A Hole in McCain’s Defense?

Newsweek Web Exclusive

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: jj2000 @ 02/22/2008 1:50:56 PM

    What the GOP loyalists are essentially saying is that they would love a hate and fear mongering guy like Bush and McCain but they hate a hope mondering black guylike Obama. Looks like absolute power has corrupted the minds of these GOP loyalists that they just can't see things clearly anymore. One clown even brings Obama's wife into this discussion. Only he/she can possibly tell how Obama's wife is related to little John's little dark secrets? Some guy who claims to be old says that he wouldn't trust giving car keys to a three year old. Well, we gave nuclear buttons to a clown in the past 8 years. What can be worse than that? No matter how these GOP morons put it, their only real complaint against Obama is that he is black and he shouldn't be entering the race to lead this country. Fortunately, majority of the nation is past that racial hatred and moved on.

  • Posted By: mouseinboots @ 02/22/2008 1:50:23 PM

    you decide...
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=sVeFVtcdSYY
    and this address http://youtube.com/results?search_query=sinclair+interview&search_type=
    Obama for president he's smoking now

  • Posted By: mouseinboots @ 02/22/2008 12:39:13 PM

    My response to the Hole in McCain's defense is who really cares??? It all old news and is not relevant to the election. If Obama can lie and steal in the present above reproach then nothing really matters anymore. I for one am sick and tired of the selective slams that the media selects to air and print.

    • Posted By: ikie12pts @ 02/22/2008 1:49:42 PM

      obama has lied and stolen? What? What did he lie about and what did he steal?

  • Posted By: Hawkeye In NEB @ 02/22/2008 12:56:00 PM

    I wonder if the media, pundits, conservative talk show hosts and public in general read the New York Times article.

    The just of the article was more about the influence of Lobbyists or the perception of Lobbyist influence on Senator McCain. After all, Senator McCain has projected himself as a reformer who has tried to lessen the powerful influence of Lobbyists and their impact on national politics. There were several examples of this influence. Lobbyist Vicki Iseman was one example used by the Times. These are the issues that should be examined.

    Senator McCain and those attacking the New York Times have neglected to address the issues of lobbyist influence upon Senator McCain, which is what the majority of the article was written about. In fact Senator McCain and those attacking the New York Times seem to be attempting to avoid these issues and doing a good job of doing so.

    Thanks for finally addressing this part of the New York Times article!

    • Posted By: AlaskaBoy @ 02/22/2008 1:49:36 PM

      Newsweek states: "One example it cited were two letters McCain wrote in late 1999 demanding that the Federal Communications Commission act on a long-stalled bid by one of Iseman's clients, Florida-based Paxson Communications, to purchase a Pittsburgh television station."

      Oh. No. "Demanded!?" Poltical corruption at its worst! Obama and Shrillary were actually lawyers for like-corrupt ed businesses and individuals- but McCain "demanded" that the FCC act on a long-tabled Bill?! Outragous!

    • Posted By: AlaskaBoy @ 02/22/2008 1:02:40 PM

      I don't think so, it's the other way around. What, exactly, is the extent of influence by lobbyists on McCain? What is thier influence on the other candidates? The Times is spouting Liberal BS yet again. "Got too close to a female client?" Give me a break.

  • Posted By: Neutral @ 02/22/2008 1:48:57 PM

    Let it go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    For all the man has done for our country and people continue to try and make people look bad.
    Nobody is perfect, and if there is such a person let them try and get this country out of the mess
    we are in!!!!!

  • Posted By: loubed @ 02/22/2008 1:48:11 PM

    Please donot get sidetracked. The issue is did Senator McCain in his respone to the allegation/s of the New York times was he honest? Was his contact with the lobbyist influenced his judgement? Comparing his testimony 51/2 years ago, did he lie in that testimony and is truthful in his defence of the times article? Is he beginning to get forgetful? If he did alloww his decisions to be influenced by the lobbyist and Paxson, has he changed his position since, and if it is changed why then is he denying the New York Times article? Just some thoughts to ponder on.

  • Posted By: hooskidoo @ 02/22/2008 1:47:56 PM

    My mistake--I thought the A Hole in McCain's defense was a reference to President Bush.

  • Posted By: garfish6f @ 02/22/2008 1:47:13 PM

    Is this the only crap someone can come with? After eight years of the current village idiot, this is minor.

  • Posted By: chaoszen @ 02/22/2008 1:46:57 PM

    If something like this bit of Poo stain on McCain was discovered on any Democratic candidates shoes the right wing smear machine would pursue it like a mad pack of rabid dogs. The interesting thing about the right is that they can dish it out, but they can't take it. The problem with the left is that they can take it but they always have a problem with always taking the high ground and not going for the throat. I think it's high time for those of us on the left to take the advantage and go in for the kill. Our country is at stake.

  • Posted By: mooJook @ 02/22/2008 1:46:39 PM

    The deposition isn't even contradictory. All the campaign said was that they didn't ask him to send a letter. At the deposition he only said that he spoke to them. There is a difference between speaking to someone and asking someone to send a letter for you, there is no "hole" or "contradiction
    here. Whoever writes the articles needs a lesson in logical reasoning.

  • Posted By: murjohn @ 02/22/2008 12:42:53 PM

    People place little importance on fidelity these days. However, I make this point. McCain betrayed his first wife on several occasions. It now appears that he has betrayed his current wife a least once. Is someone who has a history of betraying and cheating on those who trust him more likely to cheat and betray?

    • Posted By: AlaskaBoy @ 02/22/2008 1:46:00 PM

      How many times are you going to post this? Maybe it was a mistake of clicking the mouse too many times? I would like ot know where you got your source on McCain cheating on his wife- first or second.

  • Posted By: nrb2 @ 02/22/2008 1:31:08 PM

    Why is it that when a Republican is brought under scrunity the conservatives always blame the liberal media for trying to tarnish a conservative. This country has many problems and we need to solve problems together. We need change and new leadership. We do not need the same policies of the last 7 1/2 years. We need a leader that will not lead by FEAR but will lead with dignity and respect. And will also uphold the Constitution of the United States. If you vote for McCain it becomes your responsibility to make sure your sons/daughters and grandchildren enlist in the military. Do not expect the poor and middle class to continue to protect those who beleive in war and yet do not send their loved ones to protect America.

    • Posted By: redman660 @ 02/22/2008 1:45:26 PM

      nrb2 stated(Do not expect the poor and middle class to continue to protect those who beleive in war and yet do not send their loved ones to protect America). No one, rich or poor, SEND their loved ones to protect America, it's a purely volunteer army. Maybe if the Democrats get in the White House we can do our fighting on American soil rather than in Iraq.

  • Posted By: garfish6f @ 02/22/2008 1:43:34 PM

    Presidential politics as usual. 14 months into this filthy mess, we call electing a new President, here comes the mud. After GWB this nothing.

  • Posted By: pmcs @ 02/22/2008 12:30:21 PM

    This following fact alone is a clear 'corruption' if you ask me. A typical Bush-McCain hypocritical behavior:

    "four trips he took aboard Paxson's corporate jet to campaign events and the $20,000 in campaign contributions he had received from the company's executives during the period of time the firm was pressing him to intervene with federal regulators."

    McCain wants to continue the Tax Breaks for the wealthiest 1% and keep the Iraq war going for another 100 years.

    Do you all love Bush-McCain policy??

    Why aren't Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Coulter, Matthews, ... attacking McCain like there is no tomorrow??

    • Posted By: dewcooper @ 02/22/2008 1:43:30 PM

      Who do you think flys Obama, Bill, Hillary, algore, etc. around? This is very common place. As far as the 'rich', who do you think starts and funds businesses in this country? Want to penalize them for being successful, I am sure that they can fund and start businesses overseas. That should help the economy...

    • Posted By: AlaskaBoy @ 02/22/2008 1:00:13 PM

      Um, the wealthiest 1% of America pays almost 37 percent of the income tax in this country. Why would you not give them tax breaks? McCain is not Bush, so please stop lumping and grouping all Republicans in the same venue. Doing so is spurious and ignorant.

  • Posted By: hooskidoo @ 02/22/2008 1:43:28 PM

    Oh Come on...what he did is Washington small potatoes, but he has lost the bs detector on the straight spin express. If i remember right, the law of non-contradiction means that his actions can't be both A and not A at the same time. I have liked McCain for a long time, and think he is a rare senator who is concerned with the consequences of his decisions. But this smells bad.

  • Posted By: pmcs @ 02/22/2008 1:11:36 PM

    John, please step aside. Bush's 8-year has been brutal for Americans. It is time not to continue the failed policies of the past 8 years. It is time to re-direct and start something fresh.

    We do not want the ATTACKING GOP POLITICS in Washington anymore.

    John, please step aside. We, the American middle class, do not want you. We do not want your failed government of past 8 years.

    We need NEW DIRECTION!

    • Posted By: Cal_Culus @ 02/22/2008 1:42:47 PM

      Careful what you ask for . . . you may just get it! Change for change sake is . . . do I even have to say it? My guess is that you are an Obama fan. I heard Susan Sarandan say that she really likes Obama and his 'progressive' thoughts toward change. She then went on to say that she just couldn't wait to see what what his changes will be. Is this a typical Obama supporters thought process? Are you folks just willing to give it all away on an emotional whim? It's like a blind man searching for his way through a minefield.

  • Posted By: shannonmom @ 02/22/2008 1:42:36 PM

    um- what is the source for the Obama info posted earlier? No source- violation of user agreement- no libelous or kmowingly false info is supposed to be posted. If it's for real, then where did it come from?

  • Posted By: rkrenke @ 02/22/2008 1:42:31 PM

    McCain represents everything that is wrong with our government today. I don't understand how anyone can support a man whose career over the past few years has embraced nothing more than lies and hypocrisy. The "maverick" has been absent for a very long time. I commend the NYT, Washington Post, and now Newsweek for finally providing the electorate with factual information regarding our choices for president.

    Until the People start paying attention to the actual policies supported by elected officials like McCain, we will continue to have the mediocrity we have today. This country is better than that and it is time for us to hold McCain responsible for his transgressions against our best interests. No more influence peddling on Capital Hill!

  • Posted By: paul962 @ 02/22/2008 1:41:55 PM

    Drip....Drip...Drip...

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse