We need a new measurement for the McCain campaign: Whoppers per minute, or something.
Here’s the full documentary on John McCain & Keating Economics.
McCain was up to his eyeballs in Keating.
McCain met Keating in 1981 at a Navy League dinner in Arizona where McCain was the speaker. Keating was a former naval aviator himself, and the two men became friends. Keating raised money for McCain’s two congressional campaigns in 1982 and 1984, and for McCain’s 1986 Senate bid. By 1987, McCain campaigns had received $112,000 from Keating, his relatives, and his employees–the most received by any of the Keating Five. (Keating raised a total of $300,000 for the five senators.)
After McCain’s election to the House in 1982, he and his family made at least nine trips at Keating’s expense, three of which were to Keating’s Bahamas retreat. McCain did not disclose the trips (as he was required to under House rules) until the scandal broke in 1989. At that point, he paid Keating $13,433 for the flights.
And in April 1986, one year before the meeting with the regulators, McCain’s wife, Cindy, and her father invested $359,100 in a Keating strip mall.
Yikes, that documentary must be popular. Only loads half way for me in youtube, though the .MOV download seems a bit better.
From Wikipedia –
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[46][45] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising “poor judgment” when he met with the federal regulators on Keating’s behalf.[7] The report also said that McCain’s “actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him….Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate.”
William,
1) It’s Wikipedia. (I still use it though, don’t worry).
2) I’ve seen worse being said about Clinton.
3. May not be illegal, but is still bullshit, especially in this time.
McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising “poor judgment”…
Do we need this kind of poor judgement in the White House?
The Keating Five:
Republican John McCain – running against Obama
Democrat Don Riegle – has endorsed Obama
Democrat John Glenn – has endorsed Obama
Democrat Dennis DeConcini – has endorsed Obama
Democrat Alan Cranston – dead (but will probably still be voting for Obama, in Chicago if not also California)
Will Obama reject and denounce these endorsements from corrupt Democrats?
Bob Bennett, who was the Democratic lawyer selected by the committee to investigate the Keating Five, says in his book that he recommended that McCain’s name be dropped from the investigation because there was no evidence against him but, for political reasons (the other Senators were all Democrats), McCain’s name was left on the list.
Yep, McCain was totally innocent. Did nothing wrong. Bill Ayers. Rezko. Muslim…
“McCain noted that Bennett, the independent counsel, recommended that McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation.
“For the first time in history, the Ethics Committee overruled the recommendation of the independent counsel,” McCain said. For his part, DeConcini is critical of McCain’s role in the affair. The two senators never were particularly cozy, and the stress of the public scrutiny worsened their relations.
In his memoir Senator Dennis DeConcini: From the Center of the Aisle, he praises the decision to keep McCain on the hook.
“It became clear to me, and it was later confirmed by Ethics Committee members, that Bennett was attempting to dismiss the charges against McCain, and in order to appear nonpartisan, he included Glenn in this effort,” DeConcini wrote with co-author Jack August. “Thanks to the three Democrats on the committee and perhaps with the help of Senator (Jesse) Helms (R-N.C.), however, the charges remained in place for all the senators under investigation. So all of us had to attend the 23-day public hearing, which was indeed a trial, before the six-member Senate Ethics Committee.”
I also heard An American Carol tore it up at the box offce this weekend.
Ah, I was waiting for some prick to point out that McCain was the only Republican out of the five.
He’s also the only one running for President.
So if I hadn’t mentioned the parties, would that somehow lessen the effect that 60% (75% if we don’t count the dead guy) of the Keating Five supports Obama?
Nimrod …………………………… point
FAIL
So McCain intervened with regulators on behalf of a campaign contributor who paid for several vacations for the McCain family. As a result of the intervention, regulations were delayed while the Keating empire went down the drain taking depositors savings with it.
Of course, our resident wingers leap to excuse this conduct because John McCain was a POW. Or something.
I picture Matt grinning vacantly and clapping his hands together like a seal after hitting the submit button on that expert burn.
The surviving three Democrats of the Keating Five (surprise surprise) are not supporting the Republican candidate. McCain IS one of the Keating Five, and he’s actually RUNNING for President. If you can’t tell the difference you’re genuinely as stupid as I pictured.
“Of course, our resident wingers leap to excuse this conduct because John McCain was a POW. Or something.”
Silly Quaker. We’re just quoting the special prosecutor in the investigation. Take it up with him.
Bringing up Keating will never change the fact that Obama has always known that Bill Ayers was an unrepentant domestic terrorist and chose to work with him anyway.
