This morning, there was much discussion on the talking heads shows about whether or not Ben Carson, in expressing reservations about having a Muslim in the White House, was baited into a “gotcha” position or if he carries some latent paranoia about Islam (I think I have the sides of the issue right).
One talking head — I think on Fox but I was making coffee so I’m not sure — said that religion shouldn’t play as much of a role in who we elect as a candidate’s demonstrated leadership skills.
Let me respectfully disagree on that point. And bear with me before you crucify me.
Given what our “lead from behind” policies have done to our standing in the world over the last 7 years, which necessarily affects whether or not world leaders are still taking our phone calls in a manner of speaking, I think neither religion nor leadership skills are as important regarding who sits in the chair in the Oval Office as one quality alone: patriotism.
Does that sound old-fashioned? Good. I mean for it to sound exactly that way.
One can be the best leader with the best ideas in the world, but if he/she doesn’t have a desire to see their country regain its footing, renew its international command of respect, rejuvenate its economy and become strong again, those ideas will ultimately run counter to a prosperous United States. It’s far too easy to negotiate good things away from something for which you have no love.
And, as Marco Rubio laid out very effectively, there’s reason to think we better start caring now if we’re likely to care at all. Things across the pond are heating up: