An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

(Update 4) John McCain, D.C. Lobbyists & Fixating On the Bun, Not the Burger

01amccain_auto.jpg

My defense yesterday of The New York Times story on John McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman was pretty tepid. The story does, after all, have all the earmarks of an over-edited investigative mishmash with a fair amount of loaded “wink wink, nod nod” language from which the reader is to infer things that the story never comes right out and says.

But one thing that the story did get right, hence my headline McCain: It’s Not the Sex Stupid, is that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has been doing a pretty good job of fooling his supporters when it comes to his claim that he was chastened by his involvement in the Keating Five scandal. That should have ended his career but didn’t, and since then McCain has portrayed himself as a white knight who fights lobbyists and their special interests on behalf of us little guys.

The reality, as The Times story documents and The Washington Post corroborates and then some in its own story, is that McCain has continued to cuddle up to lobbyists when it suits him and his presidential campaign is chockablock with them.

That, of course, is lost on right-of-center bloggers like Iconic Midwest, Michelle Malkin, Ed Morrissey and Rick Moran, to name a very few, who are predictably fixating on the bun and not the burger.

Times bashing is sooo easy even when your support for McCain is tepid, which is true of three of the four aforementioned pundits. McCain is raising some sympathy dough because of the story. Some attention was diverted from the Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton CNN debate last night because of the story (which was bad for Clinton).

But The Times story, warts and all, as well as The Post’s, further reveal McCain to be an idiosyncratic Washington insider who plays by the rules only when it suits him. Yes, Barack Obama rubs shoulders with lobbyists, but the contrast between he and McCain — if that is the fall line-up — inevitably hurts the elderly gentleman from Arizona and helps the whippersnapper from Illinois in this year of contrasts and change.

All of the right-of-center whinging over The Times will be short-lived. The fallout from McCain’s failure to keep a pretty damned big promise will go on and on.

McCain denies the allegations and innuendos made in The Times story, of course, but it’s unclear what he is denying because of an intentional lack of specificity on his part.

One thing is damned sure: McCain will be spending a lot of quality time making further denials as new details drip drip drip out here, there and everywhere. (Kevin Drum observes that he is acting an awful lot like a caricature of a guilty man.)

Blogger emptywheel, among others, is on the case and making some potentially interesting connections:

“I find it a mighty curious coincidence that two of the companies for which Iseman was lobbying John McCain in 1999 and 2000–the time of their potentially inappropriate relationship–also happen to be the two television companies that championed the John Kerry smear, Stolen Honor, in 2004.”

More from emptywheel here. More on Stolen Honor here.

Photo by The Associated Press

  • Well, Shaun, one does not serve in Congress for any period of time without getting to know some lobbyists. And define "cuddle up" please. Neither you nor the times can seem to generate anything more than the innuendo of impropriety on McCain's lobbyist relations. If that minimal level of non-evidence is all that's required to cast aspersions, then I hope you're equally critical of the other senators in this race on that regard.

    Frankly, with your journalism background I find it hard to understand how you can defend an article that's based on two anonymous and disgruntled sources. Is the result of using disgruntled anonymous sources not obvious? Combined with a complete lack of any substantive evidence on the allegations how can anyone not view this reporting skeptically?
  • lurxst
    I am more concerned with McCain's leveraging of public campaign financing as collateral for him to get a private loan for his campaign. As much as the NYT piece appears fishy, this maneuver is clear case of unethical behavior on his part. As a taxpayer and contributor to the presedential campaign fund, I am appalled that he is being allowed to do this without the FEC slamming him.

    Even worse is watching him make his appeal/challenge to Obama to commit to public campaign fianancing, which the broadcast media delivers unflinchingly without even a reference to his shady money deals.
  • shaun
    Andy:

    Fair enough.

    The Keating Five scandal is "cuddling up" at its cuddliest. Based on what we know from an imperfect Times story and what already is coming out as a consequence of that imperfect story, it appears that McCain not only broke his post-Keating Five vow but in doing so did pretty much the same thing again.

    Tell you what: Let's see what the next month brings and revisit this on March 22. One of the cats has just entered a note into my Blackberry.

    We should have a pretty good idea of who's who in this zoo and can recap all of the denials McCain has had to make as further details drip drip drip out. If this turns out to have been much ado about nothing, I owe you an apology. if this turns out to be much more -- and my gut tells me it will -- then you owe me nothing other than continuing to visit The Moderate Voice.

    Deal?
  • DLS
    "Bun, not the burger" describes the Obama campaign, I hope you realize.
  • Well, when the bun is a juicy sex scandal for which no evidence exists, and the burger appears to be largely a rehashing of the Keating Five scandal, it's hard to see what else we should be focusing on. And the attempt to tie this together with Stolen Honor is risible; Stolen Honor was not about the Swift Boat Veterans allegations about Kerry. It was a film about POWs and how they were harmed by John Kerry's fabricated testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But please, try to tie this stuff together, because it will backfire nicely, just as the Times story has caused the conservative blogs to circle the wagons.
  • DLS
    "I am more concerned with McCain's leveraging of public campaign financing as collateral for him to get a private loan for his campaign."

    Yes, this is a real issue, unlike the Times's smearing of McCain after endorsing him. In fact, this potentially could shut down McCain's campaign.

    "The nation's top federal election official told Sen. John McCain [Thursday, February 21] that he cannot immediately withdraw from the presidential public financing system as he had requested, a decision that threatens to dramatically restrict his spending until the general election campaign begins in the fall. ..."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
  • shaun
    Brainster:

    You are invited to get together with Andy and I (see my previous comment) on March 22.
  • Shaun,

    No apology is necessary no matter what happens, though I'm happy to see what transpires over the next month. Given the months the Times has already spent on this article I doubt much more will be forthcoming.
  • GeorgeSorwell
    I think McCain may be subject a certain amount of drip, drip, drip on ethics. He was popular with the press, so maybe he didn't get enough scrutiny.

    At any rate, I'm looking forward to March 22.
  • shaun
    Addendum:

    While it is off my focus, which is old-fashioned lying through one's teeth and ethical breaches, I was asked by a commenter at my own blog if I thought that McCain and lobbyist Vickie Iseman had . . . you know what.

    I do.
  • Shaun,

    Can you see the irony here?

    McCain denies the allegations and innuendos made in The Times story, of course, but it’s unclear what he is denying because of an intentional lack of specificity on his part.
  • DLS
    McCain hasn't taken money from HMOs like Health Net, has he?

    Not only is Health Net being sued by LA for rescissions, but an arbitrator has just ordered Health Net to pay millions to someone who was subject to this after she developed cancer.

    http://www.calendarlive.com/media/acrobat/2008-...

    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure23f...
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC