Cleavage

Is there a relationship between fashion and politics? The overriding goal of ladies fashion is eye attraction. Here are times when fashion will accent a woman’s waist. Other times, a woman’s read is the focus of the fashion industry. For a long time, short skirts resulted in attracting eyes to legs and everyone has heard the expression, “fuckme shoes” which are supposed to send a particular message because of the design of footwear. Today, it seems like cleavage is the center of attraction. This is interesting from a couple of standpoints. For example, one notices a woman dressed to display cleavage constantly adjusting her top. Is she trying to avoid showing too much cleavage or trying to make certain that just the right amount is displayed. To that end, just what is the right amount? Are there standards that are published somewhere that one can look to determine if their display is correct. By the way, the same thing occurred with skirts. Women wearing short skirts are always tugging at the hem of a short skirt. What determines too long or too short? Why not just get the right length to start with and avoid having to continually tug or pull. Of course, one must be aware that all of the adjusting on the part of the wearer (both cleavage and skirt, BTW) has the effect of attracting someone else’s eye to the scene of adjustment. Thereby arises the next point. Why people displaying their various wares so vocal when someone else notices them. Go into any cocktail lounge in American and conversation will eventually get around to complaining about the guy across the room who is “staring at my boobs” or the idiot on the next stool who is “trying to look up my skirt”. Usually these comments are prompted by eye action first provoked by adjustment. So how does all of this relate to politics? Well once again Mitt claimed his mandate for Romney care was a "good" mandate while Obama's mandate was a "bad" mandate. One might suppose a mandate is a mandate just as a short skirt will display more leg than a long skirt (assuming no slit, of course) Newt was on TV and made a comment about having made past mistakes. He appeared to imply that past mistakes should not be criteria for selecting or refusing to select a candidate to head up the republican ticket. Seemingly, his conversation was the politician’s equivalent of tugging at hems or adjusting cleavage. If you wish to keep things hidden, don’t expose them to begin with. If you want to be president some day, don’t have a past filled with vote-killers and expect people to ignore the past just because you asked them to. I made mistakes in my past but don’t plan to make mistakes in the future is not a winning campaign slogan. What a lot of people will hear is: like a leopard you probably will not change your spots, but changing the angle of view might make the spots appear less obvious. Like cleavage, the spots will still be there no matter how much you adjust. In fact, the more you adjust, the more cleavage (or past) is noticed.