ATLmalcontent

on mccain and hypocrisy (including my own)

I'm not as fair-minded as I claim to be (hold for laughter). If you changed the name in the controversial Times piece from McCain to Clinton, I'd have written volumes today blasting his/her/their duplicity.

I like McCain. I don't like the Clintons. I trust the former (as much as I can trust a politician). I never have trusted the latter.

So, any story that accuses McCain of such rank hypocrisy is going to require more proof and less innuendo. Now it appears the innuendo was misrepresented, according to the alleged smoking gun (who is not at all disgruntled):

I just got off the phone with John Weaver, the former top McCain campaign official who is now an informal adviser to the campaign. I asked him about his 1999 meeting on the campaign's behalf with lobbyist Vicki Iseman. He said he "had no reason to think" that McCain might have been having an affair with Iseman, but he was concerned about word he had heard suggesting that Iseman was telling associates she had connections with McCain. "This was a woman who was saying that she had special influence with John's committee staff and with him," Weaver told me. "I didn't believe that was the case."

Weaver was telling Iseman to stop spreading what he believed was misinformation. He still doesn't believe her claims of special access. He's not John Dean.

Meanwhile, clients of Iseman's firm have donated very little money to McCain's campaigns. Since 2000, they've contributed $85,000 to the former commerce committee chairman. That's peanuts. If there's a quid pro quo going on, then McCain comes cheap.

the mccain kerfuffle

TNR has an excellent piece about the story behind the McCain story.

Beyond its revelations, however, what's most remarkable about the article is that it appeared in the paper at all: The new information it reveals focuses on the private matters of the candidate, and relies entirely on the anecdotal evidence of McCain's former staffers to justify the piece--both personal and anecdotal elements unusual in the Gray Lady. The story is filled with awkward journalistic moves--the piece contains a collection of decade-old stories about McCain and Iseman appearing at functions together and concerns voiced by McCain's aides that the Senator shouldn't be seen in public with Iseman--and departs from the Times' usual authoritative voice. At one point, the piece suggestively states: "In 1999 she began showing up so frequently in his offices and at campaign events that staff members took notice. One recalled asking, 'Why is she always around?'" In the absence of concrete, printable proof that McCain and Iseman were an item, the piece delicately steps around purported romance and instead reports on the debate within the McCain campaign about the alleged affair.

the vast right-wing conspiracy resurfaces

The Times story is heavy on innuendo, short on facts. Am I the only one who finds the timing suspicious? Could we be witnessing a final Hail Mary from McCain's conservative enemies?

Former Clinton attorney Bob Bennett, a loyal Democrat, appeared on TV earlier saying the piece is a hit job, and I'm inclined to believe him. True or not, it's old news.

Should we now expect new revelations from Juanita Broaddrick?

UPDATE (2/21): I didn't know at the time of this post that Bennett is McCain's attorney.

pssst! mccain's the manchurian candidate ... pass it on

This is how low some of McCain's conservative opponents will stoop:

I have gotten the usual daily spam e-mail from various fringe and self-acclaimed conservative groups and personages — variously alleging that McCain was not a real war hero, questioning his conduct during capture, commenting on his marital situation, and suggesting he was unhinged and identical to Ted Kennedy, Hillary (fill in the blanks).

The people behind these shameless whisper campaigns should be outed. If McCain is elected, he would be well within his rights to sic the IRS on them.

judge him by his enemies (cont'd)

Dr. Demento, er, Dobson said that "under no circumstances" would he support McCain in the general election.

One of the reasons he lists: McCain "often uses foul and obscene language." Sounds like a plus to me, especially when it's directed towards Dobson and his ilk.

By not voting, Dobson sends quite a message to the troops he claims to support. Are they fighting for the American way of life, or George W. Bush?

*I don't remember Dobson complaining when W liberally dropped the F-bomb in a 1999 interview with conservative pundit Tucker Carlson.

judge him by his enemies (cont'd)

I wish Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter hated me as much as they despise John McCain. Watch them become increasingly unhinged discussing their least favorite Republican. At one point Coulter argues Hillbot is more trustworthy and better on national security than the Arizona senator.

So now Clinton has been endorsed by Maxine Waters and Ann Coulter.

I rest my case.

*Meanwhile, that noted thinker Michael Reagan is taking McCain's ascension personally:

Until last night, when I watched the Republican debate, I had no idea how much John McCain dislikes me and just about everybody else but Rudy Giuliani, who if you believe The New York Times is a pretty good hater himself.

As I watched McCain and Governor Romney go at it during the debate at the Reagan Library I was struck by the huge gap that separates McCain -- whose contempt for his fellow humans is patently obvious -- and my dad, Ronald Reagan, who had nothing but the deepest affection and respect for the American people.

The feeling is mutual between McCain and me. I don’t like the way he treats people. You get the impression that he thinks everybody is beneath him. He seems to be saying, “I was a war hero, and you had damn well better treat me as your superior.”

judge him by his enemies

Conservative blogger Michelle Malkin, who has written in support of the internment of Japanese-American citizens during WWII, said she won't vote for McCain over Hillary. McCain should thank her.

