All the President-Elect's Men

What defines a presidential candidate? I'm sure there are many answers to that question. It could be his campaign promises and his party platform. It could be his voting record as a senator or a representative, his resume (sure, and a Libertarian might get elected President in November!), or his position on gay marriage. In this upcoming election, abortion is a hot topic, as is the war in Iraq. Apparently, other important metrics for a presidential candidate include how he speaks to his young children, what drugs he's done in the last thirty years, and who he's slept with other than his wife.

Because I like to state my opinion as if it is fact (which it is in my world), I'm going to tell you that all of the above is a bunch of equine feces. The President is a figurehead, not unlike the Queen of England. Yes, his signature is what makes a bill into a law, but do you really think he walks into the Oval Office in the morning and looks at a bunch of bills and signs them? No. A whole office building full of people has looked at that bill and told him whether or not to sign it. It's a lot like the office of a consulting engineer. A field tech did all the field work, and a junior staff level person wrote the report. A drafter prepared all the figures. A secretary formatted and bound the report. The managing engineer, the one with the authority, read it, signed it, stamped it, and took the credit. That's what the President does too.

So, back to the first question here: What defines a presidential candidate? His advisers. The Vice Presidential nominee, the cabinet, the press secretary, and even the first lady. They make the policy. The President says it out loud. He's the signatory of record. As Scott McClellan pointed out in his book, the President makes the news, not his advisers. In the Bush Administration, there are some other news makers like Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, to name a few, but that's the general idea.

Here's a question for you, as food for thought. How the hell are we supposed make an informed choice for our next President when all we know are the things in the first paragraph of this article and who the VP is going to be? Wouldn't it be nice to know who's actually going to be making the decisions around here, and choose based on that information? I don't give a damn if the President smoked weed, or even if he still does. I did. I do. I don't care who he's sleeping with. How is that any of my business? That's between the President, the first lady and their marriage counselor. And frankly, a potential President's view on the war in Iraq doesn't really matter either. Like I've said before, we're in Iraq to stay until we're in charge of the oil, whether you, I or the next President likes it or not. So in order to decide who I think should be the next President, I want to see a roster. Who's on the team?