Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.X
to be fair, strategic or not, you can't preach being open and transparency and then hide your wifes returns... and anyhow, she's not "very very very" wealthy, her fortune is estimated at around 100mil. Clintons (bill mainly) made close to 100mil since 2000. They released their returns for everyone to see.
I'm not pro any of the people involved in the election stateside (except for Ron Paul), but I can't see how people on a steroid forum can support a guy thats the most anti-steroids out there.  |
McCain is a kept man, he is considered to be one of the wealthiest men in Congress (but that fortune is not really his, he is just in close proximity to it). He married wealthy. Also his wife is not a candidate. The Clintons are a different case, for very obvious reasons.
I don't think McCain is hiding his wife's returns, I flat out think he doesn't have the balls to dictate shit to her, primarily evidenced by the prenuptial agreement he had to sign in order to marry her.
As far as supporting McCain, it has nothing to do with his position on steroids. The 3 candidates are like 3 forms of cancer, McCain is skin cancer, Hillary is lung cancer, and Obama is brain cancer. I would prefer different options all together but if I had to make a choice b/w the 3 I think I would have a better chance of surviving the skin cancer.
Besides I also have a better chance of my taxes not increasing with McCain (probably a slim to none chance...but a sliver of hope is still hope) There other two are guaranteed to raise them.
I think Ron Paul promoted the most classical American ideology, and I agree with a great deal of it. But due to our terminally corrupt system he never stood a chance.