"We, the People," stated that our organization currently had an opening for a chief executive officer. After several dozen candidates, we are left with two – maybe not the two many of us originally wanted, but these are the two that have not been "voted off the island."
Only in politics will job candidates dictate to the employer how they will change the organization, versus the organization presenting a clear job description based upon vision of the organization and evaluating the candidate using time-honored techniques such as experience, education, references and certifications. It is interesting to note that a great deal of the drama and rancor might have been avoided had We, the People, utilized hiring techniques well-proven in the business world.
Should the hiring process be conducted in a job interview format, it would certainly begin by stating the minimum qualifications for the job, as specified in Article II of the U.S. Constitution:
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.
Based on that stipulation, the first thing a candidate for president must do is to provide unquestionable proof of meeting the initial requirement. In any other corporate job, an applicant must present a valid proof of identification such as a driver's license or, in this case, a birth certificate. In the 2008 election, this basic qualification still remains clouded for Sen. Obama.
The job description itself is detailed in Article II, Sections 2 and 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
Of those duties, the first would seem to necessitate some level of experience in working with the United States military. Sen. McCain certainly brings experience and a nationwide credibility to that task. Sen. Obama has no experience with the military. The other tasks in that paragraph reflect character and leadership skills. The character and leadership skills of McCain are public knowledge, woven into the fabric of our modern history. The character test of Obama, it seems, suffers under his constant need to defend longtime associations and relationships with people who feel and act hatefully toward the United States … and themselves are of poor character. It seems inappropriate for the first duty of a president to need to exercise his ability to grant reprieves or pardons for his own associates.
Other duties of this job are as follows:
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.
These duties call for a candidate who can effectively build coalitions with at least two-thirds of the Senate. Since the Constitution does not state that the Senate must be composed of a two-thirds majority from one party, the implication is that the president must reach across party lines to build consensus for the appointments and other tasks specified. This means that We, the People, want a team player. Sen. McCain brings a lengthy history of successful bipartisan accomplishments. Sen. Obama's history of bipartisanship is virtually non-existent.
In Section 3, the rest of the president's duties are listed:
He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.
These duties require communication skills, leadership and judgment. Sen. Obama certainly possesses communication skills. He has shown leadership skills in crafting a strong presidential campaign, but his judgment qualifications are called into question by both his own views of military and economic events, as well as his long-time associations with individuals of serious questionable judgment. His less than candid responses to those who questioned his judgment also reflect poor judgment. Using "spin" to paint the truth as something else does not instill confidence in his judgment and character.
Barring anything other than a fraudulent birth certificate, both men meet the minimum qualifications needed to serve as president of the United States. So, when evaluating the resume of these two men, the decision rests on the candidates' job experience, team skills and character. In a corporate job interview, references would be called upon to help with the decision-making process. In addition to friends, family and possibly a pastor, other employers and respected community leaders are often sought out for background information as to the candidate. If the friends and pastor of Sen. Obama were sought out, the information gathered may produce less than desirable references.
An additional decision-making tool in a corporate job interview is to consider how competitors feel about the candidate. The question should be asked if the enemies of We, the People, are in favor of a particular candidate. Enemy support of a candidate should serve as a rather large red flag regarding the intentions of the candidate and/or the enemy.
The best candidate may not have applied for the job, but We, the People, the organization of the United States of America, must make a hiring decision. We, the People, must consider the position, reference the job description serving the organization for more than two centuries, evaluate the experience and qualifications of the candidate – and then choose. If the shareholders of a major corporation choose a less-qualified candidate simply because they hate the former CEO, then emotion picks the candidate. Emotion cannot, must not, have anything to do with the decision. We, the People, are hiring an employee, not a savior.
This is not simply our privilege as citizens of this great country. It is our responsibility and sacred trust as members of the greatest organization for democracy in the history of the world. With this responsibility in mind, my decision is clear: I choose John McCain.
