b322da wrote:In any event, given recent history, I suspect that Democrats, Republicans, and all the rest, for differing reasons, of course, will agree that ignorance does not disqualify one from becoming our president.
Right up even to the current office-holder....
OK, I couldn't help myself.
Here's the thing about presidents... I don't think it is possible to find a man or woman who knows all there is to know about everything there is to know anything about. Anyone who expects a president to know it all going into the office is holding unreasonable expectations. A good president is like any good executive in that, if he A) knows that he
doesn't know; and B) knows where to go or who to hire to get the answers. And it goes without saying that a good president knows the Constitution, understands the founders' original intent, and understands his own role in that framework. A
dangerous president is one who thinks he knows it all, and you can't tell him anything. He does not know what he doesn't know, and he is convinced of his own brilliance.
When my dad was in OCS during WW2, the Marine Corps taught him in leadership courses that you can recover from a bad decision if you keep your wits about you, but the inability to make
any kind of decision at all is going to get
everyone killed. The worst kind of leaders are those that make a bad decision, and then keep repeating it. That is nowhere more important than in the presidency. If a president makes a mistake, I expect him to be man enough to admit the mistake and correct it. The nation is more important than the president's ego, and a good president will respect that.
I don't think the current joker is up to the task, and he has started believing his own press. Literally "his own" press. For instance, he is not and never has been a "professor of constitutional law." That is a canard that has been repeated by the liberal press to the point where everyone left of center, and a few of the more gullible ones on the right believe it. My parents were real live legitimate Professors with a capital "P." This president was a
lecturer, a much lower position in the academic food chain, and he didn't specialize in constitutional law. He lectured on the law, and sometimes it was about constitutional law. But in academia, a lecturer is typically a grad student, maybe a PhD candidate, who gets paid a stipend to take some of the lecture burden of the professorial faculty. But that doesn't have enough caché for his bootlickers in the 4th Estate, so they are puffing the myth that he was a professor.
If he were a fundamentally honest man, he would have dispelled the rumor.... and in the long run I would have had more respect for him. But he wasn't man enough to do it, and I believe the explanation for that is that he knows as much as any critic of his administration knows that he is thin on credentials and experience, and so he goes along with the inflation of his personal history to fraudulent levels. A more confident (and qualified) candidate would have set the record straight early on.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
