“I don’t believe Condoleezza Rice can actually play piano. Everything else she’s ever touched has been a fraud and a catastrophe, why should her alleged musical abilities be any different? Think about it. Think about any event she’s been even remotely involved in since you first heard her name. An endless string of threats and blundering and arrogant bluffs turned squalid pigf*cks. It’s not that she can’t do her job; she can’t do anything. I think when she plays piano the piano catches fire and the audience dies.”

That last sentence really got me. Mind you, I’m not entirely in agreement here. It was Secretary Rice’s State Department individuals who investigated the actions of commanders on the ground in order to find the “build and hold” strategy that Petraeus was able to utilize force-wide. Granted, the war had been thoroughly screwed up at that point, but it is one of the elements that has helped to make Iraq less of a disaster. Credit where credit is due. However, that last sentence still really gets me.

Chip Collis’ essay was insightful–an elegant saut right out of our country’s insipid left-right dichotomy. The American public needs to learn to recognize when they are dealing with leaders that are considerate, thoughtful, open-minded, as opposed to idealogues who will do anything to get their way. The problem is, they ALL claim they can reach across the aisles, but you really have to look at their record to see if they do. Kennedy surrounded himself with brilliant people and then listened to them. Bill Clinton was a good president because he knew how to do this, and he knew how to reach across the aisle when he needed to. Reagan, too. Republican members of the Illinois state-house regularly praise Obama for his knack for finding common ground. But as Collis’ assessment rightly points out, Hillary and Bush are alike in at least the respect that they wall themselves off from differing opinions and attend to their agenda blindly. Why else would have taken Hillary all this time to fire Mike Penn? Simple: loyalty before sanity.

Despite how much you agree or disagree with a candidates’ stances, the more important question is: “Will they surround themselves with advisors or parrots, and if it’s the latter, will they listen?”