First, I was for Tom Tancredo. When “Send ‘em home Tom” failed to attract more than three voters in any one county, I switched to Rudy Giuliani. Rudy – God bless him — decided that not running in the eight contests before Florida was a winning formula. He was right; his opponents won hands down. So, I jumped to Fred Thompson’s bandwagon, but alas, no one could wake him up. Next, I backed Mike Huckabee, a strong candidate were he running for President of the Southern Baptist Convention. Then, in desperation, I rooted for Mitt Romney, the Conservative Republican’s last hope of keeping that impostor McCain off the ticket. (Come to think of it, my endorsements of Republicans are almost as deadly as Gore’s are for Democrats.) Telling my conservative friends that “McCain is better than Obama, Clinton, or Castro,” in sullen resignation I determined to hop aboard the straight talk express. Then, out of the blue, the New York Times gave me reason to hope.
Publishing a front page bombshell promising to unhinge Senator McCain’s campaign, by the second paragraph the Newspaper of Record was tying “female lobbyist,” “romantic,” and ”visiting his offices” to John McCain. Yee-haw! Now I knew why Huckabee hadn’t folded! With the NYT on the job, we can dump McCain and nominate a real conservative to represent the GOP.
Of course, thanks to Bill Clinton, sex scandals just aren’t what they used to be. I mean, Gary Hart was forced out of the 1988 presidential race because of a picture of Donna Rice sitting on his lap. Less than a decade later, wild Bill and Monica create the oral office and Clinton’s approval ratings exploded upward, uh, distended, no…you know what happened. With the bar set that low, the NYT would have to catch McCain in bed with a dead girl or a live boy to derail his run to the nomination. On the other hand, McCain, being a Republican (sort of), is more vulnerable to charges of ethical violations; Republicans are supposed to have morals. Bill Clinton can be accused of many things, but violating his own standards isn’t one of them.
Which brings me to the article in question. I haven’t been this disappointed since we liberated France. There is no “there” there. Where’s the beef? The article is 61 paragraphs long, but the unsubstantiated charge of sexual impropriety peters out after the 4th paragraph, replaced with lengthy discussions of the Keating Five scandal, the Bush/McCain battle for the Republican nomination in 2000, the McCain-Feingold anti-free speech legislation, and just about everything else under the sun. By paragraph #7, the Times was printing this breathless revelation: ”Mr. McCain promised, for example, never to fly directly from Washington to Phoenix, his hometown, to avoid the impression of self-interest because he sponsored a law that opened the route nearly a decade ago.” Instead, he flew on corporate jets “like other lawmakers.” That’s it! Assemble the firing squad! For such malfeasance he must not be allowed to live!
We don’t need waterboarding to get information from terrorists, just make them read the New York Times.
Here’s what the Times doesn’t have. No eyewitnesses to sexual contact. No admission from McCain or the lobbyist. No former staffers who suggest possible sexual misconduct by the Senator and will give their name. No damning e-mails, letters, or stained dresses. No credibility.
What the Times has managed to do is rally formerly reluctant supporters to McCain’s defense. Newsmax is reporting a huge surge in donations to McCain’s campaign and the previously lukewarm conservative talk radio hosts now speak of McCain as their champion. There’s no getting rid of McCain now.
The Gray Lady has really let me down.
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Posted by Jerry Pomeroy in Media, Politics, Video