Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, May 18, 2012 11:44 pm

The big political news on Thursday was that Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his controversial sermons that dogged Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign were going to make a comeback.

In case you missed it, the New York Times reported a super PAC called the Ending Spending Action Fund – a separate entity from Mitt Romney’s campaign and working independently from them – was thinking about making Wright’s statements a campaign issue after this year’s Democratic National Convention. This didn’t come from a group of people brainstorming or having an extended spit-balling session. They were going to use racial divisiveness and fear to win votes.

From the New York Times:

The plan, which is awaiting approval, calls for running commercials linking Mr. Obama to incendiary comments by his former spiritual adviser, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., whose race-related sermons made him a highly charged figure in the 2008 campaign.

“The world is about to see Jeremiah Wright and understand his influence on Barack Obama for the first time in a big, attention-arresting way,” says the proposal, which was overseen by Fred Davis and commissioned by Joe Ricketts, the founder of the brokerage firm TD Ameritrade. Mr. Ricketts is increasingly putting his fortune to work in conservative politics.

The $10 million plan, one of several being studied by Mr. Ricketts, includes preparations for how to respond to the charges of race-baiting it envisions if it highlights Mr. Obama’s former ties to Mr. Wright, who espouses what is known as “black liberation theology.”

After the plan was made public on Thursday, Mitt Romney repudiated it and a spokesperson for Ricketts said the billionaire rejects “that approach to politics.” So, it doesn’t look like that proposal will be executed. But why would a group of people write up a 54-page proposal and consider spending $10 million to stir up fear of black people? Why would they re-hash Rev. Wright’s sermons and try again to tie them to President Obama, who the Ricketts plan said deceived America into thinking he was a “metrosexual, black Abe Lincoln?”
Continue reading 'Why Revisit The Jeremiah Wright Controversy? Look At The Census Numbers'»

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, January 10, 2012 4:01 pm

After being the GOP’s latest (and for him, best-timed) flavor of the month, Iowa Caucus co-winner Rick Santorum told a group of New Hampshire voters that it’s “snobbery” for President Obama to think he knows “how to run our lives” and say that everyone should go to college. Speaking at St. Anselm College (the irony!), Santorum said he was “outraged” at “the hubris of this president to think that he knows what’s best for you.”

I agree with Santorum that college isn’t for everyone and someone certainly doesn’t need to finish college to be personally successful or influential in high-tech fields. Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg are the best examples of that. Not everyone is going to be a Zuckerberg or a Gates, though.

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess Obama wasn’t suggesting a federal mandate stating every person is required to go to college. I’m sure he meant that everyone should have the opportunity - the freedom! – to go college, if they choose.

So, while college isn’t for everyone, Obama is correct in suggesting that it’s a good thing and makes life better. Here are three reasons why:

Continue reading 'Rick Santorum’s Outrage And Snobbery'»

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, December 27, 2011 10:53 pm

A couple of weeks ago, I posted the video of Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum campaigning at an Iowa brewery where he talked an awful lot about the beers he likes and dislikes. Because he seemed like he was showing off his beer knowledge to prove what a down-to-earth and tough guy he is, I joked, “Maybe he’ll be the first candidate to have a photo-op on a hunting trip.”

The video below isn’t a photo-op, but with just a week and a day from that interview to the Iowa Caucuses, Santorum spent a lot of air-time on Fox News talking about pheasant kills.

After beer and guns, is there anything else he needs to say to prove he’s a manly man, and therefore, fit to be the president?

See the video from Mediaite.

UPDATE: It turns out there is video of the hunting trip. Sad for Santorum, though, as The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur points out, the hunting party doesn’t get him the endorsement he wants.

Like me on Facebook, connect with me on Twitter and follow my Tumblr. 

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, December 16, 2011 11:00 am

Jon Huntsman appeared on “The View” this Tuesday a few hours before Donald Trump pulled out of hosting a Republican debate because of lack of interest. Huntsman rightfully asserted that if Trump wants to influence the presidential race, the real estate tycoon and shameless self-promoter should get in the race and not influence it from the sidelines. While doing it, he questioned if he has the cojones to run. (“The View” muted him, so you’ll have to read his lips.)

Video from The Daily Beast.

Follow me on Twitter and Like me on Facebook.

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, December 15, 2011 12:43 pm

Rick Santorum made a campaign stop at the Millstream Brewery in Iowa last weekend. He talks at length at the different kinds of beer he likes, which isn’t a problem. I like beer as much as the next guy. It’s his last line that stands out: ”I don’t do wine tasting. I do beer tasting,” No wimpy wine tastings for him. Maybe he’ll be the first candidate to have a photo-op on a hunting trip.

Here’s the video:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

H/t: Huffington Post

Follow me on Twitter and Like me on Facebook.

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, November 29, 2011 2:02 pm

Before Herman Cain was accused of sexual harassment, and before the allegation of a 13-year affair came to light, the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO gave an interview to GQ magazine. Actually, it was more of a pizza party in which they talked about things like Cain’s 9-9-9 Plan over slices. But they talked about pizzas, too. Here’s a bit of it:

[GQ Correspondent] Chris Heath: What can you tell about a man by the type of pizza that he likes?

Herman Cain: [repeats the question aloud, then pauses for a long moment] The more toppings a man has on his pizza, I believe the more manly he is.

Chris Heath: Why is that?

Herman Cain: Because the more manly man is not afraid of abundance. [laughs]

[GQ Senior Editor] Devin Gordon: Is that purely a meat question?

Herman Cain: A manly man don’t want it piled high with vegetables! He would call that a sissy pizza.

