Looks like those who said that NYT article on McCain would fizzle were right

[book_worm]

Now the NYT is even repudiating it. I think the big problem with the story was it decided to emphasize a possible sexual affair instead of pointing out that McCain has a history of being two faced--taking on the special interests publicly--and then behind the scenes agressively helping lobbyists in return for help.

I'm beginning to think that the NY Times did the story to actually help McCain by rallying conservatives who could point to this as an attack by the "liberal media."

[acmavm]

1. I posted this a.m. that this whole scam was a setup by the NYT. I will never

believe otherwise.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2915898&mesg_id=2916003

[devilindisguise]

19. Which part

do you think was a scam? The sex with the female lobbyist. Or riding on Murdoch, Paxson, and other corporate media planes, taking the female lobbyist to fundraisers, on the yachett, or what. lol
naivete seems to win the day.

Here's my take. I think more is to come. If she has any sense she will do a book deal.

[wtmusic]

2. When incriminating facts don't mean squat to the average American

where do innuendo and implication stand?

[ClassWarrior]

3. Anyone who's expecting a bombshell is living in fantasy land... Let it drip...

...drip...drip... from now till November. The meme has been planted. More will come out.

NGU.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Hell yeah. By publishing and essentially retracting a sex-scandal story,

they drew the nounds off the trail of all the lobbyist stuff. As pointed out elsewhere, the real McCain scandal is his connection to the telecoms & exactly what Iseman was buying from him with the nookie.

[devilindisguise]

20. You nailed it

I can' abide McCain. I've never liked or trusted him. Just look at the Keating Five thing. There needs to be an investigation and the woman needs to write a book. And heck on the sex part I don't want just sex, I want the intimnate details. Was there a BJ involved? I'm still in shock that a rep. would do a female, but if she passes a lie detector test I will believe it. Anyway, I am interested in the crooked stuff. I really resent the MSM calling McCain's escapades "a romantic affair". Of course it was pure raw sex just like Clintons. I hate those hypocritical media. I understand why Elvis shot his television screens out. I would too if I could afford it. Fools, think they can influence people with their "opines".

[devilindisguise]

22. Sorry for the spelling errors and typos

thinking about the hypocrites on TV, Web Sites, and the hypocritical Newspaper reporters gets my dander up, and my finger fly over the keys too fast.

[napi21]

5. The story hasn't died. If you listened to any of the Sun. AM talk shows,

you know each one of them talked about it. The one thing they all said was that because McCain so flatly stated that each point in the article was WRONG, eveery investigative reporter will be digging to find something. IF they do, McCain is DONE!

[book_worm]

6. what I've seen is that they are pointing out the NY Times is repudiating it's own story

and that this may have helped rally conservatives to McCain. Probably the Times should have put out a story one way or the other. It alleges a sexual affair without any proof or smoking gun and that made the big splash while not empasizing McCain's lobbyist ties. It was a stupid way to go.

[leftofthedial]

7. it was classic rovian inoculation

the times is a compliant element of the repuke ownership of the media. they've done nothing "liberal" for a generation.

[anamandujano]

14. Also, MSM can say, "we did the story."

We're fair.

[Junkdrawer]

8. It's how Rove neutralizes political liabilities...

In 2000, Rove had an ex-Coke snorting candidate that went AWOL from the National Guard, the later being the rich man’s way of dodging Vietnam.

Now, you'd think that that would be an impossible obstacle. Well, Rove secretly leaked all the details to an author with attempted murder in his background. When "Fortunate Son" was released and started to make news, James Hatfield's background was exposed and that news made the book (and Bush's background) tainted data. For those interested, the whole story is detailed in the movie "Horns and Halos".

Move to 2004. Bush is up for reelection, but there's that pesky National Guard Story. So… genuine documents were “forged” and passed on to Dan Rather. Minutes after the 60 minutes story finished, an “alert Freeper” detected the forgeries on his TV screen and soon the whole story was shot down as an example of sloppy journalism. Bush’s National Guard record was not a factor in his reelection bid.

So, here we are in 2008 and the Republican’s have a man who divorces his wife for a mistress 17 years his junior. Not only that, but he STILL can’t seem to keep his marriage vows. So, what to do…what to do…

[ClassWarrior]

9. That's true... So it's up to us to do political judo and turn it back on them.

We didn't have a thriving Progressive Media even four years ago. Thank goodness for folks like Rachel Maddow.

As for us, write LTTEs, call RW radio shows, do whatever YOU can to be the media.

NGU.

[madokie]

10. rove is the man with the power today theres no doubt in my mind

he gets things done for the gop and for that he will be protected to no end I'm afraid

[gratuitous]

11. The Times is repudiating its story?

Gee, it would be nice if there was a link to this.

Here in reality world, I see multiple reports on the evening news and the Sunday talks shows, as well as stories from overseas that Straight-Talking Johnny Maverick might not be the independent free-thinker he likes to portray himself as. In fact, some of our somnambulent political reporters have gone so far as to notice that STJM is not just chock full of lobbyists in his campaign staff, but that some of those lobbyists haven't quit their day jobs while helping out the STJM campaign. This has led to some unseemly pondering about just what those lobbyists might expect from a President McCain.

Conservatives were always going to rally to support STJM. Like Zack Mayo in "An Officer and A Gentleman," they got nowhere else to go.

[ClassWarrior]

12. Yes, there's a spark out there now. We just need to fan it...

NGU.

[Junkdrawer]

13. Their ombudsman did...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24pubed.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[gratuitous]

15. Thank you for the link

But I don't see a "repudiation" of the story in their ombudsman's column. I did read these paragraphs, which don't amount to a repudiation at all:

But in the absence of a smoking gun, I asked Keller why he decided to run what he had.

“If the point of the story was to allege that McCain had an affair with a lobbyist, we’d have owed readers more compelling evidence than the conviction of senior staff members,” he replied. “But that was not the point of the story. The point of the story was that he behaved in such a way that his close aides felt the relationship constituted reckless behavior and feared it would ruin his career.”

I'm not sure it amounts to "repudiation" to correct a public misperception over what the story said.

[Junkdrawer]

16. It was a mixed message...

The part that Fox News et al will focus on is:

...

I think that ignores the scarlet elephant in the room. A newspaper cannot begin a story about the all-but-certain Republican presidential nominee with the suggestion of an extramarital affair with an attractive lobbyist 31 years his junior and expect readers to focus on anything other than what most of them did. And if a newspaper is going to suggest an improper sexual affair, whether editors think that is the central point or not, it owes readers more proof than The Times was able to provide.

The stakes are just too big. As the flamboyant Edwin Edwards of Louisiana once said, “The only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy.”

...

But I think most DUers would agree with this:

...

The pity of it is that, without the sex, The Times was on to a good story. McCain, who was reprimanded by the Senate Ethics Committee in 1991 for exercising “poor judgment” by intervening with federal regulators on behalf of a corrupt savings and loan executive, recast himself as a crusader against special interests and the corrupting influence of money in politics. Yet he has continued to maintain complex relationships with lobbyists like Iseman, at whose request he wrote to the Federal Communications Commission to urge a speed-up on a decision affecting one of her clients.

Much of that story has been reported over the years, but it was still worth pulling together to help voters in 2008 better understand the John McCain who might be their next president.

...

[Junkdrawer]

21. To wit:

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/24/new-york-times-ombudsman-faults-paper-on-mccain-romance-story/

[Demagitator]

17. Don't believe anything you read in the media n/t

[devilindisguise]

18. Nevertheless

There is no doubt that he was sampling the wares. Or as Tina Fey said last night on SNL, (all lobbyists are whores). Or words to that effect. Can't remember the exact words. I don't really care, if he was boinking, but I do care about the riding on planes, taking her to parties, and fundraisers, on the yacht. etc. Didn't hear him deny any of that. Of course he is an old crook, and I don't know how he ever got elected after the Keating Five incident. Poor Cindy, she could do so much better.,