by Daniel G. O'Leary

Created on: December 23, 2009   Last Updated: April 26, 2010

When someone runs for political office, they generally are running because they believe that they can and will do a better job than the person in that office at the moment. That opinion, that belief, is extremely subjective because it is their belief about themselves, and what they are capable and willing to do.

That's not a bad thing, it's actually an important thing because it affords "us" (the voters), an opportunity to see and hear contrasting opinions, suggestions, proposed solutions about issues important to "us" from different perspectives.

The people running for the political office in question, as well as the person presently in that office (if that person is seeking another term), are then tasked with selling "us" (the voters), themselves. They spend countless hours, days, weeks, maybe even months, projecting / selling an image of themselves; their beliefs, their positions, their opinions, their plan for action to us.

During the entire process, every candidate, every person in office is entitled to also have a personal life, a right to privacy. The press seems to push their right to know and inform the public to the limit, and beyond at times infringing upon the candidates and the incumbents right to privacy. However, it is at such moments or very close to such borderline moments, when those seeking political office or those in office are discovered to be acting / living in a manner or way that directly contradicts the image that they have "sold" to us (the voters). That's a problem! Why? Because if the person in question is caught in a manner that contradicts what that person has sold to us, they have lied to us, their honesty is now questionable, their trust is questionable, their loyalty is questionable, everything "we" (the voters) bought is questionable.

Worse, if the questionable or contradictory action or lifestyle had not been discovered by the press and made known to the public, but had been discovered by someone seeking leverage or favors of the candidate or person in office, the threat of disclosure could greatly compromise the positions, the beliefs, the plan of action of the candidate or the person in office that got us to vote for them, causing them to do the opposite of what we expected them to do,

I believe in our Constitution, in right over wrong, in freedom and equality for all. I have, and will continue to defend the word of law, our law, our Constitution, our Nation of "WE the People" to the best of my ability always. I expect no less of those seeking to represent "us" nor would I tolerate their lie. Either lay all the cards on the table while running and let the voters decide if they want you to represent them, or don't run, and live your lie as you wish. If the questionable acts took place after elected to the office we elected you for, resign! Why? Because no matter how you look at it at that point, you violated our trust in you, and resigning is the right thing to do! Harsh? Yes, but so is the reality that you are no longer the person "WE" were led to believe you were!

Freedom comes with a price, it's not free. Countless Americans have paid the ultimate price believing and defending the freedom granted to every American in Our Constitution. Those seeking to represent Us, "We the People" (from the Constitution), as well as those representing Us, must be held to account for their actions or lack thereof, especially when less than honorable. The stakes are high, the vote and support of "We the People"!

I believe in you. I believe in me. I believe in "WE"! Today can be a better day, shall "WE" begin?

Learn more about this author, Daniel G. O'Leary.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.