Quote:
Originally Posted by mudwhistle
When you look at it do you want somebody who doesn't have a pot to piss in?
The Clintons didn't even own a home when they moved into the White House. By the time they left they were millionaires.. Where did they get all of their money from?
Do you want somebody who's independently wealthy or do you want someone who is living month to month and thus more likely to be on the take? I would rather have someone in there that is taking a step-down in pay then a step-up.
I really think the Democrats have their priorities out of whack.
|
I agree with Mudwhistle that I could not care less about how much property my president owns. I think he also makes a decent point about having someone in the office that is not as strongly affected by salary.
The issue here is that many in the GOP,
including McCain, have suggested that Barack Obama is out-of-touch with the average middle-class American. They've tried to assign him an "elitist" label in an attempt to portray him as snobbish and distant. Karl Rove even described him as "the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by." (
Political Punch)
Though John McCain, himself, didn't make these remarks, he
has defended this "Obama is out-of-touch" mentality, and, thus, he has become susceptible to criticism when he makes a comment that is perceived as, "Gee, I've got so many houses I can't even keep track."
That being said, I'm not sure it's fair to hold the man completely accountable for making that mistake. It can be a difficult question because it depends on what you mean by
own. It also depends on what the reporter meant by
you. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say that either candidate is particularly more out-of-touch than any usual candidate running for president, so the whole purpose of the argument is pretty moot.