New York Times Ombudsman Faults Paper on McCain Romance Story
John McCain and wife, Cindy, answered questions at a press conference held Thursday in response to a New York Times article alleging that McCain had an affair with a lobbyist nine years ago.
The New York Times failed to establish a sexual relationship had existed between John McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman and therefore should not have published the salacious claims it made last week suggesting otherwise, the newspaper’s public editor wrote in Sunday’s online edition.
The editors and reporters were on to a good story about the Arizona senator’s fight against special interests at the same time he had appeared to do a favor for one, wrote Times Ombudsman Clark Hoyt, but charges that the relationship went beyond politics and into romance was a distraction without evidence. He added that Executive Editor Bill Keller’s argument that the story wasn’t about an affair belies the article’s narrative.
“I think that ignores the scarlet elephant in the room. A newspaper cannot begin a story about the all-but-certain Republican presidential nominee with the suggestion of an extramarital affair with an attractive lobbyist 31 years his junior and expect readers to focus on anything other than what most of them did. And if a newspaper is going to suggest an improper sexual affair, whether editors think that is the central point or not, it owes readers more proof than The Times was able to provide,” Hoyt wrote.
On Thursday, McCain held a press conference to deny charges that he and Iseman, 40, had had an affair nine years ago while she was lobbying for his assistance to get the Federal Communications Commission to rule on her client’s application for approval of the sale of a television station. McCain, 71, who was the Senate Commerce Committee’s chairman at the time, wrote the FCC asking the commissioners to make a decision but did not ask them to rule one way or the other.
McCain, with his wife by his side, answered questions for 15 minutes, and flat out denied a sexual relationship. The focus then turned to the newspaper, which wrote that McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign staff had tried to keep him and Iseman apart for fear their relationship would hurt his campaign.
In Sunday’s post-mortem, Hoyt wrote, “The article was notable for what it did not say: It did not say what convinced the advisers that there was a romance. It did not make clear what McCain was admitting when he acknowledged behaving inappropriately — an affair or just an association with a lobbyist that could look bad. And it did not say whether (McCain aide John) Weaver, the only on-the-record source, believed there was a romance.”
Hoyt said as a result, the newspaper is in the “uncomfortable position of being the story” because “although it raised one of the most toxic subjects in politics — sex — it offered readers no proof that McCain and Iseman had a romance.”
The McCain camp knew for months that the Times had been working on the article, and staffers had been worried that the article could have been a real crusher. In the end, however, the campaign was able to put a positive spin on the story, even using the article as a fundraising tool last week, saying if the so-called liberal New York Times is trying to smear him, then it demonstrates he’s more of a conservative then Republican opponents had suggested.
McCain has been on the hunt for conservative voters during this primary season, and in Washington, D.C., last night, he courted the 22 Republican governors who were in town for a national governors convention. McCain needs to tap into the group’s resources, both in their ability to unify the party as well as their get-out-the-vote organizations ahead of the general election in November.
Still uncertain is which Democratic candidate he likely will be challenging in November. With that in mind, McCain told the governors he is ready to take on either contender.
Referring to promised tax hikes on the wealthy, McCain joked with the governors. “I notice that Senator Clinton and Senator Obama say only on the very rich. I think a lot of people find themselves astonished to find themselves in that category when the Democrats are going to only tax the quote very rich.”
Neither McCain nor his rival Mike Huckabee have any public appearances on Sunday, but McCain came closer Saturday to winning the GOP nomination, picking up additional delegates as a result of voting in American Samoa and Puerto Rico. McCain still needs about 200 more to get to the magic number of 1,191. Huckabee, meanwhile, has 254 delegates, and aware of the mathematical inevitability of McCain’s nomination, went on Saturday Night Live for a comic turn about his knowing when to bow out of the contest.
Click here to read The New York Times ombudsman’s review of the McCain article.
Geoff. Your profile is off. WAY OFF. The same goes for your definition of ’socialism’. LOOK IT UP MORON! My ideals are not socialistic. Tell you what. Run your little yuppy ass out there and find the most relevant definition for ’socialism’. Then re-post it here along with the reference. Point out the lines that allow for land ownership, home ownership, private industry, and a reasonable scale of personal wealth. Do it now. No? THATS WHAT I THOUGHT. About your little strategy to discredit me. IT WON’T WORK. I’ve made real progress on air, online, and in protest. Even with stuck-up money-hungry thugs like you in every crowd. You’re stuck in the box little man. Too busy listening to people like Dobbs, and OReily to think outside of it. Much of our ‘economic growth’ over recent years has been false. If you don’t know what I mean by that then think sub-prime, inflation, and credit in the form of loans from China. Then look at the national deficit, consumer debt, the shrinking middle class, the expanding lower class, the crumbling infrastructure, and the weak dollar. All directly related to the OBSCENE distribution of wealth within our own country. THE EQUATION ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT WORK. Like I said. You’re stuck in the box. Tell you what. The local professor probably won’t take your calls after that little ‘incident’ with his dog so I’ll let you off the hook there. Lets consider what a true non-conformist had to say about it. Thats right. Albert Einstein tried to make people understand over 60 years ago. He explained in detail how unbridled capitalism can’t work. The more offset it becomes, the more unstable. Now, you look at those numbers again. Then respond and go on record. Put your credibility on the line. I DARE YOU. Long term recession. Yes or No? Major depression. Yes or No? Global depression. Yes or No? I’ve already gone on record. In fact, I predicted the current recession 2 years ago. Now, you do the same. Put down the ‘Psychology for Dummies’ book and answer those simple questions. Don’t let a wize-ass like me show you up in a public forum. Go on record. Do it now. No? THATS WHAT I THOUGHT.
By the way. I’m aware of my odd punctuation and long paragraphs. I simply do not care. I type the same way I think. OUT OF THE BOX. Now, get out of my face. I have work to do.
If cons3rvative is so confident in his/her allegations(that’s all they are) then where’s the sources?
Troubled American, I truly want to help you:
Please take your speech and “run it by any professor of socio-economics” that has real credentials. However, you will get much more out of it if you do it as a student in a college economics class. There they will teach you how a free market worked to make this “the largest economy in the world.” They will teach you why so many immigrants are trying to get into this country, not trying to get out of it. They will show you why your socialistic ideas have never worked throughout the history of the world and why the U.S. economic system has made success possible for “Oprah, Ellen, Dr Phil, and many other celebrities.” They will show you how “the credit industry” has made home ownership possible for so many of us oppressed middle and lower class.
Please copy this entry and run it by all your whining friends at the coffee shop that you hang out at all day. Ask them to come with you to enroll in a basic economics class so they can understand how all this really works.
Best Regards!
I have reservations on this article as being true, reading how he treated his wife after returning home from being a pow, I commend him for his service but not for how he treated his wife, she didnt want him to know that she was ina bad accident so he wouldnt have to woory about it and stood by him all the time he was in the pow camps, but when he returns home, due to her accident she appeared 3 inches shorter and a few pounds heavier, and instead of standing by her and helping her he found ways to stay away and during that time he would be openly seeing other women, instead of trying to work on his own marriage.
so he finds a well to do person, to help his career.
they were married 1 month after his divorce, I find this very suspicious, They say the ex has not said anything about bad him but you never know , I guess I wouldn’t either if I was told , or maybe I shouldn’t say told but insinuatedI wouldn’t get the settlement I was getting, to be quiet.
I could write more but I think people shoud know the person who says he is a good person, what kind of person turns his back on someone who stood by him and didnt want to worry him because she was bigger and shorter than she used to be, how so inconsiderate, To me no amount of money would make up for that, but you have to do what you have to do for the sake of the small children.
Don’t believe one optimistic word from any public figure about the economy or humanity in general. They are all part of the problem. Its like a game of Monopoly. In America, the richest 1% now hold 1/2 OF ALL UNITED STATES WEALTH. Unlike ‘lesser’ estimates, this includes all stocks, bonds, cash, and material assets held by America’s richest 1%. Even that filthy pig Oprah acknowledged that it was at about 50% in 2006. Naturally, she put her own ‘humanitarian’ spin on it. Calling attention to her own ‘good will’. WHAT A DISGUSTING HYPOCRITE SLOB. THE RICHEST 1% HAVE LITERALLY MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. Money does not grow on trees. When too much wealth accumulates at the top, the middle class slip further into debt and the lower class further into poverty. A similar rule applies worldwide. The world’s richest 1% now own over 40% of ALL WORLD WEALTH. This is EVEN AFTER you account for all of this ‘good will’ ‘humanitarian’ BS from celebrities and executives. ITS A SHAM. As they get richer and richer, less wealth is left circulating beneath them. This is the single greatest underlying cause for the current US recession. The middle class can no longer afford to sustain their share of the economy. Their wealth has been gradually transfered to the richest 1%. One way or another, we suffer because of their incredible greed. We are talking about TRILLIONS of dollars. Transfered FROM US TO THEM. Over a period of about 27 years. Thats Reaganomics for you. The wealth does not ‘trickle down’ as we were told it would. It just accumulates at the top. Shrinking the middle class and expanding the lower class. Causing a domino effect of socio-economic problems. But the rich will never stop. They will never settle for a reasonable share of ANYTHING. They will do whatever it takes to get even richer. Leaving even less of the pie for the other 99% of us to share. At the same time, they throw back a few tax deductable crumbs and call themselves ‘humanitarians’. IT CAN’T WORK THIS WAY. This is going to end just like a game of Monopoly. A total collapse of the US economy. Probably within a decade. The richest 1% will live like royalty while the rest of us fight over jobs, food, and gasoline. Crime, poverty, and suicide will skyrocket. So don’t fall for all of this PR CRAP from Hollywood, Pro Sports, and Wall Street PIGS. ITS A SHAM. Remember: They are filthy rich EVEN AFTER their tax deductable contributions. Greedy pigs. Now, we are headed for the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time. SEND A “THANK YOU” NOTE TO YOUR FAVORITE MILLIONAIRE. ITS THEIR FAULT. I’m not discounting other factors like China, sub-prime, or gas prices. But all of those factors combined still pale in comparison to that HUGE transfer of wealth to the rich. Anyway, those other factors are all related and further aggrivated because of GREED. If it weren’t for the OBSCENE distribution of wealth within our country, there never would have been such a market for sub-prime to begin with. Which by the way, was another trick whipped up by greedy bankers and executives. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. The credit industry has been ENDORSED by people like Oprah, Ellen, Dr Phil, and many other celebrities. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don’t fall for their ‘humanitarian’ BS. ITS A SHAM. NOTHING BUT TAX DEDUCTABLE PR CRAP. Bottom line: The richest 1% will soon tank the largest economy in the world. It will be like nothing we’ve ever seen before. and thats just the beginning. Greed will eventually tank every major economy in the world. Causing millions to suffer and die. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL. Please copy this entry and run it by any professor of socio-economics. I speak the truth. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE. Please copy and help spread the word.