People who saw Rick Tyler’s billboard alongside Highway 411 in Polk County, Tennessee either couldn’t believe their eyes, or must have thought they were seeing a practical joke–its message read “Make America White Again.” But the message from the independent candidate running for Congress was not a joke, and he wants to make sure everyone knows.

The sign is an obvious reference to Donald Trump’s saying “Make America Great Again.” Tyler claims he’s not racist, but merely looking back to a time when America was safe enough for residents to leave their doors unlocked. However, his Facebook post tells another story:

It was an America where doors were left unlocked, violent crime was a mere fraction of today’s rate of occurrence, there were no car jackings, home invasions, Islamic Mosques or radical Jihadist sleeper cells.

This is the criticized sign:

A congressional candidate is actually trying to argue that this sign isn’t racist… https://t.co/ODEG6A1idX pic.twitter.com/xjvFVL2RZs

— Perez Hilton (@PerezHilton) June 22, 2016

Tyler’s campaign also erected another billboard depicting an illustration of the White House surrounded by Confederate flags. At the top of that billboard are Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous words “I Have a Dream.” Tyler claimed that the signs were a very well planned maneuver to get around “the iron curtain of censorship.” In regards to people’s strong reactions to the message, he wrote, “Obviously, there are the ‘frothing at the mouth lunatics’ who react in a completely irrational, emotional, Pavlovian dog fashion.”

He even goes on to claim that people who are not white should not be allowed to move into the US claiming,

A moratorium on nonwhite immigration and the abolition of policies that subsidize nonwhite birth rates would be two constructive actions toward beginning the long journey back toward sanity and stability in our beleaguered and foundering nation.

This is one Twitter user’s solution to the hateful sign:

.@newschannelnine Oh hey, I fixed your sign Rick Tyler. #LoveTrumpsHate aka the Polk Co racist pic.twitter.com/miNJxdTIzU

— Jeska Dzwigalski (@JeskaD) June 23, 2016

Tyler’s words evoke chilling references to white supremacists and neo-Nazis. Topher Kersting, who is also running for Congress as an independent, told the Huffington Post,

He’s about as racist as you can get, from what I can tell […] He wants to go back to the 1950s where whites are in control and blacks ‘know their place. He’s wide open about it. It’s kind of scary we’re not past this.

The signs have since been removed, but no one knows who took them down. Tyler is of the opinion that most people in the country liked them, since he saw some people snapping photos of one earlier. He wants them back up as soon as possible since he paid for them to be there until the general election in November.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Tennessee Politician Wants to Win Votes by Making America White Again appeared first on Law Street.

Ted Cruz has used an approach to campaign ads fitting for the current race: bizarre, inflammatory, and slimy. You might remember his “send-up” of Saturday Night Live commercial parodies, Cruz Christmas Classics. How about his Donald Trump Doll ad, where children argue over Trump and Clinton action figures while concerned parents look on? His newest ad, however, won’t be airing on TV or the campaign’s YouTube account, because Cruz’s people took the video down over a scandal concerning one of the actresses. His campaign has quickly replaced it with a new, anti-Clinton ad.

The removed spot, called “Conservatives Anonymous,” riffs on Alcoholics Anonymous, showing a support group for conservative voters who feel spurned by centrist politicians who are “Republicans In Name Only.” The ad slyly suggests at which candidate Cruz is taking aim when a blonde woman says “Maybe you should vote for more than just a pretty face next time.” The punchline hits when a new member enters the room, wearing a Marco Rubio t-shirt, asking “Do you guys have room for one more?”

The campaign learned that Amy Lindsay, one of the actresses starring in the advertisement, has previously acted in erotic films, finding that her filmography includes movies called “Secrets of a Chambermaid,” and “Insatiable Desires.” To be clear–the distinction between hard and soft core pornography is that in soft core material, no sex acts are shown, and in some cases, no genitalia. The films featuring Lindsay fit in the latter category, as she performed topless, and didn’t perform any sex acts with her co-stars. Lindsay took to Twitter to voice her disappointment:

Extremely disappointed the #TedCruz campaign pulled the national television spot I had a role in… #moretocome #myvotecounts

— Amy Lindsay (@amylindsayLA) February 12, 2016

But is it really reasonable to pull an ad simply because of one actress’s past? It may not line up with Cruz’s “family values,” but there’s no reason to conflate Lindsay’s performance in this advertisement with her past roles. We don’t eternally see Charlize Theron as a psychopathic killer or Viola Davis as a house maid. These actresses are afforded the chance to re-invent themselves for each role, whereas any actor who participates in a salacious role isn’t offered that chance.

It’s not as though Lindsay drags Cruz’s message into a seedy pornographic underworld–70 percent of American males 18-24 watch actually-pornographic material–footage much more explicit than the soft-core projects Lindsay participated in. In fact, 20 percent of men admit to watching porn during work. Somehow, for all the ubiquity of adult content in mainstream America, the presence of a person whose naked body is in other videos invalidates the message of the ad. Lindsay even identifies as a Christian Conservative, and her personal views actually mirror those of her character in the advertisement.

By this measure, Cruz’s campaign would also refuse to cast Matt LeBlanc, Sylvester Stallone, David Duchovny, and Adam West. Even Helen Mirren acted nude in sexual scenes in the pornographic film “Caligula,” only to later portray Queen Elizabeth. All of these actors have performed in either hard or soft core pornographic programs, yet continued to have successful film careers after the fact. It wouldn’t surprise me if from now on soft-core porn production companies refuse to cast Lindsay, citing her appearance in a Ted Cruz advertisement.

This effort to save face isn’t surprising from Cruz, or similar conservative candidates who hinge on the support of religious voters–often Evangelicals and Baptists. Though it may be a shrewd move, it’s simply unfair to allow an actor’s past roles color their other performances. Clearly politicians can’t be held to what they said or did in the past–so why shouldn’t actors be afforded the same leeway?

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post In Defense of Ted Cruz’s ‘Porn’ Actress appeared first on Law Street.