Posted on 02/28/2008 7:50:05 AM PST by Checkers
WASHINGTON - Certain kinds of conservatives, distrusting Richard Nixon's ideological elasticity, rejected him -- until 1973. Although it had become clear his administration was a crime wave, they embraced him because the media were his tormentors. Today such conservatives, whose political compasses are controlled, albeit negatively, by The New York Times, have embraced John McCain. He, although no stickler about social niceties (see below), should thank the Times, for two reasons.
First, the Times muddied, with unsubstantiated sexual innuendo about a female lobbyist, a story about McCain's flights on jets owned by corporations with business before the Senate Commerce Committee, and his meeting with a broadcaster (McCain at first denied it happened; the broadcaster insists it did, and McCain now agrees) who sought and received McCain's help in pressuring the Federal Communications Commission. Perhaps McCain did nothing corrupt, but he promiscuously accuses others of corruption, or the "appearance" thereof. And he insists that the appearance of corruption justifies laws criminalizing political behavior -- e.g., broadcasting an electioneering communication that "refers to" a federal candidate during the McCain-Feingold blackout period close to an election.
McCain should thank the Times also because its semi-steamy story distracted attention from an unsavory story about McCain's dexterity in gaming the system for taxpayer financing of campaigns. Last summer, when his mismanagement of his campaign left it destitute, he applied for public funding, which entails spending limits. He seemed to promise to use taxpayer dollars as partial collateral for a bank loan.
There are two ways for a candidate to get on Ohio's primary ballot -- comply with complex, expensive rules for gathering signatures, or simply be certified to receive taxpayer funding. McCain's major Republican rivals did the former. He did the latter.
Democrats, whose attachment to campaign reforms is as episodic as McCain's, argue
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
He sees the McCain I see.
My column, just posted, is about the second hatchet job this week by the Times against McCain. Mind you, I am NOT making the brief that McCain is a "conservative" or a good guy generally. I AM making the brief that the Times is a journalistic disaster, and both readers and other press people should stop believing what it prints about politics.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "The NY Times' Latest Hatchet Job on McCain"
Yep. He is pretty much spot on here.
McCain’s biggest weakness as a candidate is that the mainstream media will fully expose his hypocrisy and self righteousness after 8 years of overlooking it.
Obama will continue to game the system against McCain, but McCain will look like a fool for brining attention to this as he subverts his own stupid campaign finance law.
He totally lucked out that the Times threw a turd in the punch bowl with their anecdote about the possibility of an appearance of an affair. If you take away the Times’ braindead, unprofessional, hack journalism that struggled to get the word “affair” into the story, then they’d have had a real story. The Times took a real story about McCain’s hypocrisy and lobbyist ties, and turned it into a story about the Times’ own pathetic standards of journalism, thereby inoculating McCain somewhat from the legitimate charge of the story.
Me, too.
From the Will editorial:
“When Smith chaired the Federal Election Commission, he voiced skepticism about the wisdom and constitutionality of aspects of McCain-Feingold’s campaign regulations. McCain responded characteristically, impugning Smith’s character. When, at a 2004 Senate hearing, Smith nevertheless extended his hand to McCain, McCain refused to shake it.”
I remember reading about this at the time.
Inside baseball blog on campaign financing. Remember, (1)McCain had his campaign pay for airplane trips; (2)He has financed a bare bones campaign as best he could and won; (3)And, something most, including Will, never mention—you are guaranteed the right to lobby your congress person by the constitution.
McCain hatred has reached new heights. Ranging from disgruntled Duncan supporters to disgruntled Romney supporters. Both types forget that one wins over and influences people with a positive approach; trashing someone does not endear you to anyone. They also forget that the first rule of politics is, if you want to be a player you need to support the person who won in your party regardless of who you preferred.
McCain has his personal and professional shortcomings. But after 50 years of government service if this is all Will and the McCain bashers can come up with, they are the ones going to the trash can, not McCain.
I'd call it more than "disturbing" and there isn't much righteous about it. And I don't believe it is limited to "appearances."
It’s about “character”.
ping
ping
That is an interesting and bizarre quirk in Ohio election law. I guess the idea is that if you have collected all the information necessary to qualify for federal funding, you are a valid candidate.
Note that you can get certified for funding without taking the funding, so the objection here is moot. The only issue is whether McCain's loan is based on his currently being signed up to get the money.
Technically, it is not. The loan uses the fact that he was ABLE to qualify, by promising to be sure to sign up again if other contributions aren't sufficient.
So what he really did was use the EXISTANCE of the matching program, and his ability to get certified once, as backing for his loan. Since his ability to get certified is independent of his actually participating in the program, he would probably get away with it.
So that is how he got on the ballot. I knew the Giuliani, Thompson, Romney, Huckabee & Paul volunteers were gathering signatures in Ohio but I never met a McCain one. Now I know why.
Spot on analysis. What mattered to the bank was his ability to get the matching funds should he need them to repay the loan. However, so long as he has some other means to repay it, the bank doesn't give a rat's a$$ as to whether he took the funds or not.
George Will obviously doesn't have a very good understanding of finance.
“McCain in A Glass House”
Shards everywhere.
The Times can eat the creep alive; pass the popcorn.
No wonder McCain says Hillary would make a good prez. They are two peas in a (corrupt and power mad) pod. If this is the best our two largest parties can do as far as candidates, let’s just draw names out of the phone book. Almost anyone has more character than these two.
Maybe George Will should run: he at least puts country and honor above party or politics. He may be the most cogent voice of the right now that Buckley is dead.
Bttt!
McCain “a situational ethicist”
Why not just call him a phony.
Yep.
Most of his supporters have political glass jaws from what I’m seeing today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.