the McCain lobbyist scandal - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-21-2008, 10:20 PM   #46
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:10 PM
When there is evidence of something I will continue to discuss this.

I have posted the original article - Which containes nothing other than innuendos.

I have posted the quotes from the articles ONLY source that would go on record.

I have posted another lobbyist's quotes - who was involved in dealing with McCain on the exact issue the article implied he was showing favoritism on.

My judgement at this time is that this story is not a story. His staff did what they should have done, they went to her EIGHT years ago when she began running of the mouth. THey told her to knock it off.

Senator MCCain's record demonstrates that he did not show her group any special treatment as evidenced by his record and the quotes from the lobbyist.

If they had a story they should have run it months ago when it was finished.

So if/when there is more I will gladly come back to this issue.

I agree with deep, if it were Obama this would be quite a different story in the forum and out of this forum. I would defend Obama as I have McCain...but there would be more of an outcry.

Irvine - If there is more to the story, and I do not think there is. They have had three more months since the story was finished to add to it. THe fact that the other news agencies did not run the story (and drudge counts in your book now as credible?) supports my position even more, that this is JUNK.

Peace

One more thing - the Pittsburgh deal that the article writes about was brought up years ago - and here is a quote from someone who did not get along with MCCain at the time of the incident about the letter the times implies was inappropriate:

Hundt Supports McCain on Pax
In another example of strange political bedfellows, former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt last week defended Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.) for McCain's letter to the FCC urging members to vote in favor of Paxson Communications' deal with a Pittsburgh TV station. In a missive to The Washington Post, Hundt wrote: "Nothing was objectionable in the letters that you mysteriously find offensive If you think John McCain's opinions and actions can be bought, your opinion flies in the face of all my experience of the man." McCain and Hundt, a powerful Democrat, often found themselves at odds during Hundt's 1993-98 tenure at the FCC. January 24, 2000

McCain's actual letter:

[Q]McCain's Letter to F.C.C. and Excerpts From Replies

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Article
Campaigns: White House 2000 -- John McCain (R)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ollowing are a letter dated Dec. 10, 1999, from Senator John McCain to William E. Kennard, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, and excerpts from the replies of Mr. Kennard and Commissioner Gloria Tristani:

Mr. McCain's Letter
On Nov. 17, I wrote you expressing concern over the protracted pendency of the pending applications for assignment of licenses of WQEX-TV and WPCB-TV, Pittsburgh, Pa. I requested that the commission take final action on these applications at its open meeting in December, if it had not acted on them in the intention pursuant to the notation voting process. I enclose a copy of this letter for your reference.

I have in hand a copy of the public notice setting out the agenda for the commission's open meeting on Dec. 15. These applications are not listed for consideration. Nor has my public notice yet been issued indicating that the commission has taken final action on these applications pursuant to the notation voting process.

In light of these considerations, I respectfully request that each member of the commission advise me, in writing no later than close of business on Tuesday, Dec. 14, 1999, whether you have already acted upon these applications in the course of the notation voting process. If your answer to the latter question is no, please state further whether you will, or will not, be prepared to act on these applications at the open meeting on Dec. 15. If your answer to both of the proceeding questions is no, please explain why.

The sole purpose of this request is to secure final action on a matter that has now been pending for over two years. I emphasize that my purpose is not to suggest in any way how you should vote -- merely that you vote. In order to assure that no oral ex parte communications on the merits of these applications take place, I will not entertain any oral responses of any kind to this letter.

This letter is not written to obtain favorable disposition of any matter on behalf of any party to any proceeding before the commission. Please treat this letter in compliance with all applicable substantive and procedural rules.

Mr. Kennard's Reply
As you know, this application raises important and very difficult policy issues. I wholeheartedly agree that prompter commission action on this matter would have been preferable.

Your letter, however, comes at a sensitive time in the deliberative process as the individual commissioners finalize their views and their votes on this matter. I must respectfully note that it is highly unusual for the commissioners to be asked to publicly announce their voting status on a matter that is still pending. I am concerned that inquiries concerning the individual deliberations of each commissioner could have procedural and substantive impacts on the commission's deliberations and, thus, on the due process rights of the parties.

Ms. Tristani's Reply
Respectfully, I cannot comply with your request. In order to preserve the integrity of our processes, it is my practice not to publicly disclose whether I have voted or when I will be voting on items in restricted proceedings prior to their adoption by the full commission.
[/Q]
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-21-2008, 10:47 PM   #47
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:10 PM
this too shall pass.

dbs
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:20 AM   #48
War Child
 
MaxFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 776
Local Time: 12:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
this too shall pass.

dbs
right.

and in the meantime all its done is helped galvanize the GOP base with the "big bad mean 'ol NY Times" hatchet jobing a Republican.
__________________
MaxFisher is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:51 AM   #49
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,689
Local Time: 06:10 PM
Has it though?

I haven't seen any galvanizing... I've seen some Huckabilly supporters smile.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-22-2008, 10:38 AM   #50
War Child
 
AnnRKeyintheUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: not coming down
Posts: 603
Local Time: 06:10 PM
McCain? Really? He's so old! But then again don't they all have a secret mistress somewhere?
__________________
AnnRKeyintheUSA is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 10:44 AM   #51
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:10 PM
There's no scandal here folks.

The only scandal here is it's scandalous that the NYT can get away with crap journalism -innuendo and no proof.

It's also curious to see how Huckabee and his supporters are handling this, perhaps their true colors are showing.

dbs
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 11:13 AM   #52
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,689
Local Time: 06:10 PM
Oh you'll be jumping back on the Mitt train if this story does actually surface anything, for Mitt will call off his suspension and you'll go back to morally condemning McCain.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-22-2008, 11:24 AM   #53
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

Irvine - If there is more to the story, and I do not think there is. They have had three more months since the story was finished to add to it. THe fact that the other news agencies did not run the story (and drudge counts in your book now as credible?) supports my position even more, that this is JUNK.

[/Q]


the Post published an article yesterday, and there was one in the works at TNR.

make of it what you will.

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 11:27 AM   #54
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AnnRKeyintheUSA
McCain? Really? He's so old! But then again don't they all have a secret mistress somewhere?


see, this is what misses the point.

it's not about sex.

the story here is that even a politician like McCain, who claims to be so devoted to ethics, is as apparently as compromised as much as any other.

the story is this:

[q]"the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity."[/q]
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:20 PM   #55
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:10 PM
claiming mccain to be unethical is like claiming bill clinton is celebate.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:25 PM   #56
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
claiming mccain to be unethical is like claiming bill clinton is celebate.



i think you want to rethink that sentence.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:26 PM   #57
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 08:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
claiming mccain to be unethical is like claiming bill clinton is celebate.

So, you think McCain is unethical then? This statement is confusing to me.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:30 PM   #58
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




i think you want to rethink that sentence.
no, i really don't.
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:37 PM   #59
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Just wait till I get to link all your posts attacking McCain's character when Romney was still in the race.

I think you do want to rethink that sentence.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 01:53 PM   #60
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond


no, i really don't.


so you're saying McCain *is* ethical?

you sure about that?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com