{"id":16162,"date":"2008-07-11T10:30:36","date_gmt":"2008-07-11T14:30:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com\/archives\/16162.html"},"modified":"2008-07-11T10:30:36","modified_gmt":"2008-07-11T14:30:36","slug":"mccain-his-personal-life-and-statements-that-conflict-with-the-public-record","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/mccain-his-personal-life-and-statements-that-conflict-with-the-public-record\/","title":{"rendered":"McCain, his personal life, and statements &#8216;that conflict with the public record&#8217;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Long-time readers may recall that I wrote <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonmonthly.com\/features\/2006\/0607.benen.html\">a Washington Monthly piece<\/a> two years ago about the apparent double standard the media applies to politicians&#8217; marital difficulties. Bill Clinton&#8217;s personal difficulties dominated the media landscape for more than a decade &#8212; indeed, in some instances, his alleged proclivities <a href=\"http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/2008\/06\/06\/emvanity-fairem-to-gina-g_n_105739.html\">are <i>still<\/i> of interest<\/a>, 16 years after reporters first started caring about this &#8212; but Republican presidential candidates&#8217; related problems were seemingly off-limits.<\/p>\n<p>For those who remember the 1992 race, &#8220;character issues&#8221; was the euphemism to attack Clinton for having a troubled personal life. Has the phrase been applied to Republican candidates with similar experiences? Not so much.<\/p>\n<p>I predicted in my Monthly piece that this wouldn&#8217;t last, and Republicans with marital difficulties in their past could expect plenty of uncomfortable questions. This hasn&#8217;t quite worked out as I&#8217;d expected, and reporters have shown no interest whatsoever in asking &#8220;character&#8221; questions about Republicans.<\/p>\n<p>There have, however, been a few cracks in the ice. There was, for example, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dailymail.co.uk\/femail\/article-1024927\/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html\">this report<\/a> in the UK&#8217;s Daily Mail last month about John McCain&#8217;s first wife. It was quite a painful story, involving physical difficulties, infidelity, and divorce. &#8220;My marriage ended because John McCain didn&#8217;t want to be 40, he wanted to be 25,&#8221; Carol McCain said.<\/p>\n<p>The first substantive report about this in the U.S. media appeared this morning, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.latimes.com\/news\/nationworld\/nation\/la-na-divorce11-2008jul11,0,6546861.story\">in the LA Times<\/a>.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>McCain, who is about to become the GOP nominee, has made several statements about how he divorced Carol and married Hensley that conflict with the public record.<\/p>\n<p>In his 2002 memoir, &#8220;Worth the Fighting For,&#8221; McCain wrote that he had separated from Carol before he began dating Hensley. &#8220;I spent as much time with Cindy in Washington and Arizona as our jobs would allow,&#8221; McCain wrote. &#8220;I was separated from Carol, but our divorce would not become final until February of 1980.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>An examination of court documents tells a different story.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Yes, McCain committed adultery &#8212; and then was far from truthful about it.<br \/>\n<!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>McCain did not sue his wife for divorce until Feb. 19, 1980, and he wrote in his court petition that he and his wife had &#8220;cohabited&#8221; until Jan. 7 of that year &#8212; or for the first nine months of his relationship with Hensley.<\/p>\n<p>Although McCain suggested in his autobiography that months passed between his divorce and remarriage, the divorce was granted April 2, 1980, and he wed Hensley in a private ceremony five weeks later. McCain obtained an Arizona marriage license on March 6, 1980, while still legally married to his first wife.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>McCain, not surprisingly, doesn&#8217;t want to talk about the subject. Asked for comment, his campaign spokesperson said, &#8220;Of course we will not comment on the breakup of the senator&#8217;s first marriage, other than to note that the senator has always taken responsibility for it.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>To reiterate a point I&#8217;ve raised before, as far as I&#8217;m concerned, McCain&#8217;s marital difficulties and adultery aren&#8217;t particularly significant in this campaign, especially years later. I&#8217;m inclined to see a distinction made between public and private worlds. I defended Bill Clinton, and said his personal controversies had no bearing on his ability to be a good candidate and a good president, so I can&#8217;t very well turn around and say the opposite about McCain, no matter how badly he treated his first wife.<\/p>\n<p>But that nevertheless leads to two relevant angles here. First, is the partisan double standard. If Clinton&#8217;s personal history was a matter of tremendous national significance as a presidential candidate (and as a president), then it&#8217;s not unreasonable to wonder why McCain isn&#8217;t subjected to the same scrutiny. I&#8217;d prefer both issues are off the table, but I&#8217;m hard pressed to imagine why only Democratic presidential candidates&#8217; personal lives are of interest in the context of a national campaign. <\/p>\n<p>In 1992, long before the election, then-Gov. Clinton&#8217;s personal life dominated the political discourse, and journalists weren&#8217;t the least bit embarrassed about making this a critical campaign issue. And yet, today&#8217;s LAT piece is, as far as I can tell, the first U.S. newspaper to highlight McCain&#8217;s background as an adulterer.<\/p>\n<p>Second, even for those who are willing to say that McCain&#8217;s personal\/family difficulties are a private matter, there&#8217;s also the fact that McCain apparently lied about his infidelity. Now, I understand <i>why<\/i> he lied; he&#8217;s no doubt embarrassed. But, again, if Clinton&#8217;s lies about adultery were evidence of a poor character, McCain&#8217;s obvious untruths warrant similar scrutiny, don&#8217;t they?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Long-time readers may recall that I wrote a Washington Monthly piece two years ago about the apparent double standard the media applies to politicians&#8217; marital difficulties. Bill Clinton&#8217;s personal difficulties dominated the media landscape for more than a decade &#8212; indeed, in some instances, his alleged proclivities are still of interest, 16 years after reporters [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[617],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16162","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16162","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16162"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16162\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16162"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16162"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16162"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}