Crying Wolf...or in this case Racism

I confess.  I am a white man who grew up in America.  I make no apologies for it.  The reason I bring up my race is that I had a little run in on Facebook recently with one of my friends, who happens to be an African-American woman, who I went to high school with.  If you have read this blog before, then you know that I am a dyed in the wool conservative.  My former classmate, a liberal.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that my former classmate and I were close friends back in high school, but it was cordial.  We reconnected a few years ago on Facebook.  I can't recall who sent the initial friend request through Facebook, but needless to say we did reconnect.  The last time that I saw here was at the funeral of our mutual friend David Mills, who was also an African American liberal, not that it matters.

Our little run in occurred when she posted a link on Facebook with the headline "Rick Perry Refuses Obama's Offer For A Tarmac Handshake" that was on the liberal website Huffington Post.  Along with the link to the article were her comments of "So disrespectful. So racist."  That is where I took offense.

Ever since Barack Obama became president, it has become fashionable to label anybody who disagrees with him or gives him any sort of slight, it is automatically labeled "racist."  After a while, you get tired of hearing that same, tired, baseless attack.  Usually, I ignore liberal Facebook postings that I disagree with.  This time, I made a comment.  Perhaps, I should have stuck with my policy of ignoring those posts.

Essentially, I told my friend that I was disappointed that she decided to pull the "racist" card out of the bag.  Needless to say, she was not happy with my response.  I won't bore you with everything she responded with, but basically attacked me as a white man who would not understand what she experiences as a black woman.

To a degree, she is right.  I do not know what it is like to be a black woman, or a black man for that matter.  That does not mean that I do not understand what it is like or that I haven't experience racism myself.  I have witnessed racism in all its ugliness and I have been on the receiving end of racism when growing up.

When I was in elementary school, we were given the opportunity to bring music that we liked into the classroom to share with our classmates.  I brought in a record from the Disney movie "Dumbo" because I liked the song from the video below.

Several of my classmates mocked me and gave me a hard time because I brought in a record that was performed by some sort of derogatory term for African Americans.  I was quite hurt.

A few years later, I was an overweight, 4-eyed white kid in a school with a large African American student body.  I was left out of a lot of recess activities because I didn't "fit in."  Eventually, I was able to show that I could hang with the more athletic peers on the field of battle as it were and earn a level of respect.

I would be naive to think that racism doesn't still exist with some people.  People as a whole are fallen, sinful individuals, and nothing is going to change that.  Unfortunately, in the Barack Obama age, society has become like the proverbial boy who cried wolf.  The more people cry racism where it doesn't truly exist, the more likely people won't react when it really does.

Related articles

• 7 Things Liberals REALLY MEAN When They Cry "Racism"
• 15 Moronic Things Liberals Call Racism Since Obama Was Elected
• Awful!... DCCC Chair: Republican Base "Animated by Racism" (Video)
• Crying Wolf: The Most Bogus Celebrity Claims Of Racism In Recent Memory
• The Changing Meaning Of Racism: What Liberals REALLY Mean When They Cry Out About Racism Being Used; How It Is Bein Used For Political Gain
• Disagree with Obama? You're a racist!

And Then There Were Four

Image via Wikipedia

When the week began, there were still six candidates vying for the nomination to be the Republican candidate for President of the United States.  Early Monday, prior to the Fox News debate that night, Jon Huntsman suspended his candidacy and threw his support behind Mitt Romney.  Huntsman was polling so low, I am not sure his supporters will help Romney that much.

It is funny to hear these candidates speak, because as a candidate, Huntsman had said Romney was "not electable."  After dropping out of the race, and announcing his support for Romney, Huntsman now says that Romney is the only candidate that is "electable" and can defeat Barack Obama.  Yes, politicians do make strange bedfellows.

With only five candidates on the stage for the Fox News debate that night, it made for a much more intense debate in my opinion.  Newt Gingrich once again had a very strong debate, and for a change, I thought Romney stumbled a bit.  Since that debate, Gingrich has been gaining on Romney in the polls for the upcoming primary in South Carolina on Saturday.

As Gingrich has surged in the polls, he has called on supporters of Rick Santorum and Rick Perry to consider voting for him as the conservative Republican option as opposed to the moderate Romney.  This morning, Gingrich may have gotten a few more voters as Rick Perry announced that he is dropping out of the race and endorsing Gingrich for the nomination.

Image via Wikipedia

Perry was showing quite a bit more support than Huntsman had been getting, so his departure may actually help Gingrich.  Tonight, there will be another debate in South Carolina to be televised on CNN.  Another strong performance by Gingrich could put him over the top in South Carolina and make a race of the nomination.  With only four people on stage, there should be ample opportunity for all to make their case.

Of course, all of this could be a moot point depending on how the public reacts to a television interview to be broadcast after tonight's debate.  Newt's second wife, the one he was married to when he was carrying on an affair with his current wife, will be interviewed on ABC. Will people give any credence to what she has to say, or will she come across as someone trying to even the score after a bitter divorce?

As of this moment, however, there are currently three separate camps vying for the nomination.  There is the moderate Mitt Romney, that seems to have the support of the so called "GOP establishment," the Ron Paul Libertarian camp, and the Conservative camp being split between Gingrich and Santorum.  A strong showing on Saturday by Gingrich and a poor performance by Santorum could whittle the field down some more.

Related articles

• Gingrich rising in SC, but in time to edge Romney? (mercurynews.com)
• Huntsman Flip-Flops on Romney (thedailybeast.com)
• Rick Perry Drops Out Of Race, Endorses Newt Gingrich (theamericanteaman.com)
• Gingrich: Santorum, Perry Should Drop Out (newser.com)

Another Great Deal

Image by 401K via FlickrOriginally, I was thinking about posting something about the New Hampshire primary that was held last night.  There were not a whole lot of surprises.   Everything pretty much happened the way the pollsters thought they would.  Mitt Romney came in first as expected.

Ron Paul finished second, and Jon Huntsman third after spending most of the last few weeks there.  Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum split the conservative vote and ended up essentially tied for 4th place. The remaining candidate Rick Perry finished with less than 1%, not that far ahead of Michele Bachmann who is no longer in the race.

Instead, I want to talk about another "great" deal I received from a credit card company.  A couple weeks ago, I found a pre-approved credit card offer with an upfront fee that would have taken a large chunk of the approved line of credit, along with a 34.9% interest rate.

This week, I logged into one of my existing credit card accounts to pay a bill online.  I was greeted with a message saying that due to my good credit with them that I was pre-approved for an increase of my credit limit.  When I clicked the link, I was greeted with an offer to increase my credit limit by $100 for a $25 fee.

Wow!  Such a great deal.  Usually, if I have had "excellent credit history" with a company, they will either automatically increase your credit limit or will do so when you request it.  I have never had to pay for the privilege that they say I "earned."  I will be passing on this excellent offer.

Brain Fart

So I sat down last night to watch the latest of the multitude of Republican debates.  It was the first debate since the accusations of sexual harassment by Herman Cain started making the headlines.  I was glad to see that the audience was firmly behind Cain.  During the introductions of the candidates, it seemed as if the Herminator received the loudest round of applause.

The debate was broadcast on CNBC, and was supposed to center around economic issues but it didn't take long for one of the moderators to bring up the subject.  In one of the early questions, Maria Bartiromo strayed from economic issues and questioned Cain on his integrity.  The crowd roundly booed her during the questioning.

Once again, Cain was cheered loudly for his response to her question.  That wasn't enough for Bartiromo though.  She then had to direct a follow up question to Mitt Romney to ask for his thoughts on the matter.  Once again, she was booed loudly.  Romney refused to answer the question and suggested they get back to the economic subject matter.

For the most part, I though Cain did a decent job of sticking to the message that has helped him gain so much momentum in the campaign thus far.  He kept discussing his 999 plan, and in some instances I thought he went back to the well just a little too often.  I don't think he hurt himself any in the debate, but he didn't stand out any either.

Of all the candidates, I liked Newt Gingrich's performance the most.  He has been a strong and steady debater in each of the debates.  I think he is going to continue to move up in the polls.  Romney was, well Romney.  He just doesn't make mistakes during the debates.  He also can't seem to gain any ground in the polls, especially from the conservative wing of the party.  Then there is Rick Perry.

I had such high hopes when Rick Perry entered the race.  His performances in the debates have been horrid, and his drop in the polls reflects his abysmal performance.  During the debate last night, he had undoubtedly the most memorable moment of the debate.  He has been making the rounds of all of the morning news programs to talk about it.

It was painful to watch Perry have his brain fart last night.  In some ways, I felt sorry for him.  I have had my own moments when in the midst of a conversation or speaking about something I have totally lost my train of thought or struggled to come up with the word I was looking for.   At least he has been showing a sense of humor about it.

Related articles

• WATCH: Maria Bartiromo Gets Booed For Asking Herman Cain About Sexual Harassment Allegations (businessinsider.com)
• The Other Great Moment From Last Night: Newt Gingrich Throws Down On Maria Bartiromo (businessinsider.com)

Rick Perry's 20-20-20 Plan

Image via WikipediaToday, Rick Perry finally unveiled his plan to help spur the economy.  Perry's plan is called the "Cut, Balance, and Grow" plan but could also be dubbed the 20-20-20 plan, which like Cain's 999 plan would be easy enough to remember.  Perry calls for a 20% flat tax, a 20% corporate tax rate, and a balanced budget by 2020.

Most opponents of flat tax plans are quick to attack them on the basis of the liberal view of "fairness."  However, the Perry plan addresses this potential argument by allowing taxpayers to have a deduction of $12500 per person per household.  A family of four earning $60000 per year, would have a deduction of $50000 and would pay a 20% income tax on $10000, or a total of $2000 which works out to a tax rate of just over 3%.

In addition to the generous standard deduction, taxpayers who make less than $500,000 per year would also get to keep some favorite deductions.  They would still be able to deduct mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable deductions.  This lowers the total taxable income even further, allowing middle and lower income earners to pay a much lower rate than the 20% rate.

Like Cain's 999 plan, I would be concerned about how such a tax plan would impact me personally.  The unknown on the Cain plan would be how much of my total income would be taxed on the 9% sales tax.  I had no such issue with the Perry plan.  Looking at my tax return from this year, I would actually fare significantly better under the Perry plan vs. the current tax structure. 

I should also add that I make well under $100,000 per year, so I am hardly one of the dirty rich that opponents of the flat tax say would benefit from the flat tax at the expense of lower and middle income folks.  My own example should be enough to help dispel that faulty argument, but those on the left will continue to claim that only the wealthy will benefit from Perry's plan.

Another aspect of the Perry plan is to lower the corporate income tax rate from the current 35% to 20%.  This would help to make the United States more friendly towards corporate investment.  It would be expected that would increase investment here leading to economic growth.  With growth, would increase the tax base in the country.

The third 20 in Perry's plan is to balance the budget by 2020.  He calls for spending to be capped at 18% of GDP.  This would put spending at levels that were maintained during the Clinton era.  It also calls for a balance budget amendment.

I heard a couple of commentators being interviewed about the proposal earlier today.  Both thought that the plan had merit, and would definitely lead to economic growth.  One of the commentators, though, pointed out that Perry's plan lacked a lot of specifics.  One had interviewed Perry and said that Perry had admitted that they had not necessarily costed out the proposal, nor did he have details on the spending cuts needed to balance the budget.

For the most part, Perry has been floundering since entering the race for the Republican nomination.  His performances in the debates has been, to put it mildly, less than stellar.  Consequently, his poll numbers have been dropping steadily.  It is good to see him come out with a plan that we can look at and analyze.  It will be interesting to see if he can get any kind of bump from his latest proposal and get back in the game as it were. 

CNN Western Republican Debate

Image by DonkeyHotey via FlickrLast night, like 5.5 million other Americans, I watched the CNN Western Republican Debate.  In my posting from yesterday, I stated that I was fully expecting to see Herman Cain's 999 plan come under a lot of debate.  Boy did it ever.

The first question asked was from an audience member regarding where each candidate stood on replacing the income tax with a national sales tax.  It allowed moderator Anderson Cooper to direct the question to each candidate to give them the opportunity to attack Cain's plan.  With the exception of Newt Gingrich, each took their turns attacking the 999 plan

For the most part, I think Cain did a decent job in trying to defend the plan given the intricacies of his proposal and the fact that he was only given 30 seconds to give a rebuttal every time one of the other candidates brought it up.  Gingrich was the only one who acknowledged that fact.  Quite frankly, I do not think most of the other candidates have a clue as to the entirety of the Cain plan nor do they understand it.

That opening salvo of attacks on Cain set the stage for the balance of the evening.  Most of the remaining attacks the balance of the evening were directed at Mitt Romney.  In fact, there was so much bickering on stage, particularly between Romney and Rick Perry, that it was rather distasteful.  At one point during a heated exchange, Anderson Cooper looked absolutely giddy about the heated discussion, as if that was his goal the entire night.

Perry looked like somebody who finally realized that any chance he had to get the nomination was slipping away fast.  While you could say it was his best performance in a debate thus far, the constant sniping with Romney was a major turnoff, at least for me.  At one point I tweeted, "The next debate should be a steel cage match.  The last man or woman standing gets the nominations."

Romney was pretty much Romney, able to talk around most of the questions without really answering.  After the initial rounds of attacks on the 999 plan, Romney took much of the attacks the rest of the night, primarily from Perry and Rick Santorum.  It was the first time that he took a lot of attacks, and there were a couple of instances where he seemed to get a bit flustered.

I have never been a big Ron Paul fan because of his stance of defense.  There were a few times when I though he sounded like a doddering old fool.  Santorum had a couple of decent answers during the debate, but for the most part came across as just an angry guy.  Neither one of them did much to help themselves.

Michele Bachmann had, I think, one of her better performances in a while.  Other than erroneously referring to the 999 plan as a VAT tax, she stayed above the fray and focused on defeating Obama in 2012. She also was able to talk about something other than repealing Obamacare.  While I do think it was one of her better performances, I have to disagree with what she (or her campaign) to her Facebook feed, "After tonight's debate, it is even more abundantly clear that I am best equipped to defeat Barack Obama and put Americans back to work."

Ultimately, I thought Newt Gingrich performed the best of all the candidates on stage.  He stayed away from the sniping and bickering, put forth ideas, acted as a peacemaker, and appeared to be the most presidential.  I also felt that Cain held his own, though I would like to see him bone up a bit on foreign policy and do a better job defending his ideas. I still have about six months until the Maryland primary in April, so I will continue watching to see how things shake out.

Related articles

• CNN debate scores large audience (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
• Did CNN Sabotage the GOP Debate? (rogueoperator.wordpress.com)
• John Baer: More bickering than debate in GOP's Vegas showdown (philly.com)

Romney, Mormons, and Cults

Image via WikipediaThey say that there are two things that you should never bring up in polite company if you want to keep things civil, religion and politics.  Today I am going to go where angles fear to tread and talk about both.  The two subjects became intertwined once again at the Value Voters Summit held in DC over the past weekend.

Pastor Robert Jeffress, a Baptist minister and supporter of Texas Governor Rick Perry, brought up the subject of Mitt Romney's Mormon Faith.  Jeffress said that Mormonism was a non-Christian cult and that Christians would be better off supporting an evangelical Christian for president than Romney.  In his view, Romney, as a Mormon would be unfit to be president.

Before I get to far into the comments of Jeffress, it would probably be best to actually define the term cult.  For this, I turn to Hank Hanegraaff, also know as The Bible Answer Man of the Christian Research Institute.  I used to listen to his radio program several years ago when I was very active in the Baptist Church.

When most people think of a cult, they think of the following definition:

a cult is a religious or semi-religious sect whose members are controlled almost entirely by a single individual or by an organization.

However, there is another way to define a cult, and this is the method that a lot of evangelicals use when describing a cult:

a cult is any group that deviates from the orthodox teachings of the historic Christian faith being derived from the Bible and confirmed through the ancient ecumenical creeds.

It is from this perspective that Jeffress made his assertion that Romney belongs to a cult.  During my days when I was active within evangelical circles, it was a common assertion that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints were members of a cult.  I also heard some claim that the Roman Catholic Church was the biggest cult in existence.  It is one of the reasons that I no longer travel in those circles.

Personally, I do not agree with a lot of the Mormon Church.  I would never belong to it.  Here is not the time, nor the place to go into all of the reasons why.  Over the years I have had several friends who were members of the LDS.  I would say that they are a fine group of people who have high moral standards.  A few years ago, when my wife was looking for an alternative to Catholicism, she decided on the LDS.

I will also say, that as of this moment, I do not support Mitt Romney as the potential Republican nominee for President.  Right now, I have not fully made up my mind, but I am leaning towards Herman Cain.  As Romney said himself in one of the debates, there are a lot of reasons not to vote for him, as there are for the other potential candidates.  However, the fact that he is a Mormon should not even be part of the discussion.

Related articles

• Romney asks Perry to disavow pastor, Perry says no (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Pastor Jeffress: Mormonism is a Cult (crooksandliars.com)
• Jon Hunstman: Pastor Who Criticizied Mormonism Is "A Moron" (outsidethebeltway.com)

Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll

Image via WikipediaLast night, I was doing my usual Saturday night gig of delivering pizzas.  Unfortunately for me, we were not very busy, so I did not make a lot of money.  As the night was dragging on, I decided to take a look at a few sites on my phone when I saw that Herman Cain won yesterday's GOP straw poll in Florida.  Not only did he win, he won handily.

I have been a Herman Cain fan for a few years now.  His candidacy is one that I have been watching with particular interest.  There have been very few politicians out there that I can say that I like and trust.  The fact that Cain is not a politician is one of the reasons that I have an interest in hearing what he has to say.  It is also one of the few drawbacks that I see as well. 

One of my biggest complaints of these early debates of those that are in the hunt for the Republican nomination for the presidency is that in several of the debates, the questioning has been geared to those who are ahead in the polls. I have been very interested in seeing how some of the lesser known candidates would perform in the debates. There is just something about Mitt Romney that doesn't sit well with me, so though if given the choice of him or Obama, Romney would get my vote.

I was extremely interested in seeing what Rick Perry had to offer when he finally threw his hat into the proverbial ring.  I have not totally decided on how I feel about him, but in the debates that I have watched thus far that he has participated in, I have not been too impressed.  I have blogging friends in Texas who speak well of Perry and say I should not put too much into what we have seen in the debates so I have not completely ruled him out.

Anyway, back to Herman Cain.  As I have said, I have been a fan of Cain for a few years now.  I have been a little upset that he has not gotten too many opportunities to express himself in some of the previous debates.  In the Fox News/Google debate last week, Cain finally got an opportunity to answer more than a few questions.  The more that I hear from Herman Cain, the more I like what he has to offer, which is common sense solutions.

I hope that Cain's victory in yesterday's Florida straw poll will result in us getting to know more about the man and his ideas.  He is one of the few potential candidates that is offering specific solutions.  In my mind, Cain and Newt Gingrich are two of the smartest candidates that are currently in the mix.  I would like to see more of each of them rather than the ones that the media and GOP establishment are pushing.  Congratulations to Herman Cain, and I hope we get to see even more of him in the future.

Related articles

• Herman Cain wins GOP Florida straw poll; Rick Perry in second place (peregrine5700.wordpress.com)
• The People Have Spoken: Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll 09242011 (pumabydesign001.wordpress.com)
• Herman Cain Rolls Over Competition In Florida Straw Poll (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
• Yee Haaa- Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll (truebluenz.com)

Republican Debates

Image via WikipediaI make no bones about the fact that I do not like the policies of the current President of the United States.  There has been very little that he has done since entering office that I have agreed with.  Consequently, I have had a great deal of interest in following those members of the Republican Party who have declared themselves candidates for the Republican nomination for President.

There is a bit about each of the potential candidates that I like.  While there is a bit that I like about each of them, each has their own individual flaws.  I do not feel like I know enough about any of the candidates yet to make a decision one way or the other for any of them.  I do know that I know enough about Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman that I can't bring myself to vote for either of them come primary time.

It is for that reason that I have been watching all of the Republican debates.  It has been my hope that I would be able to see enough of the remaining candidates that I could make an informed decision when the primary elections roll around.  Unfortunately, the debates themselves have been a disappointment in trying to learn more about all of the candidates.

The two debates that have taken place since Texas Governor Rick Perry entered the race have been a bit of a disappointment.  The one that was broadcast on MSNBC was absolutely awful for learning about all of the candidates.  That was Perry's first debate, and the questioning was primarily directed at the two candidates that were polling the highest, Perry and Mitt Romney.

Last night's debate on CNN was a little better.  Wolf Blitzer was able to get a little more air time for some of the other candidates, but it was still mostly the Perry and Romney show.  Michele Bachmann also got a good bit more time to speak than in the MSNBC debate the week before.  Unfortunately, there still was not enough from Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich.

During the last two debates, I spent a good bit of time on Twitter following tweets there along with the actual debates.  I even exchanged a couple of tweets with syndicated columnist Mychal Massie about the lack of face time for some of the lower polling candidates, especially Herman Cain.

It just seems that the media that are moderating these debates is stacking the cards in favor of the front runners.  If Perry and Romney are getting the majority of the face time during the debate, those will be the names that a lot of folks will choose between.   Everything I have heard from Cain and Santorum I have liked, but if they do not get the opportunity to express those ideas, then how can we decide who is the best choice for the GOP?   

Related articles

• GOP CNN/Tea Party Debate: Nirvana Reference Edition (reason.com)