So where's Bridget?(McCain is ashamed?)

A smear campaign during the primary in February 2000 here had many in South Carolina falsely believing that Mr. McCain’s wife, Cindy, was a drug addict and that the couple’s adopted daughter, Bridget, was the product of an illicit union. Mr. McCain’s patriotism, mental well-being and sexuality were also viciously called into question.

In the years that followed, many around Mr. McCain said, the South Carolina ghosts were not easily exorcised for Mr. McCain or the people close to him. Just a few months ago, at the onset of this campaign, Bridget, now 16, summoned Mr. McCain’s aides and asked them to explain in detail what had happened in South Carolina and to give assurances that it would not happen again.

Mrs. McCain was also unsure about another run. The ultimate decision was in her hands, she said, and she was deeply influenced by the feelings of Bridget, who only learned about the events of 2000 when she Googled herself last year.

...

People in some areas of South Carolina began to receive phone calls in which self-described pollsters would ask, “Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?”

It was a reference to Bridget, who was adopted as a baby from an orphanage in Bangladesh and is darker skinned than the rest of the McCain family. Richard Hand, a professor at Bob Jones University, sent an e-mail message to “fellow South Carolinians” telling recipients that Mr. McCain had “chosen to sire children without marriage.

...

Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s political adviser, and the entire Bush team strongly denied involvement, though it was clear Mr. Bush was the beneficiary of the campaign.

daver wrote: I think it speaks to the fact that McCain is an idiot that he came back to run again. But anyhow, I don't think that he is *hiding* her, but I don't fault him one iota for keeping her a bit out of the spotlight. Especially when there are so many _other_ things to fault him for!

sweet tea wrote: agreed.

on another note, how come we're not hearing a lot of "doesn't it make mccain a bad father with poor judgment to run when it might hurt his daughter to be scrutinized/used against him in a smeary way?" the way we're hearing about what a bad mother palin is for opening bristol up to attack?

daver wrote: Not to contradict Salon, but that isn't exactly how it went down.

Livetotravel wrote: The republicans only exploit children when it's to their benefit - when it's part of the message narrative - like tonight when they drag those 2 17-yr-olds into the spotlight - right after they told all of us that they were "off-limits"

The Gop is a bunch of fucking hypocrites and have sold out completely to the evangelical radical right