Guest written by an anonymous dude
With yesterday’s thrilling (?) upset in South Carolina, Newt Gingrich has at least temporarily ensured the right to play the “Someone Other Than Romney Candidate”, and all but clinched the fact that his party will nominate a man with a strange four-letter first name. What does this mean for Vixely readers? Well, we here are going to stay out of hard politicking, and other than encouraging you to vote, will never tell you who to vote for. That said, a look at the wives and marriages of the two Republican frontrunners sheds interesting facts.
In Newt Gingrich, women find an uneasy ally. Thrice married, and by his own admission, a serial adulterer, Gingrich is now accused by his second wife of asking for an “open marriage” in order to avoid divorce upon meeting his now third wife (and then 20-something mistress). It’s hard to imagine such a request being met kindly in any relationship, never mind a marriage. As for his current wife, Callista, she tends to keep a low profile, rarely speaking directly to reporters. In an interesting twist, she has recently been slammed for her role in breaking up her man’s second marriage.
Mitt Romney’s persona conjures up Leave It To Beaver days for many women, and certainly his 42-year marriage to Ann Romney does little to shed his image as a devoted husband—he asked her to marry him outside of his Senior Prom—does it get more American than that? Well, he does refer to his wife as a “hot angel,” something we almost certainly never heard from Bill Clinton or George Bush (either varietal). While Romney’s Ralph Lauren-looking family of five sons has been much celebrated, comments Ann made in 1994 when Mitt entered politics provide interesting insight into their relationship. She said the two had never had a serious argument, a fact that should make any woman scratch her head. Is it possible to be married 24 years and not once argue about something? Who is going to take the trash out? Chicken or salmon? Marriage, and life, is full of a multitude of decisions daily, and it’s only natural that eventually that some disagreements cause arguments of various sorts. Or, perhaps their marriage is one where one party rules with an iron fist, thereby eliminating the prospect for friction (how such a marriage would last 4 decades is fair question).
Perhaps a better question in the Newt v. Mitt debate is, “does it matter what their marriages are like?” Historically our country has had many great presidents, most of whom were adulterers. If a squeaky clean marriage was a pre-requisite for living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the list of former residents would be radically different, as would the crop of current candidates. And as a woman, investigating a candidate’s stance on other relevant issues (Roe v. Wade anyone?) would seem at least just as important as whether he was a faithful husband. If elected president, which candidate would have more women in his cabinet? Which, if any, would consider a female running mate? Answers to those questions may be the most instructive.
For now though, we are content to watch Callista and Ann duke it out for the right to challenge Michelle Obama and her famous arms. One thing’s for sure: yesterday’s South Carolina result ensured we are going to hear a lot more about the importance of family and marriage for the next several months, so much so we just may need to propose a Republican Debate Drinking Game: “a sip of wine each time you hear any of the following words: virtue, honor, marriage, wife, family, values, and family values.”