August 18, 2008

McCain crushes Obama at evangelist's forum, and ...

... the Left can't handle it. They wasted no time in circulating the idea that McCain "cheated" because he wasn't in the "cone of silence" and therefore heard the questions being asked to The Messiah. NBC's Andrea Mitchell, as I reported over at Newsbusters, was a willing Obama campaign surrogate, offering up the theory on Sunday's "Meet the Press." Reliable moonbat Daily Kos floated that McCain either heard the questions or got them ahead of time. Our local twits even demand proof that McCain did not cheat -- proof of a negative.

Well, well, well.

Kos actually got part of the story correct -- but not in the way they thought. Both McCain and The Messiah got two questions ahead of time, and were given the "themes" of the remaining questions. Obama actually got a third question in advance. McCain was to have gotten it too; however, logistical problems prevented such. So, if anything, The Messiah had the slight advantage. (Source.)

As for the "cone of silence," there was never any such thing. "Pastor Rick Warren was making a little joke when he used that phrase. But he was assuring the crowd that McCain was not hearing any of the questioning of Barack Obama," reports Byron York.

McCain was in his car en route to the forum for a span of 35 minutes -- while The Messiah was on stage. He emphatically states he heard nothing from the forum during that time. Once he arrived at the forum, he was directed to a holding room that had no TV, radio or anything. Could he be lying? Sure, I suppose. I don't buy it, however. But let's suppose he was -- he already knew the questions. And even if you think hearing The Messiah's responses would be an advantage, how is that any different from an actual debate when someone has to go (answer) first?

Again, I say The Messiah "cheated" because he was given a third question in advance while McCain was not. And McCain still kicked The Messiah's ass.

Posted by Hube at August 18, 2008 03:15 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

>>And even if you think hearing The Messiah's responses would be an advantage, how is that any different from an actual debate when someone has to go (answer) first?

In a debate, the same person doesn't have to go first on every question, without any chance to hear or respond to their opponent's answers.

I listened to the forum live - thinking that McCain was fully sequestered during the first part - and it never occured to me that McCain was responding to Obama. His answers were largely the same things that he has always said, and fairly unsurprising. However, I don't blame people for being suspicious. While I knew the "cone of silence" was an exaggeration, I assumed it was based on some truth, such as McCain being in a backstage room without a television, monitored by a Warren staffer. Being driven to the church can't really be stretched into "cone of silence". I think John McCain is an honorable man, but a hell of whole lot rides on a presidential election, and one just never knows. And I assume that every high-level campaign staffer is the scum of the earth unless proven otherwise, and that nothing is beneath them.

As to the two questions that both candidates had advance knowledge of, I thought (as does almost everyone else) that Obama did very poorly on the first. I was just as bothered by the elder statesmen roll call dodge as the mention of his wife and grandmother. McCain's answer was much better, except for Meg Whitman. We get it: she's a woman, and she has something to do with those computer things he was criticized for knowing nothing about. I thought they both handled the second question well.

Posted by: Nels at August 19, 2008 05:10 AM