You Guys, She *Gave a Speech*

Let's get one thing straight right now: While she would almost certainly do a better job than 45 (which, let's face it, is probably the lowest bar for presidential success of all time), Oprah Winfrey is not terribly well qualified to be the President of the United States. I'm not insulting her; I'm just stating a fact. She's incredibly accomplished and is qualified for a lot of things; I just don't think that being POTUS is one of them.

Giving an impassioned (and awesome) speech at an awards show does not automatically mean she'd be a great candidate. And overseeing a media empire does not automatically mean she'd be a great president, who is tasked with leading the most powerful nation on Earth.

There is a lot more to candidacy and certainly to presidency than speechmaking and business savvy.

I mean, how many times do we have to learn the hard way that business ≠ government?!? Because...business does not equal government! Would some parts of government do well to apply sound business principles? Surely. But they are not the same things. Determining how to maximize value to shareholders is a far cry from, say, deciding whether to send troops into harm's way.

As my friend Jay Cosnett put it,

 Governing requires experience... at governing! Passing bills, forging consensus, navigating overlapping centers of power and influence, maintaining and building coalitions, dealing with other politicians and governments... This idea that government is somehow "not real work" and that someone from the private sector doesn't need experience in it is bullshit.

And Thomas Chatterton Williams in this great New York Times piece:

I am not immune to Oprah’s charms, but President Winfrey is a terrible idea. It also underscores the extent to which Trumpism — the kowtowing to celebrity and ratings, the repudiation of experience and expertise — has infected our civic life. The ideal post-Trump politician will, at the very least, be a deeply serious figure with a strong record of public service behind her. It would be a devastating, self-inflicted wound for the Democrats to settle for even benevolent mimicry of Mr. Trump’s hallucinatory circus act.

*  *  *

And let's talk for a minute about how all this "Oprah 2020" talk is diverting attention from the content of that awesome speech. It was (mostly) about eliminating the need for #MeToo, to put it succinctly.

Here it is, in case you've been living under a rock for the past 24 hours:

Why aren't we talking about how to make that new day dawn? Why aren't we talking about how to make harassment and assault socially unacceptable? Why aren't we talking about how to make respect for the personhood of all human beings...absolutely basic?

Why are we ignoring these critical topics, fixating on the fact that she spoke well and passionately, and jumping immediately to...'hey, let's make her president!'?

Why?

*  *  *

By the way, since electing Barack Obama didn't end racism, do we somehow think that electing Oprah would end sexism?!?

If an extremely qualified white woman, one of the most qualified people to ever run for the presidency, couldn't get elected to the highest office in this country (and...you're kidding yourself if you think misogyny didn't play a role), how well do you think a Black woman would do—without the requisite cultural change that Oprah's speech so beautifully called for happening first?

We cannot skip the hard, hard work of dismantling systems of racism and patriarchy and expect that electing a charismatic leader will in and of itself fix our problems. Even if that charismatic leader is very well qualified (see again: Obama).

*  *  *

Would I love to see a Black woman president? Absolutely. I say bring on the #BlackGirlMagic. I mean, the white guys haven't done all that well, for one thing. And Black women have been at the forefront of social change for ages. They know how to get shit done.

But first, we need to do (at least) these two critical things: 1) look for truly well-qualified presidential candidates (of any and all identities) and 2) get to work on fixing that which is broken both within ourselves and within how we relate to each other.

The future of our culture and our republic may well depend on it.

Evangelicals: I SEE YOU, AND I SEE YOUR HYPOCRISY. I SEE IT.

Source: theblaze.com.

So Jerry Fallwell, Jr. (president of Liberty University), one of evangelicalism's first and most enthusiastic endorsers of Donald Trump, was interviewed on NPR on Thursday.

INSKEEP: What have you heard from other evangelical leaders about supporting Donald Trump so early and so strongly? 

FALWELL, JR.: You know, it was funny that rank-and-file evangelicals were ahead of all the leadership.

Great. If that's true, it's way, way worse than I than I'd thought.

[FALWELL, JR., cont.]: They saw for decades conservative Republicans had made promises to them on issues that were important to Christians and conservatives when they were running for office. But when they won, they didn't keep those promises.

