Cindy McCain is obviously a very high-maintenance wife and if she winds up in the white house, we will be footing the bill for her out-of-control spending.

I'm not a fan of the McCains, but I am a long-time American Express cardmember. (Hey, that's what they call us.) Amex doesn't charge interest on your regular balances unless you start paying late, and even then it takes a while for it to kick in. The fees aren't nearly high enough, by the way, to make up for lost interest on their own (a Platinum Card, based on the solicitations I get, is about $350 a year); Amex makes money on the fees it charges merchants, which are higher than the Visa and Mastercard charges.

My guess, in any event, is that the form is a snapshot in time, and it would have shown $0 if the report had happened to be prepared the day after the bill was paid instead of before it was paid.

The interesting thing, though, is that the total balances - which come out to somewhere in the $125,000 to $350,000 range - likely are indicative of the amounts of money the family members spend on a regular, possibly monthly, basis. Remember that the next time someone says McCain is a straight-talking regular guy.

Why is this any of our business? We are not being asked to contribute to the pay down the debt. Really, this is journalism at its worst.

She owns the largest softdrink bottler in the state.

Sorry, but this post doesn't seem warranted. He and his wife are enormously wealthy (which we all know), it makes financial sense for them to borrow on 0% interest on Amex, and they took advantage of that. And?

100k on the cards for someone with several hundred million dollars is no big thing.

Of course this is our business - if you believe that we should examine a candidate's character. Not paying one's debts - especially when one has more than enough money to do so - is dishonorable and evidence of poor character.

... you're sinking fast. Steer back to real news and meaningful opinion, please.

A stinking rich woman using a credit card for (what is to her) pocket change is perhaps the most vapid post I have ever seen on War Room.

Why not devote a bit of bandwidth to this story?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/05/report-californ.html

A sitting California Congresswoman, who has denied, perhaps incorrectly, that her home was or is in foreclosure, was a community eyesore, and that she might have pulled $40,000 of equity out of it in connection with her campaign.

The amount at stake in the California case is much greater (more than $500,000), and repersents a far greater percentage of the Congresswoman's net worth, which might be zero.

Plus, the mortgage foreclosure issue represents (unlike the McCain story) a serious public policy question, and one on which this Congresswoman might be voting in the future.

What's the difference? One is a Democrat.

That has to be one of the most convoluted assumptions I've read in quite a while. But then most assumptions based on partisanship and feelings of class envy usually are. I would think that someone worth millions IS carrying that kind of credit card debt. Unless you think the more affluent carry wads of cash around just to impress the rest of us, rather than use a credit card.

Gee, I can't wait to see what kind of credit card debt the Obama's have, I suspect that story won't be written quite like this one........

because wealth and honesty are mutually exclusive. God, you're a tool. Granted, many with money are looking at being "regular folks" in the rearview mirror, but so what?

looks like a fake, smiles like a fake, talks like a fake = it's a fake - one look at the man tells you all you need to know - so sorry Mr Mac.

and a look through the family's books? - more of the same, what a surprise - money for nothing, tricks for free

...until all the GOPpers started showing up to scream about how it isn't a big deal and actually smart and blah, blah, blah. Now, I'm thinking there must be something here.

I am going to guess that this is carried debt not a snapshot on current charges. I charge a fairly large portion of my income on my credit cards because I don't cash, but my monthly balance is zero. When I applied for a Mortgage, my credit report was very clear in showing that I carried no credit card debt. If the balances were zeroed out ever month on the McCains cards, they would not be showing up as balances on their credit report, because the report would show the accounts were zeroed ever month. This is of interest because it suggest that there could be unethical things going on with these accounts, especially on the part of McCain who does not have access to his wife's money. I find it hard to believe that the McCains would be messing around with leaving debt on their cards to make a few extra bucks on the invested money. I won't be surprised if McCain is living beyond his personal means, riding on the tails of his wife's assumed fortune. Even people who are filthy rich can run through a fortune. Remember Michael Jackson?

"Barack Obama, who has become wealthy in recent years thanks to book royalties, did not report any financial liabilities."

(cf. http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/report_mccains_have_over_10000.php)

While I agree with others that this is probably just a snapshot of what the McCains spend every month, it is still just completely ... unfathomable to me. This is the guy who's supposed to understand and be in touch with regular folks, even though he has made many ridiculous comments about how regular folks will be fine if they just work harder! Take a couple more jobs!

In general, I agree with your overall point. Unless they are doing something wrong, I don't think we need to make hay out of their credit card bills. The problem is that Democrats are always being painted as out-of-touch rich guys because they like arugula or say they want orange juice instead of coffee, while Republicans get a pass on that sort of scrutiny - I suppose because everyone already expects them to be lying, hypocritical jerks, so they are held to a different standard. But politicians are required to file this information for a reason. It's not as though anyone is invading their privacy; they are public figures, and are legally required to reveal the state of their finances.