SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - McCain - Just your average "Every man".

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - McCain - Just your average "Every man". (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=141118)

I am a capalist. I think it is great when anyone reaches what ever level of wealth they work for. I would love to see this question asked of the billionairess' Pelosi and Feinstein. The reply would be their houses or rentals would be in the hundreds. Which is ok too. So I do not see the relevancy this housing question has with the ability to lead a country. McCain is a combat veteran, POW. Long standing public servant. Obama is wet behind the ears and is a junior senator with a shallow voting record. One will rely on seasoned professional for advise. the other has publicly said he will rely on his wife and granny. The choice is clear!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeCorrado

The point of course being that 99.9% of all Americans when asked, know exactly how many houses they (and their spouses) own.

The point of course being that for the vast majority of Americans, the number of homes that they own is quite simply.... ONE.

The point of course is that McCain may have known... but due to his advanced age, he simply forgot.

The point of course being that home ownership is such a forgone conclusion to John McCain that it just isn't a big deal- a home is much like a TV set for most Americans.... how many do YOU own? Did you have to give the answer a moments thought??

The point of course is that John McCain does not see the world as most Americans do.

The point of course is that John McCain may really, really, really believe that there is no serious problem with the U.S. economy. And from HIS perspective, maybe he is right-

The point of course is that I don't live in John McCain's world anymore than John McCain lives in mine.

And THAT of course, is the point. HE is the one who is not one of us, when "us" refers to an "average" American struggling to make ends meet.

For purposes of "full disclosure" - Barack Obama "owns" one home- and THAT one is MORTGAGED. Now that is something that I can relate to.

In closing, do not be surprised that this one story has the legs to last till election day- just like when George Bush Sr. was asked a similarly innocent question concerning the price of a gallon of milk.

Okay, so if I read your points correctly we should vote for Obama because he has one house and it's mortgaged? Do you really think Obama is one of "us"? That mortgaged house is worth over a million and a half dollars. He and his wife's net worth is somewhere in the millions. That makes him one of "us"? The only difference in how un-"us" like the two are is the degree. They are both wealthy and have no clue what it is like to be one of "us".

Oh, BTW, I only have one house and it's mortgaged, so I'd like you to vote for me for president. You'll have to write me in though because I'm pretty sure I can't buy my way on to the ballot.

Good point DT. This nonsense he was brought up poor, yadda yadda yadda is just that nonsense. What is worse is what his family has given to charity with the millions they make each year. In short, about zero. Obama has not lived like the common man for years. In fact, he probably has forgotten what the common man lives like.....basically check to check. I would say he is not in the same reality as the rest of the common man is.

How many politicians are in the realm of the "common man"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57

How many politicians are in the realm of the "common man"?

One hell of a question. Your small town mayors and such are still the common man. Very few but they are out there.

Apples to oranges.

One candidate is on his 40's. He has had less time to accumulate wealth.

One candidate is in his 70's and has had more time to succeed and build a fortune. Don't forget that he spent many years in the military, a job that doesn't pay very well, so he wasn't always wealthy.

If you really think about it, does John Q. Public who owns one house, up to his neck in debt, have the smarts to hold the office of president? Those smart enough to have the job, are smart enough to aquire wealth.

The important part is not that they suffer the same fate as those who can't succeed in life, but that they pay attention to the issues that the majority of people are facing.

By your logic, neither of them could ever make a decision about welfare or unemployment because they don't collect it or don't have a job. So would it be better if the next president was unemployed and collecting welfare? At least he'd be "in touch with the people".

Sorry, I think I'd have to vote for one of the rich guys.

McCain's family had wealth. He comes from a line of Military career officers. The blueblood type. A patriotic sort but make no mistake they had some serious money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SimNut

I wouldn't go so far as to label the poor as stupid. Being born into a rich family does not bestow intelligence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I wouldn't go so far as to label the poor as stupid. Being born into a rich family does not bestow intelligence.

So true. Just look at Paris Hilton as a prime example.:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I wouldn't go so far as to label the poor as stupid. Being born into a rich family does not bestow intelligence.

So true. Just look at Paris Hilton as a prime example.:D

Didn't she prove recently that she's at least smarter than McCain ? :lol:

I don't know if "prove" would be the right word:D She certainly demonstrated that she could read a script :yep:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57

McCain's family had wealth. He comes from a line of Military career officers. The blueblood type. A patriotic sort but make no mistake they had some serious money.

And then he cheated on his first wife, wrecked the marriage, and remarried for even more money, more power, more influence... but his thirst is never ending and he has now betrayed even his own morals- selling out to the political right wing of his party....

JUST TO WIN AN ELECTION.

How sad is that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeCorrado

How sad is that?

Just as sad as every other politician that's bought their way into office, which, I believe, would be the vast majority at the upper levels. I may be a cynic, but I don't believe that there is such a thing as a "clean" politician once you get above the small town mayor. They may be clean and have all the best intentions when they start out, but the current political system doesn't allow the "good guy" to hang around for long without being bought out by someone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital_Trucker

I may be a cynic, but I don't believe that there is such a thing as a "clean" politician once you get above the small town mayor. They may be clean and have all the best intentions when they start out, but the current political system doesn't allow the "good guy" to hang around for long without being bought out by someone.

If you can find a copy check out the book "The Gentleman from Montana" by Lewis R. Foster. It illustrates the very point you made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

If you can find a copy check out the book "The Gentleman from Montana" by Lewis R. Foster. It illustrates the very point you made.

Thanks, Platapus, I'll see if I can't dig it up somewhere (although that may be difficult, since the first Google search I did didn't turn up 12 sites wanting to sell it to me:rotfl:)

I can tell already that I would enjoy reading it based on the following quote from a piece done on the movie "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" which was based on the book (which the piece says was unpublished)

Quote:

The senatorial attack on the film was lead by Senate Majority Leader Alben W. Barkley, who called it "silly and stupid," and said it "makes the Senate look like a bunch of crooks."

from here

John Stossel in one of his books addressed the same point. He was talking about congressmen who swear they'll only serve one or two terms, and never, ever be swayed by a lobbyist. As soon as they get that first free limo ride to that first free $200-dinner, it's "I know what I said then, but God has told me I could do more good if I stay."

http://donklephant.com/2008/08/24/ye...ou-were-a-pow/

Tangential to this issue, but is anyone else fed up of McCain constantly referencing his captivity as a kind of immunity card? A get-out-of-jail-free card.
I mean, the campaign response to the accusations of cheating at Saddleback was ridiculous. I think the the Dems were stupid to press this unprovable claim, but responding with this?

Quote:

"The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous."

There's an obvious benefit to this; it's a stirring story of personal courage. However, the point will surely come when it loses all currency and resonance. When a man can't answer a question about his favourite song without going on about being shot down, something's wrong. Especially when the answer is historically impossible.

EDIT - This stuff about politicians being an "everyman". Do you really want that?