McCain – Page 8 – Hank Kalet

Hypocrisy express

I think Josh Marshall properly frames the question of John McCain’s dubious tax-return release, asking how Hillary Clinton would be received had she of done what McCain has done.

First, an overview of the basics, from The New York Times’ political blog, The Caucus:

Senator John McCain released his income tax returns for the past two years showing that he received over $740,000 during 2006 and 2007 from his Senate salary, book royalty payments, his military pension and Social Security.

But yesterday’s release did not shed new light on the extent of the presumptive Republican presidential candidate’s wealth which comes from his wife, Cindy McCain.

Mrs. McCain holds a significant stake in a Phoenix-based beer distributorship, Hensley & Co. that her late father helped found. To date, she has not disclosed the size of her stake in the privately-held concern. But published estimates have speculated that it could be worth up to $100 million or more.

Hensley or entities controlled by it also have sizable real estate holdings, primarily in Arizona, public filings show.

In a statement accompanying the release of Senator McCain’s taxes, his campaign stated that it was not releasing Mrs. McCain’s personal taxes “in the interest of protecting the privacy of her children.”

So much for straight talk. McCain doesn’t just live off his own salary. He lives as a couple with his wife, relying on her connections and cash to make his career. As Marshall points out, Hillary Clinton wouldn’t be getting a pass on this.

What if Hillary Clinton released her income tax records showing relatively unremarkable (by senate standards, where almost everyone is fairly wealthy) income and said that Bill files separately and he’s a private person so he wouldn’t be releasing his?

I do not think she’d get a very easy ride from the press since Bill now makes all the money and it’s against his sources of income that any potential conflicts of interest or sources of embarrassment would likely arise.

The returns came out today, so it’s still possible that the media will do its job on this. But given the media’s track record on McCain, I’m not holding my breath.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Empty economic rhetoric

I haven’t had a chance to do much on the McCain economic address — a bunch of nonsense, if you ask me, that offers little that will aid Americans as the economy spins deeper into recession and certainly nothing designed to reverse the downward spiral.

So I offer Matthew Yglesias on the topic, from his Atlantic Monthly blog:

John McCain’s big economic policy speech hasn’t really gotten the attention it deserves from progressive blogs. But recall that we’ve heard in earlier McCain addresses that he wants to continue the war in Iraq indefinitely and also that he thinks we need to boost baseline defense spending. In his economic speech, he does what Republicans do and proposes a huge raft of tax cuts. Naturally, being a straight-talker, he’s not afraid to tell people that a certain price will be paid for these defense hikes and tax cuts. As he explains, paying for his program will require “taking the savings from earmark, program review, and other budget reforms.”

Straight talk!

Or, in reality, obfuscation. Clearly the reforms per se aren’t going to save any money. McCain is proposing processes that could lead to program cuts. But he won’t, you know, actually name any programs that he think ought to be cut. Because, after all, if he told people what he was planning to cut, they might realize that they liked these programs. So better to refer to them in a vague way. But in essence, McCain is saying we should reduce funding for our transportation infrastructure. And that at a time of rising food prices, poor people should get less in the way of food assistance. And that the federal law enforcement apparatus should do more with less. That product safety inspections can be pared back. That maybe environmental and labor regulations don’t really need to be enforced. Or perhaps the national parks should fall into a state of disrepair. Who knows? McCain won’t tell us what’ll get the ax, but there’s just no way to do what he’s proposing to do on the tax-and-warmongering sides of the budget without seriously scaling back on domestic programs.

No need to add anything.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

McCain’s spacy ad

I think someone needs to explain this ad to me. I just don’t get what Sen. John McCain is trying to say.

This NY Times blog item offers some speculation from other blogs, but the only thing I can come up with is this, from someone identified only as Peter, who offered this comment:

It seems that you can read it a few ways, but the most obvious to me seems blisteringly negative, and offensively so.

It may be my personal politics at play, but the only reason I can see for the insertion of that first, clumsy “American” is as a subtle dig at the most likely Democratic candidate’s American-ness.

It’s another tack on the bizarrely childish “Hussein” strategy.

I hope he’s wrong for no other reason than the “more American than the other guy” strategy is demeaning not only to Barack Obama, but to McCain and every potential voter in the country.

Another way of looking at this ad is to come straight out and say it lacks focus — sort of like the McCain campaign since he sewed up the nomination.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Tiger in his tank, or something like that

This story makes little sense and doesn’t make anyone involved look good. I mean, what exactly was David Bellavia trying to say, anyway?

“Fortunately, I have the privilege, the distinct privilege today, of introducing a true American hero who defies political norms in Washington,” Bellavia said. “Sen. John McCain has spent a lifetime in service to our nation. His example of unwavering courage is a model for every American. Rest assured that men like Senator McCain will be the goal and the men that my two young boys will emulate and admire. You can have your Tiger Woods, we’ve got Senator McCain.”

If he is trying to say that Tiger Woods is a flash in the pan — and that Barack Obama is, as well — and that John McCain has substance, he’s missed the mark wildly. Woods is one of the greatest, if not the greatest golfer of all time and certainly no flash in the pan.

If he was trying to remind the crowd of the race issue — I just have no idea what this is all about. It appears to be just another example of how nutty the folks connected to the campaign can be.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

The Bush extension

Glenn Greenwald offers a spot-on take on John McCain’s foreign policy thinking — a dangerous extension of the Bush doctrine that supports the cliches used (“a third Bush term,” etc.). A McCain presidency will mean an extension of the imperial project, the notion that the United States has both the right and obligation to run the world’s affairs.

It is, as I’ve been writing, the height of hubris and connected to the argument that Chris Hedges has been making, that the belief that history moves in a progressive direction (by progressive, I don’t mean liberal, but in a single direction) brings with it a rationalization of violence, a sense that the ends (a better world, the eradication of evil, etc.) justify the means.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.