You make a good point, Mr. K. I'd go further and make military service or the equivalent a requirement for voting. R. E. Heinlien expands on this idea in his novel "Starship Trooper." It's an easy and provoking read, highly recommended.

As Mr. Keillor included violinists among those who were focused and without bombast. I could think of a few, erm, colorful, terms for violinists, but I wouldn't stoop to sarcasm. Next the good Garrison will be suggesting that presidential candidates will have to endure a stint as poet laureate and a thru-hike of the Appalachian Trail.

A lovely and practicable idea, sir, but then what on earth would we watch Comedy Central for?

WTF? Garrison Keillor naively extolling the salvific virtues of militarism is the last thing this country needs.

No one who has earned more than $50,000 a year can be elected President. Also, no one who has ever owned a cat. No one who has ever owned a dog, either, those four-legged bags of wet-nosery. No one who has eaten Skittles, neither. And, most definitely, no one who has ever been caught* picking their nose in public.

No man or woman who has ever experienced more than two orgasms in their lifetime should be allowed to run for our highest office. Sexual release drains the precious bodily fluids and thus saps a person's strength. Over time, this condition could become permanent, and we can't have our Commander-in-Chief walking around in a endorphin-induced fog.

Now here are some things I believe a President must have in order to qualify for this high office. First - and this applies to men and women - a flowing, flaxxen beard. Nothing bespeaks wisdom like a good set of chin whiskers. In addition to hair on the face, hair on the chest is a good idea, and again, that goes for the men and the womenfolk. Another requirement, this time just for men, is the possession of a truly awe-inspiring pecker. Nothing shouts "Leadership!" like a sweaty, throbbing, ten-inch cock in a perpetual state of arousal, as long as it is not inserted into any nearby, moistened vaginas.

*Private picking permissible.

Oh Garrison, how very Robert Heinlein of you....for those not in the know, read starship troopers.

Unfortunately, having been briefly in the military myself, I can testify that there are as many imcompetent fools there as anywhere else, if not more. But then again, that was the French army and I was only a draftee. Maybe the US army is different. I doubt it, however.

We have the president we deserve. For God's sake, we elected the criminal fool twice. The first time, shame on him, but the second time, shame on us.

Jeff Villard

Waco, TX

An Army veteran and admirer of Mr. Keillor, I am moved to point out that he's laying it on a little thick. Yes, military service is often a passage to adulthood, a valuable indoctrination into citizenship, a democratizer of the imperial adolescent. I am proud of my service. The American military also indoctrinates its members into the real empire, and teaches them to commit unspeakable violence with moral detachment. Its history is punctuated with great valor, but deeply stained with the blood of the innocent. It is not a democracy, and it rewards sycophancy at least as often as it rewards merit. The military men who achieved political office have frequently failed to shine (Ulysses Grant) while many of our most celebrated presidents (Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR) never wore a uniform. In short, our military culture is a hothouse environment; it concentrates both what is admirable and what is despicable in the American spirit, but it is not the source of that spirit, nor its refuge. My advice to young people (to whom I teach mathematics on a university campus) is to discover what they love to do, then give everything they've got to it. Discipline, maturity, and focus will follow.

Mr. Keillor, as one of my American heroes, I am disappointed in your sentimental logic in proposing military service as panacea to our country's purported moral flabbiness as represented by its current selected leader. Dare I mention the other half of this population, the half that doesn't usually choose the military path, the half that is busy birthing babies, raising children and working usually low-paying jobs all in an effort to produce this country's next generation of "human capital" (as Lawrence Summers once put it) -- it takes a certain amount of steady focus to pull off that long-term feat. And let's not forget those who have intentionally opted for the single life -- would you call Ralph Nadar or Dennis Kucinich flabby, unfocused? Agreed, the best aspects of a military training can and should instill a certain poised and capable confidence, but so do many other occupations, like a stint in VISTA or Habitat for Humanity rebuilding lives and homes to our New Orleans neighbors, or nursing, firefighting, teaching, counseling. And since we're now incarcerating two million plus Americans per year, maybe that will serve as our new boot camp experience -- if you can make it in the big house, you can make it in the White House. For my money, I'd nominate Martha over Hillary any day. Now there's some steely no-nonsense poise!

Better still, how about military service on the battlefield?

SWG

Great going, Garrison! I have great respect for your progressive credentials and your intellectual power, and if you can discern an improvement in an individual's character as a result of military training, I'm willing to accept that.

Certainly it would have possibly eliminated the whining, arrogant, spoiled-brat Mama's boy who is in the process of destroying our nation as President; or if not, it might have shaped him up. And the same goes for his sneering sidekick, "had other priorities" Cheney.

I want to see more members of the corporate/social/educational/political elite serve in the military. I think it's a splendid idea to require a minimum of military service of any Presidential candidate.

Miriam Eldridge

No female presidential candidates allowed in our lifetime?

The military is not as good an option for females, the endless rape stories, and trials, the ones coming out of Iraq, and even in peace time out of the officer schools.

The hounding of senior females out of the service, by accusing them of being gay??? And of course the lack of career tracks for women, since they are not allowed in direct combat roles, when direct combat roles lead to more promotions and career opertunities.

By saying military experience is necessary, is practically the same as saying no women allowed to run for office.

After taking to female friends in the service, and military wives - I'd never, never want my daughters to join up.