Atop the Stoa this day, I would like to think about perception, perspective, and reality.
Michele Bachmann has been in the news of late, as a Presidential hopeful, a Tea Party Caucus organizer, mother, and wife. The latest I read about her was not what her policies as President would be, or what her agenda currently is in the House of Representatives, but the fact that she played with the child of a supporter on camera.
I'll set the stage for you. Michele Bachman, the Presidential candidate, is in Iowa seeing supporters and being seen by the populace. A supporter comes up to her and offers up her baby in time-honored tradition. Instead of kissing it on the forehead and moving on to the next donor/voter/bundler she takes the baby in her arms and plays a bit with it. Dangling out her bracelet like a mobile for the child to play with. Heartwarming, yes?
Her liberal detractors (Democrats, Republicans, etc.) point out how hypocritical and disingenuous that image is of the Spirit of the Conservative Tea Party. I mean, the image of a contemporary conservative is one that plants a boot on grandma's head while shoving down a disabled person so they can draw a crosshair on an abortion clinic doctor; not one that plays with a baby.
I have always wondered if the people that write that stuff actually believe what they write, or if it is just all media template. I contend that if they believe everything they write then they are ignorant, hate-filled shells that must yearn for meaning in their lives. No one can be so consumed with hatred for another that allowing a baby to play with your bracelet becomes worthy of expensive media air time.
Michele Bachmann needs to be put in the proper perspective and context. She is a mother, and a foster mother. She and her husband have raised many, many children over the years, and raised them well. Quite an accomplishment in this day and age where children tend to be savages let loose to wander the cultural landscape. She has a solid and happy marriage. She has a great career that is personally fulfilling to her. What more could any feminist want? I'll bet she chats with her husband over dinner, when they can, and even talks about the gossip of what is going on in D.C. I can also bet that her husband must put in his two cents from time to time. I'll also bet that she has family and friends that love her very much.
She is also a conservative of the Reagan model. She knows who she is, what she is, and where she is going. The is rooted in herself. She is rooted in her faith and in her abilities. She does not have to ponder the wider issues of a problem that hits her desk. She does not have the "Long, dark tea time of the soul" that many of us have when making a difficult decision. Her faith and her core have the answers already. Moral or immoral? Right or wrong? The answers are not always so easy, though. Many are counter-intuitive. Do I sign a bill that gives single moms a living wage, regardless of whether her job is a McDonalds or at a lemonade stand? The answer is a clear, "no". Sometimes giving someone an easy way out simply enables lazy or un-realized individuals to remain unimproved. If the single mom wants a better life, she needs to better herself, not take hand outs. Women who are sure of themselves are not, "bitches", they are confident. Why is it that a confident and forceful man is considered "in charge" while a woman is a "bitch"?
Likewise, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama are both mothers and daughters. I'll bet they want the same things for their children that Michele Bachmann wants for hers. They have friends and confidants and husbands that have their two cents to put in all the time. They too are rooted in their belief system, though it is a different system than the one I believe in. They do not have to ponder their moral beliefs as they are sure of who and what they are.
Where I diverge from them in a major way is how one presents themselves in public. Michele Bachmann, the conservative, is Michele Bachman the conservative in public AND in private. She is the same person in front of her family and in front of political donors. When asked a question about conservatism she is proud to call herself a conservative. Will Hillary call herself a Socialist? By any definition of the word that is what she is.
In my opinion, she is "suited" to do what she is doing. An elected, public official must be honest and forthright. Throughout history, politicians have been synonymous with "scum", and for good reason. We are America, damn it, and deserve better. I'd rather have a hundred people just like Michele Bachmann then a single Hillary or Michelle Obama. Why, you say?
Hillary and her husband invented the political game of "triangulation". Its only purpose is to irritate the fewest number of people. If you actually accomplish something, then great. Hillary is a woman who claims that she was named after Sir Edmond Hillary in recognition of his climbing Mt. Everest. Does she not think that we can look the two dates up? She was 6 years old when he climbed Mt. Everest. Can we say useful lie? She stuck with a cheating husband only because she knew he was going somewhere. She had invested too much time and effort into Bill and moved to Arkansas, of all places. She placed her ambition above her sense of morals. Big, big issue for me.
Michelle Obama sat in the VP suite of a hospital simply because her husband was a senator. What is her college degree in? Sociology, with a minor in African American Studies. She got her JD, but is no longer allowed to practice law. So what was she doing to collect that paycheck other than being a senator's wife, you know, someone who can help the hospital with all the pesky government regulations....
Michelle and her warped sense of Social Justice are just offensive when thought about in an intellectual and rational manner. This tells me that she is completely aware of how philosophically bankrupt the concepts are and that the reason she follows Social Justice is that it is an avenue to power and influence. Wrong answer.
Bachmann is someone who may not tell you everything, but she will not lie, even as a lie of omission. Hillary and Michelle would lie to me about the time of day if it served a purpose.
Are they good people? I'm sure that Michelle and Hillary are good to what THEY consider good people, while Michele is good to all people. Not because of politics or 'triangulation' or because of whatever. She is good to everyone because she is a moral and just person.
Character. Principle. Morality. Regardless by what method they come to possess those characteristics, leadership and decency descend from those traits.
Bachmann is suited to her role. Wiener was not. Politicians that go down to scandal go down because they were hiding character flaws that made them ill-suited to the position of public trust. Please, think on that. We hire leaders into private sector jobs based on their "suitability", why not our politicians? Oh, yeah, they lie, don't they?
What I'm talking about is instinctive and not too difficult to grasp. Think on it and don't listen to the TV. If you had to leave your wallet, key to the safety deposit box, and your baby while you ran to the store, who would you leave those items with? Hillary, Michelle O., or Michele B?
I know who I'd pick for that and I also know who I would vote for President.
Live well.
--Zavost
No comments:
Post a Comment