I am the first one to admit that I am human. As a human I am imperfect and I have made mistakes. My vices are shoes, chocolate, and an occasional glass of red wine. I have character flaws that make me generous to a fault and I donate more time and money to causes I care about than I should. I have the temper characteristic of my Irish ancestors. I hate paperwork and regulations and will procrastinate when forced to comply with either. I am a woman who loves to cook and eat. So much so that my waistline is bigger than many trees my age.

I know our next president will be a flawed human being. But, just like when I buy a car, home, business, or other major investment--I want to make sure that my investment is without a fatal flaw that will make it of questionable value. I'm not so sure some politicians on this slate of candidates are the best "investment" in America's future. And by continuing to lower our electoral standards in 2008, we may doom our country to the laws of diminishing returns. In other words, the quality of candidates will continue to get worse and worse.

Ronald Reagan was divorced and he was the greatest president in my lifetime.  But at the time he was elected president, he and Nancy had been married closer to four decades than four years. He had a successful marriage and honored his vows to one woman for fifty-two years. He and his wife committed to each other for better or worse. I believed RR when he took to oath of office. He would honor his commitment to the country as strongly as he had honored his oath to his wife. If he wasn't as devoted to his marriage as I believe, he was very good at keeping his private life just that--private.

If someone wishes to be the leader of the free world he needs to convince me that he is a man of honor. If he cannot honor the vows he made to a woman for better or worse, can he honor the promises he makes to a nation?

There also seems to be a number of men running whose current wives used to be workplace subordinates. I think it is very bad form for a man of power and privilege to be banging the office help.

Does anyone remember that our government was preoccupied with Monica, a navy blue dress, and a cigar just a few short years ago?

Consequently, I really don't want a First Lady who contributed to the dissolution of her husband's previous marriage. Women who fool around with married men are a menace to the institution of marriage--how can I trust that the future First Lady will protect the institutions critical to our nation's future?

It is wrong to break-up a marriage and family because there is someone more--exciting--attractive--intelligent--younger--smarter--faster--thinner--funnier--than the spouse chosen years ago. There was an agreement that included "for better or worse." Presidential candidates' wedding vows are not amended to say, "until I find a better spouse that will enhance my political career."

And to those women who thought they made a great catch when they landed their presidential prince charming, I have one news flash for you--if he cheated on his last wife, he will very likely cheat on you when the opportunity presents itself.

And what about the "Stand by My Man" Hillary type of political wife? The wife who knows that her husband uses his power and privilege to satisfy his carnal needs and then tells the world that the marriage isn't anyone's business. What other indiscretions has she turned a blind eye too in the name of furthering a political career? Have this political wife's actions strengthened or weakened our nation? You be the judge.

Men like Clinton and Kennedy left so many women in their wake it was bound be come out sometime in their career.

If Hillary Clinton (or anyone like her in the future) couldn't manage her marriage, what chance do we have that she can lead a nation?

Where is the common sense of an electorate that is willing to accept unfaithful spouses as our elected officials? And I don't just mean in the White House. This goes to council chambers, state houses, and other elected bodies.

I'm living in a glass house and throwing stones. But, I'm throwing stones at those who want to inhabit our statehouse and White House.

I'm married to a man who had two wives before me. He's not running for president. I'm not perfect, he's not perfect--but we are perfect for each other. I trust him in the context of our marriage and family. Neither of us broke up a marriage to be together. He is my best friend, my closest confident, and my soul mate. We share a vision and a future.

I can read him like a book and he knows what makes me tick. We argue about politics, our kid, work, who should bathe the dog, how to hang the curtains, and where we should spend time and money. All the things that a normal married couple tug and tussle over are negotiated daily. We compromise and make decisions based on what is best for our family--not what is best for each of us as individuals. The whole of our family is stronger then the sum of its parts. Our politicians need to show that they learn these lessons at their own hearth before they run for office.

If our candidates haven't learned the art of holding a family together are they a good choice for president?

Joe and I don't know everything about each other. The teenager in our house won a bet this week because dad didn't know my favorite flavor of ice cream. Score one for the kid.

Because we can never know everything about our candidates for office, we must measure them on what we do know about them. We must measure them based on what their values, morals, and character say about our personal and cultural feelings about our families, communities and nation.

We need to hold them accountable for the appearance of their personal life.

As an electorate we need to hold them accountable for their actions in office as well. Too often we elect someone based on what they say they will in a campaign, and once they are in office the politicians become constituent deaf. Why put someone in office, and then keep them in office, if they are more concerned with what the political action committees, corporate donors, and special interest groups want than what their constituents want and need?

Don't believe what the candidate for re-election tells voters. I evaluate their voting record and you should too. What are your top five issues politically in this list: education, healthcare, traffic, commerce, taxes, poverty, immigration, Medicare, homelessness, national security, social security, welfare, the arts, the environment, international relations, jobs, the economy, homeland security, landowner's rights, the military, gay marriage, or any other issues close to your heart? Do your candidates' deeds match their campaign rhetoric?

Check with public interest groups who work on issues you feel strongly about. If you cannot accept that the incumbent's voting record doesn't reflect your political agenda, exercise your options. Every two, four or six years voters get an opportunity to change the direction of our community, state, and nation. Voters expressed their displeasure at the polls in 2006 and will be heard in 2008.

If you believe that the local party machine is controlling the outcome of the elections, get involved with the county party. Don't like the county leadership--change it. Be seen at local political events, join the PTA, the Chamber of Commerce, or any other group where stakeholders gather.

The democratic process and our representative government work when individuals get involved. If you find a superb candidate make sure your endorsement is there for the world to see. Get a yard sign, walk a precinct, host a coffee, make telephone calls, tell your friends, put a sticker on your car window, donate a few dollars, register voters and make an impact. You will be serving a grateful nation.