Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Michelle should be off limits, but if they want to play that game, bring on Cindy McCain. . .

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:28 AM
Original message
Michelle should be off limits, but if they want to play that game, bring on Cindy McCain. . .
. . .that is a battle I would love to have. This drug addicted and stealing former mistress who won't release her tax returns should be an interesting target.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
1. Cindy McCain is a drug dealer. She deals alcohol.
And she stole drugs from a children's charity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
2. No she shouldn't. If she is on the trail making speeches and such she should be fair game.
Edited on Tue May-20-08 08:35 AM by xultar
Just like if Cindy is out there making speeches and shit then she should be fair game as well.

If Michelle and/or Cindy decide that they aren't going to be active in the campaign then they shouldn't be targets.

It depends on how each spouse decides work within the campaign. And yes, one can be a target and the other not. It is the chance the spouse takes when they decide to get heavily involved with campaigning. The moment the spouse of a candidate brings up the other candidate instead of just praising their own spouse. They are a target. Simple.


Apparently you have bees in your jockstrap. Maybe you should get off DU for a day or so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Well since Cindy McCain is making speeches, she is in play. . .
. . .not sure if I understand the who "bees in your jockstrap" comment but I still love you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. All your posts this am have been very...high energy, Seems you need
to take a break. It did me some good.

Love ya!
x
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. The two posts from this morning are my first OP's in a few days. . .
. . .LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. She is indeed making speeches and such. And more...
Notice that McCain filed his tax returns with the FEC, but Cindy did not. Hmmm...

She's also providing Sen. McCain with private jets, vacation homes, etc. with her vast fortune...

She's fair game...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heather MC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. Umm Cindy was doing an interview declaring that her husband would not run a negative campaign
Edited on Tue May-20-08 08:47 AM by Heather MC
IF she can speak about how he is going to run HIS campaign, SHE IS INVOLVED and therefore fair game. ALSO McCain uses HER corporate Jet at a Major discount I might add to get around.
So the little pill-popping husband stealing thief is fair game!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
20. She didn't speak of the ill of opponent though. I don't care how the fucker gets
around, guy is lucky he married a woman with her own dough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heather MC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. I never said she did, she has interjected herself in to this campaign
by making appearances, she is fair game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. I'm good with that. We can drag all of her shit out of the closet. Read:
Edited on Tue May-20-08 08:49 AM by sparosnare
"She was blonde and beautiful. A rich man's daughter who became a politically powerful man's wife. She had it all, including an insidious addiction to drugs that sapped the beauty from her life like a spider on a butterfly."

What McEachern and the others didn't know was that, far from being a simple, honest admission designed to clear her conscience and help other addicts, Cindy McCain's storytelling had been orchestrated by Jay Smith, then John McCain's Washington campaign media advisor. And it was intended to divert attention from a different story, a story that was getting quite messy.

I know, because I had been working on that story for months at Phoenix New Times. I had finally tracked down the public records that confirmed Cindy McCain's addiction and much more, and the McCains knew I was about to get them. Cindy's tale was released on the day the records were made public.

But the story I was pursuing was not so much about Cindy McCain's unfortunate addiction. It was much more about her efforts to keep that story from coming to light, and the possible manipulation of the criminal justice system by her husband and his cohorts. The irony is that Cindy's secret would have stayed secret if John McCain's heavy-hitting lawyer, John Dowd (of D.C.'s Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld; his most recent claim to fame was serving as co-counsel for fellow partner Vernon Jordan during impeachment) hadn't heavy-handedly pulled out all the stops to protect the McCain family.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/10/18/drugs/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
4. I think anyone who actively campaigns for a candidate, and
speaks at political rallies is "fair game". That includes Michelle, Cindy & Chelsea. By holding political rallies to support THEIR candidate, they opened that door.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. I think the moment a family member speaks of the opponent they are fair game.
You'd expect them to say nice things about their family member. But once they say shit about the opponent it's on and they are a target.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. It doesn't stop with the spouse of the oppnonent, though...
It would continue with criticism of Chelsea or criticism of Obama's daughters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Only if they make statements about the opponent. Should they be a target.
I would also say children 18 or younger should not be target as well.

I mean if they are asking people to vote for a parent or an uncle...why make them targets. It's family, but the moment they say something about the opponent like...XXX is less experienced than my mom or XXX has a worse voting record than my dad... then they are a target.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Yes it applies to Chelsea, but in all fairness, You don't expect
Barack's daughters are going to be holding campaign rallies, do ya?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Chelsea took plenty of hits because of her father...
Do you really think people won't sink that low again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. poor thing. Of course people will sink that low and go lower. Our society sucks big donkey balls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. nope, they are little girls, less than 18, children less than 18 shouldn't be targets...
Didn't I say that already some where?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #21
32. I don't think they should be targets, either...
But that doesn't mean they won't be. I think we have to discourage spouse-bashing right now, so it doesn't get to that point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abacus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #7
33. Well, she did take advantage of the "proud of my country" comments
though she later regretted it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. Here's my q.
Why should the wife of a candidate be off
limits if she speaks publicly?

Of course it is absurd to think that she
shouldn't be held accountable for her words
and actions.

In fact, it would have done a lot of good for
Laura Bush to be publicly scrutinized and vetted
more thoroughly.

But then, with a fascist media in place, the
goodwives of the GOP get a free pass.. as do
the candidates.

In a fair world, Dubya would have been thoroughly
and effectively excoriated for his absence from
the National Guard, and the record of his family's
Nazi ties would have been all over the media then
as they should be now.

Sue
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErinBerin84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
9. Did anyone notice that Cindy McCain's memoir was dropped?
Edited on Tue May-20-08 08:47 AM by ErinBerin84
She had signed a big deal for a memoir to come out in the Fall, but it was cancelled, I'm assuming, to avoid scrutiny. I was sure that it was going to be a very edited version anyways, but you know....the REAL Cindy McCain memoir would be awesome! I agree that the drug thing should be off the table. What do people think about her tax returns? There was a NYT op ed saying that she should release them the other day, and they were talking on Countdown about how she probably has sketchy foreign investments. I'm honestly conflicted about it. I also wonder if part of the reason that they don't have her speak much on the campaign trail more is because of her stroke and short term memory loss (I am not saying this to be mean, but she really is supposed to have short term memory loss because of her stroke, which is horrible). But I also think that if she was a more visible voice on the campaign trail, there would obviously be things to pick apart there as well. I wonder why they had her on the Today show last week talking about how McCain's campaign was going to be SO CLEAN, when obviously that is a load of BS. Likewise, I don't think that Hillary should have been attacked for stupid stuff like the "cookies" comment. Bill and Hillary made some verbal "gaffes" when they were running that the right pulled apart and attacked them for, and Bill was still elected. Sometimes I think people are using this as a crutch for "See! Amateur mistake! Only the Clintons know how to navigate the right wing attacks, the Obamas didn't think it was coming!" If Hillary Clinton was the frontrunner now, I'm sure there would be more things that you could find from her that the right would be picking apart right now, because that's what they do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #9
26. The drug thing should not be off the table because she was given a slap on the wrist......
when everybody else gets time in jail.

<snip> In spring 1993, Gosinski tipped off the Drug Enforcement Administration to investigate McCain's drug theft,<32> and a federal investigation ensued. McCain's defense team, led by Washington lawyer John Dowd,<32> secured an agreement with the U.S. Attorney's office that limited her punishment to financial restitution and enrollment in a diversion program, <7><32> without any public disclosure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Hensley_McCain

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErinBerin84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. I kind of would love it if
a journalist said to McCain "Seeing as how in the 2000 campaign, your wife was subject to criticism from the right for her drug use and theft, what do you think about Obama's wife being attacked?" I know that the issues are separate, but I would just love to see McCain respond to it...since the media had a blackout on that guy who asked him if he called his wife a cunt. I mean, I do feel sorry for Cindy McCain, but in other ways, I would just love to see what McCain says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #9
28. The drug thing should not be off the table for 2 reasons
1) an attempt to criminalize their employee &
2) the manipulation of the justice system.

Both of these are indicative of how a John McCain will deal with problems. Cindy's drug problems are one thing, their response is something yet again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErinBerin84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. hell, the press doesn't even seem to think that
Keating 5 should be "on the table", which just shows how screwed up the whole thing is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldpol Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #9
31. the table of contents was released by the publisher! (lol)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
14. Michelle should be off limits, but if they want to play that game, bring on Cindy McCain. .
Add Bill Clinton to the list.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. Bill is not the enemy, he is just a mere nuisance
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #18
29. Look as long as they are active in the campaign they have to expect this
Edited on Tue May-20-08 09:19 AM by Tippy
I don't like it but it happens....Just read where Senator Corker has asked the Repubican party to stop running the ad's Well good old Bob seems to forget those awful ad's he ran against Harold Ford...I would not have been one bit suprised if Republican party had come up with a "black face" ad against Ford...I am glad however Clinton didn't stress the race issue here...remember it was in Memphis where M L King was killed. Clinton is really stiring up racists all over the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
15. if they go after Michelle then it is fair game to go after Cindy McCain
but Obama will not do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
importDavid Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
22. I totally agree
But the kids are off limits - that would be of unspeakable nastiness...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErinBerin84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
24. I know this is a COMPLETELY separate issue, but...
I really wish someone had the balls to ask McCain about that disgusting Chelsea joke he made when she was only a teenager! I would bake them a cake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #24
34. For the record
"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno." (June, 1998, John McCain)

Of course Rush beat him by several years, calling Chelsea names on national TV when she was just 12.
I heard Chelsea speak this year and she was really very good and had an amazing amount of hard fact and figure stuff ready to cite at will. Even those who dislike her Mom were very impressed by the daughter. Chelsea was by far the best of that team's surrogates. I'd highly consider Chelsea for office but I doubt she will run for anything. I had no idea she was as smart as she is and McCain aside, I did not recognize her at firt glace, she's grown into herself as many young folk do. She's looking good. But who cares, with a brain like hers, she could look like sin itself and be a great political or business sucess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EffieBlack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-20-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. I have never understood how Clinton can say a kind word about a man who said this about her child
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 04:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC