McCain Accused of Having An Affair with Lobbyist-

[ChristopherHall]

We know that McCain had a long going affair with Cindy, his current wife, while married to Carol, his wife of 14 years at the time. John McCain then divorced his wife to marry Cindy, the woman he was having the affair with.

Now the New York Times is reporting a story of events that took place during the 2000 elections. Here is the story:

For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk
By JIM RUTENBERG, MARILYN W. THOMPSON, DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and STEPHEN LABATON
Published: February 21, 2008

WASHINGTON — 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, visiting his offices and accompanying him on 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 client, 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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin



Does John McCain have a "character deficit"?

The New York Times endorsed John McCain. Is this story's timing political? (C'mon, of course it is.)

Both?

Is McCain sold out to Washington lobbyists though he claims not to be?

What are some of your thoughts?

[Elizabeth]

Men are weak-

I think as the campaign wages on more dirt will surface on both sides.

[ChristopherHall]

Men are weak-

I think as the campaign wages on more dirt will surface on both sides.

I think you're right.

[deacon blues]

Breaking news online

www.nytimes.com

Funny, I thought those NY Times liberals didn't care about "personal" matters. Oh that's right, that's only for liberal Democrats.

Time will tell if this is just rumor or truth.

[deacon blues]

McCain campaign responds:

“It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

“Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”

[Sam]

McCain campaign responds:

“It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

“Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”

Well, that statement did not deny nor affirm that an affair took place.

[rgcraig]

Doesn't deny the affair - - it will be interesting.

[Sam]

Was it really an affair if it was with a lobbyist?

Aren't lobbyists prostitutes?

Doesn't PAC stand for Payoffs And Corruption?

[ChristopherHall]

I favor Obama over McCain, but I'm surprised nothing more substantial hasn't come up about Obama yet. Maybe they're waiting for him to secure the Democratic nomination.

[Elizabeth]

I favor Obama over McCain, but I'm surprised nothing more substantial hasn't come up about Obama yet. Maybe they're waiting for him to secure the Democratic nomination.

Someone posted a link already to an Obama indiscretion but his was NOT with a member of the opposite sex!

[Elizabeth]

Was it really an affair if it was with a lobbyist?

Aren't lobbyists prostitutes?

Doesn't PAC stand for Payoffs And Corruption?
Sam that's a pretty broad statement isnt it?

[CC1]

We know that McCain had a long going affair with Cindy, his current wife, while married to Carol, his wife of 14 years at the time. John McCain then divorced his wife to marry Cindy, the woman he was having the affair with.

Now the New York Times is reporting a story of events that took place during the 2000 elections. Here is the story:



Does John McCain have a "character deficit"?

The New York Times endorsed John McCain. Is this story's timing political? (C'mon, of course it is.)

Both?

Is McCain sold out to Washington lobbyists though he claims not to be?

What are some of your thoughts?


I have not read this thread and I can't stand John McCain BUT no I did not "know" that he had an affair with his current wife and then this lobbyist.

I have never heard that about his current wife and don't know if it is true or not. If it were true I would have thought the Dems would have made a big deal out of it.

I did read the NY Times article earlier today about the lobbyist and there was absolutely no evidence or proof that he had an affair. That is pure speculation because she was there a lot.

[Elizabeth]

I have not read this thread and I can't stand John McCain BUT no I did not "know" that he had an affair with his current wife and then this lobbyist.

I have never heard that about his current wife and don't know if it is true or not. If it were true I would have thought the Dems would have made a big deal out of it.

I did read the NY Times article earlier today about the lobbyist and there was absolutely no evidence or proof that he had an affair. That is pure speculation because she was there a lot.

Perhaps he was just flirting, you know an older man getting attention by a much younger woman--nothing probably happened.

Any little thing is going to be a big thing during this election time-imo

[jrLA]

Maybe this is the side step Huck needs! Go Huck!

As far as the Dem go---I'd rather Billary than Obama! That's for sure. Obama scares me. Really! I have a real unsettled feeling about him.

[CC1]

Maybe this is the side step Huck needs! Go Huck!

As far as the Dem go---I'd rather Billary than Obama! That's for sure. Obama scares me. Really! I have a real unsettled feeling about him.

I really like Huckabee but he is about to undo all of the good he has done if he doesn't concede. As much as I would like him to be the nominee the numbers just don't add up and he should quit. It is mathamatically impossible for him to get the nomination. I believe after the Texas and Ohio primaries he will pull out. Hopefully this exposure will set him up for four or eight years from now.

I agree that as much as I dislike Hillary Obama scares me more. Reading between the lines I believe he is probably an out and out socialist. Without a doubt he is the most liberal Presidential canidate to ever be this close to a major party's nomination.

I think his wifes statement that her husbands political success is the FIRST time she has been proud of America in her adult life speaks volumes. That is the victim mentality at it's worst. If she doesn't think America has done anything to deserve her pride all of her adult life then she has no business as the first lady of America.

[Elizabeth]

Maybe this is the side step Huck needs! Go Huck!

As far as the Dem go---I'd rather Billary than Obama! That's for sure. Obama scares me. Really! I have a real unsettled feeling about him.

I know me too, and something about those 2 in the white house worries me, besides he has no experience, but basically leans on his ability to stir up a crowd.

[Elizabeth]

I really like Huckabee but he is about to undo all of the good he has done if he doesn't concede. As much as I would like him to be the nominee the numbers just don't add up and he should quit. It is mathamatically impossible for him to get the nomination. I believe after the Texas and Ohio primaries he will pull out. Hopefully this exposure will set him up for four or eight years from now.

I agree that as much as I dislike Hillary Obama scares me more. Reading between the lines I believe he is probably an out and out socialist. Without a doubt he is the most liberal Presidential canidate to ever be this close to a major party's nomination.

I think his wifes statement that her husbands political success is the FIRST time she has been proud of America in her adult life speaks volumes. That is the victim mentality at it's worst. If she doesn't think America has done anything to deserve her pride all of her adult life then she has no business as the first lady of America.
With all her collegiate back ground, that was a really stupid thing for her to say! Can you imagine her hosting foreign dignitaries? It will be disastrous! With all the time she spent at Harvard--you think she would know better.

[TRFrance]

What is this, the National Enquirer?

We dont know that McCain had an affair with a lobbyist. Even the NYTimes isn't saying he did, although thats seems to be the conclusion they want their readers to reach. Right now its just innuendo and supposition.

Maybe he did, but maybe he did not. But how about we wait and see how the facts develop, before we go announcing the man had an affair?

[Elizabeth]

What is this, the National Enquirer?

We dont know that McCain had an affair with a lobbyist. Even the NYTimes isn't saying he did, although thats seems to be the conclusion they want their readers to reach. Right now its just innuendo and supposition.

Maybe he did, but maybe he did not. But how about we wait and see how the facts develop, before we go announcing the man had an affair?
Opps I'll place a question mark, if that helps any.

[Elizabeth]

Well I rephrased it.

This is election time and I am sure people will be posting link to all kind of alleged misbehaving by both sides.

I do not think anyone here is accusing McCain of an affair.

[TRFrance]

Opps I'll place a question mark, if that helps any.

Well I rephrased it.


Good move, Jeanie

[tbpew]

Maybe the whole thing is a multi-layered misinformation campaign to make a very old pale guy not look quite so morgue-esk when compared with a young man of color.:tvhappy

If you can be a seriously-seasoned-citizen, on a presidential campaign circuit and still have something in the tank for sneaking around on your already junior wife....the old geezer moniker will have a hard time sticking.

but....
if it turns out he actually is a serial adulterer....my last thin, thread of republican voting inclination will be snapped. If the rumor mill becomes a truth, and with so much on the line for him at this point in his life journey, it would speak not only of a core character flaw, but also his inability to assess the weightiness of the TIMES.

[OP_Carl]

We know that McCain had a long going affair with Cindy, his current wife, while married to Carol, his wife of 14 years at the time. John McCain then divorced his wife to marry Cindy, the woman he was having the affair with.

Now the New York Times is reporting a story of events that took place during the 2000 elections. Here is the story:

Does John McCain have a "character deficit"? Sure. He doesn't have the Holy Ghost. And he's a politician. Talk about easy questions . . . :thumbsup

The New York Times endorsed John McCain. Is this story's timing political? (C'mon, of course it is.)

Both?The fact that the NYT sat on this story for 8 years is the telling clue. There is too much focus on the upcoming battle in the Democrat primary, and so this is an effort to step up the drama in the Republican primary. Make no mistake, all the liberal media support for John McCain will disappear like a snowflake in the Sahara in the national campaign. There are two reasons for the media treating him favorably leading up to this election:
1) They have calculated that he cannot win the national election (they may even have some part to play in this)
2) They have calculated that, if elected, he will not be a threat to the advancement of the leftist/liberal agenda.

Is McCain sold out to Washington lobbyists though he claims not to be? Who knows? Maybe this last hope for his genuine Maverick-ness is what the NYT is holding evidence in reserve for to dash.

What are some of your thoughts? It's a tough nut no matter how you crack it.

Maybe the whole thing is a multi-layered misinformation campaign to make a very old pale guy not look quite so morgue-esk when compared with a young man of color.:tvhappy If you'd like to see a campaign drumming up its own sensationalism take a look at all the women swooning at Obama rallies.

If you can be a seriously-seasoned-citizen, on a presidential campaign circuit and still have something in the tank for sneaking around on your already junior wife....the old geezer moniker will have a hard time sticking. It's tough to know whether our post-adultery nation will maintain a double standard or acquiesce to hedonism on all sides.

but....
if it turns out he actually is a serial adulterer....my last thin, thread of republican voting inclination will be snapped. If the rumor mill becomes a truth, and with so much on the line for him at this point in his life journey, it would speak not only of a core character flaw, but also his inability to assess the weightiness of the TIMES. If this is sincere, then you have played right into their hands. They are hoping to get a large block of disillusioned conservatives to sit out like what happened in 2006. Don't give up hope. Any of these three disastrous candidates can be mitigated by electing conservative representatives. The press knows that, and that is why there has been ZERO coverage of the state and local races. They want conservatives ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED and ready to opt out.

NEVER GIVE UP!!!!!



"We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing-grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!"


Sir Winston Churchill

[Ferd]

Breaking news online

www.nytimes.com

Funny, I thought those NY Times liberals didn't care about "personal" matters. Oh that's right, that's only for liberal Democrats.

Time will tell if this is just rumor or truth.

Well, you have to understand context.

the care about "personal" matters of Republicans because they want to make sure Republicans dont get elected.

[Ferd]

Chris, YOUR VIEW OF A REPUBLICANS MORALITY IS NOT WANTED!

YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT AND UNTIL YOUR PARTY CLEANS IT’S FOUL HOUSE, YOU DON’T GET TO THROW ROCKS!

[MissBrattified]

How can liberals say anything at all, when their golden boy, Bill Clinton, actually had numerous affairs? And McCain had a lobbyist who hung around too much? LOL!!!!

Unless they get the woman to accuse McCain of sexual harassment or something similar, or they find actual EVIDENCE to support their claim, it means nada.

I find it hilarious that the media crowd has such a double face--they report manically about Hollywood and all its indiscretions with glee and happy interest, but yet they respond to the sexual deviations or indiscretions of "regular" folks (especially preachers and republicans) with the most prudish puritanism.

[Ferd]

How can liberals say anything at all, when their golden boy, Bill Clinton, actually had numerous affairs? And McCain had a lobbyist who hung around too much? LOL!!!!

Unless they get the woman to accuse McCain of sexual harassment or something similar, or they find actual EVIDENCE to support their claim, it means nada.

I find it hilarious that the media crowd has such a double face--they report manically about Hollywood and all its indiscretions with glee and happy interest, but yet they respond to the sexual deviations or indiscretions of "regular" folks (especially preachers and republicans) with the most prudish puritanism.


The thing about our liberal friends is, they can do it with a straight face!

You watch, there will be liberals all over television in all their horrified glory, talking about how bad it is for the country that McCain did this.

and how wonderful Barak is....

and fools will eat it up.

[Sarah]

The thing about our liberal friends is, they can do it with a straight face!

You watch, there will be liberals all over television in all their horrified glory, talking about how bad it is for the country that McCain did this.

and how wonderful Barak is....

and fools will eat it up.



And fools will eat it up..........that's the scary part.

[Digging4Truth]

Men are weak-

Wow...

What an insight into ones opinion of the male.

[DividedThigh]

Breaking news online

www.nytimes.com

Funny, I thought those NY Times liberals didn't care about "personal" matters. Oh that's right, that's only for liberal Democrats.

Time will tell if this is just rumor or truth.

so true db, so true, of course the article is political, and personal, what was that about the politics of personal destruction, whatever, lol,dt

[DividedThigh]

Chris, YOUR VIEW OF A REPUBLICANS MORALITY IS NOT WANTED!

YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT AND UNTIL YOUR PARTY CLEANS IT’S FOUL HOUSE, YOU DON’T GET TO THROW ROCKS!

i second that motion, lol,dt

[Jehoram]

Can't we just all get along?

[DividedThigh]

Can't we just all get along?

no

[Jehoram]

Can't we just all get along?

no

How sad.

I try to make a new friend every day.

How will I make friends if all we ever do is talk about religion and politics?

[DividedThigh]

How sad.

I try to make a new friend every day.

How will I make friends if all we ever do is talk about religion and politics?

hey dont jump on me bro, i tried to be nice, lol,dt didnt work

[Jehoram]

hey dont jump on me bro, i tried to be nice, lol,dt didnt work

I understand.

I guess that's the way it goes sometimes.

[Elizabeth]

Wow...

What an insight into ones opinion of the male.

Please don't be so sensitive, human beings are weak. gee you didn't know that?

[ChristopherHall]

Maybe this is the side step Huck needs! Go Huck!

As far as the Dem go---I'd rather Billary than Obama! That's for sure. Obama scares me. Really! I have a real unsettled feeling about him.

Huckabee said he believed in miracles. lol

If it were Huckabee, I'd definately have to rethink my vote.

[ChristopherHall]

Chris, YOUR VIEW OF A REPUBLICANS MORALITY IS NOT WANTED!

YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT AND UNTIL YOUR PARTY CLEANS IT’S FOUL HOUSE, YOU DON’T GET TO THROW ROCKS!

Democrats don't bill themselves as a "family values" party. You know you're getting rascals with Democrats. It all goes back to who one would rather vote for, a man lying about being a conservative with conservative values or a man who is honest about being a liberal. LOL

[Ferd]

Democrats don't bill themselves as a "family values" party. You know you're getting rascals with Democrats. It all goes back to who one would rather vote for, a man lying about being a conservative with conservative values or a man who is honest about being a liberal. LOL

I am glad you have admitted to being a rascal.

I am sorry you still think that gives you a right to hypocracy.

[MrsMcD]

Someone posted a link already to an Obama indiscretion but his was NOT with a member of the opposite sex!

Was it with a member of the same sex?

