Two posts in two hours.  This one really has me hoppin’ mad.  At her next interview, Hillary should wear a Burka.  

IF anyone believes that a 60-year old woman in this country would believe that showing a little cleavage would get her some votes - they are not living in reality.  Our nation does not consider women sexy after 42.   (for some after 22)

If anyone believes that Hillary has not worn a low cut shirt in the last 10 years - they are suffocating in Pamela Anderson’s ample busom.

read the article.  Ridiculous.

Defending Givhan’s cleavage coverage, Harwood asserted “calculati[ng]” Clinton knew “what she was communicating by her dress”  

On the July 29 edition of NBC’s Meet the Press, CNBC chief Washington correspondent John Harwood declared his intent to “defend” Robin Givhan’s July 20 Washington Post Style section article which referred to the “cleavage on display” during Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-NY) July 18 speech on the Senate floor. Harwood then asserted: “When you look at the calculation that goes into everything that Hillary Clinton does, for her to argue that she was not aware of what she was communicating by her dress is like Barry Bonds saying he thought he was rubbing down with flaxseed oil.” As Media Matters for America has documented media figures frequently portray Clinton as “calculating” or overly ambitious, while rarely offering actual examples or support. In the article, Givhan called Clinton’s appearance “unnerving” and wrote: “[I]t was more like catching a man with his fly unzipped. Just look away!” Since the column, Post employees such as columnists Ruth Marcus and Dana Milbank have distanced themselves from Givhan’s remarks, as Media Matters noted. 

From the July 29 edition of NBC News’ Meet the Press: RUSSERT: I want to give Gene Robinson equal time for barber shops. 

EUGUNE ROBINSON (Washington Post columnist): Well, I’ll take equal time for barber shops. I think [Sen.] Barack Obama [D-IL] needs to find some barbershops in New Hampshire to visit. And, you know, you won’t have a lot of hair left if he gets it cut there many, many times. It’s pretty short right now. I also — let me jump in and offer a word in defense of Robin Givhan, the Washington Post columnist who wrote the cleavage column. As her former boss, you know, you either cover fashion or you don’t. And I think it’s legitmate to argue that you shouldn’t worry about fashion, but, you know, it’s the way we present ourselves to the world, to others. We make decisions every morning on what we put on and how — what sort of image we want to project. And unfortunately in our society, women are scrutinized in a way that men aren’t. I mean, what did John Edwards wear at the YouTube debate? What did Barack Obama wear? MITCHELL: Eugene, arguably, if you look at the Senate floor any day of the week, if you look at the floor of the House of Commons when a new cabinet minister was speaking, who had a far more low-cut neckline, this was so marginal. This was like microscopic evidence – 

HARWOOD: I’m going to defend that column too. MITCHELL: –of inappropriate attire. 

HARWOOD: I’m going to defend that column too. When you look at the calculation that goes into everything that Hillary Clinton does, for her to argue that she was not aware of what she was communicating by her dress is like Barry Bonds saying he thought he was rubbing down with flaxseed oil, OK? MITCHELL: Sometimes a blouse is just a blouse. 

[crosstalk]  RUSSERT: I’m going to move on to South Carolina because this is important. Here’s the polls from South Carolina. 

In case you haven’t guessed, I am really not that important of a person except maybe to a handful of people who know me well enough to know all the secrets I do not talk about in this blog.

As a nobody, I still find myself reticent at times to say what I really think.  I hold back sometimes.  I am mute when I should have a megaphone blaring all the ways our world has a lot to learn.

Let me muster some courage and say to you, the article below is just plain wrong.  What is wrong with people?  No one would ever make comments about the subtle bump in Obama’s pants when he wears jeans.

A friend of mine asked me recently what I am doing to help women see that there is no glass ceiling.  Whatever.  People want to believe we are one nice little melting pot with audible “i’d like to teach the world to sing” music wafting out as the goo boils.   This article is offensive and wrong.  Just wrong.

It reminds me of when Janet Reilly and Fiona Ma raced for an Assembly seat in Sacramento.  M&R, the political column in the Chronicle, did an article about the race not being between these two women - it was in fact about the men behind them:  Burton and Reilly.

What am I doing to help women see there is no glass ceiling?     I’m spitting on it- as it doesn’t matter how much you windex that ceiling.. a little spit makes it at least visible.   Sometimes ya have to be a little unsanitary to get folks to pay attention.

The article:

Hillary Clinton’s Tentative Dip into New Neckling Territory

 By Robin Givhan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 20, 2007; C01

There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

She was talking on the Senate floor about the burdensome cost of higher education. She was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. No scrunch-faced scrutiny was necessary. There wasn’t an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.

It was startling to see that small acknowledgment of sexuality and femininity peeking out of the conservative — aesthetically speaking — environment of Congress. After all, it wasn’t until the early ’90s that women were even allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor. It was even more surprising to note that it was coming from Clinton, someone who has been so publicly ambivalent about style, image and the burdens of both.

The last time Clinton wore anything that was remotely sexy in a public setting surely must have been more than a decade ago, during Bill Clinton’s first term in office when she was photographed wearing a black Donna Karan gown that revealed her shoulders. It was one of Karan’s “cold-shoulder” dresses, inspired, Karan once noted, because a woman’s shoulders remain sensuous and appealing regardless of her age.

Throughout Clinton’s time as first lady, she wore clothes that were feminine and stately. But sexiness was not part of the image. Her second inaugural gown was by Oscar de la Renta. The original version of the gold lace dress had cap sleeves and a wide, jewel neckline. Clinton altered it so that it had long sleeves and a high, almost Victorian collar.

When she appeared on the cover of the December 1998 issue of Vogue, just after the Monica Lewinsky scandal had peaked, she wore another de la Renta gown, this one with a boat neck and long sleeves. She looked glamorous, regal and defiant. But one was not even tempted to mention the s-word.

By the time Clinton launched her first campaign for the Senate, she had found a desexualized uniform: a black pantsuit. Not a fitted, provocative suit, but merely an understated, flattering one. Clothes were off the table. End of discussion.

But as she has embarked on her campaign for president, she has given up the uniform. In its place has been a wide array of suits and jackets, in everything from dull khaki to canary yellow and sofa florals. Once again, she is playing the fashion field.

The cleavage, however, is an exceptional kind of flourish. After all, it’s not a matter of what she’s wearing but rather what’s being revealed. It’s tempting to say that the cleavage stirs the same kind of discomfort that might be churned up after spotting Rudy Giuliani with his shirt unbuttoned just a smidge too far. No one wants to see that. But really, it was more like catching a man with his fly unzipped. Just look away!

Not so long ago, Jacqui Smith, the new British home secretary, spoke before the House of Commons showing far more cleavage than Clinton. If Clinton’s was a teasing display, then Smith’s was a full-fledged come-on. But somehow it wasn’t as unnerving. Perhaps that’s because Smith’s cleavage seemed to be presented so forthrightly. Smith’s fitted jacket and her dramatic necklace combined to draw the eye directly to her bosom. There they were . . . all part of a bold, confident style package.

With Clinton, there was the sense that you were catching a surreptitious glimpse at something private. You were intruding — being a voyeur. Showing cleavage is a request to be engaged in a particular way. It doesn’t necessarily mean that a woman is asking to be objectified, but it does suggest a certain confidence and physical ease. It means that a woman is content being perceived as a sexual person in addition to being seen as someone who is intelligent, authoritative, witty and whatever else might define her personality. It also means that she feels that all those other characteristics are so apparent and undeniable, that they will not be overshadowed.

To display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d’oeuvres is a provocation. It requires that a woman be utterly at ease in her skin, coolly confident about her appearance, unflinching about her sense of style. Any hint of ambivalence makes everyone uncomfortable. And in matters of style, Clinton is as noncommittal as ever.

I am flying to London today.  I squirrel away miles so that on international flights I can upgrade to business class.

Last night, miles disappeared from my account.  I called.  It seems they forgot to credit 15,000 miles from a flight I upgraded… and didn’t get.  I got transferred around to 4 different people.

The last woman I talked to, Anna Dantes, was unable to mask her hostility.  From the moment she got on the phone she made it clear what she could not do.

I can not credit your miles.

I can not help you.

You need to call someone else

I have told you what I can do.

Her disdain for me was like venom.  The words were so professional - her attitude was shocking.  I also began speaking with the same tone.

I caught myself in the middle of it.  Simply asked her if this is how she’d want to be treated as a customer?   She told me that I was the one who was being unreasonable.

I tried to plea to her sense of fairness.  She agreed that they had made an error in not crediting the accounts and she still could not work outside the system to credit the miles back.  It was my fault for not calling earlier.  I gave her the name of the person I talked to in January.  I was told I should have followed up.

I didn’t help matters.  I was frustrated.  I told her that when I first got on the call.

I suppose it isn’t her fault either.  She is likely working under strict rules.

I made another attempt while writing this blog.  On hold listening to music.  I talked with a woman with a lovely southern accent-= Lauren in the CHicago office.  I told her I needed help.. she joked that she was not the miracle desk- that desk was busy.  It was funny.  It lightened things.

She couldn’t help me either and yet I got off the phone happy.  She was nice about it.   Shared my concern for the problem.  Joked with me a little.  Individualized the experience.
Customer Service isn’t giving the customer what they want when you can’t - it is giving them a relationship.. letting them know they matter.

It will be a REALLY long night in coach tonight.    My husband is picking me up some Nyquil so I sleep!

“In the political economy, the human relationship is the true currency,” I said at a recent political meeting.  If I can inculcate one simple principle or idea to campaigns, companies or organizations:   it is the job of every volunteer and team member to make sure no one stands alone.

Relationships matter.  I say it a lot.  Most people have felt on the outside of something.  Most of us have walked into a room singing, “One of these things is not like the other..” to ourselves.  We watch people huddled together.. clearly knowing each other.

I go to a lot of meetings where I do not know anyone.  I am often surprised by how little people talk to folks they do not know.  They name tag surf… looking for someone important or worth talking to.  Maybe it isn’t that- maybe people are just shy.

I am.  The point of this blog is simple:  if a campaign really wants to get their candidate elected make a new rule.  NO ONE stands alone.  Make it the job of every employee, volunteer and the candidate to never let a person stand on the periphery.  Make sure they feel included.

It will make a difference.  For everyone.

My brilliant friend and team member Courtney sent this one to me.  Sums it all up, really.

Playwright Theodore Rubin: “The problem is not that there are problems. The problem is expecting otherwise and thinking that having problems is a problem.”

My husband talks often of caving in Mexico. He likes to go in dark scary places.

There is a video of the cave he ventured into in the 70’s.

http://www.glumbert.com/media/cavejump

worth a watch

Fourth of July

Delores Park

San Francisco Mime Troupe

(they are not Mimes… it is political satire)

The best part - the opening song. Please tell me if you know the name of the guy who sang the National Anthem in 6 keys so anyone could sing it.

It was hysterical… he started by saying, “The National Anthem. A song NO ONE can sing and everyone HAS to.”

Brilliant.