And now, your daily right-wing fatwa:

The Republican Party has been hijacked. Over the past month a new Axis of Evil has emerged -- not one based in Damascus, Tehran or Pyongyang -- but instead in Cedar Rapids, Charleston, South Carolina, Derry, New Hampshire and Boca Raton, Florida. It is the liberal and “independent” voters in these 4 states that have nearly completed a deed that makes Kim Jong Il envious -- the near crippling of the American Electoral System. These four states have combined their native liberal populism with an imported liberal electorate and have forced the GOP to accept a nominee so distasteful that in more than one poll -- the numbers of voters choosing not to vote and those choosing to vote third party actually exceed those who will hold their nose and vote for Maverick, War Hero, Amnesty Supporter, John McCain. ...

This is our party, not John McCain’s or Mel Martinez's, or Lindsay Graham’s. The Republican Party is THE conservative party dammit. Let’s admit it and take it back. RINOS and Liberals have taken the GOP plane hostage, and its time for us passengers to revolt…and do what has to be done -- Let’s Roll.

is romney playing the crazy vet card?

Not overtly -- he claims to know nothing of this memo detailing McCain's Top 10 outbursts (though it was released by Romney staffers). Mr. CEO, out of the loop? Not likely. While McCain has struggled with the truth in recent days, lies have been a staple of The Anchorman's campaign. And this may be his cheapest shot yet, exploiting a debased stereotype to discredit his opponent.

The memo claims, for instance, that McCain had a scuffle with then-92-year-old S.C. Sen. Strom Thurmond. Read closely and you'll see that there were no fisticuffs, just a verbal disagreement. The memo is as flimsy as Romney's convictions (evidenced by his No. 1 choice for worst example of McCain acting like a human being):

Defending His Amnesty Bill, Sen. McCain Lost His Temper And “Screamed, ‘F*ck You!’ At Texas Sen. John Cornyn” (R-TX). “Presidential hopeful John McCain - who has been dogged for years by questions about his volcanic temper - erupted in an angry, profanity-laced tirade at a fellow Republican senator, sources told The Post yesterday. In a heated dispute over immigration-law overhaul, McCain screamed, ‘F— you!’ at Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who had been raising concerns about the legislation. ‘This is chickens—stuff,’ McCain snapped at Cornyn, according to several people in the room off the Senate floor Thursday. ‘You’ve always been against this bill, and you’re just trying to derail it.’”

Now that's beyond the pale. Bad enough that he cursed a fellow senator, but using the F-word is just unpardonable. Rest assured that if you elect Mitt Romney, he'll never use such salty language, by golly!

(Maybe Mitt should reprimand Dick Cheney while he's at it.)

a ringing endorsement

If you're opposed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Hugh Hewitt and Tom DeLay, you must be doing something right.

If you're supported by that same quartet, you must be Mitt Romney.

Cue the surrogates, classy as always:

“There’s nothing redeeming about John McCain,” DeLay told Fox News.

While McCain was being tortured in a POW camp, DeLay was squashing cockroaches. He wanted to fight Commies, mind you, but affirmative action stood in the way. No, seriously, that's what the former exterminator once claimed:

He and Quayle, DeLay explained to the assembled media in New Orleans, were victims of an unusual phenomenon back in the days of the undeclared Southeast Asian war. So many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself. Satisfied with the pronouncement, which dumbfounded more than a few of his listeners who had lived the sixties, DeLay marched off to the convention.

Tale a wild guess who, between McCain and DeLay, is more popular among the conservative base.

*I couldn't resist this quickie from F*Hugh:

Taking a page from his Michigan strategy, John McCain lets Florida homeowners know he won't be there for them the next time an Andrew comes ashore.

The Anchorman And Drudge

In the previous post I wondered aloud if Romney's campaign might be responsible for leaking the alleged McCain scandal. I based that not on evidence but on my disdain for The Anchorman. Turns out my suspicion was warranted:

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has hired Matt Rhoades to serve as a senior communications strategist in his all-but-announced presidential bid, according to sources familiar with the internal workings of the campaign. ...

One of the most important contributions Rhoades will make to the Romney team is his relationship with Matt Drudge. As documented in John Harris's and Mark Halperin's book -- "The Way to Win" -- the Drudge Report is an indispensable mover of political news and can shape (and often lead) news coverage by the major media outlets. The duo refer to Drudge as the "single most influential purveyor of information about American politics" and detail a meeting between Drudge, RNC research director Tim Griffin and Rhoades -- Griffin's deputy at the time -- that functioned as a passing of the Drudge torch from Griffin to Rhoades.

So that puts Drudge in the pocket of Romney and Hillbot. If they're nominated, be sure to direct at least some of your accompanying vitriol to the closeted homosexual with the initials M.D.