The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little Scrutiny

I don't know how to title a post relating to this type of article from The New York Times:

Early in Senator John McCain's first run for the White House eight years ago, waves of anxiety swept through his small circle of advisers.

A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, in his offices and aboard a client's corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself -- instructing staff members to block the woman's access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.

When news organizations reported that Mr. McCain had written letters to government regulators on behalf of the lobbyist's clients, the former campaign associates said, some aides feared for a time that attention would fall on her involvement.

Mr. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, both say they never had a romantic relationship. But to his advisers, even the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity.

It had been just a decade since an official favor for a friend with regulatory problems had nearly ended Mr. McCain's political career by ensnaring him in the Keating Five scandal. In the years that followed, he reinvented himself as the scourge of special interests, a crusader for stricter ethics and campaign finance rules, a man of honor chastened by a brush with shame.

But the concerns about Mr. McCain's relationship with Ms. Iseman underscored an enduring paradox of his post-Keating career. Even as he has vowed to hold himself to the highest ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest.

Read the whole piece by Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick and Stephen Labaton here. And, please, a little tact in the comments section, if possible...

Update [2008-2-20 20:17:1 by Todd Beeton]:Hilarious that this would break the day after McCain says this:

Thank you Wisconsin for bringing us to the point where even a superstitious Naval aviator can claim with confidence and humility that I will be our party's nominee for president of the United States.

An alternate title to this post might be "The Reason Mike Huckabee Stayed In." MSNBC is reporting on this as though there's some there there. Whether there's a smoking gun as to the affair or not, seems to me the story alone could do some serious damage to a candidate who has benefited from the sense in the media and among independent voters that his principles and ethics are unimpeachable. Favorite line from the piece:

"He is essentially an honorable person," said William P. Cheshire, a friend of Mr. McCain who as editorial page editor of The Arizona Republic defended him during the Keating Five scandal. "But he can be imprudent."

Heh. And that's from one of his "friends."



Display:


Re: The New York Times (2.00 / 1)

I wish the DNC had something set up to push that story HARD HARD HARD and start driving McCain's negatives up while O and C fight it out (see, no cockiness from this O supporter).


by Benjaminomeara on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:10:07 PM EST

Re: The New York Times (2.00 / 1)

This could cost McCain the nomination. HE may need to be replaced in the convention.

And Alan Keyes is still in the wings...

just sayin'


Bill Foster would agree, Barack Obama has coat tails.
by Walt Starr on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:12:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You hope!!! (none / 0)


by Shazone on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:21:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times (none / 0)

Are you crazy?  He'll weather this just fine.  It could have been a lot worse for him.  For example, they could have a shred of evidence that impropriety occurred, rather than just the appearance.


by semiquaver on Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 08:42:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times (2.00 / 1)

I don't think the DNC will need to push it. This is precisely the kind of stuff that the MSM can't resist.


by DPW on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:12:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times (2.00 / 1)

I think it'll be better if the MSM pushes it without the DNC's help.

The GOP will claim liberal bias, but at least there won't be any direct connection to the Dems.


"No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown
by auboy2006 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (2.00 / 1)

Wow.  Damn.

Talk about a piece.

This will knock all the Obama "plagiarism"/Michelle "proud American" stuff right off the air.


"No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown
by auboy2006 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:10:30 PM EST

Exactly (2.00 / 1)

Now the big story will be did McCain have an affair?


by puma on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:16:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Exactly (none / 0)

Considering he met and courted his current wife while still married to his last one, I would say if he did, it wouldn't have been the first time.


"No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown
by auboy2006 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:20:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Exactly (none / 0)

Its not just the affair thing (though that's definitely the media hook) its the whole big anti-special interest appears to be getting the kind of "benefits" that even Duke Cunningham didn't get (at least not directly).


by Socraticsilence on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:35:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

VIAGRAGATE (2.00 / 1)

That is all...


Bill Foster would agree, Barack Obama has coat tails.
by Walt Starr on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:11:13 PM EST

Re: VIAGRAGATE (2.00 / 1)

Viagrate.  Has a better ring to it, I think.


by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:17:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (2.00 / 1)

Dang!

My wingnut friend was right!  He said that the Times was holding back on news of a McCain affair!!


"This was never part of our arrangement, Specter" "I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!" "This deal keeps getting worse all the time!"
by LordMike on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:14:33 PM EST

Oh. My. God (2.00 / 1)

Four words I never thought I would hear in the same sentence:

"John McCain"
"Sex Scandal"

I guess we now know why Huckabee was sticking around!


by Kal on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:14:44 PM EST

She looks just like his wife!!! (none / 0)

http://www.alcalde-fay.com/meet_the_firm /BiosDetail.cfm?id=44

I mean, you would think he might try something different....guess he's to old.


by Shazone on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:19:49 PM EST

Re: She looks just like his wife!!! (none / 0)

Maybe he was confused and thought that it was his wife.  That is pretty freaky.


by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:51:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mitt Romney is jumping up and down and (none / 0)

squealing like an excited child who got the pony on Christmas morning

Never mind what Huckabee is doing..... you don;t want to know


by merbex on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:19:49 PM EST

Re: Mitt Romney is jumping up and down and (2.00 / 1)

Huckabee is ripping the bassline to "Staying Alive" by the BeeGees. It's a great bassline and thematically appropriate.


by DPW on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:27:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

What happened to him being vetted? you know....


by poserM on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:20:48 PM EST

maybe god talks to mikey h (none / 0)

Big Huck thinks ahead.


BHO/HRC 08
by omar little on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:20:54 PM EST

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain (none / 0)

Hmmm only MSNBC seems to be covering it so far....


by need some wood on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:21:16 PM EST

CNN covering it too (none / 0)


by Ben P on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:22:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

Its not a knock out blow by any means - at least not as the story stands - but it is not a pretty story for McCain, as it ties in to past unseemly behavior - its starts to create an image of McCain as a leacherous mysogynist. Remember, Cindy McCain is a product of an affair too - and 17 years his junior. This fits a pattern of his behavior, which is dumping women for younger women, more attractive women as they age. This does not make him look good, especially to female voters.


by Ben P on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:21:56 PM EST

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

Is this what Huckabee was waiting for? Is he behind this?


by poserM on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:22:08 PM EST

Yippie (none / 0)

I wrote a couple of pieces earlier on how McCain is a corporate front man.  Enjoy, although I believe the NYTimes could write one of these stories on almost every major Politician but certainly in my view, McCain is one of the worst.

McCain and ex-HP CEO Carly Fiorina

McCain is not your friend.


NoSlaves.com | The Economic Populist
by Robert Oak on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:24:20 PM EST

Re: Yippie (none / 0)

Sorry, but your hit piece on Carly Fiorina is devoid of facts.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:40:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

uh (none / 0)

is that why there are references and links everywhere with direct quotes?

It's completely factual.  I make a point to reference every claim in the links.  


NoSlaves.com | The Economic Populist
by Robert Oak on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:49:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Put em in burkas (2.00 / 1)

All I see here is a man with a female friend. No infidelity. It seems an extension of the rampant sexism in this campaign to suggest something lewd from this. A female can't be friendly with a man without wanting to get hot and heavy with him. I guess we should play it safe and segregate the sexes.

I understand his campaign staff back then doing its job and protecting him from the appearance of an affair. But to use this as evidence that there was an affair is silly.

The repukes are experts at turning these accusations back on the accusers. In the next day is this story going to be traced back to Obama's hitman Dick Morris? Or are there going to be photo exposes of Obama with adoring young hotties? This is going to be one hell of a campaign.


by ineedalife on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:30:01 PM EST

Re: Put em in burkas (2.00 / 1)

Gimme a friggin' break.

She was a FUCKING LOBBYIST!

I don't care if there was sex or not - he apparently has a close relationship with a lobbyist with numerous appearances before McCain's committee and there is a paper trail of 'favors' McCain did for her/her clients.

You're unhinged.


by zonk on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:36:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Put em in burkas (none / 0)

How many favors? They seem like small fish so far--writing a couple of letters.


by OrangeFur on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:38:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Put em in burkas (2.00 / 1)

We shall see.

