Well McCain is rich, comes from an old honorable family, is a serial adulturer, and is still a neocon bum. You are right, there is a total lack of meaningful debate in this campaign.

Hear hear!  One other thing that the rich can do is act as a gatekeeper for society.  Reading your Gstaad life columns, you seem to be the only person of decency in that you want to keep vulgar scum like Roman Abramovich out of the place, and if they do enter the enclave there are certain standards to which they must adhere. 

Another thing is that a rich man can speak his mind and doesn’t need to steal while in office because he already has sufficient wealth.  Though looking at people like Paris Hilton and Lydia Shaw, the WASP rich can do a better job raising their children.

In terms of electoral got’cha gimmicks, the non-response to the ‘how many homes do you own’ query is not necessarily an easy one to handicap.  You would think that anybody should know how many homes they own, however technically.  Or at least a ballpark figure. 

Unless of course, they’re the Sultan of Brunei.  But then he doesn’t have to run every four years. 

And no doubt, rather than referring the question to his staff, McCain’s response could have been a little silkier.  If only because it couldn’t be less.

But Obama’s latest gambit reminds one of those reports of Iraqi Scud missiles back in ‘91.  Sure they can inflict grievous damage should they somehow land where originally intended, but at what counter-cost?

So too, the ‘number of homes’ ploy.  Either it will resonate with the suburban electorate, by that I mean the media will take every measure to ensure that it does, or it will simply provide McCain’s camp with enough political cover to go nuclear in response.  Everything on the table.

If McCain was lying in wait for his own little Gulf of Tonkin incident, now he has one. 

Plus he’s got Hillary’s doppelganger whispering assuredly in his ear:  Obama can’t take a punch.  Doesn’t even have the chin of a bad Golden Gloves welterweigth.  I just b_tch slapped him into giving me and my (extremely misunderstood) husband two nights of primetime...at his own convention.  And watch me have Chelsea introduce me for a total TV hijack.  It’s a perfect set-up.  The air in Denver is already thin, just wait till the three of us suck the rest of it out.  Now, take care of business, Jack Mac, I ain’t gettin’ any younger.  You owe me, boy…

If theatre of the absurd has an apotheosis, it’s politics.

The question asked was ambiguous. Did it include properties in his wife’s name? Ditto, trusts for children? Rental units? The questioner was likely prepared to pounce on any answer, declare it dishonest by using a different definition, to create a fuss. McCain could not win the silly game, so he refused to play. In any case, it would be intrusive to go into the details of his family’s holdings. As likely no simple answer is possible it was a shrewd move to refer it to staff.

Taki said it himself - he’s not the best at anything, he just has money.

.....and mistresses, apparently, but oh, his wife isn’t hurt! No, she loves the scoundrel!

uh, huh!

Amazing how people doing wrong and knowing it, but lacking the courage to admit it, become ever so eloquent in justifying their misdeeds to themselves.

An honest elitist would simply treat journalists like garbage and be extremely condescending to the people’s concerns. And he would probably win the election.

What it comes down to is not democratic debate, but leadership.

I suppose the Kerry standard (http://www.amconmag.com/article/2004/may/24/00031/) obviously does not apply to McCain.

The correct way for the elite to measure wealth is not in homes, which is so vulgar. But to count toilets. When counting toilets, one can include the boats, airplanes, and motor coaches as well. A man’s true material wealth is exposed in the quantity of toilets sir.

It seems that Taki’s attitude towards marriage vows conflict with the accepted view the American male has been brought up with. In other, especially Southern European, societies the “casa grande - casa chica” is an accepted norm, considered to serve the needs of men, women, and society best, as long as the male has the means to take care of both. While one can argue about the moral aspects, what is certainly preferable in that model is that the husband takes his vow to take care of his wife and offspring seriously, and does not leave her destitute or as a burden to society. As the old saying goes, women look for security in a marriage and men look for sex. This way both get what they are looking for and we have a stable relationship in which to raise children. The American model ignores these fundamental differences and serves more the interest of buccaneering divorce lawyers and penis-envy obsessed feminists.

