It's only fair...

Today as people are congratulating the winning candidates, I want to take a moment to appreciate the people behind the scenes who make it happen.

This may or may not have something to do with the fact that I am the mom of a campaign manager, 3 times over.

Until this happened, I had very little idea of what goes into a campaign. Let me tell you, it’s a lot of blood, sweat, tears, anxiety, strategizing, communicating, organizing, mistakes and triumphs -- over a multitude of hours.

Because of the work of the managers and their team members, you get to know the candidate and what he or she believes. They are the ones who create opportunities for the candidate to communicate the vision and principles he or she espouses.

The campaign team works to determine which voters know the candidate, and which don’t, and where to target their communication. They deal with budgets and must decide how best to spend the money to communicate the message. They evaluate feedback and refine the message. They coordinate phone banks and door-belling and write the copy for the ads. They become experts on the issues that are most important to the voters, and help prepare the candidate to have an answer for every question that might come up.

They attend a plethora of forums, debates, fund-raisers, parades and wave signs on the street. For many months, the campaign is the priority activity of their lives. They make many sacrifices, not so they can be known, but so their candidate is.

Today, the winning candidates are receiving congratulations – and rightly so. But I just want to say another congratulations to all those behind the scenes, whether they work for winners or losers, for their dedication, hard work and commitment to the election process. You have lived out your conviction to promote what our country needs to be the best it can be – and I laud you for that.

I hope today that you are feeling satisfied. Undoubtedly, you are weary…I hope that you get to put your feet up for just a moment before the governing begins!

Apparently, modesty is just for girls who don't look good in bikinis...

Lately, I keep hearing things about modesty and how the church objectifies women by insisting on it. They think that pretty soon, we’ll be all turtlenecks and burqas, and HOLY COW, how oppressive is that!

I hear women saying that THEY ARE WOMEN, hear them roar, and THEY ARE SEXY and that it is their right to be sexy. For men to look at women and note, perhaps with a lustful thought or two, that they are sexy is objectification, and the result of a character flaw. Control yourself, you sex-obsessed beasts. We are curvy, and have breasts – deal with it!

(But I thought you wanted to look…sexy…which, is it not, an attempt to be especially appealing to the male of the species?)

The new standard feminists are demanding is that sexiness be included as a characteristic in the equality of value, capability, and performance of women. I think they’re saying, “We’re just the same as men, except we’re different!”

Given that God created men and women with an urge to merge, I think it is foolish for us to expect that women can dress with physical assets on display, and men will be blasé about it.

I reiterate, isn’t the purpose of dressing sexily to prove one’s hotness? The feminist clarion call, for many years, has been that we are more than sex objects; we are intelligent, capable, contributors in our society. When a woman dresses so that her cleavage is on display, isn’t she objectifying herself? Isn’t she saying, I’m smart, and capable, but be sure you don’t miss that I have big breasts too? Isn’t she saying, my physical assets are on par with my character and capabilities? Are they? What about those of us who don’t look good in bikinis? Aren’t they implying that we are inferior women because we lack the physical characteristics whose display they are defending?

Women can holler and complain about men’s objectification of the sexy, but I maintain that the woman who dresses with low-cut bodices and tight, short skirts is objectifying herself. She’s saying that her breasts and booty are equal in value to her intangible characteristics, and it’s an invitation for others to assume the same.

I’m not advocating for turtlenecks and burqas, don’t get me wrong. {Sidebar: Why do the burqa and the bikini get paired anyway? As if those of us stumping for more modesty are going to embrace the practices of a culture who treat women as chattel! There’s a lot of spectrum between the bikini and the burqa!}

Burqas are another form of objectification. That culture is saying to their women, “You are a collection of parts which, if seen, can only lead to perversion.” This requirement is not protective. It is disrespectful.

I think that, for the most part, we women know when we are dressing to expose and draw attention. We know what kind of attention we are seeking. If I am wearing something that makes it difficult for a man to look me in the eye, I am reducing my opportunity to be respected as a contributing member of society…not because of his view of me – but because of the value I put on myself.

As I said, I’m not seeking to clothe the women of America in turtlenecks and shapeless dresses. I think every culture has varying standards when it comes to modesty, and immodesty. I’m not proposing a universal uniform. There is nothing wrong with dressing attractively, or with being beautiful…Just as there is nothing wrong with being fashion-challenged, or physically outside of the current standards for being beautiful.

