"I did not have lobbying relations with that woman"

Paste a still picture of McCain over Bill's face and dub in lobbying.

It will go viral.

Seriously, I bet his campaign will survive. I think the timing is curious, not earlier when it could have sunk him and if the NYT's held it for effect releasing it now gives McCain just enough time before the general to either recove or blame the old gay lady or his anticipated loss?

I swear I heard about this exact issue before.

This revelation should finally put the Karl Rove whisper campaign of the 2000 primary season in its more accurate light, that John McCain is not gay but bisexual.

MEDIA FIREWORKS: MCCAIN PLEADS WITH NY TIMES TO SPIKE STORY
Thu Dec 20 2007 10:56:57 ET

Just weeks away from a possible surprise victory in the primaries, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz has been waging a ferocious behind the scenes battle with the NEW YORK TIMES, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, and has hired DC power lawyer Bob Bennett to mount a bold defense against charges of giving special treatment to a lobbyist!

McCain has personally pleaded with NY TIMES editor Bill Keller not to publish the high-impact report involving key telecom legislation before the Senate Commerce Committee, newsroom insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

McCain wants the issue to be about sex - possible sex - sexual relations because he doesn't want anybody to really think about the conflict of interest for purely political purposes.

He cannot deny what he has done on record - that is what will come out next.

For whom did he do stuff and what is her connection to some of his flip-flops?

Telecom immunity?

I'm a Obama supporter, and under no circumstances would I vote for McCain. Having said that, I'm surprised that NYT even ran the story. There are no facts there. I was hoping for more. McCain will come out fine, and this will be no more than a blip on the radar. It will damage NYT more than McCain with independents, I think.

I'm a Republican. I clearly recall during the Clinton scandals the manner in which Democrats went to their battle stations in defense of their man. I am unwilling to do the same for Sen. McCain. My feeling is that, poorly sourced and thin though the NYT article may be, the facts must be fully developed. In the event that either (A) McCain had an intimate relationship with this individual (and then lied about it) AND/OR (B) Inappropriately supported her client's positions because of that relationship, then I say he should be dismissed from consideration as a presidential candidate (at minimum). I refuse to support him blindly. The facts are the facts are the facts. Let him stand or fall on them.

Since he is a Senator, we need to appoint a Special Prosecutor with a multi-million dollar budget and full power of subpoena and wiretap. Since Clinton was only accused of zapping a random intern, while McCain is accused of doing favors, the investigation should be at least 5 times as vigorous.

To run the story at this point suggests to me that more than a handful of editors and attorneys at the New York Times – corporate as well as outside counsel -- were convinced of its accuracy.

Advised, as they surely were, that the story was about to run, I find it curious indeed if not downright damning that McCain and his legal hired gun, Bob Bennett, did not seek injunctive relief from the court. Perhaps they thought it wiser to submit the matter to the court of public opinion, where slick spin and self-righteous bravado might manage the crisis more effectively than testimony in court of law, subject to discovery and sworn oaths to tell the truth. Make of that what you will.

Despite Bay Buchannan's braying, the GOP could become the 'brokered' affair many expected it would become all along. Although Romney has “suspended” campaigning and encouraged delegates committed to him to vote for McCain, he could yet become the "go-to" guy at the convention. He could yet again be the hero on the white charger who rushes in to save the GOP from an embarrassing disaster, like he did in Massachusetts circa 2002.

If the Times report is not accurate, this matter could quickly turn into a celebrated/historic case of libel and fuel conspiracy theories for generations.

The downside to the New York Times is hard to fathom. Its credibility is already suffering thanks to Judith Miller and other reporters of invention. Even if it got the facts right, the timing for the release of this story – a few weeks after Romney withdraws, a week before the final big primaries of the season -- reeks of manipulation and political partisanship. Should The Times lose or be forced to retract on a matter of this importance, the once “Gray Lady” will surely be seen as a two-bit prostitute she will have become.

JG....seems like a good idea to me.

I don't see how The Times can be accused of timing this story to hurt McCain. He himself has been fighting to keep it out of the paper. He caused the delay. And if The Times wanted to damage his campaign, the ideal time would have been later, during the general election.

