Originally Posted by ilovetv

"Incompetent" is a relative term. All presidential contenders and winners have been "incompetent" in some way or another, because they are human beings, not God.

Many said Reagan and Clinton--two favorites in recent decades--were "incompetent" too, but I don't think they were in the overall picture.

Thinking people look at the whole picture that includes not only a technician's skill in a couple of key subjects such as economy or foreign policy, but also

- character,
- personal integrity;
- diplomacy;
- trustworthiness;
- tenacity in staying true to foundational truths and core principles;
- statesmanship enough to put the good of the nation above his own party's
grip on power, and above the demands of idealogical individuals.

Personally, I don't know how anyone can say that Romney, Gingrich, Perry or Cain (even with his latest speechlessness on Libya) are "incompetent". They have proven experience that clearly states the contrary. They are accomplished people who have personal weakness in knowledge, as anyone would.

Don't forget that major B.S. fills in a lot of knowledge gaps to make most politicians look "competent". It's usually a question of whether you want a consummate B.S. artist and pleaser, or a statesman who is humble enough to look beyond himself for advisement on the major issues.