Even his supporters had to cringe at the transparency of this gambit. Yet 10 years later, Sen. John McCain has made Bill Clinton look like Honest Abe - and he's actually getting away it.

Recently, my new book, "The Real McCain," caused a small dust-up when I revealed that McCain engaged in a physical altercation in 2006 with Rep. Rick Renzi of Arizona. I wrote that, after repeatedly being addressed by McCain as "boy," "Renzi, a former college linebacker, rose from his chair and said to McCain, 'You call me that one more time and I'll kick your old a[--].' McCain lunged at Renzi, punches were thrown, and the two had to be . . . separated."

The Huffington Post reported on my story, but the mainstream "liberal media" strained their necks looking the other way. To its credit, Fox News eventually dared to ask McCain about the veracity of the charge. "Straight-talker" McCain then launched into a variation of straight-talk also known as lying.

"No," he responded. ". . . Congressman Renzi is a friend of mine, and we have a very good relationship." He then went on to recite his supposed bipartisan bona fides, his hatred for pork-barrel spending and a recap of the Abramoff hearings that he conducted - all of which have about as much to do with whether he attacked another member of Congress as Barack Obama's lapel accessorizing has to do with his patriotism.

But the other day, when the Washington Post confirmed my story, Team McCain pulled a 180, admitting the incident had occurred, but insisting that "no punches were thrown." How nice.

By itself, this epsiode is little more than boilerplate election scuffling that only serves to detract from our national conversation about choosing a new president. But in the case of McCain, the entire event, from stammering denial to qualified confession, is emblematic of the McCain I've come to know in my reporting.

The media lionize the Arizonan as having a level of candor and honesty virtually unprecedented in U.S. politics. Yet the fact is he's left behind a trail of mistruths and contradictions, many of which take little effort to uncover, that he doesn't even bother to hide or explain.

In 1990, McCain told the New York Times that he opposed using troops in Iraq, that "under no circumstances should American blood be traded for Iraqi blood," while lately he has been more than willing to lead the charge in support of the misguided quagmire in Iraq, even as the death toll continues to rise and no political stability is achieved.

NINE YEARS later, he told the San Francisco Chronicle: "But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations." He reiterated that position on CNN.

Yet now he claims to have always been pro-life.

On more than one occasion over the last seven years, McCain also decried President Bush's tax cuts as "budget-busters" that "disproportionately benefited the wealthy." Today, he is leading the charge - during a time of war, greater economic disparity and a larger debt - to make those same cuts permanent.

If this is straight talk, I wonder what the threshold has become for being called "disingenuous" or a "flip-flopper" these days?

The American people need to ask critical questions this election - about health care, about education, about this futile and unending war - and those questions demand honest answers. But that dialogue won't happen as long as we focus on the daily Obama-Clinton smackdown, and not on examining the walking, talking contradiction that is the presumptive GOP nominee.

As long as John McCain continues to dwell beneath a warm veil of media affection, all the while trafficking in double-talk cross-dressing as straight-talk, we'll never be able to ask him the tough questions to which we deserve answers, and determine the best course for the future of this nation. *

Cliff Schecter is the author of "The Real McCain: Why conservatives don't trust him and why independents shouldn't."