War Hero. American Patriot. Compassionate Conservative.Felon?
The US Criminal Code: Title 18, Part I, Chapter 11 explicitly states in more than one manner that ‘the acceptance or solicitation of funds to obtain appointed public office’ is against the law. It also refers to three other areas in which Senator John McCain was involved in questionable activities, in addition to the one listed above, during his relationship with Charles Keating during the Savings and Loan Crisis.
McCain, along with four other prominent Senators, was intimately involved with Charles Keating, Chairman of Lincoln Savings & Loan. In 1989, Lincoln was being pressured by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) in reference to its lending practices. Keating reached out to the Senators for assistance, and they complied. Bolstered by a collective 1.3 million dollars in Keating Campaign Cash, all five made calls to and put pressure on then FHLBB Chairman Edwin Gray to leave Keating to his own devices. Lincoln soon collapsed to the tune of nearly 3 billion dollars that was covered by our taxes via the Federal Government's bailout.To make matters worse, McCain’s wife and her father were active investors in one of Keating’s real estate projects immediately prior to the scandal and McCain family members utilized Keating’s private jet for personal trips. McCain’s relationship with Keating was at the same time intimate and disturbing.
The resulting scandal rocked Washington and prompted strident calls for campaign reforms. Of course, none were forthcoming and ironically the only substantive campaign reform in Washington came many years later through John McCain’s involvement with the McCain/Fiengold Act. Thanks to laughable “ethics committee” rules and the goodwill of their comrades on the hill (all presumably thinking to themselves “There but for the grace of god go I…”), McCain and the other Keating Five members walked away relatively unscathed. They faced various mild forms of reprimand from their Congressional peers – ranging from censure to official “questionable conduct” designations.
Why isn't this more relevant today? Mostly because it speaks to the weaknesses of a candidate at a much earlier stage of his political career, a lack of character that he has not seemed to have exhibited since. Why haven’t the Democrats mentioned it? Obviously because one whisper of the Keating matter would bring up stark comparisons to Hillary’s involvement with Whitewater. Republicans in 2008 were reluctant to bring it up for fear of alienating the heir apparent. While GWB2 used the Keating connection quite effectively during the 2000 primaries to sink McCain (thanks to the inspiration of the evil genius Karl Rove) they dare not touch the subject today. There are too many cabinet positions and key ambassadorships at risk to air dirty laundry.
A better question, and one that is asked in all fairness to the candidate, is why it should NOT be relevant? After all, McCain is by far the most moderate Republican candidate of the bunch. In fact, he may well be the most centrist Elephant in years. He has a long history of bi-partisan work (hence McCain/Feingold), has supported federally funding stem-cell research, has for the longest time drawn the ire of the Christian Right (reason enough to cast your vote for the man), and has always supported Federal fiscal accountability and attacked pork-barrel politics. If you call yourself a Republican of any stripe, conservative or moderate, does he not exhibit the true qualities of your party more than any candidate you have fielded in years, let alone your current
Indeed, McCain might well be the strongest Republican candidate in decades. With a proven track record of working towards the middle and trying to find a common path with his colleagues across the aisle, can we not forgive a youthful indiscretion? He’s not asking us to forget a little wayward drug use, alcoholism or fellatio, just taking a little bribe to help a friend. In light of the events of the last seven years, it’s a fairly minor sin to forgive.
Now, if he hadn’t supported all of Bush’s Supreme Court appointees and the Iraq war from start to finish I just might vote for the man. However, these last elements are deal killers.
Obama/Clinton 2008 please, and hurry…
Obama/Clinton 2008 please, and hurry…
More on the topic...
4 comments:
Hey man, if you want to make your front page a bit cleaner you can set your blog for "expandable post summaries".
Read more here:
http://help.blogger.com/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=42215
Do you really think a combined Clinton/Obama ticket is likely?
That's a great question, sis. I think the answer is most certainly yes. The Dems will need to go with the ticket that gives them the best chance in November. Before McCain became such a strong candidate, I think it might have been a different ticket. However, I think it might well shape out to Obama/Clinton rather than Clinton/Obama. They really haven't been that nasty to each other at this point - no more than other candidates have been in the past that ended up together. It will make for an interesting convention to say the least.
Hmmm, not sure if I agree with the combined ticket prediction. I see more of Clinton/Obama instead of the reverse. I dont see her being vice to him. Id like it either way but it will be interesting to see how it all turns out. Maybe we'll get a better feel if we can snag tickets to the upcoming Cleveland State Univ debate. I paid enough money to there for grad school that they should give me some tickets. Oh to dream a little dream.
Post a Comment