Politics: To Emote or Not Emote, that is the Question

I am not one to ruffle feathers, but somehow, I had a strange feeling about Ms. Clinton's recent display of emotion in New Hampshire. History is full of tales of politicians "turning on the tears". I don't particularly feel the campaign trail is the proper place to do it. But, I've never had to stand behind a podium and hold back my feelings of delight or disappointment. I am however, drawn in when a male figurehead displays tearful emotion when the subject matter invokes empathy. But to see a presidential candidate choke up gives me two feelings. One is disbelief, and the other is, "do we want someone weak and given to "reaction", in the White House?" It's a hard call and I certainly don't want to come off as harsh or unfeeling.

Here is how I see it, in my humble opinion. It's too easy for a female (even one as tough as Hillary Clinton) to allow false emotions and tears to manipulate her targets. For a lot of men, I believe tears are harder to come by and are most often sincere. Men tend to hold things inside, unless they are prompted by tragic events. Whether it's a response to 9/11, Hurricane Katrina or a cataclysmic tsunami, all these events should prompt even the toughest leader to evoke heartfelt emotion.

But along the campaign trail, Hillary has spent enough time as a lawyer, politico and a behind-the-scenes presidential adviser, to know that you don't get anywhere with tears. I am just trying to be realistic. I won't lie. I've never been a fan of the Clintons. I live too close to Arkansas! I'm a California native and I try to keep my mind wide open. But I am also conservative and have never believed that Ms. Clinton has ever had the country's best interest in mind. Only her own.

In the hours following the Challenger Space Shuttle tragedy, President Reagan presented his speech on January 28, 1986, and I was brought to tears. Not only from the sadness of the loss of life, but seeing our president offer such an honest response. The eloquent speech offered that day was one I will never forget, even after 22 years. Anyone with a heart could see that he was still our strong president, yet truly saddened by these events. I was touched when President Reagan finished with, "We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for the journey and waved goodbye and 'slipped the surly bonds of earth' to 'touch the face of God.'"

In Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speech, "I have a dream", one truth rang out strong and clear. It is that his beliefs and convictions shined through and gave hope and promise to his listeners. I know that King's message was one to bring together all races of America. But the message did not get lost in false emotion or shallow presentation. We knew that his words came from a deep faith. Those times were fragile and explosive. The Bible tells us 'there is nothing new under the sun'. As we move through history, mankind continues along it's path of self-destruction. Men like King, Reagan and others, continue to provide us with hope for a better future. And their speeches help us with that hope. I love the line in King's speech, "I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream."

These are true emotions given at the proper times that we can believe to be sincere. Whether it be a tearful concession or an anger fuels rebuttal, politicians should consider the appropriateness of their behavior. As we continue down the campaign road, it is my hope that our candidates remember that the collective watchful eye of their audience is scrutinizing every word. We do not want to be like sheep led about as if we didn't know better. The candidates can either choose to be a "performer" or a "servant". Time is closing in on which they want to be. Whomever wins the White House, should be prepared to put their money where their mouth is.