A Hole in McCain’s Defense?

McCain has a long history of both being a tool for lobbyists and floozy-mongering. In the Iseman scandal, he combines both by being a tool for the lobbyist with whom his campaign workers thought he had a romantic relationship. This is not the first ethical lapse by McCain, nor the first affair. Is this what the Republican Party wants in the Oval Office? After all of their hysteria over Bill Clinton, do they really want a man whose past history of adultery surpasses Bill Clinton's? And do they want another president who, like Bush Jr, is a tool for special-interest and corporate-interest groups? Finally, is anyone with McCain's inability to judge what is ethical and what is not suitable for the Oval Office?

What rubbish. Name me politician that has not spoken to a lobbyist? How about Bill Clinton jet setting with his million dollar buddies who have and continue to buy access through the Clintons. Now that is a story. Now if McCain was selling secrets or giving the Chinese access to missile technology, than I want to know. When this came back on Bill Clinton it was mentioned in the back pages. Why doesn't the NYT see what they can dig up on Obama. Maybe while in college, Obama was in the same study group as a fellow student who was a radical muslim. Wow! Now that would make the front page. I guess when you are the New York times you will reach and grab for anything whether it is right or wrong. Then when you are wrong, the editor can just brush it under the rug after the damage of their story has already been done. I would like to see a study on how many trees they kill in publishing their wreckless and worthless stories. What rubbish!

The point is that there IS evidence that points to possible corruption and innapropriate contact with a lobbyist. Is there enough to put John McCain befor an ethics hearing? I do not know if that is the case.
But it IS certain that the looby in question DID contribute 20,000 dollars to John McCains campaign. It IS cetrtain that Senator McCain ACCEPTED transportation from this lobbyist. It IS certain that he personally asked for resloution that was made IN FAVOR of the Lobby in question's interests. It IS certain that MCain's aides stopped a lobbyist from seeing Senator McCain because THEY thought that there might be something inapproprate going on.
If I was a member of the Senate Ethics Committee, The certaintees that I have just mentioned would be enough to call for a hearing, whether he be a Republican OR Democrat.
The certaintees of this matter certainly demand resolution-not muddy denials.
For instance-why have we not heard more from Senator McCain's Aides about WHY they suspected inappropiate contact of the Senator with the lady in question. What led them to stop her from seeing Senator McCain and why is THIS not being pursued by the media?
When something this fishy surfaces the public needs to know what happened from all pointsa of view and should demand that questions left unaswered are satisfied. And because of this-Newsweek and other media have a journalistic obligation to pursue the answers to the circumstances and NOT accept murky "just trust me" answers from Senator McCain.

How does the incident described in this article qualify as saying something about OUR country? This is a report about a potential candidate for President of the United States and his political (shady?) connections. I am not surprised, many sketchy things could have been done in McCain's 70+ years on this earth. The only "sad" thing about this article is that it won't change enough people's perceptions of McCain.

Uh oh looks like the GOP may have to resurrect romney, what a sad state of affairs.

Another sleeze ball article posted by another sleeze ball oportunist. I used to be a card carrying democrate and wore my Union tee shirt with pride. After yesterday I am still a proud Union member but am switching my party affiliation. Mr. Isikoff, My grandfather, Dad an me are cancelling our Newsweek subscription today. piling on a none storey is pretty classless. i used to love your articles but you are no more the a gutter feeder just like the times.

When when you folks finally figure out that we don't really give a crap what the news media has to say any more. You all have an agenda and it's uaually not a good one.

Let???s see, he favors staying in Iraq for 100 more years, McBush tax cuts for those making over $250 K, chases lobbyist skirts. He has a combination of bad qualities of the past two Presidents that we can do without. My Friends, he???s cooked!

Candidates don't have to sling mud at each other any more. They have the New York Times to do it for them.

HJYU

The only "holes" in this story are the ones doing the reporting. MSNBC is a joke.

Hillary can you please console Mccain's wife and explain to her how to pick up the peices. I'm sure she is devestated.

Can we have one single Presidential campaign without the mud slinging? Every President and Presidential candidate has skeletons in their closets. Yes, EVEN OBAMA has some. Give it time, reporters will keep digging as long as he's in politics and report anything they can find even if it isn???t true or if it???s completely inconsequential. If the press is going to sling mud at McCain, I think they need to do equal justice to Obama and Hillary. Where are the news stories about associations with slumlords and Whitewater? It's amazing how credible the NY Times is all of a sudden. Wasn't it just a few years ago a certain NY Times reporter named Jayson Blair was busted for fabricating and plagiarizing numerous stories that his editors of ???high integrity??? approved over and over? Enough with the mud slinging, I want to hear what the candidates are going to do about the economy, the war, the environment, etc. I'm an independent and at this point the only place anyone is going to actually get the truth is by looking up each candidate's voting record, not through tabloid journalism, partisan reporting (both sides do it) and listing to the hardcore liberals and conservatives (or as we independents call them, ???nutcases???). The hardcore party faithful of both parties and biased media (either way) are what is wrong with politics in this country and I don't take a word of what either side or any reporter says seriously because it is so biased in their own opinion, not fact. Voting records don???t lie, people do.









fabricating and plagiarizing numerous stories that his editors of high integrity approved over and over? Enough with the mud slinging, I want to hear what the candidates are going to do about the economy, the
Can we have one single Presidential campaign without the mud slinging? First off, if the press is going to sling mud at McCain, I think they need to do equal justice to Obama and Hillary. Where are the news stories about associations with slumlords and Whitewater? Second, it's amazing how credible the NY Times is all of a sudden. Wasn't it just a few years ago a certain NY Times reporter named Jayson Blair was busted for fabricating and plagiarizing numerous stories that his editors of high integrity approved over and over? Enough with the mud slinging, I want to hear what the candidates are going to do about the economy, the war, the environment, etc. I'm an independent and at this point the only place anyone is going to actually get the truth is by looking up each candidate's voting record, not through tabloid journalism, partisan reporting (both sides do it) and listing to the hardcore liberals and conservatives. The hardcore party faithful of both parties are what is wrong with politics in this country and I don't take a word of what either side says seriously because it is so biased in their own opinion, not fact.

John McCain is not fit nor has he ever been fit to be president. His only claim to fame is his vet status which does not make someone fit to be president. Mike Huckabee has a better record than he does but does not have the mone to run an effective compain.