Cheaters write Letters
By John Amato Wednesday Feb 20, 2008 6:44pmI find it interesting that McCain didn't deny having a relationship with Iseman all that much, but that's not the big story since he had cheated on his first wife anyway. Still, there were plenty of inconsistencies all the way around no matter how Chris Matthews tries to spin it. Check out Hold Fast's: More on McCain’s Non-Denial Denial of an Intervention by Associates.
Marc Ambinder notes that the Times’ use of the word “associates” suggests that, in fact, the people who confronted him were not aides or staffers. He hazards that “associates” might actually be other lobbyists...
Obviously, I don't know whether or not McCain had sex with Iseman. I suppose by "what the meaning of the word 'is' is" standards, he didn't even deny having had sex with Iseman. Certainly it'd be a bit rich of McCain to get outraged that anyone would even suggest that he might engage in sexual improprieties. After all, it's well known that he repeatedly cheated on his first wife Carol, of a number of years, with a variety of women, before eventually dumping her for a much-younger heiress whose family fortune was able to help finance his political career. That's well known, I should say, except to the electorate, who would probably find that this sort of behavior detracts from McCain's "character" appeal.
Meanwhile, there's all this stuff Salter doesn't deny (because, again, it's true) about McCain's questionable ethics. He wrote "letters to government regulators on behalf of the [Iseman's] client," he "often flew on the corporate jets of business executives seeking his support," he resigned as head of a non-profit when "news reports disclosed that the group was tapping the same kinds of unlimited corporate contributions he opposed, including those from companies seeking his favor," his Senate office and his campaign are run by corporate lobbyists, etc.
At his press conference today, McCain sought to place his relationship with Iseman in the context of the contacts he regularly has with lobbyists in Washington. "I have many friends who represent various interests...particularly before my committee," McCain said. "And I had meetings with hundreds of them and various interests. And that was my job to do, to get their input."
While that argument may be technically correct, it's a political loser -- especially in a change-oriented election like this one. Obama's political rise has been fueled, at least in part, by his denunciation of the pay-to-play culture in Washington and his promise to clean up Washington if elected president.
McCain, too, has railed against special interests throughout his political life. But, by trying to defuse the Iseman questions, the Arizona senator may well have created a long-term problem for himself. This is a story that isn't going away any time soon. And we'll do our best to stay on top of it.
Login or Register to post comments.
Its not about the sex its about the lies on videotape.
Here comes the sex police, they’re at your bedroom door
Movin’ in next door, searchin’ from floor to floor
You know what they’re lookin’ for
Someone’s always keepin’ score every time you dip the oar
Love isn’t fun no more
Wow, looks like the Times found some balls. Too bad its 8 years too fuckin late!
McCain is hardly the first man to dump his wife to go chasing after Busch. It takes a load to maintain a full Republican lifestyle.
If the story is lame McCain didn't act like it before it was published and today like Matthew Yglesias says the denial was pretty lame.
Jackie Mason Loves Politicians
ConcernedCanuck @ 6:
It's called the Immorality of Politicians
Who cares about the sex, it's the non-sexual favors that infuriate me. We already know McCain cheated on his first wife numerous times, but what politician doesn't? Ok, ok... Huckabee probably doesn't, but you never know with theocrats, sometimes they are the biggest hipocrites of them all (see Catholic Preist Molestation Scandal). Anyways, it's high time the United States realized that the qualities that get a man elected are the same qualities that get him laid... so all of our elected officials will be desired by women and thus will probably cheat on their wives. WHO CARES? That kind of thing is nobodies business but that of the couple. We should, however, care if one of our politicians provides (non-sexual) favors to a LOBBYIST FOR CONGLOMERATED MEDIA! It's no wonder that our national media hypes the sex scandal over the corruption scandal, it doesn't want it's strong government ties to be realized by the public.
Are Democrats finally given in to the use of Karl Rove tactics? If so, just admit it. I just find it hypocritical of you to criticize Republicans when they get into the personal lives of politicians but yet you are doing the very same thing. Shameful.
Johnny2Bad @ 1:
It's about the media corruption. everyone already knows that John McCain is a Liar. If you don't know already know that, I guess you should click the link... but I'm thinking you could already tell from watching him speak (Mr. McBlinky) without reading the aforementioned article.
McCain is a liar?
So what.
Which politician isn't?
Disclosure: Am somewhere between Kucinich and Ron Paul.
CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight.
Bottom of screen while reporting on McCain scandal:
BREAKING NEWS
"TABLOID TIMES?"
McCain Rips New York Times
Is that the FoxNews question mark making a leap over to CNN? Both CNN and MSNBC coverage of this story has been disgraceful McCain puffery.
Brady @ 9:
Yes... But there is a difference. Conservative politicians ask for it, (Dem ones too I guess) IF they are of the kind that moralizes about 'family values'.
Brady @ 9:
Hey Brad,
It stops being about his "personal life" when political favors are done for a lobbyist. That's called CORRUPTION. Most liberals could care less who John McCain sleeps with, unless of course conglomerated media is benefiting from it at the expense of the Mr McCain's constituents. I've always found it hilarious that Republicans fail to see the real issues at stake. They get all caught up in gay marriage (unconstitional discrimination) and torture (war crimes) "debates" when those issues should not even be remotely controversial. Now the GOP (and their friends, the media) seems to think the issue is sex when really the issue is government corruption. If Monica Lewinsky had been a lobbyist, Clinton would have been strung up by his balls. I don't even like the Clintons or their political dynasty, they're too rich, conservative, and power hungry for me... but I don't think you can compare the two incidents.
Brady, Brady, Brady, what a poor argument. The point is that McCain's own people were concerned that he was boinking a LOBBYIST whose clients would benefit from actions McCain could (and apparently, did) make.
Do you see the problem here, ace?
Brady @ 9:
Once upon a time the personal life of a politician, even a president, was considered to be beyond the pale. No one cared about Eisenhower's infidelity with Kate Summersby or JFK's numerous infidelities.What was once the province of yellow journalism is now mainstream. This particular Pandora's Box was well and truly opened by the Republicans in their mindless Whitewater witch hunt. Now they'd like to restore civility to political discourse and turn back the clock. They have no one to blame but themselves.
href="http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-drWGnF6DjM">Gore Vidal The Corruption of Election 2008
Why don't we hear more about the month spent between him dumping his first wife and marrying his
mistresssecond wife Cindy?Because we all know that people automatically marry their "good friend" that they have no romantic ties to, a month after they divorce. Unless he is fully admitting that his marriage to Cindy is a political and monetary marriage of convenience.
ConcernedCanuck @ 17:
Damn...link not work.....
Try again...
Gore Vidal and the Corruption of the Election 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-drWGnF6DjM
RantingRaver @ 10:
Why are you on me about this?...Rave at someone who cares what your rant is.
ConcernedCanuck @ 19:
Thanks for that link, it was great!
Gore Vidal is right on.
Brady @ 9:
No, but we damn well should...
Hmmm gettin some on the side... maybe... Or, maybe not.. in this case... Well, given who he is, his background these last seven years... Well, hell, actually, given his politics over his lifetime... (It's just the respect for him as a vet that I've lost these last seven years)... I don't particularly care who he's fucking or has fucked in the past... I ain't voting for him for dog catcher let alone president.. He'll fuck us 'all' over as president.. Probably even more cluelessly than this last motherfucker who's been fucking over the country these last seven years without so much as a kiss or reach-around...
He's a freakin longtime skirtchaser (which I don't really hold against him) and a warmongering opportunist with an outsized 'topgun' type ego (which I do hold against him, being President of these United States ain't no damed Tom Cruise movie)... The bit about ditching his first wife for a trophy momma moneybags to front his career...Umm yea, pretty damned lowdown, but nothing a lot of other hounddogs on both sides of the ideological fence ain't done...(hello Newt, hate to say it, but hiya Bill)..But ya know... Women do it too for that matter...just a whole hellova lot of that cheatin shit goin round forever.....
Of course, having seen a picture of this skank, (skinny undernouished looking bottle blonde... looks like she could've been one of Coulters runaway cousins if you ask me).. I can't say much for the old boys tastes in homewreckers.... But whatever, I guess this is the dejour pissing contest about him this week..
Don't fucking care.. He's an asshole and apparently a self admitted clueless doofus about the economy and/or other domestic issues... That's reason enough right there let alone his pathetic ideology and transparent sucking up to the extreme right not to vote for the borderline senile old bastard.........JD
L.A. Confidential @ 2:
How bad would it have to be to NOT be considered "the sex police?" A presidential candidate having an affair with (let me see, who is our enemy these days, BESIDES lobbyists...) the favorite daughter of Osama bin Ladin?
Course, there are plenty of other ways to buddy up with lobbyists and wind up working for them instead of The People, and politicians do them ALL. I'm for a good brigade of Golf Police.
jack damage @ 23:
My first thought is that she looked a bit like a younger Cindy.
But yes you should care about dumping wife 1 to marry
mistresswife 2 for political and monetary reasons. It's not only low down but it goes all the more to show what kind of person he is:Problems with John McCain:
warmonger
clueless about the economy
clueless about domestic issues
quick and bad temper (you want his finger on the button)
real enemies list - for which his is known to get even with people on said list (again you want his finger on the button?)
a man with no scruples
a man who doesn't care what anyone else thinks - in not waiting a decent amount of time between marriage one and marriage two, he won't care how we look to the rest of the world or gaining back what we lost too, I'd bet)
Clytemnestra;
Agreed on all your points... The only thing about it for me is..
While it's absolutely true his infidility goes to the heart of who he is as a person... All your points goes to the heart of that. There is just so many negatives about him, I won't personally base why I won't support him under any circumstances on who he's pokin when, where and who at this point, as much as I will base my non-support and total disdain for him on the totality of his background and record of which the infidility is merely one part of a very sordid whole....JD
Clytemnestra, and don't forget his very recent flip flop on torture. My God. NOTHING is beneath McCain. He wants to be president, and that is his "scruple"--the ONLY one he's got.
ME TOO on the "this ain't why I wouldn't vote for him" issue! Hearing that he's a dirty old man, indiscriminate and incautious about who he humps or tries to hump, a damn liar, and a sap for a younger prettier face than his wife's, for me, is like hearing that he has flat white hair. It was already part of the picture I had, all but the silly specifics.
I don't like McCain's politics and think he would be a disaster as president.
But what's the point of continuing to beat the dead horse of the story of how he cheated on his first wife? 30 years have passed. What possible relevance does his first marriage still have ??
McCain had just spent 5 1/2 years in a North Vietnamese hellhole, 2 of those years in solitary confinement. He had severe injuries that were never treated. He was routinely beaten and tortured
When he came home, he was not the man he was when he went off to war. His wife was a stranger. Everything had changed. So he found comfort elsewhere. So what.
Who can dare to judge him? If you do, you're no better than Dobson and the fundamentalists and all the other narrow-minded moralistic conservatives whose pompous superiority complex has polluted US politics and facilitated the trashing of the constitution.
If McCain romped with the lobbyist, going after him is fair game. But the endless debate about Character is a cheap conservative weapon that is conveniently trotted out only to smear the enemies of the neocon religious movement. Democrats should avoid any complicity in its use.
Annoyed Cannuck, me, I think Democrats should avoid beating the "character" drum against each other, but not against Republicans. If Republicans endlessly harp on "character," and then fail to live up to that themselves, I would be furious if Democrats let that slide. Republicans would be happy about it, though. Not "stooping to the level" of an enemy is often just a way of letting that enemy off, and usually just what the enemy wants.
Carly Corday @ 29:
Heck, Carly, I wouldn't even consider that to be "stooping to their level" because they are the hypocrites, not us. They are the ones who whine endlessly about family values and character and integrity and whatnot. They can say what they want about Bill Clinton (just to name the easy one), but he never harped on how superior his beliefs and values are. He had no special "morals" to turn him into a hypocrite when we learned he had received that blow job.
Compare that to Larry Craig or Todd Vitter, who had lambasted Clinton while doing things at least as bad, arguably worse. And never mind McCain on the possible sex with the lobbyist, look at his blatant attempt to game the FEC's election funding system after all his fire-breathing on campaign finance reform.
We can and should expose these hypocrites for the worthless liars and criminals they are. And I'm quite willing to do the same to any Democrats in the same situation; we don't need the likes of them representing us. But I'd bet that, given fair time to both parties, many more Republicans than Democrats would get caught in the web, precisely because of the hypocrisy.
Canuck: Ok, fine, his wife was a stranger to him. I can understand that. Why not be open about it and get a divorce? And why, specifically, fool around with and then marry someone who was conveniently able to finance his political career for him? Say what you will about how his experiences changed him; in and of itself, I wouldn't argue with that. But it's not a free pass.
VietVet8666 @ 11:
I'm pretty sure that's a requirement these days.
Verily it is best to stay on top of many things, with the exception of sleeping bears and such.
Brady @ 9:
I could care less about the alleged sexual part of it. He's a known cheater. That obviously doesn't matter to republicans (unless, of course, the candidate is a democrat). I have a problem with "Mr. straight talk express" and his "coziness" with lobbyists. It's not like he hasn't been involved in that before either (see Keating 5).
As for Rovian tatics, I really do wish the Dems wouldn't stoop to the slimy level of Republicans, but unfortuantely, we must now fight fire with fire. If Kerry and Gore would've fought the swiftboaters we most likely wouldn't have been stuck with Bush ruining our country.
Chris Matthews was just spotted in the men's room at MSNBC with a blue dress on .... McCain behind him unzipping his pants ...........
blue @ 34:
UM, gross!
Isn't all this just like the right-wingers crucifying Bill Clinton for having sex with Monica? WHO GIVES A RAT'S ASS!!!? One's personal (sex) life has NOTHING to do with one's JOB. Granted, McCain would make a perfectly shitty president, but that's because he is a Bushite, not because of his personal life.
I agree with most of the comments here. Tacky, C&L. I hate to see liberals participate in what we have, for years, decried as nasty right-wing tactics.
If McCain overstepped his bounds in terms of granting favors to a lobbyist, go nuts. But I don't care how many wives he's had or how he treated them. It has nothing to do with his fitness (or not) to be president. This isn't the kind of stuff I'm used to seeing from you guys. Disappointing.
it's mccain who wants to beat everyone over the head with riveting tales of his 'exemplary' character and ethical charm-he just forgot to tell us the ladies appreciate it, too. obviously, his newest bff succeeded enough with boiling all the 'maverick' out him to where he is now one of them: pathetic. "silly season," indeed!
Login or Register to post comments.