Thanks to poorly-staffed watchdogs and short attention spans...

I'll be the first to admit it: I am prone to tirades.

My last blog could be fairly described as a rant against the New York Times. One of my objections was their sordid accusations against McCain for his supposedly inappropriate relationship with a female lobbyist. It seems I'm not alone in my criticism of the Gray Lady.

It also seems the accusations have largely rolled off the Maverick's back, even with the specter of a lawsuit looming.

I called up David Morrison at the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform to see what he thought of all this.

"If he has dirty laundry, now is the best time for the story to appear," Morrison said. McCain is mostly secure in his nomination and the Democratic nomination has certainly not been sewn up, so the general election campaigning hasn't yet begun.

Once it does, Morrison said McCain will have a ready response if anyone tries to bring up this story again:

"We've dealt with that; this is old news."

Okay, then. What about this buzz about McCain vs. the FEC? That can't be good...

It seems McCain may have promised to use public funds to get a loan back when he was short on campaign cash. He said if he did poorly in New Hampshire, he would accept public funding (along with the requisite spending limitations) to pay back the loan.

Well, guess what? McCain didn't fail the New Hampshire test. And now everyone wants to give him money! Fantastic!

Except that the FEC might want to hold him to his earlier intentions. However, the FEC can do little except yell at McCain. It seems they don't have enough board members to reach a quorum on the matter.

The esoteric nature of this current bind could go either way for McCain's public image. A protracted, public fight with the FEC sure doesn't look good, even if the commission can't rule one way or the other. But the weirdness of the FEC's inability to answer their own question might mean that most Americans turn off before the issue is resolved.

The Gray Lady turns yellowish

Let me just first acknowledge that I subscribe to two newspapers. Not that those are the only ones that I read, but they are (supposed to be...) on my doorstep every morning. The Chicago Sun-Times, with its cultivated populism gives me the local gossip. I balance my beloved Chicago rag with the generally venerable New York Times. This week, however, I have been distinctly disappointed with its campaign coverage.

First, the NYT reported Obama's "plagiarism" of his pal Gov. Deval Patrick's speech.

In fact, the senator had disclosed the provenience of those remarks previously, but not every time he appropriated them. Gov. Patrick backed up Barack. Personally, I blame Obama's chief strategist David Axelrod, who worked on Patrick's campaign, too. Axelrod should know better, though, being a former newsman and long-time politico.

Then, Sen. Clinton, feeling like she looked a bit petty for attacking Obama, said it was the NYT, not her campaign who exposed the so-called plagiarism. Which is, in a word, a lie(thanks, Mr. Skoglund, for the link).

A lie I would've liked to have read in the NYT. And, let me just offer that I prefer someone who borrows rhetoric instead of just making shit up. At least when were talking about, oh I donno...the leader of the free world?

But it gets worse. Today's front page insinuated the John McCain had a sordid, extra-marital affair with Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist more than 30 years his junior.

First of all: ewwwww. Lobbyists are icky.

Second of all: you needed four reporters to write a muckraking story and you couldn't even get one untainted source to go on record about Iseman?

Third of all: at least four-fifths of the article was about his role in the Keating Five scandal. McCain did his political time for that already, and I'd hope anyone considering voting for him already knows about it. His participation in a decades-old scandal does not make him more likely to sleep with a skeletal blond living in Bud Paxson's pocket.

A NYT editor defended the article saying the information was "nailed down to the New York Times' satisfaction." Well, I'm glad someone's satisfied.

I, however, am not. And I will not be until the Gray Lady goes after her own with the same tenacity with which she is attacking the opposition. Hillary needs a minor miracle or serious political collusion to get the nomination at this point, NYT, and neither one should be coming from you.

Newsflash: New Yorkers not actually that tough

AP reported two subway workers went looking for a lost kitten by scouring "the area making 'meow' sounds." Add New York municipal employees to the list of things that aren't what they used to be. At least librarians are still predominantly cat people.

McCanoodling

Love is in the air. This Valentine's Day saw a hallmark moment with Mitt Romney snuggling up to his former rival John McCain with a big, sloppy endorsement. Smack!

Will this new union gestate into a Republican White House nine months from now? It's surely too soon to tell.

Romney had simply suspended his campaign after Super Tuesday, but now he has officially released his delegates and pushed them over to McCain's side. Some say Romney is hoping to mend fences with the Republican Party so he can make another run for president.

That may be. He's certainly not going to get the vice presidential spot. McCain's going to need to make his own peace with the party after he gets the nomination, and he'll surely do so by picking a more conservative running mate than Romney. Or at least a more consistent one.

Romney has been accused of being a flip-flopper during the campaign (incidentally, a political insult I've hated since it was attached to former candidate John Kerry. Since when are we not allowed to change our minds? I have this sneaking suspicion our country might be better off if certain leaders could learn to say oops, sorry
and I changed my mind). So, I guess his most recent change of heart shouldn't surprise me. But I can't help myself...

Romney on McCain before:
He's disingenuous!
He's Nixon!
He's a dirty trickster!
He's a liar!
He's a liberal!

The silliest part of all this is when Romney endorsed McCain, he said "the character of [McCain] was apparent" throughout the campaign. Apparent to everyone but Mitt, apparently.

"I really love attending Medill School of Journalism, copyright 2008"

Kudos to David Spett, senior at Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern for calling out j-school dean John Lavine for fabricating quotes. Aaaand, for making the rest of us Chicago j-schoolers a little less jealous of the local fame Medillers are privy to. Hah. No, but seriously, folks...

Much has been made of the fact that journalism profs are constantly cautioning against even listening to off-the-record comments, much less publishing them. Really, they should be reserved for life-or-death situations (and for staffers on presidential campaigns, apparently. We'll sell our first-born for a decent Obama leak!).

Levine protests that this isn't that kind of journalism (the "article" appeared in an alumni mag), so he shouldn't be held to the same standards. I guess that's what I find so repulsive about the whole thing. Not only was the "article" written to promote his shameless marriage between journalism and marketing classes, but the "article" is nothing but an advertisement itself!

Gross. This is why I hang up on my alma mater when they call me for money. Not that I was cool enough to attend Northwestern...

financial exorcism via telephone

So, the other night my dad called me to say Elevations Credit Union had left two messages for me on his answering machine. I haven't lived with my dad for years, mind you. However, Elevations was my bank when I was slogging through undergrad in Colorado, so I assumed they were hoping I'd donate some of my massive monetary reserves to CU's coffers. Hah.

But they had called twice, and to get them off my poor father's back, I called them yesterday after class.

"Well, it seems this is about your car loan," the woman said, looking at my account.

I've never had a car loan. I don't own a car currently and I've never owned a car that would merit one. I did however, in a moment of weakness, co-sign on my boyfriend's car when we were living in Boulder. I told this to the nice lady.

Apparently, my ex (let's call him Craig) recently sent in his last car payment. Congratulations, Craig! Unfortunately, he sent in a check for less than the total amount owed.

I broke up with Craig after moving back to Minneapolis, when certain late-breaking news was revealed about our relationship, but we remained friends for a time. Later, Craig and I had a falling out which culminated in activities such as me not answering my apartment door unless I was expecting someone and being summarily ejected from several friends' parties at Craig's request.

Now that we live in different states, however, I'd put this all behind me. But, not surprisingly, I had erased Craig's number from my phone and thus could not help out the nice credit union lady. The two of us mulled over it for a second. Then, in a classic display of bill collector logic, she came up with a solution.

"Wouldn't it be easier if you just paid off the balance?" she asked.

For a moment, I balked.

Then she continued: "It's only two dollars and fifty cents."

I did the math, Mastercard style:

2001 Mitsubishi Gallant: $2.50
Cutting financial ties with both Craig and Elevations Credit Union: priceless.

So, in a few weeks I should be receiving the title for a car which cost me less than a latte. All I can say is that everyone's lucky that I've become less vindictive in my old age.

The king-unmaker continues...as does punditry

Continuing the tradition I pointed out last week, Sen. John McCain unmade the kingdom of Mitt this week. After a poor showing on Super Tuesday, Romney suspended his campaign. The news bolstered the media, who have been calling McCain the Republican frontrunner as of late. I'm sure the pundits are pleased about being right this time, after sounding the death knell for his campaign last summer.

National Public Radio's "political junkie" Ken Rudin went so far as to compare the Senator to Ed Muskie! Sure, there are a lot of parallels between the 1972 race and this one, but now McCain looks a lot more like McGovern than anyone else.

But that's all behind us. And among those looking to the future are the top two Democratic candidates. McCain was mentioned in both Clinton and Obama's speeches following primaries in Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington state and the U.S. Virgin Islands this Saturday.

However, just because the media and the Democrats say "front runner" doesn't make it so. Voters in two southern states seem to disagree; it was not a particularly good weekend for McCain.

David Espo wrote for Associated Press that "McCain flunked his first ballot test since becoming the Republican nominee-in-waiting, losing the Kansas caucuses on Saturday to Mike Huckabee." That's heavy criticism from the usually bland AP. McCain also lost Louisiana to the former minister and only squeaked out a win in Washington state.

Up next are Maryland, Washington D.C. and Virginia on Feb. 12.

McCain still has almost 500 delegates over Huckabee, though, so his nomination is all but assured. However, that doesn't mean that he (or Huckabee) is going to slow down, that the news media will put down its collective crystal ball or that I'm going to stop watching.

The McKing-unmaker

Now that Sen. John McCain has been anointed the Republican frontrunner by the media, everyone seems to be falling in line behind him. Giuliani dropped out and endorsed him, but with the former mayor's liberal leanings and lack of delegates, he's unlikely to be much of a king-maker. Same goes for the independent Republican Governator of California's McCain endorsement.

In fact, McCain himself is somewhat of a king-unmaker. His success is draining the life out of rumors of a presidential bid by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. It appears that McCain has filled the moderate Republican hole convincingly enough.

Either way, with the conventions looming, there is no doubt that McCain's surge is having an effect on general election projections.

A friend of mine is an active Obama supporter in Minneapolis and frequently indulges my inner political junkie via Gmail's chat function. He recently told me he's concerned about this turn of events.

"I hate Hillary. I hate Romney. I fear McCain," he typed.

McCain has been criticized for being too liberal by almost every right-winger who counts in this country. He is too centrist, they say.

Which is why my friend fears him, instead of hating him. McCain has the ability to draw independents that Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee do not. In fact, Romney has been calling for Huckabee to drop out and stop splitting the right-wing vote. Huckabee counters that Romney should do the same, albeit less convincingly so.

The only threat to McCain's middle ground would be if Ron Paul decides to run as a Libertarian. Or whatever he is these days.

With all these left-leaning Republicans in the limelight, whither the hard-core right wing? If McCain is nominated, will they stay home? Watch Super Tuesday carefully, kiddies. It'll be the beginning of the beginning or the beginning of the end.