Cafferty File: McCain's Been Here Before - Will it Hurt Him This Time?
By Bill W. Wednesday Feb 20, 2008 6:15pm 
As usual, Jack Cafferty sure didn't mince words when he succinctly summed up where we stand so far with the NYT's revelation of McCain's unusually close ties to telecom lobbyist Vicki Iseman, and asked his viewers to weigh in on whether it will hurt his chances come November:
Download | play 
Download | play
Cafferty: Someone is lying. The New York Times dropped a bombshell on John McCain this morning with a front page story that could cost him the White House. It's great reading: an improper relationship with a lobbyist, a woman named Vicki Iseman, his inner-circle convinced they were having an affair, all happening while he was Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee and she was representing telecom companies who had business before McCain's committee. The two of them together at fundraisers, in his office, aboard private corporate jets ... It got so bad that his closest friends and advisers finally stepped in to save McCain from himself.
This is all according to the New York Times. The problem with the story is it's a little on the skinny side. Most of it's based on unnamed sources and that detracts from its credibility. On the other hand the Times byline contains the names of four reporters who were not likely to go their editor and say 'look what we've got' if they didn't have it, and reportedly as far back as December McCain was pleading with the editors at the Times not to run this story.
McCain's explanation for all of this comes up short. "It's not true" aint going to cut it. For one thing McCain has been here before. Remember the Keating 5 and the Savings and Loan scandal? And it's highly unlikely that the Times information from McCain's inner circle of advisers is all false. You don't publish a story of this magnitude unless you are on pretty solid ground. So stay tuned, because there is a lot more to come. ...
That sounds about right. So what do you think? Is this a mess that's just going to snowball and bury the McCain campaign or could the scandal actually wind up helping him? So far, McCain seems to think so, as his campaign has now begun exploiting the controversy for a quick buck. How do you see this all playing out?
Login or Register to post comments.
What I really want to know is, what does John McCain look like naked?
Media will move back to Obama vs Hillary if anything at all happens tonight.
Coming up on Lou Dobbs Tonight:
The New York Times?McCain story. Is it journalism or tabloid journalism?
Let me save you the time Lou, it's journalism. It took the sex angle to get anyone in your profession notice it and report on it though. If had just been bribes and kickbacks, theft and graft or abuse of power - none of you would have said a word about it. The chance that there may have been a BJ makes it serious news.
The question is, Who's Huckabee gonna choose for his running mate?
Har.
It will definitely snowball - there's much much more to this than we've heard.
AquaVelvaMan @ 1:
ewwwww
Anyway, the Republican side show is an amusing distraction but Mr. Hundred Years Iraq war is not going to win an election in this country.
I live how McCain's aide claims the Times rushed the story to print just to beat out the New Republic.
Soooo... the defense is that the NYT is unreliable because they were the FIRST article to come out about this?
lol
Notice how this story gets FAR less coverage than Bill Clinton making some silly comment somewhere.
Right off the bat, I heard the press say, this will be a two day story, like they all got together and decided it.
I hope McCain did her.
Just a personal wish.
Oh, and McCain? He's a typical politician. They're all corrupt.
I think it helps McCain. I have to say, I've read the piece and I have to say it doesn't seem to be the best journalism and, even if true, the story is eight years old! Whether or not he had an affair is between McCain and his wife, and that he met with a lobbyist just doesn't shock me. That's what lobbyists do. They meet with politicians to promote their agenda. Now, if McCain was influenced by this lobbyist to do special favors might be something, but I'm not seeing any evidence of that.
The whole thing seems, at this point, to make McCain look sympathetic.
I dislike McCain, not because he's "too liberal", but because he's too conservative. But, that said, I think this is a pretty shaky case. I think the Times erred in running this story without further evidence.
On the other hand, I do love the fact that Sean, Rush, O'Really, Newt, and Joe Lieberman (the last two on the Sean Hannity show today) and their ilk, have to resort to complaining about the way their kind is treated by the press. Like these guys are clean.
I want to see more.
I am voting they use it to raise money until either a) the rest of the MSM gets on it and uncovers more and they can't hide from it or b) some evidence appears and makes it all very unseemly.
http://humidhaney.typepad.com
I don't know why you guys are so upset about this. It is about time a Republican was caught having sex with someone that wasn't a male prositute, a minor, or an undercover police officer.
eastriver @ 4:
Yep, looks like election 08 will be theocratic fundamentalist vs theocratic progressive race.
I am bothered how this is the scandal on McCain that the media is choosing to report. I think the media should be talking about his loan from the bank that helped finance him in the Primary when he ran out of money.
OT:
One of you stole my collection of naked pictures of Ernest Borgnine and nobody is leaving until I have them back.
Jack misspoke:
The staffers appear to be John Weaver, Steve Schmidt, Charlie Black and Mark Salter; all top advisers to McCain.
This is not about a sexual peccadillo, per se, who cares, except for Mrs Macain'thadahardonsincewhen.
The lady in question was a lobbyist. This about the potential tit for tat. Pun intended. But I am not laughing.
There's no need to worry about McCain anyway. The election of 2008 will look something like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ElectoralCollege1984-Large.png
But with the red and blue flipped. The whole country is gonna go dem and there's nothing the republicans can do to stop it. It's all about how badly do they wanna lose this time.
As if les liasons dangeruses of Sen. McCain weren't awful enough, he's come up with further innovative ways to worsen the National Debt, and then some.
Only he calls them "tax cuts" and "tax incentives."
(Did I mention previously about where donations can be made to reduce the National Debt?)
I can see McCain beating Obama, then I can see McCain dropping dead 3 months
into his Presidency.. leaving us with some kind of even-worse-than-Cheney VP.
God forbid it's Condoleeza Rice!!
Holy shit !
Obama security lapse
As probably the only R who reads and posts to this site, I'll answer for the Republicans. It'll be a quick blame of the liberal media and sweep this thing under the rug. McCain beats Hillary in the General and that's all that the R's will focus on. Sure he loses to Obama but only by 8% or so, whereas Huckelberry loses by 20% and loses by 10% to Hillary.
William Claude Fields @ 21:
In what fantasy world could McCain possibly win? Just look at the primary turnouts, they're 2:1 or even 3:1 in favor of democrats.
Or look at the size of the rallies if you need more evidence. McCain's are a few hundred people at best, half of them reporters. Obama's are 10,000-15,000+. The repub party is bankrupt, they have no momentum. At a minimum the general will be 60-40 in favor of the Dem or *worse* for the republicans.
The only reason McCain would even get as much as 30-40% of the vote in the general election is because of the media. They artificially prop him up as a maverick and a comeback kid, when he actually has no money and no support. Without them he'd get no more than 25% in the general.
November will prove my predictions to be true.
This story will not "cost him the White House." Being an old, war-mongering panderer already cost him his chance for the White House. Even if he vowed to leave Iraq ASAP and stopped pandering on torture and tax cuts, he'd still be incredibly old.
MOVE ON
Anyone remember those words? It should apply to all parties, or are we all hypocrites? The timing of the NYT article is more news to me then the content of the story. The media controlling elections with sensational stories like this being put out when the candidates are most vulnerable is really disgusting.
The real loser is Vicki Iseman. can you believe she had to shtup old wattleneck just to move a few lobbying issues across his desk. I bet she had to call him my friend, too.
Do we really want another President who feels rules and ethics don't apply to them?
Move on? You're kidding right? You think being in bed with a LOBBYIST is the same and the Clinton wick-dipping? Especially when the candidate's entire career is based on being a straight-shooting maverick?? Oh, and he has a history of both fooling around AND playing footsie with lobbyists while chairing committees the have control over the industries represented by those lobbyists.
Move on? Not bloody likely.
Here's a hoot:
Dateline November 9, 2008 - Senator John McCain was arrested this morning on Federal felony charges of influence peddling, fraud and conspiracy. President-elect Obama had no comment .....
Big deal. The Iraq War tubthumping Times at it again.
Insider trading, pilfering S&L's and sex for favor is all part and parcel of being a politician.
Judge McCain on his platform. His 100 Years War, continued bleeding of the US Treasury and tax evasion for the wealthy, no universal health care, FISA/detention/torture, final burial for Social Security, more education policy failure and infrastructure neglect.
Vote against McCain because he sucks not because he got sucked.
The Libs are beginning to sound allot like those Klinton hating Conservatives when Blythe was caught screwing the help.
AquaVelvaMan @ 1:
Thanks for the visual - I won't be able to sleep tonight.
Wednesday’s contributions to the McList of (currently 195) McPetNames(h/t Dr. Matt)
In case anyone's looking for it :)
Will check back later
out
Proud2bHumble @ 33:
Here, sorry.
eastriver @ 4:
I think he'll pick Jethrene.*
* a la Watertiger
"You don’t publish a story of this magnitude unless you are on pretty solid ground."
Iraqi weapons of mass destruction anyone?
he is a sailor you know!
it can only help him. his current wife is a MILF so that impresses the slobbering masses when older guys score!!!
tobergill @ 36:
well said!
Proud2bHumble @ 33:
Is McClintonImpersonator on the list yet?
Floridiot @ 22:
Now that, is something that should be making the headlines.
The fact is I don't give a shit!
I don't care what McCain does with his dick, the same way I ddn't care what Clinton did with his!
Whether he screwed around or not, McCain would not be a good POTUS, Clinton was!
Floridiot @ 22:
It has been awhile since Dallas had a good assassination. Are you sure the Secret Service didn't contract Obama's security detail to Blackwater.
I agree with Cafferty on this one.
APPLY THE MCCAIN STANDARD TO MCCAIN
ConcernedCanuck @ 39:
Would you settle for McClenisimpersonater?
the hooker/lobbyist was just doing her job. america's enemies now know that mccain can be lured with honey. mccain somehow escaped the keating 5 scandal, while a good senator like alan cranston was politically destroyed. only dems paid a price on the keating 5 scam, when in fact, the whole s&l deal amounted to a republican fundraiser.
Proud2bHumble @ 44:
McLumpInPants?
ConcernedCanuck @ 46:
McSperminator?
ConcernedCanuck @ 47:
LOL
The last three are winners, McMultiplelister 8-)
tr @ 45:
Two professions where blowing it is the Horney Talk Express elevator to suckcess...
@49 'Horney' - I'd fix it if I was anal, but I'm not so I won't.
One of the letters Cafferty read out was very insightful. The NYT article had no sources given. That doesn't mean they couldn't. If this is an ambush then I fear it might be premature. If McCain gets sunk the Republicans still have lots of time to find a more electable candidate. Don't ask me who. They could have cloned Ronny but sadly Bush killed stem cell research.
If they leave the "affair" aspect out of this, unless and until there's bulletproof evidence shown, and focus strictly on the ethical questions of the lobbyist/Senator link this thing could have legs that won't quit running. One can only hope. These folks deserve all the bad karma hits they get.
Peter G @ 51:
lol, You always a funny guy, Peter G :)
SouthernDragon @ 52:
You're right. A hawk like McPriapist probably does use Kevlar condoms.
#203, by the way :-)
Its my opinion that a politician's personal life should remain out of the public sphere, providing it doesn't involve any breaking of laws. But as big of a deal that Fox News is making of this story (it's been the top story on both O'Reilly and H&C), it just shows how huge of hypocrites they are claiming that this story has no base and is a blatant smear job. (Obama Madrassa story, anyone? The list goes on. and on. and on. and on.)
Fact: McCain has a history of cheating on his wife.
Why does no one ever ask about the wife who met him on the tarmac?
Is she like Ritchie Cunningham's older brother or something?
Fact: McCain's Keating Five History.
Fact: McCain at first opposed relaxation of media ownership laws by the FCC. He made comments at the time about the ill effects of media consolidation.
But He then Reversed his position and wrote a letter to the commission urging them to allow Ms. Vicki's clients, Paxson and Sinclair to become the largest conglomeration of television stations in the country. Paxson and Sinclair used this power to eliminate local programming and distribute the swift-boat propaganda film just before the 2004 election.
Fact: John McCain has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from telecoms in the last ten years.
Did Bill Clinton enrich Monica with anything more than a free cigar?
SCRATCH A REPUBLICAN WOUND A THIEF. (or a pervert)
This is important, because the next democratic president needs a mandate, a landslide the kind un-seen in 30 years, more than Reagan ever got, more than Nixon.
This election has to prove that Republicanism as a political ideology needs to go into the dustbin with other discarded movements of the 20th century, like fascism, monarchy, and communism.
John McCain is the best of the republicans, and he's a heel who abandoned the woman who waited for him with yellow ribbons while he was imprisoned.
Politics is about perception as much as anything else, and in order to make the big changes this country needs, a new president must be seen as unopposed.
Lord knows he or she will have enough trouble with the permanent Republican judiciary.
This reminds me of watching a chess game where an experienced opponent made an unusual move. On the surface, this appears to be a non-story due to it's rather limp proof. I'm wondering what (or who) is hiding behind the scenes.
How about McCain'tgetitup?
Hmm, maybe McCain'tgetenough would be better...
Bananaphone @ 58:
#207, lol thanks!
Already have McCain'tgetituptobangmyhotwife. (:-)
Pete&Pete @ 26:
Wrong- the timing is suspect because it was withheld since December, which would have eliminated him early on, and he would not be the Republican nominee now. Releasing it now, months before the general election is so that it can fade from the front pages and do less damage right before elections.
So timing wise, he is least vulnerable now.
Taking some cash and a little nookie from some women might play well with Joe Sixpack. But then him giving her pimps the keys to the truck might not.
The pattern is long. If the story moves from the innuendo of sex (ugh) to bribery, as it should, Mc Cain won't have to worry about his new story re how he is finiancing his campaign
Are the following on the list?
McBribery
McCrazy
McMafioso
McKeating
McEthicallyChallenged
McPwnd
Cafferty's analysis is at least balanced compared to Tweety's. Tweety's mancrush on McCain showed through today, as he only interviewed guests (McCain's attorney Bill Bennett and GOP strategist Mike Murphy) who are in McCain's camp, and joined these guests in bashing the New York Times. This treatment stands in stark contrast to what Tweety did when the Times ran a similar front page story by Patrick Healy about the Clintons' marriage on May 23, 2006. That story was also based on innuendo and short on attributable quotes. That time, Tweety salivated over the salacious rumors about the Clintons, and had no problem with the Times' reporting.
McBoner and McCanned need to be added to the list.
And don't forget McViagra.
The NY Times helped us get into the Iraq War (thanks, Judith.) They will help keep us there. In a bit of spectacular journalism gamesmanship, the GOP nominee now looks stronger than he did 48 hours ago.
Not only that, they showed every news org out there the ridicule they can face if they run unsubstantiated rumors. So any papers thinking of running with the Larry Barry story can take heed.
The GOP puts that story out when its good and ready. When Barry is there for the taking.
Are you kidding me? Are there people who were actually going to vote for this guy?
*
Did Karl set this up in case they needed it to shut McCain down eight years ago?
Just a thought . . . .
*
McPain is obviously a serial hypocrite. Instead of debating whether Billary or Barack is the best candidate to debate him and win in the fall, it's becoming increasingly clear that it doesn't make much of a difference: any Dem can beat McPain.
If John McCain married Vicki Iseman; she would be an Iseman Trophy wife.
EMPY @ 3:
You are so right...then the media says...it is what the public wants to hear.....
tobergill @ 36:
Or Judy Miller or that fake reporter Blair.
The NYTimes needs to have a followup story with names & dates to make the article more credible. Even with their past gaffs (see above) I cannot imagine running a sensational story like this with flimsy evidence. I think they have more, that maybe they're just teasing us now??
McCain was cleared off all charges of the Keating 5. It was the Keating 3
It's not about sex. its about hypocrisy! The "straight talker" who alledges to be holier than thou with regard to lobbyists
has be caught iin bed literaly or figuratively and he doth protest too much! Sounds like another third rate burglery as trickey Dick once said.
It’s not about sex. its about hypocrisy! The “straight talker” who alleges to be holier than thou with regard to lobbyists
has be caught iin bed literally or figuratively and he doth protest too much! Sounds like another third rate burglary as tricky Dick once said
Sunnyside @ 15:
BINGO!
abob @ 70:
BWAH HAH!!!!!!!!!
This is an inoculation for the general election. Get the truth out now and shoot it down over trivialities. McCain and his lawyer Bob Bennett prevented this story from coming out before the NH Primary. Now it is being released well before the General Election so it will pass from memory well in advance. This was fed by McCain’s staff to the NY Times so they could point to the paper to “prove” how unreliable the NYT is. It is the Dan Rather situation all over again.
In the words of Norm Mcdoanald, McCain is a huge whore! He is for sale to the highest bidder. He has zero principle, zero substance will pander shamelessly to anyone who give him money or their vote! Not to mention being as dishonest as the day is long. In other words, a Republican!
Wait, let me get this straight: a senator is in bed with a lobbyist and this is news?
This is how it works, folks. McCain is just a bit more hypocritical since he pretends he's not bought off. But look at his record over the last 5 years. He's sold out every single position he's taken.
Sigh @ 76:
Nah. They spoke about this on NPR this morning -- as collateralfor the loan, McCrazy had to take out a life insurance policy.
The angle of the story that MUST be covered is a lobbyist's influence over McCrazy, McHorny, McCheater, McPander.
abob @ 70:
*rimshot*
Wouldn't it be funny if all this scandal was a product of those FISA phone taps gone huey?
Login or Register to post comments.