As I continue along my journey of chapter 1, I feel it necessary to share my metaphoric analysis of Kennedy's beautiful introduction.

As he regards the responsibilities of a Senator, including that of which one holds to minorities, the party, and the nation, he compares the relationship of a Senator and his constitutents to a creature and his creator, a servant to his master. These are the individuals I am proud to have elected into office: those politicians that see their duty to serve those who had faith in their abilities, in the goodwill of their power, and in the purity of their intentions. And because of that pride, I can't help but think of those who lead but have lost my faith by abusing their power with corrupted intentions.

I also think about the comments by Senator Albert Beveridge that were referenced.
"A party can live only by growing, intolerance of ideas brings its death... An organization that depends upon reproduction only for its votes, son taking the place of father, is not a political party, but a Chinese tong; not citizens brought together by thought and conscience, but an Indian tribe held together by blood and prejudice."
These words make me fear for the Republican party. With so much emphasis on tradition and foundation, I fear that our opposition views it as intolerance. I do not doubt that some members of the Republican party are intolerant. But as a Republican, I am here to say that I am not, that I do not want to take away your rights, I just do not want to give you all the power. When JFK spoke about representing the aspirations of minorities, he stated that no minority should be denied the equal opportunity to be heard. And I do not deny you that right. I do not take away your freedom of speech, and I will listen whole heartedly with intent and sincerity. However, that right to be heard does not mean I am willing to give you the power to reconstruct what I believe to be true. The diversity of our nation is what makes us America, the land of equal opportunity. And with that, I too have a right to be heard, a right to believe, and your intolerance of what I stand for does not make what convicts you to be any more true. When describing the compromises ahead, Kennedy defines them as compromises of issues, not of principles; of political positions but not of ourselves. These are perhaps the most profound statements we can apply to today's politics and the upcoming presidential election. For example regarding abortion, politically I don't believe the government should be responsible for providing such services, whether I personally believe it is moral to do so or not. Politically, I believe the government is responsible for sanctioning the authenticity of a marriage commitment, regardless of my personal beliefs on both party's genders. When you take a step back and take the personal aspect away and focus on politically speaking of the government's responsibilities, the issues begin to solve themselves- which I may note- are in favor of both parties.

So tonight I watch the romance movie The Longest Ride, and even though this tear-jerking chic flick isn't necessarily a film I'd want added to my repertoire of monumental pieces in a biography, it still made some very important points that have resonated with me..

1. Love doesn't exist without sacrifice. With two love stories going on at the same time, the theme of the movie was that the idea of a perfect love becomes genuine, true love in the face of sacrifice. And that's really what love is all about, right? Putting the wants and needs of someone else above your own. The movie portrayed it beautifully, but living it in real life is obviously more challenging than communicating it through a fiction lifetime romance squeezed into an hour and a half. Looking back, I'd like to think I characterized a sacrificial love in the relationships I've been in, and I know my parents always have with me, and of course it's necessary to reference Jesus and His sacrificial love because honestly that's the greatest love story ever told. Now, going forward, for whatever relationships lie ahead, it is this point that I'd like to return to and remind myself of when the going gets tough (before they get going, ha.)

2. Betting on the most important things to you is much more rewarding than betting on what everyone says should be important. At the end of the movie, the painting that means the most to Ira (the fairy god mother reincarnated into an old man who loved his wife more than anything... who loved art more than anything) affords the one person who bet on it the entire multi-million dollar collection. To me, this meant that the things that mean the most to you, that you hold closest to your heart that you are so grateful for because of that one time that one thing happened that makes you see the good in the world, that is what's worth all the millions.

3. Also, Scott Eastwood is beyond dreamy. God Bless. That is all.

Hello anxious follower count of zero! Is today's empty classroom ready for the lesson plan?
Ha, I kid. I created this blog for myself after all, right?

So, tonight I read the FIRST HALF of the first chapter of John F. Kennedy's book Profiles in Courage about eight US Senators and the grace under pressure with which they endured (Ernest Hemingway's definition of courage). I'm only 11 pages in and have already fallen in love with JFK and even farther in love the US Government and couldn't help but stop myself and share a few thoughts I've had while reading through the first chapter:

• As Americans, We might be ~The People~, but we are so much more judgmental than we have the right to be. Kennedy made the point, "if American people more fully comprehended the terrible pressures which discourage acts of political courage, ...then they might be less critical of those who take the easier road- and more appreciative of those still able to follow the path of courage." This kind of hit home for me because I realized how much of an ignorant critic I've been in the past, and how I've failed to appreciate the good fight fought by certain politicians just because I didn't agree with what they were fighting for. So much of what we believe has been influenced by the opinions of those we've encountered thus far in our lives, and less on what our own actual educated stance on an issue is. This is one of the main reasons why lately I've been pushing myself to read as much as I can not only about the history of our nation, but about the basic facts of US and international current issues so that I can form my own opinion and then follow up with seeking further synonymous opinions and debating contrasting opinions (**where I learn just as much). 

• The first pressure JFK pointed out Senators face is their desire to be liked. Whaaaat?! Can you repeat that?? Senators are actual human beings with human feelings? Who knew. Who knew that they have a family to go home to, a career to sustain, and colleagues relying on their course of action, all of which rides on the decision to follow an independent course of action on an issue or to "go along." Compromise is a beautiful thing that Kennedy brought up. Having a "sense of things possible" explains that through compromise, you are given a sense of just how far you can push the actual outcome to meet the endpoint of your personal target. After all, "There are few, if any, issues where all the truth and all the right and all the angels are on one side."
• Senators basically live by the phrase "choose your battles" because you'll die early on in the war if your exhaust yourself through the first few fights you encounter. "..our influence ...and the extent to which we can accomplish our objectives...are dependent...on the esteem with which we are regarded.."To me this means, if you stand in the way of each individual person there will be no one left to stand with you. It's a give and take or you'll end up with nothing at all anywhere. 

• The second pressure Senators face is their desire to be re-elected. Double whaaat?! An employed individual actually wants to keep the job they love so much? This is unbelievable. Kennedy shed some light on the difference between this job and literally every other job that exists, which made me that much more anxious and excited (and anxious and scared) to work  hard to one day have this job. The majority of other occupations involve working towards individual progress whereas the political profession pursues national progress by the way of an individual. Senators sacrifice their private interests for the public interests they serve, along with their privacy in general which brings about my favorite phrase yet: The finality of decision. I'll let you taste the savory deliciousness of that with only one further comment to apply it to your non-office holding selves. As constituents, and everyday normal people, there are personal consequences we must face to every decision we make. As politicians, there are consequences everyone in the nation must face to every decision they make. (I now understand why Presidents walk out of the white house with grey hair and wrinkles they didn't bring in with them).

• The third pressure Senators face is the inconsistent demands and insatiable grievances of his constituency. There are two sides to every issue, and members of each side that Senators must represent. What a conundrum! Not only are they handed a honey-do list that never ends, but they must fulfill contradicting requests, all while trying to remain in office and still be liked and have friends at the end of the day. This leaves him with only one course of action that can only begin to be described as 'difficult' and 'soul-searching': "decide at which point and on which issue he will risk his career."

• If anyone has ever asked you, "What do politicians actually even do?" I'm not sure if you would have had an answer. No one's ever asked me so I've never encountered that problem. But if someone asks me now, I'll know just what to say! Wahoo! Here it is: they "engage in the fine art of conciliating, balancing and interpreting the forces, and the factions of public opinion, an art essential to keeping our nation united and enabling our Government to function." And for that, I have an inconceivable amount of respect. Political writer Frank Kent identified the most important single accomplishment for the politically ambitious: "the fine art of seeming to say something without doing so."A personal goal of mine I am in the makes of working out. I'll let you know when it's been successfully accomplished, grab a lifetime supply of water and non-expirable food like spam because it could be a while!

Yesterday I began, and finished, the book The Residence: Inside the Private World of the White House by Kate Andersen Brower. As a now upperclassman college student on the brink of obtaining a Business Management undergraduate degree while beginning a Master's Program in International Business, it would only seem fitting that I am completely and utterly obsessed with current events, international history, and the law that governs the land with my heart close to home in the beautiful country I call America. 

So having the opportunity, if only for a day, to peer into the lives of over 10 administrations that left their mark on our nation's capital, I believed the best way to truly learn more about these powerful people would be through those you wouldn't expect to run to as a first source- the Residence Staff of the White House. Humble, loyal, diligent, and characterized by a self-control I could only dream of having define the butlers, maids, ushers, and housekeepers of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Because of the sparse sacred moments they shared, I have been motivated to further explore the lives, impact, and personalities of a number of Presidents and First Ladys. My perception of an individual person is indefinitely finalized when it is brought to light how they treat people when no one is looking. And though I will probably never know the presidents of these administrations personally, this book gave me the ability to peer in through a lens capturing the truly behind-the-scene personalities of the most powerful families in America.

Below are my initial, shallow interpretations that I have adopted as a result of reading this book. 

