The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
McCain's Keating Five Scandal "Rivals Watergate"
phoenixnewtimes.com — A 1989 newspaper article written by Tom Fitzpatrick of the Phoenix New Times reflects the anger at the time over the Keating Five Scandal and particularly John McCain’s key role in it.
jamesalfaro- 1689 diggs
- digg it
- 0Xonox0, on 08/03/2008, -7/+116"Those who survive will be the sociopaths who can tell a lie with the most sincere, straight face. You, John McCain are especially adept at this."
- Urbalist, on 08/03/2008, -1/+6Nuff said..
- ekdevdas, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2ahhh the straight talk express is transforming into a decepticon! i shoulda known i'd get this from john mcsame!
- poprocksandsoda, on 08/04/2008, -3/+1Can someone clarify: wasn't McCain cleared of any wrongdoing or law-breaking? Also, wasn't the other 4 in the Keating 5 all Democrats?
Just want to make sure I remember my history.- omarqaz7, on 08/04/2008, -3/+2He and John Glen were both cleared of any wrongdoing. The rest were democrats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five
- omarqaz7, on 08/04/2008, -3/+2He and John Glen were both cleared of any wrongdoing. The rest were democrats.
- mollyk, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1McCain was not cleared - but they decided not to investigate. So the real truth is McCain case was not proven.
- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -6/+76This is eerily prescient:
"Like the old song, that now seems "Long ago and far away." Since Keating's collapse, you find yourself doing obscene things to save yourself from the Senate Ethics Committee's investigation. As a matter of course, you engage in backbiting behavior that will turn you into an outcast in the Senate if you do survive."
And thus, a 'maverick' was born- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -2/+24It's about god-damned time someone brought this up!
- sturmgiest, on 08/03/2008, -7/+113Strange, the media hasn't mentioned Mccain's involvement in the Keating Five at any time in the campaign so far. (sarcastically scratches head)
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -1/+19Or the other big family name that was highly involved in the S&Ls going boom.
Bush.
Neil walked away with a ***** bundle. - dexter411, on 08/03/2008, -19/+5Seriously? I've heard it reported on MSNBC, CNN, and FOX News. This article leaves out that part about him being acquitted of all charges after an investigation, though.
Funny how the liberals who cry "due process" for terrorists in Guantanamo Bay seem not to extend the same idea of judicial priority to people they disagree with politically.- hwy9nightkid, on 08/03/2008, -0/+4I heard it in the news on FOX, but they kind of glossed over what it was...Im too young to know, but I am voting for Obama, and find this article a bit presumptuous. Many people know about it, but maybe its best the news channels just do like a marathon show of each persons past, so no one can bitch and complain about stuff like this.
- MikeFallopian, on 08/03/2008, -15/+3That would be strange, if it were remotely true.
- toetagger, on 08/04/2008, -1/+8I guess this is what he means by, "experience".
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -1/+19Or the other big family name that was highly involved in the S&Ls going boom.
- FrankHope, on 08/03/2008, -9/+56FTA: "You won't let anyone forget that you were a prisoner of war. But you have played that tune too long. By now your constant reminders about your war record make you seem like a modern version of Arthur Miller's tragic failure Willy Loman."
---
Wes Clark tried to bring up this point and he was demonized by the media, and then Obama threw him under the bus.- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -3/+8Clark was piled on because he was comparing himself & his national security experience to McCain's, and he is not, nor should be the focus of attention. His criticisms were largely perceived to inadvertently make Obama look bad, because if you discount McCain's war record and 25 year history as being "weak on National Security" as Clark did, what does that say or do for Obama whose been in the Senate for less the 4 years?
At best, his reasoning is at odds with the everyone's perception of the campaign narrative, at worst it sounded like he was trying to make a case for himself being the only qualified VP candidate. You can't openly opine and jockey for the job -in front of the media- in this way.- marabout40, on 08/03/2008, -1/+13What Clark said was that he doesn't see how being shot down in a fighter plane make you fit to be president. He was responding to a direct question from Bob Schieffer (sp?).
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -2/+5And did they get you to trade
Your heroes for ghosts?
Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze?
Cold comfort for change?
And did you exchange
A walk on part in the war
For a lead role in a cage?
- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -3/+8Clark was piled on because he was comparing himself & his national security experience to McCain's, and he is not, nor should be the focus of attention. His criticisms were largely perceived to inadvertently make Obama look bad, because if you discount McCain's war record and 25 year history as being "weak on National Security" as Clark did, what does that say or do for Obama whose been in the Senate for less the 4 years?
- dupswapdrop, on 08/03/2008, -10/+3Take the money and run fool!
- GorfTron, on 08/03/2008, -5/+48It is much more important to fully explore how much like Britney and Moses that Obama is. Right, media?
- krnldmp, on 08/03/2008, -2/+6Right, and rather than inform the public who may not have been politically active at the time of the Keating Five scandal, Obama can only manage to call McCain "cynical". Not a real strong signal that Obama is out to rid federal government of corruption.
- ekdevdas, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2obama's winning even if he doesn't bring up the whole truth on mccain. obama wants to keep the race decent at least on his end, and even if the neocons throw all their punches, there's no doubt that obama remains standing up and in the lead -- both politically and morally. of course, i think obama should bring it up, but maybe as a big bombshell closer to the november time so the fox news squad has less time to distort the truth!
- krnldmp, on 08/03/2008, -2/+6Right, and rather than inform the public who may not have been politically active at the time of the Keating Five scandal, Obama can only manage to call McCain "cynical". Not a real strong signal that Obama is out to rid federal government of corruption.
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -28/+9Here's the problem for you: McCain and Glenn were cleared of any wrongdoing.
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -6/+16*wink wink*
*nudge nudge*
Say no more.... - JayTee44, on 08/03/2008, -2/+1Actually, what vexingmdostwo says is true. I would go further- at the time of the scandal, the media generally said McCain had the least to do with the whole thing of the five involved.
And to say it rivals watergate is just delusional.- nihilville, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Yes, whistle blowers are often given sweet heart deals irregardless of their innocence. Do you have any idea how the criminal justice system works in this country? To make sure they have an airtight case against certain criminals, they will often offer immunity to other criminals in return for their testimony,
To use an easily accessible pop culture analogy: In the Sopranos, "Big" Pussey was offered clemency in the drug trafficking charges he was facing in return for "turning" on Tony Soprano and other's from their criminal organization. Pussey is no less a criminal just because he attempted to trade evidence for immunity.
Similarly, the fact that McCain was acquitted for crimes there is ample proof to establish his culpability for does not in any ways negate the simple fact that he is a criminal. It merely lends credence to the theory that he is a rat as well, a political opportunist who has proven time after time that no loyalty is too great, no conviction so deeply held that he won't abandon it in a second for political gain. - Tanhauser08, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1Irregardless is not a word.
- nihilville, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Yes, whistle blowers are often given sweet heart deals irregardless of their innocence. Do you have any idea how the criminal justice system works in this country? To make sure they have an airtight case against certain criminals, they will often offer immunity to other criminals in return for their testimony,
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -6/+16*wink wink*
- 17999, on 08/03/2008, -26/+9What, Obama and McCain are even in the Gallup daily tracking polls?
Dredge up the Keating scandal, get it to the to of Digg! STAT! That will save Obama!- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -2/+20I just love how McCain's past is Obama's fault. This is an article from a Phoenix newspaper from 1989. Is the new McCain slogan now:
"I'm rubber, you're glue. What bounces off me, sticks to you..na, na, nah, boo, boo"- lajaw, on 08/03/2008, -11/+4Obama too will have some explaining to do when all is told of his past dealings. None of these politicians are clean, and if you think they are, you are you really shouldn't be voting.
- sodade, on 08/03/2008, -3/+2The only predictive poll I put any stock in: http://www.intrade.com/
- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -2/+20I just love how McCain's past is Obama's fault. This is an article from a Phoenix newspaper from 1989. Is the new McCain slogan now:
- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -26/+15How could he have had a key role in the Keating Five when he was cleared of all charges? As most of you are too young to even know what the Keating Five scandal was, I suggest reading up on the history before reading trash like this.
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -9/+6Technically, it's the Keating three. ;-)
- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -5/+18by 'trash' you mean a newspaper editorial from the largest city in his home state, that was published at the time it was all actually happening?
- CanIGetAWitness, on 08/03/2008, -6/+20Cleared of all charges doesn't mean you're not guilty in this good ol' boys world, so please enlighten the young with your knowledge.
BTW: I'm 38- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -9/+9Ah, so then you have evidence that he was guilty? If you're going to accuse the man of being guilty, show us the evidence that you have that the Ethics Committee sequestered or didn't even see.
Or are you basing your accusation on paranoia and fear? - CanIGetAWitness, on 08/03/2008, -4/+9Not at all, I'm not an insider to the situation so I'm stuck in the same ignorant position you are.
I just repute your suggestion that if someone is "cleared of all charges", it must be true. Now if you need some evidence of that behavior in our political system, I can provide.
Then you generalize diggers as "young" and suggest they read up on their history (as if an article from 1989 is not history) while calling this article trash.
If you're going to denounce an historical article as trash and suggest the young diggers to read up on history, you should provide some of that "history" for the youngsters to read. - CanIGetAWitness, on 08/03/2008, -2/+3Before you go getting a hard-on, I meant refute.
- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -4/+5We're in absolute agreement that there is corruption in government. Any governing organization run by humans is going to be corrupt to some degree.
Where we're in disagreement is in labeling a man guilty simply because corruption exists. That's on the same level as calling every black man a thief because a small minority actually do steal. You admitted that you have no evidence to prove that John McCain was guilty. Your sole basis on calling him guilty is a paranoia that the government is completely corrupt. Your evidence is purely subjective, based entirely on emotion and you publicly condemn a man cleared of wrongdoing based on that.
An editorial written during the scandal damning one of the suspects is hardly evidence. We rarely know the full truth of any event until well after it has occurred. For example, we know far more about WWII than any living person did at the end of the war in 1945. We know far more about the Watergate scandal than we did in '72. People like you were condemning Richard Perle simply because he was a person of interest of the FBI with no hard facts to back it up. The FBI was sure they had their man, yet time proved otherwise.
The difference between a mature adult and an immature child/adult is one bases their decisions on logic, the other emotion. Most people as they grow older will learn to rely on logic more than emotion, but some never grow up. - CanIGetAWitness, on 08/03/2008, -2/+3My God, you are a broken record. I did not call the man guilty, I refuted your statement that being all cleared means someone is not guilty.
With all your comments, you have yet to provide some knowledge for the youngsters to counter this "trash" and that is all I asked for.
The best argument for the weak minded is "grow up".
You do know what they say about people arguing on the internet, so you are not going to drag me any further down your rabbit hole. - CanIGetAWitness, on 08/03/2008, -2/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoist
Why do I waste my energy...internet interaction is taking years off my life. - Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -3/+4Hold on a second. We're speaking about McCain. This is an article about McCain, and you responded to my comment about regarding McCain's acquittal, correct?
You say that simply because he was cleared of all charges doesn't make it true. The only reason you would write something like this in a thread about McCain would be if you believed it to be true of McCain. Otherwise you're oblivious to context and you pushed the wrong "Reply" button or you're trying to squirm your way out of your fallacious argument.
I'm not talking about some conspiratorial historical knowledge. I'm talking about a publicly documented ethics hearing that absolved him of the crime. Read wikipedia an encyclopedia if you or others are so unversed on the history of this scandal. Years after the scandal, no new evidence has arisen that McCain was guilty of the crime.
As the only person so far who commented that McCain was found innocent of the charges shows that very few here know what actually happened. They read an inflammatory headline and say, "That's why I'm voting for Obama!"
People who post articles such as this are preying on the stupid and weak minded who don't bother to research facts and historical events on their own. Their political ethos becomes based on hyperbole and hatred.
- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -9/+9Ah, so then you have evidence that he was guilty? If you're going to accuse the man of being guilty, show us the evidence that you have that the Ethics Committee sequestered or didn't even see.
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1The ethics committee found insufficient evidence to indicate he was guilty of any criminal wrongdoing, but they admonished him for using poor judgment.
- artc, on 08/03/2008, -4/+59And McCain has been a media celebrity ever since.
He's great at crafting an image of himself as whistleblower rather than corrupt politician, as war hero rather than collaborator, as maverick rather than Bush follower.- booyahbitch, on 08/03/2008, -4/+14Yeah....in order to really understand what McCain got away with, you would have to been there...not just alive, but actually in the state of Arizona...like I was, and yes, I am old, so I DO remember. He is a thief and liar, but hey, who cares, he was a war hero...right? WRONG!
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -2/+11I was spitting ***** nails as it happened.
So no, I"m not going to give this "hero" the benefit of the doubt.
But he has Greenspan's book and listens to Phil Gramm.
That makes me feel MUCH better.
Yeah. - gnocchi1442, on 08/04/2008, -1/+4What exactly is a "***** nail" and where can I get one?
- ekdevdas, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2czechoslovakia. if not there, try the iraq-pakistan border. oh wait, according to mccain, all they do over there is sell camels. i hate that guy, and i hope he loses.
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -2/+11I was spitting ***** nails as it happened.
- quaxon, on 08/03/2008, -4/+2I seriously don't understand how he got the moniker "war hero." Wasn't he captured, imprisoned for like 7 years and tortured before finally being released (or was he rescued?). Wouldn't a true war hero make a heroic escape, fighting off the commies and leaving no one alive? Mccain was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and he got captured like a little bitch, war hero he is not!
- bunit03057, on 08/03/2008, -0/+6You've been watching too many war movies.
- ekdevdas, on 08/04/2008, -1/+3Yeah, you're right. I'll never forget how the neocons actually criticized the victims of VA Tech for not pulling action moves and stopping the killer. Those neocons like Mccain are a slimy, opportunistic bunch. I don't care if he's a war hero; he's not a true American!
- booyahbitch, on 08/03/2008, -4/+14Yeah....in order to really understand what McCain got away with, you would have to been there...not just alive, but actually in the state of Arizona...like I was, and yes, I am old, so I DO remember. He is a thief and liar, but hey, who cares, he was a war hero...right? WRONG!
- crackberri, on 08/03/2008, -28/+8Democrats are getting desperate. How sad……..
- Raddix, on 08/03/2008, -4/+19Yea, we're stuck using documented events in the past as so called "evidence" of misconduct. Good thing we have forward thinking republicans to protect us from our silly ways. Seriously, since when have prior events ever been relevant to anything, much less in backing a candidate for such a high public office?
- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -9/+3There is no evidence of his wrongdoing, which is why he was cleared of all charges. Are all Obama voters lead by fear and prejudice?
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -2/+6Are you too young to remember this *****?
- Raddix, on 08/03/2008, -4/+19Yea, we're stuck using documented events in the past as so called "evidence" of misconduct. Good thing we have forward thinking republicans to protect us from our silly ways. Seriously, since when have prior events ever been relevant to anything, much less in backing a candidate for such a high public office?
- JasonCox, on 08/03/2008, -18/+8Does anyone else remember how Digg supported John McCain in the past because he was the most liberal Republican candidate out there? Now that we've all fallen in love with Obama (don't get me wrong, I'm voting Obama) it seems like we're doing all the mud slinging we can to make McCain look back.
Guys, do me a favor. If you're going to attack McCain, attack his views on things that will effect America, like Iraq, the economy, etc. Stop with this political mudslinging. If Obama wouldn't do it, then let us not do it.- SwedishNinja, on 08/03/2008, -1/+3You are getting Dugg down, but you are right. Digg is extremely fickle. Remember when Obama voted in favor of the expanded FISA act and how quickly the Digg community turned against him? He went from savior to sinner with one vote.
- EtherGnat, on 08/03/2008, -2/+4It wasn't Obama that turned people against McCain, it was McCain. I was a fan of McCain's in 2000, but over the past eight years he has abandoned everything I thought made him a good candidate. I felt betrayed by McCain long before Obama ever threw his hat in the ring.
- ekdevdas, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1yeah, you're right. obama's inspired me to do a lot of things, whether they be picking up that piece of trash around the corner or going out and getting people to sign up to vote. ah, but we're looking out for the guy by exposing the truth about mccain. obama's too decent to pull any cheap moves on mccain, but mccain's the total opposite. so we've got to counter it somehow; it's not through lies and deceptions, though, because all this keating 5 stuff is the truth. mccain got away with his crimes.
- chrissku, on 08/03/2008, -3/+47As the S&L failure deepened, the sheer magnitude of the losses hit the press. Billions of dollars had been squandered. The Keating Five became shorthand for the kind of political influence that money can buy. The five senators were linked as the gang who went to bat for an S&L bandit.
S&L ''trading cards'' came out. The Keating Five card showed Charles Keating holding up his hand, with a senator's head adorning each finger. McCain was on Keating's pinkie.
As the Keating investigation dragged through 1988, McCain dodged the body blows. Most landed on DeConcini, who had arranged the meetings and had other close ties to Keating, including $50 million in loans from Keating to DeConcini's aides.
But McCain made a critical error.
In spinning his side of the Keating story, McCain adopted the blanket defense that Keating was a constituent and that he had every right to ask his senators for help. In attending the meetings, McCain said, he simply wanted to make sure that Keating was treated like any other constituent.
Keating was far more than a constituent to McCain, however.
On Oct. 8, 1989, The Republic revealed that McCain's wife and her father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center in April 1986, a year before McCain met with the regulators.
The paper also reported that the McCains, sometimes accompanied by their daughter and baby-sitter, had made at least nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard the American Continental jet. Three of trips were made during vacations to Keating's opulent Bahamas retreat at Cat Cay.
McCain also did not pay Keating for the trips until years after they were taken, when he learned that Keating was in trouble over Lincoln. Total cost: $13,433.
When the story broke, McCain did nothing to help himself. When reporters first called him, he was furious. Caught out in the open, the former fighter pilot let go with a barrage of cover fire. Sen. Hothead came out in all his glory.
''You're a liar,''' McCain snapped Sept. 29 when a Republic reporter asked him about business ties between his wife and Keating.
''That's the spouse's involvement, you idiot,'' McCain said later in the same conversation. ''You do understand English, don't you?''
He also belittled the reporters when they asked about his wife's ties to Keating.
''It's up to you to find that out, kids.''
And then he played the POW card.
''Even the Vietnamese didn't question my ethics,'' McCain said.
http://www.wmsa.net/People/john_mccain/ariz-republ ...- barbiesnow, on 08/03/2008, -0/+7And now..the rest of the story...his son works(ed) for a bank, just resigned last week...he must know more than is being reported which is next to nothing..
- zombies187, on 08/03/2008, -0/+5McCain sounds like a 'McCain points' digger here.
- gnocchi1442, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Don't forget how he was "cleared". Cindy conveniently "lost" all the incriminating documentation.
- ObamAmerican48, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3HUGE props for the concise info. A LOT of people coming out of their political comas don't remember much about this scandal, and I'm glad it's being revived.
- BootsElectric, on 08/03/2008, -14/+6Finally, a well written article about the shadier side of Mccain THAT DIDN'T COME THE HUFFINGTON PUKE. Too bad it's old as balls.
- spinchange, on 08/03/2008, -1/+14historical context is good, not bad, thing
- bjornski, on 08/03/2008, -1/+8And as relevant as ever.
- SatoriSeeker, on 08/03/2008, -2/+2Protip: Don't ever do impersonations of someone and don't use childish wordplay if you're trying to convince someone of a point.
- bstm300, on 08/03/2008, -3/+22I'm never heard of this story before. I should look more into it.
- poprocksandsoda, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1Did you read the story about landing on the moon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing
You might like that. Oh, use Wikipedia also for the Keating 5 and you'll find McCain was cleared and many considered him being investigated an attempt to get a Republican investigated since everyone else were Democrats:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_5#Glenn_and_M ...
As for this scandal rivaling Watergate, right .... that brought down a President. This is a major financial failure that could have built new homes for millions of Americans with the money it cost to clean it up ... however as you can tell from the Wikipedia McCain was cleared of all wrong-doing.
- poprocksandsoda, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1Did you read the story about landing on the moon:
- moeursalen, on 08/03/2008, -16/+4People who are really interested in the Keating hearings which involved 4 Democratic congressmen and John McCain can read about it in detail in McCain's book: Worth the Fighting For. If you put all that stuff openly into a book while you are running for anything, you are telling the truth and deserve to be elected POTUS. Or both. Of course, if you are only interested in snippets, then join the birkenstock & Prius mob right here.
moeursalen.blogspot.com - cenuiij, on 08/03/2008, -7/+20TLDR: McCain helped his chronies steal $4 billion
- readacook, on 08/03/2008, -0/+4Chronies? Lucca, Robo, Frog?!
Oh, you mean cronies. :(
- readacook, on 08/03/2008, -0/+4Chronies? Lucca, Robo, Frog?!
- Infidelcastr0, on 08/03/2008, -5/+22Ahh yes, John McCain and his shady history with the savings and loan crisis. Now we're in the wake of another financial crisis (due to imprudent lending and deregulation) and this man has a serious chance of becoming president. Yup, we must be in America all right.
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -9/+4Ahh yes, Barack Obama and his shady history with avowed racists, domestic terrorists, and influence peddlers in Chicago.
Need I say more?- gnocchi1442, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2Most of us wish you'd say less.
- rosco40, on 08/03/2008, -3/+1Look at Yomama he shady too!
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -9/+4Ahh yes, Barack Obama and his shady history with avowed racists, domestic terrorists, and influence peddlers in Chicago.
- rosco40, on 08/03/2008, -12/+2All this is is old news,move on bro your boring me...
- gtroyp, on 08/03/2008, -0/+3
This kind of reaction is the exact reason that politicians can act with impunity. He did it before, he's probably doing now, and he will do it again. What has come before matters.- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -3/+2He didn't do ANYTHING before. This is the part you missed. He was CLEARED. Stop acting like he did anything. He didn't.
- kufu91, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1he was cleared of the crime but criticized for poor judgment. he later described his actions as the worst mistake of his life. he's no criminal but he shouldn't be president.
- gtroyp, on 08/03/2008, -0/+3
- TinternAbbot, on 08/03/2008, -14/+6McCain was cleared of any wrongdoing. Stop trying to search for skeletons in his closet. Let's instead focus on his shift to the right.
- krnldmp, on 08/03/2008, -2/+2Look no further than the second comment.
- Urbalist, on 08/03/2008, -4/+3You are a tool of tools. Let's put things into perspective. If this were Obama, he would be exiled from television and wouldn't stand a chance on election day. Would you let a man who was even associated with "Dirty Money" into the white house? Especially in the state that America is in? Keep the rich rich and the poor poor? This is reality sir, America is in going in the wrong direction and the people have put too much faith in false politicians. Lets keep special interests out of the white house and shift the focus not to the right but to the people of our land. Yes I said it, "Our" land.
- TinternAbbot, on 08/03/2008, -1/+3Obama has connections to former terrorists as well as plenty of Chicago criminals. He hasn't been exiled from television.
- IdigObama, on 08/03/2008, -5/+13This is the Real McCain folk's!
Yeah I know you don't want to admit it,never the less, this is McSame!- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -4/+4He was cleared of all charges, so does that mean you're giving him an endorsement?
- IdigObama, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1"You're John McCain, clearly the guiltiest, most culpable and reprehensible of the Keating Five. But you know the power of television and you realize this is the only way you can possibly save your political career."
He's using the same tactics today that he used then. He's a liar and I believe he wasis guilty!
- IdigObama, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1"You're John McCain, clearly the guiltiest, most culpable and reprehensible of the Keating Five. But you know the power of television and you realize this is the only way you can possibly save your political career."
- IdigObama, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1"You're John McCain, clearly the guiltiest, most culpable and reprehensible of the Keating Five. But you know the power of television and you realize this is the only way you can possibly save your political career."
He is using these same tactics today.
He is a good liar and I believe he was guilty then and still is today.
- Egoist, on 08/03/2008, -4/+4He was cleared of all charges, so does that mean you're giving him an endorsement?
- GamerVer05, on 08/03/2008, -6/+1519 year old news?
- tunapez, on 08/03/2008, -4/+7Is there a statute of limitations on grand theft? Embezzlement? Fraud? Considering he is vying for the top public seat in the nation, I would consider it as pertinent, if not more so, than his 40+ year old military record.
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -2/+4Not sure about a statute of limitations but considering the investigation into this by the Senate Ethics committee ended in 1991, I'm pretty sure this is at a minimum 17 year old news.
And McCain was cleared.
In short, it isn't pertinent since the allegations were never proved, and in fact, dismissed. - tunapez, on 08/03/2008, -3/+3All his friends & associates were corrupt, he was unprofitably convenient, totally innocent.
Bush was never convicted nor implicated for taking $$$, favors from his Enron buddies, either.
Good 'ol boy deregulation at it's best. The gang profits, the scapegoats do some Fed time, everyone keeps their whey. Wonder who the Black Gold goats are gonna be. Can't wait(nor afford) to find out. - gnocchi1442, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1Not to mention the fact that the Keating Five scandal was the *high point* for McSame's ethical behavior in the Senate. The guy's as dirty as David Vitter's diaper.
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -2/+4Not sure about a statute of limitations but considering the investigation into this by the Senate Ethics committee ended in 1991, I'm pretty sure this is at a minimum 17 year old news.
- queenstarsha, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2i know, right! let's go back to talking about where obama's parents sent him to kindergarten.
- tunapez, on 08/03/2008, -4/+7Is there a statute of limitations on grand theft? Embezzlement? Fraud? Considering he is vying for the top public seat in the nation, I would consider it as pertinent, if not more so, than his 40+ year old military record.
- chrissku, on 08/03/2008, -6/+11I hope MSNBC picks this up and does a nice Keating 5 story this week. This is perfect fodder for Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow. Why is John McCain not being questioned in depth about this scandal???
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -6/+5Because he was cleared of any wrongdoing in 1991?
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1See my comment below. He was hardly "cleared." They determined that the evidence didn't prove that he had committed a crime, but they admonished him for poor judgment.
- 7734yeah, on 09/25/2008, -0/+0they already have. i love maddow's look of extreme concern when talking about this. what a joke. is that all the dems have left? (besides the power of all the MSM, celebrities, musicians and other layabouts to push the propaganda) what about "troopergate"? they don't care now because it turned into a partisan witch-hunt and she will be exonerated. the dems will NEVER win a battle of who's the most corrupt - they invented vote fraud for god's sake (see Obama's good buddy Daley)! they also don't seem concerned with the facts too much (like the obama spanish language ad that is a complete hack job lie)...
plus, olbermann is appears orange a lot of the time. is it that tan spray crap?
- vexingmodstwo, on 08/03/2008, -6/+5Because he was cleared of any wrongdoing in 1991?
- gnocchi1442, on 08/03/2008, -6/+5Any bets on whether the Obama campaign will ever mention the words "Keating Five" even once?
- bluesman3535, on 08/03/2008, -1/+6He should hammer McCain in any way possible instead of bragging about a 2nd term victory already. The 'Keating Five' was another 80's version of the Enron loophole. If McCain voted yes on the Enron loophole and Obama exploits that, linking a pattern with past unethical actions McCain is finished.
- kerouaciandream, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2I doubt they will, and I'm sure they shouldn't. Obama's been doing a great job running for president instead of running against McCain. On the flip side, McCain is looking increasingly shrill as his campaign increases their efforts to attack Obama. Unless McCain's spurious attacks start to move the polls, it'd be a terrible idea to change the tone and direction of Obama's campaign.
- kenedamick, on 08/03/2008, -6/+9Oh boy looks like "the Maverick" has lost it again! Quick - someone grab old man McCain's crazy pills! He's lost it again!
- gnocchi1442, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Sorry, he's out of crazy pills. Cindy stole them.
- Sinbaad, on 08/03/2008, -8/+0Breaking, Fox News: Portly gentlemen "May" be turned off by Senetor Barak Obama thus vote for McCain!
Let's try to keep to the days talking talking points of conciderable merit to the undecided voters, rather than past Billion dollar scandals...
McCain/Huckbee '08 - techweenie, on 08/03/2008, -5/+6this guy used up all his character 40 years ago, and has exhibited none since.
- southwestnut, on 08/03/2008, -10/+2I am so tired of the omama nuts hard at work. So here is a little of the other side.
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f126/eyeofthebeh ...
http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm125/fourthsig ...- Serphyas, on 08/04/2008, -1/+5Yeah, damn Obama supporters, bringing up these "FACTS" about McCain, his lies and corruption. Good thing your *****-edited psuedo-political pictures set those guys right, huh.
- southwestnut, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1Was I trying to set them straight, no. Glad you enjoyed my post!!!
- txtphile, on 08/04/2008, -1/+4That "my country, right or wrong" mindset is not patriotism. Well, maybe in Iraq under Saddam, or Afghanistan under the Taliban, or Germany under Hitler. Pick up a goddamned history book, you ***** twit.
- southwestnut, on 08/04/2008, -2/+1Did I mention anything about right or wrong....no?. .....hmmm who is the twit now.
oh, is the swearing needed? or do you just feel that is the only "smart" way to express your feelings. Pick up an English book and learn how to formulate thoughts without swearing and most will find that others will think you have some degree of intelligence.
- southwestnut, on 08/04/2008, -2/+1Did I mention anything about right or wrong....no?. .....hmmm who is the twit now.
- southwestnut, on 08/04/2008, -1/+2Serphyas,
Since you want to point out "facts" about mccain, here are some facts about obama. I swiped these of another member but he will not mind. Chew on this a while, and using YOUR logic, we must point out his ties to Wright, racism and other such matters.
The Chosen One Some Facts about Obama in simple words.
1. He was born from Muslim blood. (Which in Islam makes him automatically a Muslim)
2. He was educated in a Muslim school where Christians could not go.
3. For a better education he attended a Catholic school, which many Muslims do.
4. He had nothing to do with Christianity until he married his wife.
5. He joined a cult church, a non-Christian church:
a) The church teaches separatism (black and white)
b) They teach black theology, not Christ Theology
c) The church honors and respects Islam and Muslims to the point they welcome Muslims to be members of the church and gave Louis Farrakhan an award for being the man who will unite the true Christian to the true Muslim to the true Jew. WHAT A CHRISTIAN CHURCH!
d) Why would Obama leave Islam to join such a church? He joined skillfully to cover-up, knowing that a Muslim in America would have little chance to become a senator or the president.
e) When you believe in Mohammad you deny Christ.
6. He never denounced Islam or Mohammad or the Quran.
7. There is no record that he was baptized.
8. From his own words, we can judge him, for he made fun of Christianity, the Bible, Old Testament and New Testament, which proves he is not a Christian.
9. When a Muslim leaves Islam to Christianity, there would be a 100% fatwa (decree for him to be killed) issued against his life:
a) A Fatwa has never been issued on Obama. But the opposite is true, for the Muslim world is endorsing and supporting him. This includes Louis Farrakkan’s endorsement. Some may say that Obama has distanced himself for his radical minister and from Louis Farrakkan but my response is very simple, it is an act because he, his pastor , and Farrakkan, know if he does not say that. he will lose the vote of the rest of the country.
b) He was welcomed to Kenya as a Muslim hero recently.
c) Muslims in America support him, even financially “One dollar for one nation under God” (Allah).
d) As a senator, he has and continues to employ members of The Nation of Islam. Cynthia K. Miller was the treasurer of His U.S. Senate campaign. Jennifer Mason is Obama’s director of Constituent Services in his U.S. Senate office and is also in charge of selecting Obama’s senate interns. - (debbieschlussel.com)
10. His agenda for the Whitehouse clearly shows he is Muslim:
a) Remove our army immediately from the Middle East.
b) He sits and eats dinner with Muslim jihadist.
c) Removing the idea of the use of nuclear weapons in any circumstance.
d) Passing a hate crime bill that will silence anyone who speaks against Islam.
11. His stance on the issue of gay marriage and abortion proves he is not a Christian- Serphyas, on 08/05/2008, -1/+2Ignorant, xenophobic, racist *****.
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1You just listed a bunch of smears which have all been debunked except for those which are so out there that I must give you credit for. They must have come from the voices in your head. You state these things as facts and not one has any source (I am sure they would all be Corsi's book? Perhaps, straight from Limbaugh's mouth?)
A Christian doesn't hate like you do.
- Serphyas, on 08/04/2008, -1/+5Yeah, damn Obama supporters, bringing up these "FACTS" about McCain, his lies and corruption. Good thing your *****-edited psuedo-political pictures set those guys right, huh.
- roosevans, on 08/04/2008, -2/+8You better believe someone in the Obama campaign monitors DIGG and picked up on this link! Obama will bring out the "Keating Five" incident before this campaign is over, in my opinion.
- poob, on 08/04/2008, -0/+2Picked up this link? Everyone in Washington knows all about this. History isn't American's long suit, but the pols never forget.
- Joetwopointoh, on 08/05/2008, -0/+3And if McCain's lowbrow Jerry Springerish Anti-Obama ad campaign that's apparently intended to attract the trailer park vote wouldn't be justification enough for your proposed Keating campaign scenario, what would be?
There are no kudos to be handed out for McCain's tactics so far as they've been nothing more than feeble attacks. He surely isn't campaigning on the merits of his strengths so much as flailing around for ways to diminish his opponent's support.
Disagree? Site one example of an ad wherein he fails to attempt to denigrate his opponent.
His campaign thus far is as if operated according to the Reality TV mentality handbook. Boorish, childish and amateurish. Aiming for the lowest common denominator.
- mvlazysusan, on 08/04/2008, -1/+8McCain crashed 5 jets, plus was responsible for the Forrestal fire. Something made the plane behind McCain fire a rocket, which hit McCain's external center fuel tank, and caused a fire. McCain panicked, and dropped two bombs into the fire.
Surviving crewmen of the USS Forestal and those who investigated the Forrestal fire case reported that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his plane.
'Wet-starts', done either deliberately (the starter motor switch allowed kerosene to pool in the engine and give a wet start) or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft.'Wet starting' was a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots.
In McCain's case, the 'wet-start''cooked off' and launched the M34 Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that punctured the Skyhawk's fueltank, knocked the M-65 1000 lb bomb off it's 500 lb rated mount, and touched off the explosions and massive fire.
When the carrier Oriskany came along side, and McCain was put in a chopper and whisked away. McCain was the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred .I have a hunch McCain left for his own safety, because the crew wanted blood.- nitemare2, on 09/09/2008, -0/+0Have you ever been on a carrier?Know anything about munitions?#1 A wet start will not cookoff a znui #2 dropping ordnance will not cause an explosion, because removing the safety wires and pins is the last thing done before the aircraft is moved into launch position..No such thing as hanging a 1000# bomb from a 500# rack all bomb racks are the same,they may be different today but not in 1967.The F4 had problems with misfires that was corrected after this accident.I flew in one that every time the landing gear handle was moved to the lower position it would fire the gun pod and shoot off the nose gear.So don't make statements that are untrue.McCain has stood up and been punished for his part in the keating 5.Has Obama stood up and said yes Rev Wright is a racist and America hater,or that Ayers should be in jail for bombing the twin towers.Don't make him out as Mr.Clean ask him why he won't salute the flag,say the pledge of allegiance,and he hates the nation anthem and he blows it off and dances around a straight answer.
- shiftclick, on 08/04/2008, -8/+2OK, now this is just getting annoying. Are you f-ing Obamabots going to tell us that you're not getting PAID by that half-wit, snake oil salesman, now? Geez, could you annoy me anymore? At this point, i'd vote for Kerry over Obama and I'd rather piss on both of them!
- poprocksandsoda, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1I think they forgot the other 4 in the Keating scandal were Democrats ... and that McCain was cleared of any wrong-doing or law-breaking.
