Names in the quote below have been updated to reflect the personalities engaged in the current election:
Rabbi Smuley Boteach, World Net Daily, May 25, 2004:Now, having a wife who provides you with a private jet and eight multimillion-dollar vacation homes provides for a comfortable life. But is this the right preparation for becoming president? . . .
[...]
Before they married,Teresa Heinz[Cindy Lou Hensley] made JohnKerry[McCain] sign a prenuptial agreement. Which begs the question: If his own wife doesn’t trust him with her money, why should we trust him with ours?
Glenn Greenwald has a long list of partisan Republicans back in 2004 who harped on this theme, referring to John Kerry as “Gigolo John” and “Senator Gigolo”. By contrast, although McCain’s reliance on the wealth of his second wife Cindy is occasionally mentioned, no-one is using those terms regularly to discuss how very very elite and out of touch McCain must be with the normal struggles of Americans when his entire political career since he first ran for Congress in 1982 has relied upon Cindy’s family wealth being McCain’s 24K gold safety net.
Obviously, such remarks are very cheap shots. That’s why not many Democrats are returning fire against McCain by recycling that gigolo slur 4 years later. There’s been some arguments made in Kim’s Sarah Palin thread that refusing to cast as much mud as possible at the McCain campaign with respect to Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is a a losing strategy given that the Republicans’ skill at raking the muck seems to have helped them win the last two presidential elections.
While I’m on the side of those arguing that the Palin offspring should be off-limits, I wouldn’t say that those hoping to prevent McCain reaching the White House should never engage in some mud-slinging. Just that if you do feel the need to sling the mud, why not sling most of it at Senator Gigolo? Perhaps really get down with the Malkinite dregs, and sling that mud in limerick form?
hi tiggie
they might not be using the ‘gigolo’ tag, but they’re not refraining from the old ‘rich guy’ jibes, e.g.
“Do we want a guy who’s not sure how many homes he owns to be Pres. …?” or
“How can he know what it’s like to sit around a kitchen table and worry about paying the latest bills, if he’s not sure WHICH kitchen table he should sit at?”
“While I’m on the side of those arguing that the Palin offspring should be off-limits, I wouldn’t say that those hoping to prevent McCain reaching the White House should never engage in some mud-slinging.”
The only interest that I have in the Palin offspring is how her mother, in this case, proposes a ‘just say no policy’ to sex before marriage for all teenagers.
As a VP she would likely push further for the end of information about contraception for those who really need sensible and open advice. This is very scary stuff and cannot go unmentioned because of slightly unsaid LP rules.
I get the feeling that we are all being asked not mention what is plump, in front of us, because it is inappropriate and may damage the campaign.
Bristols’ not pregnant.
Bristols’ not pregnant.
Bristols’ not pregnant. Say no more.
Palin like for sure.
“Whaddaya mean the kitchen table? Only the help sit there!”
That’s a lovely impression of a pork chop, joe2, but it’s not a limerick. I also think you’re going to look very foolish in very short order about the “not pregnant” line.
Ambigulous,
I agree that there is some reference to McCain’s affluence going on, but absolutely none of the gigolo stuff. Why not? Just because of the age difference? Why can’t Cindy have a gigolo who is 18 years older than she is?
At least Kerry was long divorced when he married his wealthy second wife, his wealthy first wife initiated their divorce herself, and the Kerry-Heinz mutual prenuptial agreement in 1995 kept their separate fortunes independent (Kerry had enough inherited wealth of his own to run for Congress anyway). Contrast with McCain, who was engaging in an extramarital affair with Hensley when he divorced his non-wealthy and non-healthy first wife and who signed a prenuptial agreement to keep his mitts off the Hensley money back in 1980, when almost nobody had ever heard of such a thing, and who could never have afforded to run for Congress without Hensley money backing him.
McCain was a bought and paid-for man back before he ever ran for Congress, let alone the Presidency.
Not sure what you mean tigtog but MY foolishness is not something I hide.
so if he signed an agreement to keep his mitts off her money, to whom do the 8 houses belong?
“so if he signed an agreement to keep his mitts off her money, to whom do the 8 houses belong?”
Jesus, Ambigulous, that sounds like a modern day question of biblical proportions…”McCain to the mitts chips”?
my first name is not Jesus, I’m just a very naughty boy
The reason it isn’t being tried is because it is a lot harder to do. McCain is simply taken far more seriously than Kerry. McCain has carved out a strong enough reputation whether you agree with his policies or not to avoid being portrayed as a lightweight “toyboy” . It wasn’t fair to portay Kerry that way but he didn’t have the reputation to defeat it.
Which is quite a feat in itself when you realise how the whole “maverick” characterisation is all smoke and mirrors.
Even when he was running as a “maverick” in 2000 he was a typical Republican conservative: big oil, big military spending, big tax cuts for the rich, big corporate welfare, big bonanzas for corporate America in plans to privatise Veterans Affairs and Social Security.
He’s only become more deeply embedded in all the Big Business end of town since then. He’s more of a bought and paid for puppet than Bush ever was.
Not any more.
Uh oh, I might have to take that back. Seems she’s a charismatic right-wing evangelist anti-choice supermom, if Guy Rundle’s conclusion to his just-finished liveblog of her Convention speech for crikey is anything to go by:
hey Pavlov’s! you don’t take Guy Rundle seriously do you? comedy writer…. pining for the good old days of communism …. Jebus
Actually, Ambigulous, Guy is someone I know and like, and remember well from his Melbourne days at Arena Magazine, where it was clear to everyone who knew him that he has a brain the size of a planet. His stuff for Max Gillies has always been wonderful, and his US election coverage for Crikey has been extensive and really good; have you been reading it?
Yep, it’s been very spiffy work indeed.
I’m glad you know and like him. I read a piece he wrote a few years back, pining for communism, and it rather put me off. Good on you for supporting an old friend. His scripts for Max Gillies were wonderful: agreed.
Nate Silver notes that Palin’s speech may have released a “Reverse Redneck” dynamic upon the campaign.
A delicious irony if it gains momentum spurred by hard evidence of “conduct unbecoming” discovered as the forensic examination of Ms Palin’s past continues afrenziedly.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/cognitive-dissonance.html
“Last night I saw Lester Maddox on a TV show
With some smart-ass New York Jew
And the Jew laughed at Lester Maddox
And the audience laughed at Lester Maddox too
Well, he may be a fool but he’s our fool
If they think they’re better than him they’re wrong……”
Randy Newman.
4ejo0xqfhkjds3p0
America’s political scene seems to be mired in mud-slinging. Some of the hysterical crap you read is so extreme you wonder if the people who buy it should be entitled to vote. Most of it seems to come from the partisans outside the official campaigns. Still you have to wonder at the mentality of ‘Bros Before Hos’ etc.
.
That said I’m not sure that Sarah Palin’s kids are entirely off-limits. I wouldn’t condone hassling them but surely her daughter’s unplanned pregnancy says something about no-sex sex education?
No it doesn’t Adrien, it just confirms that school kids do have sex.
BTW, why do you always comment as if you have some special insight into the woes of the world having origins in sex-phobia?
why do you always comment as if you have some special insight into the woes of the world having origins in sex-phobia?
.
The notion that fucked up sex lives fucks up life in general is hardly one I originated. I have no ‘special insights’ as far as I’m aware. The control of human sexuality is at the heart of all moral systems. These systems of sexual control are thought by those who support them to be universal and eternal, mandated by God. They’re not. They’re contingent. They’re just contingent over long periods.
.
The Christian view of sex as something restricted to marriage and strictly for reproduction is no longer appropriate in my view. (Actually it never was.) Yet there are people who wish to entrench it. The correlation between low levels of education about contraception and the occurrence of teenage and unplanned pregnancy tells you something. Sorry it does. Kids have sex. If those girls getting pregnant without planning to are the same girls who’ve received abstinence only sex education it says something. And there’s a correlation.
.
Personally I don’t mind. If people want to have fucked up sex lives, no joy and twisted attitudes to what is a pretty natural and fun part of life – fine. Just leave the rest of us out of it.
.
That they don’t provides the reason for the conflict.
I knew you wouldn’t disappoint me Adrien.
I actually agree with you that attempts to control human sexuality have the ability to fuck things up. But your perception of sex-Ed. is archaic as A-B-C sex-Ed is the norm. Even if kids don’t receive a formal education in contraception, ten year olds have a grasp on it.
What, precisely, do 10-year-olds have a grasp on? Hope it’s not the same as what 50-year-olds have in hand.
Hmmm…Not quite what I meant. Ne touchez pas le pénis
OK, OK! But don’t you be talking that verrrrry feelthy French with me. I didn’t learn any French in school, so I can’t imagine what you wrote about. It looks like
“The pen is
mightier than…”
no, I give up.