Owning John McCain

Cancel7

Banned
This is from today's WAPO...and it's how the NY Times story should have been constructed. The NY Times just plays into the hands of the right wing, whether it's while being Dick Cheney's little ho and taking dicktation from him and slapping it onto their front page so that he can later that day go onto MTP and claim "Even the liberal NY Times is reporting today that Saddam.." and thus help get us into a war of lies...or, whether it be by taking a very important story about the 'maverick" john mccain and turning it into a "did they or didn't they". The thing is I think he was f'ing the woman, and I think they know it...i think a lot of people in DC know it, and that's why it's in there. BUT...it muddied the waters. Who cares if he was actually screwing her, he was in bed with her and she was a lobbyist. Period. He has always been in bed with lobbyists and he still is in bed with lobbyists, and whether they have their clothes on or not is really besides the point.

I bolded some important points from the piece, and put them on top. But it's worth reading the entire thing. This is what the right wing knows about McCain and why they can't stand him. Because he has based a political career on campaigning for campaign finance laws and against lobbyists - two things close to their hearts - while at the same time basically being the biggest bitch for lobbyists in Dc...certainly he's their bitch out of the presidential candidates, including other republicans. Mitt Romney tried to bring this up but he was shot down. He had it right though...and the base knows it and this is why McCain will not be as formidable as his good friends in media like Tim Russert want us to believe. His own base can't stand him, and frankly, they have good reason.

In McCain's case, the fact that lobbyists are essentially running his presidential campaign -- most of them as volunteers -- seems to some people to be at odds with his anti-lobbying rhetoric

Public Citizen, a group that monitors campaign fundraising, has found that McCain has more bundlers -- people who gather checks from networks of friends and associates -- from the lobbying community than any other presidential candidate from either party.

By the group's current count, McCain has at least 59 federal lobbyists raising money for his campaign, compared with 33 working for Republican Rudolph W. Giuliani and 19 working for Democrat Clinton.



For years, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has railed against lobbyists and the influence of "special interests" in Washington, touting on his campaign Web site his fight against "the 'revolving door' by which lawmakers and other influential officials leave their posts and become lobbyists for the special interests they have aided."

But when McCain huddled with his closest advisers at his rustic Arizona cabin last weekend to map out his presidential campaign, virtually every one was part of the Washington lobbying culture he has long decried. His campaign manager, Rick Davis, co-founded a lobbying firm whose clients have included Verizon and SBC Telecommunications. His chief political adviser, Charles R. Black Jr., is chairman of one of Washington's lobbying powerhouses, BKSH and Associates, which has represented AT&T, Alcoa, JPMorgan and U.S. Airways.

Senior advisers Steve Schmidt and Mark McKinnon work for firms that have lobbied for Land O' Lakes, UST Public Affairs, Dell and Fannie Mae.

McCain's relationship with lobbyists became an issue this week after it was reported that his aides asked Vicki Iseman, a telecom lobbyist, to distance herself from his 2000 presidential campaign because it would threaten McCain's reputation for independence. An angry and defiant McCain denounced the stories yesterday, declaring: "At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust."

Even before McCain finished his news conference, uber-lobbyist Black made the rounds of television networks to defend McCain against charges that he has been tainted by his relationship with a lobbyist. Black's current clients include General Motors, United Technologies, JPMorgan and AT&T.

Black said he is still being paid by his firm and does work for clients in his "spare time," recusing himself from lobbying McCain: "I not only do not lobby him [McCain], but if an issue comes up that I have a client on, I will tell him that and stay out of the discussion."

A common career path for political operatives is a lucrative job at a Washington lobbying firm that allows them to continue campaign work, and McCain is hardly the first candidate to draw on that talent pool. The campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has been aided by lobbyists Harold Ickes and Mark Penn, who heads Burson Marsteller Worldwide. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been advised by former senator Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.), who is not a registered lobbyist but advises clients about Washington.

In McCain's case, the fact that lobbyists are essentially running his presidential campaign -- most of them as volunteers -- seems to some people to be at odds with his anti-lobbying rhetoric. "He has a closer relationship with lobbyists than he lets on," said Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "The problem for McCain being so closely associated with lobbyists is that he's the candidate most closely associated with attacking lobbyists."

Davis did not respond to requests for an interview. Black, acting as a campaign spokesman, said that Davis is being paid neither by his firm nor by the McCain campaign, and has not been a registered lobbyist for three years.

Schmidt and McKinnon said they remain with their firms, but are not lobbyists and have recused themselves from the issues of their clients in the McCain campaign. "I've never discussed a client issue with the candidate or his staff," McKinnon said in an e-mail.

Campaign finance experts said employees of a company are allowed to volunteer for a campaign as long as they do so on their own time, or continue to perform the functions for which their employers are paying them.

McCain's reliance on lobbyists for key jobs -- both in the Senate and in his presidential campaign -- extends beyond his inner circle. McCain recently hired Mark Buse to be his Senate chief of staff. Buse led the Commerce Committee staff in the late 1990s and early 2000s, and was until last fall a lobbyist for ML Strategies, representing eBay, Goldman Sachs Group, Cablevision, Tenneco and Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

McCain's top fundraising official is former congressman Tom Loeffler (R-Tex.), who heads a lobbying law firm called the Loeffler Group. He has counseled the Saudis as well as Southwest Airlines, AT&T, Toyota and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Public Citizen, a group that monitors campaign fundraising, has found that McCain has more bundlers -- people who gather checks from networks of friends and associates -- from the lobbying community than any other presidential candidate from either party.

By the group's current count, McCain has at least 59 federal lobbyists raising money for his campaign, compared with 33 working for Republican Rudolph W. Giuliani and 19 working for Democrat Clinton.

"The potential harm is that should Senator McCain become elected, those people will have a very close relationship with the McCain White House," Sloan said. "[That] would be very helpful for their clients, and that would give them a leg up on everybody else."

Of all the lobbyists involved in the McCain campaign, the most prominent is Black, who has made a lucrative career of shuttling back and forth between presidential politics and big-time Washington lobbying. He has worked for the campaigns of former congressman Jack Kemp (N.Y.), former president George H.W. Bush and former senators Phil Gramm (Tex.) and Robert J. Dole (Kan.), all Republicans.

"I've spent a fair amount of my life as a lobbyist, but I've spent a majority of my adult life running Republican political campaigns," Black, 60, said.

His relationship with McCain, for whom he is a senior adviser, goes back more than two decades, from the time McCain first came to Washington. They got to know each other well during Gramm's 1996 presidential run; Gramm, now an investment banker, is a major supporter and adviser to McCain.

But even as Black provides a private voice and a public face for McCain, he also leads his lobbying firm, which offers corporate interests and foreign governments the promise of access to the most powerful lawmakers. Some of those companies have interests before the Senate and, in particular, the Commerce Committee, of which McCain is a member.

Black said he does a lot of his work by telephone from McCain's Straight Talk Express bus.

He said, however, the combination now requires that he work on weekends, which means 80- or even 90-hour weeks. If McCain were to ask him to step up his commitment to the campaign during the general-election battle, Black said he would take a leave or a reduced salary from BKSH and devote himself to electing McCain president.

McCain has long sought to defend his associations with lobbyists, stressing that friendships with them do not influence his independent judgment when it comes to legislative action. In comments to reporters yesterday, he acknowledged those friendships.

"I have many friends who represent various interests, ranging from the firemen to the police to senior citizens to various interests, particularly before my committee," McCain said. "The question is . . . do they have excess or unwarranted influence? And certainly no one ever has in my conduct of my public life and conduct of my legislative agenda."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022101131_pf.html
 
Last edited:
yeah, you keep riding that. That's a whole lot of words for not having a shred of evidence. Volunteers. BURN HIM AT THE STAKE...
 
McCain should be an absolute pushover for the Dems this fall. They'll try to blow it, no matter who the Dem candidate is, but they just won't be able to do it.

Of course, I thought Bush would be a pushover, too, but the "base" - somewhat inexplicably - absolutely adored him. It will be a different story with McCain. He musters no enthusiasm whatsoever, in any demographic.

It's almost like the GOP is picking the guy they like the least, because they know he's just going to be a sacrificial lamb for the electorate....
 
McCain should be an absolute pushover for the Dems this fall. They'll try to blow it, no matter who the Dem candidate is, but they just won't be able to do it.

Of course, I thought Bush would be a pushover, too, but the "base" - somewhat inexplicably - absolutely adored him. It will be a different story with McCain. He musters no enthusiasm whatsoever, in any demographic.

It's almost like the GOP is picking the guy they like the least, because they know he's just going to be a sacrificial lamb for the electorate....


I thought Bush would be a pushover, too, but the "base" - somewhat inexplicably - absolutely adored him. It will be a different story with McCain. He musters no enthusiasm whatsoever, in any demographic.



It depends on turnout. If it's a "base" vote, the GOP base will dutifully turnout like robots to vote for McCain. There is no "reagan democrats" demographic in the republican party that can be swayed either way. As John Dean's book documents, conservatives are authoritarian in nature. They're followers, who like to line up behind a Daddy figure.

We often hear alleged moderate, or "independent" leaning republicans complain about the iraq war, about bush's assault on civil liberties and the constitution, about rampant republican corruption in government.

But, when it comes right down to it, the guy who has an (R) next to his name, and who promises to allegedly cut spending by 1.5% at the Environmental protection agency and Health and Human Services Department (while, still spending 10 billion a month in Iraq); and who promises to protect them from "socialism" and "islamofacism", will earn their vote in spades.
 


But, when it comes right down to it, the guy who has an (R) next to his name, and who promises to allegedly cut spending by 1.5% at the Environmental protection agency and Health and Human Services Department (while, still spending 10 billion a month in Iraq); and who promises to protect them from "socialism" and "islamofacism", will earn their vote in spades.


I'm really not so sure on this one. Limbaugh & Coulter are hacks, but I seriously doubt they will vote for McCain, much in the same way that I wouldn't vote for Hillary. I think they represent fairly significant portions of the GOP base; I just don't see them coming out in droves for McCain.
 
I'm really not so sure on this one. Limbaugh & Coulter are hacks, but I seriously doubt they will vote for McCain, much in the same way that I wouldn't vote for Hillary. I think they represent fairly significant portions of the GOP base; I just don't see them coming out in droves for McCain.

LOL - Cypress has become embittered by too much exposure to Superfreak and Damo!

I think you're right and the base is going to stay home. But yeah, SF and Damo are going to run down to the polls to pull the lever for McCain.
 
I'm really not so sure on this one. Limbaugh & Coulter are hacks, but I seriously doubt they will vote for McCain, much in the same way that I wouldn't vote for Hillary. I think they represent fairly significant portions of the GOP base; I just don't see them coming out in droves for McCain.


I didn't think they'd come out in droves for Bush in 2004. By that point, iraq was clearly a tragic mistake, Bush was obviously not qualified for the job, and he was spending like a drunken sailor.

Rush will vote for McCain.
 
So true; Freak has spent the last 2 weeks or so already defending his vote for McCain.

As for Bush in '04, I don't think it was so much the man himself who drove turnout, as it was lingering fear in the "war on terror" (man, do I hate even using that expression), and the scourge of gay marriage....
 
It's going to be interesting. I don't want to vote for anybody who thinks Bush's Preemptive War policy is a good idea. I'll very likely be voting for the Libertarian candidate.

The reality is, without very real evidence Preemptive War based on the idiotic War Powers Act will continue to get us into stuff we don't want to own.
 
So true; Freak has spent the last 2 weeks or so already defending his vote for McCain.

As for Bush in '04, I don't think it was so much the man himself who drove turnout, as it was lingering fear in the "war on terror" (man, do I hate even using that expression), and the scourge of gay marriage....
He's been supporting the candidate he thinks will do best, that's like saying people are "defending their vote for Clinton" in the primary.
 
He's been supporting the candidate he thinks will do best, that's like saying people are "defending their vote for Clinton" in the primary.

I'll have to remember to direct all inquiries about SF to you going forward; forgot you were his spokesman...
 
So true; Freak has spent the last 2 weeks or so already defending his vote for McCain.

As for Bush in '04, I don't think it was so much the man himself who drove turnout, as it was lingering fear in the "war on terror" (man, do I hate even using that expression), and the scourge of gay marriage....


anyway, getting back to the lobbyist thing, I don't think this will merely be a base vote this fall. I think turnout will be huge.

And McCain's message of "more wars", and "some of my best friends are lobbyists" is politically stupid. I think Obama is all lobbied-up too, but he's got the right rhetoric on the war and on lobbyists. All things being equal, it could be a blow out, unless Obama stumbles.
 
I'll have to remember to direct all inquiries about SF to you going forward; forgot you were his spokesman...
Right, and anything about somebody supporting a candidate on the left has to go through you because you are theirs?

Get real. You may want to dismiss other's opinions, but the reality is he supports McCain. There is nothing to apologize for when supporting a candidate. It is simply support.
 
I didn't think they'd come out in droves for Bush in 2004. By that point, iraq was clearly a tragic mistake, Bush was obviously not qualified for the job, and he was spending like a drunken sailor.

Rush will vote for McCain.

Yeah, and it's still nice to be able to say he got the most votes ever for President!
 
Yeah, and it's still nice to be able to say he got the most votes ever for President!

Why is that nice to say?

You realize he'll go down as one of the top 5 worst Presidents in American History, correct?

It's nothing more than a reflection on how stupid Americans were in 2004. Future generations will certainly wonder about that aspect of it...
 
The more one observes this story in these early stages, the more it appears likely the NEW YORK TIMES WOULD RATHER BE WRONG THAN BE BEATEN TO THE STORY BY A COMPETITOR.
 
Back
Top