Presidential Paradox

Three United States Senators are now competing for the top job, President of the United States. Each one has tried over the past year, and will continue to prove, that they know what is best for this nation, and will be able to provide our country with the best possible guidance. They talk about how they will work hard for this country, and lead us out of all the problems we are currently in. They hype their own work ethic, brag about their accomplishments, and tout their leadership prowess. And yet, they each share one glaring flawthat no one seems to recognize.

THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANY WORK IN OVER A YEAR!

Think about it. The States of Illinois, New York, and Arizona hired the best people they could find to represent their nation in the US Congress, entrusting these three to negotiate and vote in order to return the best results for their respective states. And yet, each one of them has spent the better part of 2007, and will spend a great portion of 2008, looking for a new job. What is wrong with our nation that we entrust people to work in our governement in a 6 year term, and allow them to take 2 years off? How is this in any way benefitting Arizona, Illinois, or New York, when one person has assumed the duties assigned to two? If I tried that at my job, I'd be fired in less than a week. And yet some of the msot important people in our nation are able to do it without anyone blinking an eye.

I know it takes quite a bit of time for America to narrow down the candidates for the most important job in the country, but I can't help but think that this is a terrible way to do it. and to consider that when we do pick someone for the job, they will spend 2 of their first four years trying to keep the job they aren't even doing! This entire process has become far too drawn out, and I fail to see the benefit of losing the services of Senators for a third of their terms. Not to mention, two of them will turn out to have wasted these last two years in a losing effort, and will go back to the same job they left behind, the job they didn't value enough to actually DO!

In the case of an election such as this one, with noe incumbent, All contenders should resign to allow another person to assume their duties and actually do the job they were hired for. If they lose, they have to run to get their job back again. You can't just leave a job looking for a new one, and then lcome back when it doesn't work out.

In the Case of an incumbent election, the challenger should have to resign from any Government position, and campaigning should not start until one year to the day of the election, to limit the time the president is campaigning and not in office.