[ChristopherHall]

I wouldn’t be surprised if McCain had an affair, he cheated on his wife of 14 years. But he’s trying to position himself as a man with our values and he’s not. If he’ll lie and panders like this to be elected, I can’t trust him. The Democrats bill themselves as the working class party. They don’t pretend to agree with all of our values, in fact they’re very inclusive, sometimes too inclusive. The Democrats repeatedly state that their party’s goal is to better manage the country, not to be a poster child for religious faith or values (though some Democrats do express their faith). While a Democrat may have values quite different than my own…he’s telling me the truth about who he is. Now let’s say that Democrat is caught in moral indiscretion. Well…in a way it’s not surprise. They didn’t bill themselves as paragons of faith and values like the Republicans do. So when it comes to morality Republicans have accepted a higher standard by billing themselves as a “family values” party. And the Republicans by all means should be judged according to the standards implied by their claims. Democrats bill themselves as fiscally the party that is responsible and good for the middle class. Well….that’s what they should be judged by. One is running with a significant focus on faith and values…the other is not. Therefore when it comes to faith and values the Republicans will be judged by a higher standard.

[ChristopherHall]

Was it with a member of the same sex?

If it's true, that's the story. Odds are the Republicans are going to wait and see if he wins the nomination to make a deal of it.

I'd like to see McCain go down in flames and Huckabee get the nomination.

[ChristopherHall]

Ferd, you're most likely a minister. Aren't ministers, because of what they preach, judged by a higher standard that a common man?

[ChristopherHall]

Ferd, would it be safe to say that Republicans, as you invision them, want to be seen as the “family values” party that is taking a stand for faith and morality….but we're not supposed to hold them to it? LOL

[ChristopherHall]

I am glad you have admitted to being a rascal.

I am sorry you still think that gives you a right to hypocracy.

Why do you go personal?

[Ferd]

Why do you go personal?

which part?

the hypocracy isnt personal per sey. it is commentary on your actions. i am truely sorry you have acted out in such a manner.

[Ferd]

Ferd, would it be safe to say that Republicans, as you invision them, want to be seen as the “family values” party that is taking a stand for faith and morality….but we're not supposed to hold them to it? LOL

If and when Republicans choose to have that disucssion, then it is perfectly fine to put all cards on the table.

however, we are not required to give hypocrits from the democratic party a seat at the table.

And there is NEVER a day (post Clinton) that democrats get to hold Republicans to their word. especially on morality issues.

until you guys get rid of the man slaughterers, child molestors, male prostitute pimps, liers, philanderers, drunken sots, whoremongers, buttless chap wearing gay pride advocates, and puppy kickers, you dont get to discuss morality issues concerning Republicans. period.

[DividedThigh]

by the way, before you lynch mccain he says he didnt do it, and so does she, lol

[Ferd]

by the way, before you lynch mccain he say she didnt do it, and so does she, lol

My freind, demonrats dont need a witness, the truth, or a mia culpa to lynch a republican. they dont even need a new rope!

By the way, this story is not a new story, it was discreditied 8 years ago.

[DividedThigh]

My freind, demonrats dont need a witness, the truth, or a mia culpa to lynch a republican. they dont even need a new rope!

By the way, this story is not a new story, it was discreditied 8 years ago.

very true, but the dem you are talkin to seems to just swallow the koolaid, lol

[ChristopherHall]

which part?

the hypocracy isnt personal per sey. it is commentary on your actions. i am truely sorry you have acted out in such a manner.

What do you feel is hypocritical?

[ChristopherHall]

If and when Republicans choose to have that disucssion, then it is perfectly fine to put all cards on the table.

however, we are not required to give hypocrits from the democratic party a seat at the table.

And there is NEVER a day (post Clinton) that democrats get to hold Republicans to their word. especially on morality issues.

until you guys get rid of the man slaughterers, child molestors, male prostitute pimps, liers, philanderers, drunken sots, whoremongers, buttless chap wearing gay pride advocates, and puppy kickers, you dont get to discuss morality issues concerning Republicans. period.

First, I'm a registered Republican and I've voted Democrat maybe twice in all the times I've voted. Am I going to swing "Democrat" this election? Maybe. You know my issue is health care.

Bro, the Republicans are the one's pretending to be the "family values" party. They are competing for my vote. They are trying to sell me a bill of goods...but they're misrepresenting the product. They say they're the "family values" party, but it's all false advertising.

Again, the Democrats don't make that claim. They're honest about their being a bunch of sinners.

[ChristopherHall]

by the way, before you lynch mccain he says he didnt do it, and so does she, lol

True. But that doesn't change the fact that McCain had "affairs" and left his wife of 14 years for his current wife.

[DividedThigh]

i think i am gonna crack up, honest dems, and admitting to sin, come on, lol,dt:ursofunny

[MrsMcD]

:girlpopcorn

[ChristopherHall]

Dude, most Democrats admit to being Pro-Choice, they dont' pretend to be Pro-Life like Republicans do. They admit to being accepting of alternative lifestyles, they don't pretend to be anti-gay like Republicans do. So when Republicans sabatage Pro-Life legislation and are just as open about gays as Democrats, they're the one's who aren't practicing what they preach.

[ChristopherHall]

It would suit most Republicans better if they just became Libertarians. That's really what they are. The "values" plank is nothing but false advertising.

[ChristopherHall]

Also, Republicans claim to be non-socialistic. They decry Democratic efforts to get health insurance covering every American as socialist and stealing from the tax payer…then they sink tax payer dollars into the Iraqi Ministry of Health for national health insurance for Iraqis in Iraq. What makes Iraqi’s more important than their fellow Americans? Why is it socialism when done here but not when done there? Why do they argue against taking our tax dollars to care for the health of other Americans but steal it to pay for health care for Iraqis? Whose side are they really on?

At least the Democrats are honest about their intensions. If a party is going to use my tax dollars for health insurance, I want to make sure that it’s for Americans.

[ChristopherHall]

And to McCain's credit, I don't think he had an affair "this time". I don't really think the present story will pan out to be true. Part of me would like to see McCain go down in flames because I like Huckabee far more, and I would even think about voting for Huckabee. Huchabee, while himself not perfect, most likely has the most character out of them all.

[BrotherEastman]

How sad.

I try to make a new friend every day.

How will I make friends if all we ever do is talk about religion and politics?
I try to get Chris to leave politics alone, but he is a glutton for punishment. I kinda felt sorry for him on the other thread, but I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for him now. I guess he obviously can take it. LOL!

[BrotherEastman]

Ferd, you're most likely a minister. Aren't ministers, because of what they preach, judged by a higher standard that a common man?
Aren't you a minister as well? Hmmmm. I seem to remember you saying that certain posters were unintellegent.

[ChristopherHall]

Aren't you a minister as well? Hmmmm. I seem to remember you saying that certain posters were unintellegent.

I’m not a minister anymore.

Honestly, I know certain posters are very intelligent. What bothers me is when they say things that aren’t intelligent. For example, intelligent men who I believe are very upstanding and trustworthy….believing urban legend emails. That’s not smart. And when it comes to the health care thing…they believe all the propaganda against systems they’ve never personally seen. And they disregard the word of men from one of those countries. LOL To me, that’s not smart. Hey, I can see disagreeing on a philosophical level or political level…but to actually believe and propagate things that are proven falsehoods? I think that’s unintelligent.

[Ferd]

What do you feel is hypocritical?

Did you read the part about man slaughters and puppy kickers? i thought that pretty well covered the hypocracy.


Chris, Attila the Hunn could have said he wasnt a barbarian unitl every roman got blue in the face. It didnt change the fact that he was a barbarian.

you can tell me how registered you are until that "great gettin' up morning"

It will not change the fact that as long as you and I have discussed politics, you have sided with the democrats at every turn (I even gave you the fairness doctrine to redeem yourself and you failed miserably.... for a fellow Vet, I am disappointed)

Therefore, your republican status is about the same as Attila's status as a cultured, civilized roman citizen.

peace.

[Ferd]

Ferd, you're most likely a minister. Aren't ministers, because of what they preach, judged by a higher standard that a common man?

Yes Chris, and this has nothing what so ever to do with a democrat trying to besmerch the moral charictor of a republican.

sorry my friend. that is the highth of hypocracy, and as a minister, I am doing everything in my power to hold you from such a terrible action! :tantrum

[ChristopherHall]

At this time I do feel Obama has more character than McCain who left his wife. McCain's most likely going to loose anyway. I'd much rather deal with Obama than Hillary. Obama doesn't issue any mandates and really believes in what he says he believes in (though I disagree with him on some issues). Hillary on the other hand would issue mandates...and frankly...not even she really believes in her cause. She just wants power.

I think it would be intelligent to do whatever it takes to stop her.

[ChristopherHall]

Ferd, you're only going personal because you don't have a leg to stand on.

[Ferd]

Ferd, you're only going personal because you don't have a leg to stand on.

No Chris, I am not going personal.

if Republicans want to discuss John McCains morals, then I would engage and be very engaging!

you arent a Republican. you have joined the team that validates perversion. by virtue of your team status, you no longer have the right to speak out against the things your team validates.

you have pretty much called me too stupid to understand in this discussion more than a few times.

I simply refuse to have this discussion with you.

was that personal?

Why cant you understand this simple point? everyone else

[Pressing-On]

Bob Bennett, a high-profile Democratic attorney who represented former President Bill Clinton during the Paula Jones scandal and has investigated McCain’s Senate Ethics activities said the story was “shameless, just shameless” on Fox's "Hannity & Colmes" Wednesday night.

Bennett said, “I'm in a pretty unique position to talk about John McCain. First, I should tell your listeners I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on his side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five, which, by the way, this ‘New York Times’ article goes back to and discusses, goes back years and years. And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the ‘New York Times’ to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain's public statement about this is correct. It's a smear job. I'm sorry.”

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/02/21/mccain_blasts_new_york_times

[Elizabeth]

Pressing yo! Good reporting girlfriend-

[revrandy]

I am currently having an affair with my wife!!

Does that count???

:)

[Elizabeth]

I am currently having an affair with my wife!!

Does that count???

:)

Are you running for public office???????????? Is there something you are not telling us?

[Pressing-On]

Pressing yo! Good reporting girlfriend-

Loved how Bennett cleared McCain of both the Keating Five and the affair - all in one swoop. The Times are known for their ostentatious lies.

[Pressing-On]

I am currently having an affair with my wife!!

Does that count???

:)

Better you than someone else, I guess. Ya think? lol

[ChristopherHall]

Ferd,

You're stereotyping. Not every Democrat is Godless or validating perversion. There are Democrats who side with Republicans quite often, but still don't buy into everything Republicans believe.

Here's a question, if the Democratic party is so evil...why don't you help change it? Why not offer the hand of fellowship to those working with Democrats to steer the party from the far left? For example, there are a number of pro-life Democrats and the number is growing. Each Democrat and each Republican stands as an individual.

The DLC is known for it's more conservative economics. They worked with Republicans to pass NAFTA
http://www.dlc.org/

The DFLA is known for being Pro-Life. They were key in passing the ban on partial birth abortion.
http://democratsforlife.org/

The Democratic Party is changing. Slowly, but changing. There are men on the inside who are working hard to rescue the party from extreme liberalism.

[ChristopherHall]

Bob Bennett, a high-profile Democratic attorney who represented former President Bill Clinton during the Paula Jones scandal and has investigated McCain’s Senate Ethics activities said the story was “shameless, just shameless” on Fox's "Hannity & Colmes" Wednesday night.

Bennett said, “I'm in a pretty unique position to talk about John McCain. First, I should tell your listeners I'm a registered Democrat, so I'm not on his side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five, which, by the way, this ‘New York Times’ article goes back to and discusses, goes back years and years. And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the ‘New York Times’ to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain's public statement about this is correct. It's a smear job. I'm sorry.”

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/02/21/mccain_blasts_new_york_times

I agree. It's a smear job. Nothing of substance can be verified.

But I think McCain could benefit somewhat from this. It certainly takes the press' attention off Obama and Hillary. McCain's campaign might want to lead a push for press reform in how things are reported during the campaign. For example, when CBS anchor man Dan Rather reported false information about Bush's National Guard activities, it too blew up in their face. The Bush campaign used that to capitalize on pushing for greater accuracy in reporting during the election and the pressure applied to CBS lead to Dan Rather resigning and a big shakeup at CBS. I think this could be used to make some major changes with the New York Times and make the press more careful during this election season...if McCain knows how to cash in on it.

Just my thoughts.

[Ferd]

Ferd,

You're stereotyping. Not every Democrat is Godless or validating perversion. There are Democrats who side with Republicans quite often, but still don't buy into everything Republicans believe.

Here's a question, if the Democratic party is so evil...why don't you help change it? Why not offer the hand of fellowship to those working with Democrats to steer the party from the far left? For example, there are a number of pro-life Democrats and the number is growing. Each Democrat and each Republican stands as an individual.

The DLC is known for it's more conservative economics. They worked with Republicans to pass NAFTA
http://www.dlc.org/

The DFLA is known for being Pro-Life. They were key in passing the ban on partial birth abortion.
http://democratsforlife.org/

The Democratic Party is changing. Slowly, but changing. There are men on the inside who are working hard to rescue the party from extreme liberalism.

I got as far as "Ferd you are steriotyping."

Yes. I am.

Not every dem is a devil. but every dem supports a party that has held perverts and puppy kickers as their paragons of vertue. ERGO....

Chris, just walk away. you want to discuss politics, lets do it.

just drop the morality tale. accpet that you just dont get to play in this sandbox.

[ChristopherHall]

Puppy kickers? lol

[ChristopherHall]

Hey bro, the county board of elections has me registered as a Republican, and that's official. Also in a free country anyone can comment as they like. Republicans still believe in free countries right?

But if you don't want to talk politics that's cool bro. I really enjoy the poetry thread. I like the poetry you posted.

[chaotic_resolve]

“It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

“Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”

Does the Keating 5 ring a bell? John McCain himself has admitted he messed up back then.

I'll try to find his name, but one of McCain's top campaign guy's is the head of a big-time lobbyist firm that rakes in millions from the very thing McCain so ardently speaks against. So it's not hard to think McCain may have set himself up for trouble. If nothing else, he doesn't think very well - having the head of a big lobbyist firm on staff and being close and giving too much personal access to a female lobbyist.

I don't think McCain had an affair ... good grief, not even the little blue pill could help that guy ... however, I think there may have been favors done for this lobbyist. If nothing else, his close association with her shows that he's a hypocrite about his major political career messages.

As for the story ... the NYT's knew all of this back when they endorsed McCain. It's political, pure and simple. If they can find any evidence of favors being done, McCain's finished. He'll be proven a liar. And with the conservatives already uneasy about him, it will only drive more away.

I doubt, though, the NYT's could find any evidence.

McCain will weather this ... in fact, this is a god-send for his campaign. He should be thanking the NYT's for the story; because now he's got conservative talk radio on his side.

[DividedThigh]

mccain should know by now that the ny times only attacks those they fear, lol,dt

[Neck]

mccain should know by now that the ny times only attacks those they fear, lol,dt


Would the Senator in Washington that is without "sin" cast the first stone.

[DividedThigh]

Would the Senator in Washington that is without "sin" cast the first stone.

i agree bro, good luck finding one of those, lol,dt

[Ferd]

“It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit-and-run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election.

“Americans are sick and tired of this kind of gutter politics, and there is nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career.”

Does the Keating 5 ring a bell? John McCain himself has admitted he messed up back then.

I'll try to find his name, but one of McCain's top campaign guy's is the head of a big-time lobbyist firm that rakes in millions from the very thing McCain so ardently speaks against. So it's not hard to think McCain may have set himself up for trouble. If nothing else, he doesn't think very well - having the head of a big lobbyist firm on staff and being close and giving too much personal access to a female lobbyist.

I don't think McCain had an affair ... good grief, not even the little blue pill could help that guy ... however, I think there may have been favors done for this lobbyist. If nothing else, his close association with her shows that he's a hypocrite about his major political career messages.

As for the story ... the NYT's knew all of this back when they endorsed McCain. It's political, pure and simple. If they can find any evidence of favors being done, McCain's finished. He'll be proven a liar. And with the conservatives already uneasy about him, it will only drive more away.

I doubt, though, the NYT's could find any evidence.

McCain will weather this ... in fact, this is a god-send for his campaign. He should be thanking the NYT's for the story; because now he's got conservative talk radio on his side.

Bob Beckel (D) was the speical procecutor on the Keating 5 deal. he recomended that Senator McCain be released from all charges related to that case.

NYT released this story to beat another outlet to the punch. the other outlet (National Review or some such) was going to report that NYT has been trying to nail the story down and failing miserably.

The only legs this story has are the ones the hypocrit democrats try to nail to it.

[DividedThigh]

Bob Beckel (D) was the speical procecutor on the Keating 5 deal. he recomended that Senator McCain be released from all charges related to that case.

NYT released this story to beat another outlet to the punch. the other outlet (National Review or some such) was going to report that NYT has been trying to nail the story down and failing miserably.

The only legs this story has are the ones the hypocrit democrats try to nail to it.

i believe it was bob bennett, who is a demo, who said, that , and you are right again of course, just trying to start smearin a war hero, lol,dt

[Pressing-On]

i believe it was bob bennett, who is a demo, who said, that , and you are right again of course, just trying to start smearin a war hero, lol,dt

Right.

I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five, which, by the way, this ‘New York Times’ article goes back to and discusses, goes back years and years. And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the ‘New York Times’ to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain's public statement about this is correct. It's a smear job. I'm sorry.” - Bob Bennett

[DividedThigh]

Right.

hey sis, by the way even if bilary gets elected do you really think they will return the silver,, come on, the have clinton stamped on it allready, lol,dt:tantrum

[Ferd]

i believe it was bob bennett, who is a demo, who said, that , and you are right again of course, just trying to start smearin a war hero, lol,dt

you are right. bob bennett, bill bennet and bob beckle always confuse me!

[chosenbyone]

Loved how Bennett cleared McCain of both the Keating Five and the affair - all in one swoop. The Times are known for their ostentatious lies.

I saw a video this evening on MSNBC which showed Tucker Carlson interviewing Bob Bennett. Bob Bennett was identified as McCain's attorney and he tried to defend his friend on the charge of adultery.

He was asked if they would ask for a retraction from the NY Times or if the would sue them and he stated that McCain just wanted to leave this matter in the past. I questioned if there wasn't any truth to the story then why let the story continue to be out there in the news? I don't think that we have heard the last of this alleged adulterous affair.

Remember, he does have a history of courting young blonds while being married...

[Pressing-On]

I saw a video this evening on MSNBC which showed Tucker Carlson interviewing Bob Bennett. Bob Bennett was identified as McCain's attorney and he tried to defend his friend on the charge of adultery.

He was asked if they would ask for a retraction from the NY Times or if the would sue them and he stated that McCain just wanted to leave this matter in the past. I questioned if there wasn't any truth to the story then why let the story continue to be out there in the news? I don't think that we have heard the last of this alleged adulterous affair.

Remember, he does have a history of courting young blonds while being married...

If Bob Bennett is McCain's attorney then he is wise to not get involved during an election. The story was used as a distraction from the campaign. Any wise attorney would run from that for the betterment of his client - a presidential contender to boot!

[ChristopherHall]

The more I look at this the more it's obvious to me that it's just tabloid journalism.

[chosenbyone]

If Bob Bennett is McCain's attorney then he is wise to not get involved during an election. The story was used as a distraction from the campaign. Any wise attorney would run from that for the betterment of his client - a presidential contender to boot!

PO,

I would have to agree that Bennett should run from pursuing any lawsuit again the Times, but how would requesting a retraction do anything but help clear up a story that could hurt McCain's bid for President?

Given the allegations against McCain's honor and character, I would have thought that a retraction from the Times would have been desirable. McCain had an affair with his current wife while married to his first wife and if the latest allegations prove to be true, it would severely impact his chances to become President. His honor and character would not be par with the office of President of the US.

It would be best for the country if this matter was sorted out before he was elected, IMO.

CB1

[Pressing-On]

PO,

I would have to agree that Bennett should run from pursuing any lawsuit again the Times, but how would requesting a retraction do anything but help clear up a story that could hurt McCain's bid for President?

Given the allegations against McCain's honor and character, I would have thought that a retraction from the Times would have been desirable. McCain had an affair with his current wife while married to his first wife and if the latest allegations prove to be true, it would severely impact his chances to become President. His honor and character would not be par with the office of President of the US.

It would be best for the country if this matter was sorted out before he was elected, IMO.

CB1
Legally - I don't know what is entailed in a retraction. I'd have to ask his lawyer.

[chosenbyone]

Legally - I don't know what is entailed in a retraction. I'd have to ask his lawyer.

You do that, LOL. :toofunny

[Pressing-On]

You do that, LOL. :toofunny

LOL! Or a lawyer. I'm sure he is not going to derail a campaign over an article in the Times. Everyone knows how the Times operates.

[chosenbyone]

LOL! Or a lawyer. I'm sure he is not going to derail a campaign over an article in the Times. Everyone knows how the Times operates.

It isn't the article that would derail his campaign, but the possibility that the article was factual. Again, if the allegation of adultery wasn't true, then why not dig in and force the Times to print a retraction, so this matter would be put to rest? Remember, he does have a history of being married and chasing skirts outside of his marriage bed.

My biggest beef with McCain is that he is clearly a warmonger. In this video, he alludes that during his Presidency there will be war after war. This is what the American people don't want and are expressing their desire for change in order to prevent the nation's sons and daughters from dying and being crippled and maimed.

If he becomes President, be prepared to send your children and your children's children off to fight in war after war!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tScqLhPaJEM

[chaotic_resolve]

Bob Beckel (D) was the speical procecutor on the Keating 5 deal. he recomended that Senator McCain be released from all charges related to that case.

NYT released this story to beat another outlet to the punch. the other outlet (National Review or some such) was going to report that NYT has been trying to nail the story down and failing miserably.

The only legs this story has are the ones the hypocrit democrats try to nail to it.

Okay so Beckel "clears" McCain of impropriety in regards to the Keating 5. I have doubts, but I'll take the special prosecutor's word for it. The fact he's a Democrat means very little, though some point to that being a big deal in his coming to McCain's defense. We all know McCain has Democratic friends, and is himself a RINO in many areas.

What about the Washington Post story, which focuses - not on the alleged affair - but rather on McCain's business relationship with the lobbyist, and accusations of impropriety in 1999 in which McCain sent letters to the FCC at the request of a Lowell Paxson, who would benefit from the sale. McCain has received campaign contributions from Paxson and other Iseman clients, and flew on Paxson's corporate jet while involved in writing these letters.

Two of the five FCC members voted against the sale to Paxson ... note that both were contacted by McCain during the final hours of deliberations on the sale; both were pressed on how they were voting, for or against; and both have written statements from then which said they felt it "unusual" for McCain to interject himself in the process.

Besides this, is the current situation in which McCain signed up for public funds, has used some, and now wants to opt out because now he's realizing it was a bad decision that may severely hinder his campaign before September and limit his funds to just 4 or 5 million.

The problem is McCain's a liar, or has terrible memory. Consider this from a Newsweek article:

Just hours after the Times's story was posted, the McCain campaign issued a point-by-point response that depicted the letters as routine correspondence handled by his staff—and insisted that McCain had never even spoken with anybody from Paxson or Alcalde & Fay about the matter. "No representative of Paxson or Alcalde & Fay personally asked Senator McCain to send a letter to the FCC," the campaign said in a statement e-mailed to reporters.

But that flat claim seems to be contradicted by an impeccable source: McCain himself. "I was contacted by Mr. [Lowell] Paxson on this issue," McCain said in the Sept. 25, 2002, deposition obtained by NEWSWEEK. "He wanted their approval very bad for purposes of his business. I believe that Mr. Paxson had a legitimate complaint."

While McCain said "I don't recall" if he ever directly spoke to the firm's lobbyist about the issue—an apparent reference to Iseman, though she is not named—"I'm sure I spoke to [Paxson]." McCain agreed that his letters on behalf of Paxson, a campaign contributor, could "possibly be an appearance of corruption"—even though McCain denied doing anything improper.

Hello?!? Anyone else read that last part. Here's for those with sight problems ...

McCain agreed that his letters on behalf of Paxson, a campaign contributor, could "possibly be an appearance of corruption"—even though McCain denied doing anything improper.

He agreed that he wrote letters on behalf of Paxson ... something he's been adamantly denying, yet back in this deposition taken Sept. 25, 2002, he acknowledges that it was for Paxson, on his behalf and, oh yes it could appear a bad thing, but we're supposed to believe the old man when he denies it.

Source (http://www.newsweek.com/id/114505)

McCain is in trouble. The NYT's should have skipped the sleazy story about the affair and instead focused on the real story - hard, legal evidence that McCain's lying about this, and likely other matters. McCain parades himself as someone against earmarks and special interests, yet he acts on behalf of lobbyists and special interests.

If the NYT's wants a story, just look into the McCain campaign.

His [McCain's] campaign manager, Rick Davis, co-founded a lobbying firm whose clients have included Verizon and SBC Telecommunications. His chief political adviser, Charles R. Black Jr., is chairman of one of Washington's lobbying powerhouses, BKSH and Associates, which has represented AT&T, Alcoa, JPMorgan and U.S. Airways.

Senior advisers Steve Schmidt and Mark McKinnon work for firms that have lobbied for Land O' Lakes, UST Public Affairs, Dell and Fannie Mae.

Source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022101131_pf.html)

That's the story the Times missed. Too bad, too. Now conservative talking heads are ignorantly bashing the NYT's for a stupid, badly-timed, politically-motivated article, thereby missing the real story.