Category Archives: Election

potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest

I knew that, eventually, the rabid dimwits like Lush Limbaugh would realize ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.’ So, the NYTimes has goaded the Far Wrong to reconsider Big Mac. The Times provides cover for a perfect flip-flop by Limbaugh and his ilk. I frankly don’t care if McCain screwed a lobbyist. I care about whether he did favors for her and her clients. I care about McCain’s judgment and sense.

For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk – New York Times 

It had been just a decade since an official favor for a friend with regulatory problems had nearly ended Mr. McCain’s political career by ensnaring him in the Keating Five scandal. In the years that followed, he reinvented himself as the scourge of special interests, a crusader for stricter ethics and campaign finance rules, a man of honor chastened by a brush with shame.

But the concerns about Mr. McCain’s relationship with Ms. Iseman underscored an enduring paradox of his post-Keating career. Even as he has vowed to hold himself to the highest ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest. …

Mr. Keating, a Phoenix financier and real estate developer, became an early sponsor and, soon, a friend. He was a man of great confidence and daring, Mr. McCain recalled in his memoir. “People like that appeal to me,” he continued. “I have sometimes forgotten that wisdom and a strong sense of public responsibility are much more admirable qualities.”

During Mr. McCain’s four years in the House, Mr. Keating, his family and his business associates contributed heavily to his political campaigns. The banker gave Mr. McCain free rides on his private jet, a violation of Congressional ethics rules (he later said it was an oversight and paid for the trips). They vacationed together in the Bahamas. And in 1986, the year Mr. McCain was elected to the Senate, his wife joined Mr. Keating in investing in an Arizona shopping mall.

For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk – New York Times

Am I the only one disturbed by Cindy McCain? Is she a trophy wife (2nd, 3rd) or really well-preserved? At one appearance, Cindy and McCain’s mom both dressed in red power-suits — I thought I was seeing double. mjh

WW2

Think Progress » McCain: I Could Send U.S. Troops ‘Anywhere’ For ‘A Long Period of Time’ 

On ABC’s Good Morning America today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was asked if he has “regrets” about “saying that the U.S. could be in Iraq for a hundred years.” McCain said he didn’t because — in his mind — the U.S. could have a military presence “anywhere” for a long period of time:

ROBERTS: So it’s clear you have no regrets in saying that the U.S. could be in Iraq for a hundred years.

MCCAIN: The U.S. could have a military presence anywhere in the world for a long period of time.

Think Progress » McCain: I Could Send U.S. Troops ‘Anywhere’ For ‘A Long Period of Time’

McCain has rewritten that history a couple of times lately

McCain’s Rewrite of His Anti-Rumsfeld Script | The Trail | washingtonpost.com By Peter Baker

As he gets closer to the Republican nomination, John McCain has been
trying to balance his unqualified support for the Iraq war by reminding
audiences that he was also a tough critic of the way it was managed
until President Bush finally changed strategies a year ago. In recent
weeks, McCain has gone so far as to tell audiences that he was “the
only one” who called for then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld’s
resignation.

The only trick is he never did, at least not publicly. The senator
from Arizona was a tough critic of Rumsfeld and more than once declared
that he had no confidence in the Pentagon chief in the two years before
Bush finally dumped him in November 2006. But even as he was
criticizing Rumsfeld, McCain typically stopped short of calling for the
defense secretary to step down on the grounds that it was up to the
president to decide who served in his
Cabinet.

McCain has rewritten that history a couple of times lately. While
campaigning in Fort Myers, Fla., on Jan. 26, he told a crowd: “In the
conflict that we’re in, I’m the only one that said we have to abandon
the Rumsfeld strategy — and Rumsfeld — and adopt a new strategy.”
Four days later during a debate
at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., aired
on CNN, McCain said, “I’m the only one that said that Rumsfeld had to
go.”

A McCain spokesman acknowledged yesterday that was not correct. “He
did not call for his resignation,” said the campaign’s Brian Rogers.

Will McCain Pick Lieberman as Veep?

Think Progress » Lieberman: McCain ‘Almost Always Right On The Big Issues Of Foreign Policy Over The Last 20 Years’

On the 2/12 edition of Bill Bennett’s radio show, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) explained that he was supporting
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for president because he believes that
withdrawal from Iraq would “abandon” the country “to the killers” and
“empower them to come after us again.” “McCain will never let that
happen,” claimed Lieberman.

“The guy has been almost always right on the big issues of foreign
policy over the last twenty years,” said Lieberman. “That’s why I want
him to be my president,” he added.

Lieberman is now claiming that McCain has a nearly spotless foreign
policy record, but in reality, McCain was an ardent supporter of the “worst strategic mistake
in the history of the United States.” In fact, McCain was one of the
most prominent voices telling the American people that Iraq would be
“easy” and that Americans would be “welcomed as liberators“:

“And I believe that the success will be fairly easy.” [CNN, Larry King Live, 9/24/02]

“I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time.” [CNN Late Edition, 9/29/02]

“Do you believe that the people of Iraq or at least a large number of them will treat us as liberators?” “Absolutely. Absolutely,” replied McCain. [MSNBC, Hardball, 3/12/03]

“There’s no doubt in my mind that once these people are gone that we will be welcomed as liberators.” [MSNBC, Hardball, 3/24/03]

In the same segment, Lieberman stressed that “you’ve got to take
people at their word.” Unfortunately, too many Americans did take John
McCain at his word when he said Iraq would be “easy.”

Think Progress » Lieberman Defends Waterboarding: It’s ‘Not Like Putting Burning Coals On People’s Bodies’

“It is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological,” Lieberman said.

Lieberman appears to be mimicking his close friend Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) pandering to the right wing. Like Lieberman, McCain voted against banning waterboarding this week, even though he had previously called the technique “very exquisite torture.”

Until recently, Lieberman had also raised objections to the Bush administration’s interrogation practices….

Which McCain?

Think Progress » New McCain Rips Old McCain’s Argument That Bush Tax Cuts Benefit The ‘Wealthy’

On ABC’s This Week today, host George Stephanopoulos asked Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) about Democratic proposals to protect “middle-income Americans” and “only raise” taxes “on the wealthy.” In response, McCain bristled at Stephanopoulos’s distinction, mockingly warning against rhetoric that talks about “who the, quote, ‘wealthy’ are in America”:

MCCAIN: But more importantly, we’ll argue about whether we should increase your taxes or decrease them. Obviously, I’m for decreases in taxes. Maybe Americans want their taxes increased. We’ll argue about…

STEPHANOPOULOS: … for middle-income Americans, only raise them on the wealthy?

MCCAIN: Oh, yes, sure, the wealthy, the wealthy. Always be interested in when people talk about who the, quote, “wealthy” are in America. I find it interesting.

Now that he has to court the hardline anti-tax factions of the conservative movement, McCain is changing his story on tax policy. In 2000, 2001, and 2003, McCain was one of the people “interested” in talking about “who the, quote, ‘wealthy’ are in America” when he argued against Bush’s tax cuts that “mostly benefit the wealthy“:

“There’s one big difference between me and the others–I won’t take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy.” [McCain campaign commercial, January 2000]

“I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers.” [McCain Senate floor statement, May 21, 2001]

“But when you look at the percentage of the tax cuts that–as the previous tax cuts–that go to the wealthiest Americans, you will find that the bulk of it, again, goes to wealthiest Americans.” [NBC’s “Today,” Jan. 7, 2003]

McCain now appears more interested in protecting the “wealthy” than he does in straight talk.

Think Progress » New McCain Rips Old McCain’s Argument That Bush Tax Cuts Benefit The ‘Wealthy’

Which McCain is Right?

Think Progress » McCain: I Have ‘An Extensive Background And Knowledge’ On The Economy

Last night during an interview with CNN’s Larry King,
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) tried to make the argument that, among the
remaining presidential candidates, he is best suited to address “the
economic challenges we face” because of his “extensive background” and
“knowledge” of the economy.

McCain’s claim does not hold up to his own scrutiny. Throughout the
past eight years, and as recently as last December, McCain has
acknowledged on a number of occasions that he knows very little about
the economy:

– Seeking to explain his shift to the left on economic issues, McCain claimed: “I didn’t pay nearly the attention to those issues in the past. I was probably a ’supply-sider’ based on the fact that I really didn’t jump into the issue.” [Jan. 2000]

– “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.” [Nov. 2005]

– “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” but “I’ve got Greenspan’s book.” [Dec. 2007]

On the issue of whether he’s prepared to lead on the economy, it sounds like John McCain needs to convince himself before he can convince others.