The Paris attacks have spotlighted again, unfortunately, the impact a relatively few number of terrorists can have on the free world's comfort level with personal and national safety. In an interview, the French minister of defense indicated that France is a "testing" ground for terrorist's goals of destruction and mayhem and that France is second only to the United States in who "they" hate most.
This act brings focus on the candidates for our presidency. Currently the Republicans are getting more media coverage and my comments are in regard to the comments those candidates have made, but the Democrats are not exempt. Dan Senior, a foreign policy advisor for Republican candidate Mitt Romney in 2012 was quoted "This is a real life crisis situation, and it reminds people of the importance of having a serious person as commander-in-chief." The current candidates have uttered answers that point out lack of knowledge of the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah, mistaken belief that China is involved in the Syrian conflict, or the difference between ISIS and al Qaeda to name a few.
A candidate that I haven't paid much attention to and thought I'd take more thorough look at was John Kasich. Kasich is the current governor of Ohio and previously had spent 9 terms in the House of Representatives. During that time he was also on the Armed Forces committee for almost all 18 years. Unfortunately, some of his other positions are suspect.
So I am still searching for a candidate that will not be in training mode on foreign affairs and has a comprehensive domestic policy.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteIt definitely goes to show that just how much, or how little in this fact, potential presidential candidates actually care about events here in the United States. It seems to me that both Republicans and Democrats have used this event to propel their political careers. Nice post!
Hi!
ReplyDeleteI like how you said you are still searching for a candidate not in training mode.....this has been something I have heard numerous people complain about. It seems as though foreign affairs aren't exactly as high on the priority list as they should be when it comes to knowledge and application by those in power. As of now during the election and campaigning coverages, it only makes me believe that the candidates running (and likely even political figures of past and present), are more concerned with the number of votes they receive rather than how and when they should handle events like the recent acts of terrorism. What they don't understand is that the number of votes they receive will no doubt correlate with what they have to say and what strategies of action they plan to take in order to make change and progress in these horrific occurrences. I, too, would like to see someone come into office who has prior knowledge and experience of how to handle these types of situations, and a plan to carry out in hopes of making the world a safer place.
Roger, I enjoyed reading your post and like the tone you approach the situation with. I too share your position of continuing to research candidates, especially those who aren't getting the majority of the media hype and coverage, in order to find the one(s) that best align with my personal beliefs, and more importantly what is best for our nation and her people.
ReplyDeleteI think this election comes at an important time in relation to the events happening around the world. The candidate who presents the strongest platform and strategy for foreign policy should likely be the front runner for our next Commander-In-Chief. Unfortunately, much of the coverage has little to do with relevant issues and more about things simply to stir the pot and provoke distractions among the American people.
One of the chief responsibilities as President is being in charge of the military. Republicans Rick Perry and Lindsey Graham, as well as Democrat Jim Webb, are the only candidates who have military experience to reflect upon should they win the election. Tying back to your original point of foreign affairs, another top responsibility of the President is that he/she serves as the Chief Diplomat. While I don't believe it's a necessity to have both military and political experience to be a successful President, I would surely hope the ideal candidate has at least one of the two, if not both. For guys like Carson and Trump, once the charade is up and the real, tough questions are asked, they'll fold up like a paperback book in the wind.
Campaigning for President is essentially one really long job interview. Hopefully, as time progresses, people will take the approach you have mentioned and do their own research in order to formulate their own opinions, rather than being so agreeable with what the media spoon feeds us.
Its so refreshing to be reminded that there are still other voters out there who will take the time to look into candidates as a whole, instead of picking one topic and deciding who gets their vote. While there are many "hot" controversial political topics like gun laws, gay marriage, or legalizing marijuana, you would think/hope that more people would be focusing on what the candidates say in situations like this that actually affect the safety of the country as a whole.
ReplyDelete