UPDATE: This was during his 2000 campaign. His staffers at the time "intervened to protect the candidate from himself". The article also hearkens back to the Keating Five incident.
UPDATE #2: Pat Buchanan says the NYT was ready to go with this story a day or two before the Iowa caucuses. Bob Bennett spoke to the Times editorial staff on McCain's behalf and got it quashed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
Somewhere on the web is a song titled "And Clinton Got a BJ" that someone sent to me a while back that may be on point for John's defense, which they will plagiarize from Jimmy Carter (I had lust in my heart).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
My speculation is that one of the opposing GOP campaigns probably did some oppo research and passed the lead along to the NY Times. The fact that they sat on the story for about two months means that they had some time to do some additional due diligence. They hedge their claims saying only that there MIGHT have been something more than a professional relationship between the lobbyist and McCain.
Either way, his statement that he's never done favors for anybody is demonstrably false in light of the Keating 5 scandal.
Also, I'm a little curious about the telecom lobby angle in light of the FISA legislation. This angle isn't quite as salacious as the other side of this story, but from a taxpayer perspective giving telecoms retroactive civil immunity for law breaking is a substantive concern.
MEDIA FIREWORKS: MCCAIN PLEADS WITH NY TIMES TO SPIKE STORY
Thu Dec 20 2007 10:49:27 ETJust 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.
The paper's Jim Rutenberg has been leading the investigation and is described as beyond frustrated with McCain's aggressive and angry efforts to stop any and all publication.
The drama involves a woman lobbyist who may have helped to write key telecom legislation. The woman in question has retained counsel and strongly denies receiving any special treatment from McCain.
http://www.drudgereportarchive...
Also The New Republic seems to have an angle on it:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/a...
I find it very difficult to believe that the Times would have put their chin so far out on this story if they didn't know a lot more than they felt they could put in the article, at least on the first go. But in a decade of doing this, I've learned not to give any benefits of the doubt, even to the most esteemed institutions.Equally telling, though, is the McCain camp's response and their clear unwillingness to address or deny any the key charges of the piece. (Read the statement closely. It's all bluster.) When it comes to sex stories even falsely accused politicians have some reluctance to get into nitty gritty denials. But McCain -- or rather McCain's communications office since it's in their name not his -- doesn't even address it.
That tells you something. So too does the Post's decision to jump in very quickly. Charles Kaiser, at Radar, gives some of the backstory on the other publications that were in the hunt and why the Times may have pulled the trigger when they did. Apparently some others were about to jump in too.
Reading all of this stuff I have the distinct feeling that only a few pieces of the puzzle are now on the table. Given unspoken understandings of many years' duration, a lot of reporters and DC types can probably imagine what the full picture looks like. But we're going to need a few more pieces before the rest of us can get a sense of what this is all about.
I am SO VERY GLAD that Jim Webb exposed George Allen to be the nut that he is....it seems more important now that we know that McCain appears to be a lightweight candidate on issues other than keeping this war going for centuries.
Even if the latest rumors aren't true, in my humble opinon Barack Obama will eat McCain for breakfast when we gear up for the General Election.
Miss Vicki gave me lobbyist money and straight, talk-free sex in return for legislative favors. The bonds were professional, not emotional or romantic.
My friends, that's simply how we do things in Washington, as we who have the most power and experience know. Let's not be naive.
--McCain's parsed rebuttal, the abridged version
Proposed new lettering for McCain's campaign bus:
The Straight, Talk-free Sex-press
I saw your comment on another post about Super Tuesday voting...and wondering if anyone had done an analysis of "same day" voting to "early voting."
Did you ever get your question answered?
Because I've had the same question for a couple of weeks...and my hunch is that if we can ever find the data, it will show an even bigger swing toward Obama over the last month.
Let me know if you ever found out anything about this.
Eric Folkerth