When did you ever think they were going to keep their promises to you? When did you ever think that making this country "more Christian" was really at the top of their priority lists? Oh wait—for a long time, I know. So I guess the better question is: Why? WHY did you ever think that?!?

And wait—wasn't Jesus always having to remind people that His is a spiritual kingdom and not about the politics of the day?

John 18:36: Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

 Also, the phrase "kingdom of God" appears 54 times and "kingdom of heaven" 31 times in the Gospels alone (of the New International Version).

So...maybe—I'm just going out on a limb here—maybe Christians shouldn't trust political leaders to make this country more like, say, themselves...and should instead focus on the spiritual kingdom, perhaps by fulfilling the first and second greatest commandments, the ones on which all "the law and the prophets" hang? Just a thought.

For anyone listening in who may not be familiar enough with the Bible to know, here are the two greatest commandments:

“Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (from Matthew 22:37–40)

 Love God and love your neighbor. That's it. And in case anyone wondered who his or her neighbor was (so they could get away with making certain people not their neighbor), Jesus told an entire parable to clear up that one.

[FALWELL, JR., cont.]: And I think, you know, like the song by The Who "Won't Get Fooled Again," I think they just decided no more. We want somebody who maybe makes mistakes and maybe sort of talks off the cuff and may not get it right all the time, but at least he's not bamboozling us.

 Noooo, Trump's not bamboozling you at all. Not even one tiny little bit.

INSKEEP: Is his personal life or any candidate's personal life relevant to you?

FALWELL, JR.: Well, I think Jesus said we're all sinners. When they ask that question, I always talk about the story of the woman at the well who had had five husbands and she was living with somebody she wasn't married to, and they wanted to stone her. And Jesus said he's - he who is without sin cast the first stone. 

Um...No. If you're going to use stories from the Bible—the book you supposedly believe to be the most sacred of all—and if you're going to use them on a national program, and if you're going to use them to, of all things, justify your support of probably the most unChristian* presidential candidate in American history...at least get those stories right.

There was a woman at the well. And she had had 5 husbands. But a) no one wanted to stone her, b) Jesus talked to her about spiritual stuff—He didn't try to get her elected to public office (there's a ginormous, important difference), and c) Jesus talked to her even though she was both a woman and part of an outcast ethnic group. (Think about it.)

The one about whom Jesus said, "he who is without sin cast the first stone" was the woman caught in the act of adultery, for which a bunch of religious establishment dudes wanted to stone her to death. And...oh yeah, she was, like, a totally separate person.

[FALWELL, JR., cont.]: I just see how Donald Trump treats other people, and I'm impressed by that.

Oh, so you’re impressed by a man who disrespects women, mocks the disabled, and stereotypes people based on country and religion (rather than, say, welcomes the stranger as the Bible says to do)? (And those were just the examples that sprung to mind. We both know there are more.)

Wow. Just...Wow.

* * *

If Trump has done anything "for" us, it may be that he revealed the true nature of many evangelicals (and a lot of other people in this country). As Jonathan Merritt put it in an excellent piece for The Atlantic (emphasis mine):

Evangelicals are acutely aware of their waning cultural influence and shrinking share of the population. These religious leaders care about their principles, yes. But they care about something else even more: power. While not every evangelical leader is enthusiastic about Trump, many are starting to express warm feelings toward the candidate.

 I really believe that rather than causing misogyny, racism, homophobia, and xenophobia among his supporters, he has merely exposed it. He has somehow "given people permission" to bring all that ugliness out into the open. As bothered as I am by Trump, I'm bothered even more by the fact that he has supporters—and enough to have actually won presidential nomination.

* * *

Back to Jerry. Does he represent all evangelicals? Certainly not. (He doesn't even completely align [politically] with his own brother, who happens to be the pastor of their late father's church.)

But he represents a lot of them. Trump met with 1,000 or more evangelical leaders last month, and he received plenty of praise from them, as well as endorsements from many who once vehemently opposed him. (Source: Merritt's piece, linked above.)

So—I am speaking here to Jerry and to those evangelicals he does represent:

Dudes, your hypocrisy has finally come out.

There had to be at least a strain of this hypocrisy there all along if this—THIS—was ever going to be a result.

Are you proud of yourselves?

Because I'm pretty sure that Jesus is not.

——————————————————————

*I've got a newsflash for ya: Being a Christian is not required to be a good president. It's not even required to be president at all. It's possible for a person of another faith or even—gasp!—of no faith to be principled enough, to have all of the right qualities, and to make an excellent president. It really, really is.

P.S. The title of this post is paraphrased from Jon Stewart's epic, not-to-be-missed takedown of hypocritical conservative media and Republicans.

"Special Sizes"

screenshot from
macys.com

Dear Major Department Stores,

I am what you and most people today would call a "plus-size" woman. And while I'm glad the world has come as far as it has in acceptance of and fashion for women of my size, when I go to your website, and I see this (screenshot, right), I have a few thoughts:

My size is not "special." It's just...the size that I am.

My size is bigger than some people's and smaller than others'.

My size should not mean that to you, I am a whole separate category. Apparently, to you, I'm not "Women"; I'm a "Special Size." (As are "Juniors" and "Petite"s.) Um...seriously??

screenshot from
nordstrom.com

What if, instead of lumping everyone not in "Misses" (who came up with these category names, anyway?) into "Special Sizes," you just put all clothing for women under...oh, I don't know, "Women's Apparel"?

And if not everything comes in every size, then feel free to have a "Shop by Size" section in your navigation...in addition to the general categories and subcategories.

If you did that, then maybe--just maybe--more women would be inclined to shop at your store, because they wouldn't feel like that store is treating them based on their size and not on the fact that they are women.

Why a Health Food Store Worker Told Me to Love Myself—and Why I Won't Shop There Again

On a recent Friday night I ended up driving around in an area that I don't usually, just looking for somewhere different to eat. I found a little Greek food place, and while I was waiting at the drive-through for my gyro and fries, I saw that across the street was a health food store I've been intrigued by, so I figured I'd stop over there after I got my food. (Don't think I haven't noticed that I just wrote "gyro and fries" and "health food store" in the same sentence....)

So I drove over there, parked and went inside. I figured I'd look around a little bit but make it quick so my food wouldn't get cold before I had a chance to eat it. I browsed for a few minutes, picked up one item, then got an idea. I walked to the counter, where one of the employees was helping someone; another was apparently just having a casual conversation, because she turned to me and asked how she could help. I asked her what the number one, "top of the list" thing was for acid reflux (I suffer...daily). Well, this woman launched into a laundry list of every single thing that I simply MUST start doing—or stop doing as the case may be (ya gotta eliminate a lot stuff too, apparently). This was simultaneous with a tour of the store, each stop being the next thing I needed to start taking.

Now, believe it or not, I don't think she was trying to sell me—at one point she mentioned that they don't work on commission—as much as trying to convince me of the necessity of doing ALL of the things she was throwing at me.

When she got done, I said, "Wow, that's a lot to take in." I was thinking, "I don't know that I'm ready for that much change." She didn't hesitate when she responded, "You need to start loving yourself."  Uh, wha...?!? ...is what I would have been thinking if—it didn't make so much sense to me. I said, "It's interesting you should say that...that's been a real theme for me lately. And I'm determined that 2011's going to be a different year for me in that regard." She expounded by saying that a lot of people come in, the staff tells 'em what they need, and they walk right back out the door because they're not ready for change. Whoooa...sound familiar??

I can see how if you don't truly love yourself, you're less open to change—because even though you don't "love what you've got," it's all you've got...and you cling to it desperately, just so you have something.

Our conversation was done at that point, and she went back to whatever conversation she'd been having before, while I thought more about what to do. Well, I didn't have a lot of time (my food, relatively unhealthy though it may've been, I was still going to eat—and it was getting colder as we spoke). And as usual I didn't have a lot of money, so I said "Well, I hate to be a stereotype, but I'm just going to get this one thing" (unrelated to acid reflux, by the by). I stepped back to the counter, and while she continued her previous conversation, she began pulling together bunch of brochures for me (fine, no problem). So her coworker rang me up.

