Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

February 22, 2008
By: Kevin Drum

THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO "HMMM"....Normally, John McCain can't talk to the press often enough. Michael Scherer reports that on Thursday that suddenly changed:

In the wake of a scandalous New York Times story suggesting a romantic fling with a lobbyist, McCain arrived at a Ford Focus car assembly plant with a decidedly tense grin plastered across his face. His campaign staff promptly separated anyone with a pen or a tape recorder from the candidate. "The McCain campaign decided who they wanted on the tour, and it's only photographers," a nice lady from Ford announced after a reporter spotted the candidate behind a car chassis and tried to approach him.

....At the end of the day, McCain boarded the plane with his wife, his staff, and his daughter, Meghan, who trailed an entourage of friends, bound for Indianapolis. On another night, he would have sauntered to the back to chew the fat with reporters. But on this night, he only came half-way down the aisle, keeping a safe distance. "Everybody happy?" he called out. "Fun day. Fun day." McCains eyebrows bounced up and down to signal his sarcasm.

His question, of course, was rhetorical. He didn't want to hear anything more. Before anyone could answer he had wheeled around and gone back to his seat, beyond the reach of reporters and their notebooks for just a while longer.

Look, there's no two ways about it it: this is very weird behavior. If there were really no story here, McCain wouldn't be avoiding reporters. He'd be yukking it up and insisting to a sympathetic press corps that he was the subject of a comically thin hit job from the Times. Instead he's acting almost like a caricature of a guilty man. What's going on here?

Kevin Drum 11:51 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (74)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Where there's smoke and a man sarcastically arching his eyebrows, there's fire.

Posted by: LHB on February 22, 2008 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK

I just think it's hilarious watching all the cons freak out criticizing the "liberal" newspaper that took an insignificant Whitewater story and ran it on the front page for more than years.

Posted by: Joshua Norton on February 22, 2008 at 11:57 AM | PERMALINK

Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Vicki Iseman.

Posted by: humanfaculties on February 22, 2008 at 11:57 AM | PERMALINK

So could she be his Iseman trophy wife? Oh the pain!! Sorry about that.

Posted by: Joshua Norton on February 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM | PERMALINK

Don't know if I agree with your police work there, Lou.

McCain is notorious for holding grudges. He's probably pissed off that the press isn't giving him the standard kid gloves treatment.

Posted by: Joe on February 22, 2008 at 11:59 AM | PERMALINK

Sorry - that should have been "more than 2 years".

Posted by: Joshua Norton on February 22, 2008 at 11:59 AM | PERMALINK

What's going on here?

Well, I'm no expert, but from the looks of it I'd say that Maverick McStraigtShooter just got busted for being in bed with a lobbyist.

But that's just a guess.

Posted by: Brautigan on February 22, 2008 at 11:59 AM | PERMALINK

Definitely that's "kill the story" behavior. Don't feed it in any way with new quotes or whatever. It doesn't matter whether the quotes help him or hurt him, it puts them in the news another day.

Though, it's also the case that are questions he doesn't have a good answer to. And there are maybe reporters on that bus that remember things. Thinks like, how close she stood to him, or how they would look together in public. Things that you couldn't print and stay respectable. But things that he doesn't want to answer questions about on that bus.

Posted by: Doctor Jay on February 22, 2008 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin Drum >"...What's going on here?"

Maybe he`s afraid of what will come out if people keep digging.

So keep digging please.

"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept." - Ansel Adams

Posted by: daCascadian on February 22, 2008 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK

People are saying this is a lobbyist issue. That McCain is a hypocrite in his dealings with lobbists.

But I think this scandle highlights his cheating on his wives.. and that is something he really doesnt want to talk about in the general election when up against a guy like Obama. The way he cheated and dumped his first wife after she was loyal to him while he was in prison in vietnam is shameful. Being accused of cheating on his current wife brings this up again.


Posted by: winterbear on February 22, 2008 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

He's known about the NYT's story since December. All in all, the NYT's piece was pretty weak.

Couple that with his nondenial denial from yesterday.

Seems to me that he doesn't want to trip up and raise more questions about lobbyist-lap-gate and is waiting for it to fall out of the news cycle.

At the same time, I think he still wants to cultivate his press friends... since they are the only reason he has gotten this far. (Somehow they made his 4th place finish in Iowa a 'comeback'.)

Posted by: sdh on February 22, 2008 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

May be he knows that he has the Presidency locked up, what with Hillary imploding, and Obama, the Dem nominee, bound to repeat history -- if not like Dukakis or McGovern, but definiteley like Mondale or Kerry-- in November.

St. McCain may be just acting Presidential.

You can never lose if you bet that Democrats will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Posted by: gregor on February 22, 2008 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK

McCain's history suggests this behavior will last two days, maybe three. He and his campaign staff haven't worked out how to handle the lobbyist issue, and (especially) the FEC issue. When they do, he'll be back with the press, his best source of free advertising.

McCain has faced questions about his associations before -- and really, up to now the difference between him and all other politicians at his level is that he's attacked the role of money in politics and the influence of special interests, and they haven't. Now, of course, there is another difference, in that a lot more people are paying attention. There is a lot more riding on how he handles these stories now.

I have no inside information. If there really is "fire" here -- improper favors done for lobbyists and campaign contributors, inappropriate personal conduct -- then McCain is in real trouble, and this would certainly account for his wanting to keep the press at a distance now. Hard evidence, however, is lacking at this point, as Kevin observed yesterday.

Posted by: Zathras on February 22, 2008 at 12:07 PM | PERMALINK

It's another way of saying he did not have sex, er, lobbying with that woman. Srsly!

Posted by: David W. on February 22, 2008 at 12:09 PM | PERMALINK

It's time to put the NYT on trial.

Of course, McCain can't do that himself, being above gutter politics and all.

Posted by: Horatio Parker on February 22, 2008 at 12:10 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin: "What's going on here?"

McCain: "Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies."

Posted by: sheerahkahn on February 22, 2008 at 12:11 PM | PERMALINK

I am a great judge of character and liars, if I do say so myself :)
And his behavior just screams "guilty!" No doubt about that. What he's guilty of is another matter yet since MSNBC and CNN said yesterday morning that they were expecting another statement/presser any minute now from Iseman and nothing came forward it sounds like they "got" to her.

If I were accused of flirting for favors with an old geezer on the front page of the Times (basically being called a whore) you better believe I'd hold my own presser and shoot down the story. But she didn't do that. The silence is deafening.

Posted by: valletta on February 22, 2008 at 12:11 PM | PERMALINK

To hell with McCain.
T-bogg got a Mac.
Kevin, you're next.

Posted by: neil Buckiley on February 22, 2008 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, I'm sure if you were a victim of a false allegation of adultery, you would just LOVe to deny the smear over and over again in front of a biased media. *snicker*

Posted by: Al on February 22, 2008 at 12:15 PM | PERMALINK

If Kevin gets a Mac we'll know that the Apocalypse is nigh.

All those reporters whose undying man-love for McCain has been fed by years of "straight talk" one-on-ones may start feeling jilted if he keeps this up. And as they say, Hell hath no fury...

Posted by: jimBOB on February 22, 2008 at 12:24 PM | PERMALINK

McCain's always struck me as a guy uncomfortable with the media and the spotlight. He receives a question from a reporter, and he immediately takes umbrage at the question.

Posted by: Quinn on February 22, 2008 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK

Four years of this jerk would make us long for the "good old days of George Bush, honest man".

McCain is a huge liar. Straight talk! What a laff riot!!! He was against torture before he was for it, which he was last Tues, when he voted to allow the CIA to continue to torture.

Posted by: POed Lib on February 22, 2008 at 12:29 PM | PERMALINK

This behavior could also be explained by McCain's anger management problem. He's renowned for being a complete hothead. His campaign may be eager to keep him away from media scrutiny because he doesn't want to be caught yelling and screaming obscenities on tape.

Posted by: b on February 22, 2008 at 12:29 PM | PERMALINK

McCain is starting to face the same problem Bob Dole faced: Republicans do well in Presidential campaigns running as Washington outsiders. How does he sell himself as an outsider when he has spent much of his adult life in Washington, apparently "in bed" with lobbyists?

Posted by: coldhotel on February 22, 2008 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

If the press had any integrity at all in this country, its members would give McCain the silent treatment and continue investigating the legislative favors/influence he peddled for his lobbyist whore.

Please, spare me the lame excuses..he's guilty as hell of the same corruption he claims to be above.

Posted by: getaclue on February 22, 2008 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

I disagree, Quinn. McCain has had a cozy relationship with the media, he has a quick temper, and now that there is semi-legit criticism, he is sulking. That, or he has been humping a lobbyist.

Posted by: Lux on February 22, 2008 at 12:31 PM | PERMALINK

What's going on, I think, with the "very weird" behavior is that McCain knows the gig is up on the issue of his character.

He has mocked and quipped his way into the hearts of journos, believing they are nearly as cynical as he is. Not quite, but nearly, and it's all a frickin' game and we're all in on the joke. Hah hah hah, let me get on this private Paxson plane. I'm bulletproof. Hah. heh. hm.

There's a really, really good biography to be written about a reckless young naval aviator become bitter old veteran and senator, angry about the Naval Academy, about having to live in the shadows of his father and grandfather, angry about civilian commanders telling him what he could and could not bomb, in a rage over the five years lying on a concrete slab in Hanoi (when he wasn't being tortured). I suspect he spent those five years largely plotting his revenge on the world.

Why hasn't anyone written this book?

The "very weird" behavior, in short, is rooted in the damage wrought by McCain's defining life experience, his captivity during a misbegotten war that the US lost, the willingness of civilians ashamed in the shadow of that war to suspend their legitimate misgivings about his recklessness, his inability to learn from his mistakes, and his plutotropic core principles.

Posted by: paxr55 on February 22, 2008 at 12:34 PM | PERMALINK

1. He's guilty.
2. He's pissed off that he got caught.
3. He's waiting for another big shoe to drop.
4. Cindy kicked him out of bed.

Posted by: dalloway on February 22, 2008 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

Where are the photos/videos? One would expect our intrepid news sources to be flipping through their 10 year old databases for McCain/Iseman evidence at this very moment.

So far, McCain is getting a media pass if he is in fact guilty. And he is getting the normal crap accorded an expensive haircut if he were a Democrat.

Posted by: Nat on February 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM | PERMALINK

The quid pro quos are more important than any fluid exchange. The reason to concentrate on the sex is to try and induce a 'Muskie Momment' from old Saint John.

(Wonder if any of her swift-boat loving clients ever talk to team Huck?)

The whole thing is, of course, ridiculous. John would never fall for her, she doesn't have enough money...

Posted by: wmcq on February 22, 2008 at 12:37 PM | PERMALINK

This post by Drum is as stupid as the smear piece itself. It must be so miserable to be liberal, looking for a boogie man conspiracy behind every door.

"Look, there's no two ways about it it: this is very weird behavior. If there were really no story here, McCain wouldn't be avoiding reporters."

Didn't he just do a two hour press conference with the media in which he answered every single one of their questions? Maybe, just maybe, he's sick of talking about this nonsensical story? His campaign team did a brilliant job of dressing down the NYT, and exposing this for the silly hit piece it was. What else is there to say?

It's time you realized that the NYT is a shitrag, borderline tabloid paper that serves the interest of a few limousine liberals on the upper east side. It's no longer the paper of record, at least for anyone with any sense or education.


Posted by: JBJB on February 22, 2008 at 12:38 PM | PERMALINK

Not sure I agree with your police work either, Kev (and thanks for the highly apt Fargo reference Joe). I think any campaign at this advanced stage of the game is going to go into lock-down when a story like this is floating out there, irrespective of the candidate's culpability. Either way they are going to want to exercise maximum message discipline, because there are very few right things and very very many wrong things you can say during a media feeding frenzy like this.

Posted by: DrBB on February 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

CNN said yesterday morning that they were expecting another statement/presser any minute now from Iseman and nothing came forward it sounds like they "got" to her.
Posted by: valletta

If she is a lobstitute, she might have a rolodex that goes beyond McCain. Discretion is the better part of prostilobbery.

Posted by: sjrsm on February 22, 2008 at 12:45 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin wrote: "Instead he's acting almost like a caricature of a guilty man. What's going on here?"

What's going on is that McCain realizes that his fake, phony pose as a "straight shooter" and scourge of the "special interests" has been completely and permanently blown, and that he has been revealed as the bought-and-paid-for tool of corporate lobbyists that he is.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 22, 2008 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

Wait Kevin,

Didn't you just declare yesterday that there was no story? I'm confused. Why are you posting so much about this story?

Are your instincts telling you there is something while your mind is telling you there isn't?

Posted by: mirror on February 22, 2008 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

This post by is as stupid as the smear piece itself. It must be so miserable to be , looking for a boogie man conspiracy behind every door.

It's time you realized that is a shitrag, borderline tabloid that serves the interest of a few limousine liberals on the upper east side.

Posted by: Lux on February 22, 2008 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

Seems to me that he was pissed off, and flipped off the press.

Posted by: Boorring on February 22, 2008 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

There's a really, really good biography to be written about a reckless young naval aviator become bitter old veteran and senator, angry about the Naval Academy, about having to live in the shadows of his father and grandfather, angry about civilian commanders telling him what he could and could not bomb, in a rage over the five years lying on a concrete slab in Hanoi (when he wasn't being tortured). I suspect he spent those five years largely plotting his revenge on the world.

Why hasn't anyone written this book? Posted by: paxr55

I think mainly because McCain has been pretty much a non-starter as a politician from a state with no electoral or economic clout. He's no intellectual, not a good public speaker, and has proven since the 2000 presidential campaign to be pretty much a lick-spittle toady to the Bush clan (endorsing Bush in 2000 and 2004 and rolling over on torture).

His two claims to fame are having been a POW in a war most Americans have already forgotten, and co-sponsoring McCain-Feingold, which hasn't done dick to clean up the money problems in politics, while all the while being just as cosy as anyone else in congress with lobbyists. In short, he's a hypocritical politician of the worst stripe.

McCain's had way more than his 15-minutes of fame and like Dole, he'll fade into the past after November.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 22, 2008 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

Earth to trolls. It's time to reel yourselves in from your alternate reality. You don't like the story and maybe the implications of sexual pecadillos by McCain don't sit well with you but the lobbygate part just won't go away.

Posted by: Gandalf on February 22, 2008 at 1:02 PM | PERMALINK

Paxr, great takedown on McCain's history and psychology. His dad/grandpa are in the history books as the only pair of four-stars in Navy history. Interesting he didn't stay in too long after Vietnam.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on February 22, 2008 at 1:06 PM | PERMALINK

Two days of innuendo, and not one person has asked if "The Iseman Cometh." Get with the program, people...

Posted by: thersites on February 22, 2008 at 1:06 PM | PERMALINK

But seriously, the woman should buy a Mac.
Oh, wait...

Posted by: thersites on February 22, 2008 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

'what's going on here'?

easy. he's guilty as charged. and will avoid schmoozing until it's clear that his his base of yammering marionettes have beaten these charges back into hiding.

joescar, mike, tweety, tucker, barnicle -- all working their angles of that damned, dirty liberal new york times out to smear their st john the tortured's reputation. sadly, i suspect they will prevail.

Posted by: linda on February 22, 2008 at 1:08 PM | PERMALINK

lux - I think McCain's been comfortable with the media when he's being the maverick Republican, i.e. comparing himself to Bush. Now he's in the spotlight and people are looking at him as the party figurehead. The "warts" are a lot more evident.

Posted by: Quinn on February 22, 2008 at 1:25 PM | PERMALINK

His good friend and protégé, Rick Renzi was indicted today. That has to be a bummer.

Posted by: Mike on February 22, 2008 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

Poor McCain his aides outed him and its the NYT fault.

Wahhhh.

Posted by: Jet on February 22, 2008 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

McCain's pissed because he got caught with his metaphorical pants around his ankles, whilst in bed with lobbyists.

Not exactly a position that generates, uhm, pride.

Posted by: brat on February 22, 2008 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

Straight-talk man is a lot of jive.

So, straight talker is in bed with the lobbyists-possibly also in bed with a lobbyist. (in this I follow the Dick Cheney Doctrine--if there is a 2% chance of a story being true, then, by God, it is true.)

Not excusing the man, but isn't that the way our system works? When our founders steered the country between monarchy and democracy, didn't they come up with Oligarchy--rule by the rich?

Isn't that what lobbyists facilitate? Middle men, in this case middle women, take money from
a rich corporation and give it to a politician so as to influence his vote.

This is the way it works, no?

ABSCAM Congressman Ozzie Myers famously remarked, “Money talks, bullshit walks.”; it ought to replace “E pluribus unum” on our currency.


Posted by: Dr WU-the last of the big time thinkers on February 22, 2008 at 1:35 PM | PERMALINK

I wouldn't go as far as labeling McCain's conduct as a veiled admission of guilt - although this is always possible. As someone said above, it might just be a tactic to let the story die out. And he might just be reacting - badly, I admit - to the possible reverse of the effect Kevin mentioned on his post yesterday: that, even if not true, this will hurt him even more with the conservative base he so desperately needs to capture in November.

Posted by: Tricolaco on February 22, 2008 at 1:37 PM | PERMALINK

read the New Yorker piece on John McCain's relationship with the press on the campaign trail and you will note that his withdrawal from the press is very unusual.

Posted by: Neal on February 22, 2008 at 1:40 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin asked: "What's going on here?"

Here is what's going on here:

At a town hall meeting in New Hampshire last November, McCain said:

"Everybody says that they’re against the special interests. I’m the only one the special interests don’t give any money to."

What's going on is that McCain is a liar. As reported on the Think Progress website:

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, McCain has taken nearly $1.2 million in campaign contributions from the telephone utility and telecom service industries, more than any other Senator. McCain sides with the telecom companies on retroactive immunity.

McCain is also the single largest recipient of campaign contributions by Ion Media Networks — formerly Paxson Communication — receiving $36,000 from the company and employees from 1997 to mid-year 2006.

Vicki Iseman has represented Paxson since 1998, longer than any of her other clients. The Washington Post reports that Iseman’s clients have given nearly $85,000 to McCain campaigns since 2000, according to records at the Federal Election Commission.

All told, McCain has received more than $400,000 from lobbying firms, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. And among his major fundraisers (”bundlers”) 59 have been identified as lobbyists by the non-profit organization Public Citizen.

McCain is a blatant liar and a fraud. He proclaims that he is "the only one the special interests don’t give any money to" when in reality he is one of the top recipients of "special interest" (ie. corporate) money, a man whose policy and legislative positions are up for sale to the highest bidder.

Meanwhile, "sensible liberals" like Kevin write that "If McCain didn't have an affair, there's no story ... the rest of the story about the Paxson lobbying is mildly interesting, but we all know perfectly well that no one really cares about it."

Rumors of a sex scandal? Now there's a story.

Incontrovertible evidence of corruption and blatant lying to the American people? Nothing interesting about that. Move along now, nothing to see here.

That's how Democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on February 22, 2008 at 1:43 PM | PERMALINK

"You can never lose if you bet that the democrats will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory"

Go for it dude!!!! Bet the ranch and everything you can hock on the republicans this year. I'm sure someplace in Las Vegas will give you some very favorable odds.

Posted by: James G on February 22, 2008 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

(1) The Editors call her Vickie Isengard, which cracks me up every time I think of it.

(2) Kevin would've switched to a Mac years ago (in blog years) if you guys didn't harass him about it and put his back up.

Posted by: Emma Anne on February 22, 2008 at 2:41 PM | PERMALINK

"His campaign did a brilliant job of dressing down the NYT and exposing this for the silly hit job it was. What else more is there to say?"

How about "No representitave of Paxson or Alcade & Faye personally asked Senator McCain to send a letter to the FCC." - this quote is from the point-by-point denial issued by the McCain campaign. But in a lawsuit deposition in 2002 McCain said "I was contacted by Mr. Paxson on this issue. He wanted their approval very bad for purposes of his business" Somebody's lying. Is it McCain or his campaign and is there a difference?

Posted by: James G on February 22, 2008 at 2:41 PM | PERMALINK

Joshua Norton,

So could she be his Iseman trophy wife? Oh the pain!! Sorry about that.

Since you can earn the "Iseman" trophy by scoring or completing a lot of passes to a wide receiver or tight end, well, say no more.

Posted by: Tripp on February 22, 2008 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

Tripp: Joshua Norton,

So could she be his Iseman trophy wife? Oh the pain!! Sorry about that.

Since you can earn the "Iseman" trophy by scoring or completing a lot of passes to a wide receiver or tight end, well, say no more.

Well done!!

Posted by: Lucy on February 22, 2008 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

If he's avoiding the press because he's no good at lying, that's kind of refreshing, in a weird way.

Posted by: ferd on February 22, 2008 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK

Emma Anne: Kevin would've switched to a Mac years ago (in blog years) if you guys didn't harass him about it and put his back up.

Yeah, if people didn't fail to constantly stroke Kevin in his opinions about computer and political platforms, he'd be a Mac user and a progressive now. I trust you've all learned a little something today?

Tripp! You dirty dog! Rowf!

Posted by: shortstop on February 22, 2008 at 3:37 PM | PERMALINK

slrjm:

"lobstitute" I hadn't heard that one before.

Posted by: mirror on February 22, 2008 at 3:51 PM | PERMALINK

"lobstitute"

Hey, what I do on vacation in Maine is my own business!

Posted by: thersites on February 22, 2008 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK

Since you can earn the "Iseman" trophy by scoring or completing a lot of passes to a wide receiver or tight end, well, say no more. Posted by: Tripp

Tripp,

"Wide receiver"? Is that just more Rethug code about being on the down low like "wide stance"?

Posted by: Jeff II on February 22, 2008 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

"lobstitute" I hadn't heard that one before.
Posted by: mirror

Yea, I was kind of proud of that one.

Posted by: sjrsm on February 22, 2008 at 4:31 PM | PERMALINK

Yea, I was kind of proud of that one.
Posted by: sjrsm

In fact, for the first time in my adult life...

Heh. It's Friday.

Posted by: sjrsm on February 22, 2008 at 4:32 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II,

I dunno but when I yahooed "down low" I was amazed to find a CDC FAQ titled "Men on the down low."

Holy oleo! My tax dollars at work. Right on!

Posted by: Tripp on February 22, 2008 at 4:33 PM | PERMALINK

sjrsm,

"Lobstitute" is a good one.

Before I knew what it meant I was getting hungry and thought it had something to do with a fake lobster.

Posted by: Tripp on February 22, 2008 at 4:37 PM | PERMALINK

Well, I'm waiting for the press to start parading around a stained dress, and showing off a box of cigars as evidence...oh wait...who we talking about again?
I'll never figure out why any self-respecting woman would want to sleep with a Republican tool who would sell his soul so cheaply.
McCain, you're a disappointment, go now, back to Arizona, and bury your head, and our memories of you in the sand.

Posted by: sheerahkahn on February 22, 2008 at 4:38 PM | PERMALINK
If he's avoiding the press because he's no good at lying

I think he's just avoiding them because they've stopped the bizarre irrational fawning behavior they've engaged in toward him for years, which is the whole reason he was so cozy with them before.

McCain is, manifestly, fairly successful at lying, especially to and through the press.

Posted by: cmdicely on February 22, 2008 at 4:44 PM | PERMALINK

Before I knew what it meant I was getting hungry and thought it had something to do with a fake lobster.
Posted by: Tripp

Yea, I tried "prostilob" or "lobbytute" but they just didn't have the same rhythm. My second place in the voting among the voices in my head was "lob-a-whore".

Posted by: sjrsm on February 22, 2008 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

I think he's just avoiding them because they've stopped the bizarre irrational fawning behavior they've engaged in toward him for years, which is the whole reason he was so cozy with them before.

And I imagine he's pretty steamed (mmmm, steamed lobstitute with drawn butter) about the kid-gloves treatment he'd come to feel entitled to being yanked away. As his frustration grows, perhaps we will be treated to one of those patented McCain eruptions. (Not that kind of eruption, Tripp!)

Posted by: shortstop on February 22, 2008 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

he's trying to hide because he is terrified that the record of his adulterous ways during his first marriage will begin to surface. and after that history begins to float, then his actual voting record may be unearthed for the electorate.

and then, someone might think to read An Enormous Crime: The Definitive Account of American POW's Abandoned in Southeast Asia. and might learn that Senator McCain was one of the principals in the erasure of that record. learning all of that, the electorate may finally begin to notice that john has always been a monstrous jerk.

Posted by: albertchampion on February 22, 2008 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

"The way he cheated and dumped his first wife after she was loyal to him while he was in prison in vietnam is shameful."

Yeah, I always wondered why he didn't get any flack for that. Also dumped his wife for a RICH one, too, who has apparently funded his politics and his lifestyle ever since.

Republicrats, compare and contrast: dumping a wife who stood by for years while you were a prisoner of war v. dumping a wife while she's in the hospital with cancer. Which is worse?

Are Lux and JBJB the same person, or do they just get their opinions from the same wingnut website?

""No representitave of Paxson or Alcade & Faye personally asked Senator McCain to send a letter to the FCC." - ... McCain said "I was contacted by Mr. Paxson on this issue."

Now look. These two statements are NOT contradictory. It was NOT a representative of Paxson who contacted McCain. It was Paxson himself. See?

Posted by: Cal Gal on February 22, 2008 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

"The way he cheated and dumped his first wife after she was loyal to him while he was in prison in vietnam is shameful."
Quoted by: Cal Gal

On his behalf, I'm pretty sure the divorce rate for POWs was abnormally high. Anecdotally, I grew up in VA Beach near a military base, and we had a number of POW families in my neighborhood. The wives all stuck out the war and waited for their husbands, but none of their marriages survived the peace by more than 5-6 years.

A quick google shows this TIMES article from 1975 (kudos to them for putting it on line).

Military records show that as of last October the divorce rate for former P.O.W.s stood at 27%—about twice the normal rate for men of their age group. By now, the percentage has certainly climbed far higher. Recently, the Navy's Center for Prisoner of War Studies published the results of a research project showing that ex-P.O.W.s' marriages break up for many reasons.
Posted by: sjrsm on February 22, 2008 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

I believe we and the press of the past have coddled McCain because of the countrys long lasting guilt over our treatment of Vietnam vets. Witness liberal's defense of him in these past days. Let's be honest. John McCain may have been a genuine war hero, but he has been figuratively in bed with lobbyists since before the Keating days. Just look back at his local home Arizona news coverage over the years. Can we be objective about his history and behavior? Let's be for real ethics in American politics... and "real people.

Posted by: bluejeans64 on February 23, 2008 at 2:26 AM | PERMALINK

Play Backgammon for fun - for free, when ever you feel like it - midday or midnight there are are literally thousands of people playing Backgammon

online backgammon - http://www.nacr.net/ Posted by: online backgammon on March 5, 2008 at 12:17 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly