Posted on 05/16/2010 9:32:36 AM PDT by timesthattrymenssouls
I am always leery of those who seek power. Reluctant leaders are the most trustworthy in my experience. The ones who would rather be home with their families attending Little League games and barbecuing in the back yard. But the guy who is more comfortable wearing a suit on the weekends, attending a Rotary meeting or a City Council meeting, that guy scares me.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be a movie star. Who didn't? I wanted to be famous, I wanted to inspire, I wanted to make people laugh. Long before reality TV shows made any schmo a star I watched Maureen O'Hara stand toe to toe with John Wayne in The Quiet Man, take a swing at him and finally melt in his arms. I wanted to be her. I watched Lucille Ball convince Vivian Vance to go along with another of her harebrained schemes and I laughed and thought it would be great fun to be a comedienne, like Lucy. Problem was, I wasn't a good actress like Maureen O'Hara and I wasn't funny like Lucille Ball. I wasn't qualified. No Hollywood producer would hire me simply because I wanted to be a star.
So can someone explain to me why we vote for people simply because they want to be our president or congressperson? Why don't we delve into their backgrounds, check their qualifications? Why don't we subject them to the kind of scrutiny, at least, as a contestant on American Idol?
Our president has claimed to be many things. He has said he was a college professor but now we learn he was a lecturer; big difference. We were told he is the smartest president ever to sit in the Oval Office, but for some reason his academic records are sealed, off limits to the public. Populism goes only so far these days. He promised his policies ($787 billion in stimulus courtesy of the taxpayers to begin with) would create jobs but unemployment seemed to accelerate almost as soon as those policies were put in place. We were offered Hope and Change by this president but the only thing that has Changed is that we no longer seem to have any Hope.
He is a pleasant man we are told. He is trim and athletic. And he really really likes being President. He has given more speeches, made more appearances and commanded more of the airwaves than any president in my lifetime. He has opinions on anything and everything and is not one bit shy about sharing them. Or twisting arms to turn them into law.
He reminds me of FDR. The four term president. The one whose policies extended the Great Depression and launched the Big Government thinking so popular today. Read what Walter Lippman wrote of FDR: "a pleasant man who, without any important qualifications for the office, would very much like to be president."
There are many parallels between Obama and Roosevelt and between the economic climate then and now. That is not meant to be a compliment. Rather it is a warning. A warning that it is time for each of us to wake up, to join forces for Liberty and economic freedom and take our country back. It is not too late, there is still time.
And one of the first places we can start is by supporting citizen candidates who simply want to fix this mess and then return home to their families and businesses. Who are reluctant leaders and wary of power. Who respect the hard work of their fellow citizens. And feel a responsibility to future generations not to spend their legacy recklessly and irresponsibly.
Pleasant men and women who simply want to do the right thing.
“Reluctant leaders are the most trustworthy in my experience.”
####
George Washington being the exemplar of that idea.
Gee, and he didn’t even have a law degree from a “prestigious” university or years of “experience” in public policy.
Law degrees from “prestigious universities” are no longer what they used be. About the time that Harvard forced Larry Summers to resign, Harvard revised their curriculum to make it easier for women to succeed, in doing so, they abandoned the study of precedent at the law school, in favor of on the job training and world law. Most of the top law schools in the country have followed suit. No more classroom study after the first year, just on the job training and oversight by a mentor. Grades are also irrelevant, at least at the University of WA law school, where the lowest grade that a student can earn is a B+.
Ha! Well said.
I always thought our president should be the poor schmuck who drew the short straw.
bttt
This column prompts a couple of thoughts.
One -- good quote from Lippmann about FDR. His coalition made him powerful, and "Tommy the Cork" Corcoran, his confidential agent, made him master of DC. And I suppose J. Edgar Hoover was already gathering files on people and sharing select tidbits with the President.
Two -- she manages to get a whole column out of the ancient Sufi wisdom, that one never gives a job wisely to a person who wants that job in the worst possible way.
This Constitutional Republic, IMHO, is Broken
A Meritocracy would be preferable
Citizenship must be Earned
My Preference, by honorable service to country
- CCC / Military / “Peace Corp” - examples
- Available to any who has given, say 3 years, to commanded task
- Must complete service “Honorably”
Only Citizens given full Protection and Service of the Government
- Social Security / Medicare / Police / Fire
Citizenship must be maintained
- Submit self to public service when called
- Those Called to service, randomly assigned from pool
— Of those who have Shown “Merit” in the past
— Consider mandatory test in leadership capability
— The higher the “score” of leadership capability,
-— the higher the level in government assigned to serve
Release those who serve back to their prior life
Children of Citizens are also Citizens until some age, say 21
Children of Non-Citizens are not Citizens,
- until they, themselves have served
- Powerful incentive as Public schools only for Children of Citizens
— unless it is paid for, at real cost
Those not Citizens, not given full support of Governance
- No such thing as “Illegal Aliens” as
— Citizenship is not assigned as birthright
Obviously, the “Devils in the Details”
Confucianism is one example
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism#Meritocracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination
I would rather have a wise and honest man who does NOT want to be president.
Wm. F. Buckley once commented that one could easily embarrass a Swiss citizen by asking him to name the last five presidents of the confederation. That's because in Switzerland they do not have a cadre of green-eyed monsters panting after power and glory, and the adults in the room wouldn't let someone like that anywhere near the presidency.
In Switzerland, presidents are prosaic, government is simple and dull, and the people are happy.
Political essayist James Fallows, 20+ years ago, murdered thousands of helpless trees running out an argument that went to several thousand words in The Atlantic Monthly or The New Republic (don't remember which), attacking the idea of "meritocracy". He made a series of arguments that said, basically, you don't get what was intended, from a meritocratic ("mandarin") system. Instead, you get showoffs and schemers. Harvard graduates, people like that.
If I ever find his essay (I kept it), I'll re-read his conclusions to a) make sure I understood him the first time and b) remind myself what he thought the better answer would be.
By the way, I've met a few Harvard grads over the years, and the only one who, when asked a question, didn't give me a speculative look first as if examining the specimen and deciding whether and how to answer/handle me, was Taiwanese.
me too.
The problem is that we expect, indeed, demand more qualifications from plumbers and pest control professionals than we do from our elected officials.
The Constitution placed no limitations or prohibitions on a chicken, or a tortoise to be president (or senator, or representative) other than citizenship (native birth) and age. The word "human" is not mentioned once!
It was literally inconceiveable at the time that anyone would propose to promote a chicken for office. Hence no explicit prohibition.We can say the same for human beings who are functional idiots in the medical sense. Or unusually clever and intelligent, but hopelessly ignorant.
That seems to be (literally) the present standard in politics.
We can all make a list of successful candidates in this group; even beyond the obvious candidates.
Nancy Pelosi, stating with a straight face that "we must pass a law to find out what 'is in it'!"
Another retard saying that he did not read the law before passing it because even a flock of lawyers "couldn't understand it."
So I reject, preemptively, any "Don't be silly, Publius 6961," cute remarks.
The legislature in California has perhaps 20% of its members qualified to satisfy the requirements of the office. Unfortunately that is not enough prevent the stupidity, ignorance of that legislature for decades.
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.*
Or sow mindless egalitarianism, and reap chaos and destruction.
*(We all know the bible is racist, but I digress...)
But he must have been a "neighborhood activist," having had an army and all...
Just saying.
There.
Fixed it for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.