WHAT SHOULD WE EXPECT?

The last couple weeks I have been lost for words. The leadership crisis in government is beginning to overwhelm me. the actions of the current White House administration are becoming so unacceptable, so frustrating, so unquestionable. I cannot summon the vocabulary to address it. So maybe it’s time to turn to basics.

So what should we expect of the president? Or rather what should we expect the presidency? One of the lessons I recall in my American history class was the reluctance of Constitutional Congress to deal with leadership. They certainly did not want to set up a monarchy. That approach was not on their agenda. Their belief was that heads of state should not be anointed by the result of birth, but rather the emergence of the self-made man as a rightful leader. That first self-made man was George Washington who was expected to be the first president of the United States. With that in mind the Congress did not sweat the details as for the most part Washington had the characteristics that they desired of the leader of the country. However, they did take the time to requiring that a future president be either natural born citizen or a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted. Perhaps an expression of the inherent fear of those who are not us? wariness of foreign influence, maybe?

.

Historians have opined that since Andrew Jackson’s time American democracy has revived the oldest political institution of the elective kingship. So with this in mind we may wish to consider the observations of John Adams in 1790 after his own presidency – “ the people ought to consider the president’s office is the indispensable guardian of their rights.” Then he added… “the people cannot be too careful in the choice of their presidents.” Is there any question that It’s time to heed John Adam’ words and exercise care at the polls.

the people ought to consider the president’s office is the indispensable guardian of their rights. …

the people cannot be too careful in the choice of their presidents.

Since the adoption of the Constitution this country has been blessed with presidents that for the most part exhibited morally leadership. The only president that I know has been roundly criticized was Ulysses S Grant. – Ineffective, a drunk, unwise in his choices – and so on. However, If you read his biography you may come to a different opinion. I believe, he deserves a seat next to Lincoln. Only his impeached predecessor Andrew Johnson warrants condemnation as a president.

Even Linden B Johnson who gave us the Vietnam War, offered

Nothing makes a man come to grips more directly with his conscience then the presidency.

The burden of his responsibility literally opens up his soul. No longer can he accept matters as given, no longer can he write off hopes and needs as impossible.

While I intended this as a discussion of the presidency and historic context, I must offer a comment on our current president, or rather the New York Times did when they reported a year after his election that based on his staff’s recollections, Trump described the presidential day as one that should be played as a reality TV show where he always wins by defeating his foes. Somewhat of a novel approach but not unexpected given his history in that business.

Enough said.

What we shouldn’t expect was described by a defeated candidate for president, Thomas E Dewey who commented

a presidential candidate should not can’t divide the country up into sections and have one rule for one section and one rule for another.

The president can’t encourage people’s prejudices he has to appeal to people’s best instincts not their worst ones. That candidate may win an election, but that victory does a lot of harm to the country.

John F. Kennedy stated that “the president represents the national interest”. An interest that goes beyond a specific constituency, a region, state or nation. An interest that extends to the entire world. The vision must be global not myopic or self-serving. It is the hopes and aspirations of all the people in their pursuit of happiness that should provide the basis of presidential decisions or form the moral character of his leadership. As a leader, the president should understand that there is a linkage in the pursuit of happiness from the individual to the general populace. That concept of happiness is woven in our social fabric. Unravel those threads then ultimately all will suffer. Social well-being comprises both singularity and multiplicity. Linkage of the public welfare to the one and all must be considered in decisions affecting the national interest.

Our future president should recognize that he does not represent any one constituency but all people living in America. He does not speak for any special interest. He, or she, should attempt to rightly interpret the thoughts and desires of all Americans. If successful, he should boldly insist on that vision. With that. posture he becomes irresistible. Our nation will then be emboldened with the need for action arising out of the insight and character of a president of moral leadership.

A high expectation, a tall order, a challenge for any person that is called to a vocation of public service and seeks the office of the presidency.

But then what should you expect?