Lou Dobbs was yappin' away on CNN. He announced MAJOR BREAKING NEWS. Apparently, the New York Times is going to run a story claiming that John McCain may have had an affair with a lobbyist.Here's a potential reason not to feel really proud about America.
No, conclusion jumpers, I'm not saying that McCain scoring a side piece is a reason for national shame. A little McCain/Mystery Woman quid quo pro might be, but my concerns start elsewhere.
My fear is that everyone is gonna get all up in arms over specious allegations that have very little supporting evidence. I'm afraid that the nation and its free press will suddenly turn into a bunch of petty scandal-mongerers who are gleefully obsessed with making bullshit speculations, suggestions and assertions.
I also have a concern that the "so far so good" Barack Obama campaign, which has been operating on higher ground, will be unable to resist scoring points by piling on McCain. I hope he doesn't do it. I hope he tells people to pay attention to something a little more meaningful than a handful of unsupported allegations.
If the folks who are supposed to be showing us a better way dive into the gutter, I won't be proud. If the press, blogosphere and everyday chit-chatters obsess over the travels and travails of Johnny Mac's penis, I will be a wee bit ashamed.
I hope the "McCain humping a lobbyist" story isn't true. That might sound strange coming from a guy who'd prefer to see someone other than McCain win, but that's how I feel. I don't want to wade through the gutter if the story is bullshit (or doesn't even materialize).
And, even though I'm not on Big Mac's team, I'd hate to think that our elected officials are trading pork for porking. (Please note that "trading pork for porking" is a completely awesome catch-phrase for this sort of thing and that it started here).
If the whole thing is complete nonsense, shame on Lou Dobbs for acting like it was news. Shame on the NYT if they run a BS story. Shame on McCain if he made the trade (again, I have
Like the movie title, it appears as though "There Will be Blood". No matter who's spilling it, it's a recipe for frustration.
UPDATE:
The NYT article is online now. The lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, works with Telcom interests. As suspected, there is little evidence to support any damning argument against McCain. The article provides no reason to believe there was any quid quo pro. There's no proof that the relationship was inappropriate in any way.So, let's test my theory... How many asswipes who favor someone other than McCain are gonna go crazy about this? Will McCain take a completely (at this point, anyway) unwarranted beating? Will Obama resist the urge to get slimy?
Who on the left will be honest enough (other than me) to call the NYT on its bullshit, running an undeveloped story that it knew would create a storm of controversy by couching it as an example of how McCain's self-confidence on ethics creates a problem?
Here we go again...
Are you proud of America on this one?
Technorati Tags: McCain, john mccain, affair, Lobbyists, new york times, Media, elections, shame, pride Del.icio.us Tags: McCain, john mccain, affair, Lobbyists, new york times, Media, elections, shame, pride Furl Tags: McCain, john mccain, affair, Lobbyists, new york times, Media, elections, shame, pride
Something stinks at the NYT. Not bias; something less nefarious but just as disappointing.
ReplyDeleteLike the Obama drug use story, this McCain piece reads very obviously like the reporter and editors had invested so much time that they were unwilling to abandon it simply because they couldn't prove anything of substance. So, instead, they glue their notes and a lot of stale background together with a very thin lacquer of "broader context" and call it a story.
Hence "Obama's drug use might have been only as casual as he said it was, rather than as intense as we thought it might be." And now, "McCain's aides apparently kept him from doing something wrong, which he might not have planned to do anyway."
One would have thought the Times was better edited than that. For shame.
John, I appreciate your work on this piece. Even though it wasn't that late I must've been pretty tired when I read this the first time b/c I misread lobbyist for lobster... What's sad is that I was completely convinced without any coercion that the press would actually print a story about McCain having an affair with a lobster. When I got to the Times link I even read through the whole article expecting the seductive lobster to be mentioned somewhere...
ReplyDeleteWe have become a nation a fuck-nuts when it comes to politics, haven't we?
ReplyDeleteAnd so many in the inner circle of Washington politics call this "sophisticated"? Or "aggressive reporting," which ever suits them.
I'm so tired of this shit and how little real discussion and debate there is in Washington. So much arrogance and ego drives this process at the expense of something more real.
And when something more real doesn't materialize, we don't say, "Maybe it's us." We just satisfy ourselves with, "It couldn't be any better anyway."
Americans are such fuckin' assholes. And then we wonder why the world doesn't trust our lead or example.
Maybe all of this has something to do with it.