Welcome to Chris Brady's Blog

"The only way to be happy, is to give happy."

Recent Posts:

There was a charming environment in the late eighteenth century elections that occurred in the young United States. It was thought that anyone who would actively seek Presidential office was unworthy to serve in the position. This was because "ambition" was counter to the "serving and selflessness" that was considered a prerequisite for statesmanship. As a result, both Washington and Adams refrained from campaigning in any way, only casually asknowledging that they were being considered for the position. Jefferson, always a split personality, took his "disinteredness" to the point of deception, taking the preposterous posture of acting surprised when he was chosen! Since Jefferson and Madison ushered our country into the age of political parties, that chivalrous moment is gone forever.

The concept was barely workable in the age of America’s founders, and it would certainly be hard to imagine today. But the precept remains an intriquing one. I was thinking of this recently as I reviewed the list of candidates vying for our attention and affection like so many puppies in a litter trying to be the one next selected for purchase. In the case of a few of the candidates, their ambition for personal glory and their obvious lust for power are frightening.

Don’t get me wrong. After all, co-author Orrin Woodward and myself established "hunger" as a fundamental starting point for any would-be leader. But hunger differs from "ambition." The difference might appear to be subtle, but it is enormous in practice. Hunger comes from the tension that a God-given vision to assault the status quo generates. Ambition is the desire for personal gain, power, status, fame, fortune, and control. One is selfless and for the sake of a grander purpose which always includes God and serving others, the other is selfish and for the sake of a grander self which rarely includes God (unless as a cover) and uses others.

Orrin Woodward’s blog has generated many great discussions about the Presidential candidates and how to consider which one deserves to be elected. I would suggest everyone interested in this topic to read through it all. And then throw this one last log on the fire, asking: "Why, exactly, does each of these people want this position? Which of these is most driven by a true vision of service to others, self-sacrifice, and statesmanship? Which of them is truly consumed by a God-given vision of a cause they have no choice but to serve?" These are all really the same question asked in different ways. The negative way to ask it, perhaps, would be: "Which of them wears their ambition with the least amount of ugly?"

What are your thoughts on the "ambition" showing on the faces and in the actions of these candidates?

Posted in Current Affairs

13 responses to ““Ambition” Wears Ugly”

dean clouse

January 21, 2008

Of that bunch of misfits (democrats picture), I would say the least ugly would have to be Kucinich. Yes, Dean actually said that. I did not say I have ever agreed with the guy, but he is the only one in that picture who has always stood on the same ground. Everyone else is for the war in front of the vets and against the war in front of the peaceniks, etc. ad nauseum. As far as the picture of the republicans, I believe many of them are actually running for the sake of God and Country, with the possible exception of Ron Paul–I believe he is an atheist, so he is just doing it for the sake of Country. The two I really wanted to win have already dropped out (Hunter and Keyes, even though I did not know Keyes was running until he popped into a debate). If you want to see your definition of ambition personified, watch the 2004 vice-presidential debate and look at Edwards closely. Wow.

LikeLike

Reply
Mark

January 21, 2008

Honestly, looking at both fields of candidates, it is hard to find one who actually doesn’t want personal fame, glory, and power.
Personally, I like Fred Thompson, but he hasn’t caught on and I think his campaign made some mistakes. There are several things that scare me about Mike Huckabee (like the smoking ban…and the fact that he often does not answer direct questions with a direct answer), but I strongly support the FairTax because it would take away power from the government.

LikeLike

Reply
Ian

January 21, 2008

well, i’m not voting for monika’s boyfriend’s wife.

LikeLike

Reply
MArk

January 21, 2008

I think if you track the lifestyle gain of many past presidents and politicians in general you will see those that started with little, gained the most financially. Those that came to the table with previous economic means did not gain as much, if at all. Sometimes the argument that a person of means is just out to help his wealthy friends is a weak argument. What gain would there be if you were only out for the power and influence? I believe those that have made a career of politics to reach their personal goals are the most scary.

LikeLike

Reply
dean clouse

January 21, 2008

Did you see the democrat complain fest, I mean blame fest, I mean Bush trashtalking fest, I mean debate tonight? What great timing for this post. It was ugly.

LikeLike

Reply
k shin

January 21, 2008

I enjoyed arguing politics.. in another life. I once was blind but now I see. I have some (deep to my core and soul)Biblical reasons of why I vote conservative Republican! Then I have some common sense free enterprise anti-communism/ socialism reasons for being a conservative republican!None of these candidates are what I am looking for but I will takeThompson,Gulliani,Huckabee,Romney and McCain in that order over any democrats. I understand Gulliani’s stance on choice and Huckabee’s great society leanings before someone tries to correct me..but alas.
I do not agree that it is such a good idea for these chats being about politics because I will try to get liberals “to the site and eventuallly see the light” as well and slowly help them. I don’t want it to be divisive on the “getgo”!Dale Carnegie–if you know what I mean..

