In August, when Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney picked his running mate, he showed his hand.  Potential VP Marco Rubio, a man of Cuban descent and therefore thought to be able to garner a share of the coveted Hispanic vote, was the politically expedient choice, and Tim Pawlenty was seen as the safe choice.  Instead, to the surprise of many and shock of a few, Mr. Romney tapped Paul Ryan, a representative from Wisconsin who has authored several budgets that seriously address Medicare – a sacred entitlement that politicians are loathe to challenge.

Opponents of the Ryan plan argue that it will end Medicare as we know it.  Clearly, Mr. Romney is more worried about the end of America as we know it.  Romney/Ryan are concerned that America is quickly reaching Greece’s debt-to-GDP ratio.  (To see the numbers for yourself google “America’s debt to GDP ratio.”) The numbers may or may not make sense to you, but what should be perfectly clear as well as very scary, are the images you see on your television screen of the riots in Athens because the Greek government has promised more than it can deliver. American politicians having been making promises that they can’t keep for too long.  Romney’s pick of Ryan sent a signal to voters that there is no way around our budget woes without taking on Medicare.  Truth number one: Romney is prepared to lead on hard problems that won’t be popular with voters, but may be necessary to save America from going broke.

Truth number two:  Mitt Romney works well with others.  Mr. Romney as the Republican governor of very liberal Massachusetts passed his signature health-care legislation with a legislator that was over 80% Democrats.  By comparison, President Obama pushed his health-care bill through Congress without a single Republican vote, thus creating an even greater tension between the two parties and major gridlock.

Truth number three:  Mr. Romney is always prepared.  If you are one of the 67 million people who watched the presidential debate you are aware of this.  There are numerous accounts from Romney’s Harvard classmates extolling his extraordinary focus and work ethic.   Can you imagine if instead of a debate to be re-elected President (no small thing!), Mr. Obama had shown up at a meeting with an important head of state so unprepared?

Further revealing the truth of Mr. Romney’s character are two anecdotal stories that have not been widely distributed by the media, but have been solidly verified.

The first is from Romney’s time at Bain.  Mr. Romney got word that a colleague’s daughter had gone missing.  Upon hearing such horrible news you would expect the President of a large financial corporation like Bain to step out of his meeting to call the distressed colleague and offer supportive words while directing his assistant to send flowers or a basket of fruit to the home.  Not Mitt!  Romney went into full crisis mode shutting down the office for business as usual and putting people to work posting flyers, making phone calls and sectioning the city into a grid for searching.  There are two truths here:  Mitt Romney is not a man who shrinks from a crisis and his compassion extends beyond words to actions.  Not to mention, this story shatters the myth put forth by his opponents that Romney is a man out of touch with humanity and solely focused on profits.

The second story took place over the summer when Mr. Romney was recording a campaign advertisement in a staffer’s back yard.  He was asked to wait in the garage, out of the sun, while they prepared the shot.  While waiting, Mr. Romney not only organized the garage he also swept it out.  Most people won’t clean out their own garages much less someone else’s.

Mitt Romney’s opposition is pressing the notion that he’s not like you and me.  Truth number six:  HE’s NOT!  He’s nothing like you and me.  He doesn’t drink, smoke or swear; he has been married to the same woman for forty-plus years with no hint of scandal (he glows in her presence!); he’s never tried drugs, but as a pastor of his church he helped counsel people with drug problems; he got a double degree in graduate school (a law degree and a business degree simultaneously) while making top grades; he sees a mess and he fixes it even when it’s in someone else’s; and, maybe the most surprising of all, he’d rather work for his money than have it handed to him — he gave away his inheritance.

The truth is maybe we shouldn’t elect Mitt Romney president — maybe we should just clone him.             

The Iowa caucuses are the official start of the Republican primary season. For months we’ve had the chance to meet the candidates through a series of televised debates. The press has boiled the choice down to Mitt Romney or the non-Romney candidate du jour.

Michele Bachmann started strong with her Iowa Straw Poll win but was soon upstaged when the governor of Texas threw his ten-gallon hat into the ring. But, oops, it turns out Rick Perry is all hat and no cattle. Everyone wanted to like Herman Cain but it seems his libido got in the way of his good judgment.  Libertarian-leaning Ron Paul will make you love him with one answer and be terrified of him with the next. Newt Gingrich, who has been a brilliant debater, surged when Cain suspended his campaign and Perry self-destructed. But, alas, Mr. Gingrich’s past relationships — marital infidelities and Fannie & Freddie — left voters wondering about the strength of his character. Rick Santorum, a solid debater and tenacious, was rewarded with a timely surge just before the caucuses but is probably too conservative for independent voters in the general election. Jon Huntsman, the former ambassador to China and governor of Utah, is popular with independents but has barely made a blip on the primary screen. (Mr. Huntsman’s inability to gain any traction is unfortunate; he has bold ideas and a pragmatic sensibility.) This leaves Mitt Romney as the most viable choice to top the republican ticket.

