world

Cindy McCain says she'll never release her tax returns

62 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

62 Comments
Login to comment

What is Cindy McCain hiding from the American people?

We'll only know if she fesses up. Cindy McCain needs to stop denying the American people information about her tax returns and show the people that the wife of soon-to-be-losing presumptive Republican nominee John McCain is an honest woman.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"In response, Republican National Committee spokesman Danny Diaz said, “Howard Dean continues to lower the bar in this election.”

How, by asking Cindy McCain to do exactly what the spouses of the other candidates have?

What a nutjob.

What is Cindy McCain hiding from the American people?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In response, Republican National Committee spokesman Danny Diaz said, “Howard Dean continues to lower the bar in this election.”

I'll say. If he keeps lowering the ethics bar, people will confuse him as a republican!

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313, I'll say.

Republicans wrote the book on lowering the bar.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Is Cindy McCain running for co-president as a 2-for-1 deal?

Oh wait, that was 1992...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

She shouldn't have to release that information because it is no one's business but hers and her husbands. And as for the other wives doing it, it goes back to if your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"She shouldn't have to release that information because it is no one's business but hers and her husbands."

Wrong. It's your business becase the man she is married to could (but won't) become the President.

Why do you want her to keep denying the American people rightful access to her tax records?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh guys, it's just politics.

If a democrat was refusing to open up her taxable information, then she's unpatriotic and he shouldn't get the office.

But when it's a republican who refuses to open her finances up, it's no body's business.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Okay, so tell me why her personal finances are any of our concern? I could understand if she was suspected of some shady business, but not just because she is married to someone who is the president (hypotheically speaking of course). Now, if they were married and filed jointly, then possibly. But I mean, come one, she was richer that all get out before she was even married to him. I don't think anyone without being charged or suspected of a crime should have to just hand out that information.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Personally, I think she should, its the responses of the above posters I don't like. What I feel if you are a public figure, including actors and sports people, what you earn is our business because ultimately we pay for you..

But, if John McCain is not a recipient in anyway of her cash flow, then maybe she is correct in not putting out her tax forms as it could have other effects on her and not necessarily John McCain himself.

What was Hillary's tax statement when she was first lady? cricket, cricket, cricket...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I do believe Mrs McCain has said she will release her tax records when the 2004 presidential election loser John F Kerry releases his military records, as he promised he would do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

rtrhead1: "I could understand if she was suspected of some shady business,"

But how will you and your countrymen ever know unless Cindy McCain does the honorable thing and releases her tax records?

Bottom line: If Cindy McCain has nothing to hide, why is she being so secretive about her tax records????

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cindy McCain is guilty of causing unnecessary concern for the American people by denying them access to her tax records.

If that wasn't bad enough, she is also creating a totally unnecessary headache for her divorcee husband John McCain by refusing to surrender her tax records.

At this stage of the race, she really should know better.

It's almost as if she - like the majority of the American people - wants her husband to lose.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you believe that Michelle Obama's comments have anything to do with her husband's candidacy, then you should also be prepared to believe that Cindi McCain's income has something to do with her husband's. Otherwise why should you even bother considering what Michelle says? Her husband is the candidate. Isn't he?

I sympathize with Cindi. This is probably not a "fair" thing, but the simple truth is that potential First Ladies and First Gentlemen cannot expect the same rights of privacy as ordinary citizens. The separate return cannot and should not provide a veil over full disclosure.

I think it is true that most Americans tend to believe that the family is a basic unit of society. Recently the more conservative element has broadcast that the family is the basic unit of society. If a man's minister can be vetted, so can a man's wife--or a woman's husband.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

28 years of separate returns? Why should she have to open her returns up at all? If they just started filing separately prior to this candidacy, then there might be an issue. As it stands, it's a non-story.

Taxes have always filed jointly at Casa's barack and clinton. Different story.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cindy McCain's business is a family owned business, not a public one so there is no need to search for any illegal trading. She also files separately from John McCain and they have a prenup securing herself.

Unlike Hillary, Cindy has been very clear on her business dealings. So, since 1. she is not a candidate, 2. really doesn't want to be a first lady, thus really has no scrupulous intentions just by that statement alone, and 3. made all her money outside the public, I can not see why her taxes are such an issue. Hillary had indictments placed against her as First Lady, she used the travel office for her personal business. Still ventured into new business as a first lady. And least we not forget, it was not an easy task to get Hillary's statements out - only after she was pressured. I am seeing double standards here.

If you want to find out is she has done anything illegal, why the hell would you ask for tax statements?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skip:

Exactly. Anyone with a brain (which leaves the liberals out of this discussion) knows is that what's hers is hers. What's his is his.

Since they have a prenuptial agreement and file separately, his is our business; hers is not.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So Cindi can cry and bitch and get an attorney and do everything she can, but if (Ha Ha Ha Ha) John McCain was to get the popular vote, Cindi will release her taxes.

That or her old war hero won't take the whitehouse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: She does not have to. It is not a law and actually this only started when Kerry was trying to get in. Hillary did not have to do and she was filing jointly with Bill - thus part of her money was tax payer money. Additionally, the Clintons are still being asked to come up with reason why they had such an increase in taxable income.

Again, Cindy's money, has never been John McCain's money where as HRC's cash came through taxes and state level contracting - big difference. I can understand digging dirt on McCain - he is on our pay roll, but Cindy? C'mon.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A European observer of the US election pointed out that the Democrat party have as their candidates a witch (not the original term, but close) who is a lawyer who is married to a lawyer and also a lawyer who is married to a witch who is a lawyer.

The Republicans, on the other hand, have a genuine war hero who married a former beauty contest winner whose father owned a beer distribution conglomerate of some kind.

Is there really any contest?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cindy's 100% right. The dead elephant parties going into political exile and may it go the way of the whigs party that it replaced just prior to the American civil war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Is this a requirement of law?

Did John Kerry's wife release her tax information?

Just kwestions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SezWho2 your comment concerning a scale of rights, merits consideration.

This whole "rights" business began with the American and French Revolutions. The Bill of Rights best summerizes, this "notion" that all citizens of a State have rights. Prior to these revolutions, only the land owning aristocrats and the crown enjoyed "rights". Feudalism in europe died a slow painful death. Time passes and kings become ancient history and democracies rule the lands! Churchill called democracy the worst form of government, but that nother better existed to replace it.

Governments, past present and future, require a "moral mandate" permitting or even justifying their rule over populations. The "rights" issue, like some cheap drug, many have abused and OD'ed upon. Rights come in ratio with obligations. An illegal immegrant that pays no taxes, does not merit free health care and public schools. A woman who has paid her taxes all her life, however can demand her privacy, especially if she's married to a man whom the American people trust to run and manage their country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone with a brain

... will not use ad-hominem attacks and other such fallacies. Thus leaving the idiots (liberal AND conservative pundits alike) out of the conversation. Don't be a hater.

Now, anyways. If someone were to release their tax documents voluntarily to the public and not part of any legal requirement or investigation, then how do we know the documents are accurate?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushisake,

Interesting comments, mate? Do you know something we don't know about her?

Anyhow, seeing that you're all for being open, how about telling us your real name? You wouldn't be willing to deny us our democratic rights now, would you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

She has a history of filing separately from her husband and there's also the history of the prenup, so I'm pretty much satisfied that her motive is privacy and not protecting some super sinister and secretive financial empire. If people don't like that, then McCain will pay the consequences for it, good or bad (probably bad). But the choice is still hers to make.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't think this is a matter of suspecting a diabolical cover-up. I think it is just a matter of knowing who people are and a matter of knowing how people benefit or are harmed by the programs and policies that candidates support.

Despite pre-nuptial agreements or histories of separate filing, marriages are not arms-length arrangements. If a candidate supports programs which enrich his or her immediate family, we should have access to that information.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If a candidate supports programs which enrich his or her immediate family, we should have access to that information" True, but can you tell any one politician who hasn't enriched themselves or those close to them?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

a complete non-story...funny though how the RNC accuses the Dems of "lowering the bar"...that bar disappeared for good like 20 years ago

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"funny though how the RNC accuses the Dems of "lowering the bar"..."

Do what I say but not what I do. Heh, republicans wrote the book on dirty politics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong,

No, I can't. But you will perhaps appreciate that I don't have time to research all politicians to answer that question. Additionally, I probably couldn't tell you one who has--although I have my suspicions about Cheney.

