Change your world today…

January 11, 2017

“You can change your world by changing your words.”  (Joel Osteen) – from some time ago on my favorite source of inspiration, the Jack’s Winning Words blog. 

I don’t recall what Jack said about this little quote at the time, but I knew that I wanted to save it and write something about it later. I’ve posted here a few times about attitude and how having a positive attitude can change things in your life. The words that one chooses to use can both spring from that attitude and impact it at the same time.

It may seem to you to be a simplistic view of life that your words matter so much; however,different beliefs if you choose to use upbeat and positive words to describe the things and people around you it will reinforce your positive attitude about life. If your words are harsh or critical, things will look a lot darker around you. People might start avoiding you, because they don’t want to be dragged down by your words or they may approach you in an argumentative way, because they find your words to be offensive or hurtful.

It may take a conscientious effort to choose to use positive and upbeat words, rather than just throw out the first words that come to mind; but, after a while, you will notice that the words of encouragement and thanks and praise come more naturally. It also requires more thought about the way the words that you use are received and perceived by those with whom you are speaking. I was recent sent a link to an article on the use of words in business for use as an educational topic at an upcoming referral network group meeting. The article was entitled Phrases Smart People Refuse To Use In Conversation by Dr. Travis Bradberry. One example from this article demonstrates how the words you use about the same topic can be taken by the listener as either hurtful or positive.

Bradbury wrote this about the words not to use with someone who has lost weight –

“Wow, you’ve lost a ton of weight!” Once again, a well-meaning comment—in this case a compliment—creates the impression that you’re being critical. Telling someone that she has lost a lot of weight suggests that she used to look fat or unattractive.

Instead say: “You look fantastic.” This one is an easy fix. Instead of comparing how she looks now to how she used to look, just compliment her for looking great. It takes the past right out of the picture.

You can see how even an innocent comment that is meant as a compliment can be taken the wrong way by the listener. So, it’s not just positive vs. negative words that one needs to be concerned about, but rather how all of the words that we use to try to communicate will be received.

obamhaUsing the right words requires attention and concentration. One of the aspects that I most admired about outgoing President Barrack Obama is his very measured, thoughtful and precise use of the language. You can tell by watching him speak that he is carefully choosing the words that he uses to make sure that they get his points across in an unambiguous manner. Let’s all hope that the incoming Tweeter-in-Chief can indeed “act Presidential” as he claimed during his campaign and do a better job of communicating his thoughts when he has to use more than 140 characters.

So, resolve to take the time and make the effort to choose your words more wisely and to use positive and upbeat words wherever you can today. See if that doesn’t have a positive impact on you and the people around you. Your words can paint a picture of you as EeyoreSnoopy joy the sad donkey in Winnie the Pooh or as the happy, dancing Snoopy in the Peanuts comic. Which would you rather be perceived to be?

Speak happy, be happy!  Change your world today.


In search of classy…

December 17, 2016

Recently Jack Freed posted this on his blog, Jack’s Winning Words – “Anyone can ride in ajohn-glenn spaceship or serve as a politician, but class is rare—something lacking in this crassest of American eras.”  (Ted Rall in Forbes)  Jack went on to write – John Glenn was classy!  He was humble, well-mannered, intelligent, who never tried to build oneself up by tearing others down.

I grew up in an era where there were classy role models in Hollywood and in Washington. These days one would have to search long and hard for actors or politicians that one could call classy. It seems sometimes like crass has replaced class in both places.

From the Urban Dictionary comes this definition of classy –

An adjective

1) meaning very stylish and elegant.

2) not crude or disgusting or dirty or depressing

2) a deeper, more meaningful word for ‘cool’

Yes, we also used the word “cool” a lot back then, too. In today’s political and entertainment gregory-peckworlds it seems the second definition is getting harder to find. George Clooney is often mentioned as a modern classy actor, although the ultimate classy Hollywood actors will always be Carey Grant and Gregory Peck; and actress Meryl Streep might be called classy today, though not on the level that we used to think of Katherine Hepburn.

One must really work at trying to find a politician that one could label as being classy, especially when using the second definition as the measuring stick.  In fact the term classy politician may be an oxymoron. I suppose that many people would say that JFK was a classy politician. He certainly met the requirements of the first definition and many thought him to be cool; however, history has revealed cracks in his classy facade that some find disquieting. I tried to find current political examples, but even Google couldn’t turn up a classy current politician or even an honest one. Maybe John Glen was one of the last of that classy era. Both John Kasich and Bernie Sanders rank fairly high if you just search for an honest politician.

