So, Jack, riddle me this...

In the "all I want for Christmas is a brokered convention" thread I was asked the following question by commenter "canuk":

Perhaps the only way to separate them is to ask yourself one question, in times of war with the survival of Western Civilization at stake, who would you rather have in command. Which candidate have a proven record of actual achievements when the task was considered impossible. Who in the immediate aftermath of 911 showed strength and leadership when both were sorely needed.

You can pretty much discard most of the pretenders right there. That's the only question we really should be asking, all other issues are minor details.

I think he has a point here. So I answered him with:

General David Petraeus.

I'm genuinely interested here. If Gen. Petreaus were to suddenly become part of the GOP field, would you be excited? Would you rethink your current commitment to whichever candidate you support?

Because he's a cypher at this point, isn't he? What do we really know about the General?

Do we know his stance on illegal immigration? On tax cuts? On abortion? On any social or fiscal issue? I will admit, if there is anything out there in which he has discussed these types of issues I haven't seen it.

We do know this though: he is a career military officer who took over a difficult assignment in Iraq at a time when the majority of the Nation's political elites seemed to be determined to write off the country to the islamofascists. We know that at the request of President Bush and Vice President Cheney he developed and implemented a strategy that appears to be placing Victory in reach. We know that he has seen the enemy up close and personal, and that he continues to kick its ass.

Is this not a more significant achievement than can be claimed by any candidate of either party currently in the field?

You see, I'm not looking for a "perfect" candidate. I'm simply looking for a man or woman who measures up to the responsibilities and demands of the office.

I have no doubt that General Petraeus would.

Giuliani? Romney? Thompson? McCain? Paul? Huckabee? Clinton? Obama? Edwards?

Don't they all, to one extent or another, appear diminished by Gen. Petraeus' public accomplishments?

I think so.

And I think it's a shame that we are faced with a choice between a guy who's claim to fame is that he "saved the Winter Olympics", or a guy who's claim to fame is that he "lost a ton of weight", or a woman who wouldn't be in the discussion had she not married a future President, or a man who channels dead kids' spirits in court, or a man who was endorsed by Oprah, or a blimp flying Bircher, or a guy who's been on TV a lot, or a guy who never met a TV news anchor he wouldn't sell out his party for, or a guy who ditched his wife at a press conference.

Which is why I want a brokered convention. That allows for the "unexpected". That allows for the opportunity to draft a candidate who, whatever his or her shortcomings, doesn't seem so...small.

I have long felt that a legacy of the Clinton Administration was a diminishment of the Office of the Presidency. Between his constant scandals and his inability to do anything of substance *except Lewinski*...(ba-da-bump) for 8 years, about the only legacy Billy Jeff left was a lowering of the bar.

He lowered the standards for men and women who could be considered fit for the office. And he lowered expectations of what they would do when they got there.

That's one of the reason some of these clowns....yeah, I'm looking at you Silky...honestly believe they can be President. The expectations are so low, no one feels they are going to be laughed off stage.

I think someone like Petreaus would reverse that trend. I don't think anybody in the present field would.

And I think it's time that the trend were reversed. Bush was on to something with his "restoring honor and dignity to the White House" theme. And I think he tried. I also think history will treat him more favorably than it will Billy Jeff, so perhaps to some degree he succeeded.

So it's not so much that I want a perfect candidate. I just want one that is not as imperfect as the choices we have.

That doesn't seem like it's so much to ask for.

And if you perked up at the thought of Petraeus as a GOP nominee?

You just might agree with me.

posted by Jack M. at 11:48 PM

| Access Comments