Posted By:
CoreyRS.hanusI put much of the blame on the media for the paucity of qualified candidates to choose from. After all, how many of us don't have a skeleton in our closet. Yet, regardless how irrelevant that skeleton might be to a person's qualifications to be a public leader, if discovered (and how cannot it not be given that everybody in the media and opposing political camp will be looking for it) the media will blow it up into something grossly disproportionate to what it is. The person then will, in addition to being disqualifed from running, also be publicly lambasted and embarrassed. I for one would in a heartbeat rather see as President someone truly qualified to deal with the complex issues of our society -- economic, foreign policy, social, environmental, etc.) -- even though he/she has a few warts in his/her past, rather than someone squeaky clean who other than that has little to qualify him/her for the job.
In fact, to go one further, I would argue that in regard to certain aspects of the job, the more of an a-hole a person is, the more effectively he/she will be able to deal with the many a-holes he/she will come into contact with. Take foreign policy for example, who would you rather have deal with the leaders of countries where rule is predicated on oppression and thuggery (which happens to comprise most of the world), Mr. Squeaky Clean or Mr. A-Hole?