Mr Mulhern,
I appreciate your honesty and intregity. My issue as a Democrat and a supporter of President Clinton, wasnt the fact the he had a sexual relationship with an intern. That was wrong. My problem with the Starr investigation was, that it started out as an investigation as a twenty year old land deal. The Special Prosecutor could not get any "dirt" on the Clintons with Whitewater, so the investigation was broadened and kept continuing until they could find something on the President. The simple appearance of a rogue prosecutor out to get the President, because they could not beat him at the polls, is what gave many of us pause.

Still waiting for the other shoe to drop. This was a long article, and I expect there will be more to follow especially regarding McCain's cozy relationship with lobbyists of all stripes (and genders).

Curious that John Weaver, the former chief political strategist of the McCain campaign who resigned under pressure last summer when the campaign imploded, is the main source for information regarding a possible extra-marital affair. The "Times" alludes to other sources but they remained anonymous. That leaves open the possibility that this story is nothing more than sour grapes on the part of Mr. Weaver.

I'm not catching spears for McCain. I'm merely leaving that out there for public consumption as a possibility. Does the gentleman prefer blondes? Stay tuned and we'll find out together.

Curiouser still, McCain has yet to deny the alleged affair. Or did I miss something? This could further tarnish his reputation in the decicedly pro-family (for show, anyway) GOP. Oh, mercy!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Keating Five (or Keating Five Scandal) refers to a Congressional scandal related to the collapse of most of the Savings and Loan institutions in the United States in the late 1980s.
In 1989, the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association of Irvine, Calif., collapsed. Lincoln's chairman, Charles H. Keating Jr., was faulted for the thrift's failure. ........several U.S. senators had approached him and requested that he ease off on the Lincoln investigation. It came out that these senators had been beneficiaries of $1.3 million in campaign contributions from Keating. a series of investigations by the California government, the United States Department of Justice, and the Senate Ethics Committee. The ethics committee's investigation focused on five senators: Alan Cranston (D-CA); Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ); John Glenn (D-OH); JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ); and Donald W. Riegle, Jr. (D-MI), who became known as the Keating Five.After months of testimony revealed that all five senators acted improperly to differing degrees.......

As a liberal Democrat who voted for Obama in my state's primary, maybe I just don't get it about McCain & the Times, so perhaps someone could explan it to me.

The NY Times started working on this story months ago, and as far back as December it was so well-developed that McCain personally was calling the editors to try to quash it. Okay--and then, just before Super Tuesday, the NY Times editors endorsed--John McCain. Huh?

No wonder Mitt Romney is steamed!

Now, there are chicks who do dig that frosty comb-over on old angry short guys who've been tortured during years of bondage. McCain's got that extra sexy leather bomber jacket thing going, too. Stop laughing, it could happen.

I can't wait for the reports verifying that McCain took a 'complimentary' HBO and Cinemax package home from this suspicious encounter. That, or the release of sex tapes.

Did anyone ever consider this story could have been planted by McCain staffers? 1. To win the support of conservatives who normally would not support and contribute to McCain's presidential attempt, and 2. To dispell any future accusations that McCain has been a lobbyist playmate in DC. Seems like a Rove tactic to me.

Back in 1999, Arthur Schlesinger in his personal journal wrote "John McCain woulld not be a viable candidate for preseident because of his wayward sex life: It appears that the fact that John was a player was common knowledge 9 years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if the Times doesn't have more than they are telling.

McCain will deny deny deny deny deny this until it goes away. What's with his banging with his fist on the podium when he is on the microphone. Does anyone with any common sense vote for a guy that is 72 years old. Give me a break! I thought we wanted change? This man will destroy us all. Remember, the tax breaks are for the rich not for us working folks. sorry

Copy of Tax Warrant of Bill Keller editor of New York Times McCain story

webofdeception.com/editorkellertaxwarrantnewyorktimesmccain.html

Can someone tell me if McCain has ever held a "real" job? Lets see, a playboy for 20 years, now married to a wealthy woman, gosh i cannot think of anything else.

Can you believe that Lieberman had to whisper the correct comment on his ear while he made a fool of himself. I see another George. In fact, George McCain.

Luz, McCain is the puppet of Lieberman. McCain is really raking in the Jewish money too. Obama doesn't have a chance.

We have conquered the uter space,but not our inner space

We spend more,but enjoy less

There should be a better way to start a day than waking up every
morning.