Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

A Warmonger, Not a Whoremonger

There's something very, very weird about this NYT Lusty McCain and His Busty Lobbyist story. It is not following the proper sequence of Drudge-->Enquirer-->NYPost-->Imus-->NYT "covering the controversy, not the icky insignificant trivial gossip story, heaven forbid".

This will, my guess, rebound to McCain's advantage, both among the Viagara cohort, the "he's too old" arguers, and especially the conservatives who see Liberal Media Persecution everywhere. But personally, I could give two shits. There are enough reasons already out on the table and bragged about--"bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" et tedious cetera--to dislike John McCain serving Huggy Bear Bush's 3rd term.

0
No votes yet

Comments

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

--he's not just St. John the Straight-Talking Maverick Independent--he's virile too...i wonder....

I just posted this in the next thread down--Meanwhile, if the McCain Lobbyist Lover thing gets real traction, watch for Cheney to step down so they can install someone to become the GOP nominee (Romney, Jeb, Condi?) /psychic prediction #455

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Some of us are more sensitive about that than might be appreciated and yes, many of us are still getting some and that is only surprising to the very young.

This is a bit of old news, the sources are in their own words disenchanted ex-staffers, and better for McCain to get it out now rather than later. McCain has the nomination wrapped up so whatever this disturbs it won't be his campaign, not now and not in the general. He skated out of the Keating scandal when he was factually in it up to his neck, this should be no problem.

The MSM will huff and puff for a few days because it might be about sex, drool, slobber, snicker, wink, and then another bright shiny something will come along and they'll all run in that direction. So long as Mrs. McCain hangs tough, he'll be fine.

If anybody comes out of this badly, it appears that it will be the NYT and too bad about that, eh?

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

it was going to hurt him that he was 30+ years older if it's Obama. This is a total plus for McCain but will hurt him with the religious right base.

I know you can have sex til you die--we used to catch my grandparents when they were 80+ (and that was before viagra)

Susie from Philly's picture
Submitted by Susie from Philly on

I think it was placed by some of those Republicans who are so unhappy with McCain as the nominee. As you point out, it just doesn't follow the usual sequence.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Amberglow took my conspiracy theory #1 - this will make McCain look young and virile.

Conspiracy theory #2 - this prefaces some trash on Obama and this was their attempt to fight off charges re that piece by doing this one first.

Non-conspiracy theory - the Times has turned into a panty sniffing tabloid that, with the occasional investigative reporting piece, isn't worth the paper it's printed on and is part of a larger movement by the press to quit writing about actual issues altogether in favor of this celebrity tabloid crap.

Honestly, I don't see much story here. No proof of a sexual relationship. No proof of any quid pro quo or corruption that I see. Sure it seems slightly seedy and raises questions, but that's the lobbyist-politician world. And while I would like to know more about McCain's dealings with lobbyists (of the non-sexual sort), I don't expect to ever get the real scoop. Just like I'm never going to find out what happened at the poker party Obama attended with all those high rollers and whether they "lost" some big bucks to him. These things are done in dark rooms for a reason.

As for the sex angle, in the immortal words of Molly Ivins, my momma may have raised a mean child but she raised no hypocrite. Don't care who Bill Clinton is fucking. Don't care who Hillary Clinton is fucking. Really don't care who John McCain is fucking.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

I suspect that something important is attempting to be hidden, glossed over, or assigned a lower importance level than it deserves?

Of COURSE the important part here is that he was being too accommodating to a lobbyist, not that he was/was not bonking her/him/them*. And look at the areas for which this woman worked (sorry no link; this was from an Atrios thread and I think somebody said later it had already been scrubbed from her firm's website. So FWIW:)

VICKI ISEMAN

Vicki Iseman, Partner, represents corporate and public clients on issues as diverse as government contracting and regulatory reform. Her experience includes representation of clients before Congress, Federal government agencies and local opinion leaders.

She has extensive experience in telecommunications, representing corporations before the House and Senate Commerce Committees. Her work on the landmark 1992 and 1996 communications bills helped secure cable access for broadcast television stations. Her experience in the communications field includes digital television conversion, satellite regulations and telecommunications ownership provisions.

She has been active in grassroots communications campaigns for clients, building community based support for legislative initiatives. Among others, she participated in the "Keep America Moving" campaign that educated community leaders on the allocation of Federal highway trust funds.

In addition, she has consulted for clients who are interested in government contracting opportunities. She has assisted corporations through the authorization and appropriation process. An active fundraiser, she has organized and participated in many political fundraising events.

A native of Pennsylvania, she holds a B.A. degree in Education from Indiana University in Pennsylvania.

Tells me that it's very likely this woman is personally responsible for the fact that I can't get fucking ABC or Fox stations on my satellite dish because the "local affiliates" think I ought to be forced by law to watch them rather than the New York/LA stations the satellite carries, despite the fact that it is physically impossible to pick up their signals where i live.

Assholes.

Ahem. At any rate I must note that when I ever get around to composing a complete list of Xan's Laws, the one about Sentences Starting With "Honestly" will probably be listed as a corellary (sp?) to McCain's Law anyway, since that one reads "Anyone who repeatedly addresses total strangers as 'My friends'...isn't."

(* "them" was going to involve repeating a crude joke relating to the fact that Ms.Iseman bears a striking resemblance to the most recent Mrs. McCain, and something to do with a three-way. But that would, I decided, not only be unseemly, vulgar and crude but deplete the world supply of brain bleach to an alarming degree at a time when the commodity is already in unprecedented demand.)

Submitted by lambert on

I guess a simple Google search will tell me what I need to know....

three-way-flanged-ball-valve-L-port

You mean like this three way flanged ball valve?

Sometimes I don't understand you, Xan. Honestly.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

I had no idea that starting a sentence with the word "honestly" made me some sort of fixer for John McCain. And for the record, it's not my fault you can't get Fox or ABC affiliates on your satellite dish. Honestly, I had nothing to do with it.

I'd be absolutely fucking thrilled if this story turned into something. But all I see is John McCain was cozy with a lobbyist. If I'm missing something, please tell me what it is. Because I do not think simply proving McCain was cozy with a lobbyist eight fucking years ago is some magic key to the kingdom that is going to lead to his downfall or even be a story that lasts past the weekend. Of course he's close to lobbyists, he's a politician and more than that he's a Republican. It would be shocking if he didn't have all kinds of ties to lobbyists.

The only part of this story that might have legs is if it becomes part of a drumbeat that McCain is a phony. But the press has been kneeling before the great McCain for so long, I'll believe that when I see it.

And the sex is the important part of the story. It's both the indictment and defense for McCain - of course he gave her clients special treatment, he was fucking her and in rebuttal, of course he didn't give her clients special treatment, he was just fucking her.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

directed personally at you. It was one of those things where I started out snarking on a common bit of phraseology and sort of twisted in the air as I was thinking while typing and, well, in the end it came out somewhere else entirely.

I blame the lunar eclipse, even though I can't see it. Or else that cat that is lying full weight over top of my right arm and seriously impeding use of that side of the keyboard...

Point I was trying to get at is that the sentence you started out "Honestly" is the angle that the McClangbird people would most like for the story to take: it's a sleazy sex story dammit! and Mr. Straight Cock, er I mean Talk, is way too heroic and Straight...Talking to do anyting like that, although not because he's too old dammit!

The story is his closeness with a telecom lobbyist and what influence she may have had upon the writing and subsequent passage of legislation not in the public interest. Not whether he offered her a position on his staff, as it were.

hope that straightens out matters BD. again, apologies, insult of your esteemed self unintended.

speaking of three-ways though, I have two cats on my (female) lap now. Meaning I have three...um, well, never mind. Karma works in mysterious ways.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

I have the same reaction to "clearly." You're right about both my little tic, in terms of what it often denotes (I just recently picked it up and have been using it way too much), and about how John McCain will seek to defend himself. I have no doubt he was too close to the lobbyist and did the industry's bidding. But perhaps it's because I hold McCain in such low esteem that none of this seems all that scandalous to me.

And I can't see the lunar eclipse either. Crappy rainy weather.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

(starts by spraying disinfectant around the room, waving burning sage for purification. Yes this is a dKos diary (waves sage extra hard, ignites a couple of other herbs just in case) but it's from nyceve, who is THE go-to person on healthcare/insurance abuse and related topics at DK. Now to carry on:)

I noted in the bio of Ms. Iseman above that it was unsourced. Turns out, nyceve has found, that the website of the firm for which she worked, Alcade & Fay (from which the bio evidently came) was first "taken down for maintenance" then disappeared completely.

Pause for cadaverous bwWwwWAAAAAHAHAHAHA! laugh. These people forget at their peril about The Wayback Machine!

From that we get, you guessed it, Alcade & Fay In All Their Original Unscrubbed Glory.

I haven't read it all, gotta get to work, but the diarist and commenters say there are lots of Florida connections. FL politics being reknown for uprightness 'n' purity 'n' such we may all breathe a sigh of relief.

btw catching bits of the morning shows it is clear from the high-pitched-ness of Pat Buchanan's voice that the blastfax has gone out: the issue here is about improper behavior of the NYT, not, we repeat non, improper behavior of St. John of McClackbird. Just so yer clear on this.

Submitted by lambert on

I like the motto on the site, from 2004:

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit."
-Aristotle

Excellent at what, though, is the question.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

McCain possibly lying to cover up his connection to lobbyists?

As I've said I didn't think much of the NYT piece, more innuendo than quid pro quo. But it looks like it might lead to actual reporting of actual facts and those appear to be very bad for St. McCain (not that I'm surprised by that, it's the actual reporting of actual facts that is a shocker).

See here for some links of interesting follow up to this story - http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/22/1320...

Hopefully it will continue to focus on McCain's integrity and not his sex life, because reading too much about McCain's sex life could scar me for life.