President Bush is constantly being put down for seeing things in black and white, with no shades of gray. I tend to think this way also. Granted, there are issues that are not straight pro or con. A great example of this is drug testing. If a person smokes a joint on Friday and pisses in a bottle on Monday, they lose their job even though they weren't high at the time they were working. Until they come up with a device that can tell if a person is stoned at a given moment, such as a breathalyzer test, the idea is flawed. However, thinking out all sides of an issue for hours or days is not the sign of an intellectual, it's the sign of a person deciding not the issue, but the effect it will have on them. Political thinking if you will.

Think about this, if you are faced with a problem and have to make a decision, how long do you dwell on it? I'm talking about problems such as the ones you'd have to solve at work. How long do you dwell and think on the issue. Let's suppose it's an issue that could potentially cost you your job if proven wrong. Do you dwell on the issue for hours or days, or do you look at the issue and weigh it for several moments then decide.

I make decisions the latter way, weigh how it will effect me and others, also how it will effect my employer. I don't dwell and find that my initial instinct is the correct one. The former way, dawdling and extrapolating out every conceivable outcome makes you indecisive and in in turn, ineffective.

Now imagine you are the President, two planes have just smashed into the twin towers at the hands of Muslim terrorists. Do you agonize over every facet of what your options are, or do you go with the first instinct, protect the country at all costs. I don't want a leader who is going to be "nuanced", I want a leader who is go to react and do what has to be done. Could John Kerry be that man? I doubt it:

Some aides and close associates say Mr. Kerry's fluidity is the mark of an intellectual who grasps the subtleties of issues, inhabits their nuances and revels in the deliberative process. They call him a free-thinker who defies stereotypes. Others close to him say his often-public agonizing — over whether to opt out of the system of spending caps and matching money in this campaign, or whether to run against Al Gore in 2000 — can be exasperating.

Of course the Libs and Donkeys call anyone who is a flip-flopper an "intellectual", I call him mealy-mouthed and wishy-washy.

Update: One post script, I make decisions based on how it will help the most people. Some of these decisions are not necessarily good for me. That to me is the definition of leadership.