I can tell you that I have a Thomas window open right and I'm screening proposed legislation and cross-referencing it with her clients' best interests.


by zonk on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:39:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Put em in burkas (none / 0)

And Obama wrote letters for Rezko. Do we really want go there on the eve of Rezko's trial? I can see two weeks of sanctimonious rage about McCain maybe being influenced by a friend and then: BAM! The real life version of it gets played out daily during the Rezko trial. Be careful what we wish for.


by ineedalife on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:51:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Put em in burkas (none / 0)

Do I really need to explain to you what the 'DD' in MyDD stands for?

I'm amazed.

This is a Democratic blog dedicated to helping elect Democrats.... and you're treating the place like it's a Salon.com messageboard.

It's a partisan website.  A pro-Democrat partisan website.  

Do you even know what the Rezko trial involves?  Do you know what the 3 counts in the indictment reference?

The only mention of Obama -- "candidate A" -- different from "public official A" (Rod Blagojevich) is as a recipient of donations which emanated from wire fraud.  Rezko (allegedly, still, at this point) received fraudulent loans based on assets he no longer 'owned' being used a collateral.   Those funds have long since been donated to charity and nothing in the indictment, nothing in the story has ever implicated Obama in any wrongdoing.

...and that's just the 3rd count of the indictment.  The first 2 counts have absolutely no - bupkus, nada, zero - to do with Obama.  

I'm just amazed... you're trying to twist this story like this place is freerepublic.com.


by zonk on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:21:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

good point (none / 0)

They are spinning the fact she is attractive and thus making assumptions, which is incredibly sexist.
A man is attractive no one is going to think he's hopping in the sack.  An attractive woman is always a sexual suspect.

But the real issue is he did a corporate lobbyist favors (as if the comprehensive immigration bill wasn't one huge massive favor to the US Chamber of Commerce, Bill Gates).

To me that's the bombshell, I personally glossed over the other implications.


NoSlaves.com | The Economic Populist
by Robert Oak on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:37:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sounds like a nothing burger (none / 0)

A lobbyist hounded the crap out of a member of Congress, who wound up helping her clients.  Hard-core dog bites man.

Next you will be telling me that McCain retired to an Irish pub and consumed a beer while on vacation.


by Crablaw on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:33:43 PM EST

Re: Mr McCain... (2.00 / 1)

Seriously.

Take it to freeperville, LGF, or lucianne.com.

This is a Democratic site.

You ought to be ashamed.


by zonk on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:34:58 PM EST

Some smoke, but no fire yet. (none / 0)

I don't see anything that's too damaging just yet. So far it's a lot of innuendo but no facts--there's no proof he had an affair (which I wouldn't care about anyway), and no proof that he did anything wrong regarding her role as a lobbyist (which I would care about).

In fact, my guess is there's not too much else to be found immediately. If there was, the Times would have held it until they got proof. That they're publishing it now means they don't think they'll find out much more.

As I said elsewhere, I don't want this to be true. I'm tired of the kind of politics of personal destruction that's tarnished everyone who's ever thought about running for office.


by OrangeFur on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:37:06 PM EST

Re: Some smoke, but no fire yet. (none / 0)

The reason they published now is that new Republic was set to publish that NYT was holding the story.


"The Bumble Bee flies because it thinks it can."
by LadyEagle on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 11:30:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

May I be offensive for a second but I sometimes don't understand men (I am one for the record). Cindy McCain may not be my favorite person in the world but she is REALLY REALLY hot. Why would anyone want to cheat on her ?


by Benjaminomeara on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:37:17 PM EST

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

Well, he was 63 at the time, and she is a dead ringer for Cindy McCain.

Just sayin'...


Bill Foster would agree, Barack Obama has coat tails.
by Walt Starr on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:53:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The man is so old. (2.00 / 0)

Not to defend him too much, but he can't wave because of his time as a POW in Vietnam.


by OrangeFur on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:40:04 PM EST

Re: The man is so old. (none / 0)

And his disfigured face is from skin cancer.

It is horrible and I wish we were not so shallow but I guarantee you it will play like Nixon-JFK in fall debates against the fresh energetic basketball playing Obama.
In theory his age won't matter. In practice he shows it and after six months of seeing every day it will be ingrained in people's minds.
Especially if he picks one of the idiots that are mentioned as VP (less so if he picks, say, Pawlenty).


by Benjaminomeara on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:07:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The man is so old. (none / 0)

All the dead kids in Iraq thank you for your choice.


by Kal on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:45:17 PM EST

Title: Quid Pro Quo? (none / 0)

I think that gets to the heart of the matter.


