Uh Oh

Note to presidential candidates: have your staff check your previous sworn statements before responding to related allegations. Sen. John McCain-a man I respect and admire, by the way-may have really stepped in it, and I'm not talking about the alleged improper relationship with a lobbyist. I'm talking about his defense of those claims that appears to contradict his own sworn statements. According to Newsweek, it appears that in responding to the NYT's thinly sourced allegations about an improper relationship with a female lobbyist, McCain contradicted his own sworn statements, given in a deposition more than five years ago.

When this story initially broke on Wednesday, I was intrigued by the headline and but less impressed with the content. It seemed like a re-circulated old allegation, and the sourcing, though thin, seemed to point to a Republican leak. I couldn't figure out why loyal Republicans would be going after their nominee-unless they knew a bomb was ticking that could explode post-convention and doom his candidacy. Then, perhaps, it would be better to explode it now, in the "liberal" Times and hope for enough distance to avoid real damage to his candidacy. Toss in the likelihood that Republicans, even the cautious conservatives, would rally behind him if attacked by the "liberal media," and all in all, it would be a win for McCain.

But, I don't think that the architects of this leak counted on McCain contradicting his own sworn statements in his lengthy and specific denial yesterday. Americans are a forgiving people and have a short memory. The exception? We really don't like hypocrisy and lies. Just like Bill Clinton's infamous "it depends on what 'is', 'is' ", this part of the McCain story has teeth. His campaign has responded by saying that it really is not a contradiction. I'm pretty sure that most third graders who can pass a reading comprehension test would disagree. Check the story and see what you think.

Sphere: Related Content