The New York Times’ lengthy story Thursday about presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain has, predictably, put conservative talk radio and TV news programs on screech mode. Commentators are casting the story as the supposed liberal media’s leading voice deliberately smearing the GOP’s cleanest candidate by suggesting Sen. McCain may have had a romantic relationship with a lobbyist during his 2000 bid for the White House.

Rather than rely on TV and radio commentators as arbiters of truth and fairness, those interested in the presidential campaign ought to read the story for themselves. The salacious nature of the allegations – the married and then-63-year-old senator cavorting with a then-32-year-old lobbyist – has, sadly, dominated pundit TV. The story does not actually state the two were physically intimate, but the notion that their relationship, according to the candidate’s advisers, “had become romantic,” is juicy enough to recall the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair.

But there’s a lot more to the story, to which four reporters contributed, and it’s apparent the Times debated internally for months before publishing it. It essentially uses the new allegations about the lobbyist as a hook to take up Sen. McCain’s history on ethical matters. The bulk of the story is devoted to the senator’s career, and its prevailing theme of fighting corruption in politics, while at times succumbing to less than ethical conduct.

As with many crusaders, it seems Sen. McCain’s wrath was aimed at something with which he was personally familiar; it’s often said that what we hate in others is what we hate in ourselves. Early in his political career, Sen. McCain was one of five senators – later known as the Keating Five – to go to bat with federal regulators on behalf of Frank Keating, who owned failing savings and loan institutions. The savings and loan crisis cost taxpayers $3.4 billion.

That scandal, the Times story argues, defined the senator, driving him to “expunge the stain on his reputation,” which then expanded to “a zeal to cleanse Washington as well.” Those efforts have included the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform effort, and other work aimed at limiting the influence of private money on Congress.

That’s what makes the latest revelation disturbing. According to the Times story, Sen. McCain’s advisers in 2000 were worried about the perception created by the frequent appearance of the lobbyist in the candidate’s office and at public events. Whether Sen. McCain violated his marriage vows is less germane to his fitness to be president, and the story reflects that perspective.

Sen. McCain has been candid about his seemingly contrary impulses: a maverick willing to offer “straight talk,” but who sometimes displays a tin ear to conflicts of interest. His response to the Times story was that he had not violated the public trust. That may be true, but perception rules in politics.

The Times quotes Sen. McCain’s longtime supporter William Cheshire, who as editorial page editor of the Arizona Republican during the Keating Five scandal defended him. “He is essentially an honorable person,” Mr. Cheshire says of his friend, but concedes, “He can be imprudent.”

In his memoir, Sen. McCain wonders about that imprudence when he met with bank regulators on behalf of Frank Keating, the Times reports: “Why didn’t I fully grasp the unusual appearance of such a meeting?” he wrote. The same question might be asked about the relationship – romantic or not – the senator had with the lobbyist.