21 After the birth of Serug, Reu lived another 207 years and had other sons and daughters.
22 When Serug was 30 years old, his son Nahor was born. 23 After the birth of Nahor, Serug lived another 200 years and had other sons and daughters.
24 When Nahor was 29 years old, his son Terah was born. 25 After the birth of Terah, Nahor lived another 119 years and had other sons and daughters.
26 When Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran.
NLT
The correct interpretation of Genesis 6:3 is that the men living at that time were only going to live 120 years more. God could have destroyed them immediately but in his grace he was giving them time to come back to him. These people would have seen Noah building the ark for 120 years. Most likely, they would have asked Noah what he was doing. Noah, a righteous man of faith would have shared the truth with them and since none of these people joined Noah and his family in the ark, we can assume they did not believe what Noah told them.
Noah had to wait 120 years to see God fulfill his promise to him. The question we must ask ourselves is how long would we be willing to wait for the fulfillment of God’s promise to us?
Just as Noah’s faith was rewarded and his family was spared the destruction that God brought upon the earth, our faith in God’s fulfillment of his promises to us will also be rewarded. We live in tumultuous times and it often may seem that God has forgotten his promises to us. My word of encouragement to you is to remain faithful for God is true to his Word and he will reward our faithfulness to him.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Mr. President, What Country are You President of?
By: Dale Weckbacher
This week President Obama had the President of Mexico at the White House. Of course the hot topic of conversation was the Arizona immigration bill. The statement issued by The President in the Rose Garden was troubling and begs the question, Mr. President, what country are you president of?
Mr. Obama’s statement is as follows:
“We also discussed the new law in Arizona, which is a misdirected effort — a misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system, and which has raised concerns in both our countries…
And I want everyone, American and Mexican, to know my administration is taking a very close look at the Arizona law. We’re examining any implications, especially for civil rights. Because in the United States of America, no law-abiding person — be they an American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico — should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like” (The Heritage Foundation, 2010).
It appears from this statement that President Obama is more interested in not violating the “rights” of individuals entering the United States illegally then protecting the people of Arizona. I live in Arizona and the last time I checked, Arizona is part of the United States. After all, I do recall filing a U.S. tax form this year.
Mr. Obama, the voters elected you President of the United States, not Mexico or the world. When you were sworn into office you promised to uphold the constitution of the United States, which includes protecting its citizens.
Phoenix Arizona is the capital of Arizona. Unfortunately, it is also the kidnapping capital of the U.S. In my own neighborhood, I cannot go to the public park behind my house without fearing for my safety. This is because my skin is not dark enough. I have no problem with anyone using the park no matter what color their skin is so it seems to me that the racism is not with me but others. The Reverend Martin Luther King’s dream was that people be judged by their character and not the color of their skin.
Those of us who favor the Arizona immigration bill are not being racist, we are only interested in the safety of our families. You are right in your statement that our immigration system is broken but the answer is not in catering to those who enter this country illegally. The goal of any countries immigration system is not to close the door on anyone who wants to enter the country but to allow the country to know who is coming into the country in order to protect the country’s citizens.
What is broken about our immigration system is that it takes an excessively long time to enter this country legally and it is extremely expensive. With today’s technology, it should be possible for us to run a background check on individuals wanting to enter this country in a rather short time-period. After successfully passing the background check, we can issue either a work-permit or a student visa so they can enter this country legally.
For those already in the country illegally, give them the opportunity to turn themselves in during a 60-day grace period and have a background check run. Upon passing the background check, they will be issued the proper documentation and become legal. They can then begin the process of becoming a citizen if they desire or they can re-apply for a work-permit of student visa every two years. Failure to do this during the grace period will result in deportation.
This will root out those in the country illegally who intend harm to our citizens since the last thing they will want to do is have a background check run. In fact, most of these people will most likely go home during the grace period rather than risk deportation leaving us with only those seeking a better life in this country.
Mr. President, rather than standing up before the cameras and demeaning the citizens of one of the states you are president of, take the initiative and begin serious immigration reform. Reform designed to insure the safety of the citizens you govern and not pander to the desires of some foreign dignitary visiting the White House.
