Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Keating 5 scandal an old issue

It's already been discussed to death in the past. Here's the part about Sen. John Glenn and John McCain:

The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in the scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped. He was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."

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. McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf. 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."

People already knew about it and have voted to re-elect McCain in 1992, 1998 and 2004.

As for Obama though, he hasn't come clean yet about his shady associations in Chicago, unlike McCain.

Glenn Reynolds: McCain's role in Keating 5 a bit overstated.

UDPATE: Megan mcardle:

The problem Obama's critics have is not that he once spent some time talking to Bill Ayers; it's that he refuses to apologize for it now. That refusal to apologize is why the charge has proven hard to counter. You can argue that it isn't a big deal, but you can't argue it isn't true, and unfortunately for Obama, some voters think it is a really big deal.

If I were the McCain campaign, I would be throwing a hell of a lot of resources into making my own video. They have an actual factually accurate and coherent narrative about how McCain has spent the last 20 years atoning for the Keating 5; I would tell that story. I would ask why Obama is choosing to bring up this 20 year old scandal without mentioning that McCain has repeatedly regretted it. And then I would throw in Ayers and Rezko and ask when Obama's going to apologize for his lapses in judgement.

No comments: