Chuck Noris

Published Date Author: , January 10th, 2012

Bookmark this category
Who should we nominate to represent the GOP in a fight against President Obama for the 2012 presidential election? I believe the name of the candidate which fills the majority of the answers in the following 10 questions (in no particular order of importance) deserves your vote.

The first five questions below (in Part 1) lean more toward who the candidate is rather than what he or she can do. The last five questions (in Part 2) lean more toward what they must be able to do rather than who they are.

Based upon the characters and track records of the GOP candidates:

10) Who is most committed to follow and lead by the U.S. Constitution?

I’m not talking about someone with merely a verbal commitment to the Constitution, but one who actively quotes and supports it. It’s one thing to take the presidential oath of office, but who has the strongest track record of citing and standing by the Constitution?

James Madison, America’s fourth president and one regarded as the “Father of the Constitution,” explained: “The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.”

Strictly following the Constitution includes restoring a Tenth Amendment balance of power to our states and shifting solutions away from an “only government” savior (to which Obama committed early in his presidency) to encouraging local communities, agencies and even neighborhoods across our nation to rally together, strategize and resurrect the Golden Rule in caring for their own, just as it was done in America’s heydays.

9) Who has the greatest leadership ability to rally, unify and mobilize citizens across political and societal spectrums?

Everything rises or falls on leadership. It’s true for a family, company or nation, and I believe it is a particularly quintessential ingredient in our next president because of the increasing political and social divisions (including class warfare) across our land and around our world.

I believe our country was duped to interpret our current president’s charisma as reflecting leadership abilities. Pitting political parties and polarizing social classes against one another isn’t leadership.

In November 2008, I warned of this leadership crisis and peril if Obama was elected in an column I wrote titled, “A personality profile of Obama’s leadership,” based upon a professional personality profile conducted by a Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict, which concluded Obama was a conciliating people pleaser.

As I wrote then, “It’s one thing to be political, but it’s quite another to be a chronic people pleaser under pressure. Swaying [others] based on political expediency is not a leadership quality we need in tough times. Sooner or later, that character flaw will bite Obama big-time – and us, too, if we elect him president.”

I believe America’s woes have been exacerbated by Obama’s inexperience and lack of executive leadership, and our country and world are suffering for it.

More than ever, we need a new president who has a proven track record to rally a team of Washington rivals as well as a diversified American public and world. As I’ve written extensively in a previous column, I firmly believe that the candidate who extends a public invitation to all his GOP rivals to be a part of the same administration could start a chain reaction leading to their nomination and election?

8) Who has the best working comprehension of America?

John Adams, America’s second president, said, “I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy.”

I believe a mastery of American history and politics is a must for any president, for it is a record of how others have led the country since its founding. To the degree to which one comprehends America’s ebbs and flows parallels one’s proficiency to lead. As the adage goes, if one doesn’t know history, he or she is doomed to repeat its mistakes.

Again, Thomas Jefferson offered a wise word here: “History by apprising [citizens] of the past will enable them to judge of the future; it will avail them of the experience of other times and other nations; it will qualify them as judges of the actions and designs of men; it will enable them to know ambition under every disguise it may assume; and knowing it, to defeat its views.”

Nothing could be more essential for this next president than a working knowledge of the past. The same is true for his or her knowledge of other nations, as it will reflect upon how they move America’s chess pieces on a global scale.

7) Who has the best ability to influence a volatile world away from its brink of destruction?

These are dangerous times. Mexican cartels are clashing at our borders. Global terrorists have taken their jihad to the borderless Internet. China has become the new global super power. European and global markets are bouncing up and down. Arab springs have sprung unrest across the Middle East. Syria is in utter turmoil. Countries like Egypt, Libya and now North Korea have unclear futures. Iran is determined to add nuclear energy among its arsenal, heightening its strained relations with the West. America is still in a war with extremists in Afghanistan. We’re also in a new warless battle to quell violent uprisings back in Iraq, etc.

Now is not the time for political novices, wimps or sheepish patriots in the Oval Office. More than ever, we need a profoundly wise Thomas Jefferson, who moved along a flailing new republic while maneuvering a war with Tripoli, or a Ronald Reagan, who was savvy and tough enough to build up the economy while toppling the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall.

6) Who has clear and present moral fortitude?

Samuel Adams was correct when he wrote in his essay in The Public Advertiser, 1749, “Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”

For our founders, moral fortitude was dependent upon the liberties of religion, not the laws of men. For example, John Adams, our second president, explained: “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Benjamin Franklin put it this way: “That wise men have in all ages thought government necessary for the good of mankind; and, that wise governments have always thought religion necessary for the well ordering and well-being of society, and accordingly have been ever careful to encourage and protect the ministers of it, paying them the highest public honours, that their doctrines might thereby meet with the greater respect among the common people.”

Temptations are abundant when power is combined with position, and none is greater than the presidency. That is why it is mandatory that the next occupant of the White House demonstrate a life mastery over themself and the wiles of evil and corruption.

That doesn’t mean the next president is perfect, but definitely a moral model, including the ability to admit faults and learn from mistakes.

I believe what George Washington said: “[A] good moral character is the first essential in a man.” But I also believe what Washington also said: “We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals.”

While character is preeminent to leadership, we must never penalize one’s past from progressing forward into a forgiven and fruitful future; lest we forget that some of the greatest national leaders in human history, like King David of Israel, committed heinous acts of immorality.

The dilemma for many in this race for the GOP nomination is discerning whether to choose the unblemished and relatively inexperienced youthful shepherd in the field or the veteran of war who battled Goliath long ago but slung mud on his face when doing so.

Whom should we nominate to represent the GOP in a fight against President Obama for the 2012 presidential election? I believe the name of the candidate who fills the majority of the answers in 10 questions (in no particular order of importance) deserves your vote.

Last week in Part 1, I discussed the first five questions, which leaned more toward who the candidate is more than what he or she can do. (If you haven’t, read those before proceeding.) The last five questions here (in Part 2) lean more toward what they are able to do than who they are.

Based upon the characters and track records of the GOP candidates:

5) Who has the best chance of beating President Barack Obama (in and outside of debates)?

The reason this question is so critical is because Rome is burning. Our republic is being “fundamentally transformed” by the agents of progressivism, chief among whom is their leader in the White House. There is nothing more critical than providing the best and most worthy contender to enter the ring against Obama, because four more years of his reign will certainly bring the kiss of death to so much that we have held so dear.

Whomever competes as the GOP nominee against President Obama rivals one of the toughest competitors in presidential history, not only in his charisma and oratory ability but also by the comprehensive backing of the mainstream media and a billion-dollar campaign.

It is imperative Obama’s GOP rival be very polished and articulate, possess a comprehensive knowledge of America and the world, including societal and political ills as well as historical solutions, in addition to a quick recall of Obama’s failed solutions and promises, etc.

As Thomas Jefferson once said, “I should consider the speeches of Livy, Sallust, and Tacitus, as preeminent specimens of logic, taste and that sententious brevity which, using not a word to spare, leaves not a moment for inattention to the hearer. Amplification is the vice of modern oratory.”

4) Who has the best abilities to lead Washington politics and politicians?

Leading in Washington is unlike leading in any other setting, political or otherwise. That is why I believe we need to be careful about how we throw around the pejorative term “insider.”

Is all Washington experience negative “insider” politics? Absolutely not. To be sure, one man’s “insider” is another man’s “expert.” (Would we not prefer an “insider” in the armed services to lead us into war? Would anyone want a surgeon operating on him or her who hasn’t had “insider” experience?)

While desiring a presidential “outsider” to Washington has its appeal, where does U.S. capital inexperience crossover to ineptness? And aren’t most Washington “outsiders” at least somewhat restricted by their inexperience and unfamiliarity of the vast web of capitol workings? To be sure, as Robert Frost once said, “You can be a rank insider as well as a rank outsider.”

Though I know longevity in Washington has a tendency to create bad politicians, we must remember that it also has the ability to refine its good ones. What’s critical here is not only that the next president has a great working knowledge of Washington but also superior experience in getting things done there. Without that, he or she will spend a large part of the first term in office just learning the ropes and spinning their Washington wheels mastering the maze.

3) Who has the best plan and leadership ability to restore America’s economy?

It’s only half the battle that America’s next president has a better economic plan than other candidates and the current administration, under whom the national debt has almost doubled at twice the speed than under President George W. Bush to more than $15 trillion and during which time the unemployment rate, while better than a year ago, has remained at a recession-level 8.5 percent (up from 7.8 percent when Obama took office).

The other half of the economic battle for the next president is that he or she must have much greater leadership skills to see his or her economic plan to acceptance and fruition. William Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services, recently criticized the White House, saying it has “often failed to lead with enough vigor to overcome political obstacles.”

2) Who is the most fiscally prudent?

This question is related to the former one, but I believe deserves solo attention because of the escalating crisis of our national debt and spending. America is drowning in debt, and Washington is on a runaway spending spree. President Obama again wants to increase the national debt ceiling another trillion dollars?

As George Washington said, “To contract new debts is not the way to pay for old ones.” Or as Thomas Jefferson said, “The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” On his first campaign trail, even Obama himself called that type of fiscal management “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic.”

We need to ask which candidate has the best track record for making fiscally prudent decisions, cutting where it needs be and (re)allocating investments to bring about the greatest yields. It’s one thing to know what to cut, but quite another to know where to invest. Solvency comes primarily from the former and growth from the latter. Our next president has to have a great track record for both.

1) Who has demonstrated the highest regard for human life?

More than a nation, our president leads one of the largest masses of human beings on the planet, as well as maintaining influence over the remaining global majority. Therefore, it is imperative that he or she has an impeccably high view and value of humanity.

The Declaration of Independence affirms the value and rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for all human beings – something further secured in our Bill of Rights. How one values human life is reflected in ones’ adherence to America’s founding tenets, as well as how one has treated others and where they stand on such issues as abortion, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia, civil rights and capital punishment.

No more critical of an issue is at the heart of government than placing ultimate worth and preservation on human life. As Thomas Jefferson again so eloquently put it, “The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.” And, therefore, it is the first and only legitimate object of good leadership, too.

For further study of where each GOP candidate stands on these and other critical issues, check out the Family Resource Council’s Voter Guide and this “Know the Candidate” chart.


No comments as yet.

Leave Your Comment  Leave a comment

All fields marked with "*" are required.