But those things only make good candidates, not good presidents.
After thinking long and hard about where we are and where we are going, what I think America needs is a leader. President Bush's approval ratings make it impossible for him to be the leader America needs. Congress is busy passing non-binding measures to make political statements to truly lead (not that a group can ever effectively lead). Looking over the '08 field, I do not see the kind of person who can unite the country and deliver the type of principled leadership we need right now.
We need someone who can restore our hope that America's future is bright. We need someone willing to make painfully difficult decisions. We need someone who is willing to argue that the people on the other side are wrong without trying to call names or belittle them. Who is such a person? Is it McCain or Clinton? No. Is is Obama? His "wasted lives" comment (or "slip of the tongue" as he put it) would seem to suggest not. Is it Giuliani? Maybe, but I question his ability to make it through the primary and the general to even have the shot. Is it Edwards? He seems tied up in the "America is always the problem" crowd. Is it Romney? Honestly, I've not heard enough from him to say yes or no. Of the Democratic Trifecta and the GOP3, he might have the best shot, but I'm skeptical that even he could do it.
Last week I expressed my affinity for Ronald Reagan. Though I would not put him in the category of top presidents (too early to tell), what I want to see from our next president, no matter which party, is the spirit of Reagan. We need Reagan's conviction and courage to stand up and say what needs to be said, and assert the moral authority of the United States.
Reagan was frequently chastised during his time for "stoking the flames of war" with the Soviet Union. Many criticized both his Evil Empire speech and his Tear Down This Wall speech as provoking the enemy. He almost certainly did provoke them. Here is what he said to the Democratic National Committee late in his presidency regarding his "escalation" of tensions with the USSR:
If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand--the ultimatum. And what then? When Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we are retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary because by that time we will have weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he has heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he would rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin--just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace?...You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.Where is the Reagan for our time? Where is the person who will stand up and take the lead? Where is the one who will put America first and assert our position in the world as the greatest beacon of freedom and hope that he world has to offer.
To find such a person for our day would be more important than party, more important that politics. We need our Reagan, and we need him/her now.
2 comments:
While I agree that America needs a strong leader, I disagree that we need another "Reagan", type president, maybe a better choice would be a Lincoln type figure. In saying this, I am not implying that Obama is that figure, but just hoping that someone with Lincoln's leadership skills steps into the office next. Also, I am not convinced that America has the right to assert a moral authority; in fact that whole idea disturbs me. America too often still sees’ itself as a city on a hill, as the standard which all other nations must be judged; which in my opinion, we are not. Don’t get me wrong, I love living in America, but I feel like we have our own problems that need to be fixed. It's like we are trying to tell other people that they have something in their eye, while we have a whole plank of wood in ours.
But back to the point, whoever the next president is, I believe they must surround themselves with strong, moral, intelligent people of either party, and lead us through the current situation we are in with convection and humility.
--JW
JW,
A Lincoln type leader would be just as great as a Reagan one. Honest Abe kept his focus on the grand prize--preserving the country at all costs--and when the time was right asserted his position on slavery. What our cultural memory is forgetting is that Lincoln was not beloved in his time. The South seceeded upon his election, he could not get his generals to follow his orders (until Grant), and he barely (and luckily) won re-election. Nevertheless, he got a job done that, in all likelyhood, no one else could. He was truly great, and another like him would be more than welcome.
As to asserting America's moral authority, you are correct that America has its problems. There can be no question about that. At the same time, is there any other country that can, on the whole, compare to America? I submit there is not. If you take our parts in isolation, then yes, other countries will be better in certain aspects. But if you consider our committment to human rights, our legal system, our economy, our opportunity, our government structure, our respect for order, our committment to the rule of law, and the list could go on, then I am more than comfortable saying America should both act as, and continue to strive to be a shining city on a hill. A city that is, as Reagan put it, a "tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and...after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home."
Post a Comment