"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
by molly bloom on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:49:32 PM EST

Without Ken Starr and a dress... (2.00 / 1)

this goes nowhere.  


by Upstate Dem on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:50:35 PM EST

Re: The man is so old. (none / 0)

That's a really principled decision you've made.


by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:54:36 PM EST

Don't get your hopes up (none / 0)

This really sounds like a nothingburger.

He hung around with a lobbyist ... eight years ago?

Come on.


by TL on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 08:54:58 PM EST

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

How can Rezko get so much attention, and McCain be the "clean" candidate when so much about the Keating affair is public knowledge?

Is it simply old news, so McCain gets a pass?


The best sig is no sig.
by Noonan on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:01:39 PM EST

All will be forgiven (none / 0)

We all know that all it takes for republicans is to get saved in order to be forgiven. this might be the opportunity to endear himself to the evangelicals and rightwingers who are now a little cool to him.  If god is willing to forgive , then who are they to hold it against him.


by Scotch on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:10:20 PM EST

Re: The man is so old. (2.00 / 0)

He can't raise his arms because they were not allowed to heal properly after being broken when he ejected from his plane over Vietnam.  I'm no fan of McCain, but I do respect his service to his country.


by godemsin08 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:13:03 PM EST

All will be forgiven (none / 0)

We all know that all it takes for republicans is to get saved in order to be forgiven. this might be the opportunity to endear himself to the evangelicals and rightwingers who are now a little cool to him.  If god is willing to forgive , then who are they to hold it against him.


by Scotch on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:13:32 PM EST

Tens of millions of "Kos kids"? (2.00 / 1)

never woulda thunk it.

Thankyou ever so much for your insightful commentary...


by Ajax the Greater on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:14:30 PM EST

MYOB (none / 0)

McCain's past personal life is nobody's business.


by BigBoyBlue on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:16:53 PM EST

Re: MYOB (none / 0)

It is when he's the "straight-talking, lobbyist-hating maverick" he claims to be.


by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:36:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Mr McCain... (2.00 / 1)

Please go away. This is a site for Democrats.


by animated on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:33:00 PM EST

Re: The New York Times (none / 0)

There is no 'there' there. This is nothing. If writing letters is a crime then Obama will be next. Hell, he just admitting to touring his house with Rezco before the purchase to get his 'advice'.

Move on...nothing to see here.


by americanincanada on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:34:37 PM EST

Re: The New York Times (none / 0)

Right, because hey, McCain isn't corrupt (either politically or morally), he just has amazingly bad judgment to find himself in sticky situations with Charles Keating, a female telco lobbyist, and other assorted cast and crew.  Which is worse - lack of judgment, or corruption?  The story is bad either way.


by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:43:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times (none / 0)

Hey...by all means...lets investigate presidential candidates who write leters for lobbyists. I am all for that. Let's do it.


by americanincanada on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 10:27:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The New York Times (none / 0)

Great.  I'll take verified facts about McCain's involvement with the Keating Five and his apparently close relationship to this lobbyist to unsubstantiaed innuendo about Rezko any day.


by rfahey22 on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 11:15:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nancy in Cali... (2.00 / 2)

a despicable comment.  Your partisanship has taken you to a dark place.


Our Moment Is Now
by mboehm on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 09:40:17 PM EST

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

I think this will be McCAin's ticket to the white House. The story is so lame all he has to do is to rail against New York media to rally his base. the way the media has treated Obama this would be easy. Remember Dan Rather's interview with GHW Bush?


by rocky on Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 10:40:59 PM EST

Re: The New York Times Gives John McCain a Little (none / 0)

It'll be interesting to see how support or opposition from Vietnam veterans will impact McCain's campaign, especially as it hits snags like today's allegations about the affair with the lobbyist. (We're beginning to discuss this at http://veterans.lohudblogs.com, too.)


http://veterans.lohudblogs.com
by NicoleMN6 on Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 08:07:05 AM EST

Good article to googlebomb with? (none / 0)


by pualo on Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 01:22:42 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.