Here’s a look at the candidates:

MICHELLE BACHMANN — The only woman in the field, Ms. Bachmann had to answer a question at the debate about a statement she made regarding wives being submissive to their husbands. Apparently, this is how Ms. Bachmann decided to become a tax account — something she wasn’t keen on but her husband thought she should do. Ms. Bachmann is not only a tax lawyer, she is also the mother of five children and 23 foster children, was a state legislator, and is currently a congresswoman and presidential candidate — there is nothing about her that makes me think submissive. However, when she tried to explain the statement away by saying that to her and her husband, submissive means respect, I wanted to laugh. This, along with some strong rhetoric on gays, has put Ms. Bachmann in an uncompromising social conservative corner. She’s considered a top tier candidate but I don’t see any subtlety, just enthusiastic talking points. Although she won the straw poll I don’t think she stands a chance against Rick Perry, another social conservative, but with executive experience and a lot of Texas swagger.

HERMAN CAIN — A successful businessman with tons of charisma, but no political experience. Americans may be tired of career politicians, but when it comes to the presidency, they generally won’t vote for someone with no political experience . I am hoping that Mr. Cain will bring his common-sense business approach to California — I’ll volunteer to run his gubernatorial campaign. Cain in 202o?

NEWT GINGRICH –I’m always impressed by just how smart Mr. Gingrich is (in an IQ sort of way). I just can’t get past the extra-marital affairs, and his Tiffany affair. It just seems to me if someone wants to appeal to conservatives they should not have repeated affairs, and if they want to make decisions about fiscal policy they should not owe Tiffany and Co. a half a million dollars. We want intelligent politicians, but it’s imperative that we make sure they have good common sense too. And, wouldn’t it be nice if they could lead by example?

JON HUNTSMAN — Some say that his service as ambassador to China for the Obama administration is a negative. I disagree. We need a president that can bring democrats and republicans together. I liked his answers at the debate — he’s in favor of a flat tax and he recognizes that cyber warfare is a threat that we have to take very seriously — not only for national security but for financial security. His experience with the Chinese could prove to be very valuable over the next eight years. Mr. Huntsman could attract the independent vote in the general election with his moderate stance on social issues, but the primary will be tough. The problem with Mr. Huntsman is that no one knows who he is. He doesn’t command attention, and with America and the world in a mess of troubles, we need a strong leader. Mr. Huntsman has the experience and proven record to add substance to the debate. It will behoove the process to have Mr. Huntsman become a strong candidate.  Make no mistake, the White House fears Romney and Huntsman more than anyone else in the field.

RON PAUL — Everything Mr. Paul says makes perfect sense to me.  Like Keynesian economics, Mr. Paul’s Libertarian viewpoint is perfectly sound in theory; however, in the real world we have to keep an eye on Iran and we probably shouldn’t completely dismantle the Fed. There is no hesitation from Mr. Paul when he is asked a question — he knows exactly where he stands and he sees no reason to politicize his answer. He doesn’t have much of a chance of winning, but this Texan is a straight shooter and he keeps us all thinking.

TIM PAWLENTY — Mr. Pawlenty dropped out of the race after a “whooping” at the debate and a third place finish in the straw poll. Mr. Pawlenty is a nice man but if Michelle Bachmann could take him down just imagine what Rick Perry would have done with him. He was smart to get out when he did.

RICK PERRY — Mr. Perry did not perform in the debate — he announced two days after, but he still managed to steal the show. Mr. Perry is an evangelical Christian conservative in the same vein as Ms. Bachmann, Mr. Pawlenty, and Mr. Santorum, but with a jobs-creating track record as governor of Texas. For Mr. Perry, the “T” in Texas stands for testosterone, and there is no one in this race that can “out Texas” him, and, he will eviscerate anyone who tries. His Texas “talk” will help him in the primary, but it could be the end of him in the general election — it sounds an awful lot like George W. Bush.

MITT ROMNEY — Mr. Romney has appeared in two of the three republican debates — winning both on substance if not on charisma. As the nominal front runner, Mr. Romney has taken hits from all sides and has done a remarkable job of staying calm, cool, and keeping his responses above the fray. Romney has run a successful business, he took over the Salt Lake City Olympics when it was in crisis and turned it into a financial success, and he was the republican governor of the very “blue” state of Massachusetts for four years. Not a bad resume’ considering America needs jobs, is in a financial crisis with its debt, and is suffering from gridlock due to partisan politics.

RICK SANTORUM– Mr. Santorum was passionate and aggressive during the debate. But, the bottom line is he had to raise his hand to get a question  and he couldn’t win his last senatorial race. One of my son’s friends posted on Facebook: “When Tim Pawlenty dropped out of the presidential race I was disappointed cause I was worried we lost the best worst candidate, thank god for Rick Santorum.”  Kind of sums it up.

BARACK OBAMA  –  His health-care bill spawned the Tea Party and his move to the middle on the Bush tax cuts and the debt-ceiling debate have enraged the left. His approval rating is a dismal 24% and yet he has no challenge from the left– AMAZING!  While Mr. Obama is well educated and has a strong vision for America (not that we all agree with it),  his lack of experience has led to a dearth of leadership. Although his approval rating is at a historic low, he is still well liked personally; ultimately, the economy will make or break him.

Mr. Daniels, the current governor of Indiana, has been very successful in keeping Indiana’s finances in the black at a time when so many states are drowning in a sea of red.  He worked his magic with good policy decisions: he privatized a toll road and implemented a health-care system where people had “skin in the game” that has saved money and been very popular.  He has managed to bring the people of Indiana together with his soft-spoken, yet wicked-smart ways.

Mr. Daniels has none of the fierce partisan rhetoric that you expect from a potential presidential candidate.  In fact, he deigned to upset the republican base by suggesting that we “call a truce” on social issues. I agree with Mr. Daniels: government’s focus should be on economics and foreign policy, not morality. Leaders should exemplify morality, not preach or legislate it.

Interestingly, the far right is littered with candidates that espouse family values while carrying on with their mistresses.  While Mr. Daniels wants to focus on economic issues and not moral ones, his personal life would make any girl’s heart flutter. He raised his four daughters after he and his wife divorced and she married another man and moved to California.  Four years later he remarried his wife. When the press speculated that Daniels wouldn’t run because his wife’s four-year hiatus from their marriage would be under scrutiny, Mr. Daniels chivalrously declared that she had kept a house in Indiana to be close to her daughters and was the “best mother any daughter could ever hope to have.”

There are other good candidates in the 2012 race: Mitt Romney has a spotless reputation as a family man and is erudite. Tim Pawlenty is from a humble blue-collar background and should be able to relate to middle-America, and Jon Huntsman is a solid family man with good foreign policy experience — all good men, but I’m sure that Mr. Daniels would have raised the level of the debate. At a time when our country, in fact the world, faces so many challenges, more intelligent and measured voices are needed.

Daniels announced he would not run saying, “I love my country, but I love my family more.” Anyone running for public office should be scrutinized to the max, but their families should be left alone; whether they’ve made mistakes or just don’t want to live under a microscope, if they aren’t running they should not be part of the debate.

Character counts — we need more leaders that exemplify good moral and ethical behavior. However, we are losing good would-be public servants because we have a 24-hour news cycle with a voracious appetite. We have to stop feeding this monster by ignoring irrelevant salacious tidbits and start demanding relevant facts presented in a civil fashion.

Pundits are saying that Tim Pawlenty is the big winner with Mitch Daniels getting out of the race. I disagree. Barack Obama is the big winner. But more importantly, America is the loser when we focus on the wrong things, or the wrong people.