Character matters in a President -- Part II

Marc Abrams

When I posted the recounting of the interaction between John McCain and Dr. Ana Dubey yesterday, I believed it. I still do. However, what ensued was a a rather interesting discussion of what essentially amount to journalistic ethics and what level of proof is needed to post such information on Blue Oregon.

As a result of that discussion, and because I believe ultimately this was a pretty close call, I have removed the prior post.

The information, as they said on the X Files, is out there. It's on DailyKos, among other blogs. Dr. Dubey is not, as some suggested, a fictional person -- a quick google shows she worked at the Bar Association of San Francisco while getting her Ph.D., and was interviewed on graduate student issues for a profession magazine in 2005 (still not yet graduated). Her friend who is, as I mentioned, a tenured professor at a major university, strikes me as credible, and as someone who would not risk their career on a false rumor. Lawsuits are frequently determined by various forms of hearsay and even murder cases determined on inference and logic, and it is up to the jury to determine the credibility of the evidence. As I noted in response to Jack Roberts -- who is one GOPer who always rises above the "troll" level on this blog -- his own agency, the Bureau of Labor and Industries, accepted such evidence in contested case hearing and he himself has signed orders based on such evidence.

That having been said, there is no clear line for what should be a required amount of "proof" for a posting. Can I confirm beyond a reasonable doubt that Dr. Dubey wrote this? No, I can not. I do not believe that is the Blue Oregon standard (in fact, BO notes we are even a place for "gossip"), but if there are this many doubts -- and clearly they have not all come from trolls -- I respect the level of self-policing the true progressives on this blog are requesting. So down comes the post.

That having been said, however, character does matter in a President, not merely some multi-page resume of their experiences, and there is abundant evidence that John McCain lacks the character to be President. His reference to Chelsea Clinton as being ugly because Janet Reno is her father was far more offensive than the inquiries about Bristol Palin McCain's campaign said were out of bounds. Even friends of his such as Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina remark on his amazingly combustible temper, a temper that likely could flare out of control in a moment of national crisis. His flip flops on offshore drilling, tax cuts and other major issues are far beyond even the normal prevarication politicians of both sides engage in. His choice of Sarah Palin -- in stark contrast to Obama's selection of Joe Biden -- was a stunning triumph of political expediency and calculation over even the pretense that Palin is qualified to be "a heartbeat away." All of these are demonstrable. All of these show a lack of character currently, whatever character he may have had 40 years ago in Viet Nam.

Certainly there are myriad reasons to vote against McCain on the issues. But character matters. His is deficient. And, based on that evidence (and so much more -- add your own!), I'll stand by that assertion.

Comments

  • Sid Leader (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What did Hillary say... "grow a pair?"

    Indeed.

  • Marco (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Are you, as a senior assistant US Attorney--a federal appointee (?)--really willing to stand by either of your postings of this story?

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Marc, I'm not sure I understand why you or someone else can't ring up Dr. Dubey and find out whether she wrote the story in question, or not, and whether it is in fact true. Why does doing this seem to be such a barrier? A story like that, I'd imagine the press would be on like paparazzi on Paris Hilton.

    Those other people that allegedly had to put up with McCain at the resort mentioned in the story; How many people was the story referring to? If it's true, some of them might have something to add to this story.

    The resort in Turtle Island probably has records of who stayed there back in 2000. Even if the resort declined to release them to the public for privacy reasons, It seems likely that some sleuth or P.I. could get them if this story had any validity worth seeking out.

  • (Show?)

    Are you, as a senior assistant US Attorney--a federal appointee (?)--really willing to stand by either of your postings of this story?

    He's willing to stand by it as a blogger, as is apparent in the piece that's posted.

    The links to the story are provided. You can click on them and decide for yourself if the story merits the "gossip" tag or the "news" tag.

    Blogs are not newspapers and most bloggers aren't journalists. I've been both a blogger an a journalist--and I can unequivocally state that they are not the same thing (One example--journalists have editors). Bloggers do journalism sometimes--but its an open forum. So lighten up.

    It seems to me that some commentors are rather being rather heavy handed with Marc here. Do your own due diligence and make a determination for yourself about the story.

    If you think its wrong, then provide the evidence. Grousing about it is just silly and a waste of time.

  • Lars (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Thank you. I'm an Obama supporter, but I don't want to have to win "that" way. Barak's election premise is about a new kind of politics and a new way of governing together. If that's going to be "real" change, his supporters need to NOT buy into the old Rovian ways. Otherwise we're no different than the folks who have trashed this country over the last eight years.

  • RW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Marc - I am not sure I was pretending I can tell you waht it takes to post on Blue Oregon. But I sure hope that we might never find ourselves the originating hosts of a Wasila Letter. NOT unless we want to put our effort out there to do a little TINY bit of double-checking. I'm the guy who keeps posting it when there are lies or shadyisms coming from the Obama campaign too, and someone was angry enough that I'm going to talk about the CHARACTER I want to see in my candidate to call me a troll somewhere along the way. A McCAIN Troll! Lordee.

    So you sound a little bit defensive there understandable. The other route you might have taken was simply to do your own tiny bit of due diligence so that we all could feel fully comfortable to get your back if anyone wants to come in and strafe you!

    However, with your position, access and education, my bet is that you could do more writing up here than you do and give us a lot more information and interesting discussion than this (sadly, probably true) rendition of someone none of us wants to see in control of our country.

  • (Show?)

    Are you, as a senior assistant US Attorney--a federal appointee (?)--really willing to stand by either of your postings of this story?

    For what it's worth, I don't believe Marc is a senior assistant US Attorney. He's a senior assistant Attorney General for the State of Oregon.

  • Sid Leader (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This story is ALL OVER the Net -- from DailyKos to the hinterlands.

    So, the question this former CNN supervising producer wants to know is what exactly is Mr. Abrams, one of the most powerful lawmen in this state, afraid of?

    Cindy macing him with her hair spray? Lars stopping the invites to sub?

    As I said, and SNL has repeated, to its highest ratings in years, it is high time for the media, including bloggers like this counselor, to grow a pair, and stand by their stories.

    Otherwise, as Andrew Sullivan says, why have a freakin' First Amendment? Why?

    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/the-press-vs-mc.html

  • (Show?)

    Marc, I respect your decision and acknowledge that you didn't have to do it, that there are no clear lines for what is and is not appropriate for posting on a blog and that you did in fact go farther in verifying this story than a lot of people who are posting this on the internet.

    At the same time, I think you did the right thing in withdrawing the original post. I also recognize that this does not in any way undermine your ability to continue to criticize John McCain for his shortcomings, as you have already demonstrated.

  • (Show?)

    Marc, I respect your decision and acknowledge that you didn't have to do it, that there are no clear lines for what is and is not appropriate for posting on a blog and that you did in fact go farther in verifying this story than a lot of people who are posting this on the internet.

    At the same time, I think you did the right thing in withdrawing the original post. I also recognize that this does not in any way undermine your ability to continue to criticize John McCain for his shortcomings, as you have already demonstrated.

  • joel dan walls (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Mr. Abrams, please keep it real. If I wanted innuendo and hearsay, I'd turn directly to Fox News and Willamette Week.

  • (Show?)

    I think Marc did the right thing but not because of some general rule about fact-checking and BlueOregon.

    The truth has a way of coming out eventually and most of us do have our own standards and lots of practice applying them. You post coprolites and claim they are diamonds and that fact ends up in the record.

    There's an issue, though, when stuff that can hurt individual innocent people gets spread across the blogosphere or other media. Bridget McCain doesn't deserve to end up as collateral damage any more than Chelsea Clinton did. I'd be reluctant to post that part even if I knew it were true. In the absence of that certainty, I find it impossible to justify.

    One could argue that by harming this one person we promote a greater good but the Bush administration has provided an excellent object lesson on where things are likely to end up when that approach becomes your focus. The harm you are willing to tolerate just keeps getting bigger and the good less and less meaningful.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "The links to the story are provided. You can click on them and decide for yourself if the story merits the "gossip" tag or the "news" tag." carla axtman

    Without simple verification from Dubey herself, this story can merit only the 'bullshit' tag. It's not gossip, as in 'did you hear?..', or 'did you see?...', etc, etc., but something far worse. This is a story, that, unless it's true and backed up by the person telling it (which so far, apparently is not), is most likely something deliberately contrived to malign someone's character and make a lot of other people look like complete fools.

    Blogs are not all the same, and neither are newspapers and other places where people do journalism or report news worth printing. Even given a more casual standard of reporting I didn't think blueoregon was one of the weblogs driven by the kind of junky standard of reporting by which the Dubey story arrived here.

    If Marc Abrams is a senior assistant Attorney General for the State of Oregon, I would think that might give him some kind of better connection than most working people could hope for, to appeal directly to Dr. Ana Dubey herself for verification of the letter she allegedly wrote and the truth or not of the vacation experience it describes. This is what should have been done before Marc Abrams printed here it with such an emphasis on the suggestion that the letters contents likely represented the truth. Even for a weblog like blueoregon, this seems like the least everyone reading here should have been able to expect.

  • (Show?)

    So, the question this former CNN supervising producer wants to know is what exactly is Mr. Abrams, one of the most powerful lawmen in this state, afraid of?

    As long as we're asking questions, I want to know from Mr. Leader whether he really believes that fear is the only factor that might motivate another human being to reconsider a previous action?

    I can think of several others myself without being a journalist of any kind--let alone a former CNN supervising producer.

  • mp97303 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Come November 5th, at least y'all can say you ran with class as the GOPers celebrate another improbable victory at the polls.

    If you are gonna fight with pigs, you gotta get dirty.

  • (Show?)

    I want to know from Mr. Leader whether he really believes that fear is the only factor that might motivate another human being to reconsider a previous action?

    I can think of several others myself without being a journalist of any kind.

    Excellent point Doretta!

    When the first post went up, many of us expressed scepticism and questioned the wisdom of the post as formulated. That Mr. Abrams responded in a very constructive way to our concerns, demonstrates that he is willing to reflect on his own previous idea and do something different after he had thought it through.

    This is great stuff, and fits the model of rational and critical thinking.

  • (Show?)

    If you are gonna fight with pigs, you gotta get dirty.

    Personally, I prefer slicing them up and eating them with big slabs of freshly picked tomatoes, a little mayo and a couple slices of toast.

    I do use a napkin along the way. The pig's not much of a problem but my tomatoes tend to be quite juicy.

  • Marc Abrams (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Thanks to all who responded thoughtfully, whether you agreed or disagreed with my initial posting decision or agreed or disagreed with my decision to take it down.

    To be clear, I work for the state Department of Justice, not the US department of Justice, but that in no way realtes to anything I say or do on Blue Oregon. In fact, if you check my bio, that disclaimer is posted there. I don't represent DOJ here and don't, certainly, have the right or ability to use state resources to check out a story. I cannot even weight in here during work hours unless I am out of the office on my own computer. (Nor am I, by any stretch of the imagination, "one of the most powerful lawmen in the state." Heck, I don't even think I qualify as a "lawman!" I do defense work for when the State is sued by others.).

    I think the interesting question remains: "what are the standards that bloggers should maintain?" That question -- and my inability to resolve it to my own satisfaction -- is why I took down the initial post. I don't know what burr is under "Sid Leader's" saddle (and, BTW, "Sid," how about posting under your real name when you take shots?), but this has nothing to do with "growing a pair." It has to do with what I saw as a real divide among the non-trolls (and Rebecca, I never included you in that!) about how we set forth our beliefs and premises. That means, among other things, that we respond rationally.

    Now, to get back to what I had intended as the original reason for this post: a discussion of the character of Sen. McCain. It is, I believe deficient, for the reasons I raised at the beginning of this post and even for new reasons -- lying about his top staffer's continued links to Fannie Mae broken hours ago by the NY Times. Apparently, McCain emphatically said Sunday that Mr. Davis had had no ties ot Fannie Mae since 2005, and the Times has discovered that the guy was getting $15000 a month from his onld firm as a result of Fannie Mae work as recently as two months ago. As with the McCain-Palin campaign's insistence that Palin stopped the "Bridge to Nowhere," this shows that McCain won't even correect a knowing falsehood when he knows it to be false. "Straight Talk," indeed. How about some discussion of that!

  • Bill R. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    There are reasons why McCain's own colleagues in the Senate have serious misgivings about his character and temperament to be president. This from Sen. Thad Cochcran of Miss. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/01/27/famed_mccain_temper_is_tamed/

    "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine," Cochran said about McCain by phone. "He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me."

    By all means let's talk about his character and temperament and keep him away from the nuclear button.

  • RW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Marc: did I miss something? Did someone on BO stupidly think you should use your OFFICE to vet internet railings? That would be deeply wrong. I'm sure we are all sufficiently versed in confidentiality, professional (mis)conduct etc. to never have suggested such! Sorry if you think _I_ was so naive as to suggest it. And shame on anyone who did! I hope you are simply mistaken in what you are reading. However, any CITIZEN can do a lot of truth-parsing damage if they will stir themselves to it. You would be amazed with the correspondences and substantive exchanges you can achieve with key persons if you simply approach courageously, respectfully and with some bit of wit on display.

