Earlier this week I was in a meeting and heard previous leadership denigrated. Three former leaders of the organization were called "idiots." One consultant who worked fairly successfully for the organization was derided as "that Jerry guy."
Look, I know that we don't mix with every leader. I know we don't have leaders doing what we think ought to be done. But not doing what we believe should be done isn't the same as being a weak leader, or as being an ineffectual leader.
We've heard countless talking heads biting at the President for "failing to lead," and heard calls for "stronger leadership" on the commentary shows both left and right. My favorite was a recent David Brooks column in which Brooks asserted that the President needed to show leadership by doing X, Y, and Z!
The President had already done X, Y, and Z.
Yet it seems that the only criteria we have for any leader is "did they achieve my goal?"
Or as one of my church council members from back in my days of being Pastor at Trinity, Georgetown reminded me (he was a banker), the only question people seem to be willing to ask is "What have you done for me lately."
Anyway. I wish that we would take a deep breath before deriding our leaders as idiots, calling our political opponents imbeciles and generally denigrating the intelligence of those who don't do what we want done.
Maybe they can't. Maybe they're ideologically opposed. Maybe they're constrained by situation. Maybe they don't think our idea is a very good one.
Please stop calling for "stronger leadership" unless you can do some behavioral definition of that. And please, please, please, don't call and absent former leader "idiot."
If you're willing to do that, what will you say about me when I leave the room?