Requirements for Office

-
Amidst all this scandal here with our wonderful Governer and all the hoop-la leading up to the Obama election, I've been thinking a lot about how to evaluate candidates. It seems to be that it simply comes down to two factors (in this order):

• Character
• Competence

To me, if someone has both of those things, then I'm good to go. Of course, there's a lot packed into those two words, but it seems to me that it boils down to that.

Character: This, to me, is the most important factor. No matter how competant, how experienced, how knowledgable a candidate might be, if they don't have that Moral Restraint, then there is a problem. They will be corrupted by the office - there's almost no way around it these days. However, on the flip side, if they have a good base of character, but are light on experience, they may apply their character, the value of hard-work, the value of reaching out for help and eventually become competent. It's very difficult to learn good character, but having good character, it's possible to learn competency.

Competence: A person must have some sort of background to qualify them for office. Relevant experience, training, previous office-holder, etc. seems invaluable to the position. A basic shrewdness and wisdom (I'm loath to use the term "intelligence" as that seems so elitist to me. Just having some good 'ol brains is what I'm talking about here.) seems indispensible. However, if the person is light on this count, but stong in Character, I believe that the job won't necessarily be a total disaster, but it would be a steep challenge.

Of course, the ideal is to have a generous supply of both of those. It seems that (in Illinois, at least) we seem to be distinctly lacking in both.
-