Today's Senator McCain Media Moment
In which...
He seems to forget where he is.
Then lies about the Obama campaign making a retraction.
Then lies about supporting a holiday celebrating Martin Luther King.
Enjoy!
And this from Jon Alter. Hey. A Mother should know.
In the middle of John McCain's dopey Britney & Paris attack ad, the announcer gravely asks of Barack Obama: "Is He Ready to Lead?" An equally good question is whether McCain is ready to lead. For a man who will turn 72 this month, he's a surprisingly immature politician—erratic, impulsive and subject to peer pressure from the last knucklehead who offers him advice. The youthful insouciance that for many years has helped McCain charm reporters like me is now channeled into an ad that one GOP strategist labeled "juvenile," another termed "childish" and McCain's own mother called "stupid." The Obama campaign's new mantra is that McCain is "an honorable man running a dishonorable campaign." Lame is more like it. And out of sync with the real guy.
--
To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Harley's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Conservative
Liberal
Moderate/Mixed/Non-Partisan
Non-Political/Reference
Related Sites -
Polisci Applied (Aaron)
Intrepid Liberal Journal (Intrepid Liberal)
Obsidian Wings (Bird Dog)
Open Hand/Open Eye (locutas)
Red State (Bird Dog)
Swords Crossed (brendanm98)
Wagster Speaks (Wagster)
WatchingAmerica (BlaiseP)
The Social Pathologist (TSP)
Foreign Affairs -
Abu Aardvark
'Aqoul
American Footprints
Council on Foreign Relations
CSIS
Democracy Arsenal
Intel Dump
The Fourth Rail
The Head Heeb
War and Piece
Politics -
Ace of Spades HQ
Andrew Sullivan
Balloon Juice
Belgravia Dispatch
Captain's Quarters
Crooked Timber
Curmudgeonly & Skeptical
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton
Firedoglake
Glenn Greenwald
Global Guerrillas
Hugh Hewitt
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Liberals Against Terror
Matt Yglesias
Michael J. Totten
Michelle Malkin
Moon of Alabama
New America
OxBlog
Patterico
Political Animal
Political Wire
Publius Pundit
QandO
Reality Based Community
Talking Points Memo
The Agitator
The Belmont Club
The Corner
Truman Project
Winds of Change.net
War -
Counterterrorism Blog
Iraq the Model
Jihad Watch
Small Wars Journal Blog
Economics and Business -
Angry Bear
Brad DeLong
Daniel Drezner
Mahalanobis
Marginal Revolution
Roubini Global Economics
The Big Picture
Science and Tech -
Bad Astronomy
New Scientist
Real Climate
Science Blogs
Scientific American
The Panda's Thumb
Legal -
Balkinization
Conglomerate
Ideoblog
Jurisdynamics
Law and Letters
Overlawyered
ProfessorBainbridge
ScotusBlog
Talk Left
The Becker-Posner Blog
Volokh Conspiracy
Sports -
Baseball Crank
Baseball Musings
Baseball Reference.com
ESPN.com
NFL.com
Only Baseball Matters
The Sports Economist
Books, Film and Music -
Amazon.com
Internet Movie Database
All Music Guide
News and Aggregators -
Asia Times
Boingboing
CNN
Digg
English Russia
Fark
Los Angeles Times
Memeorandum
MSNBC
Politico
Poynteronline
Slashdot
The New York Times
The Washington Post
References -
And people wonder whether I'm sincere when I tell them I want this guy to lose.
--God help the while, a bad world I say.
- Login or register to post comments
)I still wouldn't be 100% certain of the outcome. That's how unsure I am how the country's going to react to the idea of the first brother as President. My generation and the one or two ahead of me are ready to transcend race, but most of the Boomers? I have my doubts. Aside from the race issue (but also a little bit because of it) I think he's a very good candidate, one of the best fielded by the Dems in decades.
McCain's also a good candidate -- certainly not perfect but of his weaknesses his party is his greatest liability. I'm speaking of the ones that support him, of course.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I think he's senile. But you know it really doesn't matter. He could forget his own name on national TV and he would still pull between 30 to 40% of the vote.
