| Author |
|
Joel Tesch Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 19 May 2006 Posts: 2834
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 12:15am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
It's a shocking thing to many people that anyone has too many homes to count, or however you want to slice it. McCain should have seen that landmine and not stepped on it.
Here's the thing. Associated Press reported on this, and stated this (bold emphasis is mine):
"Property records reviewed by The Associated Press show McCain and his family own at least eight homes: A ranch and two condos in Arizona; three condos in Coronado, Calif.; a condo in La Jolla, Calif.; and another in Arlington, Va. The number of houses is a bit trickier to determine since the ranch has at least four houses and a two-story cabin."
See...even AP is having a hard time determining an exact number. Are you shocked by that too? Property and what is considered a home (not to mention property having been bought/sold, etc.) It's not a simple "wow, how can you not know how many homes you own" matter.
Regardless, it's a stupid issue. No more valid than criticizing Obama for talking about the price of arugula. Frankly, I think his behavior towards and treatment of his first wife, his involvement in the Savings and Loan scandal are far more damning strikes against McCain (not to mention the shortsighted, ineffective McCain/Feingold bill).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Thom Price Byrne Robotics Member
LHomme Diabolique
Joined: 29 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 7592
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 12:40am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Jason Czeskleba:
I just do not get it.
****
What I think you don't get is that not everyone has a black &
white, them-versus-us, "Republicans are evil and Democrats are good"
point of view. I am very much in the middle, politically. Although
I've voted Democrat in every major election, it's never been without
misgivings. Every time I've voted for a Democrat for President, it's
been with the knowledge that while I may agree with them on some issues
there were others that I disagreed with. Other factors swayed my
decision: maybe the issues I agreed with were particularly important to
me at the time, maybe I felt the candidate had something special, or
(and most likely) I simply found the Republican candidate at the time
to be thoroughly unappealing.
Yes, there are issues that I agree with Obama on; and there are others
that I disagree with. Beyond that, he offers nothing worthwhile to sway
me. The only thing that separates him from a run-of-the-mill
politician is his vague promises of change -- and, from that get go,
that struck me as little more than flimflammery. After all, what else
is a thinly experienced, virtually unknown candidate going to say to
get attention.? "Blah blah blah change blah blah blah." Now that he
has the spotlight, not surprisingly he's backing away from it. It's
telling that his VP pick is a Washington insider whose been in office
almost longer than I've been alive and one who voted for the war
(curiously, the two things he most often railed at Clinton about.)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Mark Haslett Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 19 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 6940
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 1:17am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Thanks Joel, but AP or anyone else having trouble counting his houses is a sideshow to a sideshow. The political flat-footed-ness of saying "I'll get back to you with the number of houses I happen to own (houses, that is, not cats, socks or televisions)" is what McCain stumbled on here. A timely deflection in this case would have earned respect from me, if I could have been made aware of it.
But hearing McCain's response was a moment where I couldn't help but gasp at the chasm between his life and mine. I'm not anti-wealth or success, but I don't consider any politician's wealth to be comforting or endearing. "I can't remember how many houses I own" is like cold water in the face saying "remember, I ain't like you."
Of course he has much bigger failings, but new news is just newer (tho I guess we can probably agree this is getting to be old).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Keith Elder Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 1973
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 1:59am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Jodi: If Obama
was running against a dog the Klan guy would vote for the dog.
If a dog was in the running, I think he would have a real shot at it. Appealing to both sides of the political spectrum.
The thing that bothers me about McCain is, he said to be considered wealthy you had to make over 5 Million a year
I think that was a joke; if I remember right, I think he mentioned that reporters would take that out of context right after he said it.
In fact, I just did a little searching, and it was interesting. I found some youtube links that have his real answer edited out, so he responds '5 million' when the moderator asks him to define 'rich'. The print articles I turned up did basically the same. It took a fair amount of searching to find a transcript of McCain's answer, which is nothing like what was generally reported:
Q ON TAXES, DEFINE RICH. EVERYBODY TALKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, TAXING THE RICH AND -- BUT NOT THE POOR, THE MIDDLE CLASS. AT WHAT POINT -- GIVE ME A NUMBER, GIVE ME A SPECIFIC NUMBER WHERE DO YOU MOVE FROM MIDDLE CLASS TO RICH? IS IT 100 THOUSAND, IS IT 50 THOUSAND, 2 HUNDRED? HOW DOES ANYBODY KNOW IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STANDARDS ARE?
A SOME OF THE RICHEST PEOPLE I'VE EVER KNOWN IN MY LIFE ARE THE MOST UNHAPPY. I THINK THAT RICH IS -- SHOULD BE DEFINED BY A HOME, A GOOD JOB AND EDUCATION AND THE ABILITY TO HAND TO OUR CHILDREN A MORE PROSPEROUS AND SAFER WORLD THAN THE ONE THAT WE INHERITED. I DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANY MONEY FROM THE RICH. I WANT EVERYBODY TO GET RICH. I DON'T BELIEVE IN CLASS WARFARE OR REDISTRIBUTION OF THE WEALTH. BUT I CAN TELL YOU FOR EXAMPLE THERE ARE SMALL BUSINESSMEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE WORKING 16 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK THAT SOME PEOPLE WOULD CLASSIFY AS, QUOTE, RICH, MY FRIENDS, WHO WANT TO RAISE THEIR TAXES AND RAISE THEIR PAYROLL TAXES. LET'S HAVE -- KEEP TAXES LOW. LET'S GIVE EVERY FAMILY IN AMERICA A 7 THOUSAND DOLLAR TAX CREDIT FOR EVERY CHILD THEY HAVE. LET'S GIVE THEM A 5 THOUSAND DOLLAR REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT TO GO OUT AND GET THE HEALTH INSURANCE OF THEIR CHOICE. LET'S NOT HAVE THE GOVERNMENT TAKE OVER THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IN AMERICA. SO -- SO I THINK IF YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT INCOME, HOW ABOUT FIVE MILLION. SO -- BUT SERIOUSLY, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN -- I DON'T THINK, SERIOUSLY THAT -- THE POINT IS THAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE HERE SERIOUSLY -- AND I'M SURE THAT COMMENT WILL BE DISTORTED, BUT THE POINT IS -- THE POINT IS -- THE POINT IS THAT WE WANT TO KEEP PEOPLE'S TAXES LOW AND INCREASE REVENUES. Amazing how actual answers get buried, and the entire attention is focused on four words out of the middle. Four words that were followed by "but seriously". It happens to both candidates, I'm sure; but God, our media coverage is awful.
As far as the house thing, I think it's really a non-issue. I know a few people that would have to spend a few moments counting on their fingers to figure out how many properties they own.
Thom: That McCain and Obama are in a virtual dead-heat or Obama is, at best,
leading by low single digits seriously undermines any claims towards
Obama's effectiveness.
That's been my amazement over the last two elections; the Democrats lost? Really? How did they manage that? Bush won not because he's an appealing candidate in the least, and not not because of dirty tricks or vote fraud, but because of the Democrat's poor candidates and colossally mishandled campaigns. By all rights, they should have won. Obama isn't a poor candidate, but I think his campaign is starting to swerve dangerously.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Tom French Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 07 January 2005 Location: United States Posts: 4154
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 3:49am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I saw John McCain defend not knowing how many houses he had with: I'm a war hero don't you know...
Oh really? Where did you see that? I call BS.
Quote from SLATE.com:
"You know, could I just mention to you, Jay, and a moment of seriousness. I spent five and a half years in a prison cell, without -- I didn't have a house, I didn't have a kitchen table, I didn't have a table, I didn't have a chair. And I spent those five and a half years, because -- not because I wanted to get a house when I got out." -- John McCain, asked jokingly by Jay Leno how many houses he has
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jodi Moisan Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 19 February 2008 Location: United States Posts: 6808
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 5:50am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
WHAT? Certainly he couldn't be a Democrat Jodi! He MUST have been a Republican!!
Ahhhh but Joel, he declared his racism and explained he is now voting Republican. (Hee hee, before I get jumped on, I am kidding!!!!!)
After all, what else is a thinly experienced, virtually unknown candidate going to say to get attention.? "Blah blah blah change blah blah blah." Now that he has the spotlight, not surprisingly he's backing away from it. It's telling that his VP pick is a Washington insider whose been in office almost longer than I've been alive and one who voted for the war (curiously, the two things he most often railed at Clinton about.)
Thom have you seen the Biography channels Barack Obama Biography? If you have seen that and then say all he has is words "Blah, Blah, change...." Then I would be shocked. Or have you read his book?
I love in your paragraph you call Barack, thinly experienced, then you say his running mate: is a Washington insider whose been in office almost longer than I've been alive. Come on Thom, which are you most upset with, too much or too little? As my mom would have said "he can't win for losing"
Edited to add: I thought Hillary did a pretty fine job.
Edited by Jodi Moisan on 27 August 2008 at 5:51am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Joe Zhang Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 12843
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 5:51am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
In American society there's a difference between 'well-to-do' and 'wealthy'. Most of us here probably consider ourselves well to do. We don't have tens of thousands of dollars of cold, hard cash in our bank accounts. What we do have is access to large amounts of money when the need arises, primarily through bank loans. Banks give us the money because we have skills and relatively steady jobs, are of good character, and are likely to make good on those loans. We take the money and spend it on important things like housing, education, children, etc. Money literally flows through us, making the economy run successfully. Hence the term 'affluence'.
The truly wealthy don't have to borrow from anyone to support their personal lives. Most of them wouldn't panic if they lost a job or couldn't find one. There's nothing wrong with that; it's a good place to be and many of us are trying to get there. (Some of them do manage to live beyond their means, but that's truly nobody's problem but their own.)
Since the late 80's right-wing propagandists have done an incredible job blurring the differences between the two. Raising taxes on the wealthy is now somehow equivalent to class war on Middle America. Demands for social / environmental responsibility from corporations is now the reason for all our economic ills. And as far as I can tell the Democrats have done little to counter this lie. Most probably because they feed from the same corporate and private troff as the Republicans.
Edited by Joe Zhang on 27 August 2008 at 5:58am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Geoff Gibson Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 21 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 7:24am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Here's a few editorials to read with your morning coffee if you all are so inclined:
Tom Friedman compares the actions of the Chinese over the last seven years with actions taken by our country and notes how this is a unique time for an American Renewal.
Maureen Dowd notes how this Convention is different from any other before and how the Democrats are tearing themseleves apart again.
Finally, Jeffrey Rosen attempts to dispell the myth of Biden v. Bork while confirming that the Bork appointment began the movement toward the "politics of personal destruction."
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Scott Richards Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 22 September 2005 Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 7:24am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Not so fast. Don't confuse "wealthy" with "rich." Two different things. Chris Rock put it best describing the difference (paraphrasing):
Shaquille O'Neil is rich.
The guy that writes Shaquille O'Neil's check? He's wealthy.
Very good point. I agree with McCain completely on that. Wealthy and Rich are two completely different things.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Richards Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 22 September 2005 Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 7:27am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Joel: And really, what we're seeing here is Barak and the Dems playing old school politics. The real reason for McCain's nonanswer comes from owning multiple properties, some of which they do not reside in. These properties are bought and sold - especially in today's volatile market. It's not bc "the rich old guy doesn't know how many houses he has."
*** What is the meaningful difference you are trying to point out? If McCain owns multiple properties worth 14million and doesn't know how many there are... he is NOT an old rich guy who doesn't know how many houses he has?
Most people in that income bracket hire people to handle their investments. On any given day they have no idea what their actual holdings are. Smart people are willing to delegate to the professionals. I'd be more worried if he knew exactly how many since it would mean he micro-manages instead of deferring to the experts. I want a man who is willing to double check rather than be incorrect.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Richards Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 22 September 2005 Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 7:30am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I think the thing that is upsetting about this, is how can a guy that has 7 homes and think anything below 5 million a year is not wealthy is out of touch with what is going on in most peoples lives.
Which is it, rich or wealthy? McCain said rich, not wealthy. What was the income for the Obama family in 2007? I'd say they qualify for out of touch based on your standards.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 21 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 27 August 2008 at 7:33am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
In Muncie Indiana, if you make $150,000 a year you are considered rich. I don't know about Long Island, but an average income in Indiana is around $40,000
The most important words in your statement are "In Muncie Indiana." One of the many inequities in the tax code in this country is there is no consideration of cost of living factored into the application of income taxes. You get more for your $150,000 in Muncie than you do in Manhattan -- your dollar stretchs much further. That was my objection to Obama's blanket response that $150,000 was wealthy -- it may depend on where you live not just your gross earnings.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
|
|