Posted on 02/21/2008 6:31:35 AM PST by teddyballgame
TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) -- John McCain denied a romantic relationship with a female telecommunications lobbyist on Thursday and said a report by The New York Times suggesting favoritism for her clients is "not true."
"I'm very disappointed in the article. It's not true," the likely Republican presidential nominee said as his wife, Cindy, stood alongside him during a news conference called to address the matter.
McCain described the woman in question, lobbyist Vicki Iseman, as a friend.
The newspaper quoted anonymous aides as saying they had urged McCain and Iseman to stay away from each other prior to his failed presidential campaign in 2000. In its own follow-up story, The Washington Post quoted longtime aide John Weaver, who split with McCain last year, as saying he met with lobbyist Iseman and urged her to steer clear of McCain.
(Excerpt) Read more at breakingnews.nypost.com ...
Obama vs. McCain doesn't bode well for conservatives. I feel like we lose no matter who wins!
“This has been a setup from the start. Endorse the most liberal, least electable candidate from the opposing party and, when he is assured nomination, take the dagger to him.”
Exactly. No surprise here.
And beyond all that . . . John McCain may very well make Bob Dole look like a youthful, energetic champ.
Pretty hard to sue anybody when you are a public figure, in fact, almost impossible.
RINOs: Enjoy your immolation at the hands of your "friends" at the NYT. This will be a long, slow burn. Hope it hurts, you deserve it.
Pretty hard to sue anybody when you are a public figure, in fact, almost impossible.
I should have added “for defamation”.
According to the story in the Times, eight years ago McCain was tempted by a lobbyist and did not give in to temptation.
O-Kaay. That means eight years ago he was a healthy male who did not stray. This is a story because?
I think it says a lot more about the character of the editors of the New York Times than it does about John McCain. A *lot* more.
The old media will see to it. Kind of like calling Florida for gore in 2000. This time the old media is looking to make an impact sooner, so that none may question.
What I found callous and deplorable was at the end of the news conferencee when Mr. & Mrs. McCain turned and walked away. If you get a chance, watch it. I can't believe McCain didn't offer any "gentlemen" type gesture toward her. He's missing a sensitivity chip... and a code of chivalry.
McCain did NOT look guilty. Save your personal feelings for your posts and keep them out of the headline.
That’s exactly what a bully does. He intimidates people who try to tell the truth into not telling it because he’s an in-your-face streetfighter with a bad temper.
What is sad is to see supposed conservative Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan and their liberal news buddies as well as the full court press by his former aids on ALL the channels trying to do damage control. They didn’t need much help! MSNBC, particularly Buchanan and Scarborough, are going after the NYT and not McCain.
So what was proven with the keating five????
“After months of testimony revealed that all five senators acted improperly to differing degrees, the senators continually said they were following the status quo of campaign funding practices. In August 1991, the committee concluded that Cranston, DeConcini, and Riegle’s conduct constituted substantial interference with the FHLBB’s enforcement efforts and that they had done so at the behest of Charles Keating. The committee recommended censure for Cranston and criticized the other four for “questionable conduct”.”
Bugger off on this one, buddy!
LOL.
1) Wait until he gets the nomination in the bag (check)
2) Write article on an affair where both supposed participants deny the report (check)
3) Throw in a few smears about lobbyist influence (check)
Typical NYT bull$hit. At lease these dumbasses couldn’t hold their fire until September.
The Times, like many on this forum, have let the Obama scandal slide in favor of ongoing attacks on McCain.
Well said!
The MSM mad McCain waht he is and now it’s time to destroy him. I’m just surprised they didn’t waitr until he’s officially the GOP nominee. Everyone with eye to see saw this coming miles and miles away.
I'm afraid you are right about the tables truning, although I would maintain that Paul, the Huckster, and Hunter, were all far less electable. "Maverick" John McCain, poking the Republican Party in the eye, got great press. Presumed Republican Nominee/Republican Nominee John McCain, is target # 1 of the press.
I'm not that afraid of the "dirt" they have on McCain. If it was certainly fatal, the media would have not been able to resist the temptation to take him out long ago. Its not every day they can hang the scalp of a Republican Senator on their belt.
On the other hand, I'm very concerned that McCain, shocked and feeling betrayed by finding himself the object of a sustained media attack, will start appearing in public rolling ball bearings in his hand, and mumbling darkly about strawberries.
The amazing thing to me is that McCain seems to be completely blind to what the MSM is up to, and what their agenda is.
Yes sir ... He'd be a great president and commander in chief ... of, say, Grand Fenwick. ("The Mouse That Roared")
I think his understated response is a nice contrast to Clinton’s angry finger-wagging. The big story here is the NR piece on the turmoil in the NYT newsroom over this. The McCains need to work with their media allies to make THAT the focus and reveal the individual players involved with the apparent screaming matches that apparently occurred at the Times over whether to release this trash. Larry Sinclair has more proof on Obama (receipts, etc.) than the Times does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.