After repeatedly delaying the release of his medical records, John McCain has a received clean bill of health, at least according to the AP. Given that the McCain campaign provided a tightly restricted pool of reporters only three hours to pore over almost 1200 pages of material covering the past 8 years, reviewers focused almost exclusively on the skin cancer history of the man who routinely proclaims himself "older than dirt."
But those strict time constraints and prohibitions on copying McCain's voluminous records mean that a broad investigation of the 71 year old candidate's health was not possible this morning. Here, then, are five things still to look for in John McCain's medical records:
Papantonio of Air America Radio was on FOX News earlier today debating Media Research Center's Brent Bozell about whether Michelle Obama is or isn't off limits for the 2008 election.
Are spouses off limits? Bozell says they are fair game if they make comments like Michelle's "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of America" statements. But Papantonio comes back strong saying that children and wives shouldn't be fair game. If they are fair game, however, he says that the GOP should be careful what they wish for because "they're gonna get it" on Cindy McCain's tax returns amongst other things...
I imagine that FOX News isn't going to have Papantonio back on their show any time soon. A liberal guest that holds his own and wins an argument? FOX simply can't have that.
He raises a pretty good point considering Cindy McCain's baggage. If the GOP wants to go hard after Michelle they might have to think twice.
There are some items up on News Unfiltered that may interest the community.
The pressure is on John McCain to release Cindy McCain's tax returns:
The McCain campaign's decision to withhold Cindy McCain's tax returns is drawing criticism from across the political spectrum. This morning, editorials in both the Washington Post and Washington Times echoed calls for the McCain campaign to release Cindy McCain's tax returns. This follows a column in yesterday's New York Observer that blasts McCain for his hypocrisy on disclosure, noting that Mrs. McCain's corporate jet "has been flying him and his entourage of lobbyists around the country at bargain rates."
Today's Daily Flipper - McCain Corruption Edition you will read:
McCain Pushed Key Land Deal For Fundraiser
McCain Misses The Mark In Michigan
McCain Doesn’t Know Much About The Judiciary Either
McCain Gets Support From EU Trade Minister
Cindy On Release Of Tax Returns
As The Money Woes Continue
McCain Wants His FEC
Ron Paul Supporters Plan Takeover of GOP Convention
Read all the detail and take action on the flip. Flip it good.
On Thursday, John McCain's wife Cindy declared she would never release her tax returns. Unfortunately, the McCains are bucking the tide of public opinion regarding her income and href="00 million fortune. The American people by lopsided margins overwhelmingly believe presidential candidates should disclose their tax returns. And as they showed four years ago in the imbroglio over Theresa Heinz Kerry, the leading lights of the Republican Party and the conservative movement used to agree.
To date, it seems to me that the MSM has missed the common thread between Mark Penn's interactions with Colombia, former President Clinton's own interactions with Colombia (and, previously, the United Arab Emirates), and the release of the Clintons' tax returns. For me, at least, these stories raise a series of as-yet unanswered questions for Senator Clinton:
Of the $52 million in household income that your family collected in fees for your husband's "speaking engagements" over the past seven years, how much of that came from officials of foreign countries with business before the U.S. government, corporations with business before the U.S. government, or trade associations representing companies with business before the U.S. government? What governments and corporations paid those fees?
The Clinton's money matters not because they're rich, but because we must question their motivations for returning to the White House, and we must question whether this will cloud Sen. Clinton's judgement if she is elected as the next POTUS.
The Clinton hypocrisy is being revealed piece by piece and this will only grow, there is a lot that is still not known but from what its known its looking really bad for the Clintons.
The following video is from Dan Abrahams Show Verdict and as you will see the news on their recently released tax returns couldn't be worst for the Clintons:
According to John "Anger Management" McCain's website,
"accountability and transparency are the pillars of essential reform" (link to site, if you dare)
But! Oh noes!
"While both Democratic candidates for president have released several years worth of full federal tax returns, John McCain has not. As a self-professed champion of disclosure and ethics, John McCain should explain why for the past 26 years he has not seen fit to provide this important financial information to voters. Presidential candidates have disclosed several years worth of returns for decades, John McCain stands as a disturbing exception." DNC
So for those of you arguing that the Clintons' tax returns are a nonstory, how do you feel about the McCains'? According to MSNBC:
A McCain spokesman tells First Read that the Arizona senator will release his tax returns after they're filed, the week of April 15.
Hillary Clinton's campaign is in deep trouble. She's tanking in national polls against Barack Obama. Obama has substantially cut her lead in Pennsylvania. Her fundraising machine brought in $20 million in March, but even if most of that is available to be spent in the primaries she is still being
outspent by the Obama campaign.
Yesterday's late-Friday document dump of the Clinton's Tax Returns should be a wake-up call for ALL of us.
The DC Corporate Democrats are getting FILTHY RICH by playing on our fears, and we have precious little to show for it.
We have allowed a huge, Outside-the Party's Control Machine of 527's and foundations to be built, largely financed with OUR MONEY, to the detriment of the Party. We are subsidizing a grand lifestyle of DC Mansions, Private Jets, and Limos with our hard-earned cash, while a child went to bed hungry and cold in Detroit last night, ducking from the sounds of gunfire.
Hillary made good money. What I think is telling is how the contrast between her campaign economic mismanagement and her lush financial stance (and unwilling to use any of it to wrong her misdeeds or fund the "passion" of her life--us americans) makes me doubtless as to her obtuseness and inability to run the economy of the United States.
I feel as sorry for the Clintons as one can feel for any couple reported to have earned $109 million in the last seven years. They are in an impossible political position because a lot of that money is interpretable as being in the ambiguous category of influence seeking.
The least objectionable payments to the Clintons are those in which the host made a payment for a Bill Clinton speech and then made money on the speech. (Payments for speeches by U.S. Senators and House members have been against the law for a good number of years, dramatically reducing the availability of cogent speeches by Washington insiders, and helping to create a scarcity that enriches journalists and former insiders in general as well as the Clintons.)
The Clintons this week revealed their tax returns and claimed $108 million over the past eight years, gleaned primarily from speaking engagements where the faithful dole it out and Bill Clinton commands up to $250,00 per speech. What is remarkable about their returns is that they claimed only $10.2 million in charitable deductions over eight years. But it turns out that small amount was in fact dolled out to their own charity: They gave the money to themselves. And further, they gave none of it out until last year when Senator Clinton declared her Presidency.
Well, as I'm sure you all are now aware, the Clintons have released their tax returns for the last seven years. I don't have much to add to the discussion except the obvious observation that these numbers may make it difficult to appear within the mainstream of the American public, as all candidates are wont to do.
As a non-millionaire with admittedly little to say about the revelation, I thought I'd share a short web video I put together for this occasion:
InfoUSA sold [92-year-old Richard Guthrie's] name, and data on scores of other elderly Americans, to known lawbreakers, regulators say.
InfoUSA advertised lists of "Elderly Opportunity Seekers," 3.3 million older people "looking for ways to make money," and "Suffering Seniors," 4.7 million people with cancer or Alzheimer’s disease. "Oldies but Goodies" contained 500,000 gamblers over 55 years old, for 8.5 cents apiece. One list said: "These people are gullible. They want to believe that their luck can change."
Richard Guthrie, a 92-year-old Army veteran, was one of those victims. He ended up on scam artists’ lists because his name, like millions of others, was sold by large companies to telemarketing criminals, who then turned to major banks to steal his life’s savings.
I generally hate advertisements. They're annoying, loud, banal and repetitive. Nevertheless, given the news found within the Clintons' tax returns, I think it's time for a parody:
Speaking fees for Bill Clinton? $51,855,599
Book income for Hillary Clinton? $10,457,083
Pretending to care about the plight of the poor so you can win the Presidency? Priceless.
I find it ironic that Hillary Clinton, who has only recently re-invented herself as a populist, filed a joint return with IRS of 109 million dollars. But she cares about you, don't you know? If NAFTA and Welfare Reform, two controversial (and rightly so) laws that Clinton was for before she was against didn't help you, it must be your fault. You're just not working hard enough. And that union thingy you're in? Don't worry - Mark Penn's on your side! Hillary promises!
Read what the Republicans Wish You Wouldn’t 
