What we really need

All of the chatter about the candidates (both parties) struck me today. The process is skewed, at best. We, the voters, are 'hiring' a new (fill in the blank) but for the purposes of today's note, let's use President. Unlike any other hiring process, we let the prospective employee tell us what he or she will do if we give her or him the job. Does that strike you as being a little backasswards?
By anyone's count, a substantial majority of us feel that the country is going in the wrong direction. The people we have 'hired' aren't getting the job done. We need to hire some new people...and we will.
I propose that we create the job description and give it to the prospective candidates and let them tell us whether or not they can do the job. In November 2006, we hired a bunch of people that we thought could get the job done and look how wrong we were then. We need to learn from our mistakes. Using the Democratic candidates as the example, there is not one amongst them that I dislike and on a purely personal basis, I'd hire any of them for the job. But if I use my demands (ending the war and soon, reducing the budget deficit, creating a healthcare finance plan that will work AND that we can afford, repairing our image in the world) the choice gets harder. Some of them will get some of these done but it is hard to find one that will get them all done. Rather than let the candidate dictate the goal, we need to set the goals, make them clear and then elect the one person who can get the job done. Let's not make the mistake that we made in 200.