By Margaret Curtis, PhD
Since the third US presidential debate fast approaches, and voters suffer fatigue from Biden’s same old “stuff”—and Candy Crowley’s answers—here come questions which require the candidates to think outside the box:
1. What did Obama organize in Chicago, aside from his campaign base?
2. What did the candidates do to prepare them to be US Commander-in-Chief?
3. How can the candidates immediately improve safety in Forbes’ list of the 10 most dangerous cities in America?
4. Should prisoners have the right to vote?
5. Can senators and congresspersons develop the courage to cut their own benefits, demonstrating their solidarity with American citizens?
6. How can the US meet the challenge of the Chinese educating students in English, while America practices social passing of students?
7. What can protect Americans from security breaches of the internet?
8. Why should women have the exclusive right to choose abortion?
9. Why are this writer’s favorite boots made in China?
10. How can religion and democracy demonstrate their compatibility in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, China, and America?
Candidates hardly need to agree on solutions to difficult challenges facing the US, but it would hearten voters to witness these individuals engaging in rigorous intellectual activity, as required by the above inquiries. By contrast, the verbal equivalent of a street brawl satisfies no one.
Only the excruciating exercise of thinking on one’s feet—without a teleprompter and without prepared questions—demonstrates competency for the highest office in the land. An American president experiences surprise after surprise, and he better be good at thinking per se, or step aside and let the better man pass him on the freeway to a better America.
** This symbol indicates a hornet's nest column.