And bringing up Ayers will never change the fact that McCain knew Liddy was/is a traitor and chose to work with him, take money from him, and appear on the radio show that Liddy received as payment for his treason. On that show McCain called Liddy, “my friend” and expressed pride in him.
That should read “an UNREPENTANT traitor.”
My, how many wrong points are there in this thread?
1) John Glenn has not just endorsed Obama, he is out campaigning for him.
2) Liddy is neither a terrorist nor a traitor. He was a willing participant in crimes in support of a corrupt administration, but never committed acts that could be considered “treason” or “terrorism.”
3) Bill Ayers, in his own words: “Guilty as hell, free as a bird.” Liddy: guilty as hell, served his time, paid his debt.
4) Obama spent 20 years as a member of a church who specifically said its doctrine was NOT for white people. He followed a minister (even praising him and using him for a book title) who said that AIDS was a government plot aimed at killing black people. And Obama was either so clueless to know about this or didn’t care or — most likely — weighed the costs and benefits and found it better for his political career to stay affiliated with Wright — until the pendulum swung the other way and he suddenly discovered what he’d been missing for 20 years, and he publicly left his church. (That this was right after Wright slammed Obama was a pure coincidence, I’m sure.)
J.
All of that and your candidate is down by 8 points. Sucks to be you doesn’t it?
Only in wingnut land could there be moral equivalence between showing poor judgment in the Keating 5 case and being in the same party as someone else in the Keating 5 (which happened when the candidate was 26 years old).
Funny seeing the same old smears being recycled by the right. Trouble is, America is finding that smears don’t help them pay their mortgage, or restore their lost jobs, or pay for $3.25/gallon gasoline. People want change they can believe in, not more of the same.
Word.
Liddy is neither a terrorist nor a traitor.
Really?
Obama has always known that Bill Ayers was an unrepentant domestic terrorist and chose to work with him anyway.
Who else chose to work with Mr. Ayers on that same board, willie?
Quaker, you’re my hero.
No one ever answers these questions that you already know the answers to.
Love it.
Obviously Liddy’s a traitor, and if he’d done it for McGovern you’d have no problem with that. And if breaking and entering to sabotage democracy isn’t terrorism, I don’t know what is.
And it’s my understanding that Ayers turned himself in, but the prosecution screwed up his case so badly that charges had to be dropped.
Liddy “served his time” for SOME of his crimes, but remains an unrepentant traitor to this day. Publicly calling for the murder of ATF agents is terrorism. Plotting the murder of journalists is terrorism (what if his plot had succeeded?) Subverting the electoral process is treason, in my book.
“Who else chose to work with Mr. Ayers on that same board, willie?”
McCain? Palin?
Ayers is a terrorist. His wife, Bernadette Dohrn, a psychopath, speaking before an audience of SDS members, exclaimed, “Dig it! Manson killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach.”
These are sick f!@#ers and Obama CHOSE to hang with them. SICK!
William, I wonder why you ignored Dohrn’s context for the statement. Let me be clear that I don’t endorse her use of that incident to make a political point, and you’re free to not believe her if you wish, but why didn’t you include her explanation?
Oh, we need to understand the cohhhhntext do we? F that. The Ayer’s and Dohrn’s of the world should be shunned and marginalized, but Obama chose to hang with them…because of the context baby.
Oh, we need to understand the cohhhhntext do we? F that.
Does this also hold when your hero, Bill O’Riley blames a child for being kidnapped, or wanting San Francisco to be bombed?
So since William is going to continue to ignore it, Dohrn was allegedly making a point about relative media coverage of violent events, not endorsing the Tate-LaBianca murders. Here is Ayers on the matter… (I know there are those here who will discount the explanation because it’s Bill Ayers. To that I’d say that I’m not defending Dohrn and claiming this version is gospel, but we shouldn’t pretend we “knew” what Dohrn meant simply because we disagree with her politics.)
“Her speech was focused on the murder just days earlier of our friend Fred Hampton, the Black Panther leader [...] She linked Fred’s murder to the murders of other Panthers around the country, to the assassinations of Malcolm X and Patrice Lumumba, the CIA attempts on Fidel’s life, and then to the ongoing terror in Viet Nam. “This is the state of the world,” she cried. “This is what screams out for our attention and our response. And what do we find in our newspapers? A sick fascination with a story that has it all: a racist psycho, a killer cult, and a chorus line of Hollywood bodies. Dig it!…”
By including the context, Parthenon proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that william is a complete idiot.
By ignoring the context, william confirms it.
willie, you didn’t answer my question.
Who else served on that board with Mr. Ayers? While I’m at it, let’s add this: What are the politics of Mr. Annenberg who selected Mr. Ayers to head up the project?
[...] McCain Campaign Now Dismissing Entire Keating Investigation [...]