OHATCHEE, Al. November 11, 2011 — Exactly a year ago, I did a write-up of the Alabama Policy Institute Annual Dinner, which featured Fred Barnes, Kellyanne Conway and Stephen Moore.
The subjects discussed included the conservative victories in Congress and state legislatures, as well as the looming 2012 presidential election. Who would be the best candidate to both beat and succeed President Obama?
I remember Conway emphatically telling us, "Please don't rush to find a nominee. Come up with a job description for president, and force these job aspirants to audition for the role...Don't ask who can win. Ask who can lead."
I think those are wise words. But now that year 2011 is winding down, what should we ask of the candidates that we are left with now? (This column is going to be more questions than answers, I'm afraid.)
Writing about politics is no fun at this stage for me, because the dynamics are shifty and the talking points fleeting. It's frustrating to write articles that end up frozen in time, losing relevancy in a matter of weeks or months. It's entirely too easy to wind up a false prophet.
Thus, I'll begin looking at this broadly. Like S.E. Cupp said months ago, we need to start "whittling down the field".
In so doing, we should consider the U.S. government as a whole - not just the White House. Perhaps the presidential candidates we have now are smart and good leaders, but is the White House where they need to be?
Consider Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN). I think she's wonderful, but something has bothered me about her presidential run from the beginning. Aside from Ann Coulter’s recurring observation about the difficulty of winning the White House from the House of Representatives (James Garfield was the last to do so), there is another aspect of Congress that needs to be considered while pondering Bachmann’s presidential candidacy.
Bachmann first won her House seat in 2006, a bad midterm election year for Republicans. She was reelected in 2008, yet another bad year for Republicans. Finally, she won reelection in 2010, an epic year for conservatives that gave Republicans a majority in the House.
Now Bachmann – who is experienced in tax law – has a better opportunity to influence policy as an excellent legislator. Why is she trying to jump from the legislative branch to the executive branch now (and leave the door open for who-knows-what might come out of Minnesota next)?
James Madison once observed that "[i]n a republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates," (Federalist No. 51) hence the reason for a bicameral legislature along with other checks and balances. The legislature is the first branch addressed in the U.S. Constitution.
In short, keeping good leaders in Congress is a pretty big deal - especially if you count on the next president accomplishing everything these GOP candidates claim they can accomplish.
If Bachmann decides to leave the presidential race, that doesn't make her a loser, in my opinion.
To an extent, the same goes for Representative Ron Paul (R-TX). True, he has had his chance in Congress awhile longer than Bachmann has, but with the possible exception of a position in the next GOP Cabinet (Treasury Secretary, anyone?), we might need him in the legislative branch more than the executive branch too.
I also don’t think Americans (particularly the conservative base) would accept Paul as commander-in-chief because of his narrow foreign policy.
Speaking of foreign policy...why should the rather moderate Jon Huntsman have left his position as ambassador to China in order to pursue the presidency?
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is the resident GOP professor - a savvy debater and lecturer with much to contribute. But like most anyone with lots of political experience, he also has lots of baggage (personal as well as political, unfortunately). I wouldn't be surprised to see him as a vice presidential candidate, but I don't expect him to earn the top of the ticket.
Herman Cain has the cleanest slate to send to Washington by virtue of the fact that he hasn't held political office before and isn't afraid to think outside the box. Ironically, this great strength is also his weakness, considering the fact that many conservatives are getting irritated with the way his scrappy campaign staff has handled some things.
Then we have Mitt Romney - the default candidate that many conservatives are getting disgusted with the more they think about him - and Rick Perry, the federalist superstar who has a habit of stumbling through debates.
(For the moment, Rick Santorum and Gary Johnson have practically dropped off the radar.)
There is still time - and perhaps too many debates - to continue this primary refining process. But the candidates and voters should be cross-examining with this fundamental question in mind:
Who is really most fit for the role of America's chief executive and commander-in-chief at this moment in history?
Like Sarah Palin said last month, "We all have a role to play in this." There is more to reforming America than the presidency.
Which of the Republican candidates are wasting time coveting the presidential role instead of seeking the role they're meant to play?
Amanda Read is an unconventional scholar, a Southerner without an accent, a Christian who hasn’t been a churchgoer in 17 years and a college student who lives with eight younger siblings. A writer and artist, she blogs at www.amandaread.com and is the author of the historical drama screenplay The Crusading Chemist. Amanda is majoring in history and minoring in political science at Troy University.
Keep up with her on Facebook at www.facebook.com/AmandaChristineRead and Twitter:
This article is the copywritten property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media.
REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
