By including vague insinuations of a sex scandal, the New York Times has risked ruining their story even if there is something to the whole lobbying angle. Recall how Republicans revived Clinton’s popularity by impeaching him. Because there was sex involved, the whole rest of the story was quickly forgotten.

A reporter friend writes:

The core of the story – that McCain’s top advisers were concerned enough about his ties with a lobbyist to confront both the lobbyist and McCain about it – is clearly legit. That in itself is not a really big story — it’s no bigger than Obama & Rezko, which is fairly inconsequential but entirely worthy of reporting.

Agreed. Moreover, despite the complaints of some conservatives (including Limbaugh, who is discussing it now), the timing of this story could not possibly be better for McCain. He has just sewn up the nomination, and the general election is months away. Imagine if this had broken, without the unsubstantiated sex angle, in October. It could have been much more damaging. As published now, it inoculates him.

Meanwhile — Rush Limbaugh, tongue-in-cheek, suggests that the Times is deliberately rallying conservatives to McCain. As expected, his callers are suddenly finding themselves much more sympathetic to the Arizonan. His biggest “I-told-you-so” goes to McCain himself — essentially that these people in the media will never be your friends.