- Login or register to post comments
)against Obama because he's a liberal black man. No one cares about McCain one way or another, other than he's not Obama.
I think McCain is going to win this thing, by sheer virtue that he's not Obama. When he wins, three years later he will become the most despised president of all time.
McCain is the perfect candidate at this point. The people who call themselves conservatives will all support him, or at least vote for him. Then a year from now, the 'conservatives' will claim he's not really one of them (there are no true conservatives) and will claim they just had no choice. After 8 years of bush, McCain is the ultimate republican candidate.
- Login or register to post comments
)I call myself a conservative.
I do not support John McCain, and will not vote for him, under any circumstances that I can imagine, at present.
Admittedly, paleo-conservatives/paleo-libertarians like me are few in number.
But when you write: "The people who call themselves conservatives will all support him, or at least vote for him," you are, quite simply, wrong.
--God help the while, a bad world I say.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )all 136 of you 'new crusades' types will stay home. The rest of the 'conservatives' and general 'f-off' types will vote McCain. I think he's gonna win.
I say racism is the main reason. But it's also (as A. Sullivan put it) 'cultural insecurity' that's going to push it over the edge. Americans will by and large vote for an old standby versus anything new... it's cool to be -anti. Obama's black, young and skinny. He's not gonna win. -Anti will narrowly win in November.
Edit-
Also key is your use of 'at present.' Not sure about you, but for the vast majority of the most part... those folks 'on the fence' who just can't decide 'at present' will have at least one or two talking points why they gosh-darn it just had to vote for McCain.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Well, Pranky - say what I may, you will go on telling yourself whatever makes you feel good.
Please do enjoy.
--God help the while, a bad world I say.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )nor do I think that it's lynch mob style racism. It's that Obama is an 'other'... a different person that doesn't fit the style of person that many americans think of as a president.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .Colin Powell had decided to run for President as a Democrat and had beaten HRC for the nomination--do you think the themes of the Republican approach to beating him would be substantially different from what they are using now, or much the same?
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )What would be REALLY entertaining is watching the Republicans run ads of Powell holding up a vial of anthrax at the U.N. and asking if we can trust this man : )
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )His Democratic opponents would have used those images in the primaries--anyone who wasn't inclined to vote for him for that reason would already be gone long before the conventions.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Becuz of his age and military experience, it wouldn't be possible to slime him like they're sliming Obama. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't try some other approach.
They'd still work the experience angle, even while praising him for his service. They might work an Out of Touch angle too, wondering just how much this military man can understand the problems of hard working Americans. But they would have a much harder time with Powell, if only becuz he is so clearly an Establishment figure, and therefore moderately immune to the 'other' gambit. Heaven forbid, the Republicans might have to battle someone like Powell on the issues.
The latter is speculation, of course. And has nothing to do with the McCain campaign's despicable behavior at the moment.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .that racism is the primary factor here?
Noted.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Racism is a factor. It's simply too hard to know if it's primary or not. However, it's not at all hard to know if some of the attacks on Obama dip into those fetid waters. They do, sometimes unconsciously, sometimes not.
There is data to suggest the Bradley Effect is moribund. On the other hand, Peter Hart suspects as many as ten percent of the Obama respondents are not telling the truth.
Again. It's very hard to know the truth of the matter.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I think he is seriously starting his descent into senility. Do we really want a senile old man running this country?
The debates are going to be a joke. McCain is going to come off as the doddering old fool that he is. No vigor, no energy, just old and tired.
- Login or register to post comments
)Bush lost every debate during his two presidential campaigns, didn't seem to hurt him any.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )McCain won't stay on message. This is a fatal flaw in a conservative. That's what Conservative means: don't change what works. Stand up for established principles.
Poor old guy, I'm reworking a summary of the Keating 5 scandal. McCain was hip deep in that mess. I'd failed to grasp the full extent of Keating and Lincoln Savings. McCain was the lone Republican in that gang. Glenn and McCain got off with "poor judgment" reports, but that was because they were considered heroes. McCain lied about the whole thing, including the leaks. Everything McCain said about Keating was a lie.
I am amazed nobody dares to mention McCain's involvement in the Keating scandal. Maybe that' because so many Democrats of august fame were involved. But McCain had better be really careful in what he says about Obama's poor judgment. McCain is hardly an exemplar of wisdom and prudence.
- Login or register to post comments
). . .and thereby drag John Glenn's name through the mud along with McCain's, by all means go ahead--Glenn's tough enough to take it (as is McCain), and Republicans will gladly accept the votes of Ohio voters thereby alienated.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )talking about an actual corruption scandal is "dragging [Glenn's] name through the mud"? That's really, really weak. It's a matter of public record unlike many of the charges Republicans make about faux outrages.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .because both McCain and Glenn were cleared of any impropriety in the scandal, though they were criticized for poor judgment. McCain was dragged into the investigation to provide cover for the three guilty Democrats, and Glenn was dragged in because his involvement with Keating was on the same level with McCain's.
I repeat, feel free to rehash this--it'll cost Democrats votes in Ohio and perhaps elsewhere, while gaining no significant votes for Obama.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I've already said the Keating 5 incident was mostly Democrats. I've also said that's why Keating 5 won't be broached unless the chips are down. So why bother repeating what I just said?
My point is this: John McCain has Poor Judgment. Absolute, rock bottom undeniable fact. He got all cozy with another Naval Aviator in Keating and he hemmed and he hawed and he lied about the whole thing, and he leaked details about it, and he lied about that, too. Most importantly, John McCain took what can only be described as bribes from Keating, living it up at Keating's little Caribbean villa. Dodgy real estate deals with his wife's money and in his wife's name. John McCain obstructed justice.
The Hausas have a proverb "tubun muzuru", the sorrow of the cat. The cat, you see, has been caught in the pigeon house, and is Very Sorry Indeed. John McCain was caught dead to rights obstructing justice, and all he and Glenn got was a slap on the wrist. But that slap made a point, one nobody should forget: John McCain has Poor Judgment. All the rest of that bullshit apology of his, all that breast beating and mea maxima culpa crap: bullshit. He's still riding around in corporate jets. Still associating with crooks. Still play hypocritical little games, still tolerating his handsome visage on 527 sites. The man's morals, to put it baldly, are a crock of ill-concealed and very stinky merde.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )scratching head with front paws, who are you talking about? I certainly hope it isn't Glenn, who wasn't Navy.
A hint, Glenn's wing man in Korea played left field in the fenway and has tunnel named after him.
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )scratch thy head no further
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )John Glenn wasn't Navy.
But he was a Naval Aviator (as is every aviator in the Marine Corps).
--Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )he was a Marine Corps Aviator and a pretty good one at that
--"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Ob
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Welcome back to TtWD.
--Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Well now, that brings back some memories. Not all of them pleasant, mind you, but it's funny is it not how memories improve with age. Only five years, but that's eons in blog years. (And dog years.)
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That would be Sam Wyly, a man who has attacked McCain in the past. But now McCain takes Wyly's money, yeah, right up until a grand jury indicted The Wyly Coyotes. But the RNC hasn't returned any of its Wyly money, and they've given Lots 'n Lots to the RNC, something like $175,000.
It's just pathetic. People like Keating and the Wylys throw money at politicians, they like Conservatives more than Liberals, but they're remarkably bipartisan in their bribing. If the Keating 5 scandal has any lesson to teach us it's this: crooks like the Wylys and Keating and Saban and all the rest of 'em know politicians are always on the take, always trying to game the system, always ready to do a big favor for a big donor. Bribing a politician is the best value for money in the history of investing.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )/churchlady
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )While I don't think it's worthwhile to make a big play about the Keating 5 thing -- voters have short statute of limitations on this sort of thing, it strikes me as an odd and dangerous play to bring up John Glenn as a defense.
How would McCain possibly play that? "Why are you dragging John Glenn's name through the mud?! He was part of the Keating 5 too!"
To which the response is -- "We didn't mention John Glenn. You did. Why are you dragging his name through the mud."
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .about Glenn were virtually identical to those regarding McCain, to cast aspersions about McCain regarding Keating is to cast them against Glenn. Your scenario would be like claiming "well, I'm not saying anything bad about *Chang* Bunker--but that guy Eng Bunker was a real SOB"--and the Republicans won't let the media or the Democrats get away with that.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But that's the trick, just like you said -- in order to make the line of defense work the Republicans will have to be the ones who drag John Glenn into it.
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .someone says "the Senate Ethics panel cleared McCain and Glenn of any wrongdoing." After that, the accuser will have to go into specifics--which favor McCain--or explain why one exonerated Senator should be viewed differently than another.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"Someone" doesn't say anything -- a specific person says something, be that Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or a McCain campign aide.
If it's one of the first two, nobody bothers replying.
If it's a campaign aide, then a Glenn aide or relative says "why is the McCain campaign sliming me to protect themselves?"
That's why it strikes me as a self-destructive line of defense.
Far better to simply say: "The Senate Ethics panel cleared McCain of any wrongdoing, McCain has admitted to his errors in judgment, and done substantial work since then in campaign finance reform."
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .is it sliming someone to point out that the reviewing authority exonerated them of any wrongdoing? At most, it presents an opportunity for Obama's people to slime McCain and Glenn by denying the validity of the exoneration--one which they would be foolish to exercise.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I withdraw the "sliming" and replacing with "dragging me into this".
Still strikes me as a foolish defense when a safer one is available.
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )...gosh, let's just stop this before it becomes embarrassing. McCain lied, repeatedly. Leaked, and lied about that too. All a matter of public record.
Now, exoneration is simply not a word you can safely use. Please refrain from any such statement. I think McCain came within a hair's-breadth of going to jail. It certainly was obstruction of justice, of that there is not a shadow of a doubt. The Senate did not exonerate him. It put two words into the record, which might as well be engraved on his goddamn tombstone. Poor Judgment.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Alan Cranston: severely reprimanded, did not run for re-election in 1992
Don Riegle and Dennis DeConcini: criticized for acting improperly, did not run for re-election in 1994
John McCain and John Glenn: cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment. Both ran for re-election in 1992 and won.
Looks like exoneration to me--both by the Ethics Committee and the electorate. As for "poor judgment," he's had twenty years to improve it--and the Keating scandal wouldn't be where I'd be looking for proof that it hasn't (the Democrats might look rather hypocritical in pointing out that pushing campaign finance reform and immigration amnesty aren't signs of great judgment, though).
As for the "I think he almost went to jail" riff, spare me. You've got nothing.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )protecting one or two of their own. The cost for Glenn being McCain. Both had historic hero bonifides... It was in each parties interests to drop the case. I also bet justice viewed it that way. If we were privy to the real inside baseball stuff Scott we would both more than likely want to puke. As for the attacks on McCain being an attack on Glenn. I don't see the defence being a good one. All that has to be done is put out "cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment." Now maybe his answer is Campaign finance etc. It might be spun into a positive or it might not.
--Ask courageous questions. Do not be satisfied with superficial answers. Be open to wonder and at the same time subject all claims to knowledge, without exception, to intense skeptical scrutiny. Be aware of human fallibility. Cherish your species and your
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )And the obstruction of justice for two years, and the pathetic apologies and the rest of it.
Quit while you're still ahead.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The Democrats dragged McCain into the investigation because they couldn't have it being a "Democratic only" scandal, and to do it they dragged one of this country's greatest heroes through the mud with him. After they had finished off the true figures in the scandal, they had to justify involving McCain and Glenn, so they issued the meaningless chiding about "poor judgment." The voters saw the flimsy language for what it was, and re-elected McCain and Glenn without hesitation, while Cranston, DeConcini, and Riegle retired in disgrace.
Quoting the wiki again:
The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in the scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped.[15] He was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."[18]
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[16][15] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf.[6] The report also said that McCain's "actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate."[12] On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do."[6]
Several accounts of the controversy contend that McCain was included in the investigation primarily so that there would be at least one Republican target.[19][20][21][8] Glenn's inclusion in the investigation has been attributed to Republicans who were angered by the inclusion of McCain, as well as committee members who thought that dropping Glenn (and McCain) would make it look bad for the remaining three Democratic Senators.[19][21] Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, "that there was no evidence against him."[20] The Vice Chairman of the Ethics Committee, Senator Warren Rudman of New Hampshire, agreed with Bennett, but the Chairman, Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama, did not agree.[8]
Regardless of the level of their involvement, both senators were greatly affected by it. McCain would write in 2002 that attending the two April 1987 meetings was "the worst mistake of my life".[22] Glenn has described the Senate Ethics Committee investigation as the low point of his life.[5]
[bolding mine]
McCain has been harder on himself than the Senate Ethics panel ever contemplated being--he was understandably embarrassed by the whole thing.
Of course, if you want to keep flogging this along with the "McCain sold out to his captors" riff, I've got no problem with it--it certainly won't lose McCain any votes.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That section in italics is a quote from the wiki on the scandal, which is linked upthread and has footnotes.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Reading problem on my side.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )if a democrat met with regulators to try to influence a decision would you be so sympathetic?
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You *did* read the rest of the comments upthread, right? Not to mention the italicized quote from the wiki?
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )a democrat involved in a situation that didn't also include the current republican nominee for president. A democrat that hasn't been retired for ten years or a hero for other reasons.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .is that I was alive, an adult, and paying attention to what was going on during that scandal. McCain was a freshman Senator who was only known to me because he took over Barry Goldwater's seat, and John Glenn was John Glenn. It was obvious from listening to the news accounts that McCain and Glenn had been dragged into the matter to provide cover for the Democrats in general and the specifically guilty Democrats in particular, and the final disposition of the matter by the Senate Ethics Committee vindicated that belief. The fact that Glenn was a national hero and a loyal Democratic party man made the Democratic Party's willingness to allow his reputation to be trashed for CYA purposes all the more despicable, but I would have defended any other Democrat dragged in under similar circumstances. . .why wouldn't I? Even looking at it from a partisan angle, there were plenty of actually guilty Democrats involved without dragging in innocent ones.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I have a hard time believing that you'd extend the same (or any) sympathy to any democrat with even a hint of a scandal to their name. Call me cynical, but your current bet hasn't erased my memory.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You can make it a personal issue if you like, but the fact remains--McCain and Glenn were cleared of wrongdoing by the ethics panel, and it was widely believed at the time that McCain was dragged into the investigation because of the need of the Democratic majority to make it a bipartisan scandal--with the reputation of John Glenn being besmirched as part of the cost. Trying to resurrect the scandal now to harm McCain without acknowledging that would be dishonest, and there will be instant pushback if it is attempted in the campaign by Obama's people.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )...that McCain was likely the least guilty of the Keating Five. I'd forgotten just how guilty Cranston was in that whole mess. All I recall of that time is how mad I was that so little jail time was served.
--Me: We! -- Ali
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Maybe, Blaise, the reason why it hasn't been brought up a lot (actually, from what I can recall of the primary coverage, the Keating imbroglio was mentioned in connection with John McCain - albeit usually in passing) is not so much the involvement of Democrats (none of whome, I believe, were re-elected) - but because:
a) it is yesterday's news (scandal or no)
b) Sen. McCain made, IIRC, one of his much-heralded and (now) much-lauded public "apologies" for his involvement in the affair*, and so "burying" the issue. He hoped.
* or regret at being caught - who knows? Or cares- it's politics!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )like white on rice. Of course, Rove's main line of attack on McCain would be to suggest he broke and/or cooperated with his Hanoi captors, that he was actually treated well & got on famously with those badguys, etc. Make his strength his greatest weakness, however many lies and disgusting insinuations it takes.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The MLK holiday thing was the main botch of that clip. My guess is that much of America doesn't realize he voted against it, and the Obama camp cannot make a big deal of it (and still can't make a big deal about it).
But now McCain's going to have to go through a news cycle first explaining the mistake, then explaining his earlier opposition -- and thereby raising awareness of the issue.
--Steven Palmer Peterson
- Login or register to post comments
)He voted against the federal holiday and opposed the state holiday for years before changing his mind and supporting it.
--More Wagster!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )