What if the $500 shoes were on the other feet?
August 4th, 2008 at 08:41am Pat Cunningham
Ordinarily, I judge a person’s fitness for high office on the basis of political issues rather than personal stuff, unless that stuff involves violations of the law or especially egregious misconduct.
That’s why I don’t care where Barack Obama goes to church or whether John McCain gambles away large sums shooting craps in Las Vegas.
Still, I can’t help but wonder what the reaction among the self-appointed moral guardians of our body politic would be if Obama’s record bore the questionable items in McCain’s record that curiously gain so little public attention.
How many of McCain’s supporters are even aware that he has accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the family of a porn star?
How many of his supporters are aware that McCain appeared in an R-rated movie noted for its nudity and strong sexual profanity?
How many of his supporters know that he dumped his first wife after she was disfigured in a car accident to marry a beautiful and wealthy heiress who is almost 18 years younger than he? Or that he got the license to marry the second wife before his divorce from the first one was final?
I wouldn’t bring up these matters if it weren’t for the world-class hypocrisy with which McCain’s backers pick at Obama, often dishonestly so, and treat him as if he were the anti-Christ.
Imagine the howls we would hear from the self-righteous phonies if it was Obama rather than McCain involved in those aforementioned matters.
And don’t get me started on the ridiculous notion that the elitist in this race is the relative pauper, Obama, while the other guy, John Sidney McCain III, wears $500 shoes, has 11 homes and, between he and his wife, has a fortune of more than $100 million.
Entry Filed under: John McCain, Barack Obama
12 Comments Add your own
1. Q Jordon | August 4th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Pat, you are confusing the McCain supporters with facts. Once they are overwhelmed, they will shut down all logical reasoning and resort to amnesia. They do not care about family values, if it involves one of their own.
As you state, it is hypocrisy at its full glory. Of course, they will claim we are being hypocrites for allowing it with the candidates we choose, but then again, I do not claim or pretend to be from the party of “family values”.
And when it comes to “family values”, they claim those on the left are lacking in this area; however, when it comes to down to it, so are they.
2. Mike Carroll | August 4th, 2008 at 10:25 am
I am beginning to to get the first whiff of panic among the Obamabots as The Chosen One is running well behind the Democratic brand. It is pretty much a statistical dead heat and he should be 10-12 points up. Perhaps you are about to nominate another Dukakis (sp?) rather than the black JFK you thought you had.
3. Menlo Bob | August 4th, 2008 at 10:47 am
So the expectation is that a candidate is supposed to vouch for the morality of the children of his donors? You’re something else.
4. Menlo Bob | August 4th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Another thing; Why wasn’t the McCain divorce story a prominent part of the the coverage of the Republican primary? Everything about that was readily available to read on the internet. Newspapers LOVED John McCain–even endorsed him. Yet almost no one said a peep about his post Vietnam behavior.
Instead of putting a spotlight on McCain we were treated to endless ‘Romney is a Mormon’ stories. Endless. Why it almost seems as if left wing newspapers wanted to tee up the weakest candidate to match up with the least qualified one. Imagine that.
5. Pat Cunningham | August 4th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Two things, Bob: 1) I don’t care whether you’ve heard of Tim LaHaye or anybody else. That doesn’t change my theory that the potential downsides of naming Romney his running mate are too much for McCain to risk. It’s not going to happen. There’s also the Mormon thing, as you suggest. 2) Regarding your comment No. 3, the unfairness of holding the Hilton parents responsible for the their daughter’s misdeeds has nothing to do with the point I was making. My point was that the moralists would have made a huge deal about it if Obama was getting money from the Hiltons.
6. Pat Cunningham | August 4th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Mike: Brand schmand! I discern no great panic among Obamaphiles, no matter all this wondering about why he isn’t up by double-digits. The amazing thing is that he hasn’t fallen behind despite all the rumors, allegations and smears he’s endured all year. And don’t give me your comparisons of Obama with Dukakis. Obama excites his backers. Dukakis never did. The Duke was bland. The Chosen One is anything but. There are a couple of other factors that warrant consideration here. 1) I think the polls are underestimating Obama’s support, especially in light of all the new registrations and the likelihood of record-high turnout and the difficulty in polling cell-phone voters (like me); 2) By every account I’ve read and heard, Obama’s organization is historically large and well-disciplined. His “ground game,” as they call it, makes McCain’s pale by comparison. Moreover, polls show far more enthusiasm among Obama backers than among McCain loyalists. In short, my friend, there’s no panic here.
7. Menlo Bob | August 4th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
“My point was that the moralists would have made a huge deal about it if Obama was getting money from the Hiltons.”–Sauce
Well as long as you get to make up imaginary events of what ‘would’ have happened, then we might just as well continue making up events ‘as if’ they actually did. I guess you’re not reality based then.
Yes, I do know who Tim LaHaye is, but he is incapable of doing anything near what you imply. Let’s test the theory–ask 10 people at random if the name rings a bell.
8. Mike Carroll | August 4th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
I see that your candidate continues to lurch towards the middle with his modified approval of limited offshore drilling. Now that he has made up his mind, perhaps he could inform the 2 dim bulbs that lead the House and Senate.
More change we can believe in.
9. Pat Cunningham | August 4th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Don’t worry, Mike. He’ll never catch McCain in flip-flops. He’s not even in the same league.
10. Orlando Clay | August 4th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
I’m not sure which MSNBC commentator should get the credit for the following line, the content of which is hilarious: “McCain has done so many flip-flops over the last year that it’s suprising he hasn’t broken a hip.”
11. Kaus | August 5th, 2008 at 7:11 am
Obama is obviously pandoring to conservatives. No way is this radical lefty endorsing drilling unless he can nationalize it to distribute even more income to his cronies.
12. equalityrkfd= | August 5th, 2008 at 9:16 am
He may have $500 pair of shoes, but defintely hasn’t gotten a $400 haircut…
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed