"If nominated, would you run? If elected, would you serve?"

These are the questions that my fellow brother-in-arms, Alexander Hamilton (a.k.a. The Monarchist) from the American Federalist Blog, asked me in a comment to an earlier post. And in my youth, the instant response would be, "Of course!" Alas, I am a youth no longer, and I have been witness to more than two decades of politics and their affects on people. Still, these are valid questions. I take pot shots at many politicians here on The Light Bulb, so one has every reason to ask whether or not I would expose myself to a similar treatment from the Lefties.

Let's start with the second question: "If elected, would you serve?" This is the easier to answer of the two, to which my response would be an almost unqualified "Yes." I say almost because I would require two things in order to serve: a salary that allowed me to provide well for my family and a budget that provided for a capable staff. These two requirements are not always a given in public service. My own state is a case in point for the former. You might recall an earlier post where I mention the salary for a representative in the Texas legislature: $7,200. Now, mind you, I'm all for the principle of this salary. We in Texas assume that successful people will want to serve in the Legislature. We want that service to be the prize, not a large salary. However, for me personally, I could not support my family on $7,200 per year. Additionally, because I am neither a lawyer nor a public relations expert, I would require a staff consisting of lawyers and public relations experts (among others) to assist me in crafting well-reasoned, durable legislation and spreading the word about why such legislation is needed and why the liberals are wrong. But apart from those two requirements, I would gladly serve. Of course, this is all from the perspective of Mr. Light Bulb. For the fully accurate view we need to hear from . . . Mrs. Light Bulb.

And now for the first question: "If nominated, would you run?" This is a tough one. I understand that running a campaign is necessary to winning an election, unless the Governor appointed me (and, given how much I criticize him on this blog, that's very unlikely). But running a campaign, to me, is one long, debate-filled request for money—begging, if you will. I hate begging. Then there's the lies and innuendo from the liberals and their lapdogs in the drive-by media. I guess, once again, it boils down to money. I would only run for an office if the Republican Party guaranteed me enough money, staff, and support to mount a significant campaign.

Sounds like I need to become a multi-millionaire first, doesn't it?