Thursday, February 21, 2008

Conservatives to McCain: Told You So!

The New York Times ran a story in their print edition this morning that has been in the works since at least November of last year. The writers for the New York Times hint that McCain may have had an affair eight years ago. They never come out and say it directly, and they never discuss any evidence (unless you count unnamed sources). Even worse, the not-really-alleged affair was with a lobbyist. The article is a very long one, and dredges back up many of the embarrassing moments McCain has had in his Senate career going back to the Keating Five Scandal. The article has done two very important things: embarrass the Times, and send a shot across McCain's bow.


McCain has said he is very disappointed with the article. I have to agree with him. Even given the low standard I hold the Times to, it reads more like an article you would expect in one of the supermarket tabloids. There is gossip that is confirmed by "two unnamed sources", and hints of a sex scandal in McCain's camp. Of course, the Times never actually says there was anything improper, thereby carefully avoiding a lawsuit. If you have the endurance to read the entire article, you will find there is very little meat to this story. Other news agencies are now attacking the Times for running the story at all. The New Republic says that the most incredible thing about the article is, "…that it appeared in the paper at all." There seems to be a small firefight going on between a few news agencies on this. I can only hope that this firefight grows and consumes as many of these publications as it can.


The second lesson was for McCain and is something conservatives have been warning him about for a long time. Simply put, no matter how liberal I think McCain is, the mainstream media still sees that (R) by his name. They will talk about his "maverick" tendencies, his positions on global warming, Gitmo, torture, and free speech. At the end of the day, he is still running as a Republican, and to most of the media, that means he is one of the bad guys. Conservatives and most Republicans know what that means. It is only a matter of time before the media he has been buddies with for so long starts turning on him. Today appears to be the first shot. Even with Hillary and Obama at each other's throats, McCain can expect more of these attacks. Heaven help him if any of it turns out to be true.


Of course, I don't think there would have been any articles about extramarital affairs with a Romney candidacy.


Domesticated Dog said...

I love reading your blog, although there are often matters that we disagree on, you, at least reason thing out, before you write on them.

McCain is not the Great White Hope, he does not represent a great move away from corruption, he is not a leader that inspire the kind of changes that need to be made.

This election will most likely go to the Democrats and this is a matter of concern for those that are concerned that the political landscape will become hyper-liberal.

McCain does have skeletons in the closet and he is tied into the apparatus and he has benefited from corruption and, my brother made a comment the other night reminding me about the Keating Five. It was great to see you pick up on this and comment on it in your blog.

Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

Can you post an article about tonights democratic debate. I don;t care if you include my comment on your site, but I would like your opinion of the Democratic candidates and an assessment on who is running the cleaner campaign.

I am biased against Clinton, whenever there is an opening for a cheap shot she takes it and that speaks to her character and integrity. She can respond to a compliment with an attack. This is obscene.

I am an Conservative Independent, who sees value in many positions held by Democrats, but recognizes the danger of left wing of the party to everybody. The reason that I am independent as opposed to an out and out conservative is because, preservation of the status quo is extremely dangerous and neo-conservative values (when fed to the public in placebos full of lies to take advantage of implied agreements.

Jayne d'Arcy said...

Somehow I don't think my vote is going to be based upon whether or not a candidate has had an affair.

familyman said...

jayne d'arcy - I don't think the issue is the affair. I think the issue is that the relationship (if it happened) was with a lobbyist for whom McCain was in a position to do favors. If it's true, it's more about conflict of interest than the love affair itself.

David said...

I thought McCain had leaked this story to the Times so he could get conservatives to unite behind him by saying the liberal media were attacking him. So you might be right.

Andy D said...

Dog -- thanks for the compliments. I wish I could disagree with you on your points...

Anon, I will come back to you.

Jayne and Family-- the real issue is that the New York Times has no real story. IF (and that is a huge if) more comes out about this, some real evidence surfaces, or the NY Times makes an accusation, we can come back to this point.

David -- An interesting theory. I don't think he did, but who knows. Either way, this is one conservative who still isn't quite ready to unite behind him.

Andy D said...


You raise a few issues here, I will try to be brief. If you want me to expand out, let me know and I will do a full post about it.

First, I think Obama is running the cleaner campaign. Having said that, neither Obama or Hillary are very different on issues you can get them to comment on. Obama is more to the left of Hillary, and Hillary is a Socialist, so either one would be bad for the country. Obama seems to be more naive about the international scene, but that could be an act.

You label yourself a Conservative Independent, which is fine. However you say you aren't a full blown Conservative and instead are Independent. The two aren't necessarily related. Typically conservatives are Republican, but you could just as easily be a full blown conservative, and be Independent.

I am conservative on most issues. I would like to know why you don't consider yourself a full blown conservative. The last part of your comment confuses me a bit.