What's wrong with Iowa?

(NOTE: Originally posted Oct. 2007 in my Facebook notes. Indicative of my writing style/attitude at that time. Came across it today and found it relevant, in light of the Bloom fiasco.)

Being from Iowa, and being young, I’m often asked two questions that, when asked together, seem ridiculous. They are:

1) Why is there such a brain drain (i.e. smart people leaving the state), and what can we do to stop it?
2) What the hell are you still doing here?/Why did you move back?/You’re from Iowa?

Interesting, if enigmatic.

I believe these two questions answer themselves. I’m not sure if it’s technically a catch-22, but it’s most assuredly a chicken-before-the-egg scenario: You should leave to get better employment, but you should stay so we have better employees.

Most kids growing up in my generation, if their parents had the good fortune to actually choose to live in Iowa, were likely indoctrinated into this kind of hypocritical thought process (Go to the bigger cities for better jobs, better quality of life, etc.). Then these kids get to be my age and are asked, “Why are you leaving?”

There’s talk of incentives; higher incomes, more large employers locating in Iowa, promoting our quality of life in the rural/small town areas. Sen. Bill Dotzler even told me of an idea floating around Iowa Senate committees involving some type of incentive for an increase in arts and cultural centers and activities; the idea sprung from a book hypothesis arguing businesses are attracted to vibrant, hip communities.

Without attacking or disproving any of these notions (and many of them, arguably, could improve Iowa life), it’s not the exterior we need to worry about changing to get people to stop leaving and start arriving. To the extent I sound like a certain politician, we need to win hearts and minds. And we don’t just need to worry about changing people’s attitudes outside our state (which would be a much more difficult, if not impossible, task). We need to change the minds of our children growing up today who are going to our schools, enjoying our museums and parks and community pools --- who are all the while being told that to get ahead in life, they need to get the hell out of the Midwest.

If there’s one amazing thing I learned from talking to people from all over the world at RAGBRAI, it’s that people say the exact same thing about us when they come here: “Iowans are so friendly.” If the economic director or tourism bureau wants a catchphrase, get a picture of some athletic cyclists riding by Iowa yards, where Iowans sit in their lawn chairs, smiling and waving as they ride by, and blow that phrase up and plaster it on the top of that photo.

But here’s the thing: You can’t escape who you are. It took me a while to face the fact that most of Iowa truly is like the stereotype: full of small, farming towns with a lot of church-going white people. If you feel like you’re looking in a mirror when you hear that, you’ll love Iowa. But if you’re not, or prefer to be surrounded by a bit more diversity, there are places like that for you here, too. I live in one of them, Waterloo, and it and several other metropolitan statistical areas in the state cracks the stereotypes – Des Moines, Iowa City, Cedar Rapids, etc. But none are exactly brimming with diversity, or have exceptionally more places to work or things to do than, say, the other 49 states.

The Minneapolis band Atmosphere tries to take on the status quo mindset with “Say Shh.” ('Shh' refers to what you say to those who would criticize your humble roots.) The lyrics extol those who choose to live, or return to, the Midwest, because it’s where your “mom stays”:

“If your playgrounds are clear of stems and syringes, say ‘shh,’ say ‘shh.’
If there’s only one store in your town that sells 12-inchers, say ‘shh,’ say ‘shh.’”

Fair enough. We don’t have abundant sex stores or rampant drug use (provided, of course, we exclude alcohol, marijuana and methamphetamines). But we also don’t provide a state that proves appealing among the master’s- and doctorate-degree crowd. And the only thing that’s rampant is the flight of that crowd to decidedly-more drug-and-sex-store infested places, if only to get employment opportunities and whatever else they feel will give them a more satisfactory life than Iowa promises.

I don’t blame them. Not one bit. I may live in Iowa today, but if given the chance to move out tomorrow, I wouldn’t think twice about leaving the state that raised me, educated me, provided me with recreational opportunities and allowed me to develop a trust and friendliness with strangers for no other reason than to be polite.

Why, you may ask? Lured by the big-city life, by the endless entertainment possibilities, fine dining, a place where fringe groups are allowed to come out in the open, where I could sport my hippie-wear without being shunned or laughed at?

Nah. I can flip through the Courier any Thursday and find an abundance of live shows, karaoke, poetry slams, sports, recreation and festivals. There’s plenty of restaurants, both find and not-so-fine, that I still haven’t found the time to frequent. And I definitely wear skirts and head wraps on occasion, and my coworkers and friends treat me just the same. Maybe there aren’t too many people willing to flaunt whatever life or style they’ve got going on, but maybe I also haven’t been keeping my eye out for them. Either way, it’s not a dealbreaker, cause I know they’re out there.

My point is, these all exist where I stay. Maybe just not in amounts that are captivating to some.

But if politicians, business owners, venture capitalists and others think all it takes for people to move here is more businesses, they’re wrong. A recent study reported more than 100,000 jobs, especially in high-paying, high-tech fields, will all be up for grabs in the next 10 years – and no one will be around to fill them. Sen. Dotzler says this is already a problem; around the state, approximately 10,000 positions have yet to be filled by qualified employees, a situation he classifies as “alarming.” It’s not a lack of high-paying jobs that’s the problem here.

Which brings me back to question number one. What IS the problem, if not employment? And it also brings me back to the answer that’s most troubling – changing hearts and minds. We can’t just tell our kids that Iowa’s great, because if they’ve been other places, they know they’re great, too.

So here’s the question I at last pose to you: What is it that MAKES Iowa, if not better, than just as good? And what would make you decide to stay?

Iowa Hate: Quick Meme Stephen Bloom

Also, for an extra dose of funny, Raygun does it again.

UPDATE 3:15 p.m. 12/14/11: Same pic, different meme; even better.

Iowa Hate: Professor Stephen Bloom edition

UPDATE 3:30 p.m. 12/13/11: Hey, quit picking on poor Stephen Bloom! He doesn't like all the mean emails calling him names. He wouldn't do that to yoooouuuu.

Also, Raygun continues to be awesome.

Also, check out the Combat Blog, as Dan Brooks says it better than I can. #thnx

Original post:
This one is so hateful, even the Des Moines Register noticed.

When Obama spoke of those clinging to guns and religion, he was talking about the Iowa hamlets that will shape the contours of the GOP contest

Oh. Well. I didn't know we were fightin' dirty right off the bat.

*takes out switchblade*

OK. I'm ready.

The offender: Stephen G. Bloom (oh please, using your middle initial is like putting "esquire" after your name), a professor at the University of Iowa who has been here for 20 years. As any good Iowan knows, not being raised up here makes you an outsider, no matter how many years you've been here.

Wanna know how we came up with that logic? Because, no matter how many years you're here, you're still likely, at any time, to spew horse manure the likes of what you'll see from Bloom.

The offense: The entire article linked above. Really, if you wanna go read the whole bloated, rambling piece of what passes for "commentary" over at The (We Should Really Know Better) Atlantic, bastion of East Coast snobbery, and you've got about 20 minutes and a desire to be filled with rage and SMH giggle fits, be my guest. It's hideous. A snippet:

Those who stay in rural Iowa are often the elderly waiting to die, those too timid (or lacking in educated[sic]) to peer around the bend for better opportunities, an assortment of waste-toids and meth addicts with pale skin and rotted teeth, or those who quixotically believe, like Little Orphan Annie, that "The sun'll come out tomorrow."

It's no surprise then, really, that the most popular place for suicide in America isn't New York or Los Angeles, but the rural Middle, where guns, unemployment, alcoholism and machismo reign. 

Ho. Lee. Mackrel.

I mean, where to start, Prof. Bloom? In an article that, according to your wording, attempts to "explain to the geographically challenged a little about Iowa" (which, by the way, even geography nerds might not know about the geopolitical* challenges), you instead choose to cut down, rearrange and conveniently stereotype every part of your "adopted state."

*(word choice you actually meant)

The giggle fits come when he talks about things that, actually (OK, I've pointed out before that I am not a farmer,) can't really be true. When you walk by corn fields, you hear popping? Can anyone else verify this? (UPDATE: Corn does not pop.) Or was this just BB guns aimed at the holier-than-thou Bloom, who also claims that everyone asks if his dog (presumably, a lab) is a good hunting dog. Which, fair question, Bloom. Is he? Because if he is, he'd probably be happier running around sniffing out pheasants than locked up in your Iowa City abode all day listening to the Brahms you left on for him while you're teaching your courses.

What, I'm being unfair? I don't even know the dude? OK. But it's pretty clear he doesn't know me, either. More than once, he calls out my own damn hometown -- once as a "scuzzy river town" and another time, oddly, to make fun of its name. Its damn NAME. So, yeah. Gloves off.

Reached for response by the Register, Bloom is unapologetic.

For his part, Bloom, a visiting professor this fall at the University of Michigan, said that he’s merely engaged in unflinching journalism with foresight, similar to his 2000 book, “Postville.”

“I mention some uncomfortable truths in the story, some unconventional truths,” he said. “Maybe people are not accustomed to reading those kinds of things.”

Maybe Bloom is unaccustomed to having the entire populace of a state he's just unabashedly bashed ream him out. Did he not think we would? Cause we're all just a bunch of elderly, methed-out farmers who aren't actually representative of America?

Or maybe, Professor Bloom, it's because when people read lies, they want to call the person who is spreading such lies out. Lies like "Iowa sucks super hard, who wants to go there/let them pick a president in the caucuses/have anything to do with them? Amirite?" Because that's all East Coasters need, is another reason not to care/invest in us/move here. And that's all former Iowans need, is a reason to convince themselves not to come back here/bring their families back here.

And that's all we Iowans need, is yet another doucher telling us who we are, why we can't achieve and how depressing that all is.

I especially like blogger Rebecca McKanna's take on it:

Does my state have problems? Yes, it does. It has serious economic issues that need to be addressed and which your article suggests no solutions for. Does my state include some red necks and uber-Christians and people who think Michele Bachmann is swell? Yes. But my state also includes millionaires, Pulitzer prize winning authors, social activists, feminists, drag queens and many other types of people.

But hey, why bother with nuance? The Atlantic pays the same for slipshod journalism.

Iowa Hate: "Aren't Iowans cute!" edition

It's pretty easy to spot Iowa Hate a mile away. You're not from here, so you bash us, or you are from here, and you bash us anyway (MINOs, psh, amirite?).

Iowa Hate masquerading as a glowing portrait of our state isn't as easy.

But you can spot the code words: "humble" (they never do anything worth talking about), "quaint" (old-fashioned, behind-the-times) and "polite" (you can walk all over 'em). Armed with those, plus a nice little tone of "oh, we're just beginning to make our home here for a temporary time/maybe permanently, just moved from the Big City, oh aren't these mums so BIG and BEAUTIFUL, we could NEVER grow these in our rooftop garden plot in Brooklyn, could we, darling?" -- and you've got yourselves some patronizing Iowa hatin'.

The offense: The entire article at The Rumpus, a literary online magazine for the literary minded who like literary things and live or are familiar with San Francisco, the better to get the myriad inside jokes the publication posts regularly. (Dear Sugar really is their saving grace, but.)

Here's the lovely introduction, from an article on the Occupy movement coming to DSM:

Des Moines isn’t known as a hotbed of activism. It’s not known as a hotbed of anything really — except perhaps butter cows and caucusing on presidential election years. Iowans practice a fierce moderation in all things, particularly their daily lives: an exciting Saturday starts with a trip to the Farmer’s Market, and if you’re not there by 9:00 a.m., you’ve missed the good stuff (so I hear). The major industry is insurance, which has kept the local economy from feeling most of the effects of the recent downturn, and the real estate bubble never really inflated here. Politically, Des Moines is almost the anti-Austin: Austin, Texas is a blue city in a state of red; Des Moines resides in the most Republican county in the state–but is represented in Congress by a conservative Democrat.

The offenders: Amy Letter and Brian Spears, presumably a couple, who -- I'm quoting from the bottom of the article -- say they "moved to Des Moines this past summer" and "are preparing for their first real winter." (DISCLAIMER: One time, hoping for some freelance work, I emailed Spears [then-poetry editor there, and maybe he still is] and asked about the pay for reviewing poetry books, which they had advertised -- after he said it was precisely nothing, I politely declined. And that is the entirety of our "relationship.")

I assume Spears and Letter really do mean to showcase the ol' Occupy movement. But ugh-ugh-ugh, the patronizing is patronizing, and I gotta

Break it down:

"Des Moines isn't known as a hotbed of activism" -- OK, Letter/Spears, again, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt (and assume you didn't much research this assumption) because you're not "from here," but let me just tell you that, yes, actually, Des Moines and lots of other towns around it in Iowa have, indeed, been sort of hot-bed-y. For a long time, actually.

Off the top of my head, I can think of Muscatine's Alexander Clark, who won the right for his daughter to go to her neighborhood school 100 years before Brown v. Board; or Iowa being only the third (and first Midwestern) state to repeal its anti-miscegenation law (that's whites and blacks marrying) in 1851. It was among the first to allow women to own property and was the first state (that's out of the whole United States, bt-dubs) to admit a woman to the bar to practice law. (ooh, we let the womenfolk be activists, too?)

Oh, and there's that whole gay marriage thing. Wonder how that came about. Surely not because of activism, and even if it was, it definitely didn't have anything to do with Des Moines.

So if that's "fierce moderation," then right about now I'm practicing fierce apathy. Moving on.

"Has kept the local economy from feeling most of the effects of the recent downturn" -- don't make me recap this for you. Moving on.

"Politically, Des Moines is almost the anti-Austin" -- what? Are you trying to say that Des Moines is a red city in a state of blue? First of all, most political folks see Iowa as a swing state, going from blue to red and back again as the wind blows. While Eastern Iowa is more blue, Western Iowa is very red. Central Iowa, where Des Moines is located, is really the swing factor. Secondly, Iowa's "blue territory" is concentrated in -- surprise, surprise -- its urban population centers: Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids/Iowa City, Waterloo/Cedar Falls and - weird - Des Moines, where the city tends Democratic.

But beyond the incorrect line, what Letter/Spears are really trying to say is that Austin -- imperceptibly cool, live-music friendly, hipster paradise Austin -- is exactly what Des Moines is not. Where Austin attracts a liberal crowd to a conservative state, Des Moines is supposed to be a conservative hotbed? In a liberal state? I think you're thinking of San Diego.

In reality, Des Moines is politically complicated, and -- just like the rest of Iowa -- not only capable of thinking through the issues and deciding based on the evidence (the markers of a good swing state), but of making decisions before the rest of the country because it's the right thing to do. Which doesn't make Des Moines the moderate anti-Austin, or whatever. It does make them activists, in the truest sense of the word.

Occupy Des Moines? I'm surprised we didn't think of it first.

Iowa Love: Helpin' folks out in other states

Just for the heck of it. Before stuff even goes down. Because -- well, we help people out around here. Even if they secretly think we're all a bunch o' backwards hicks.

Red Cross volunteers and others are headed to the East Coast to help out in case Hurricane Irene slams the coast good.

We've always been a helping people. Officially, we're second in the nation among percentage of residents who volunteer (nearly 38 percent of us do), contributing almost 40 hours per resident per year (ranking us 13th).

So next time I hear one o' ya New Yorkers bitchin' about how flat and corny we are... well, I'd better not hear that.

h/t Des Moines Register

Iowa Hate: ABC News: 'Rural job creation plan may simply shift resources'

This one ain't just Iowa, folks. It hits everybody who's ever felt that, ya know, rural folks deserve doctors too, and maybe a modicum of health care, and all that. But it happened because of President Obama's rural jobs tour, which took place in Peosta, Iowa, so it's going on the blog.

The offense: Pretty much the biggest premise of the article, but specifically the following:

Bronars also said the allowing citizens to access Labor Department job search information at field offices could be beneficial, but the key question is whether applicants’ skills will match the positions for which employers are hiring.

Economists would have difficulty estimating the number of jobs created from the preliminary plans. Bronars warns that targeting job creation in rural areas could potentially displace a job in another area of the country. ...

If this rural physician is displaced from an urban or suburban area,  Bronars said there may be one fewer physician in urban and suburban areas, which could lead to less revenue and fewer jobs where the physician would have otherwise been placed.

“The net impact of this program on jobs must account for both the increase in health services provided in the rural communities and the decrease in services provided in other areas,” which will likely lead to lower job creation numbers, Bronars said.

The offender: Stephen Bronars, a senior economist with Welch Consulting in Washington, D.C. (Nothing says "I talk to the press all day" like that title.) And yet, here we have another Midwesterner In Name Only -- Bronars went to three different schools in Illinois, including the University of Illinois Urbana, which is sort of rural if Bronars happened to step beyond the bounds of campus once in a while and notice things.

And while it's clear ABC News sought him out to assess the economic plan as it relates to job creation, and not to muse on whether farm folks deserve them some physicians, Bronars clearly does both.

Breakin' down the nastiness:

"Allowing citizens to access Labor Department job search information at field offices could be beneficial, but the key question is whether applicants’ skills will match the positions for which employers are hiring" -- keep in mind, here, that what we're talking about is making current, already-in-existence USDA offices nationwide, of which there are 2,800, keep job search information available. That's it. Help people get better access to job information when they're out of work without spending another dime on a new office. And we're supposed to believe this only "could be beneficial?" And maybe it won't be because those dumb, backwards rednecks wouldn't even have no skills for jobs anyway?

Mean level: On a scale from "peeved" to "rioting with a pitchfork," I'm giving it "smoke coming out of my ears." Next.

"Targeting job creation in rural areas could potentially displace a job in another area of the country" -- Oh NOES! The jobs! They are being potentially taken, by this plan, and given to the backwoods hicks! Whatever will the urbanites, who so deserve it more, do now? Are we going to make THEM move to rural places? If those rural people want jobs, THEY should move! Obviously! Because that's definitely not what is already happening. Brain drain, psh -- that's just what some science-y people who moved to the country thought up. If we pack all them people into sardine cans in New York City, we can just put all the jobs THERE! Problem solved! We only use 10 percent of our brains anyway; why not do the same with our economy?

(sarcasm paragraph over)

Really, Bronars? Did you think this up when your wait at Starbucks went up from 8 minutes to 10, and you figured it was because they had to fire someone due to the economy giving jobs to the farm folks and all? News flash: rural jobs, which tend to be of the agricultural and manufacturing sort, are disappearing at a rapid rate. This has been happening for a long time. Know how to change that? With more job opportunities in the rural sector! I think it's actually the point of President Obama's plan. WEIRD, I KNOW. MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ IT.

Mean level: On a scale of "iced mocha" to "double expresso," I'm going with "steamer."

"If this rural physician is displaced from an urban or suburban area, Bronars said there may be one fewer physician in urban and suburban areas" --- OK, OK, wait. There are long lines and such, in big cities! And they need more doctors because they have more population! But are we REALLY saying that, in order to give them farm folks a doctor that they don't have to drive two hours to see, we have to take away a doctor in a big city, thereby increasing their wait times and potentially harming the health of hundreds just to get Farmer Ned in for his annual physical?

Leaving aside the question of who deserves care more -- Rural Ron or Urban...Ursula? (suggestions on U-names accepted at amzpoet@gmail.com) -- this assertion simply isn't true. There ARE doctors in urban areas. There simply aren't doctors in rural areas. Period. End of story. Ned and Ron have to get into their pickups and drive down country roads for hours at a time until they get to a hospital that can treat all their needs. If they're lucky, they can drive less than an hour for one of those clinics that might not even have an M.D. on staff. True story. If you have a heart attack, 20 percent of the population of the United States is probably trusting it all to a nurse practitioner or, heavens, simply a midwife. That's what they mean by "rural health clinic."

People all over the country, and the world, are increasingly moving to the cities for work because there isn't work in the rural areas that they want to accept. But there are also loads of people who want to stay in their hometown and, therefore, get trained for a skill their hometown would employ them at. What if that skill is medicine, and their town just opened up a clinic? Are you saying that, because this young person would have otherwise moved to the Big City, that they don't deserve to stay in their hometown and treat their own? Or that a Big Cityan who wants to move to the country shouldn't?

Or maybe, just maybe, Bronars is saying that now that the rough economy has come to the big bad urban areas, those rural problems aren't as important. They're not going to impact "job creation," after all. Rural people need doctors; so what? It's not his problem to be nice to farm folks. It's his job to talk about the economy.

Just at the expense of Iowans.

Iowa Hate: Huffington Post: 'A tiny Midwestern state ... gets to decide'

I could get all eastcoasty on you folks and point out that all the Huffington Post does is steal news from other people for the most part, but that'd be just mean. Instead, I'll point out how their writer is unnecessarily unfair to Iowa, and Iowans, for no reason other than to just be mean.

First, the offense:

At a time when the shambling economy dominates the national political debate, a tiny Midwestern state little harmed by the Great Recession gets to decide who will lead the discussion.

The offenders: Arthur Delaney, a reporter for the HuffPost based in Washington, D.C., and -- more egregiously -- Tyler Kingkade, who is from Des Moines! Which of course goes to show that you leave Iowa, you bad mouth it to fit in. Don't put this all on Kingkade, however; he's only got 130 "likes" on Facebook compared to Delaney's "1K"-plus, meaning Delaney has probably been at HuffPo longer than Kingkade, or at least works on more stories for the newsstealer, and is therefore likely the senior "reporter" for this story and probably made most of the decisions on the direction of the story and the lead and whatnot.

So enough of that. Let's break it down.

"A tiny Midwestern state" -- Iowa, according to the U.S. Census, is the 30th most populous state in the United States. So, if you were to ask us if we're in the "big" half or the "tiny" half of the United States, OK, I'll give you that we're in the tiny half. But we're certainly not the tiniest.

But the writers insist that we're a "tiny Midwestern state," which seems to mean, to my Iowa brain, tiny compared to other Midwestern states. Let's compare:

Illinois: 12,830,632 (5th)
Ohio: 11,536,504 (7th)
Indiana: 6,483,802 (15th)
Missouri: 5,988,927 (18th)
Wisconsin: 5,686,986 (20th)
Minnesota: 5,303,925 (21st)
Iowa: 3,046,355 (30th)
Kansas: 2,853,116 (33rd)
Nebraska: 1,826,341 (38th)
South Dakota: 814,180 (46th)
North Dakota: 672,591 (48th)


So, yeah, I mean, I ain't a statistician or nothin', but how is that not the heck right in the middle, there? We sure ain't the tiniest.

And I ain't hatin' on North Dakota, neither. (I feel for y'all, being that "Fargo" pretty much happened in Minnesota and the accents in that movie were stupider-n-heck, Cohen brothers be damned.) Even if we WERE the tiniest Midwestern state, what're you saying? You saying we can't be decidin' on things if we don't have the biggest population? If the first-in-the-nation political caucuses were held in Rhode Island or Alaska, would they not deserve it? Cause, you know, there's less of 'em, and all? And therefore, because they don't see fit to pack their people into sardine cans they like to call high-rise buildings and projects, they don't count?

Psh. Shaddup with your "tiny" this and "tiny" that, or we'll think you're overcompensating for somethin'.

"Little harmed by the Great Recession" -- I mean, I don't wanna do your jobs over there for you at HuffPost, but if you're gonna straight up lie about us, I gotta set the facts straight. (Also, that's kind of what I do here.)

If by "little harmed" you mean there haven't been hundreds of closures and thousands of mass layoffs nearly ever quarter, or that initial unemployment claims, number of unemployed and the amount of unemployment paid by the state aren't up, or that existing home sales haven't been trending either close to or worse than trends elsewhere, or that construction weekly earnings aren't down, you're incorrect, Misters Delaney and (Turncoat) Kingkade.

And if by "little harmed" you mean we didn't have an almost paralyzing standoff between our state legislators regarding a budget deal, an act that very closely mirrored what would later play out at the federal level, you weren't paying attention.

Don't you love caucus time, Iowans? A time when candidates for president tromp through the corners and cities of our fair state, proclaiming their "love," while the national media (HuffPost, be glad I'm including you in "media") tromps after them, stuffing their faces with fried butter on a stick and tweeting all about the "small town charm" and other such code words that really mean "oh, geez, Iowa gets all this attention and they don't REALLY deserve it, because TINY! Also, stuff on a stick at the Fair! And country music! Blerggh! It's summer and I'd rather be spending it at my Martha's Vineyard beach house! Not with these weirdos sitting on a porch! Can this be DONE already! Except, paychecks! Pass that fried Twinkie, please!"

We're onto you. We may not say much, but we're thinking it. And right about now, we're thinking, "oh geez, another bunch of braggarts thinkin' they're gonna be President! Bunch of nutcases! What's that? I get to meet them all, thereby allowing my vote to actually be influenced by a REAL person instead of a soundbite or two? Oh. Yeah. I want to keep that going. Because, democracy, and all. Pass that fried Twinkie, please!"

So. "Gets to decide who will lead the discussion?" Yeah. That's the most important part to us. Because, yeah, politicians are all a bunch of blowhard crazy people, but they -- and this is the key part -- actually treat Iowans, if only once every four years, like we MATTER. Like we're PEOPLE with OPINIONS that should be VALUED. Unlike some HuffPo reporters I may or may not have previously mentioned.

And, you know what? We deserve to be valued. Because, unlike some parts of the country we could name, we're a pretty politically diverse set of people, with opinions grounded in reality, because nobody likes to be a blowhard around here. We fancy ourselves to be rational, reasonable people, who can think and vote for themselves and who like to have ONE LITTLE TINY SLIVER OF DIGNITY ONCE EVERY FOUR YEARS OR SO.

So would you let us have it?

'K, thanks.