Lies and Corruption: the career of John McCain

[gabosaurus]

What a total sleaze! You sure you want this influence-dealing dirtbag in the White House?

http://wonkette.com/358941/john-mccains-long-career-of-sleazy-lies-semi+affairs--total-corruption

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/02/sex-lies-and-john-mccain/


"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

McCain at a GOP fund raiser, 1998

[Pale Rider]

I kind of like this guys response...


James E. Campbell Says:
February 28th, 2008 at 11:42 am

Talk about hatchet jobs! The New York Times story was only an embarassment to The New York Times. The Keating story is old news and was dismissed at the time as a sorry attempt to give Democrats cover, to try to make the scandal appear bipartisan. McCain was a victim of this. As to the Paxson matter, he was quite candid in his response. The FCC had taken twice as long as normal and McCain was simply urging them to get their job done–whichever way it turned out. This is like the simple casework that is done tens of thousands of times by every member of Congress for citizens trying to get get the bureaucracy to move faster than at snail’s pace. The tie in to the female lobbyist was an outrageous and undocumented smear. There was nothing, zilch, to the story except that it revealed that the NYT is a subsidiary of the Democratic Party–but that should be old news to anyone paying attention to politics in the last three decades.

With McCain’s nomination all but sewn up, it is clear that the liberal establishment now wants to smear their favorite Republican and get him out of the way to pave the way for an ultra-liberal Democrat. The national hero, the guy who won the just a few months ago endorsement of the New York Times for the GOP nomination, the reformer who took on big money in the system is now a “very dangerous man”! The only real danger is allowing smear tactics to prevail. Our insurance against this is that the ultra-liberal wing of the Democratic Party will overplay their hand. They can try to sell the public on McCain being corrupt and dangerous, but this is going to be a hard sell. They might be better off trying to sell the equally self-righteous Clinton and Obama as responsible moderates and had better hope that Barnum underestimated the population growth of suckers.

[Immanuel]

I kind of like this guys response...

You actually got that far into the second link?

I read down to the first couple of bullets in the first link and decided that was enough opinionated BS for a month and quit reading.

AND I CAN'T STAND JOHN McCAIN AND WON'T BE VOTING FOR HIM.

At least the first link, was not worth the read.

Immie