“And, between you and me, the less houses and possessions one owns, the happier one is.” -TakiI find that to be the case having been as it were on both sides of the street. There’s a bit of irony, in that Greece gave the west monogamy which really is unnatural in my opinion. But so is being a human being. Who’d ever have thunk there would be ‘conceptual creatures’...except apparently mother Nature, thunk’ed it. However let us REMEMBER, after all she came first not conceptual paradigms like ‘monogamy.’ IMHO a man ought to marry his first love assuming it’s reciprocal. And take a second wife into the family when and if in love again. This is best for the children which is why mother Nature made sex and wuw pleasurable and central in the first place - kids, procreation.  After all we don’t want to ‘think’ about sex too much do we? All of those indecorous positions and the exchanging of bodily fluids - oooooh...grody-?-Albeit mother Nature is kind in that regard, and it doesn’t seem so bad while it’s happening. I’ve improved, I don’t smoke afterward. Women want so much today I’m so nervous I smoke during...wait let me light-up, how’s that, want a little smoke down there?I kid. But the vibrator (seriously) is a miracle for women’s ability to have orgasms either with or later without, since it’s also facilitated by body memory (those big O’s or involuntary contractions.) She has so many during sex and then at the end of it all, we only have one- how is that fair? We get ‘delight’ she gets ecstasy - what’s to complain-?-I mean on her part too. If the poor ol’bumble bee falls for another flower? It’s about the kids if we’re ‘alleged’ adults. I’m a monk - I make this stuff up. I cover all the bases. Especially home. (humor) Carry on! Perhaps it can be the next Olypic event?

Well, in my mind the issue was more about McCain not remembering exactly how many houses he owns.  An issue that may come back to haunt him because, as it seems to me, McCain is borderline senile.  As in “senile dementia”.  If his tendency to babble, forget and confuse things rears its ugly head during the campaign, it will ruin his chances.

“There is nothing wrong with being rich as long as one has good manners, treats people worse off as equals, pays his taxes, serves in the armed forces, and puts America first.”

While this might fit McCain to some degree the problem is that most of the rich don’t do any of these things.  They treat the American people and nation like an occupied colony.  Literally a colony.  There can be no greater expression of hatred toward the people than supporting open borders, which McCain, along with virtually all of his class peers, does.

There’s too few aristocrats. Almost none in America besides myself. Here’s how you KNOW if you’re an aristocrat. You feel like you OWN the world and are RESPONSIBLE for it...and BEHAVE that way. There’s none in America (except moi) and very few in the world remaining. There’s some Chronicles people who might also qualify except they’ve taken on responsiblites which within the context they’ve taken them on i.e. living in America today, they know they can’t be aristocrats by that definition per se, which is the only one. Now this, yes is an aristocrat even if he doesn’t have a dime to his name - sweet evening primrose I smoke the very best of cigars that people throw away...no. I buy mine.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for the “McCain is a Gigolo” column by Taki, Ravi.

This is simply blowback for McCain accusing Obama of being elitist [whatever that word really means]

I also recall Limbaugh accusing Kerry of being an elitist for marrying Theresa Heinz.

For the love of God and America please stop the hypocrisy and let our country heal lest the pundits destroy it.

“There is nothing wrong with being rich as long as one has good manners, treats people worse off as equals, pays his taxes, serves in the armed forces, and puts America first.” I would endorse almost all of this, but serving in the American armed forces means serving a commander in chief who might order you to bomb a pharmaceutical factory, to serve in an occupying force that oversees the destruction of 14th century religious institutions, to attack countries that do not threaten us, etc.  I have all due respect for our military personnel, but I don’t think it is dishonorable to decline to serve the recent commanders in chief or most of the recent crop of potential commanders in chief.

Where does this idea of McCain as an honorable man correspond to reality? I hear it parroted incessantly but haven’t seen the facts. Can anybody reference them? Spending time in prison isn’t honorable in itself. Coveting the power to make very real and very unjust wars throughout a world that one has lost touch with because of a degenerating mind is not honorable.

I think the problem with some non-neocon conservative movements is that they are too populist. This is because they perceive rich people as being Jewish and leftist. This is a great generalization.

The real battle is not between right and left but between elitist and populist. This website should support the elitists. Peasants and proles can join the elitists if they accept the hierarchy. The problem with some of today’s elitists is they are alien and don’t have loyalty to the majority population. But that too can be changed.

Your constant boasting and self-aggrandizement gets boring. You lack the style and moral authority to be elite. And the nobility bestowed upon your forbears on that goat-infested little island seems equally dubious. Can’t you stick to what you do best, namely pull the so-called great with their snotty noses through the dirt?

Ari

I don’t expect consistency from Taki, or for that matter, Buchanan, when it comes to Bush and McCain. Phrases like “a decent man,” “an honorable man” will be used. See, Bush and McCain don’t have a mind of their own and not responsible for their actions because the neocons have bewitched them!

Taki:

We are waiting to know your comments on John Edwards’ affair.
He was going to be the democratic candidate running on “family values.”

That John Edwards got so hammered by his fellow Democrats over something that caused only a snicker, when done by Bill Clinton has more to do with John violating the Democratic code of conduct:
When having an affair, you definitely have to insist on abortion (like Jesse), or at least throw the lady into the ditch (like Teddy). If you can’t do that, you are not top politician material.

I just saw walking, passing through a CVS pharmacy - the funniest MAD Magazine cover in a long time:
Alfred E. Obama holding up the bumper-sticker for his campaign which reads - “YES WE CAN’T” - ...

The point is not that he has five homes but that he did not know how many homes he has? How many
more memory losses would he make when he becomes President?See how many souls have been lost because of a fooloish president? He could be forgiven because he made his money using his heart not his brain like Obama…

An other interesting article, by Taki, and many interesting comments. There is nothing wrong with being rich Taki tells us but he doesn’t tell if there is nothing wrong with being poor. Both go together, like a package, or like Chiotes, the inhabitants of Chios Island. For the rich to “treats people worse off as equals” is not imperative. Mother nature took care of that in two ways: the equality before death, trivial, that happens once in lifetime, so it is not, in that perspective, to painful, Mother nature can be kind, indulgent, you know; and the everyday equality, again the work of the Mother nature. This equality, the second one, is the most painful for the rich, the powerful, the famous, the so-called elite, because it is recurrent; happens every single day, usually in the morning. When the rich, the powerful, the famous goes to the toilette, to the bathroom, say every morning, he or she looses his or her richness, powerfulness, famousness and that it’s extremely painful. In that very moment, they realize that they are equal with everybody else. Unsupportable! They excrete excrements like everybody else. Unbelievable! And with high probability that the smell coming out is much worst that the one of ordinary people due to theirs elaborate alimentation comparing to the simple one of the simple people. The mornings are then les moments de vérité de la nature! It is the most unpleasant moment of the day for them, and that happens every day. Can you imagine, for example, the most powerful men on earth, our George W. Busch, in his golden toilette in the morning? Wow! Really amazing! Isn’t it?  You didn’t thought about it? Well, just think of it for a moment.  ...pays his taxes? Thanks, had a good laugh with it.

I’m with Curt. Taki is a pompous blowhard and a dirty old man.

I’m with Curt. Taki is a pompous blowhard and a dirty old man.

And what on earth is wrong with that?

Well, as far as McCain being an honorable man, his hypocrisies have already been noted in above comments. The only problem with being an unapologetic elitist in America today is the only candidates being offered for president are elitists, and elitists have a difficult time understanding (even if they had the inclination) the problems of people struggling to put food on the table and who are losing their homes to crooked banksters.
What I fear most in this election year is, conservatism and white males have become so hated by society at large that there is going to be a radical swing back to the hard left with all the woes that attend it (more government intervention, seizure/nationalization of private property). Naturally and historically, those of us in middle America will get the brunt of this backlash.

Being rich and caring about the poor rarely go together in America. People like McCain and most rich whites have this doctrine that if you are not a multimillionaire in America, then something is obvioiusly wrong with you and you deserve all the bad stuff that’s happening to you. Being rich in America doesn’t just mean that you are rich, it means that you are a better creature than the rest, you are righteous and just and closer to the divine. Which is why we can’t have another one of those, like McCain/Lieberman/Biden in power. These people put America last, precisely because they are rich and are thus a danger to this country. Be rich, be elitist, but at least put something else above you and your money.

Does anyone else think maybe there’s a noteworthy difference between an aristocrat and a parvenu?  Being filthy rich alone doesn’t give one class.  E.g. the Roosevelts were up there when New York was Nieu Amsterdam; Teddy and Franklin, like them or not, were real aristos.  McCain may come from a line of military leaders, but he somehow seem real.  The phony just-folks pretentions of the nouveau types can be just as galling as the phony I’ve-got-class of a Madonna.  Aristocracy is an instinct as much as a position; some have it, and some never will.  A person in a very humble position can act nobly.

Sorry, I meant that McCain seems unreal.  Also it’s Niew Amsterdam.

That God Reg you corrected yours above and said ‘unreal’. Amen. It may be an instinct,
like religion & similarly (fact is we don’t know) it also ‘may’ be more (e.g. both). For example
if it’s a gene it may be off...as many genes are there but not as it were ‘on’. There
were identical twins studied recently who grew up with the same loving parents in the same town and both became teachers in that town. (With identical twins they have the exact same genome or dna, the only physical trait that
differs is their fingerprints.) One twin came down with a particular disease her dna protected
her against and the other twin didn’t. Come to find out the twin who came down with the
disease her gene protected her against was there yes - but it wasn’t ‘on’ it was off. The
question then becomes *when and how did it go off… and of course then why? Here’s something
that occurs on both the conceptual and pragmatic/instincutal levels: ‘don’t do to another
what you would not have done to you.’ The age old, traditional golden rule.

Thankfully, there are no more poor people in the US, the Anglosphere and Western Europe. Such a breed is now extinct.

If wealth is not a requirement for aristocracy, the definition of aristocracy is purely arbitrary, anyone can become an aristocrat if you think yourself one. Therefore, one can’t be aristocratic without being rich.

Whatwemaybe is just a bit arch.  At the end of WWII Churchill, an aristocrat of the best sort, turned down a grateful nation’s offer of being made Duke of London.  He felt the position would carry frightfully expensive obligations, postwar Britain couldn’t offer a suitable income with the title, and he wasn’t goint to try it on the cheap.  Did forgoing the title make him less an aristocrat?  Did living on a relatively modest income make him common?

I have not visited this site before, though I have been an ardent fan of Taki since ca. ‘69.
I’m delighted to find such a treasure-trove of intelligent conversation, or comments. Such cheekiness! How refreshing, and so rare.
Taki, O wise and jaded rake, please, afore ye go (many, many years hence), please help us to find an antidote to the ubiquitous, ill-mannered, and dangerous neos. I don’t think we have all that much time left. These folks have had wealth for countless millennia, but they have never, ever, had so much unrestrained power. Will they spell our doom? I fear so.

Churchill was an aristocrat because he was knighted, was wealthy, even if not as wealthy as he could have been, and was prime minister.

There are technically no aristocrats in the US. The US is an egalitarian society with a constitution that bans titles on nobility. It has advantages, such that almost no residents in America are impoverished. It means a vibrant Christianity like nowhere else.

It also means a 1/3 non-white population. No country in Europe will be this bad in 50 years worst case scenario. It means no parties dedicated to closing the border. It means as much as 1/2 the country attending “colleges”, and so on.

One whose lineage is historically not wealthy, has no title of nobility, and has held no office of note cannot be considered aristocratic just because he thinks he acts righteously.

Being knighted, wealthy, and Prime Minister were perhaps reflections of Churchill’s aristocratic character; by themselves they didn’t make an ordinary fellow a meritorious person.  Technically there may be no American aristocrats, but let’s get real.  Several years ago an old Hollywood type of my acquaintance said, with feeling based on deep knowledge, that Jane Wyman (Ronald Reagan’s first wife) had more class in her little toenails than Nancy is capable of imagining.  In the sense in question aristocracy has to do with character, not hereditary title nor wealth.  It means having class, and anyone who would claim to has none.

El Lay Writer said something about Paris Hilton being a WASP.  Actually, the founder of the
Hilton Dynasty was a Catholic of Norwegian and German ancestry.  I’m all for WASP-bashing,
but only when it’s called for.  For whatever that’s worth.

“an old noble Greek family”???

it sounds like you believe in your own publicity

Taki, you miss the point. It’s not that McCain is rich, the issue is that he is RICH and doesn’t care about the economic security of his fellow countrymen. He supports the looting of America’s economic sovereignty, selling to the highest bidder, all the while running a campaign appealing to PATRIOTISM.

He’s a pimp for the “New World Order, the combination of Jewish ethnocentrism, Wall Street economics and the CEO classes…

I for one don’t begrudge anyone his wealth. But the wealthiest tycoons of the 19th Century cared a damn about their community, and the people who lived in it. George Eastman of Kodak, and the Hormel Brothers were American’s self-made aristocrats. But they voluntarily gave their employees wage dividends as well as paying themselves out of the profits their workers earned. The Hormel Brothers had a policy of giving a YEAR’s notice on any layoffs, and when asked why, they said, “Because we can afford it...” The soul heir to the Hormel fortune sold out and abandoned his father’s company, and now he is a notorious boylover, who uses his wealth to fund various “gay rightrs’ organizizations, particularly the gay marriage campaign.

Part of the probem today was identitied by James Burnham in his book “The Managerial Revolution”, and rise of the soulless “CEO Classes”, who didn’t earn the wealth themselves, and as often as not strip companies and hopelessly cripple them, while making a get-away with MILLIONS of dollars in loot as their reward for destroying what was once America’s great corporations.

McCain deserves special scorn as the mouthpiece of these “free traitors”...nobody begrudges you or yours Taki, whe know where you stand.

Please don’t take this personally, but wanting to be seen as an aristocrat is akin to wanting to streak at the local football match.

There’s a certain prurient novelty, indeed.

Gasps and groans emerge from the onlooking, common herd; men and women alike look askance, if not in an empathetic sorrow or jealous delight; the air and climate treat one’s soul with, well, a distinct and naked aggression; and, last, there is little to be said once the sordid, fanciful exhibition ends.

Little being figurative, of course.

Taki when your ego gets int he way of your mind - you come across as an amusing but spiled twit. (See your above article as an example.)

We all want to be taller. (humor) ... McCain’s last joke on the campaign trail (seriously) in public, to a crowd. (No one got this on You Tube?) “Gal was robbed, beaten, rapped repeatedly and knocked-unconscious. When she awoke with” (according to the McCain joke) “a blissful smile on her face she asked the officer ‘who was that big monkey?’” ... Honest truth. Not a joke in ‘virtual.’ Needless to say in the ‘political fantasy/reality’ of that joke America is the girl (i.e. us) and McCain is the big monkey. You can’t even make this stuff up - it would seem too bizarre. McCain must be feeling ‘pretty’ err confident.

As many others have stated here, it’s not that he has seven houses. He has no one to blame but himself for being asked such a question after he’s spent the campaign accusing an opponent of truly modest background of being an “elitist.”

Obama, who I don’t much care for politically or personally, has at least worked his way up and achieved his stature from meager beginnings. Whereas McCain who is the son and grandson of Admirals barely made it through Annapolis(despite decent intelligence) and doubtlessly stole a pilot slot from a more qualified midshipman. He then proceeded to wreck one aircraft in flight school and two more in his career besides the one in which he was shot down(another of his was destroyed on a carrier deck while he was in the pilot’s seat but it was due to no fault of his own). Would anyone else still have gotten or kept their wings with this record?  Not to nit-pick, but McCain never led a squadron in Vietnam.  In fact he never got more than 20 hours of flight time over Vietnam before being shot down. Now he brags in his speeches and ads that he commanded the largest squadron in the Navy while omitting the fact that it was a stateside training squadron and that was as high a posting as he ever achieved. Given his family and former POW status, most in the know agree that it’s a truly bad mark that he never advanced past the rank of captain. Most all former POWs suffer from deep trauma and mental instability. McCain seems to be no exception to this.

Jim Webb, who is a close friend of McCain’s, has himself criticized his pal’s shameful touting of his service in his quest for high office. Webb never once mentioned his Navy Cross and 3 purple hearts during his campaign,and certainly never mentioned his son’s current service in the Marines. McCain hasn’t passed up an opportunity to cheapen his service. While I know that McCain undoubtedly suffered more for his country than I or most anyone ever will, he nevertheless was put in that situation as a result of failing in his job as pilot. It’s not as though he was knowingly charging into gunfire to save his men(as Jim Webb actually did). If America wants to view a true hero from the Hanoi Hilton then it is Admiral Stockdale they should look to. He physically brought himself to near death in order to convince his captors of the futility of trying to get information out of him. McCain promised to give up secret his first day in captivity in order to be put in a hospital. He then agreed to partake in a propaganda interview by a French film crew and now uses this footage in his ads as some sort of testament to his courage. Note that he’s holding a lit cigarette in the grainy film. I don’t think the NVA gave him a smoke out of admiration for his holding out on them. Some fellow POWs have said that it was the top ranked Stockdale who ordered McCain to turn down an early release offer because of his father’s rank. Yet McCain has used this distorted fact in his ads as well. I want to admire his service, which far outpaced my relatively peaceful years in the Army, put his shameful self promotion turns “service” in to self aggrandizement.

I think Taki makes an interesting point in his comparison of European acceptance of mistresses versus American divorce, but fails to note that McCain is on the bad end of that comparison. McCain’s wife suffered through his years of captivity as well and was the unfortunately disfigured in an automobile accident during that time. Within two years of his return he began the adulterous affair with his current wife and soon left her for the heiress who would fund his early political career (with the help of Mr. Keating who traded donations and a few Bahamas vacations to McCain in exchange for bilking the taxpayers for billions without legal reprisal).

I can’t believe I’ve spent this much time working myself up over McCain, but I’m truly frightened of the prospect of this warmonger in power. He brings a whole slew of nightmares (second Cold War, permanent middle east occupation, war with Iran, military draft, etc) into the realm of possibility.

AP Fitz sed: As many others have stated here, it’s not that he has seven houses. He has no one to blame but himself for being asked such a question after he’s spent the campaign accusing an opponent of truly modest background of being an “elitist....Not to nit-pick, but McCain never led a squadron in Vietnam.  In fact he never got more than 20 hours of flight time over Vietnam before being shot down. Now he brags in his speeches and ads that he commanded the largest squadron in the Navy while omitting the fact that it was a stateside training squadron…

Your article was brilliant! A real put down of the hyprocrisy of the Republicans, and McCain in particular. Let’s not forget that the worst neo-con warmonger---Dick Cheney---said he was “too busy” to serve in Vietnam.

Of course, this begs the question of why McCain is any better then John Kerry when it comes to pimping
his war record? I’ve read the swift boat book on Kerry and it looks that the biggest difference between McCaain and Kerry is that Kerry was sly enough to get out of the war without getting himself shot up or captured.

The hyprocisy of Republicans and Conservatives in complaining about the Democrats pimping patriotism and religion seems apparent when comparing their own leaders.

What I am is the heir to an old noble Greek family.

And that’s what I like about you: you’ve a proud heritage.

Pearls of wisdom from Taki, as always much appreciated.

America has nummerous aristocrats, but the nature of the beast is that they have to keep a low profile (and want to, in any event).

Tak’san. Since you named your yacht the BUSHIDO you have some awareness and understanding no doubt of that (Japanese) culture. San is sort of an endearment. like ‘friend’ or ‘my friend’ or ‘buddy’ or ‘dear’.

Write more. Discipline yourself if possible in that regard, you are rather gifted. Poor ol’Jeff san is jonesing
(drug term ‘jonesing’ – need my fix) for more Taki stuff. Really. It’s fresh. Probably because possibly you never took yourself seriously as a writer and it’s intelligent, erudite often - and honestly fresh from someone with talent. Great. Write more (seriously) Tak’san. Don’t just leave Jeff’ san out in the cold.

Reg Stocking
Churchill a good aristocrat? Oh dear! There is an interesting book out by Patrik Buchanan. Never heard of it?

Patrik Buchanan?  Never heard of him.  If you mean his latest, it hasn’t come to hand yet, but soon will.  I’m perfectly aware that Churchill was, for a political eternity, the bad boy of the Conservative Party.  In his old age he was heard to remark that, at heart, he was an Asquith Liberal.  As for being a proper aristocrat, well, he did have a mind of his own, and he tried to do the right thing as he saw it, even if it wasn’t to his immediate political advantage.  It seems that Patrik and I may disagree.