I don't think that is really the point, however. I think that the point is that we expect our president to act for the good of the people. We would not expect, for example, our president to tout permanent tax cuts which had the effect of greatly enriching his family but contributed very little to the electorate as a whole.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Raising that bar, lowering that bar. Is it a Dem/Repub thing?

Obama's wife (who hasn't done too badly - for the daughter of a precinct captain in Chicago's fabled "Machine," able to get into Princeton despite poor grades because her older brother was a basketball star there) constantly says "they" keep raising the bar on the ordinary folks who are on the verge of escaping the grind.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yesterday I ask:

adaydream at 02:15 PM JST - 9th May

Is this a requirement of law?

Did John Kerry's wife release her tax information?

Just kwestions.

No body answered. Maybe we're bitching and moaning about something that's not our business. If it's required by law, kewl. If not, it's really just B/S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream:

If a democrat was refusing to open up her taxable information, then she's unpatriotic and he shouldn't get the office.

But when it's a republican who refuses to open her finances up, it's no body's business.

The Democrat in question is running for office. The wife of the Republican in question is not, and files separately.

Anyone capable of deductive reasoning could've figured that one out. What's that, you couldn't? Oops.

Did John Kerry's wife release her tax information?

Who cares?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk, is it a requirement of law?

If so, has Michelle Obama opened up her financial records.

Or is this just a chance to bitch?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't know if it's a requirement of law when the couple files separately.

Does Michelle Obama file separately?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have determined in my short search of the internet that disclosing tax returns for previous years prior to becoming president is not a requirement of law. It is a requirement from the American people.

Last election there was the flap about John Kerry and where his wife's fortunes came from.

This election John McCain only released his last two years tax returns, causing a flap about how he got his fortune and where the millions have come from. Is there a bit of corporate involvement in the making of his vast wealth. Ronald Reagan was the only other candidate that has released that few years.

I see no requirement, so this is a non-arguement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't think Kerry's wife released her tax returns although she was rather hounded by the Republicans to do so. What she did release was income statements which allowed people to estimate how she benefited from or was hurt by various tax laws.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a piece of audacity! this woman wants to be first lady but insist that the American people has no right to know anything about her finances. I wonder how that would play out if Michelle Obama took the same stand.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SezWho2:

I don't think Kerry's wife released her tax returns although she was rather hounded by the Republicans to do so.

I thought it was pretty obvious where her money came from. Same for the current Mrs. McCain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If a candidate supports programs which enrich his or her immediate family, we should have access to that information.

I'm betting that in 3 minutes or less you or I could find information about what she owns on the internet. You don't need tax records for that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Or, I guess I could have said, "What Whitehawk said." heh

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib,

The point is not about what she owns. The point is about income and expenses. The point is about how the family unit fared after taxes. Knowing what a person owns gives no indication of how they may or may not be enriched by certain measures.

As I said before, I don't think this is a particularly fair thing to ask of McCain's wife. She certainly has no legal necessity to provide the information. Nonetheless, I don't see how this is substantially different from the repeated requests that were made of Kerry's wife and which she at least partially satisfied by releasing income statements.

Also, I trust that by this time you have spent the 3 minutes on the Internet and have computed the extent to which Mrs. McCain has been advantaged or disadvantaged by tax law. Now if you will only share that with us.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WhiteHawk,

Of course it is obvious where her money comes from--especially if you mean that in the common sense. Kerry's money came from ketchup and McCain's comes from beer. Kennedy's supposedly came from rum-running. That's not the point.

I don't think Americans care so much about how much money she has. What they care about is whether she is paying a fair share of taxes. This is especially of interest when she has a husband who is recommending permanent tax cuts that, oddly enough, favor the already wealthy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What they care about is whether she is paying a fair share of taxes." Then she is right to be concerned. Some people will say she's paid enough, others, the anti-McCain crowd will say she didn't.

None of her money comes from tax payers (if her company has any gov contracts, then they should be opened) but not her personal. Why isn't anyone crying about Hillary's income, who is on a tax payer payroll yet she still gets to tend to her business and the amount she has made, makes you wonder. We can leave Michelle Obama alone too.. She is not on a tax payer's salary, therefore she is free to make what she wants but Obama, McCain himself, Hillary and every other stinking politician is not!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sez, ike I said McCain will face the consequences, good or bad, from his wife's decision. But in the end it's still her decision. Your concerns just aren't as important to me as they are to you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good point, Sez. Whether she's paying, and whether the income is from legitimate sources.

Why isn't anyone crying about Hillary's income,

They are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib,

I don't think you understand my concerns. Let me go back to my original post. I sympathize with McCain.

I don't know what I would do if my spouse were running for office. However, if she were, and and if I were under pressure to disclose my separate return, and if I had nothing to hide, and if I wanted my spouse to attain office, I think I might disclose either the returns or sufficient information to satisfy the concerns.

I don't think I would take a confrontational attitude and say that I would never release my tax returns. That only serves to exacerbate any suspicions that are already out there. You're absolutely right that it is her decision and in never said otherwise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong,

What you say is quite true and if that were the only thing that people are concerned about then she would be right be concerned but not necessarily prudent to refuse to be forthcoming.

That isn't, of course, the only concern and if you had quoted more fully you would have gotten to it. People know how the Bush tax cuts have effected them. They know that John McCain wants to make them permanent. What they do not know is how these tax cuts have benefited the McCain family.

Yes, it's absolutely her decision whether to release her records or not. This is a matter of law. However, it is absurd to take the position that it is her husband who is running for office and not her and that therefore she should not, laws aside, disclose her financial positions.

If we take that attitude there, I think that we should also apply that principle to everything that she say or does, to everything Michelle says or does and to everything that Bill says or does. Now wouldn't we be in a fine pickle if we actually had to listen only to what the candidates themselves said and did and discount all the noise and innuendo? If you can tell me with even a half-straight face that this is what the she's-not-the-candidate Cindi defenders are prepared to do, I'll stop giving you grief about this but I don't think you will change my mind.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Cindy McCain is guilty of causing unnecessary concern for the American people by denying them access to her tax records."

This is some of the most hilarious commentary on US politics I have ever come across.

"...guilty of causing unnecessary concern for the American people"

Priceless!

If you are looking for an agent, I know a good one.

Give us some more of your act.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just a quick comment becuase I view this a pretty much a non-issue though I would change my mind if the circumstances were a bit different. They have an agreement that works for their marriage.

Sen McCain is routinely is ranked among the richest lawmakers in Congress, but he and his wife have kept their finances separate throughout their marriage. A prenuptial agreement left much of the family’s assets in Cindy McCain’s name.

I think we should respect that fact also and not try to change their marriage that has worked for them for 28 years because Ms. McCain might have possible dirt to slam her husband with in her financial affairs. I don't think we should as an electorate should cross a line of demanding that they change what has obviously worked in their marriage to keep them together all these years. As most folks know the leading cause of divorce between couples is how they handle their finances together, the McCain's have decided along time ago how they would handle their respective finances and though I agree his running for President does change things a bit, I still don't think we should cross a line that works for a marriage just to satisfy some political point. I'm more inclined to say good on ya both for making the marriage work myself in this day of so many divorces.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind - this is not about their marriage and how it has managed to work for 28 years. For all you know it may have been hell with a consensual pause in the interest of political ambition. Politicians are capable of anything, our history is littered with the lies and deceit perpetrated by politicians on the road to the highest office. We don't trust them or their spouses and that is why it is important for them to come clean on such a basic requirement. Cindy under these circumstances can not be separated from her husband in as much as Michelle could not be from Barack. If Cindy's husband is elected she will be the first lady, essentially speaking on behalf of America from the female perspective. We seek some assurances in the way she has conducted her life especially in the area of finances a really critical issue in a capitalist society.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Cindy's husband is elected she will be the first lady, essentially speaking on behalf of America from the female perspective. We seek some assurances in the way she has conducted her life especially in the area of finances a really critical issue in a capitalist society.

