It's one thing for the media to refuse to investigate whether McCain is losing his mental acuity - it's a valid point to inquire about, whether McCain is showing signs of senility, dementia or early Alzheimer's, but it's understandable to a degree that reporters are reluctant to investigate the details of people's private medical records. Of course, when you're running for president, are 72 years of age, have had 4 bouts of melanoma, and pick an inexperienced neophyte as your running mate, the voters have the right to ask and know whether you are healthy enough to survive an eight year term in office.
But putting that aside, what has been the corporate media's reluctance about bringing up McCain's Keating Five banking scandal? It's a scandal very much like the banking crisis we face today, and it's probably the most noteworthy experience John McCain had on the job dealing with the financial industry. Yes, McCain was corrupt in his dealings with that industry, and was admonished on the Senate floor for his poor ethical judgment, but why does the fact that McCain did something really horrendous on the job in the Senate, on an issue that is again before the voters, somehow make that issue no longer relevant?
The New York Times has done zero stories this cycle, zero, about John McCain's Keating Five past. But I'll bet you the NYT and the rest of the media have reported on what they perceive as possible scandals involving Obama's past. So why the double standard? Why is John McCain's sleazy behavior during the Keating Five banking scandal off-limits as though the banks involved were his children or something?
The Morning Plum
14 minutes ago
