Author Topic: Is McCain another Bill Clinton?? (Read 985 times)

Chairboy · « **Reply #30 on:** February 21, 2008, 12:18:11 PM »

Agreed, any accusation like this needs some serious fact checking and demands a high standard of evidence. Attempting to manipulate the public through insinuation is poisonous to democracy.

If the media gives a rumor legs, then they're doing a terrible thing. If, however, they can demonstrate conclusively that there's real evidence supporting it, then it could be a legit story.

AKIron · « **Reply #31 on:** February 21, 2008, 01:38:44 PM »

Could anything be worse than selling military secrets to China for campaign money? Even murdering those who threaten your career or selling thousands of pardons isn't as bad imo. You've got to stoop pretty low to establish a new presidential precedent.

texasmom · « **Reply #32 on:** February 21, 2008, 02:14:16 PM »

Even if he turns out to be sleazing... he's no Bill Clinton.

SirLoin · « **Reply #33 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:12:01 PM »

Thomas Jefferson had one too with his wife's half sister.

MORAY37 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:19:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
the question about McCain should not be one about inappropriate personal relationships. It should be about having a close personal working relationship with a lobbyist that has business being overseen by a committee he (McCain) was chairing at the time.

And that, is exactly what it is about. It's amazing everyone seems to be zeroed in on a sex angle... the big deal is that he was palling around with a lobbyist that was actively involved in his dealings with the FCC which he was ruling on.

C(Sea)Bass · « **Reply #35 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:23:52 PM »

Who really cares. If hes getting it on with women half his age, then good for him. When Slick Willy was getting serviced in the oval office the economy did well. So if McCain is getting some in the white house then maybe the economy will be good again.

MORAY37 · « **Reply #36 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:27:22 PM »

It is interesting that the NY Times endorsed McCain as their republican candidate. I'd wonder about what the next few days of this story will bring. I would seriously wonder if a mainstream paper such as the Times would fictionalize this story.... they must feel they have a pretty solid foundation for the story.

I'll wait to render judgement until the rest of the facts come out. The article is interestingly bland in it's details... It might be a case of the facts being a little more substantial than they may have wanted to release.

I hold my judgement for a while, whatever the case.

MORAY37 · « **Reply #37 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:32:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
Who really cares. If hes getting it on with women half his age, then good for him. When Slick Willy was getting serviced in the oval office the economy did well. So if McCain is getting some in the white house then maybe the economy will be good again.

Sir sex is one thing. I don't care where and when the guy gets his willy wet. I don't care when or where ANY republican or democrat does.

Getting friendly with a senator that is on a deciding committee that is dealing with the industry you are a lobbyist for.... is completely another.

It is wrong and it was the original reason for the capitol being moved from NY to the then "swamplands" of Virginia....Lobbyists were getting way too much access to lever holders and deciders in power.

JBA · « **Reply #38 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:57:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MORAY37
And that, is exactly what it is about. It's amazing everyone seems to be zeroed in on a sex angle... the big deal is that he was palling around with a lobbyist that was actively involved in his dealings with the FCC which he was ruling on.

He as dose others has lobbyist on his election staff. It's not uncommon. The bigger questions are :
1. The NYT was forced to run the story sooner then they had planed do to competitors
   If so then when were they planning to run it? Perhaps in August when it would do the most harm?
2. If the NYT had this story in December as is implied when they said the sat on the story, Then why did they indorse JM.
   Perhaps to set him up for a primary win so they could assassinate him with this head shot later.
3.They story of 4 pages has about two paragraphs about the alleged affair, the rest is about the Keating 5, four democrats and JM,
   A blatant attempt to dredge up a 20 plus old news story

john9001 · « **Reply #39 on:** February 21, 2008, 06:35:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by JBA
A blatant attempt to dredge up a 20 plus old news story

well, there is no bad news out of Iraq, so they have to print some "news".

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #40 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:02:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by texasmom
Even if he turns out to be sleazing... he's no Bill Clinton.

I knew Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton was a freind of mine.

John McCain is no Bill Clinton.

SIG220 · « **Reply #41 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:14:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I knew Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton was a freind of mine.

John McCain is no Bill Clinton.

True, he was unsuccessful at dodging military service during Vietnam, unlike Clinton.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #42 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:19:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SIG220
True, he was unsuccessful at dodging military service during Vietnam, unlike Clinton.

In order to be unsucessful at dodging, I would think one must have attempted to dodge.

I am not aware that McCain attempted that. With a Admiral for a father, I would think that McCain volunteered.

My post was a paraphrase from political history.

bj229r · « **Reply #43 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:24:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MORAY37
And that, is exactly what it is about. It's amazing everyone seems to be zeroed in on a sex angle... the big deal is that he was palling around with a lobbyist that was actively involved in his dealings with the FCC which he was ruling on.

There is yet to be any evidence that Mr Straight-talk tried to get this lobbyist's wishes through--he DID ask (wrote a letter) the FCC to stop delaying a decision affecting the lady's company in question--no evidence he tried to influence the outcome of said decision.

So typical---NYT could have run this before New Hampshire, when McCain was an outsider and Romney was the likely nominee--they run adoring story after adoring story of McCain, either neutral or negative coverage of Romney---now that McCain is the likely nominee, they try to torpedo him with an 8 year old-thus-far-unprovable story. Perhaps now McCain will grasp that being a thorn in the Gop's side and garnering lavish praise from the Times is fine until there is a candidate that the Times REALLY wants to succeed

bj229r · « **Reply #44 on:** February 21, 2008, 07:27:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SIG220
True, he was unsuccessful at dodging military service during Vietnam, unlike Clinton.

Umm...McCain went to Annapolis?