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1First of all, who cares what parties the others were? So they were corrupt Democrats. No one is claiming one party is better than another. In fact, history shows that when a party has been in power for too long it becomes corrupt. The Democrats had and will always have its share of bad apples. But we are talking about McCain here. He was not "cleared." In fact, McCain was admonished by the Ethics Committee for "poor judgment" (like his choice for VP). The Committee 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." That is far from being "cleared."
McCain knows nothing about economics yet he surrounds himself with powerful banking lobbyists who will most likely be appointed to his cabinet and key regulatory posts. Is this really the kind of President you want? Or is he your choice because you just don't like Obama?
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1First of all, who cares what parties the others were? So they were corrupt Democrats. No one is claiming one party is better than another. In fact, history shows that when a party has been in power for too long it becomes corrupt. The Democrats had and will always have its share of bad apples. But we are talking about McCain here. He was not "cleared." In fact, McCain was admonished by the Ethics Committee for "poor judgment" (like his choice for VP). The Committee 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." That is far from being "cleared."
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+1Obama is a far superior candidate to McCain or even Kerry. If you can't state a reason for your decision I can only conclude that you won't vote for a black man. What are you afraid of?
- poprocksandsoda, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1I think they forgot the other 4 in the Keating scandal were Democrats ... and that McCain was cleared of any wrong-doing or law-breaking.
- macdesire, on 08/04/2008, -1/+1drink the Kool-aid
- JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+2Did you even read the article? Are you too young to remember the last time the banking system was in total ruin? Why don't you think for yourself instead of just trolling around jabbing at people. If you had anything to say that made a difference you would say it. The bottom line is you have nothing.
- elwior, on 09/19/2008, -0/+3 McCain has a great deal of experience in dealing with catastrophic financial crises resulting in Federal Government bailouts involving hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money.
He was an integral part of the last one - as a perp! His boy (Keating) was himself responsible for several billion of those dollars. This time around, McCain is caught between a rock and a hard place. He must (once again) ignore his non-interventionist philosophy because his greedy cohorts (once again) have made a mess through their malfeasance which requires a "Big Government" bail-out.
In effect, McCain has been dead wrong for years on the proper role of government's role in the Regulatory process, which if properly in place is designed to avoid the sort of meltdown the government is now reacting to, having to step in with taxpayer (our) money. And now this clueless guy (mcCain) wants to take over stewardship of this system? NOOOOOOOOOOO! - JenniferInMO, on 09/21/2008, -0/+2FTA:
"You're John McCain, a fallen hero who wanted to become president so desperately that you sold yourself to Charlie Keating, the wealthy con man who bears such an incredible resemblance to The Joker."
It is so sad that McCain's ambitions are clearly placed above the country he gave so much to. But it is true. People, this man is not the maverick. He is not the war hero he once was. He is not competent to be president, he is not running for the right reason and country first is far from his thoughts.
This election is about getting our country back on track. Let's stop the party bickering and make the right decision to change the direction of our country.- 7734yeah, on 09/25/2008, -0/+0boy, that is about as vague a plea as i've ever seen. democrats don't get things "back on track" - they make messes that have to be cleaned up. one look in pelosi's beady eyes can tell you that. empty.
- mruffy, on 09/21/2008, -0/+0John McCain "The Great Deregulator" his own words. The Keating 5 S&L scandal was too far back for most people to really be appalled. What we really need to dwell o is the Gramm-Leach-Bliley legislation that completely abolished the regulations that FDR enacted to prevent another depression. You should know that the Gramm in the above act is none other the "Mental Recession" & "Nation Full of Whiners" Phil Gramm McCain's Co-Chair, and his little bill basically cause this weeks meltdown.
Oh by the way, 8 of McCain's campaign staff from Rick Davis to Charlie Black all lobbyist for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. All who made it certain that no one was regulated, and again the group that brought you this week's meltdown..
Oh I'm sorry, according to McCain Barack Obama did!!
John McCain has became a desperate, angry, and pathetic shell of whatever his former self was.- 7734yeah, on 09/25/2008, -0/+0Rick Davis had responded to those complete lies - oh from the NYT - go figure! He was never a lobbyist for Fannie/Freddie. Barack should look to two dudes (Raines and Johnson) who should probably go to prison for the way they walked away with tens of millions in golden parachutes. Somehow (MSM) we always just hear about McCain's ties to that world - even if someone has to lie about it. The real tragedy of this election is that the lies stack up and dumb parroting Dems don't fact check and spread the Dem talking points without being bothered by the truth.
Also, de-regulation wasn't the problem. It was the social engineering the Dems protected to force companies to give loans to deadbeats who had no business being in houses. Bush and McCain tried to stop it on several occasions with Dodd and Frank being the most vociferous in opposition. Get your facts straight.
- 7734yeah, on 09/25/2008, -0/+0Rick Davis had responded to those complete lies - oh from the NYT - go figure! He was never a lobbyist for Fannie/Freddie. Barack should look to two dudes (Raines and Johnson) who should probably go to prison for the way they walked away with tens of millions in golden parachutes. Somehow (MSM) we always just hear about McCain's ties to that world - even if someone has to lie about it. The real tragedy of this election is that the lies stack up and dumb parroting Dems don't fact check and spread the Dem talking points without being bothered by the truth.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is 
