opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris
6 Nov 2015
A New Definition for Better Living Through Chemistry

Although I have had an interest in the subjects of health and fitness my entire life, I never pretend to be … Read More.

10 Feb 2015
The Defend Freedom Tour

Patrick Henry once said, "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave."… Read More.

3 Feb 2015
Operation Digital Delta Force

I was humbled and honored to see on various global news networks how my action movies that were pirated into … Read More.

10 Questions To Find Our Next President (Part 1)


Whom should we nominate to represent the GOP in a fight against President Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election?

I believe the name of the candidate that fills the majority of the answers in the following 10 questions (in no particular order of importance) deserves your vote.

Based upon the GOP candidates' character and track records:

10) Who is most committed to follow and lead by the U.S. Constitution?

It's one thing to take the presidential oath of office, but who has the strongest track record of citing and standing by the Constitution?

James Madison, America's fourth president and regarded as the "Father of the Constitution," explained: "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."

Strictly following the Constitution includes restoring the 10th Amendment balance of power to our states and shifting solutions away from an "only government" savior (to which Obama committed early in his presidency) to encouraging local communities, agencies and neighborhoods across our nation to rally together, strategize and resurrect the golden rule in caring for their own, just as it was done in America's heyday.

9) Who has the greatest ability to rally, unify and mobilize citizens across political and societal spectrums?

Everything rises or falls on leadership, and it's the quintessential necessity in our next president because of the increasing political and social divisions (including class warfare) across our land and around our world.

I believe our country was duped to interpret our current president's charisma as leadership ability. Pitting political parties and polarizing social classes against one another isn't leadership. America's woes have been exacerbated by Obama's inexperience and lack of executive leadership, and our world also is suffering from it.

More than ever, we need a new president who has a proven track record to rally a team of Washington rivals, as well as a diversified American public and world. As I've written extensively in a previous article, I firmly believe that the candidate who extends a public invitation to all his GOP rivals to be a part of the same administration (to fight together) could start a chain reaction leading to his nomination and election.

8) Who has the best working comprehension of America?

John Adams, America's second president, said, "I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy."

I believe a mastery of American history and politics is a must for any president, for it is a record of how others have led the country since its founding. The degree to which one comprehends America's ebbs and flows parallels one's proficiency to lead.

As the adage goes, if one doesn't know history, he is doomed to repeat its mistakes.

Knowledge of other nations is essential, too, as it will determine how the next president moves America's chess pieces on a global scale.

7) Who has the best ability to influence a volatile world away from the brink of destruction?

These are dangerous times. Mexican cartels are clashing at our borders. Global terrorists have taken their jihad to the borderless Internet. China has become the new superpower. Global markets are bouncing up and down. The Arab Spring has sprung unrest across the Middle East. Syria is in utter turmoil. Egypt, Libya and now North Korea have unclear futures. Iran is determined to add nuclear energy to its arsenal, heightening its strained relations with the West. America is still in a war with extremists in Afghanistan. We're also in a new warless battle to quell violent uprisings back in Iraq.

Now is not the time for a political novice, wimp or sheepish patriot in the Oval Office. More than ever, we need a profoundly wise person like Thomas Jefferson, who moved along a flailing new republic while maneuvering a war with Tripoli, or like Ronald Reagan, who was savvy and tough enough to build up the economy while toppling the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall.

6) Who has clear and present moral fortitude?

For our Founding Fathers, moral fortitude was dependent upon the liberties of religion, not the laws of men. Samuel Adams was correct when he wrote in a 1749 essay, "Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt."

Temptations are abundant when power is combined with position, and none is greater than the presidency. That is why it is mandatory that the next occupant of the White House demonstrate a life mastery over himself and the wiles of evil and corruption.

That doesn't mean the next president must be perfect, but he must be a moral model and have the ability to admit faults and learn from mistakes.

I believe what George Washington said: "A good moral character is the first essential in a man." But I also believe this Washington quote: "We must take human nature as we find it. Perfection falls not to the share of mortals."

Character is a pre-eminent qualification for leadership, but we must never penalize one's past in such a way that prevents him from progressing forward into a forgiven and fruitful future; lest we forget, some of the greatest national leaders in human history, such as King David of Israel, committed heinous acts of immorality.

Indeed, the real dilemma for many regarding this race for the GOP nomination is discerning whether to choose the unblemished and relatively inexperienced youthful shepherd in the field or the veteran of war who battled Goliath long ago but slung mud on his own face when doing so.

Next week, I will discuss the remaining five questions, including the critical economic ones. Until then, for further study of where each GOP candidate stands on these and other critical issues, check out the Family Research Council's voter guide.

