Here's an article from McCain's home state newspaper, The Arizona Republic, written almost a decade ago, but more relevant than ever:
"Those of us who've known John McCain since he began his Arizona political career made two mistakes.
First, overestimating the Washington media's willingness to look beyond a politician's self-serving façade.
Second, underestimating McCain's skill in camouflaging his bullyboy ways and reincarnating himself as a lovable maverick glowing with political virtue.
If McCain becomes President, America will have more than a prickly president with a low boiling point. He carries grudges, fibs rather than admits mistakes, cannot endure criticism, threatens revenge, controls by fear, is consumed with self-importance.
Shifting blame also is second nature.
It was vintage McCain who exploded when The Arizona Republic questioned whether the man dubbed "Senator Hothead" in Washington was fit to handle presidential powers. Instead of conceding what's common knowledge, McCain erupted into denial, blaming a newspaper vendetta (rubbish!) and George W. Bush for "orchestrating" the criticism (more rubbish!).
McCain's artfully contrived persona of a high-minded champion of political virtue works: Washington reporters blindly lionize McCain.
But venerable Washington Post columnist David Broder warned on NBC's "Meet the Press":
"After the experience we all had with President Clinton, I'm not inclined to disco unt the view of home state reporters and journalists who have covered a candidate over the years," meaning McCain.
But except for Boston Globe reporter Walter Robinson who spent several weeks digging into McCain's Arizona behavior and reporting his dark side, Washington reporters avoid disturbing their "hero" perception of McCain.
ABC's 20/20 almost gave the nation a clearer snapshot. Sam Donaldson taped an interview with Amy Silverman, of The Phoenix New Times, regarded as Arizona journalism's expert on McCain. But the segment was canceled the night before airing, fueling speculation that McCain's powerful Senate Commerce Committee's oversight of broadcasting makes TV wary of offending him.
As an early McCain acquaintance and now a former friend, I find him to be a man of obsessive ambitions with self-destructive petty impulses. McCain admits to a lifelong thin skin: as an infant, he held his breath until he was unconscious when angry. In Washington, he's resorted to physical pushing and shoving of colleagues when irritated.
When feeling inferior, McCain belittles: he snidely said, for example, that he slept better knowing that George W. Bush guarded the Texas border as a pilot in the National Guard.
When he explodes, McCain is quick to threaten, "I'll destroy you!"
After McCain settled in Arizona with his young second wife, a millionairess, he asked me at dinner for help with a political career.
As editorial page editor of The Arizona Republic, and later publisher, I demurred. We socialized, however, including dinners in his home, and even once discussed writing a book.
But our friendship was shattered by a story and editorial exposing McCain as a liar. He'd boasted to me and my wife over lunch in Washington that he planted complex questions with the chairman of the Senate Interior Committee to sabotage testimony of Arizona's Gov. Rose Mofford, a Democrat, about the Central Arizona Project, which delivers Colorado River water to Arizona urban areas.
When reporters later asked McCain about planted questions, he feigned insult and denied any dirty trick.
I informed editors in Phoenix of the deceit. Within hours of a story and an editorial appearing, McCain was in meltdown, shrieking on the phone,"I know, you're out to get me!"
Several years later, McCain admitted the dirty trick and apologized to Mofford, who was then out of office.
More:
· When NBC refused to support his TV rating system, McCain wrote NBC president Robert Wright threatening to work to have the FCC lift NBC licenses of locally owned stations.
· When Barbara Barrett, wife of Intel CEO Dr. Craig Barrett, ran against McCain's protégé, Arizona Gov. J. Fife Symington III, McCain offered to buy her out of the 1994 GOP primary. Barrett refused. Furious, McCain threatened revenge, which materialized only in minor ways.
· Barrett lost, but Symington later was forced out of office after being convicted on seven counts of fraud. Barrett, meanwhile, continues a successful international law practice and serves on major corporate boards.
· Maricopa County (Phoenix) schools superintendent Sandra Dowling, a Republican, refused McCain's demand to abandon support of Barrett. Dowling told Morley Safer during a "60 Minutes" interview about Arizona politics that McCain exploded and threatened to "destroy" her. Thereafter, her son lost his appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy, where McCain sits as an ex-oficio member of the Board of Visitors. McCain denied any connection.
· One of my Arizona neighbors, Dianne Smith, wrote McCain protesting his criticism of Anita Hill in confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas. A widow then in her 60s, Ms. Smith was flabbergasted when McCain phoned her, shouting at her for "questioning my integrity."
