Published by FRSC
Is it possible that running for President can be a greater undertaking than being the President?
Even if a candidate has tried to live a wholesome and clean life the attempts to diminish him or her because of so-called prior “bad acts” puts a bad taste in the mouth of this political junky. It smells bad. It’s call “foul-play” for a reason. Politics is often referred to as a game because it almost seems like the candidate’s team coaches are strategizing with clever trick plays. Are we watching an “end around”, or a “slant”, or a “reverse”? These are all offensive football plays—but in politics they are just plain offensive. My interest in dramatic political theatre wanes.
Candidly, I do care if a candidate is so dense that he would not remove a racial slur from the name of his vacation home (Rick Perry) because it reflects on the dignity he might bring to the white house. On the other hand, I am not interested in knowing if a candidate put his family dog in a portable kennel on top of the family car when he went on vacation (Mitt Romney). I see the former as a character flaw but the later as nick-picking.
So, what do I think about the spotlight on Herman Cain and accusations of previous employees? Well, time will tell on this one. Initially it seemed innocent and the accuser was hyperbolic. As the days go by other revelations build this into a legitimate case of concern regarding Cain’s ability to function as the “executive-in-chief”. The Oklahoma pollster who witnessed the incident is being second-guessed because he is a Rick Perry supporter. Well, one would have to ask why a political influencer who once worked closely with Herman Cain is not supporting Herman Cain. I think comments of a third party witness are worth consideration. The other element of this story that fascinates me is that the woman does not want to go public. She wants her privacy. Does this mean she doesn’t want to answer questions about the incident or that the incident truly was traumatic and she can’t deal with it? Who knows for sure, except the woman and she won’t say. We are left to judge for ourselves.
Is judging candidates something we are entitled to do? I say yes. I say all laundry, clean or dirty, is open to inspection when a person runs for President. For example, Michelle Bachman’s family business, Christian Counseling Center, offering gay reparative therapy may be a negative to some voters but to others it is quite the opposite. Either way, it is open for public assessment. She puts herself out there and we get to decide.
In the end it seems to me that we should judge based on the counsel from God. Matthew 7:16 says: “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” We also read in the New Testament, “That they do good, that they be rich in good works” (I Tim 6:18.) This tells me that when a person lives a life that shows good works (yields good fruit) whether it is in private, public, family, church, or anywhere, they are deserving of more opportunities to do good.
If there is a litmus test for a President, then that is the one I use. I want a person who does “good” within their circle of influence because they will likely do “good” when they influence my circle.
REFERENCE:
