As I watched the state of the union address the other night, I couldn't help but sympathize with Obama. Not because I agree with his agenda, but thinking about what it must be like, day in, day out, with no real relief, to have every one of your ideas questioned, your personal integrity attacked and to have such dangerous friends.
I thought about how much pressure George W. Bush was under and all presidents before him. Can you imagine what it must be like to have your closest advisers made up of people who owe their loyalty to you, but who just a few years ago were complete strangers? And all the while they are in your midst, you know they could turn on you in an instant.
As the camera panned the house chamber during the speech I saw the oddest assortment of people. In fact it looked more like the annual convention of side show freaks than an assemblage of men and women we should admire and trust with our future.
Today Drudge has a number of headlines all screaming missiles aimed a Newt Gingrich. His honesty, his conservative credentials and his morality are all under attack because he is now leading in the polls. If he continues to lead it will only get worse.
What kind of people survive this kind of gauntlet? What kind of characteristics does one need to possess before entering that brutal battering? And what kind of personality emerges on the other end? In trying to answer these questions on my own I realized why the joint session of congress looked like the biggest collection of weirdos in history.
Newt had it exactly right in South Carolina. Our tolerance for this kind of selection process is what keeps the kind of people we would prefer as leaders, from ever entering the fray.
Think about that the next time you feel like giving in to the temptation to shred a candidates character. We get what we deserve.
Comments