Current Article

McCain Folo

By dcmediagirl on February 21, 2008 at 10:48 AM in Current Affairs

It remains to be seen how soon the next shoe will drop with regards to this McCain story. Now it’s not a question of if, but when.

Even if you take the enlightened view that it doesn’t matter what a politician does in his private life with someone not his spouse, this story is devastating on several levels.The favor currying angle has already gotten the press to dredge up the Keating 5 scandal, which had been tamped down for years. This is not the story the McCain people want the public to be reminded of at this or any other juncture.

And even if you don’t care about a candidate’s sex life, there is one group that does: Republicans. Now, if McCain had a stronger grip on the conservative base, like Newt Gingrich for example, perhaps there would be more forgiveness, but given his tenuous hold on that group this revelation could be devastating.

Not surprisingly, the press has reacted quite violently to this news. MSNBC just aired a segment on Morning Joe during which Mika Brzezinski raked a journalism professor over the coals while interviewing her about the “ethics” of using anonymous sources. Even by that channel’s low standards this was hypocritical beyond belief. Does anyone need to be lectured about journalistic standards by cable news anchors, who consider rumor, hearsay and innuendo part and parcel of their “news” coverage. See also Clinton, Bill.

Now it’s official: MSNBC’s “talent” have become surrogates of the McCain campaign. Go check it out if you can stomach it.

S. Markom

1. This was one of the shoddiest pieces of yellow journalism which is something the newspaper is becoming known for: from phony stories to Duke lacrosse slander pieces.

2. There were no quotes and very, very thinly sourced except for one disgruntled ex-aide.

3. There is ZERO evidence of an affair of any kind and at any time. Unless you are sexist it has always been common practice that lobbyists try and establish a very close relationship with elected officials.

4. This won’t be a story next week unless Iseman decides to sue the Times for slander.

In addition, the Times intentionally coveer up four pieces of evidence that clearly showed that McCain had positions opposite to Iseman.

Donald from Hawaii

Your point No. 3 is well taken, and your statement “… it has always been common practice that lobbyists try and establish a very close relationship with elected officials” is the key here.

The underlying and more important story is not about extramarital sex. It’s about influence peddling, and Sen. John McCain’s willingness to shill for further consolidation of the telecommunications industry, which Ms. Iseman represented.

S. Markom

But there was zero evidence of that including the situation that was presented. In that case the waiting perios was very long past what was expected for an answer and McCain just asked for an answer. In addition, as Bob Bennett said, they gave the Times four concrete examples of times McCain had the opposite position on a major issue than Iseman.

What is incredibly shameless is how the Times tried to convince readers that if you spend a lot of time with a lobbyist and at times alone but that lobbyist is a woman then therefore there must be some sexual relations going on. I find that blatantly sexist and would hope that Iseman sues the Times.

The story is and will turn against The New York Times and their shameless and unethical style of reporting.

Financially the newspaper is dropping quickly and I guess their only hope of salvation is to resort to inaccurate sensationalism.

It is so bad that now you cannot read an article in the NY Times and not question its credibility.

http://nobloodforhubris.blogspot.com No Blood for Hubris

Hmm.

Simon

Hmm.

I agree.

And Obama should take a clue as to what’s to come, for him.

If not in the press, given they’re all as insipid as the Washington Post guy, at least in his head.

Marjorie

I don’t support McCain or his policies; however, neither do I support such time wasting gossip mongering. When this happened to Bill Clinton, the proceedings cost the taxpayers and the Clintons millions. Bill Clinton was elected to a second term, despite the impeachment, indicating the public was happy with the job Clinton was doing. The media is all over the place, smearing one candidate then another and calling it “breaking news.” Are there any professional requirements for news reporting? Who gives them the news? Who decides what is news?
I really miss Peter Jennings.
http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

Mika got bit by Keith Olbermann. She’s really full of herself these days.

And I love the parts where she’s so faux objective about Obama, who her dad advises.

Thankfully, I don’t watch MSNBC much anymore. The constant suppositions, extremely superficial analyses are really hard to take. Once in a while, Abrams does a decent segment — but even he gets goofy when he does that “fair and balanced” baloney. (I.e., his segments on calling out false stuff used by campaigns rarely makes any sense to me, and once he’s made up his mind, it doesn’t matter what his guests try to tell him. Speaking of his guests: I don’t think he ever has a Clinton supporter on his “panels.” Rachel Maddow is a thinly disguised Obamaite, and should say so! Pat Buchanan is one of the few who kinda says what he really thinks — it’s jarring and refreshing to hear him sometimes — agree or not, he tends to say what he thinks rather than follow the MSNBC memes.)
grannyhelen

Can I just be the first to make this pithy comment:

“I’ve never had sexual relations with that lobbyist!”

Just had to do it.

That being said there is an aura of nonsense over this whole thing, but that’s never been a deterence in American politics.

Fred C. Dobbs

Until Americans can lose their fascination over who sticks their little wee-wee into whose little woo-woo, it’s unlikely to change.

grannyhelen

Lol – yes, this is what our Great National Dialogue In A Time Of War And Economic Recession has boiled down to: wee-wee’s and woo-woo’s.

Gotta love our culture sometimes.

DisenfranchisedVoter

I agree with the other comments that this is just shoddy journalism and it will end up hurting The New York Times more than John McCain.
An affair nine years ago. Are you kidding me? Why bring this up NOW? Conservatives are obviously going to see this as the liberal media’s way of taking down their candidate while helping the Obama family. This is even more suspicious since this comes right after Michelle Obama was criticized for her comments about never being proud of her country. Is the journalism community seriously this dedicated to protecting Obama that they will make up anything to divert attention whenever they get into trouble?
I’m not a fan of McCain either but this is ridiculous. I agree with Taylor Marsh that the NYTimes just shot themselves in the foot and this story could potentially hurt liberals in the end. I thought the NYTimes was better than this. They better come up with some valid sources fast or photos or any evidence that their allegations are true.

http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

Taylor seems to see through stuff … it could hurt the liberals / if Republicans hear this came from the NYT, that’s all they need to know. And from watching a bit of Fox last night for research purposes, that is EXACTLY what Fox is pushing.

However, the parts about him using his considerable influence to help this lobbyist are quite troubling, and should not be summed up as part of a sex scandal. It’s more than that.

DisenfranchisedVoter

Well, I’m hoping that McCain is telling the truth especially if Obama turns out to be the nominee. If there is any proof that McCain is lying his candidacy is over and Obama doesn’t deserve another easy election. He already got too many free passes in Illinois running against Alan Keyes.
If the NYTimes story is discredited, Clinton nor Obama will not want to refer back to it to accuse McCain of anything whether it is helping lobbyist or having an affair with one.

Simon

If the NYTimes story is discredited

And that seems to be the point of this, the newspapers have no credibility, anymore.
http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

But… but … I’ve heard Michelle twice on C-Span talk about what a STRUGGLE that Senate campaign was! It was hard against Alan Keyes! And it was hard on the family! Have a little heart!

(god, he won’t know what hit ‘em if he’s the nominee…. brutal.)

TeakwoodKite

Some people don’t do “feeling helpless” very well, especially when it is “lies” they have to fend off.
I keep wondering when Michelle will “get it”.
Hillary talks about being tested and vetted.
Michelle Obama will grow a new appendage of understanding and will never be the same.

SusuanUnpc, you posted a picture of Barak and Michelle Obama on a bus or train, and while back. Barak was working his Blackberry, Michelle had this faraway look on her face gazing out the window… a very telling “is this really worth it” look.

Simon

Michelle Obama will grow a new appendage of understanding and will never be the same.

Maybe.

Some times the human mind just shuts down, and denies, denies, denies, it’s just too damn frightening to acknowledge the truth.

It’s Candy (McCains’ wife?), I worry about.

Aren’t the Obama’s young?

Then their pliable minds should have no trouble dealing with the Presidency.

Fred C. Dobbs

Richard Pryor’s corpse (or, since it’s Chicago, Lou Rawls’) could have beaten Alan Keyes.

BernieO

Why you think the NY Times is above this kind of journalism is beyond me. They were one of the worst offenders pushing the bogus Whitewater scandal and calling for an independent counsel. Their reporters and pundits also trashed Gore. And who can forget the damage done by Judith Miller?
Everyone ought to be emailing their public editor.(public@nytimes.com) Let them know you are a Democrat, too. I am heartened by the number of Dems who are principled enough to be offended by this. I am particularly disgusted that they waited until after McCain is the almost certain nominee. What is the message to Republicans whose primaries have passed – look who you dummies voted for?
jimbo

At a minimum this exposes the hypocracy of the winger crazies who are incensed that McCain is being exposed to treatment they cheered on when applied to Bill Clinton. Hey, creeps, compare Clinton’s lie to the 935 (and growing every day) associated with bush and the move to unneeded war. You are enablers of this administration, just as you were enablers of the attempted destruction of the Clinton administration. Go whine elsewhere.

Anne

Left this comment at Taylor Marsh this morning – seems appropriate here, as well:

First of all, it would do my heart good to see the media form a circular firing squad and take themselves out of the equation – which is entirely possible. And it would be about time for it to happen.

Somewhere along the line, the media got the idea that it was not just supposed to report on what was happening, it was supposed to make things happen, engineer and manipulate the coverage and the bias until the story that resulted worked for them – boosted ratings and readership and made everyone across the spectrum of the power elite feel beholden. It has become a sick symbiotic relationship, where writers and reporters and talking heads trade off accuracy for access and the special feeling of being on the inside eating the cocktail weenies, and the subjects sell their souls for a friendly platform and the pleasure of having the media grovel. Look no further than the Valerie Plame debacle. Look at Judith Miller and her ties to the administration and how her willingness to be a stenographer instead of an investigative reporter aided and abetted the march to war. She did such a good job on that that they used her again to punish Joe Wilson.

In some ways, I do not blame Obama, for example, for not giving the media unfettered access to him. I don’t blame Chelsea Clinton for not talking to the media. They know what we all should know – that the filter the media provides does more harm than good. Watch a hearing on C-SPAN and then compare what you saw and heard with what the mainstream media tell you about it – go to a campaign rally, or watch a debate and then compare your experience to the coverage, and you wonder if the people reporting were in the same room you were in.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not looking for things to help McCain; in fact, I think there may be more “there” there with respect to his lobbying and special interest ties than we know – but if this thing works to de-legitimize and neutralize the credibility of the media, then three cheers – it’s about time.

http://www.voanews.com dcmediagirl

In some ways, I do not blame Obama, for example, for not giving the media unfettered access to him. I don’t blame Chelsea Clinton for not talking to the media.

Chelsea Clinton is under no obligation to give interviews. She’s the daughter of a candidate. Obama, on the other hand, IS a candidate, and therefore should be pressed to answer questions.

votermom

Chelsea Clinton is under no obligation to give interviews. She’s the daughter of a candidate.

OT. The corp media is really ragging on Chelsea about that. The other morning on tv (I forget if it was ABC or MSNBC) one reporter was whining about it. Then the reporter said Chelsea won’t even give an interview to an 11yo from Scholastic (flashed a pic of Chelsea with kid — cute).
Anyway, good for Chelsea. She knows from her parents experience not to trust them; shows she’s smart.

Simon

Then the reporter said Chelsea won’t even give an interview to an 11yo from Scholastic (flashed a pic of Chelsea with kid — cute).

Carole King wouldn’t do interviews, either.
BernieO

Just imagine how an interview with Chelsea would probably go. First question: “How did you feel when you found out your dad cheated on your mom with a woman close to you in age?” She’d be crazy to let them interview her.

Simon

Just imagine how an interview with Chelsea would probably go. First question: “How did you feel when you found out your dad cheated on your mom with a woman close to you in age?” She’d be crazy to let them interview her.

Any different from Rush and McCain calling her ugly?

She’s a tough kid, tougher than Bush, tougher than ‘Bama.

Anne

Who said Chelsea was obligated to give interviews – all I said was that I don’t blame her for not doing it, which was to my largeer point that the media cannot be trusted.

As for the candidates being obligated to answer questions – of course they are. Obama avoids the media one-on-ones, but he also doesn’t subject himself to much in the way of questions from the people, either. He talks at them, not with them – so he’s having his cake and eating it too – and no one else is getting away with that. Remember the flak Hillary got for not taking questions at campaign events?

Something is seriously wrong with the whole system. Hillary cannot win for losing – her strong suit is the one-on-one with the people, answering questions and displaying her mind-boggling grasp of the issues. But you don’t see much of that because the media hates her – so while she impresses those who see her in these events, it does not get the wider play that Obama’s soaring – but empty – oratory does. It’s why she wants as many debates as possible because those do get covered – and every time she does one, it helps her numbers.

Obama, on the other hand, gets to get away with (1) not talking to the media, (2) not being hated for it and (3) not revealing how little he has to offer to the people.

It’s insane – and yet another example of the media controlling the story.

TeakwoodKite

Watch a hearing on C-SPAN and then compare what you saw and heard with what the mainstream media tell you about it

This always makes me crazy…watching what occured on C-span and seeing the BS the MSM puts out…
The one that does the job for is when the clip or live feed is shown with the “DJ” doing voice overs.
Like seeing is believing…sy-ops wise the viewer is left with an association of the visual; connected to an editorial comment that normally far from accurate.

At the very least it will chew up a news cycle or two.
What I got from the NYT artical is that McCain thinks it is ok to have a Lobbiest running his senate office…and that is not a news story in of it self I don’t know why…public office, private contractor. “NUTS”
Simon

Somewhere along the line, the media got the idea that it was not just supposed to report on what was happening, it was supposed to make things happen, engineer and manipulate the coverage and the bias until the story that resulted worked for them –

And isn’t this disgusting, after Larry revealed the thinking, and the methods, of that Madonna-like Washington Post reporter?

Imagine lightweight trash like that determining who is President, shouldn’t he be trailing Britney Spears ambulance?

Oh, perhaps he is…

Jesus Reyes

Damn, I forgot about Mika. Zbig and crew have a plant. “Surrogate for McCain”, I dont believe it. The Mika attack is just a “feint”. Chris wanted to have a beer with Bush but Obama sends tingles up his leg.
http://www.voanews.com dcmediagirl

Let’s be clear about several things:

If this relationship, whatever it may be, resulted in the Senator including earmarks in bills for her clients that’s a legitimate news story, not gossip mongering.

And again, McCain’s relationship with his fellow Republicans has been rocky for many years. The conservative establishment hates him but has no other viable contender in the race now. Sexual pecadillos are not welcome among these people unless the politician in question has established his right wing bona fides. That’s why Newt Gingrich is still welcomed into the fold. McCain can’t afford the luxury of poking that beehive with a sharp stick.

yttik

I think this whole story is just a smokescreen, a distraction. I don’t believe it will hurt McCain at all, in fact it probably will benefit him. He must be young and healthy, he’s out chasing blonds.

I think the only people who will see this as an ethics violation will be those who have ethics. I haven’t seen any ethics coming from Republicans for the last seven years. Why would they be troubled by such things at this point? For them this story is probably more like a character reference then an ethics scandal.

Fred C. Dobbs

“Ethics” is a class of aircraft carrier, or, to our Brit friends, a county in East Anglia.

Anne

I agree that the bigger story – if there is one – is the special interest/lobbyist deals, but I thought the Senator didn’t do earmarks? If he’s writing letters and smoothing the way for others to put in the earmarks, it makes his ethics as questionable as everyone else’s.

If the NYT had a real story about corruption or unethical behavior, why muddy it up with the sexual allegations? Other than the fact that sex – even sex we don’t really even know happened – sells.

It’s eight years old, it’s thin on real facts and sourcing, and if there’s more to it than this initial story, why not just write the whole story? Unless the NYT is hoping its story will smoke out even more.

Those familiar with Obama’s primary run in Chicago say this is all too reminiscent of what happened to Jack Ryan at just the right time – when it was too late for another serious challenger, leaving Obama with a no-contest contest.

My head hurts.

Simon

Those familiar with Obama’s primary run in Chicago say this is all too reminiscent of what happened to Jack Ryan at just the right time

McCain isn’t Jack Ryan.

Why are they letting Obama win?

You see these tactics, and you know the MSM is owned, manipulated, by others with more power than Obama, and yet Obama still gets a free pass.

Why?

He shows no talent.
http://www.dcmediagirl.com dcmediagirl

Jack Ryan should have had his head examined for deciding to run for higher office knowing that this gigantic skeleton could come rattling out of his closet at any time following the unsealing of his divorce records, and it didn’t help that his wife played the sexy Seven of Nine. There’s no escaping the category 5 force of a story like this, particularly when the former spouse is a celebrity and/or the grounds for divorce include “the performance of sexual acts in public/bizarre clubs with cages, whips and ‘other apparatus’ hanging from the ceiling.”

Was Obama exceptionally lucky in his opponent? No doubt. But this would have come out at some point anyway. You just can’t keep this kid of stuff a secret. See also Vitter, David and Craig, Larry.

rjj

What some call luck other call preparation.

See also Coleman, Norm. No trouble there.

Perhaps also Morris, Dick

a lot of scandals appear to be in a controlled release form.

Simon

If this relationship, whatever it may be, resulted in the Senator including earmarks in bills for her clients that’s a legitimate news story, not gossip mongering

Right.

And the sex angle, which no one really cares about, will be used to drown the corruption angle.

So, they kill two birds with one stone, McCain’s campaign deliberately trying to assert control of the issue, a controlled burn.

Obama should pay attention, here.

This is the “build up phase” in the press, we’re witnessing, now.

In two months, it will be old hat, McCain admired for his sexual prowess, certainly virile enough to be President.

As long as he has Viagra.
Marjorie

“Let’s be clear about several things:

If this relationship, whatever it may be, resulted in the Senator including earmarks in bills for her clients that’s a legitimate news story, not gossip mongering.”

You are entirely correct, of course. However, the media story I heard focused on the relationship and barely mentioned the earmarks-what they were, etc. Perhaps the earmarks should have been the main story and the relationship mentioned only as a means to the earmarks.

demfromphilly

Please spare me the faux indignation by McCain and the Repugs! How could the press smear this man of honor!? WTF!? He is on his THIRD wife! They hooked up after cheating on their spouses! Cindy says she and her children “trust John”! You have got to be kidding me! I hope to never be blessed with such a trustworthy spouse!

Donovan Fraser

no shit!!!

http://www.despair.com/doubt.html Smilin’ Jim

It seems to have made all the east & west coast papers. Not bad for a December Drudge rumor.

These trysts with Republicans don’t seem to get feet unless the relationship is homosexual, though.

Now if it were transgender, that would be a Presidential first.

Maybe.
Stoic

Heh, you think more “bad new” about Teflon John is going to come out. Nope, the NYT will be spanked by the rest of the media until they “apologize” for daring to report anything negative the media’s anointed hero.
fafnir

After watching the exploding talking heads on cable this morning, what is certain is that any pronouncement of the right-wing echo machine’s demise is greatly exaggerated. Conservative talking heads — and their sympathizers — quickly closed ranks to defend their beloved “Maverick” idol, while making the “librul” NYT and their unnamed “leakers” the story.
vee

Is there more than gossip and innuendo to substantiate a front page on nytimes.com of this story?
wwz

Wait for it….

The story will we good for McCain. Its always good for the Republicans, right?

heh. As has been said many times over the story is not the sex angle. Thats the sizzle, not the steak.

I really don’t see Huck or any of McCain’s colleague antagonists letting go of this.
Iphie

And even if you don’t care about a candidate’s sex life, there is one group that does: Republicans.

I have to disagree with you on this one; Republicans only care about a candidate’s sex life if that person is a Democrat. In your next sentence you mention Newt Gingrich — he’s the perfect example of this, not only has he had multiple affairs and multiple divorces, but he served one of his former wives with divorce papers while she was in her hospital bed — facts that bothered his supporters not one bit. The Clinton impeachment saga gave us so many examples of this blatant hypocrisy; I don’t know how we can ever view their ‘family values’ as anything other than a craven tool to humiliate their opponents. Bottom line, they don’t care about the extra-marital sexual shenanigans of anyone with an R after their name, e.g., Henry Hyde, Bob Livingston, Duke Cunningham, Larry Craig … well, clearly I could go on and on with this one, but you get the picture.

http://www.dcmediagirl.com dcmediagirl

lphie:

All the people you mentioned are/were hardcore conservatives. I would like to point out, however, that Gingrich left the Speakership assuming that the Flynt Report was going to expose his relationship with Callista Bisek (which it didn’t). Livingston didn’t even get a chance to serve as Speaker due to his “personal relationship” with a female lobbyist (!). Even those two true believers could see the writing on the wall. The point is that McCain’s relationship with the right is fraught with conflict and mistrust. He’ll probably weather this but it’ll hurt him.
Nellie

You left out Bolton’s ex-wifes story about swapping partners at that NYC club.

rjj

Jack Ryan.

I have been asking who’s greasing the skids (too lazy to do my own heavy lifting or browsing). I didn’t realize it was LaHood and Hastert who pulled (or pushed) Ryan.
lemonv

Hmmmmm……there is something fishy about the timing in which this affair is now being reported.

There was a time during the GE in which Barack Obama’s opponent was Jack Ryan, the Repub primary winner. There was a public disclosure of child custody divorce records containing sexual allegations of Ryan’s ex-wife which made Ryan withdrew from the race.

Im just pointing out the fact that the MO between the 2 are similar. Im asking the readers then to draw their own conclusions out of it.
John Stanton

Groan….Not nearly as good as Brittany’s story but same category.

In my feeble way of thinking, this deserves a shoulder shrug…So what? Can the man/woman make decisions to lower unemployment, give the nation basic healthcare, revamp the US military for littoral warfare, unrestricted warfare in the face of Climate Change? The new French President seems energized by his recent divorce and hooking up with a most beautiful woman. He’s been cutting arms, nuclear power, basing deals all over the globe.

Another so what goes to the Congress looking to make the news with Roger Clemens/baseball up time on the Hill. The media is all over sex, madness, murder and alas so is Congress. Not like we don’t have a zillion other problems to worry about.

I just got a copy of The Age of American Unreason. That just reaffirms how stupid we all are that we seem to gorge on these stories like flies on poop.

Anyway, if you want–going back to an earlier post–to see and hear a powerful voice in support of our warfighters–and the kinda event the news should have up front—go here to be moved. It’s about Walter Reed.

http://duelingtampons.magnify.net/item/NCG8T9N6M5714BHZ

Simon

The new French President seems energized by his recent divorce and hooking up with a most beautiful woman. He’s been cutting arms, nuclear power, basing deals all over the globe

According to one source, he (the French Preident) was also financed by Auchi.

Independent

Don’t you just hate to see McAmnesty go through this crap. His wife is a drug addict.

Hillary’s a carpet muncher, Bill has the bodies piled up behind him, Obama is a Muslim terrorist related to Osama and Paul wears a tin foil hat.

Lets move on now, TIA.
bob h

Mr. Straight Talk may not have had carnal knowledge of the lady, but his denial that he was warned by staffers to avoid her is a straight-out lie.