Follow Chuck Norris through his official social media sites, on Twitter @chucknorris and Facebook's "Official Chuck Norris Page." He blogs at To find out more about Chuck Norris and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at




7 Comments | Post Comment
When Britain was greatest, she had a King James Bible-believing monarch at the helm, Queen Victoria, who said to one of her clergy after listening to him preach a message on the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, "Dean Farrar, I should like to be living when Jesus comes, so that I could lay the crown of England at His feet." See Halley's Bible Handbook, Revised Edition, p 447. The kind of leader(s) that the UK and the US need are such that would perceive the Lord Jesus Christ as "the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords" 1 Timothy 6:15.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Alan O'Reilly
Tue Jan 3, 2012 4:52 AM
I like how Chuck does not endorse a candidate here, but rather provides questions we should already be asking ourselves. I"ll take it one step further and say Ron Paul exemplifies all the characteristics of these questions, especially 10 and 6. In fact, no other candidate comes close to RP in terms of sticking to the constitution and moral fortitude.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Tue Jan 3, 2012 7:28 AM
Dear Mr. Norris,

I hate to say this but our current Christian president meets all of the first five criteria that you have laid out BETTER than any of the current crop of candidates presently before us. I am expecially impressed at Obama's handling of foreign policy through Hillary Clinton. And how can we fault the Precise killing of Bin Ladin that not only assured that we had indeed got Bin Ladin, but also garnered tons of useable intelligence that has led to the killing of many other terrorists controlled by Bin Ladin, All this with no loss of American life or innocent women and children.. Then the killing of the traitor, AWL-LAKI again with no loss of American lives,,,Then the killing of Khaddaffi, again with no loss of American life. All of these Republican candidates criticized all of these policies or tried to shift credit to George W. Bush. Now our troops are safely home from Iraq and they have all criticized that accomplishment (notable exception is Ron Paul) ......I then look homeward and see DOW at 12,400 or double what it was when Obama came into office......22 straight months of job growth..... an economy no longer in the free-fall it was under Republican financial policy of George Bush...????? Why would any thinking American want to go backwards to those losing policies??? I voted for John McCain the last vote will not go to a Republican this time as none of the candidates have put forward an agenda that will bring about any POSITIVE Change. Hatred of this president simply because he is black is not a valid reason for replacing him with any of the Republicans currently in the field. Just take Newt, the GREAT PHILANDERER, for one example. You want that guy to set the example for America kids or his wife from a six year affair to be the woman in the White House. What would we call her since we sure can't call her a LADY? Need I say more.
Comment: #3
Posted by: robert lipka
Tue Jan 3, 2012 9:58 AM
Chuck Norris does not hate Obama, he dislikes him, and does not dislike him because he is black. Its amazing how easily liberals will play the race card even when it does not apply. Chuck think Obama is a bad president because his policies are driving this country into the ground and putting the burden on our children. You claim financial growth when we borrow 40 cents of every dollar we spend from China? Thats like borrowing $5 from my son, $5 from a bank and claiming I've made $10. And Obama is the worst president in terms of following the constitution and civil liberties. He bombed Libya without congressional approval. Killed Alaki when he could have easily been captured and tried. He passed the defense authorization act with allows him to gitmo any US citizen at any time for any reason. Obama is a terrible president and his civil liberties record is indefensible. I would like to see someone with some balls challenge him within his own party.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Tue Jan 3, 2012 11:15 AM
The President did not Pass the Defense Authorization bill, he signed it after it was put together by the Republican controlled House. The Republicans added that rider to the bill as a means of trying to embarrass the president. They thought htat he would not sign it with that provision in it and then they could call him weak on defense in an election year BUT OBAMA OUTSMARTED THEM BY SIGNING THE BILL AND ADDED A SIGNING STATEMENT TO THE BILL WHICH SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THE MILITARY CANNOT DETAIN AMERICAN CITIZENS WITHOUT TRIAL. The tactics of the Republicans backfired on them again. This is the gang that cant shoot straight.
Comment: #5
Posted by: robert lipka
Wed Jan 4, 2012 2:13 PM
He wanted these provisions just as much as McCain did. He rejected the bill the first time because it didn't give the president enough power. Then after he signed it he went on record saying that he signed the bill anyway dispite being provisions in it that he didn't like. So he signed the bill and is trying to dodge the blame. If there is one thing republicans and democrats can agree upon, its taking away our civil rights under the guise of "fighing terrorism". I'm not blaming Obama for signing it, any president would have. What boggles my mind is why we're not having a national discussion about these issues.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Thu Jan 5, 2012 7:00 AM
I read through all the ammendments of the defense appropriations bill I could find and did not find the one you speak of, but lets say your right. There is still enough liberty-killing things in this bill alone to make Obama a bad constitutional president. I did find a quote by Obama saying that the military powers granted go to far, but only because they infringed on his own executive powers. Nothing is as one sided as the stories you hear on MSNBC.
You can bash Bush and Gingrich all you want with no arguement from me, but I take issue with when you try to defend Obama and say his detractors must be racist. If thats the case than most of the country, including many democrats, must be rasict because very few people still remain on Obamas side right now. Its just mostly rich people and celebrities that know he's good at maintaining the status quo and keeping them in power.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Thu Jan 5, 2012 9:10 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Chuck Norris
Nov. `15
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Veronique de RugyUpdated 11 Feb 2016
Matt Towery
Matt ToweryUpdated 11 Feb 2016
Froma Harrop
Froma HarropUpdated 11 Feb 2016

12 Feb 2013 Reducing Violent Crime in the US From the Inside Out (Part 4 of 4)

7 Sep 2010 Obama: Muslim Missionary? (Part 4)

5 Aug 2008 The Forgotten