My Remarks and Concerns about the 2012 Presidential Candidates' Campaigns

It takes a load of courage to display yourself and your ideas before your country, hoping against the odds that someone might take notice and recognize the value of your ideas, plans, and qualities for leadership. In 2008, I was one of those candidates.

I know what it feels like to sell everything you have that someone will buy; enter a race where you know that even an underdog looks like a sure-win in compared to you –only to discover that most voters will never judge your campaign based on your ideas and plans but how much you spend on your campaign and how good you look and sound on the television.

I know what it feels like to travel across the nation for an interview with State-wide and National news media, only to have them send you to their advertising department as they tell you that you are not a “viable candidate” because you are not showing high enough in the polls or because you have not generated hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions. As a candidate you know that our country need better ideas and plans to solve our problems, not more polls to tell candidates how to spin their message and to whom. As a candidate you know that our government does not need more money, just more responsible officials controlling the purse strings on the money already in hand.

I know what it feels like to finally get that interview (though not with a national outlet) only to have the interviewer try to get you to agree to words that you never spoke; only so that they might write about which tinfoil hat they think you ware.

I know what it feels like to get your hopes up when talking to voters on the campaign trail when they tell you that if you get on the ballot that they will vote for you –only to have them tell you that they will do nothing to help you get on the ballot, never even mentioning your campaign to their family or friends because they do not think you stand a chance, and that they do not want to waste their vote on you.

I know what it feels like to have some of those same voters complain to you because the candidate for whom they voted, being the lesser of evils, and got into office has not kept a single one of their promises but indeed have acted in opposition to those promises –as if the voter really expected better.

I know what it is like to go back to your home community where dozens of people ask you if you will run again, only to find that not even eight of them will attend your local meeting to organize a better campaign that does not require hundreds of millions of dollars to win.

With that said, I respect the courage these candidates possess to risk what they have to enter and pursue the Office of the President of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Now, if you are waiting for that hammer to fall and that dreaded “BUT” to follow –here it is.

But, I will not tell a candidate that I will support their campaign if I think that their plans are not solid or if I think that the candidate intends to violate the Founding Charter for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or the present Constitution for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I will tell the candidate when I think that they place too much emphasis on plans and ideas that violate the rights of others so as to advance other people’s rights, under the guise of trying to improve our country.

If I appear harsh in some of my comments, so be it. These candidates are applying for the position of managing the affairs of my country. I want to make sure that when elected, they do not ruin it.

I will “please” voters by categorizing my judgments in “pageant” form, dividing candidates into two primary groups: Statesmon, (deliberately spelled for political correctness) are candidates who risk putting forth their ideas and plans so that they can be judged on constitutionality. The other is Politician, who are candidates who merely state the obvious (such as, we need to secure our borders; we need to control government spending; etc.). Politicians do little more than tell the people what they already know.

Most importantly are the Plans to Improve My Country. The 9/11 criminal-vandals “changed” my country, but they did not improve it. The politicians in office at the time “changed” my country, but they did not improve it. Illegals are “changing” my country, but I see no improvement. The politicians in office who grant amnesty and plea-bargain with illegals are “changing” my country, but I see no improvement. Most of the politician’s reactions are worse in the long run than the criminal acts themselves.

By the way, if you tell me that “you plan to create jobs, improve the environment, or health care”, you told me that you only recognize these areas have problems. You told me nothing about your plans, and you go to the bottom of the pile as you fill the bill for a politician. However, as a Statesmon, when you tell me you intend to create jobs, you might include specifics such as a particular project in the scale of the Hoover Dam or the Interstate Highway system. Such plans would also include how you intend to fund the project and get Congressional approval for the project.

Second: How does your method of implementation for your projects stack up against to Founding Charter and the Constitution? Are you a Politician or Statesmon? The reason this is not top priority is because excellent plans may not be presented properly so as to not violate either. With a little polish, a politician might become a statemon.

Finally: Does the Candidate carry themselves as a person with authority, as a Statesmon; or wishy-washy like a Politician?

My judgments will result from the information presented to me from the candidate, websites, mail, e-mail, interviews, other internet locations, and other discovered resources.