· He recruits Republicans to run against Arizona GOP officeholders whom he considers insufficiently loyal to him. McCain's candidates inevitably lose.
· Upset about coverage in The Phoenix New Times by Amy Silverman, McCain phoned her father, Richard Silverman, general manager of the Arizona water-electricity utility Salt River Project to complain. McCain's intent seemed clear—using muscle on the federally chartered SRP in hopes Silverman would pressure his daughter to cease.
· Although McCain promised Arizona voters that "I've never tried to exploit my Vietnam service to my country because it would be totally inappropriate," his presidential campaign is built on his POW years.
· While he moralizes about corrupt corporate money, McCain unabashedly rakes in tens of thousands of dollars from Washington lobbyists plus asking corporations for their jets for campaigning. A lobbyist told Newsweek: "He (McCain) sees no connection between twisting our arms for money and then talking about how corrupt the 0A system is."
· As he lectured about campaign finance corruption, McCain's handpicked candidate for Arizona attorney general, state Sen. John Kaites, was being investigated for violating Arizona's campaign finance law.
· McCain attacks tobacco addiction, but ignores alcohol addiction. No surprise: his wife's fortune stems from the family beer and wine distributorship, Arizona's largest.
· While serving Arizona's First Congressional District, McCain lived in a modest townhouse in suburban Mesa. Impatient for bigger things, he took over a lavish home owned by his wife's father in a pricey Phoenix neighborhood 25 miles away. Papers taken out for renovations were in the name of "Smith." McCain denied deceiving voters, and blamed others—architects—for using "Smith."
· McCain's friendship with master swindler Charles Keating wasn't his only misjudgment in friends.
· McCain's Arizona protégé, Gov. Fife Symington, claimed to be a successful tycoon. In fact, he was bankrupt, later convicted on seven counts of fraud and forced to resign. McCain's wife was a front row regular at Symington's criminal trial in Phoenix. McCain still calls Symington "my friend."
· McCain picked my publisher predecessor, Duke Tully, to be godfather of his first child. Tully boasted he was an Air Force hero of the Korean and Vietnam wars—but ultimately was exposed as a phony who never served in the military. McCain says he considers Tully "my friend."
· McCain is no friend of free speech. He favors the "flag desecration amendment" that would criminalize "abuse" of Old Glory, and the number of news reporters he's threatened to have fired because of stories he dislikes would staff a large newspaper.
· McCain bullied Arizona legislators into creating a Republican-only presidential 1996 primary to benefit Sen. Phil Gramm at a cost of more than $2 million to all taxpayers. Gramm pulled out, and never showed up for the Arizona election.
· A person who was there tells how McCain reacted when a delegation went to his Senate office in 1991 to discuss liberalizing flight duties for women in military aviation. After greeting them with "Hi, honey, Hi sweetie," McCain launched into an angry diatribe, disparaging the women as "a bunch of Pat Schroeders"—the Colorado Democrat known for championing feminist causes.
Although he's on his best behavior now, the campaigning McCain is not recognizable to Arizonans who know his real persona."
—Pat Murphy (the retired publisher of the Arizona Republic and a former radio commentator)
AND HIS OPINION NOW:
"I've written worse about McCain since that 2000 column.
Now that I'm getting calls from Big City reporters for Arizona tales about McCain, I'm utterly astonished at how poorly backgrounded so many of them are about McCain - his temper tantrums, vindictiveness, his lies, his crass ambitions, the phoniness of the "Straight Talk" shtik, etc,
Little wonder then he's gotten away with so much in Washington.
If and when the history of media coverage of McCain is written it'll be a dark chapter in journalism."
—Pat Murphy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
McCain has been vetted for years. We already know he was one of the Keating Five. He was investigated by the Senate and nothing came of it.
It is well known that he can be both nasty and tough.
He evern swears like a sailor. Of course he was in the navy.
Biden's problems are also well known.
Obama and Palim are the ones that have not been vetted. The Obama vetting is happening belatedly, since Hannity has the only one doing the mainstream media's job for a year. But that has changed somewhat. The mainstream media will vette Palim very quickly, since most of them want the Democrats to win.
Jim, I don't want to get in an endless stream of me making precise points and you misdirecting your answers with endless citing of rightwing source materials as if that settles it. But tell me this, as simply as you can, if the media has a liberal bias and wants the Democrats to win, then why do they continually take the rightwing bait and do stories on how the blogosphere is claiming Obama was educated as a Jihadist and is a secret Muslim or how his wife once called whites "whitey" and wrote a college thesis denigrating whites, etc. none of which is factual and the media knows this, outside Fox and the rightwing lie meisters, and yet they have never done a story on how John McCain cheated on his first wife (and on everyone he was ever with from what those who were involved have reported) with his present one when she was just a young millionairess, and how she was caught stealing drugs from her own charity and how her family's fortune is based in part on bootlegging and other illegal activities and her father's connections to the mob, etc. etc. etc. endlessly. They don't even ever mention that McCain was a literal traitor as a P.O.W. (and as I've said, I probably would have done the same, but nonetheless, others who turned and signed confessions and made statements supporting the North Vietnamese in that war were tried and convicted and/or harassed and kicked out of the service and/or belittled in the press etc.) or that there are many who worked under him in the service who despised his bullying and his rich boy son-of-the-admiral preening etc. and how his record as a pilot was pretty bad too, crashing planes and getting shot down, and etc. etc. There is a ton of stuff that is extremely negative in terms of Republicans in general but McCain and his wife and their campaign in particular that seems to be off limits to the media, either because the owners of that media are mostly Republicans or beholden to them or frightened of what they have on them, or because they are afraid of the reaction from the Republicans and the right if they bring any of that up (the old Ollie North in his Marine's uniform at the Iran/Contra hearings and presenting himself as a Vietnam Wart hero, when the facts prove otherwise and if we all wore our old uniforms for political and propaganda reasons, more than half the people at that hearing would have been in uniform, but his tactic worked and cowed the investigation because it came across on TV like they were harassing a war hero rather than questioning a criminal) but there has been no fear on the part of the media in repeating allegations from the right against Obama that the media knows are untrue but bring up anyway because they're "circulating on the web" or some other excuse, well there's plenty of videos criculating on the web from veterans and ex-P.O.W's who despise McCain for his misuse and distorting of his war record etc. (what about the cross in the dirt story that comes right out of Solstynichen (or however you spell his name) writings? etc. The media is rightly impressed with Obama, he came out of nowhere and is now a candidate of a major party for the presidency, a man who was born, as Keith Olberman pointed out, the same month and year when the yankees moved their winter qurters from Saint Petersburg, Florida, because their black players were legally not allowed to stay in the same hotel as their white players. And they are impressed with McCain, who keeps seeming about to lose but then makes a comeback and somehow defeated a lot of more qualified republican politicians to gain his party's nomination. Thjose stories are legit to cover, as are the details of both of their proposals for solving this country's problems. But internet rumors and lies are not legit, but if they are going to cover them and react to the rightwing Republican talking points, then they should do the same for the other side, but don't. That is a clear bias, undeniable, in favor of the rightwing.
Hi Mike,
That is a lot to cover. My first observation is that you have changed your opinion of McCain. I remember you defending him last fall, when I was saying he was my least favorite Republican candidate.
I must admit that I do not watch network news. I have seen on Fox News, stories by Hannity, of Obama's Muslim youth in Idonesia. I have read some of the recent books by Corsi and the other fellow, Feddoroso (sp). I have found Feddoroso the more credable. Corsi seem to be loose with dates and facts and attacks to virolently for my taste. I don't think anyone is saying that he is anything but a practicing Christian now. Muslims may have a differnt view of Obama since his natural father was Muslim and his Indonesian step father was Muslim. The Muslim religion does not like apostates.
I don't have the statistics at hand, but there have been numerious overwhelmingly positive Obama reports in the print and network media. Just look at the number of magazine covers and the fact that Katie Couric, Brian Williams and other network people accompanied him to the Middle East and to Europe. There was no such coverage of McCain and his overseas trip.
I find the critical stories of McCain and the 5 1/2 yrs in the Hanoi Hilton offputting. I wonder if I was in his position, if I would have turned down a ticket home, if it was offered. Whatever else he did in camp to stay alive, I certainly am not qualified to judge after all I was I-Y and safe in New Jersey. You may have more insight.
In summation, I believe John McCain is an honorable man who does not make a habit of lying or making up stories. It can be a problem vouching for another's honor, but I do
believe it. I also think he has some traits which have been mentioned earlier like randiness in mid life,(I can relate how about you?) coarsness and nastiness. I would rather have a nasty vulgar man, whose world vision matches mine, in charge of defending the country.
Note: I am curious, how would you judge the quality and accuracy of Keith Obermann's and Chis Mathews's commentary vs Hannity or Limbaugh.
PS Does this mean you are no longer mad at your right wing nutcase, childhood chum?
I'm praying for McCain to have a "Caine Mutiny" moment before the election. Give the guy a handful of ball bearings, confront him with some tough truths, and stand back for the meltdown.
He was on the precipice in that Time interview a week or so ago. They'd better feed him a lot of Xanax.
~ Willy
Totally Willy.
As for Jim, I wasn't tired of you son, just of your repeating of the rightwing party line and getting nasty about some of it, towards me and other friends who read this blog.
And as for Olberman and Matthews. Matthews is what we used to call in the center. Olberman is a little to the left (there are no true leftwing newscasts anywhere on TV, and only aspects of Air America on radio, where it can be heard) and to some extent counterbalances O'Reilly and Hannity on FOX, though Olberman is only one person while just about everyone who appears on FOX regularly as announcers or whatever are on the right (not talking about guests). But MSNBC doesn't reach nearly as many homes (I was told by delegates in Denver that at their hotels they could easily get FOX but not MSNBC). If you live in certain urban areas of the country, and/or the Northeast and West Coasts, you may have the opportunity of possibly getting Air America or Keith Olberman (the rest of MSNBC, like I said, is either in the center or the right, though the new show by Rachelle Maddow should represent the left I suspect and hope), but the middle of the country and much of the South and Southwest, you can get Rush and FOX but not much else, except for the three major networks. As for their coverage, if you have been watching, which you admit you haven't, but if you did, you would see them skewing either in the center or rightward, and as I said and has been shown in numerous recent studies by various academics and research institutes etc. the ratio of favorable stories for McCain versus Obama is startling. Of course they covered Obama's European trip, because McCain's campaign had made it so important and newsworthy. But they covered it in this way Jim, by pointing out that if Obama made one mistake his campaign and his reputation would suffer severely, holding him again to a much higher standard than McCain (the old black/white double standards where the black person had to do twice as good as the white to get the same reward etc.), since McCain has frighteningly too often mixed up countries and Arab religious differences and terrorist groups and geography and etc. which frankly makes me suspect his age is getting to him in ways that are dangerous for the country if he's elected. And then when Obama has a triumphant overseas tour, including a lot of contact with the troops, the rightwing, which now unfortunately is running McCain's campaign, (one of the reasons I took a closer look at McCain's record in the Congress and back in AZ) Republican machine put out two lies, one was that Obama refused to meet with troops in Germany because there wasn't a camera crew to film it, outright total lie, which is still being perpetrated by the right, and the other being that Obama's popularity in Europe was somehow a negative for America (hello? our stauchest allies for the past forty years are finally finding an American leader they can relate to and know is not only bright, even brilliant, but is also measured and thoughtful, rather than impulsive ala Junior and McCain (and I suspect Palin from what I've heard). So that's what the networks covered, the negative rightwing propaganda, which became the meat of the stories, rather than Obama's amazing achievement, of not making one mistake and in fact doing the opposite, winning over masses of people as well as their leaders who had grown to distrust and even fear the USA because of the actions Junior and Cheney have taken over the past eight years that have left the world so much worse off than when they came into office.
The EU facet of the Trilaterals are trying to subjugate the USA. Jimmy Carter and his fellows seem to have more allegiance to the EU and its goals of 'world construction in their chosen image' than success of the USA.
They are actually the ones buying or merging with USA corporations and promoting sending industry to the third world. While their intention is to build up the Third World, it is having a detrimental effect on labor, employment and the standard of living of USA citizens.
Fox New - Just for the record - primetime
Shep Smith - I can not tell whether he is a D or R. He plays it strictly down the middle.
Brit Hume - I assume is a Republican but without vitriol. He always has conservative and liberal commentators including Mara Lliasson, Juan Willians and moderates like Nina Easton, Mort Kindrake.
Hannity and Colmes - one conservative and one liberal both with considerable feeling.
Gret Van Sustern - Liberal Democrat
Geraldo - Liberal Democrat.
Note - It is hard to see Mathews, as in the middle. He was an aid to Carter. He gets a tingle down the leg when he sees Obama. He may be in the middle of the Democrat party but not as a commentator.
Post a Comment