Mr. Romney has shown intelligence and deftness time and time again on the debate floor and is squeaky clean in his personal life, yet America hesitates and Mr. Romney’s poll numbers stay constant but somewhat anemic. Some say the hesitation is due to a weak Republican field. I don’t think so. Every person running has helped define the type of leader that America needs, and voters have been paying attention — the many debates have been widely watched.  If voters have been slow to fall in love with Romney it may be  because they are a little “gun -shy” after electing Mr. Obama — another great debater from Harvard Law, but unable thus far to get America back on track.

What separates Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney as leaders? In a word: Experience. Mr. Obama was a community organizer, briefly a state legislator, and even more briefly a U.S. Senator before becoming President. Mr. Romney graduated from Harvard with a law degree and a business degree, went to work for a management consulting company, later co-founded and ran a private equity investment firm, took over the financially troubled 2002 Olympic games turning them into a success, and from 2003 until 2007 was the republican governor of the very “blue” state of Massachusetts. Mr. Romney has been demonized for making a lot of money but if you look closely at his resume you will notice that he has also been very successful in crisis management.

So, why is this election so important? Where do I start? Unemployment is incredibly high, Europe is going broke and America is not far behind. Almost half of every dollar we borrow goes to pay the interest on our debt. Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare) are unsustainable and will either go broke or break our children and grandchildren if they aren’t reformed. There is an Arab revolution taking place. Iran is run by a crazy man that will soon have a nuclear weapon and North Korea, which already has nuclear weapons, just lost their long-time dictator and the country is now being run by his son that we know nothing about. We are nearing crisis mode.

In the mid-term elections Republican candidates led by Tea Party types were wildly successful, Obama dug in his heels, became divisive, resorted to class warfare and America suffers.

Mr. Romney will never be loved by the far left or the far right and the press doesn’t find him exciting. There are however, plenty of people who appreciate his success in working with a democratic legislature (as a republican governor!) to move his state forward, and his business background that allows him to seek solutions to problems without letting ideology get in the way. Mr. Romney is not a dreamer he’s a doer. He’s not a cool uncle that will give you a beer and take you to a concert — he’s the dad that will make you take your medicine (and it’s not going to taste good) but you will feel better the next day, not hungover.

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.

Does character count in politics? We want our politicians to be smart — we even like them tall– but do we care if they are faithful to their families? Philandering by politicians has been around forever, but if George Washington cheated on Martha, the whole country didn’t find out about it. Now, with Facebook, Twitter, and cable news, cheaters are not only found out, the news spreads across the country within minutes. We, as voters, are privy to information that we can act on — should we?

The recently married Mr. Weiner, after adamantly denying any wrong doing, admitted yesterday that he had sent messages and photos “explicit in nature” to six women he had met online over the past three years via Twitter, Facebook and Email. One of the pictures appears to be of a shirtless Mr. Weiner in his office. While he is not accused of breaking any laws, using government computers or phones  to transmit explicit pictures would be an ethics violation. Mr. Weiner has said that he won’t step down. The people of New York’s ninth district will have to decide if Mr. Weiner engaging in online dalliances is worth their tax dollars, and they will have to ask themselves this: Do I tacitly condone Mr. Weiner’s behavior by giving him my vote?

Meeting with the press last week after his indictment, John Edwards said that he was so sorry for the pain that he had caused his family, but that he had not done anything illegal. I’m betting that he did. He lied about the affair he had with his campaign videographer and he lied about the child from that affair being his. Why should we believe him when he says that he did not do anything illegal? Again, a politician that pushes the boundaries, crossing the line morally, pushing the envelop legally and lying until he is totally surrounded.

Juxtaposed to Mr. Weiner and Mr. Edwards, Mitt Romney stood on a podium at a farm in New Hampshire and announced that he would be running for president; of course, his wife of forty-plus years was with him. Mr. Romney was governor of Massachusetts for four years, ran for president in 2008, and has continued to be is the spotlight, yet there is no hint of scandal around him. He is often described as “squeaky clean” and even held his wife’s hand when the two were on The View. Mr. Romney, a devout Mormon, doesn’t drink, doesn’t smoke and by all accounts, doesn’t fool around. Watching Mitt and Ann Romney last week amid the Edwards and Weiner scandals was like a breath of fresh air.

The movies The Hangover part 1 and 2 went from funny to obscene, music has gone from suggestive to explicit, and politicians aren’t expected to be role models anymore. Raising kids has gone from hard to near impossible. Character has become obsolete and I’m truly getting worried. America is suffering from a character deficit, as well as a fiscal deficit.

John Edwards’ political career is over. Anthony Weiner and Mitt Romney will both be seeking offices next year. I hope that when Americans go to the polls they cast their votes for character. We need more Mitts and less Weiners.