For myself, I wish to dress in a way that doesn’t draw attention, either by flashiness or homeliness. I enjoy my wardrobe, but I don’t want it to compete for the definition of who I am.

I just don’t understand why women, who are wholly committed to equality, now turn to demanding the right to objectify themselves.

It seems nonsensical to me.

Change, The

Apparently, I am going through The Change.

And I’m kind of anxious to see how I turn out when it’s all over. Maybe I’ll finally be energetic, optimistic, and send birthday cards on time! I wonder if I’ll stop worrying, and lose my voracious appetite, and start to like to exercise…Oh the possibilities!

However, I have to admit, that most days the evidence doesn’t support the realization of these hopeful transformations.

I’ve heard that some women display Jezebel-like behaviors as they go through The Change. Some seem to lose touch with reality, and create conflicts wherever they go. These incidents are usually reported by someone who also says, “She was never like this before!!”

I’ve always been kind of afraid of that happening to me…And I’m not sure that it has, or hasn’t – because the overwhelming feeling I have at this time is not malice, but one of being fed up. Yes – just fed up. I’m over it. Not my circus; not my monkeys. Nothing to prove and nothing to lose...I won’t be dropping everything to work on your problem.

My new mantra: I’m going through The Change, and things are gonna be different around here!

I submit that these “Jezebels” just might be women who have been stuffing it for many years and finally decide to speak their mind -- and damn the torpedoes! They say what they see, and don’t sugarcoat it anymore. They register an opinion, and don’t cede their intended plan to the perceived common good. They object, and don’t worry about feelings. They pick up and pursue goals they have left on the back burner for years.

And the people around them are surprised, bewildered, and say “She was never like this before!”

Sorry to rock your world, people…but I am like this now. And it’s not so much about what I’m doing, as it is about what I am NOT doing anymore. I’m done with measuring myself by others’ standards. I will live by my own convictions, and not always strive to be acceptable to the elusive and changing values of the world. I have gained a thing called confidence, and I don’t have time to mess around anymore. Life is for living, not for wishing…And that means accepting what is, and dealing.

And that means, dear loved ones, you have to deal with me too.

Here’s hoping you can see beyond the surprise, and not think of me as Jezebel…And here’s hoping that I retain a little tact even as I accomplish The Change.

Because, you know: total depravity and all that. It’s still a bad mix with hormones.

She's got questions...that have no answers...

I love to watch crime stories on TV. Maybe it is sick and wrong to take such interest in the abominable actions of criminals, but I justify it because I love to see the mysteries solved and justice served. That’s why I watch it! Ever since I was a 1^st grader who decided I would become a teacher so I could “punish the bad boys”, justice has been a keen interest of mine.

But one crime show that of which I have had enough is On the Case with Paula Zahn.

I’m thinking that Paula just might be a little bored with the formula they created for the show. Lately, she has been asking mostly questions that can only be answered with the word ‘very’.

With a grave look, and a serious tone, she queries, “How devastating was it to find out your mother had been murdered?”

Uh…duh! “Very!”

I think she should follow up with more hard-hitting revealing questions like:

How brutal was the brutality?

How hurtful was the hurt?

How terrifying was the terror?

How devastating was the devastation?

Uh, Paula? Everyone already knows the answers to these…

Really, if that’s all she’s going to ask, she might as well leave it to the narrator to tell the whole story.

Of course, then, they couldn’t call it “On the Case with Paula Zahn” so I guess that’s why she has to be there to ask questions.

I wonder if she was ever one of those sports sideline reporters. They ask the same kind of questions: “Are you going to make changes for the second half?”

Breaking news, girl reporter; yeah, they’re going to make changes because they are losing right now!

I wish that sometime one of those coaches would say, “I don’t know! What do you think we should do?” or “No, we’re going to keep doing the same things because we’ve had so little success with it in the first half of the game.”

Please! If you’re paid to ask questions, how about trying to ask one in which the answer is not already given!

Oh, I should have written this a couple of weeks ago...

Okay…so I keep hearing how irritated people are with all the election flyers, and especially the automated calls, and the surveys.

Some of you are so irritated that you say you won’t even vote for a candidate who employs the auto call method…

…in which case, I don’t know WHO you WILL vote for…because I think they all do it.

And why do they choose to use this irritating tactic?

I submit to you that these tactics have become necessary because of the irresponsibility of the voters. And I’m not referring to those who are ultimately irresponsible in that they don’t vote at all. No – I am referring to the many which do not know the candidates, or the issues, but feel that they SHOULD vote. They fill out their ballot by ticking the names they recognize, or simply looking for an ‘R’ or a ‘D’ to make a mark by. They are voting in ignorance.