This guy must be a peach in real life. As part of ringing me up, he asked me for my contact info. so the could add me to their system (which I totally understand as we do that in my store). So I gave it to him...which, naturally, involved giving my street name. Now, my street name happens to be Tuckahoe Lane. (Oh yes I did just tell you that.) Soon as I said it, he goes, "Really?? I wanna live there...I'm gonna come live by you." (giggle) Yeahhhh, I let that one just hang out there. Didn't say a word. ("Sorry"; more giggling.) *gag*

At some point in the next day or two I realized: While that lady is probably right, not just about loving myself, but maybe also about every single health thing she told me to do, I won't be shopping there again. (In fact I plan to return the one product I did buy; I'm certain I can easily obtain it elsewhere.) And do you want to know why? It's because she didn't meet my stated need. At my company, we've been trained (and rightly so) to first meet the need that the client tells you she has. It's why she came into the store in the first place. Once you've done that, you can engage her to see what else she needs and make additional recommendations. But you meet that stated need—first.

Let's review: I'd asked for what was the one thing at the top of the list for my condition. Implied is: I don't want a laundry list. What I got was a laundry list. And—it's not that I am completely un-open to change. If I were, I wouldn't have even walked into the store! I just am not ready for that much change...all at once. For better or worse, gradual is the way for me. Drastic equals stressful in my book, and Lord knows, I don't need any more stress. If she had said "The first thing I would recommend is _______" and then asked me questions to determine other solutions to focus on, that would've been one thing (and I would've been more open to her suggestions). But she didn't. Well guess what: I don't want to shop where they steamroll over what I asked for.

And—her coworker's crudeness...well, that's just the kicker. Being in retail, I take an additional lesson: Keep it classy. I don't want to shop where the creepy cashier's gonna be crude.

I'll keep on working on loving myself...and take my health food business elsewhere, thank you very much.

Why It's Hard to Post Sometimes

Sometimes it's hard to post because: I'm busy, forgetful, tired...you name it. (Don't even start with the "those are just excuses" stuff--it's not like this is required. And really, I often do well to just get through the day.) But sometimes it's just about...not wanting to go public with, say, some new thing I'm gonna try as part of this project. I'm not so great with the follow-through, I'm afraid. So if I post about it and then I don't end up doing it much, or--it just doesn't "work," well, I don't relish the thought of explaining either scenario to people.

Speaking of which, another reason it's hard to post sometimes is that often, it doesn't feel like Project: Reclaim at all. It feels like Project: Regress. This isn't straight-line growth here, people. And--"deciding you're gonna commit to it" isn't enough. It's not like after making that commitment, my pain has really lessened all that much. *sigh* This shit is hard.

Why I "Hate" Positive Thinking

I "hate" positive thinking. No, I don't mean that I hate it when a positive, seemingly reasonable thought occurs to me. What I hate is the whole "just think positive thoughts and all your heartache will go away" message.

Why? Well, I want to be very clear about this. Thinking positive thoughts is, of course, not bad...practically by definition. After all, it's positive. (Yep, I've got that whole grip-on-the-obvious thing goin' for me.) My problem is: I cannot so easily "switch" from a negative thought I'm having to some positive thing I'm supposed to be telling myself. And why is that? Because 99% of the time, the positive thing I'm supposed to be telling myself is not something I can believe. If I'm going to think a (new) positive thought, it has to be something I can believe.

And--why do I have a hard time believing the positive? I think there are a couple reasons: One, so much of my life has been heartbreak, pain, shattered dreams. (To my own ears, this sounds like: one could easily think I'm being melodramatic. But if you know my story, you know I'm not.) Two, I have a hard time having a lot of hope. Again, why is that? Well--revisit reason one. Now, as a result of my Christian faith, I have hope for eternal life. I know that I will go to heaven when I die and that I'll see again my loved ones who are already there. It's the whole between-now-and-then part that I struggle to have hope for.

Yes, I'm aware that I've asked "why" four times in the last 2 paragraphs, but given my life, I think that too is apropos. (P.S. I love saying the word "apropos.")

Having said all that, I do recognize the value of thinking positive things. Thoughts determine attitudes, actions, ultimately destiny. So...what I've come to is: I'll have to do positive thinking me-style. And I'll expound on what I mean by that in a future post.

Thanks for listening!