wow what a crazy thing to have happen to you. with that said i’ve always just kind of assumed that McCain was probably interested in the lady and gave her access she might otherwise not have had if he hadn’t wanted her around. that happens with beautiful women all the time. doesn’t mean she recipricated in any way. just used teh opportunity. she sure does look like his wife!

It was about ETHICS not an affair.

"The memo, from Washington bureau chief Dean Baquet, is below.

To the staff,

Vicki Iseman has dropped her lawsuit against The Times, just weeks after it was filed. We paid no money. We did not apologize. We did not retract one word of the story, which was a compelling chapter in the tale of Senator John McCain and his political rise.

The story stands as a powerful examination of a presidential candidate who cast himself as an ethics reformer and scourge of special interests, yet seemed blind at times over the course of his career to appearances of conflicts of interest.

The article was the result of deep reporting, dozens of interviews and an abundance of caution. I am as proud now of the work of the reporters — David Kirkpatrick, Jim Rutenberg, Stephen Labaton, and Marilyn Thompson — as I was the day it ran.

In Friday’s paper we are publishing a note to readers that repeats what we had already said in countless interviews, that the article did not state or intend to conclude that Ms. Iseman had engaged in a romantic relationship with Mr. McCain.

We let Ms. Iseman’s lawyers have their say in a commentary on the Web, with a response from Bill Keller. Why? Because that’s what we do. We let people we write about have their say.

Dean Baquet

Although The Times piece was widely interpreted as indicating an affair could have taken place between McCain and Iseman, The Times never stated outright there was a romantic relationship. That would have been a significant legal hurdle for Iseman’s lawyers to overcome in trying to win the defamation suit.

UPDATE: The Times has posted a joint statement and statement from Iseman’s lawyers. And below is the reader’s note that will appear in Friday’s print edition

A Note to Readers

An article published on Feb. 21, 2008, about Senator John McCain and his record as an ethics reformer who was at times blind to potential conflicts of interest included references to Vicki Iseman, a Washington lobbyist. The article did not state, and The Times did not intend to conclude, that Ms. Iseman had engaged in a romantic affair with Senator McCain or an unethical relationship on behalf of her clients in breach of the public trust. "

- Politico 

For anyone to have such charges levied against them as was waged against McCain and Iseman in this instance; and given the denials that were raised at the time the article ran, you would have thought there would have been a more vigorous attempt to challenge the article at the time it ran.

It would have been advantageous for McCain and his campaign at the time to (if he truly knew he had not acted improperly) scream, shout and demand proof from the Times. It would have served as a feather in his cap in terms of honesty and credibility.  Iseman, now that his campaign is over feigned outrage and filed suit, only to drop it soon after it was filed. Why?

I personally don’t believe they had an affair (it’s hard enough to picture Cindy doing anything sexual with him). My mind was focused when I first heard about this drama it was the ethics issue, which for me was pertinent to him being a viable choice as our President. I think there is something there and that is why she dropped it. Period.

Another one????  Obama is really scraping the bottom of the bucket…lol 

Add former Dallas Mayor Ron Kirk to the list of Obama Cabinet picks with tax problems.

The Senate Finance Committee says he underpaid by $9,975 in the last three years.

Senate aides uncovered the shortfall during weeks of vetting, and Kirk – the administration’s designated point person on trade — has promised to pay the Internal Revenue Service in full.

The problems: Kirk deducted too much for season tickets to the Dallas Mavericks and too much for tax preparation fees, and failed to report as income speaking fees that he donated to his alma mater, Austin College.

The full political implications won’t be clear until at least next week.

Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., is standing behind Kirk, though today he postponed a long-delayed confirmation hearing until Monday, four days later than planned, citing a conflict with the White House health care summit.

“Mayor Kirk is the right person for this job and I will work to move his nomination quickly. I am confident he can successfully restore the confidence of Congress and the American people in a balanced international trade agenda,” Baucus said in a statement.

The White House shrugged off Kirk’s tax problems as a “few minor issues” and said the nomination remains on track.

“We are confident that Mayor Kirk will be confirmed,” said White House spokesman Ben LaBolt.  (MM)