So, in effect, the candidates must find a way to go to the voters, as the voters will not come to them.

And thus, you get the automated calls…and lots and lots of flyers.

Surveys can have a different purpose. They are used to gauge a candidate’s support, and define the demographics in which he is lacking. I suggest that when you receive a survey call, come out strongly for your candidate. You will be identified as someone who does not need to be persuaded by either candidate, and will be less likely to be called again. Help out your candidate by showing him where to spend his money, and where not to spend it.

If you do not want to talk to anyone about anything having to do with the election, hang up on the automated call, or politely interrupt the live caller and say so. You are doing the kind thing by saving their time.

A more important issue when it come to automated calls and the blanket bombing of the flyers is that too many times that votes come down to name recognition. If you have a lot of money, you can buy a lot of name recognition. So the independently wealthy, or a candidate supported by national/regional organizations can, in effect, buy a seat in local government.

This should not be so, and it is possible because people are irresponsible voters. I believe everyone who is registered should take this responsibility seriously and should vote…but if you are voting, do some research! Take the time, first, to know what you believe and support, then seek out the candidate that most closely lines up with that. Go beyond the flyers, as these are often akin to sound bites edited without context.

I can hear your weary sighs…I know you’d rather not have to mess with all the conflict, complex issues, and confusing claims…But it really matters! Every year (not just presidential years) there are people and issues that will affect your everyday life here locally. Have a say – and don’t just brush off the election process because you find it irritating. It MATTERS! You can influence your quality of life if you avail yourself of the opportunity.

“The penalty a man pays for not participating in politics is to be governed by men worse than himself.” -- Plato

It's just like that fairy tale...

…where the emperor had no clothes.

I was embarrassed yesterday as I watched Congressman Adam Smith, from our fair state of Washington, comment on the Benghazi situation. He was a guest of Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.

Chris challenged him to respond to the newly disseminated facts that talking points about the attack were revised 12 times before they came out with the false story that a demonstration against an internet video resulted in violence and the deaths of our Ambassador to Libya, and 3 others.

Despite early video of presidential spokesman, Jay Carney, insisting that there was only one change made to the talking points about the Benghazi attack – they changed the term “consulate” to “diplomatic facility” – our honorable representative would not admit that it was a lie.

He danced round and round the evidence, obfuscating, and denying that a lie was perpetuated.

He looked absolutely stupid.

I watch this and wonder what kind of a man Rep. Smith is that he willingly supports the lie when clear evidence to the contrary is presented. Does he not have at least a modicum of personal pride and integrity that he would not shame himself? How can he justify denying the obvious? What is the payback to him for making such a fool of himself?

His behavior points to the likelihood that he is committed to some agenda (on which I will not speculate) more than he is committed to truth. What use is he if this is so? He’s willing to play the fool more than he is willing to serve his constituents. What service can he render his country if he will not deal with reality? He’d rather believe a fantasy, than make his government better, or work to defend our State Department employees from further danger.

From what I saw yesterday, I would recommend that his district throw the rascal out! You can’t trust someone who chooses to be blind to truth for whatever reason. He’s wasting the office.

I can’t fathom what he hopes to accomplish by this behavior.

The ban on shame...

Yesterday I heard Dave Ross say this: "We have to know how he {Tamerlan Tsarnaev} got radicalized because, since this is something anybody could do, we have to figure out how to make sure nobody wants to."

This could be pretty difficult because we live in a society that seems to be committed to making everyone comfortable with their choices. Let's make alternative lifestyles normal. Let's make pot legal. Let's reward the lazy with a free ride. Let's explain away evil as the result of a bad childhood ...and so on and so on...

A lot of effort has been spent making shame shameful. I don't think it's helping.

At the base of this is the rejection of absolutes...If you reject shame, you reject that there are truths that apply to everyone. How can you make something unattractive without imposing shame on the activity? How can you make sure nobody wants to bomb innocents without imposing your truth on them?

It seems that moral relativism is all well and good -- until somebody you love gets hurt. Then come the demands to impose your particular belief system on everyone.

But you can't have it both ways...There ARE absolute truths -- absolute morals, and shame is appropriate when they are flouted.

Certainly, every culture has misapplied shame, and probably always will to some extent, but we are foolish to attempt to make everyone feel good by eliminating the emotion instead of the action.

A little bit of shame could go a long way, in my opinion.