I have a newfound respect for Hilary Clinton. Enraptured by the relationship she worked so hard to maintain with her daughter, the softer side of a woman characterized by her strength made transparent her heart of a mother. Her silence in knowing about the affairs of her husband before they were made public may come across as a political plot to some, however, I sympathize with the professional aura of personal matters that the first family and politicians in general must commit to in sacrificing their emotions for the good of the reputation they swore to uphold. After all, Why would you give someone the ability to run the country if they can’t keep their emotions from having the power in the public eye. In private, however, I can’t really condemn her actions either. Yelling swearing and throwing books at her cheating husband doesn’t stray to far from my drunken crying swearing 19 year old frame swinging deckers at my ex boyfriend post his cheating escapade. She made strides for the feminist movement before it was socially popular to do so by demanding the equal, quality of treatment for female employees and clearly communicating her appreciation for their work done well. I don’t condemn her for not leaving her husband even in the humiliation of adultery because if her passion and first love is dedicating her heart to America above all else, then a trust-less marriage is no more of an emotional affair than her husbands physical one. The pool privacy she so deeply and genuinely requested before the entire world knew the details of her faltering relationship living in a museum where you are literally never left alone for a minute of at least four years reminds me of my time spent in Austria constantly surrounded by new friends and house members where cordial communication and the silent polite standard were practically inescapable. Privacy is a privilege, a gift, and the self-reflecting, quiet, pure alone time shouldn’t ever be taken for granted. However, the Clintons were paranoid about their privacy and that almost leads me to question exactly what they needed to be so private about. Not trusting staff members that had loved the Bushs’ to the point of firing them, and conjuring up an entire new telephone system to eliminate the secret service between certain rooms is questionable to say the least. Chelsea, the Clintons daughter, was one of the White House children I enjoyed reading about the most. Independent, gracious to the staff, and strong in the tough scandal her family endured were all qualities the book highlighted. Amy Carter was my close second favorite as she also independently and graciously carried herself throughout her introduction to the White House World as a 9 year old child. Never forcing her way as if she was spoiled, she was described by staff as whimsical, making employees her friends and neighborhood without a single complaint of distance from the real world.

The Kennedy’s relationship is one that seems to baffle me. Jackie Kennedy was portrayed as a politely controlling perfectionist who had a deep loving relationship revitalized by the death of her premature son Patrick with a husband that was cheating on her like clockwork in her absence.  I was confused by the contradicting descriptions of their relationship and their time spent in the White House is one I would like to further research. Her devotion to her husband was unwavering, with a pure genuine love for him as she openly stated there was no place she would rather be in his final moments then directly next to him amidst his assassination. Her strong desire to raise her children as a normal family while I saw them as the family regarded to as more of royalty than democracy has definitely intrigued me. I just bought An Unfinished Life: JFK 1917-1963 by Robert Dallek and Profiles in Courage written by JFK himself because Camelot is one thing I do not want to stand in the dark on a minute longer.

The most pleasant family to read about was of course the Bushs’, both sets of them. All throughout the book, both the author and the staff talked of them the most highly. They made the staff feel appreciated, comfortable, and human without making them feel like unnoticed pieces of furniture as some of the other First Families had. Instead of attempting to make pleasantries and conversation through jokes and talking about themselves, the Bushs' made efforts to learn about the staffs’ families, emotional states, and needs. The staff knew every detail of the First Family's personal lives and so in exchange, the Bushs’ made efforts to know important details about the staffs personal lives in a comfortable way they could appreciate. Maitre d’ George Hannie was a favorite of the older Bushs’ and his son and wife established a lasting friendship with butler Ramsey. Their adoption of these staff members as family just goes to show their genuine love and appreciation for the people. Barbara Bush seemed exceptionally well mannered, instilling hope in (sometimes regarded hopeless) staff members like the replacement housekeeper.I would love to read more about this family too, perhaps as a way to teach myself how to be more well-mannered like them.

The Obamas were portrayed in a more unpleasant light. Keeping emotional distance from the staff, though not unpleasant but shallow. They were almost portrayed in an arrogant heir, where they just wanted their needs to be met and their wants to be met even faster (like Obama’s impatience with a basketball court’s construction). This didn't surprise me much at all to be brutally honest. 

That’s not to say other presidents didn’t have ridiculous requests either, most notably Lyndon B Johnsons obsession with his shower and his horribly taxing treatment of the poor plumber. He also wanted every baby to be named after him and never wanted any of the lights on in the White House. 

Nancy Reagan was almost as crazy as LBJ with her OCD placement of her collectiables and unnerveing yelling breakdowns when accidents shattered them. (Which caused me to helplessly compare her condemnable reactions with those of Barbara Bush and Hillary Clinton who remained calm and lighthearted when accidents happened.) But Nancy's intensity extending to the protection of her husband was something I appreciated reading about. President Reagan was portrayed as too friendly, to the point where staff would dodge his normal routes because of long conversations they would get wrapped into with him. Even though too much talking can be a hassle, I still think I'd prefer that to the coldness of other administrations.

Nixon was cast in an innocent light where the negative shadow fell on Ehrlichman and Haldeman (council and assistant of domestic affairs & chief of staff). This surprised me because Nixon was the Watergate scandal and his personal detoriation to depression described made him appear as a victim instead of a criminal which was confusing. However, he did establish close and kind relationships with the staff as did his wife who even flew the pot washer by the mountains of his homeplace Seattle bringing him to tears.  Nixon’s enemy list and Watergate are also things I would like to read more about. Stay tuned.