LikeLike

Reply
Bert Fall

January 22, 2008

I’ll be honest, I don’t even really pay much attention to the Democratic. I fundamentally disagree with them so I don’t invest much time getting to know them. I have been following the Republican side since the race began and I’ve decided to cast my vote for Ron Paul. I feel he wants the position because he sees the politics and policies of this country shifting to the left. Also, he feels that government has blatently ignored the rule book, the U.S. Constitution. As President he can set a standard and enact policies that he doesn’t have the ability to do in Congress.
I believe he feels a strong desire to serve others by giving the power of government back to the people and not hording it at the top. To the best of my knowledge his is the only candidate that platforms on scaling back the powers of the executive office to what is defined by Article 2 of the Constitution. He has shown self-sacrifice in that he has served 10 terms in Congress and has never taken a government junket, he’s never voted to raise congressional pay, he’s never participated in the congressional pension program, and he has demonstrated fiscal responsibility by returning a portion of his congressional office budget back to the treasury every year. And as far as his statesmanship is concerned, I believe that is evidenced by how he has conducted himself through this entire campaign. He’s been ridiculed or excluded at debates and virtually ignored by the mainstream media yet he has always chosen to continue promoting liberty and small government instead of bickering with newscasters.
Finally, I believe that he is fulfilling a vision given to him by God. I would like to clarify an earlier post by Dean and say that Ron Paul is definitly NOT an atheist. In fact two of his brothers are pastors and he himself considered going into the church but was called to become an obstetrician and a statesman.

LikeLike

Reply
dean clouse

January 22, 2008

I apologize about Ron Paul then. Everything I have heard said he was an atheist and I have never heard any refuting of that opinion. Thank you for clearing that up. I am glad to hear that about him because he is one of the four guys I have been watching and I like him. Thank you Bert, it is appreciated.

LikeLike

Reply
Matt Foote

January 22, 2008

I have been watching this race very closely for the past year, especially in regards to the GOP candidates. I have always been a conservative voter, but this was the first year that I have actually taken time to find out more about the Democratic side as well. There is a real chance that one of them could be elected, and I feel it would be best if I am prepared as much as I can be.
As for the GOP, I must say that I like Mike Huckabee. I of course don’t agree with everything, but I tend to agree with him on most issues, particularly abortion, health care, and tax reform.
I don’t agree with Ron Paul a great deal, but I appreciate what he brings to the GOP party. I was very disappointed with how he was treated and some of the debates by many of the other candidates. I expected more from them. The biggest issue I have with Ron Paul is that I feel like he leans too far towards a Confederacy with how much authority he wants to give to the individual states, particularly in regards to abortion. He is willing to say that he believes the act of abortion to be fundamentally wrong, but is willing to give authority to a state to decide to make something legal that is morally wrong. Personally that bothers me a bit.
All-in-all it looks to be a very close race on both sides. I think it will be a turning point for our great nation one way or the other. We all should be as informed as possible to make the decision God is leading each of us to make.
Thank you Chris, for all your insight and leadership. You and Orrin are amazing examples of true leaders and patriots. I thank God for allowing me the opportunity to be involved with such an incredible organization.
God Bless,
Matt

LikeLike

Reply
dean clouse

January 22, 2008

Matt, I can agree with you about Ron Paul to a certain point. There are certain beliefs that are central to America, whether State or Federal such as freedom of speech, religion, press, arms, etc. However, I believe that the Federal Government has taken too much power from the individual States and have taken over many of the rights and powers that are clearly written in the Constitution to either be States responsibilities or individuals responsibilities, not to mention many of the things the Feds do goes against the Constitution. In the case of abortion, like slavery, I would agree with you that it is the part of America to eliminate it, not a state right to choose. But if I could only vote for the guy I agree with 100%, the only person I would vote for is me, and maybe Bradyman. Orrin too.

LikeLike

Reply
DaveC

January 26, 2008

Chris,
Orange suits are ugly too, and scary (think Great Pumpkin).
DaveC

LikeLike

Reply
Matt

January 30, 2008

Mitt Romney is the one that is least “ambitious.” What does he have to gain? He was basically asked to fix the olympics, then asked to run for governor of Mass. He is not running for power of glory, he is running because he feals it is duty to God, and that he honestly believes he has the experience to make conservative change. As for his stance on abortion, did you know that it is grounds for excommunication in his church to even encourage abortion? He has always been personally against it. It is so fundamental to his core beliefs. He was for years “effectively” pro-choice, which bothered me when i found it out at first. I then studied the issue and dicovered his reasoning and now have no problem with him becoming powerfully and politically,pro-life. His Church also believes in “being subject to kings, presidents, rulers and magistrates, and in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law.” His position has never been officially pro-choice, he only conceded to the law that allready was in place. When he officially changed his position, was when legislation came accross his desk, in a very blue state, HE CAME DOWN ON THE SIDE OF LIFE! He has been recognized by pro-life organizations for his RECORD. He flipped, but not flopped. As far as his religion, he is a strong Christian, who believes the constitution is litterally inspired by God. He is most capable and has the best track record. Huckabee has some good ideas, however, that is all they are, still. For example, Fair Tax. Seems to make sense (not taxing productivity), but why did he not impliment it on the state level while governor for 11 years. He has also been called a Mormon bigot because of his wisper campaign. Think that sounds harsh? He has offended the LDS church be his comments.

LikeLike

Reply
David

February 8, 2008

On Feb. 7 Mitt Romney showed that his campaign was not about self ambition but out of love for country and his willingness to sacrifice for his country.

LikeLike

Reply