I suspect that there are many politicians at the local levels of government who might deserve the label classy, but it appears that those who aspire to higher levels of government (even county or statewide positions) quickly abandon the traits that one would use for that label in their pursuit of political power.

At a local level, from what I’ve seen, there remain classy people in the school systems, the business community and in the clergy (Pastor Doug McMunn leaps to mind in Milford). While many of these people don’t make enough in those jobs to afford to be called classy in the sense of the first definition, they certainly meet the requirements of the second definition and most are considered to be “cool” people in the local community.volunteers You see them in the local newspapers doing good deeds and helping out in their communities. They run or work at non-profit volunteer organizations, like Community Sharing or the Village Fine Arts Association. They support local civic projects. Many are leaders in youth organizations like the boy or girl scouts or in organizations focused upon youth, like the Optimists Clubs. Without these “classy” people our local communities would be dreary places indeed.

The good news doesn’t stop with being able to find classy people in your local neighborhoods. The really good news is that you too can be thought of as being a “classy” person by jumping in and helping, too. There is no shortage of needs at all local volunteer organizations, so pick one or two and volunteer. Soon people will be talking about what a classy guy or gal you are, because you care and give of your time and effort to make a sewrving soupdifference. It’s not enough to just send in a check. No one ever said, “what a classy giver his is”. They appreciate the donations of money, but they see real class in the donation of time and effort.

We may be in for more politics at almost all levels that lack class, but that doesn’t mean that we can,t find class all around us or that we can’t be thought of as being classy ourselves. So, be cool. Jump in at your local level and do the right things to help. It’s the classy thing to do.


It all starts with me…

December 14, 2016

“The Buck Stops Here” (President Harry S. Truman) Truman had a sign that had that little saying on his desk in the White House and he used that phrase in speeches. There is anbuck-stops-here interesting story about the sign on Truman’s office and the origin of that phrase at the Truman Library web site. Truman, and many who have followed since, used that phrase to indicate that rather than “pass the buck” the buck would stop with them and they would make a decision. It is useful for making personal decisions in many facets of life, such as dealing with bullying or dealing with prejudice or continuing to look the other way and allow any number of injustices to continue. It is all too easy to pass the buck, rather than have the buck stop here- with you.

I wrote a post here yesterday about the lack of respect (and from that a lack of civility) in our modern political system and our society in general. A reader commented on that post, “Norm, you are so very right. Where has it gone and when can we get it back?” That sparked the Respect2thought that it really isn’t just about the buck stopping here, with me (or you); but, also the fact that the different behavior that is needed to combat that lack of respect and civility must start with me, too. It starts with me showing respect for the opinions of others, even if I don’t agree with their option or point of view on things. There are ways to respectfully disagree without resorting to screaming or name calling. Rather than waste my time and yours trying to denigrate you and your position, I need to focus upon doing a better job trying to understand your position and searching for some common ground upon which we might be able to find compromise.

So the answer to that question from my reader about how to recover the lost respect and civility in life is that we get it back when we start giving it back. We resist the reflex to jab back at the person taunting us or belittling our position or beliefs. We turn the otherdisagreement2 cheek. (Where have we heard that before?) Maybe, instead of just blurting back, “You’re wrong”, we could say instead, “I see that we have different opinions on this; is there anything about it that we can agree upon?” There may not initially be any apparent common ground; but, just changing the situation from a confrontation into a conversation may defuse what otherwise might escalate into something that you both regret later. We can start by respecting that we have differences and being civil about it. See how that works..

I also wrote recently about dealing with people who are looking at life through completely different lens that we can even imagine. (See – Trying to understand others without a frame of reference…) While the example used in that post and the follow-on post about Depression are examples of frames of personal reference (lens if you will) that are a little further out of the norm, they are examples of how things can be seen and opinions formed based upon different perspectives on life. The differences in the frames of reference discussed in those posts may have been extreme; however, something similar seems to looking-through-glasses-lenshave happened in our everyday lives, especially in the aspects that deal with politics.

The lens that we “see” things through in order to formulate those political opinions are often not internal, but those that are held up for us to look through by the politicians of our times. Sometimes they are charismatic charmers who can convince us to walk through fire with them in order to do the “right thing”. Sometimes they tap into our darker side and encourage us to let out the anger and frustration that we may have bottled up. We have the choice of forming ourWWJD own opinions by looking through the lenses that are held up by others or by choosing our own lens and view of things. If we really need an external lens to look through, we might do better by looking through the lens of the Bible and the “truths” that we will find there, rather than the “truths” that we see in a political ad or a tweet.

So, where does it start? How do we get back from the lack of civility and respect that we find ourselves in today? The simple truth is that it starts with me. I postulate that if I, and every other “I” out there, decided to be more respectful of differences and more civil in my interactions with others; eventually there start-with-mewould be enough “I’s” being respectful; and civil to others that it would turn us into “we” and then everything would be better. “We” would be living in a more respectful and civil world. I like that; and it starts with me.

How about you? Would you like to make your “I” a part of “We”? It starts with you, too.


R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

December 13, 2016

From the Jack’s Winning Words blog comes this post – “We don’t need to have the same opinions as others, but we need to be respectful.”  (Taylor Swift)

Jack went on to also write – “Is anyone teaching manners these days?  I’ve read that how people treat others reveals how they feel about themselves.  How are you feeling today?  I like Taylor’s comment on the importance of being respectful.    😉  Jack

Aretha Franklin had a hit song about RESPECT and the Staple Singers had a hit called Respect Yourself. I suspect that what Jack was saying starts with the second song and then deals with the first one. You can’t respect others if you don’t respect yourself. Showing disrespect and contempt for the opinions of others is just inviting them to return the favor about your position on things.

debatersIn the current loud and fractious political environment in the United States, respect and good behavior seemed to have been trampled under the heavy boots of partisan politics. As the gulf has widened between the major political groups, they have lost the ability to even hear the other’s side of the story, much less respect the differences. Both sides seem to have reached the “my way or the highway” position on their opinions and disdain has replaced disrespect in the conversations. In fact the conversations themselves have devolved into shouting matches.

One doesn’t have to look far below the surface of the shouting and apparent anger to see that the root cause – fear. The hints are actually in the phrases that are used on both sides, like “take back our country” on one side and “continue the fight forwinner-loser social, racial and economic justice” on the other. One side fears that “those people” are taking things away from us; while the other side fears that “those people” are preventing us from having equal opportunity. Both sides fear the other and see the other side’s success as taking something away from their side. Both sides view the world as a zero-sum game in which the outcome must be a winner and a loser. The position taken by both sides is “I’m right and you’re wrong”. There is no respect in this game.

There has always been a difference of opinion and approach to matters between the so-hands-across-the-gapcalled conservative and liberal factions within government. In days long gone the crack that divided the two groups was just that – a crack. It was a gap in thinking and approach to government that could be easily bridged or crossed. There were many politicians on both sides who crossed back and forth on issues, based on what they perceived to be for the good of the county. Due in many ways to the recent (relatively speaking) focus on social issues by our politicians, that crack or gap has now widened into a chasm which politicians on either side find to be too politically dangerous to cross. So they stand on bridging-the-chasmeach side of the divide hurling insults at each other across the chasm. No attempt is even made to build bridges between the opposing ideologies. They totally lack respect for each other.

There is little hope that the strident politicians that occupy the banks of the current political chasm will find a way to bridge that gap. In fact, they do not see any political advantage to trying to build that bridge. They find comfort in joining in on the shouting from their side of the chasm and encouraging even more strident views. They have become “US” and they have no respect for “THEM”.

What is the solution? Perhaps it is not to try to bridge the chasm, but rather to jump into it and build a new, third party from the bottom of that pit that can represent a way of governing without such rancor. There are many historic precedents in international politics for the creation of more moderate and centrist political parties. Instead of standing on the sides of the chasm and yelling that “government is too big” or “government is not doing enough”; perhaps this new party could focus more on what government can do to better serve the people that it governs. Instead of being focused upon the “haves” and the “have-nots”, this new party could focus on the needs. Maybe we do need to spend more time and money fixing what needs fixing here at home, but we must always be concerned about the wrongs that are occurring elsewhere in the world and new-way-forwardhelping where we can to make them right. This new party could start by showing respect to the people and the real problems at hand.

Rather than fighting a rear-guard battle against change to the world as we knew it; maybe we need to embrace a new world and a new political party that is more diverse in every way than has been the case in the past. We can’t go back; but, we can do better going forward. Let’s show some respect for the real issues and the solutions. It’s just a thought.

In the meantime, maybe we can all go back to kindergarten and re-learn what they tried to teach us there about RESPECT.


And then the sun came up…

November 9, 2016

“Don’t worry about the world coming to an end today.  It’s already tomorrow in Australia.”  (Charles Schulz) – from the post on Jack’s Winning Words on the day after the recent Presidential election.

The reactions to the U.S. election around the world ranged from the pollsters’ and pundits’ shock and disbelief to a general sense worry and fear. The stock markets of the world swooned and nervous governments everywhere when back to the drawing boards to try to figure outme what this will mean to them. Many went to bed not knowing the outcome; some did not go to bed at all. And then the sun came up.
The world did not end and will not end because of the election of Donald Trump to be President of the United States. The awesome power and responsibilities of that office seemed to sink-in to the President Elect a bit as he delivered his winning speech to supporters, pledging to be a President for all of the people and trying to reassure allies and adversaries around the world that he will act prudently and with restraint. He had been through a dark and brutal campaign for almost two years; and then the sun came up.

President Elect Trump’s campaign tapped into and aligned itself with the frustration and anger of the American electorate – a frustration with the gridlock and self-dealing of Washington politicians and the anger of feeling helpless as the world-wide economy shifted and took jobs with it to other countries. That anger and frustration sometimes turned very dark, but it also fueled a movement bent on change, no matter what the cost. Perhaps there will be real good come out of some of that change. Whatever the immediate future holds, there will always be a tomorrow and another opportunity to change again. A old saying tells us that it is always darkest before the dawn.  And then the sun came up.

For those with tears in their eyes and fears in their hearts who supported Secretary
Clinton, it is hard to see anything positive from the outcome; however, they must not lose faith in the basic goodness and principals upon which our country was founded. Whether
it veers slightly to the right or slightly to the left it continues to move forward as the greatest example of a free people ruling jesus-as-lightthemselves for their common good and the good of the world. We print the foundation of our beliefs as a people on our money – In God we Trust.

And then the Son comes up.

God bless America!


Pivoting to inclusiveness…

August 30, 2016

From the Jack’s Winning Words blog comes this post, which I have re-blogged in its entirety –

“I used to use the word diversity all the time.  Now, I’ve learned to use the word inclusiveness.”  (Oprah)  I live in a community which is very diverse…over 60 different languages spoken in the homes of our high school families.  Oprah reminds us that it’s possible to be diverse without being inclusive.  “Inclusive” is an action word, to reach out and welcome in.  We are not really a community, a church, a neighborhood without being inclusive.   😉  Jack 

The change noted in Oprah’s quote is one of perspective. Instead of being “outside looking in” at how things are,  as the word diversity allows us to do; the word inclusiveness forces the perspective of being inside and taking action to be a part of what is going on all around us.

time for changePivoting is the term de jure in business and political vernacular this year. Literally it is used to mean making a change in direction or opinion about something, but is used to make the speaker seem somehow more businesslike or serious. In politics pivoting allows a candidate to change directions without seeming to be wishy-washy on something. The candidate can say that, “I didn’t change my mind on that, I pivoted.” Whatever, it is still a change of direction or mind.

One reason that some diehards are finally pivoting from the use of diversity to espousing inclusiveness is that inclusiveness allows them to remain somewhat relative and influential in the conversation orstubborn events that are happening, rather than being labeled as old fashion or accused of fighting a rear guard action against the inevitable demographic changes that are happening in our society. They have realized that they can join the movement or be by-passed by it, if they are hunkered down in their foxholes trying to resist the changes. In U.S. politics those foxhole resisters are the ones gerrymandering political districts to try to avoid being overrun by the demographic changes. Those “safe districts” are their foxholes and they are hunkered down in them.

Jack points out that it is possible to be diverse without being inclusive. It is pretty much impossible these days to be inclusive without also being diverse. There are certainly communities and even whole countries that have populations that are relatively homogeneous in their ethnic makeup; however, even in those cultures there is both some diversity (whether it be in class or religion or other characteristics) and most have achieved some level of inclusiveness. Some have not and we have seen the use of “ethnic cleansing” in many of those places, whether it is driven by differences in ethnicity or religion.

predjuicesEvents around the world and the massive movement of people throughout the world constantly force the reexamination of the characterization of people using the terms “Us” and “Them”. More and more of “Them” are joining the ranks of “Us”, such that the “Us” population is rapidly growing while the “Them” population is becoming smaller and less relevant.  The sooner we get to an understanding that it all of “Us” that have to learn to live together the better.

So perhaps, instead of building walls to keep “Them” out; we should be working on strategies and programs to help all of “Us” have better and more productive lives. We need not only to pivot to usingpeople talking the word inclusiveness; but, also to start living inclusive lives.  Just keep an eye out for the foxholes dwellers. There are some really frightened and angry people living in those holes. The challenge for Us is to figure out a way, not to by-pass Them, but to include them, too. Sometimes it ain’t easy being inclusive, but in all times that is better than the alternative. Let’s keep expanding “Us” until there is no more “Them”.

Have a great and inclusive week ahead.


The streets still echo with his steps…

January 18, 2016

“When you are right you cannot be too radical.  When you are wrong you cannot be too conservative.”  (MLK Jr) – as seen on the Jack’s Winning Words blog.

MLK image over DOwntown MIlfordOn this Martin Luther King day, America and the world are still struggling with many wrongs that need righting, many injustices that beg for justice and many old prejudices that seem to refuse to die. People still take to the streets, as they did in King’s day seeking redress of the wrongs, although many times not as peacefully as he would have liked. Too often there is still a lack of recognition between the right and wrong positions in many of the areas that still cause division and pain. There is too much of a mentality of “them vs. us”; rather than searching for a solution that involves “we”.

The struggles that Dr. King lead, that were so clearly defined along racial lines, have expanded to embrace other groups who are discriminated against because of their differences; not only differences of appearance, but differences in lifestyles. Other groups have added their ethnicity to the discrimination issue fight and a growing issue concerning religious beliefs has begun to creep into the conversation. And, the streets that Dr. King marched upon have not fallen silent. To this day we have people of color marching in the streets caring signs that say “black lives matter”; and new groups marching with them with signs that say “all lives matter.”

In a perversion of Dr. King’s thought, some of the most wrong in America do call themselves Conservatives and seek to justify their discriminatory actions my proclaimingopinionated their righteousness in their “defense of American Family values.” Apparently they think it is OK to discriminate so long as they also proclaim themselves to be evangelicals who are mounting a Bible-based defense of American life as they define it. What’s that old saying about two wrongs not making a right? That’s apparently not in their Bible.

Dr. King might be proud of some of the progress that has been made in the struggles that he led; but he also would surely recognize the unleveled playing fields that still exist. The people that he led can ride the buses and eat in the restaurants now, but the same factions that he was fighting back then still own the buses and the restaurants – and almost everything else. There are laws that allow for redress of wrongs; but also many laws or loopholes that protect those who commit the wrongs, especially at the economic level.

Jim Crow may have put away his guns and called off his dogs, but he did not give up control; he just found a less obvious and violent way to exert it – thru economics and rich man poor manpolitical power. He also found new adversaries to try to hold in check – those who were different from him in almost any way. For quite some time this new strategy worked well by employing tactics such as direct political contributions, Political Action Committees and gerrymandering to maintain political power. That political power allowed the structuring of laws that stripped away what power the masses has accumulated through the tort process or via organized labor. Rather rapidly, in terms of history, those in power amassed most of the wealth of the country, too. Now the top 1% of the world’s people control 99% of the wealth of the entire world, and with that wealth they can buy all of the power that they need to maintain their positions.

I’m not sure if Dr. King would have wanted to lead the coming class wars against this oligarchy, but I think he would have seen it coming and understood that it is both necessary and a noble struggle; one in which it will be impossible to be too radical. The “Occupy Movement” was more of a baby step than a real opening salvo in this war. Historyrich snob is full of instances of the people eventually getting fed up with existing on the crumbs that fall off the tables of the rich rulers and rising up against them.

Those will not be echoes of Dr. King’s marches or distant drums that you will hear but the pounding of millions of feet on the streets of the world and they will all be carrying the same sign that reads – “our lives matter”. The 1% cannot buy enough politicians or arm enough police to hold back this movement. Did someone on Wall Street
say “let them eat cake?”


Wouldn’t it be a hoot…

January 17, 2016

The silly season is upon us all again as the Presidential Primary Season approaches. I think
it would be an absolute hoot if Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders were selected as their party’s candidates. Can you image the fun of seeing in the debate the
biggest, conservative billionaire blowhard vs. the avowed Socialist, whose motto is “Have the courage to take on the billionaire class”? What a hoot that would be, if only it weren’t such a sad commentary on the state of political affairs in America.

This year’s silly season is the most silly and vicious that I have ever witnessed and has disagreement2certainly exposed the carnage that rabid partisanship has wrecked upon both parties. The huge philosophical divide between the parties and the lack of interest in any compromise has left the entire middle of the political spectrum abandoned and ripe for a third party effort. Unfortunately, the only way that anyone can mount a campaign effort for President these days is to first acquire a billion dollars or more.

Imagine the ridiculous scene it would be to have these two populist politicians even trying to debate. One can only imagine the biting satirical thrusts of Sanders on the income inequity issue that has become his hallmark cause and the animated and bombastic tirades (sans any need for fact or logic) that Trump would launch in retort. Perhaps Sanders attack on the greedy heart of capitalism would even cause the Donald to forget for the moment his plan to block any further middle-eastern immigration and put those already here from the middle-east under surveillance.  To further expose the intolerance and bigotry of Trump (and the Republican party) Sanders could choose as his Vice-Presidential running mate a member of the GLBT community who was born in America of naturalized, but foreign-born parents and who espouses a woman’s right to choose and tougher gun control laws. Trump would be so flummoxed that he would likely be unable to get a single sane word out.

We hear every political pundit saying that Sanders has no chance to be the Democratic nominee and few pundits had given Trump a chance to even get as far as he has, so far. Interestingly enough, many so-called political experts are now starting to hedge on Trump’s chances and even Sanders has surprised many in the latest round of polls. Strange things can happen when the system gets skewed so far off center, as it is right now.

I don’t like to watch political debates, since they are little more than strings of campaign debaterssound bites and personal attacks along the candidates; however, I did recently watch the reruns of the last republican “debate”. It was obvious that the closer to the center of the stage a candidate was placed measured not only his current polling strength, but also his adherence to the tea party conservative line. The only candidates who made statements that seemed to both thoughtful and reasonable in a political environment that is begging for compromise were the politicians relegated to the far ends of the stage. Of course they spent most of the evening off camera.

The decline in civility that has accompanied the ideological split in Washington is also on display during the debates for both parties. Watching the debates, one comes away with the impression that is essentially a contest between a bunch of scum-bags and your choice is which scum-bag you decide to hold your nose and vote for in the primaries. If one believes all of the rhetoric, none of the candidates is trustworthy, none will end up doing what they say that they will do and the country is in grave danger if any of them are elected. Both parties and their stalwarts claim that the other side has run the country into the ground, are providing morally corrupt leadership and will lead to the end of America as we know it if their candidate is elected.

One is reminded, of course that this has always been the case in American politics. From the PhillyMagazine web site comes this (edited for this post) – It all began in 1796, when Alexander Hamilton attacked Thomas Jefferson on the pages in Gazette of the United States, a federalist paper in Philadelphia. Hamilton claimed that Jefferson was having a love affair with one of his slaves (which, of course, turned out to be true). Hamilton went on to call Jefferson a coward. In that same election, Supporters of John Adams also claimed that Jefferson’s election would result in a civil war, that he would free the slaves, and that he was an atheist. As for his supporters, they were “cut-throats who walk in rags and sleep amid filth and vermin.” The language has changed a bit but the vitriol has remained.  To read more about Americas history of mudslinging Presidential Campaigns click here.

In the case of our current Presidential campaign one can take offense at the statements being made within or between parties or treat it like the political circus that it is and enjoydumb and dumber it.  At least it is somewhat like a modern TV comedy, filled with ridiculous characters sparing with each other with words rather than swords. Like a TV show, or a movie, it requires that you suspend your disbelief for a period and just enjoy it, laugh along and don’t think about the horrible consequences of any of these clowns actually get elected. It’s only a hoot if you don’t stop to cry.