  • (Show?)

    Rebecca--

    I sort of read that into ws's comment, but mostly, given the comments on my profession, I wanted clear some of that up.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I understand the inference, and no, I do not expect Marc Abrams to use his office to ferret out the truth of the story from Ms Dubey that he shares with everyone here. Nevertheless, as a citizen with the education, job experience, and people he knows, I'm inclined to think he, much more so than many people, would have been able to get a little interview with Dr. Ana Dubey, and confirm or refute the truth of this highly questionable story. Apparently not.

  • RW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Marc -- ah, yes. I see. Well, never hurts to reinsert clarity. Although, up here, you may get your ears boxed as "chest-thumping" if you try to clarify WHY you are coming off as this breed or that of watchdawg... :)... you are either an uniformed troll, or a chest thumping gnome. Unless you happen to hold Office, in which case we all bow down to your office, but need a tune up now and again as to the specifics therein.

    Grinning here. Thanks for your work. And the conversation. I get the feeling I know you from somewhere in the line of some of my endeavours.

    Bex

  • (Show?)

    Regardless of whether it's posted on Blue Oregon or not, the story is out there, and no doubt has caught the attention of major media. I hope 'professional journalists" glom onto it and shake out the truth. And I hope that if it is found to be for the most part true, that they wave it in McCain's face night and day and show him to be a sexist, cruel pig unfit to serve as president of the US..

  • Tom Civiletti (unverified)
    (Show?)

    According to another blogger chasing this story, Dr. Dubey is keeping silent while she negotiates with a mainstream publication over use her account. This may be true or not.

  • RW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Submit it to Factcheck.org. They'll shake it for you. They shook Kilkenny. Was useful.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "According to another blogger chasing this story, Dr. Dubey is keeping silent while she negotiates with a mainstream publication over use her account. This may be true or not." Tom Civiletti

    It's interesting to think about what the negotiating that Dr. Dubey is participating in consists of. How much of it might concern money? How much concerns efforts on the part of the publication to help her in confirming the story that she says took place 8 years ago?

    I did a little searching around in the blogosphere myself. All the info out there seems very wispy. Some people have heard she's talked to the NYTimes. Someone commenting on tellingthoughts says they heard that a publication in negotiation with Dubey got a negative response from the other vacationers when asked if they'd talk about their experience at Turtle Island with McCain in company.

    Maybe up one day, this story will be the big smash, the damning truth, but right now, it seems to be a long ways from being confirmed.

  • Sid Leader (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Dear Marc,

    I always use my full legal name in all posts since I have a resume that includes Capitol Hill.

    Makes me... different!

  • Bill Bodden (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Regardless of whether this story is true or not it is a nickel-and-dime event when compared with McCain's jovial rendition of "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" to a Beach Boys tune. That and the Thad Cochran story cited above should be enough to scare the bejesus out of any sane person.

  • Sid Leader (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The story is true, if it wasn't McCain would deny it.

    He hasn't denied it... neither has Mrs. McCain III... or is it IV... because it is... true.

    Too bad the truth ain't enough anymore. In W's Amerikkka.

  • Bill Bodden (unverified)
    (Show?)

    There is another story that just had a mention on CNN. Andrew McCain, son of John, resigned abruptly from the board of the Silver State Bank in Nevada a couple of months before the bank failed. He was on the audit committee. Sounds reminiscent of dad's involvement with the Keating Five.

    More details at CNN and Huffington Post.

  • (Show?)

    Apparently, McCain emphatically said Sunday that Mr. Davis had had no ties ot Fannie Mae since 2005, and the Times has discovered that the guy was getting $15000 a month from his onld firm as a result of Fannie Mae work as recently as two months ago.

    No, it's really worse than that.

    Davis hadn't been getting $15000 a month from his firm. His firm had been getting $15000 a month from Freddie Mac (not Fannie Mae), ostensibly for work done by Mr. Davis since Freddie was his client and no one else at the firm has any ties to Freddie.

    Davis apparently stopped taking money from his firm when he went to work for McCain. That's the two years McCain is talking about. He does, however, have an equity position in the company so he has materially benefitted from those payments even though he isn't currently pocketing the cash.

    I suspect McCain didn't know those particular payments were being made. Don't take that to be a defense though. As I said, I think the truth is even more damning. The truth, according to the insiders who blew the whistle on this arrangement, is that his firm was getting those payments not for any work done by Davis for Freddie Mac but rather simply for his relationship to McCain. The Freddie boys assumed that those payments would buy them influence down the line. They were willing to bet 15 grand a month on it. Anyone want to argue they were simply mistaken?

    Fifteen grand a month--that's about what a person working full-time for the minimum wage makes in a year. Fifteen grand a month based on the assumption he'd have John McCain's ear when they needed it. McCain's campaign is rife with people with that sort of conflict of interest and John McCain knows it. Lobbyists dominate McCain's campaign to such an extent it's hard not to conclude he's hired them because of those ties not in spite of them.

    John McCain is terrifyingly ignorant on almost every aspect of foreign policy and completely clueless about broader economic issues. But hey, let's give him some credit, when John "I'm #5 of Keating 5 fame" talks about the corrupting influence of money and lobbyists in Washington he is finally talking about a subject he knows really well. He's almost always lying, more often than not, lying spectacularly, but at least it's a break from the ignorance.

  • johnny (unverified)
    (Show?)

    If character mattered the NYT would close up shop. How many completely untrue hit jobs have the wrote about McCain?

    http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainreport/Read.aspx?guid=74063c9d-7cb5-47c9-acf6-53c0c2d88376

    Besides, it isn't like McCain took $150,849 dollars from Fannie and Freddie.

    http://pfds.opensecrets.org/092408.html

    More Fannie and Freddie $$$ and employees (Johnson) in Team Obama. Unless it's ok to take money, have former employees who became millionaires on your team, including some mentioned as your AG (Gorelick) as long as you are a progressive.

    If McCain was into F/F as deep as Team Obama this site would be in meltdown.

  • Sid Leader (unverified)
    (Show?)

    As of late Tuesday evening, Republican Presidential nominee Sen. John McCain hadn't even found the time to read the President's plan.

    http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_article.aspx?storyid=97180&catid=45

  • Researcher (unverified)
    (Show?)

    There is an Ana Dubey in San Francisco. She is 38 years old and has been associated with various addresses in SF for more than ten years. Her phone number is unlisted.

    There is no one named Dubey (or Duby) who is a licensed psychologist in California, nor is there one listed with this local S.F. association.

    The next step would be to write a letter to Ms. Dubey at the various listed recent addresses, which I am considering.

    Resources consulted for this research include:

    -- the local association in S.F. (http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllqryna$lcev2.startup?p_qte_code=PSX&p_qte_pgm_code=7300)

    --the statewide database of licensed Psychologists: http://calpsych.affiniscape.com/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=104

    -- and: http://www.psychboard.ca.gov/

  • Ed Kelly (unverified)
    (Show?)

    According to the weblinks Anasuya Dubey was a staff person for the SF bar assoc in 1996 in a gay & lesbian committe report. She has been quoted as being a psychology student at Wright Inst. of Prof. Psych (seemingly confirmed by willingness of a staffer there to send her a message), as applying for a non-APA approved part-time psychology internship, later as being an intern at the Univ of SF Counseling Center in 2005 and an intern at the Community Mental Health Services of HHS in the fall of 2006. She has not been licensed in Calif. There is an unlisted phone for an Ana Dubey in SF. The unwillingness of this individual to actually corroborate what is being said is highly suspicious. My own guess is that her reluctance is because she exaggerated or fabricated a story in the past and now does not want to have to actually corroborate it under the glare of people who will actually factcheck it. Vigorous efforts to either confirm or refute with the author must be done before it can be considered even half-reliable. Simply having acquaintances of friends vouch does nothing. Incidentially, this person is not nearly as experienced or credentialed as some of those who are vouching for her seem to imply. If they actually have been led to believe that she is some sort of "respected" psychologist, that itself is stretching the truth. Psychologists can only claim that title if they are licensed - and she is not. The story stinks of a smear, and all those who have spread it around should share in the stink when the truth actually is outed.

  • Caitlin (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I received this story in an email forward today. I hadn't seen it before, and I wanted to re-post it on my blog. So I contacted the person who appeared to have written the story, through the email he used to send it, which was a business email address. After a few messages back and forth with Ravi, the author's husband, I believe that the story is true. He did corroborate the story and say that it would soon be published in either the New York Times or the Washington Post, along with quotes from others who were vacationing on Turtle Island at the time. So I guess we'll see if that happens or not.

  • Gregg Smith (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This story seems to be a hoax. There is no Anasura Dubey, the alleged author, in the California telephone directory. (If she is a clinical psychology she would be easy to find.)

    The story may be 'true' symbolically, but there is no evidence it is true. Speading it will only hurt the Obama campaign.

    GS

  • RW (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I assume nobody sent it to Factcheck as suggested. The benefit to doing so is that this will then be easily accessed by great numbers of the hoaxed, and, hopefully, quoted by other media outlets.

    Send that spam over and let them add it to the growing list of political entertainment they keep on tap for us there.

  • Edward (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Here's a reply from Mary Kate Gemel, the person who sent out the initial email sent to her and somehow her namewas attached to the article:

    Little did I think when I forwarded this account to four or five friends on 16 September that I would be identified as the author or receive so many questions. Some of you have clearly received the email without the preface attached. Most simply ask whether this really happened, some praise "my" courage, some angrily accuse me of distortion and lies.

    I'm sorry that I did not check the story more carefully before forwarding it. I am paying for my mistake by sending this clarification to every person who contacts me. Here's as much of the truth as I know:

    First of all, I did not write this account. Here is the preface to the story as I received and forwarded it:

    To: Mary-Kay Gamel [email protected] Subject: Fwd: MY HOLIDAY WITH JOHN McCAIN Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:13:22 -0400

    ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Kate Marianchild <mailto:[email protected][email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 Subject: My Holiday with John McCain: a first-hand account

    (Note from Kate: This shocking account was written by Ana Dubey, a friend of my cousin and her husband, who have known Ana for many years. Ana has a PhD in psychology and has a private practice in San Francisco . My cousin's husband went to business school with Ana's husband, who has since started and sold a number of successful companies. Ana's husband is currently a Managing Director of a private equity firm in the Bay Area. Ana and her husband are not political activists and don't have any personal ax to grind. In fact, in writing this account of her experience with John McCain, Ana is acting outside of her own economic self-interest as she and her husband are among the top 3-5% of our population who would benefit from the McCain tax/economic policies. Please pass this on to anyone you know who might vote for John McCain. Also please post it on blogs and send it to newspapers and radio stations.)

    I am not Ana Dubey (whose full name, I believe, is Anasuya Dubey, apparently the daughter of a former Indian Consul in San Francisco). I gather that Turtle Island costs $2000/day--I could never afford such a holiday. After the email was further forwarded and people wrote with questions, I wrote to Kate Marianchild. Here is our exchange:

    Dear Ms. Marianchild: I got your email with the shocking story and forwarded it. Some recipients are questioning it. I googled Ana Dubey and got a husband/wife team who run a bakery in Honolulu. Can you assure me that Ana Dubey really is a psychologist in San Francisco?

    thanks MKG

    Yes, I can assure you of that. She is a private person and psychologist. And perhaps you can send this on to your friends:

    Dear Friends,

    Everyone is asking to talk to Ana Dubey or receive a direct email from her validating the "Holiday with John McCain" story. I emailed Ana and asked her how to handle all the correspondence I was receiving. She didn't reply to me, which is understandable as we have never met and I am sure she is totally besieged with emails right now. I don't feel comfortable forwarding lots of emails to her or giving out her email address.

  • Elizabeth (unverified)
    (Show?)

    How likely would it be that McCain would make those kind of racist and disparaging remarks about his INDIAN daughter to a woman who is INDIAN??

  • Edward (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I found this interesting tidbit from an article about the hacking of Palin's email from the Anchorage News:

    "If you are asking do we have those e-mails, then the answer is no," said Anand Dubey, director of the state's Enterprise Technology Services. "We don't control Yahoo or Gmail or Hotmail or anything like that."

    Could this person be the real Ana Dubey??

  • JJPierce (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Wouldn't you expect the tabloids to have picked this up by now?

  • JJPierce (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Here's a listing I found in the public records index at Ancesty.com:

    Ana Dubey, 18327 52nd Ave W, Lynnwood, Washington 98037

    No phone number shown.

  • hay you (unverified)
    (Show?)

    funny, the "professor" DENIES the whole thing?

  • hY (unverified)
    (Show?)

    FUNNY, california board of psychology doesn't have a licensed pyschologist with that name.

    you don't have to be close to know this smells like the rotting garbage it is

  • JJPierce (unverified)
    (Show?)
    <h2>Snopes says the real Ana Dubey denies having written the piece, that she has never met John McCain and never been to Turtle Island. But she received the story by e-mail, like a lot of people, and it might be true for all she knows. Somebody down the line, she says, out her name to it,</h2>

connect with blueoregon