Even though he’s the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain has a lot of work to do to win over conservatives. Today’s story in the New York Times may give him a big boost in that regard.

The Times story implies, but never outright alleges, that McCain had an affair with a female lobbyist. That’s the juicy element of a long story raising questions about McCain’s ethics and his ties to lobbyists.

Bloggers on the right are up in arms over the story, ripping it as baseless and a smear job. Here’s a sample of the reaction, starting with two Minnesota-based bloggers.

Ed Morrissey at Captain’s Quarters:

The New York Times launches its long-awaited smear of John McCain today, and the most impressive aspect of the smear is just how baseless it is. They basically emulate Page Six at the Post, but add in a rehash of a well-known scandal from twenty years ago to pad it out and make it look more impressive. In the end, they present absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing — only innuendo denied by all of the principals.

John Hinderaker at Power Line (posted Wednesday night):

The New York Times smears John McCain in tomorrow’s paper, accusing him of ethics violations and insinuating that he had an affair with a lobbyist. What is most striking, though, if you actually read the story, is how thin it is. It’s mostly about the Keating Five scandal, which dates to the late 1980s. The “news” that gives the story a hook has to do with McCain’s friendship with a pretty blonde lobbyist that apparently ended in 2000. As for the purported affair, the Times offers zero evidence.

From Allahpundit on Hotair:

A sex scandal that may not be a scandal tucked inside an ethics scandal that may not be an ethics scandal tucked inside an ethics scandal that was a genuine scandal 20 years ago, and for which McCain has begged forgiveness ever since. The Paper of Record.

Right Wing Nut House, by Rick Moran:

The story “alleging ‘impropriety’ on the part of John McCain with a female lobbyist has several different angles to it but basically, it comes down to a story about sexual infidelity – a perfect start to the Times effort to smear McCain.

That’s what the Times is peddling. And it is why they decided to run the story despite the fact that the legitimate issues they raise about McCain doing the bidding of this lobbyist is so thin that it’s damn near invisible.

Sister Toldjah:

I have no problems with his role in the Keating Five being discussed. It’s part of his political career, and one he will have to always answer for. But the insinuations that he had an affair with a lobbyist are the gutter type politics you’d expect to find on an opinion piece, partisan website, or blog, not a mainstream news outlet.

And here’s a comment from the Left.

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo:

At the moment it seems to me that we have a story from the Times that reads like it’s had most of the meat lawyered out of it. And a lot of miscellany and fluff has been packed in where the meat was. Still, if the Times sources are to be believed, the staff thought he was having an affair with Iseman and when confronted about it he in so many words conceded that he was (much of course hangs on ‘behaving inappropriately’ but then, doesn’t it always?) and promised to shape up…

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.)

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 21st, 2008 at 10:29 am and is filed under John McCain, Main. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.