Gosinski details a conversation with Jeri Johnson, Cindy McCain’s aunt, regarding Cindy’s nanny, Diane, in a July 28, 1992 entry. Diane voice concerns regarding Cindy’s use of drugs and the effect it is having on the kids. Diane told Jeri that Meghan recently told her to “fuck off” after trying to discipline her. She also told Jeri that she is concerned that Cindy is giving the kids drugs which unnecessarily sedate them. I hope that is not happening. Concerns that Cindy McCain is unnecessarily drugging her children appear again in a July 31 entry — “Cari (Cindy’s adopted daughter) told the three that she fears Cindy gives the kids prescription drugs they do not need,” Gosinski wrote. Whooooo. Getting addicted to drugs? It happens. Having a powerful spouse push your problem under the rug? It happens. Drugging your own children? That’s demented, warped, horrifying, and disgusting.
Apparently he came out with at least part of this journal in 1994 when Cindy McCain “came clean”. It’s here. (Full disclosure, I found the link in the comments to that story, I haven’t read most of it yet and make no representations about the quality of the journalism, etc.)
I dislike John McCain as much as the next human being, but am I the only person who is made really uncomfortable by these kinds of stories? I want to see him lose, but at the same time it seems pretty terrible to go after him for what essentially boils down to defending his wife against insane and unreasonable drug laws. I mean, he should be raked over the coals for hypocrisy, but I’m not sure Cindy McCain needs what essentially boils down to a personal medical problem dragged out into the public sphere.
Drugging your own children? That’s demented, warped, horrifying, and disgusting. …thats what I get for multitasking. Yeah, if thats true all bets are off.
“Drugging your own children? That’s demented, warped, horrifying, and disgusting.” I’m not excusing her behavior but it’s not unheard of for someone who is addicted to drugs. Things that might originally seem extreme and wrong start to take on a different light when your mind is messed up on drugs. As for the article. I don’t care if John McCain tried to hide her drug addiction, it’s no different than people all over the country. It’s called enabling and it’s common. I do NOT want to see stuff like this on the news because it’s not relevant.
And look, for the record I’m more than sympathetic to the effects of drug addiction on the person and the family. I have addicts in the family and I’ve been through a twelve-step program myself. But I do have to draw the line on wrongful termination, baseless investigations to bolster your own reputation and protect the addict, and using public funds and public figures to orchestrate a cover-up to save your own career. Looking at the timelines at hand, it appears that the confession and subsequent treatment were to salvage an image and not merely to recover from addictive behavior.
Oh my god, can’t you see this is a private family matter? How can these immoral journalists go poking around in people’s family business? It’s positively Republican, I mean, Unrepublican!
It’s a public matter because it means that John McCain covered up a potentially deadly prescription drug addiction that his wife had in order to keep his political career afloat. It’s a public matter because this man wants to run our country. If he could put his wife through this amount of secrecy – AND THEN LIE ABOUT IT MULTIPLE TIMES – then why would we want him to be our president?
The most recent New Yorker has an article on Cindy McCain by Ariel Levy that covers a lot of this territory.
It’s relevant if he used *state funding and force* to provide the enabling cover. I know it is, I just don’t like that it has to be. Its an election year and all, but I still have trouble not feeling a lot of empathy for Cindy McCain. Its like the whole thing with Bristol: I know its relevant, I just really wish there was another way. At the end of the day John McCain is running for president and his past actions need to be closely, brutally, unflinchingly scrutinized. The stakes are high and we can’t afford to shy away from uncomfortable things. Just because I recognize that doesn’t mean I can’t have empathy for the collateral damage.
1992-1994 I sort of remember talk like this. Isn’t a little strange to be coming up again about a person who is not running for office? Isn’t this a lot like a Clinton death list or Vince Foster? The guy “waits” for 15 years to discuss it, even when I see googles that lead me to believe this story has been floating along for a while? I don’t care how much truth is in this story, It’s crap. It’s just meant to do what the other stories did to Clinton.
Considering that Cindy McCain’s history of drug addiction is old, old news, I suspect that Gosinski (spelling?) is a fake “whistleblower” employed by the McCain campaign to divert current and future media attention away from Sarah Palin’s performance in her series of interviews with Charlie Gibson of ABC. Palin’s performance in the initial interview with Gibson was appalling and undermines her claim to be “ready to serve.” Given that Palin’s performance might not improve in future interviews, the McCain campaign would probably want to divert media attention away from the remaining interviews. I suspect Gosinski’s “revelations” were planted by the McCain campaign and represent the first of many attempts to distract media attention away from Palin’s poor performance. By the time my comment clears moderation, the regular Feministe commenters might have already noted this, but I wanted to call attention to it just in case.
Poeschl – you echo my sentiments exactly. when I heard about this this morning on the news, I immediately suspected something was up. The obama campaign has nothing to gain from this. Considering Obama has not even given any lip service to the Palin Teen pregnancy, he would be even more loathe to touch this. I smell a rat and I don’t think it is coming from the Obama camp. And I can also see McCain throwing his wife under the bus to generate press for himself, at the expense of imagined persecution from the other side. I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who thought this!
I’m not sure why this is relevant, here (especially) or elsewhere. I link, you decide. Considering that Cindy McCain’s history of drug addiction is old, old news, I suspect that Gosinski (spelling?) is a fake “whistleblower” employed by the McCain campaign to divert current and future media attention away from Sarah Palin’s performance in her series of interviews with Charlie Gibson of ABC. Ha! I’m not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I’ll keep you in mind. If you’re right I totally owe you twenty bucks.