ON THE TOWN:Lives sacrificed ... to chew gum?

I know for a fact that chewing gum is allowed on the U.S. Senate floor. I also know that it’s OK to drink water on the Senate floor. Beyond that, my knowledge of the rules of consumption is sketchy.

Still, what is allowed and what is proper decorum are often different. And so it was that I found myself sitting in the Senate gallery last Tuesday, watching the progress of an eventual 70-28 vote, thinking about the rules and wondering why, out of the 98 senators present, the only one I saw chewing gum was California Sen. Barbara Boxer.

To many it’s a small thing: “Boxer was chewing gum — so what? And get over it.”

But I grew up thinking of the Senate floor — and the House floor too — as special places, places where ladies and gentlemen acted as such. Ladies and gentlemen, particularly those who are Senators, do not chew gum.

Watching Boxer chew gum while she voted on a bill made me hesitant to take my family to the House, where it may be expected that the general behavior is even cruder than that of a gum-chewing senator.

If a senator is chewing gum, what can we expect in the House? Would Rep. John Campbell be eating a Big Mac? Would Rep. Dana Rohrabacher be playing a Game Boy?

Fortunately, we’d never find out as the House was adjourned for the week. As for Campbell and Rohrabacher, I only exploited them for an attempt at humor. Despite my agreements or not on various issues, I believe that both work hard.

A Washington trip is a must for any family that has kids learning about U.S. history and a strong recommendation for everyone else. There is so much to see and do that is so interesting, so historical and often so moving that one cannot leave without wondering why it took so long to visit. And for all that it represents to visitors, I have no doubt that many locals look at all the marble, granite and bronze as a nuisance, something that attracts crowds, cars and congestion.

Being moved by a memorial or a graveyard is easier when one has more personal history on which to draw.

At the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, it is nearly impossible to walk away without deep sorrow for all of the lives lost in a war that so much of the country tried to get us out of for years.

One does not need to have served in the armed forces to appreciate their sacrifice, although I am sure that that service does heighten the awareness of the tragedy of war.

These men and women did not die in vain, though, for they supported the legacy of President John Kennedy, who promised to “pay any price” and “bear any burden” to further the cause of democracy.

My family and I were reminded of Kennedy’s words on our last full day in Washington, which included a trip to the National Cemetery at Arlington.

We were moved again at the Iwo Jima Memorial that day and finally at the Jefferson Memorial where we were reminded that he was one of a clutch of soon-to-be-Americans, a very wealthy one at that, who pledged his life, his fortune and his sacred honor in the effort to create this nation.

I’m afraid that today most of us would be willing to do the same only as collateral against a new flat-screen television. If that is a comment on our smallness, so to speak, it has more to do with a personal state of mind than a comment on the state of mind of readers.

I have just returned, you see, from a place where I saw thousands of tombstones and other reminders of the sacrifices made by those who were defending our right to be cynical or to buy a flat-screen television if we so desire. Or to chew gum on the Senate floor.

If you did not read Tony Dodero’s column yesterday, please go online and do so, particularly if you are interested in journalism.

One of the hardest jobs an editor has is balancing the desire or need to make changes with the possibility of losing the writer’s “voice.”

In the case of a public official whose grammar, syntax and spelling are incorrect, I could make the case that the public should know that this person is not a good written communicator and as such, a letter should be changed as little as possible or the notation “[sic]” should be used where applicable.

The Pilot editor with whom I work and who edited the article in question in Dodero’s column has been very good in helping to achieve that balance. He understands that I write informally and is protective of that while trying to prevent serious style mistakes.