I want to talk about John McCain.
I've wanted to talk about John McCain for awhile now. Too much press coverage on the Obama-Clinton epic struggle is leaving the Republican frontrunner with little to do, nothing to say, and becoming increasingly irrelevant as his campaign gets pushed back to the third, or fourth, package on the network newscasts.
It's bad timing. Horribly bad. Even last week when he swept through the Potomac Primaries, there he was, following another of Obama's uplifting speeches, with a cast right out of Century Village behind him, and talking about an ever-lasting war and smiling at the wrong times. Obama talks about hope. McCain talks about battle. He's a Debbie Downer.
And who can escape the media drama this Tuesday when Obama, tired of Hillary not admitting defeat, not conceding, and not congratulating him for his tenth-in-a-row victory, cut her off as she was making another primetime campaign stump speech and went on a 45-minute barnburner in Houston. All the networks cut away from Clinton mid-sentence and went to Obama as he still was giving his "thank yous." Hume on Fox had his microphone live and one can hear him screaming to his production crew to "Go" to Obama now. To borrow a phrase from the current Vice-President: the Clinton campaign is in its last throes. Veteran AP Political Writer, Ron Fournier, in the AP wire story which appeared on many newspapers around the country said that it was "panic-button time" in the Clinton Campaign. That explains the "War of Words" this week between both camps and whether or not Obama borrowed phrases from Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick. Then it doesn't help when Michelle Obama goes off saying that she's proud of her country for the first time. It hasn't been a good week for Obama.
But I want to talk about John McCain. Just when it seemed that he was going to go into semi-retirement, to catch his breath, maybe go on a short-vacation, the New York Times splashed a front-page story in today's edition, posting the story online last night at around 7:45pm. Apparently, The Times had been sitting on this story for a couple of months now, at least since December. The appearance is that The Times waited until McCain's frontrunner status was clearly established before they came out to produce this story. In it, The Times suggest that McCain's crusade on ethics and campaign-finance reform is not but a charade. That McCain has failed to practice what he has preached. In addition to that, the article insinuates that there might have been a romantic relationship between McCain and a lobbyist—so much so that during his 2000 presidential race, aides tried to keep her away from the Senator. The Washington Post's version of this led with the confrontation between the aides and the female lobbyist, Vicki Iseman.
Today McCain surrogates defended his actions on the network morning shows. Bob Bennett called it a "non-story" on Today. On Early, McCain Campaign Manager Rick Davis called it "the worst kind of tabloid journalism." At around 9:00am ET, McCain held a presser denouncing the story and any wrongdoing. Cindy McCain, who's had a more visible role in the campaign this week—what with her subtle attack on Michelle Obama's "pride"—said that "he would never do anything to not only disappoint our family, but disappoint the people of America."
The silver lining in this of course is that for the first time in a long while, McCain led the network morning newscasts, he'll probably lead tonight on the network evening newscasts and without a doubt, he'll be the top story on all the cable newsers. On Drudge, he's been the top headline for almost 16-hours now. Rush goes live on the East Coast in an hour, and he'll probably start off with this.
This gives McCain plenty of ammunition. One thing that the Conservative wing of the Republican Party absolutely abhors is The New York Times. Even though this paper previously endorsed John McCain for president, he can now come out and once again accuse The Times of displaying a liberal slant in its coverage and an incredible bias. The Times will be mentioned almost as much as John McCain today—this wouldn't happen if say, it was ABC News that broke this story. It'll be interesting to see if Rush joins the attack on The Times and somehow defend McCain today—the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
As of this post time, Huckabee hasn't come out to publicly mention anything; he'll wait to see how this plays out.
So what is this? I think it's a non-story. If this is the best that The Times has then I think that it either A) Isn't trying hard enough or B) Doesn't have much to begin with. Ethics? Are you kidding me? McCain hasn't even made ethics central to his run this time around. It's all national security all the time. This is an article that would've derailed his candidacy in 2000 which was D.O.A. anyway since the Republican establishment was hovering around Texas Gov. George W. Bush. This article is eight years too late. At the end of the day, McCain can come out winning if he's able to spin this as an unfair attack, another example of the media practicing the "politics of personal destruction." And once again—Ethics? Just imagine if Hillary pulls a miracle and she's the nominee, then the media will really have something to run with; with Billary the question will be, Where do we start?
1 comments:
Hello. I am quite impressed with your analysis of the whole campaign and also McCain's recent dilemma. I don't think this will hurt his campaign but rather just slow his "momentum" a bit. It could also discourage the conservative voters who were beginning to lay trust in McCain. Huckabee is just waiting for when to strike and use it against him, but by then he would have already lost the nomination and any hopes of being Vice President. While on the Democratic side, their party is gradually uniting. I honestly believe that both candidates stand a strong chance against McCain. The Republicans are afraid of Hillary, and Obama is a very intelligent, well spoken man. Although his track record may not include a World War Two victory, a revived economy, or a resolved missile crisis, he does have realistic means of revitalizing this fallen nation. And for the first time, we can all be proud of what our nation can do when we aren't divided. The Republicans can bash him all they want and even dare to manipulate the ignorant voters by yelling "HIS FATHER WAS A MUSLIM." Let them, it only goes to show how ignorant this country is while every other potent force is taking advantage of us. His father was a Harvard Law graduate, like himself and that is a much bigger accomplishment than what our ignorant aristocrats or pseudo elitists can ever dream of doing.
Post a Comment