References:
The Heritage Foundation. (2010). The Foundry. Retrieved from http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/21/morning-bell-raising-arizonas-defense/
This week President Obama had the President of Mexico at the White House. Of course the hot topic of conversation was the Arizona immigration bill. The statement issued by The President in the Rose Garden was troubling and begs the question, Mr. President, what country are you president of?
Mr. Obama’s statement is as follows:
“We also discussed the new law in Arizona, which is a misdirected effort — a misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system, and which has raised concerns in both our countries…
And I want everyone, American and Mexican, to know my administration is taking a very close look at the Arizona law. We’re examining any implications, especially for civil rights. Because in the United States of America, no law-abiding person — be they an American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico — should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like” (The Heritage Foundation, 2010).
It appears from this statement that President Obama is more interested in not violating the “rights” of individuals entering the United States illegally then protecting the people of Arizona. I live in Arizona and the last time I checked, Arizona is part of the United States. After all, I do recall filing a U.S. tax form this year.
Mr. Obama, the voters elected you President of the United States, not Mexico or the world. When you were sworn into office you promised to uphold the constitution of the United States, which includes protecting its citizens.
Phoenix Arizona is the capital of Arizona. Unfortunately, it is also the kidnapping capital of the U.S. In my own neighborhood, I cannot go to the public park behind my house without fearing for my safety. This is because my skin is not dark enough. I have no problem with anyone using the park no matter what color their skin is so it seems to me that the racism is not with me but others. The Reverend Martin Luther King’s dream was that people be judged by their character and not the color of their skin.
Those of us who favor the Arizona immigration bill are not being racist, we are only interested in the safety of our families. You are right in your statement that our immigration system is broken but the answer is not in catering to those who enter this country illegally. The goal of any countries immigration system is not to close the door on anyone who wants to enter the country but to allow the country to know who is coming into the country in order to protect the country’s citizens.
What is broken about our immigration system is that it takes an excessively long time to enter this country legally and it is extremely expensive. With today’s technology, it should be possible for us to run a background check on individuals wanting to enter this country in a rather short time-period. After successfully passing the background check, we can issue either a work-permit or a student visa so they can enter this country legally.
For those already in the country illegally, give them the opportunity to turn themselves in during a 60-day grace period and have a background check run. Upon passing the background check, they will be issued the proper documentation and become legal. They can then begin the process of becoming a citizen if they desire or they can re-apply for a work-permit of student visa every two years. Failure to do this during the grace period will result in deportation.
This will root out those in the country illegally who intend harm to our citizens since the last thing they will want to do is have a background check run. In fact, most of these people will most likely go home during the grace period rather than risk deportation leaving us with only those seeking a better life in this country.
Mr. President, rather than standing up before the cameras and demeaning the citizens of one of the states you are president of, take the initiative and begin serious immigration reform. Reform designed to insure the safety of the citizens you govern and not pander to the desires of some foreign dignitary visiting the White House.
References:
The Heritage Foundation. (2010). The Foundry. Retrieved from http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/21/morning-bell-raising-arizonas-defense/
Finding the Ideal Leader (Part 6)
Leadership Qualities of Ronald Reagan
By: Dale Weckbacher
Bailey (2004) in a speech delivered at Bowling Green University outlined eight points that make up an ideal leader.
1) Having a vision
2) Communicating strongly and optimistically
3) Focusing on a few priorities
4) Exhibiting the courage of your convictions
5) Relentlessly preparing for the challenge
6) Being willing to take risks and make decisions
7) Understanding that you are a steward of other people’s resources
8) Caring about what you are doing….that is demonstrating passion
(Bailey, 2004)
One of the most powerful leaders in recent history has been President Ronald Reagan. He was able to take a country mired in stagflation and a protracted Cold War, transform its economy, and set in place the processes that would end the long protracted Cold War. However, was Ronald Reagan an ideal leader according to Bailey’s (2004) criteria? In the next few paragraphs, we will measure Reagan’s accomplishments against these criteria.
Reagan’s Vision:
The situation for the country in 1980 was dreary. The nation was suffering from stagflation, a situation with high inflation and a stagnant economy. To make matters worse radical Islamic Terrorists took over the embassy in Tehran. There was an attempt to rescue the hostages but it failed (Tristam 2010).
In Candidate Reagan’s acceptance speech at the 1980 Republican Convention, Reagan outlined his vision. “More than anything else, I want my candidacy to unify our country; to renew the American spirit and sense of purpose. I want to carry our message to every American, regardless of party affiliation, who is a member of this community of shared values” (Reagan 2020, 2006). Reagan had a positive message for a nation tired of stagflation and showing weakness on the world stage.
In preparing Reagan for the 1980 presidential debates, Martel (2006) remembers Reagan telling him that a leader “must be clear with his followers about what he stood for”. Reagan’s positive vision coupled with his ability to clearly communicate it to the voters resulted in a landslide victory in the 1980 election (Leip, 2005).
Reagan became the Leader of the United States because of his vision and his ability to clearly communicate it to his followers. However, after becoming President, would he be able to continue communicating his vision with strength and optimism?
The strength and optimism of Ronald Reagan:
Perhaps the greatest measure of a leader’s effectiveness is the leaving of a legacy that outlasts their tenure as leader. In commentary on the ongoing legacy of Ronald Reagan, Hallow & Lambro (2004) cited that his two greatest accomplishments were cutting taxes and defeating the Soviet Union.
The tax cuts initiated by Reagan resulted in unprecedented economic growth and were the basis used by President George W. Bush to bring the nation out of the recession caused by the bursting of the dotcom bubble and the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Even though the Soviet Union remained intact when Reagan left office, his policy of “peace through strength” and “trust but verify” laid the groundwork for the eventual fall of the Soviet Union. Once again the legacy of Reagan lives on as President George W. Bush adopted these same policies when facing a new enemy, radical Islamic Terrorism (Hallow & Lambro, 2004).
The legacy of Ronald Reagan’s policy and the fact the other leaders were able to successfully use similar policies when facing similar situations demonstrate the power and strength with which Reagan was able to communicate his vision even after he became leader.
Reagan’s simple but difficult plan of action:
Leaders often find themselves inheriting extremely desperate situations. These leaders often have trouble when they attempt to change too much too soon. In order to prevent himself from falling into that trap, President Reagan’s agenda upon taking office was a tenacious pursuit of a few strongly held convictions (i.e. cutting taxes, reducing regulations, restoring the national defense) (O’Toole, 2004) (Hallow & Lambro, 2004).
Even though Reagan’s agenda was simple, the initiation of the agenda would be difficult but throughout his tenure in office, Reagan remained the idealist (O’Toole, 2004). Just like Reagan’s optimistic vision was able to propel him into office, his tenacious optimism enabled him to follow-through on his promise and successfully implement his agenda, leaving a lasting legacy and pattern for future leaders to follow.
Reagan’s preparation for the challenge:
Martel (2006), worked as a debate advisor for Ronald Reagan during the 1980 campaign. In his book “Leadership Legacies”, he wrote of how he was impressed with Reagan’s belief that a leader “be clear with his followers about what he stood for”. Reagan had a strong set of core values, which had developed throughout his lifetime. In preparing for the debates, he wanted to make it clear that his responses clearly communicate these values to the voters.
Core values are something we acquire as we progress through our lives. Parents, teachers, and other people we encounter in our lives teach them to us. These core values prepare us to fulfill our calling in life. Reagan’s core values prepared him for the presidency and as long as he adhered to them, he found himself adequately prepared for whatever challenges he would face.
This is a valuable lesson for all leaders. We are prepared to lead according to the core values we have acquired in our lives but when we stray from these values, we will find ourselves unprepared for the consequences. David, King of Israel was known as a man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14) but when David sinned with Bathsheba, there were consequences for which David was not prepared to handle (2 Samuel 12:1-12). David had strayed from his core values and found himself ill prepared for the consequences that would follow (Holy Bible, n.d.). Reagan refused to fall into the same trap as David and as such, remained prepared to handle any and all challenges he would face.
Reagan’s willingness to take risks and make decisions:
In order for a leader to lead the way, he or she must be willing to take risks and make decisions. Every leader is one major bad decision away from being let go but failure to do anything or make any decisions is also a sure way to be let go as a leader. All leaders must be aware of this delicate balance.
When Ronald Reagan assumed The Presidency, he did so with a few simple and strongly held ideas and pursued them tenaciously. For Reagan quitting was not an option and he persisted until he accomplished what he wanted (Johnson, 2004). The risk with this strategy is what if what you want to do makes things worse instead of better.
This is where preparation and a dedication to ones values are most important. Ronald Reagan had no doubt that his policies were just what the country needed to come out of its troubles. This lack of doubt in is policies came after years of experience seeing these policies work in other situations. For Reagan, adopting these policies was no risk for he knew they would work.
Reagan also had a deep love for his country and wanted to see it succeed. As President he knew he had the power to initiate policies that would move his country forward and had no fear in implementing his policies.
The ideal leader must have a deep love and commitment to his or her organization. They must also have a deep set of core values from which they will formulate policies for success in their organizations. The ideal leader is then able to fearlessly move forward with their policies knowing the risks involved but moving forward anyway because of a deep belief in their policies. Ronald Reagan was this type of leader and this was why he was able to accomplish great things for his country and the world.
Reagan’s awareness of whose country it is:
The United States has a representative republic form of government. In a representative republic, the citizens elect representatives who make the policies that run the country. In other words, the citizens are the main stakeholders in the country and hire, or elect, leaders to represent them (Republic, 2010).
Reagan was fully aware of this and is why he was committed to restoring the confidence of the nation that had elected him to office (Johnson, 2004). He understood the importance of explaining his policies to the public that had elected him in a manner they could understand. He also understood the importance of explaining to the public how his policies would benefit them and make their lives better.
Whether we are leading a country, an organization, or our families, the people we lead are looking to us to lead them. We are not just leading an inanimate organization but we are leading people. As leaders we have the responsibility to empower those we lead and to enrich their lives. This is an enormous responsibility, but the leader that is willing to take it on will be greatly rewarded by those they lead and the legacy they leave will be remembered long after they are gone.
Reagan’s Passion:
Reagan had a simple idealistic plan to restore the United States back to greatness (O’Toole, 2004) as do most people who become leaders in their organizations. What sets great leaders apart from ordinary leaders is a deep passion for their organizations. This great passion drives them forward through opposition to success.
When seeking an ideal leader for an organization it is expedient to find someone with a contagious passion. A charismatic leader with tremendous passion will be able to get and hold the attention of those they lead. Their followers will not be following out of duty but out of a love for their leader and what he or she stands for.
However, passion alone is not a determinate of a great leader but must be compared with the other qualities of great leadership. With Reagan, the nation got a complete, but not infallible package.
Conclusion:
Bailey (2004) has provided qualities with which to judge leadership. When these are applied to leaders, we can assess their effectiveness as a leader. Applying these concepts to Ronald Reagan revealed much about his qualities and taught us some valuable lessons.
First, effective leaders must develop a vision and strongly communicate it with optimism. Reagan was known as the great communicator. He won election as President by strongly communicating his vision of a strong and prosperous America. He won the nation’s affection, and re-election, by never wavering in is commitment to his vision.
Secondly, Reagan spent his entire life developing his deeply held values of individualism and national security. His deep conviction to these values prepared him for the challenges of being President. Reagan was willing to take the risk of implementing policies in line with his values because he knew in his heart that they were right.
Finally, Reagan was effective because he maintained focus on a few priorities and did not think he had to accomplish everything right now. Leaders must learn to prioritize their agenda. This way they will focus on what is most important and work down from there.
In future leadership postings I plan to apply Bailey’s qualities to other leaders. I invite you to respond to this post with ideas of leaders to investigate.
Resources:
Bailey, J. (2004). Taking Precedent From Presidents. Vital Speeches of the Day, 70(20),
626-630. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Hallow, R., & Lambro, D. (2004). Legacy: Tax Cuts and the End of the USSR. World &
I, 19(7), N.PAG. Retrieved from International Security & Counter Terrorism
Reference Center database.
Holy Bible (n.d.). The new american standard bible, Updated Edition (2002), Anaheim California, Foundations Publications Inc.,
Johnson, P. (2004). A New Beginning. National Review, 56(12), 18-20. Retrieved from
Academic Search Complete database.
Leip, D. (2005). 1980 Presidential general election results. Uselectionatlas.org. Retrieved 1/4/2010. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1980.
Martel, M. (2006). On goodwill and great leadership. Directors & Boards, 30(3), 80.
Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
O'Toole, J. (2004). The Realist-Idealist Dilemma. Fast Company, (86), 31-32. Retrieved
from Business Source Complete database.
Reagan 2020, (2006) Acceptance of Republican nomination for president at the 1980 Republican National Convention in Detroit Michigan. Reagan 2020, Retrieved 1/4/2010, http://reagan2020.us/speeches/nomination_acceotance_1980.asp.
Republic. (2010). In Encyclopedia Britannica (Online edition). Retrieved from http://www.search.ed.com.exproxy.apollolibrary.com/eb/article-9473188
Tristam, P. (2010). What was operation eagle claw, the failed rescue of American hostages in Iran? About.com Guide, Retrieved 1/4/2010, http://miccleeast.about.com/od/usmideastpolicy/f/me090413c.htm.
By: Dale Weckbacher
Bailey (2004) in a speech delivered at Bowling Green University outlined eight points that make up an ideal leader.
1) Having a vision
2) Communicating strongly and optimistically
3) Focusing on a few priorities
4) Exhibiting the courage of your convictions
5) Relentlessly preparing for the challenge
6) Being willing to take risks and make decisions
7) Understanding that you are a steward of other people’s resources
8) Caring about what you are doing….that is demonstrating passion
(Bailey, 2004)
One of the most powerful leaders in recent history has been President Ronald Reagan. He was able to take a country mired in stagflation and a protracted Cold War, transform its economy, and set in place the processes that would end the long protracted Cold War. However, was Ronald Reagan an ideal leader according to Bailey’s (2004) criteria? In the next few paragraphs, we will measure Reagan’s accomplishments against these criteria.
Reagan’s Vision:
The situation for the country in 1980 was dreary. The nation was suffering from stagflation, a situation with high inflation and a stagnant economy. To make matters worse radical Islamic Terrorists took over the embassy in Tehran. There was an attempt to rescue the hostages but it failed (Tristam 2010).
In Candidate Reagan’s acceptance speech at the 1980 Republican Convention, Reagan outlined his vision. “More than anything else, I want my candidacy to unify our country; to renew the American spirit and sense of purpose. I want to carry our message to every American, regardless of party affiliation, who is a member of this community of shared values” (Reagan 2020, 2006). Reagan had a positive message for a nation tired of stagflation and showing weakness on the world stage.
In preparing Reagan for the 1980 presidential debates, Martel (2006) remembers Reagan telling him that a leader “must be clear with his followers about what he stood for”. Reagan’s positive vision coupled with his ability to clearly communicate it to the voters resulted in a landslide victory in the 1980 election (Leip, 2005).
Reagan became the Leader of the United States because of his vision and his ability to clearly communicate it to his followers. However, after becoming President, would he be able to continue communicating his vision with strength and optimism?
The strength and optimism of Ronald Reagan:
Perhaps the greatest measure of a leader’s effectiveness is the leaving of a legacy that outlasts their tenure as leader. In commentary on the ongoing legacy of Ronald Reagan, Hallow & Lambro (2004) cited that his two greatest accomplishments were cutting taxes and defeating the Soviet Union.
