Candidates’ housing crisis

The latest housing crisis doesn’t involve mass foreclosures and shady lending.  It involves presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain.

McCain remains unsure of how many homes he and his wife own together (I’ve heard estimates as high as 14[!] and as low as 7).  It’s charged that Mr. Obama, on the other hand, acquired his own home through a connection with convicted influence peddler Tony Rezko.  Both candidates have leveraged these stories against each other, though Obama has perhaps gained more traction through addition to the “out of touch” narrative.  An editorial in the Washington Post makes these points, then says that anyone voting on the basis of such petty details deserves the president they get.

We should take this a step further.  Voters who would elect candidates with questionable connections to criminals, or who can’t manage their own real estate holdings, deserve the president they get.  If Mr. McCain cannot be bothered to care about his own property, why should he be given charge of public insitutions?  I don’t believe the man should even be a Senator with all the dirty laundry that’s come out over the last few months.  Meanwhile, Mr. Obama calls his dealings with Rezko “regrettable.”  I’m sure Mr. Obama doesn’t regret the campaign contributions, though.  Mr. Rezko’s Wikipedia page paints quite a colorful picture of his background.  No public official should associate with those who would defraud the public or violate its trust.  Mr. Rezko has quite a history of just such behavior.

When will Americans learn?  Was President Bush, whose connections to the House of Saud and Osama bin Laden have given us very clear hindsight, not a big enough mistake?

Vote Nader this November and send a message that you won’t stand for frauds and crooks acting in your name anymore.  Vote Nader to say, “No more corporate or criminal ties to our public institutions.”  Vote Nader for REAL change in America.


~ by Daniel on 22 August, 2008.

3 Responses to “Candidates’ housing crisis”

  1. Vote Nader if you don’t want your vote to count for anything. Rezko was convicted after Obama dealt with him, and it was just to buy a house. There was nothing illegal about what Obama did.

  2. No but Obama has a history of association with Rezko, including campaign contributions. I never said Obama did anything illegal, only that he associates with crooked individuals.

    Can you please explain to me why your vote won’t count for anything if you vote for Nader? How does your vote count differently? A vote is a vote. You’re implying that it’s better to vote for one of the guys who will likely win, and therefore don’t need your vote.

  3. I’m not supporting Nader this year, although I did in 2004 (note: I’m a minor, so I can’t actually vote. But still). Daniel is right – a vote is a vote. You, Ben, could be equated to what is known in sports as a ‘bandwagon fan.’ You don’t vote for who you think is going to win. You vote for who you think should be running this country. If Americans had never stood up for what was right, well… we wouldn’t be Americans, we’d be Britons.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: