Straight Talk express off the tracks?

As almost every media outlet will report tomorrow morning, the New York Times broke a simmering story wide-open tonight regarding Senator John McCain's relationship with a telecom lobbyist, Vicki Isema, while McCain sat on the powerful commerce committee . Two things are alleged here, one that is getting too much attention, and another, not enough:

First, McCain may have had an extramarital (his second/third, depending on who's asking and which wife) affair with a lobbyist working the Senate beat. McCain has written about his indiscretions during his time with his first wife (whom he divorced when he arrived back from Vietnam, only to marry Cindy one month later). This is the over-reported story. Who cares if a public official cheats on his wife?

The second, and more troubling, issue speaks to a betrayal of public trust. As expected, the far-right jumps all over the messenger, the loathed Grey-Lady. I tend to agree that the story is lightly sourced, but from what I hear and read, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Several McCain advisors speak on record about the relationship, and others speak off the record in more detail. The problem here isn't an affair, but the fact that McCain, who prides himself on "clean government", fighting government pork and earmarks, and public financing reform is doing the bidding of a lobbyist against the interest of his constituents. Senators should not be sharing private jets with lobbyists, should not be going to vacation destinations with such individuals, nor should they be associating themselves so closely as to create the aura of impropriety.

Now, most of the conduct McCain apparently participated may not have been explicitly illegal, although Senators may not take personal gifts from lobbyists (such as rides on airplanes, hotel comps, etc.). I don't particularly think this is any worse than the known McCain scandal, the Keating 5 savings and loan disaster. McCain has apologized for this behavior in two of his books, following a pattern that endears him to the press by grinningly acknowledging the error of his ways and then sarcastically explaining away the fault with snark and bitting wit. He has done so explaining his 6th to worst class rank at the Naval Academy, his flip-flop over the Confederate Flag in South Carolina in 2000, and over his former denunciation of Christian Right Leaders.

Many will dismiss this story as a fable timed to sink McCain. The media is always out to get politicians like McCain, because he's someone that could change the game. The hypocrisy inherent perpetrated by a reformer, like McCain, doesn't bode well for the well-honed character argument he's primed to make in the general election. Generally, I love John McCain and any other year I would have been an ardent supporter of his. This does not lower my opinion of him (yet), but I have several thoughts on this story I'd like to share:

• If this has been floating out there, why didn't the Bush Campaign use it against him in 2000. They had no problem using the famous "black baby" smear in South Carolina. So why not use this stuff?

• Why release this today? It was after the last primary in February so it has the least potential to deny him the nomination, but it is sufficiently early in the election year to be forgotten by November. It seems like a very favorable time to drop it by the New York Times.
  

• Will this unite the far-right in support of their imperfect (liberal!) hero in Senator McCain, or will Huckabee rise from the dead?

• Did Huck know about this? Is that why he stayed in?

• Does Cindy know about this? And will he have to make a "I did not have sex with, or trade votes with, that woman" statement?

• Attacking the messenger may work for now, but reports are now surfacing that McCain knew about the story several months ago and even lobbied Bill Keller (NYT executive editor) to spike it, but Keller declined. I doubt the New York Times would purposely hit McCain, someone they LOVE, especially when they've been reticent to accept Obama and have actively supported Senator Clinton.

• How bad does Willard Romney feel now? Will he reconsider his thoughts on his true talent, hosting game shows, to re-enter the race (remember, Romney only "suspended his campaign, never ended it: He's still got those delegates)?

• How pissed are evangelicals? Will they sit this one out? Or will they move cautiously to Obama (he spent lots of time in Churches in the south, and his message resonates with a certain section of evangelicals who dislike the ideological purity the movement has bred in support of right-wing candidates, whose policies run county to some biblical truths)?

Just some things to stir on. And I do wish this had never happened to Senator McCain, but if it's true, this may be very big.