The tax cuts initiated by Reagan resulted in unprecedented economic growth and were the basis used by President George W. Bush to bring the nation out of the recession caused by the bursting of the dotcom bubble and the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Even though the Soviet Union remained intact when Reagan left office, his policy of “peace through strength” and “trust but verify” laid the groundwork for the eventual fall of the Soviet Union. Once again the legacy of Reagan lives on as President George W. Bush adopted these same policies when facing a new enemy, radical Islamic Terrorism (Hallow & Lambro, 2004).
The legacy of Ronald Reagan’s policy and the fact the other leaders were able to successfully use similar policies when facing similar situations demonstrate the power and strength with which Reagan was able to communicate his vision even after he became leader.
Reagan’s simple but difficult plan of action:
Leaders often find themselves inheriting extremely desperate situations. These leaders often have trouble when they attempt to change too much too soon. In order to prevent himself from falling into that trap, President Reagan’s agenda upon taking office was a tenacious pursuit of a few strongly held convictions (i.e. cutting taxes, reducing regulations, restoring the national defense) (O’Toole, 2004) (Hallow & Lambro, 2004).
Even though Reagan’s agenda was simple, the initiation of the agenda would be difficult but throughout his tenure in office, Reagan remained the idealist (O’Toole, 2004). Just like Reagan’s optimistic vision was able to propel him into office, his tenacious optimism enabled him to follow-through on his promise and successfully implement his agenda, leaving a lasting legacy and pattern for future leaders to follow.
Reagan’s preparation for the challenge:
Martel (2006), worked as a debate advisor for Ronald Reagan during the 1980 campaign. In his book “Leadership Legacies”, he wrote of how he was impressed with Reagan’s belief that a leader “be clear with his followers about what he stood for”. Reagan had a strong set of core values, which had developed throughout his lifetime. In preparing for the debates, he wanted to make it clear that his responses clearly communicate these values to the voters.
Core values are something we acquire as we progress through our lives. Parents, teachers, and other people we encounter in our lives teach them to us. These core values prepare us to fulfill our calling in life. Reagan’s core values prepared him for the presidency and as long as he adhered to them, he found himself adequately prepared for whatever challenges he would face.
This is a valuable lesson for all leaders. We are prepared to lead according to the core values we have acquired in our lives but when we stray from these values, we will find ourselves unprepared for the consequences. David, King of Israel was known as a man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14) but when David sinned with Bathsheba, there were consequences for which David was not prepared to handle (2 Samuel 12:1-12). David had strayed from his core values and found himself ill prepared for the consequences that would follow (Holy Bible, n.d.). Reagan refused to fall into the same trap as David and as such, remained prepared to handle any and all challenges he would face.
Reagan’s willingness to take risks and make decisions:
In order for a leader to lead the way, he or she must be willing to take risks and make decisions. Every leader is one major bad decision away from being let go but failure to do anything or make any decisions is also a sure way to be let go as a leader. All leaders must be aware of this delicate balance.
When Ronald Reagan assumed The Presidency, he did so with a few simple and strongly held ideas and pursued them tenaciously. For Reagan quitting was not an option and he persisted until he accomplished what he wanted (Johnson, 2004). The risk with this strategy is what if what you want to do makes things worse instead of better.
This is where preparation and a dedication to ones values are most important. Ronald Reagan had no doubt that his policies were just what the country needed to come out of its troubles. This lack of doubt in is policies came after years of experience seeing these policies work in other situations. For Reagan, adopting these policies was no risk for he knew they would work.
Reagan also had a deep love for his country and wanted to see it succeed. As President he knew he had the power to initiate policies that would move his country forward and had no fear in implementing his policies.
The ideal leader must have a deep love and commitment to his or her organization. They must also have a deep set of core values from which they will formulate policies for success in their organizations. The ideal leader is then able to fearlessly move forward with their policies knowing the risks involved but moving forward anyway because of a deep belief in their policies. Ronald Reagan was this type of leader and this was why he was able to accomplish great things for his country and the world.
Reagan’s awareness of whose country it is:
The United States has a representative republic form of government. In a representative republic, the citizens elect representatives who make the policies that run the country. In other words, the citizens are the main stakeholders in the country and hire, or elect, leaders to represent them (Republic, 2010).
Reagan was fully aware of this and is why he was committed to restoring the confidence of the nation that had elected him to office (Johnson, 2004). He understood the importance of explaining his policies to the public that had elected him in a manner they could understand. He also understood the importance of explaining to the public how his policies would benefit them and make their lives better.
Whether we are leading a country, an organization, or our families, the people we lead are looking to us to lead them. We are not just leading an inanimate organization but we are leading people. As leaders we have the responsibility to empower those we lead and to enrich their lives. This is an enormous responsibility, but the leader that is willing to take it on will be greatly rewarded by those they lead and the legacy they leave will be remembered long after they are gone.
Reagan’s Passion:
Reagan had a simple idealistic plan to restore the United States back to greatness (O’Toole, 2004) as do most people who become leaders in their organizations. What sets great leaders apart from ordinary leaders is a deep passion for their organizations. This great passion drives them forward through opposition to success.
When seeking an ideal leader for an organization it is expedient to find someone with a contagious passion. A charismatic leader with tremendous passion will be able to get and hold the attention of those they lead. Their followers will not be following out of duty but out of a love for their leader and what he or she stands for.
However, passion alone is not a determinate of a great leader but must be compared with the other qualities of great leadership. With Reagan, the nation got a complete, but not infallible package.
Conclusion:
Bailey (2004) has provided qualities with which to judge leadership. When these are applied to leaders, we can assess their effectiveness as a leader. Applying these concepts to Ronald Reagan revealed much about his qualities and taught us some valuable lessons.
First, effective leaders must develop a vision and strongly communicate it with optimism. Reagan was known as the great communicator. He won election as President by strongly communicating his vision of a strong and prosperous America. He won the nation’s affection, and re-election, by never wavering in is commitment to his vision.
Secondly, Reagan spent his entire life developing his deeply held values of individualism and national security. His deep conviction to these values prepared him for the challenges of being President. Reagan was willing to take the risk of implementing policies in line with his values because he knew in his heart that they were right.
Finally, Reagan was effective because he maintained focus on a few priorities and did not think he had to accomplish everything right now. Leaders must learn to prioritize their agenda. This way they will focus on what is most important and work down from there.
In future leadership postings I plan to apply Bailey’s qualities to other leaders. I invite you to respond to this post with ideas of leaders to investigate.
Resources:
Bailey, J. (2004). Taking Precedent From Presidents. Vital Speeches of the Day, 70(20),
626-630. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.
Hallow, R., & Lambro, D. (2004). Legacy: Tax Cuts and the End of the USSR. World &
I, 19(7), N.PAG. Retrieved from International Security & Counter Terrorism
Reference Center database.
Holy Bible (n.d.). The new american standard bible, Updated Edition (2002), Anaheim California, Foundations Publications Inc.,
Johnson, P. (2004). A New Beginning. National Review, 56(12), 18-20. Retrieved from
Academic Search Complete database.
Leip, D. (2005). 1980 Presidential general election results. Uselectionatlas.org. Retrieved 1/4/2010. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1980.
Martel, M. (2006). On goodwill and great leadership. Directors & Boards, 30(3), 80.
Retrieved from Business Source Complete database.
O'Toole, J. (2004). The Realist-Idealist Dilemma. Fast Company, (86), 31-32. Retrieved
from Business Source Complete database.
Reagan 2020, (2006) Acceptance of Republican nomination for president at the 1980 Republican National Convention in Detroit Michigan. Reagan 2020, Retrieved 1/4/2010, http://reagan2020.us/speeches/nomination_acceotance_1980.asp.
Republic. (2010). In Encyclopedia Britannica (Online edition). Retrieved from http://www.search.ed.com.exproxy.apollolibrary.com/eb/article-9473188
Tristam, P. (2010). What was operation eagle claw, the failed rescue of American hostages in Iran? About.com Guide, Retrieved 1/4/2010, http://miccleeast.about.com/od/usmideastpolicy/f/me090413c.htm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)