Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Activism and Politics => Politics => Topic started by: NicholeW. on August 27, 2008, 02:31:09 PM

Title: Does McCain Really Need Another Mansion? Giving Him White House Is One Too Many
Post by: NicholeW. on August 27, 2008, 02:31:09 PM
Does McCain Really Need Another Mansion? Giving Him White House Is One Too Many
By Jared Bernstein, Huffington Post. Posted August 27, 2008.

http://www.alternet.org/election08/96506/ (http://www.alternet.org/election08/96506/)

McCain's got eight houses and a level of wealth that insulates him from the real lives of 99% of Americans. That's dangerous for a president.

So McCain is rich. Or, his wife is rich, and that makes him rich too. Wasn't there some movie where Dudley Moore was engaged to a women with megabucks, and he kept getting drunk and introducing her to people as my 'financier' (instead of fiance)?

For all the ink spilled over this last week, two related issues were under-explored, the latter of which is especially important: what's 'rich,' and why does it matter? What does McCain's wealth, and the way he talks about it, reveal about his ability to be a successful president?


Title: Re: Does McCain Really Need Another Mansion? Giving Him White House Is One Too M
Post by: BeverlyAnn on August 27, 2008, 03:45:41 PM
I'm not an apologist for McCain but gee, I seem to remember a Democratic president whose family owns about half of New England and a good bit of Palm Beach.  Wait a minute, didn't his brother just get a standing ovation at the Democratic National Convention Monday night?  I think the Kennedy family owns more mansions than McCain does so maybe the press ought to just drop how many houses somebody owns as an issue.

Beverly
Title: Re: Does McCain Really Need Another Mansion? Giving Him White House Is One Too M
Post by: NicholeW. on August 27, 2008, 03:57:40 PM
I think the issue is how well Mr. McCain, hobnobbing with the banking and mortgage-set as well as being firmly attached to the discovery of wealth by whatever means necessary, will be able to see interests other than those of big-oil, big-pharmaceuticals, big IT, big-defense contractors, big automotives, big media, big food and such other bigs when it comes to regular folks.

I mean, you and I aren't going to be able to buy him mansions number 9 that he'll claim to have forgotten about, now will we.

Last I checked JFK was last president in 1963. That was 45 years ago. And when was Ted last running for the presidency? 1980? That's quite awhile ago as well. I'm not certain how well that zeroes in on who's running this year and what their particulars are.

But, I am willing to learn.

Nichole
Title: Re: Does McCain Really Need Another Mansion? Giving Him White House Is One Too Many
Post by: lisagurl on August 27, 2008, 04:02:03 PM
There are two things that corrupt people , money and power, if you already have money that reduces the probability of a bribe. Then that leaves power.

Since the beginning of this country, society has been loosely divided by classes.   Those born with a silver spoon like Bush that get to go to the best schools with average intelligence and those like Bill Clinton that make that class by brute smarts. Most people fall below that class and find a way to live. McCain did survive war prison and married big, call it luck or smarts he had to do something that got him there.

It is hard for either candidate to identify with working class America. I bet Obama has a better intellectual understanding of the world then McCain, but McCain has connections as he has been around longer and he uses them.
Title: Re: Does McCain Really Need Another Mansion? Giving Him White House Is One Too M
Post by: BeverlyAnn on August 27, 2008, 08:25:13 PM
Quote from: Nichole on August 27, 2008, 03:57:40 PM
I think the issue is how well Mr. McCain, hobnobbing with the banking and mortgage-set as well as being firmly attached to the discovery of wealth by whatever means necessary, will be able to see interests other than those of big-oil, big-pharmaceuticals, big IT, big-defense contractors, big automotives, big media, big food and such other bigs when it comes to regular folks.

You mean the same big money bankers, mortgage companies, pharmaceuticals, IT, defense people that ABC has reported on being in Denver hobnobbing with and spending lavish amounts of money on Democratic Congresscritters the last couple of days?  The same reports that got an ABC producer first pushed out into the middle of the street by a police officer, then choked for just a second and then arrested for trespassing on a public sidewalk because they were filming those same money people with Democrats.  Those Democrats who talk about ethics laws and reform so that they can't accept meals from lobbyists if they are literally eaten with a "knife and fork" so the chef hired by  lobbyists created finger foods held in a ceramic spoon. Huh???? And Nancy Pelosi held a private get together just for the people who are willing to give $100,000 or more to the Democratic Party.   :o

Like I said somewhere else, I wouldn't give you ten cents for Obama, Biden, McCain and whatever puppet he picks for Veep.  But at least the Republicans are up front and honest about catering to big business and big money.  They hold their hand out in front of them for the checks.  It appears the Democrats are just as bad but they want the check handed to them behind their back while they wink at big money and pat all us "little common folk" on the head.

Democrat or Republican, as the old Southern expression goes, "they are all about as worthless as "boobs" on a boar hog."

Beverly