Messrs. Laitin and Lustick make a useful advance in conceptualizing the components of leadership skill. It is quite obvious that such a venerable but often ill-conceived topic cannot be exhausted, even conceptually, within the space of a short article. I should like here to make three qualifying remarks, which are intended not to detract from the advance made by the two authors but to situate their contribution within a somewhat wider perspective. These remarks are directed toward the impact or consequences of leadership. They concern: (1) the relationship of leadership skill to leadership effectiveness; (2) pathological leadership, producing negative outcomes; and (3) the Tolstoyan question about the extent to which “A king is the slave of history,” i.e., whether political leadership does have room for maneuver and can significantly affect outcomes.