One of the arguments the lefties are pushing this year is that John McCain is getting a “free ride” from the press. (Eugene Robinson is far-out enough to contend that McCain’s position on Iraq is not getting sufficient scrutiny. Yes, it’s barely come up at all in this campaign.)
Never mind that the New York Daily News repeated a tale of McCain calling his wife a horrible name, from a book that claims to have three sources, none of them named. We’re to believe the Arizona media has covered up this tale for the past 16 years, but that the reporters who heard it were willing to tell a lefty blogger.
Media Matters has written a quickly-thrown together book on this mad “free ride” theory, and the AFL-CIO is touting it. In promoting the book, Media Matters Paul Waldman reacted to the New York Times’ insinuating that the candidate had an affair on the front page without any named sources, “Considering there’s been so little negative press for McCain, it’s not surprising that they led with the salacious stuff.”
The logic of this escapes me. Because there’s been so little negative press, they went with the unverified, most explosive accusation?
Waldman also claims the press is ignoring how back in 2000, McCain used a four letter word starting with “g” when he “referred to Vietnamese.” Actually, he was referring to his North Vietnamese prison guards who beat the hell out of him for about five years. It’s an ugly term, but I’m willing to indulge McCain a little intemperate anger at the guys who inflicted permanent injuries to him. A mile in another man’s shoes, and all that.
(Also, that story was on Drudge earlier this year. Some “ignoring.”)
Anyway, I was reminded of the “free ride” argument when I came across the New York Times’s article today about concerns that “McCain might be coming under increased influence from a competing camp, the neoconservatives, whose thinking dominated President Bush’s first term and played a pivotal role in building the case for war.” Allegedly, prominent realists are worried that… well, I’m paraphrasing, but that those nefarious Neocons are performing their Jedi mind trick on McCain.
Except none of these “prominent realists” are quoted, other than Lawrence Eagleburger, who says, “It maybe too strong a term to say a fight is going on over John McCain’s soul… But if it’s not a fight, I am convinced there is at least going to be an attempt. I can’t prove it, but I’m worried that it’s taking place.”
The group allegedly includes, “former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage and Brent Scowcroft,” but there’s not only no quotes from those officials, there’s no, “They did not respond to requests for comment.” Did Times reporters Elisabeth Bumiller and Larry Rohter even call up their offices and try to ask? Isn’t that rather traditional methodology at a newspaper?
We’re given, “Scowcroft is said to have expressed reservations about Mr. McCain’s call for creating a League of Democracies”, suggesting a second-hand source. Really, if Scowcroft won’t confirm the comment, the reporters are putting words in his mouth.
Soren Dayton — is he back with Team McCain? If he isn’t, why not? — is similarly exasperated with the Times.