Ummm.....I think being smart enough to have her hubby sign a pre-nup so if they ever did get a divorce he wouldn't be entitled to her fortune is a pretty smart move and a pretty good role model to speak from a female perspective. She doesn't seem like the stay in the kitchen and bake cookies type and do whatever hubby says. You do understand everton by your demanding that she come 'clean' you also demanding that they tear up a legal contract they agreed between them 28 years ago. I don't think we have any right to demand anything from them here, this is just trying to get dirt, you know that and I know that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think being smart enough to have her hubby sign a pre-nup so if they ever did get a divorce he wouldn't be entitled to her fortune is a pretty smart move and a pretty good role model

Don't Republican 'family values' assume that when people get married the intention is to stay married, not hedge your bets against a divorce? Marrying someone without being sure you want to stay with them and without being sure they're going to want to stay with you is neither smart nor what I would expect from a role model, male or female. If you aren't willing to throw everything you have, body and soul, including your money, into a marriage, what's the point?

It's weird to be married and live in separate purses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Howard Dean - "What is John McCain trying to hide?"

Doesn't he mean Cindy McCain?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Everton, I agree with you and disagree with Sail. It's not about marital health. It's about some other things: privacy, ethics, transparency, possible conflicts of interest and influence peddaling.

Cleo wrote - It's weird to be married and live in separate purses.

I'd say there are more than just the two purses involved, Cleo, which is why she wants to keep her/their sources of income hidden.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Carefull Cleo.... You almost sound like a conservative that believes in family values, you know a Republican.

Marrying someone without being sure you want to stay with them and without being sure they're going to want to stay with you is neither smart nor what I would expect from a role model, male or female. If you aren't willing to throw everything you have, body and soul, including your money, into a marriage, what's the point?

I think a pre-nup was a pretty good call on Ms.Cain's part a very liberal position on my part dont'cha think.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What ever agreements Cindy may have made with regards to her marriage vows and asset retention do not mitigate the American people's right to know. It overrides any sordid, self serving arrangements that underlines their union . The moment the McCains decided to run for public office at this level their lives current and past are now an open book subject to public scrutiny . To say that you will not release your personal tax records will hurt her and her husband. It will be a point of contention and discussion for the entire campaign

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo, family values, pre-nups and rich Repubs? For rich Repubs, the pre-nub is equivalent to foreplay.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge: "Doesn't he mean Cindy McCain?"

Cindy too... Illegal campaign financing and other forms of dirty payments to John McCain through his wife. See the Clintons for the same suspicions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nessie at 12:06 AM JST - 12th May

Cleo, family values, pre-nups and rich Repubs? For rich Repubs, the pre-nub is equivalent to foreplay.

So, I guess while Hillary was Vice Pr..Um, I mean First Lady, speculating on futures (to the tune of a couple hundred thousand of not her money), then when the margin call came, she was not required to pay...Um, yeah, the Republicans are bad. Give me a break.

As far as family values, I would think that Mrs. McCain did the smart thing by protecting her assets from anything that could come in the future. I think she did the right thing, and the American people do NOT have a right to know what her finances are.

Now, the American people DO have the right to not vote for her husband. So this will work it self out.

Addiu

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Normally, I am all about privacy issues, but I have to go with the B team on this one. Public figures always scream that want privacy in their lives while craving attention in the public spotlight. Ok Cindy McCain is not Madonna. But I think with all the financial scandals that H.Clinton and Co. had, we deserve to know a little bit more from Cindy than Its my business. Sure they decided a long time ago about this, but its doubtful they dreamed of the presidency on their wedding day. See we are talking about the highest office in the USA. The most powerful person in the world. His/ or her spouse will have a great deal of influence over a broad range of issues. (Reference Clintons in office). Cindy will be the first lady and all the benefits that implies. But lets also look at it another way. If you plan to go to work in the Whitehouse for the President. Say you get hired, before you can even be confirmed, you have a have a Top Secret SCI clearance. Which simply means, you get a full and complete background check. The FBI looks at your credit, tax returns,medical history, and who you have associated with in the last 10 years. Thats just part of it. Now given that, don't you think we should know a little bit about who sits in our public offices and who and what kind of persons have influence on them? Most of us, wouldn't care if properly cleared personnel looked at out tax returns. God knows I have had to freely pass them around the JGOV. So I have to think that like most rich people, they don't want you looking at the their tax returns, because the press will investigate every line and every entry.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites