John McCain released his taxes on Friday, because, well, that’s what you do when you’re running for president. However, as previously mentioned on Turtlewatch(ing), Cindy McCain holds most of the assets for the McCains. Accordingly, John McCain did not release his wife’s tax returns because, as stated by the McCain campaign, it’s “in the interest of protecting the privacy of her children.” Now, if this leap of logic makes absolutely no sense to you, you’re not alone, but you’re here for an explanation and that’s what I provide. You see, McCain’s children have already taken up residence at Dick Cheney’s compound in stasis pods, so that they can serve in John McCain’s place should he be incapacitated during the campaign. If tax records were somehow released, there is worry that saboteurs would find vice-president Cheney’s compound of bin Laden-like caves.
The Democrats have criticized McCain’s lack of transparency. However, the McCain camp has compared it to the situation of John Kerry, when Kerry’s wealthy wife didn’t disclose her taxes to the public. Although the Republicans had a problem then, not many seem to have much of an issue with it now. Perhaps it’s because McCain’s wife is able to provide beer to people who would criticize her lack of disclosure, while Kerry’s wife could only provide ketchup. There’s only so many freedom fries you can eat before ketchup is useless, but there’s almost no limit to the amount of piss-water/Budweiser you can drink.
The fact that Cindy McCain holds most of the McCain’s wealth also proves that she is more intelligent than Paul McCartney. Hopefully, being vaulted into the public spotlight Before their marriage, John McCain signed a prenuptial agreement to keep the two McCain’s assets separate. However, from a logistical standpoint, it would have been difficult for McCain to sign a prenuptial agreement because the physiological structure of a his foot (pictured left) makes it difficult to hold a pen. There has been speculation as to whether it is legally valid when a turtle dips its foot in ink and presses its inky foot on a contract. The South Carolina state supreme court case of Slave #024 v. Thurmond is the only known precedent for the legal basis of turtle prints. In the case, one of former senator Strom Thurmond’s indentured servants disputed the contract in which the man had entered indentured servitude. The man claimed that his 50 years of indentured servitude should have accounted for at least $1 million in punitive damages. Thurmond commented: “who you gonna believe, a leather-faced old Negro or a leather-faced old turtle?” The comment elicited laughs from the seven white male justices and because it was the south and the plaintiff was black the case was ruled in Thurmond’s favor. Since the case took place during the 1990s, it’s difficult to know of the legal precedent is still valid. Additionally, there is little legal basis granted to cases in South Carolina outside of the state because the justice department has come to accept it as proof that God is not infallible.
Turtlewatching - John McCain 