Comments on: McScandal? http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:34:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: scott http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526887 Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:19:01 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526887 The way the Times pursued this story distorted what's the real scandal here. The romantic angle, maybe it happened, maybe it didn't, who knows, but it's just undisputed from reading the Times and the Post stories that McCain acted legislatively to favor the Paxson firm (for which Iseman worked) in ways that were directly contrary to his stated positions on the issues involved. The story could have been pitched as one of influence peddling and special-interest coddling by Saint John the Maverick, but they couldn't let go of the romantic angle and opened themselves up to fairly justifiable criticism of the thinness of that part of it. Jesus, sometimes you wonder if the Times in recent years can get anything right! The way the Times pursued this story distorted what’s the real scandal here. The romantic angle, maybe it happened, maybe it didn’t, who knows, but it’s just undisputed from reading the Times and the Post stories that McCain acted legislatively to favor the Paxson firm (for which Iseman worked) in ways that were directly contrary to his stated positions on the issues involved. The story could have been pitched as one of influence peddling and special-interest coddling by Saint John the Maverick, but they couldn’t let go of the romantic angle and opened themselves up to fairly justifiable criticism of the thinness of that part of it. Jesus, sometimes you wonder if the Times in recent years can get anything right!

]]> by: biggerbox http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526862 Fri, 22 Feb 2008 02:22:13 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526862 Maybe it's just that I'm a bit confused after a long day at work, but didn't I hear that the Times ran the story in order to keep McCain's load of toxic hydrazine gas from threatening the public? ;-) Maybe it’s just that I’m a bit confused after a long day at work, but didn’t I hear that the Times ran the story in order to keep McCain’s load of toxic hydrazine gas from threatening the public? ;-)

]]> by: PurpleGirl http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526858 Fri, 22 Feb 2008 01:32:53 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526858 Americablog points out that McCain's website was still showing and calling attention to the NYT endorsement of him. Go figure. Americablog points out that McCain’s website was still showing and calling attention to the NYT endorsement of him. Go figure.

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526856 Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:32:40 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526856 <i>Is it because he’s a dork in a stupid hat who has cooties?</i> That would be my guess. Is it because he’s a dork in a stupid hat who has cooties?

That would be my guess.

]]> by: Swami http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526853 Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:33:04 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526853 I think McCain is lying. He might not have been romantically involved with Iseman, but I believe he was counseled by his campaign people to abstain from the appearances of impropriety. The wording of McCain's denial leads me to believe he's not being honest. And if this allegation gets any traction it will be by further information that McCain had knowledge that the relationship wasn't viewed as cool. Maybe McCain's Campaign planted the story to portray McCain as the virile candidate.. When there's snow on the roof, there's a fire in the fireplace? I think McCain is lying. He might not have been romantically involved with Iseman, but I believe he was counseled by his campaign people to abstain from the appearances of impropriety. The wording of McCain’s denial leads me to believe he’s not being honest. And if this allegation gets any traction it will be by further information that McCain had knowledge that the relationship wasn’t viewed as cool.

Maybe McCain’s Campaign planted the story to portray McCain as the virile candidate.. When there’s snow on the roof, there’s a fire in the fireplace?

]]> by: joanr16 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526852 Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:25:02 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526852 If this story originated with Drudge, it sure as shootin' didn't come from the "liberal" media. Drudge must think Huckabee still has a shot. What's with Drudge's obsession with other people's sex lives, anyway? Is it because he's a dork in a stupid hat who has cooties? John McCain, sex bomb. Who knew? If this story originated with Drudge, it sure as shootin’ didn’t come from the “liberal” media. Drudge must think Huckabee still has a shot.

What’s with Drudge’s obsession with other people’s sex lives, anyway? Is it because he’s a dork in a stupid hat who has cooties?

John McCain, sex bomb. Who knew?

]]> by: Doug Hughes http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526847 Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:47:38 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2008/02/21/mcscandal/#comment-526847 John McCain needs to recognize how serious the implication of impropriety in office can be. The best think he can do is get expert advice from someone who has been there and taken all the mean-spirited crap of the attack machine. He needs to call Bill Clinton. John McCain needs to recognize how serious the implication of impropriety in office can be. The best think he can do is get expert advice from someone who has been there and taken all the mean-spirited crap of the attack machine. He needs to call Bill Clinton.

]]>