Cindy McCain's company lobbies against Mothers Against Drunk Driving

[blondeatlast]

Callback to this thread with permission of the thread's author, FLDem5*

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6405567&mesg_id=6405567

Quoting from the article:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-hensley22-20...

His wife, Cindy McCain, owns a beer distribution company that has engaged in lobbying. As senator he's recused himself from alcohol issues, but as president he wouldn't be able to.

<snip>
The company has opposed such groups as Mothers Against Drunk Driving in fighting proposed federal rules requiring alcohol content information on every package of beer, wine and liquor.

Its executives, including John McCain's son Andrew, have written at least 10 letters in recent years to the Treasury Department, have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to a beer industry political action committee, and hold a seat on the board of the politically powerful National Beer Wholesalers Assn.

Hensley has run afoul of health advocacy groups that have tried to rein in appeals to young drinkers. For example, the company distributes caffeinated alcoholic drinks that public health groups say put young and underage consumers at risk by disguising the effects of intoxication.

*in an attempt to get more views; there's enough multiple postings of the Obama critiques that I thought this was worthy, too--and dupes are okay except in LBN...

[eleny]

1. This is why it's so important for us to know about Cindy McC's finances

[Coexist]

2. knr

[ashling]

3. But he promised to

veto the beer!

[rox63]

4. Maybe that's what he meant when he said he'll "veto every beer"

As a way to make up for this. :rofl:

[klyon]

5. of course they did, they are the real drug pushers of our day

Ok, I'll have another beer, thanks.

[ieoeja]

6. Good! One thing I will agree with her.

MADD went too far (even the founder says it got out of hand). Every officer I have ever met in MADD was also a member of the Women's Christian Temperance Union.

A lobbyist for the insurance industry once told me that when the statistics are run properly they could never blame drunk driving for more than 5% of traffic fatalities. The 50% figure (I think they still try to claim 35%) came from ignoring all other factors.

A sober person rear-ends you while you're parked at a red light? That counts. They can even come up with pretzel logic to count it. The guy in the parked vehicle might have been able to do something to prevent the fatal accident had he not had a couple drinks in him.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

7. What I hate is how the drunk drivers are "victims" when it comes to inflating the fatality numbers

But revert back to being evil monsters when it comes to punishing them and passing laws. It's very misleading. A large percentage of the people "killed by drunk drivers" are the drunk drivers themselves.

Not defending drunk driving here, just pointing out the inconsistency.

[onetwo]

11. It is not misleading.

Many of those who lobby for harsher punishments for drunk driving are loved ones trying to save the drivers from themselves. Repeat offenders eventually stop taking the well-meaning advice of their relatives. People simply want the strongest deterrents in place to make their relatives think twice and hopefully avert disaster.

[Occam Bandage]

13. That's not inconsistent at all.

1. Drunk drivers who are killed are victims of their own actions and should be counted as such. They, too, have family who will grieve for them.
2. Drunk drivers who are caught driving drunk cannot be allowed to continue to do so, because they are a risk to themselves and others. Therefore, laws should be passed to alter their behavior.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

17. But it's the only time DDs are treated as "victims"

Which leads to the impression that the 40000 or whatever DD fatalities are all innocent non-drinking victims. You'll actually hear people say things like "Drunk drivers kill X number of people a year" when a large percentage of those are the drunk drivers themselves. This is why I say it inflates the number. It's done deliberately to gain public support for harsh punishments. It's dishonest. It's like adding suicides to the murder rate because, after all, someone took a life.

[Coexist]

8. but you do agree that driving drunk is a bad thing, right?

[blondeatlast]

9. Didja bother to read what they were lobbying against? It has nothing to do with

your point.

Didn't think so. Too obvious--fail.

[Gabi Hayes]

16. what I want to see, but won't, because the media won't ever allow this as a

topic for discussion, is McCain try to defend the idea of his wife's proven advocacy AGAINST MADD

that would be sweet, but that's why it won't happen, cause it's a classic no-win situation

I'd love to see Ron Christie, Todd Harris, or Brad Blakeman try to spin that one

or better yet, the totally amoral, unconscionable Clifford May

[sniffa]

10. Thanks for this

[Beacool]

12. I think that the law in some states is not harsh enough with drunk drivers.

There's not a week that goes by that some person who drunk too much kills someone on the road. It just happened here in NY when some drunk got on the sidewalk and hit several people, killing one.

If Cindy McCain and her company lobby against MADD, then she should be held accountable for it.

[SoonerPride]

14. She is a death merchant.

Not to mention an adultress and thieving drug addict.

[uponit7771]

15. WOW...my suspisions that they are only slight better than BushCo are being established