Another GOP candidate touted their manliness as a qualification for office on Nov. 16.

From CNN.com:

“If we want to change this country up…I’m your man,” [GOP presidential candidate Rep. Michele] Bachmann said in Webster City, Iowa, on Wednesday. “When people think of the president, they think of who is that individual. And I’m willing to ‘man up,’ so to speak, for the job and do what needs to be done… I’m a very strong woman.”

So, it’s started. The candidates are beginning to man up for the election.

All of this may be moot. Bachmann has been down in the polls for weeks, and Cain may drop out by the end of the week. But these probably won’t be the last flexing their manly muscles. What’s interesting is that it doesn’t matter if the candidate is a man or woman. For some, manliness is a qualification for office.

Which of the pizzas served at the GQ interview did Cain like the most? It shouldn’t be a surprise: “The man pizza!” he said. “The manly pizza! That was great.”

As always, you can follow me on Twitter and Facebook. You can now follow me on Tumblr, too.

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, March 11, 2011 1:30 pm

Most politicians don’t mention their infidelities and patriotism in the same breath.

Apparently, Newt Gingrich isn’t like most politicians.

The former House Speaker and possible 2012 presidential candidate sat for an interview with David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network in which he talked about “God’s forgiveness” relating to “personal issues” in the past. He said:

There’s no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.

Here’s some background on those things “that were not appropriate:” Newt proposed to his second wife, Marianne, in 1980 while his first wife, Jackie, was in the hospital fighting uterine cancer. Newt hadn’t asked Jackie for a divorce before he proposed to Marianne. After Marianne was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1999, Newt dumped her for Callista Bisek, with whom he was already having an affair and who became Newt’s third wife in 2000. Ironically, Newt was having the affair with Callista while pushing for President Bill Clinton’s impeachment over lying about sex with Monica Lewinsky.

So those “personal issues” – as the question was posed to Gingrich in the CBN interview – were caused by how hard he worked for America?

Continue reading 'Newt Gingrich Blames Affairs On Passion For America'»

Comments (3)

By Dean Arrindell, November 11, 2010 7:33 pm

The night before the election, Anderson Cooper remarked on one of the big trends of the 2010 Election season: “‘Man up’ is sweeping the country.”

He was talking about a clip in which Sarah Palin responds to unnamed Republican sources who reportedly don’t want her to run for president. She said they should “man up” and come forward so she could debate with them.

Palin’s remark was the latest in a string made by candidates this election year who told their opponents they were “unmanly” they needed to “man up,” “put your man-pants on,” or that they lacked “cojones.”

If a politician is going to criticize an opponent for not being strong enough or having certain skills, just say that. Man Up implies a candidate is not a “real” man because he’s weak, ineffectual and impotent. The slur is an attempt to undermine and insult him on the basis of what society thinks an ideal man is. It’s the male equivalent of what got California Governor-elect Jerry Brown in trouble when someone in his campaign called Meg Whitman a “whore.”

Man Up hurts women, too. It assumes masculinity is a qualification to hold public office. Equating “manly” with strength, productivity and integrity demeans women by excluding them from those characteristics. It doesn’t allow femininity to be powerful. That further marginalizes women in politics, which is something that the U.S. needs to improve.

In light of the testosterone litmus tests this year, it’s worth noting that presumptive House Speaker John Boehner cried on Election night. He wept when he spoke about spending his “whole life chasing the American dream.”

There absolutely nothing wrong with a man crying in public. In fact, it was actually fitting he did. In an election season when terms like ‘man up” and “unmanly” were thrown at candidates, the head of the winning party wept. Politics clearly isn’t immune from American masculinity’s soul-searching and attempts to figure itself out.

Boehner’s tears won’t stop the Man Up trend. It’s an easy soundbite to throw at a candidate. I do hope, though, that the next candidate who’s told to “man up” can call out the remark’s inherent sexism. If they win, they should feel free to rejoice and cry in victory.

Comments (2)

By Rich Perkin, November 5, 2010 3:48 pm

Guest post for Jazz Guns Apple Pie

There’s a saying that people use to explain things they can’t. ‘God moves in mysterious ways.’ Now, my religious practicing went the same way as my piano practice when I was twelve, but I’ve always understood this phrase to mean that we can’t always explain why God causes things to happen. Because it’s God. That’s part of the whole divinity thing.

So when you have political candidates such as Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, and Christine O’Donnell, all claiming that God called them to run or it was a part of His “plan,” what does it mean when they keep losing? There’s a couple of ways this can go.

To begin with, maybe it’s a personal thing where He wants them to grow, to learn from their experiences on the campaign trail. Maybe He wants them to learn a little humility in defeat. After all, the meek are going to inherit the Earth.

Continue reading 'God’s Political Plan'»

Comments (0)

By Dean Arrindell, October 29, 2010 9:18 pm

Before the Christine O’Donnell “One-Night Stand” story came out, I was already thinking about sexism in politics going the other way: toward male candidates. This year, several female candidates have called the manhood of their male opponents into question. Those candidates include O’Donnell who called her primary opponent Mike Castle “unmanly” and said, “this is not a bake-off, get your man-pants on.”

Sure, that’s not the worst thing you could say to someone, but if you use someone’s gender to attack them, isn’t that sexism? When a female candidate’s sex life is made public, it’s done to shame her because some people think women should be sexually modest. When a male candidate’s masculinity is questioned and he’s told to “man-up” or “be man enough,” is that shaming him by saying he’s weak and impotent?

Continue reading 'A Politician’s Manhood'»