No Cone of Silence (Video!)
by furiousxxgeorge
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/1...5/709/91/569439
Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:28:52 PM PDT
Pastor Warren, the host of last night's forum was just on CNN. In an interview with Rick Sanchez the pastor admitted McCain was not even at the Church for the first half hour of the event. This admission comes as a surprise to those of us who watched the event and were told many times that McCain was at the Church and in isolation.

CNN says they talked to McCain's camp and they said no one in his camp was listening. The honor system, are you kidding me?

I think it is pretty clear at this point McCain did indeed know the questions in advance.

furiousxxgeorge's diary :: ::
Video here. http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2...mccain-not.html

Previous conjecture on this topic can be found in this diary from last night: McCain cheated?

According to MSNBC, Obama was aware that this was going on.

MS. ANDREA MITCHELL: Oh, absolutely. And, you know, there was the crisp, immediate, forceful response by John McCain, clearly in a comfort zone because he was with his base. And Barack Obama, taking a risk in going there but seeing an opportunity. And a much more nuanced approach. The Obama people must feel that he didn't do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, because that -- what they're putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.

MR. GREGORY: Right.

MS. MITCHELL: He seemed so well prepared.
http://newsbusters.org/...

Warren will be appearing on Larry King on Monday, submit questions here:

http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2...mccain-not.html

Sunday, August 17, 2008
Video: Pastor Rick confirms McCain NOT in "Cone of Silence" during Obama Q&A


This is for Anonymous, and other Commenters who have been discussing J Sid's supposed isolation from Obama's interview at the Big Fake Forum. John Sidney McCain didn't have the cojones Cones he said he did. He never has, but that's another post for another time.

No, there was no Cone of Silence for J Sid while Obama was thoughtfully and thoroughly responding to Pastor Rick's questions. There was no Sphere of Silence, Cube of Silence, or Cylinder of Silence. There was, however, a Cone of Deceit:


Pastor Warren, the host of last night's forum was just on CNN. In an interview with Rick Sanchez the pastor admitted McCain was not even at the Church for the first half hour of the event. This admission comes as a surprise to those of us who watched the event and were told many times that McCain was at the Church and in isolation.

CNN says they talked to McCain's camp and they said no one in his camp was listening. The honor system, are you kidding me?

I think it is pretty clear at this point McCain did indeed know the questions in advance.


Yeah, that was as transparent as Bush's cranium, all right. Nothing like a level playing field, huh god-fearin', straight-talkin' J Sid?

BY THE WAY- THIS MEANS PASTER WARREN IS ALSO A LIAR.

IMAGINE THAT- A RELIGIOUS ZEALOT LIES...how original.

Some comments

15 comments:
GottaLaff said...
It's time that McCain's lies are thoroughly trumpeted on every media outlet there is. He needs a confessional, too, while we're at it.

And how about that honesty, huh? In a church no less.

August 17, 2008 8:55 PM
Adrienne said...
So, Pastor Rick Warren just straight up lied to everybody? WOW! A Pastor lying? I'm shocked.

Seriously, that really DOES piss me off to no end. And we're now supposed to take the adulterer's word that he wasn't listening or watching? Oh, okay...

August 17, 2008 9:06 PM
Man, now I'm totally pissed off. Did McCain tell his first wife that he wasn't cheating? Yup. Was he? Yes. Is he telling all of us he didn't cheat last night? Yup...
Did he???? For Christ's sake, the PASTOR of the church lied FOR McCain. Why was that necessary?

August 17, 2008 9:23 PM
Ezekiel said...
Give me a break Gotta, I know it is you birthday and all, but religion is the biggest lie of all. . . no honor among thieves. . . we will not be free until the last king is strangled by the entrails of the last priest. . .or something to that effect. . .

August 17, 2008 9:27 PM
Adrienne said...
So CNN breaks the news that the whole thing was a sham and the even Pastor Warren lied for Senator McCain, but what the hell, they're showing it AGAIN?

August 17, 2008 9:30 PM
GottaLaff said...
You think I don't agree with you, Ezekiel? Are you kidding me?

August 17, 2008 9:30 PM
GottaLaff said...
Of course they are, Ady. It's called "ratings".

August 17, 2008 9:32 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin

Despite Assurances, McCain Wasn’t in a ‘Cone of Silence’

By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: August 17, 2008
ORLANDO, Fla. — Senator John McCain was not in a “cone of silence” on Saturday night while his rival, Senator Barack Obama, was being interviewed at the Saddleback Church in California.


Members of the McCain campaign staff, who flew here Sunday from California, said Mr. McCain was in his motorcade on the way to the church as Mr. Obama was being interviewed by the Rev. Rick Warren, the author of the best-selling book “The Purpose Driven Life.”

The matter is of interest because Mr. McCain, who followed Mr. Obama’s hourlong appearance in the forum, was asked virtually the same questions as Mr. Obama. Mr. McCain’s performance was well received, raising speculation among some viewers, especially supporters of Mr. Obama, that he was not as isolated during the Obama interview as Mr. Warren implied.

Nicolle Wallace, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain, said on Sunday night that Mr. McCain had not heard the broadcast of the event while in his motorcade and heard none of the questions.

“The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,” Ms. Wallace said.

Before an audience of more than 2,000 people at the church, the candidates answered questions about policy and social issues.

Mr. Warren, the pastor of Saddleback, had assured the audience while he was interviewing Mr. Obama that “we have safely placed Senator McCain in a cone of silence” and that he could not hear the questions.

After Mr. Obama’s interview, he was joined briefly by Mr. McCain, and the candidates shook hands and embraced.

Mr. Warren started by asking Mr. McCain, “Now, my first question: Was the cone of silence comfortable that you were in just now?”

Mr. McCain deadpanned, “I was trying to hear through the wall.”

Interviewed Sunday on CNN, Mr. Warren seemed surprised to learn that Mr. McCain was not in the building during the Obama interview.

Elisabeth Bumiller contributed reporting.

John McCain should be forced to step down as nominee.
This is a total lie, and one of the biggest scandals to rock American politics ever.

An out and out LIAR
The lie has been proven

JOHN MCCAIN NEEDS TO STEP DOWN AS NOMINEE...
Now that he has been proven to be a LIAR.

SONG OF THE DAY

we send out a big dedication to someone who has brought honor to these two words
JOHN MCCAIN A LIAR AND A CHEATER
may cheaters never prosper.

YOU CHEATED YOU LIED
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulsYB8oinDA
(sung by the Shields, Frankie Ervin on lead vocals)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNw5jfPb-vk...feature=related
THE SLADES, Donnie Burch


JOHN MCCAIN SHOULD RESIGN AS NOMINEE AFTER BEING CAUGHT.

Holy Moly I agree with you Graham! Watch the skies open up!

McCain was so prepped that must have known the questions ahead of time. He simply isn't like that in a question answer setting (having watched way too much CSPAN I think I know that), so someone was listening and prepping. I'm not saying it was him, but I'm saying it was done.

also, I think Warren rooked Obama. I think he knew he supported McCain but then acted like he was neutral. He waited until after the forum and then went all weak in the knees for McCain. I just don't buy it. He may have lied to himself, or he may have justified it in the name of doing God's work, or something like that, but he clearly revealed his preference too quickly to have formed it that fast.

Sorry y'all, but McCain has a lifetime of experience to pull from...
and that was the difference...it wasn't any 30-minute copy-writing frenzy.

I know y'all are the "cheated", "offended", and "feared" (because of
dollar-bill-faces, funny names and that card y'all love to play) campaign...
but, y'all need to take a tip from your guys's lead - get over the
"self obsession" and make wise use of the political treasury he holds.

I agree that this is not a huge thing and shouldn't be obsessed over, although I think that that charge itself may very well be true. (And how did that "lifetime of experience" figure into McCain's statement about Czechoslovakia as though it were a country that hadn't been broken up 15 years ago? I heard that commented on when I was in Colombia last month.)

And in terms of card playing, it is not Obama and his supporters who are playing the card that is most in play this year, the Caucasian card.

A lifetime of experience doesn't read like McCain's canned, prepared and on-point answers.

It sounded like a speech and not an impromptu response.

IMHO it appeared almost scripted...

Most know what it looked and sounded like.

Hrm, does it look like Obama won the debate?
I thought he did give decent answers. McCain might have cheated or not, but this type of he said/she said is just childish and reflects poorly on Obama. Well perhaps not Obama, but supporters of his that do so. Not to mention making Obama's supporters look desperate in pointing out such nonsense.

Get McCain for other things, things like this that can't be proven just creates noise that may do more harm than good.

I think it's simply forum fodder for the most part. Just today's 15 minute headline... er, well, yesterday's.

That's true. I didn't really bother with this till it had become a conversation of more than just one.

I read that Warren gave Obama and McCain some of the questions before the forum event....so, I guess no one "cheated". This Warren forum is a 'non issue" except to those anti choice voters who will now feel better knowing that McCain REALLY is out to overturn Roe v Wade.

Except it really screwed up the myth that Obama is a great orator.

Without a teleprompter Obama sounds as bad as George Bush without a teleprompter.

It's all opinion, Marine. I think Obama sounds just fine when discussing issues. Mccain is a master of the quick response...when he remembers what he's supposed to say or when he gets the facts right. I plain just don't like McCain....I don't think he's a person of solid character. My republican husband doesn't like McCain either...his person or his policies.

Btw, Obama is a great orator...no myth....oration is peformed in front of a large audience as in not a discussion. Get those facts straight, Marine, before you offer criticism. You might like McCain's policy and his character but he is not an effective speaker, in a large setting or in a small setting.

I don't think I said anything about John McCain Amy. I said I see shades of George Bush when Obama has to think on the fly. Too much stuttering and stammering, too many ahs and uhs, and even in some of his prepared speeches you see this. And on top of that he don't think before he says something, for example Jerusalem as the capital of Israel gaffe he made at the AIPAC conference; you got a Black George Bush in speaking abilities.

He stammers a bit on occasion when he's thinking through an issue......that has nothing to do with the agility of his mental processes. I know many very bright people who do this when they speak.....including John F Kennedy.....Ted Kennedy, etc, etc, etc.....

Marine...can you not look beyond the superficial?.....content vs delivery of content...you equate GW with Obama because you don't like GW (but voted for him twice??) and you don't like Obama. You will never convince Obama supporters that McCain is a better choice...so vote for him like you voted for GW....you didn't vote for Kerry because of his actions when he came back from Nam....Since you voted for GW rather than not vote, it is obvious to me that you support GW's policy positions... why would any rational, mature person vote for anyone based on anything other than agreement with policies?

I voted for Gore in 2000 and Bush in 2004 cause I can't hack Kerry. Where Bush was in 2004 is where a bunch of presidents before him should a been. This country has been getting attacked and have had acts of war committed agaisnt us for 25 years before we took the proper response. There is only one thing I would a done different than Bush in 2003 after the Taliban had been ejected from running Afghanistan; I would have cleaned Iran's plow instead of Iraq's. Iran has been the source of most of problems we've faced in the Middle East.

So, you think Gore would have handled 9/11 (invade Iraq) like GW?

Actually, I won't defend Obama here, since like any other politician, I see shades of Bush on Obama as well.
I would state that Obama still is far ahead than Bush in teleprompter oration skills, as well as extemporaneous speeches. I equate him with a well versed televangelist.

McCain's strength has always been "straight talk express" short and sweet answers that are almost always oversimplified. I definitely see him doing well in debates.

This, is in no way in regards to their positions however. There is a reason I am leaning towards Obama more than McCain. However, unlike many, I wouldn't mind whomever wins. Though I must admit, my most important issues are health care, energy policy and economics. Economics I think is my highest priority issue, and in that sense, I tend to agree with Obama's position a bit more than McCain's who admitted to not being well versed in that area, whereas Obama worked in a firm before even going in to politics.

That though I can't agree with either of the two's policies completely, Obama's makes a little more sense to me. If I have to explain it, I will, but seriously, I don't want to.

Be fair. I doubt that 9/11 would have happened under Gore's watch. He would not have had Condi as a liability.

Many people have the problem of putting their thoughts into words. In Bush's case it is because there is no thought there. In Obama's case it's overthinking and oversearching for the words imho.

I understand, which is why I mentioned "well versed" instead of "air head".

At least he knows the number of states in the U.S.
Experience, as in his on-point anecdotes used in responses.
Those and his "at conception" (human rights begin) and
"follow him to the gates of Hell" (Osama=evil) comments were
some I've hear him say before...they just fit neatly, rather than
a longer...philosophical conversation...preferred by academics.

The Caucasian card? The Queen of "white-haired dudes"?

Cacasian Queen

If I liked what GW had to say, I would not fault him for his mispronunciations.....but anyway, Obama has a strong intellect, an intellectual curiosity and an ability to see the larger picture...all qualities that GW and McCain lack, IMO.

Well, I'm not an "academic" but I prefer the longer explanations when they are appropriate...longer responses offer more insight into the whys and hows of a person's thinking on a subject. I'm not an "academic" but I am educated and I do know how to analyze info.....like many voters...not enough voters though, IMO...

You were the one who claimed that McCain had a lifetime of experience. So his experience is comparable to that of Obama's after all?



The point is experience giving you the skill to come up with snappy anecdotes? That's great, as long as our problems never get so big that they cannot be contained by snappy anecdotes. I myself prefer a conversation that really deals with those problems, and not just give me a warm, fuzzy feeling.



In case you missed Ana Quindlen's article about the most played card game of the year:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/151725

THE LAST WORDAnna QuindlenThe Caucasian Card
It can be tough being black in America. But the tough stuff builds character. Maybe that's why Barack Obama got this far this fast.

Published Aug 9, 2008
Aug. 18-25, 2008 issue

Much of America's political conversation is couched in code. And so it was that recently the McCain campaign accused Barack Obama of playing the "race card," two four-letter words that, taken together, trail a wealth of innuendo like a comet's tail.

Using the term "race card" as a pejorative is almost always meant to promulgate the big lie that takes hold everywhere from the workplace to the classroom: that black men and women commonly use race as a bludgeon and an excuse, and that they will always blame failures or disagreements on racism.

This is belied by objective reality. To hear tell, you would believe that the world is chockablock with minority lawyers, teachers, construction workers and police officers who spend all their time complaining about institutional racism, calling others out on offensive jokes and assumed stereotypes. But most of us encounter the opposite, the silence of people who learned a long time ago that to get along it's imperative to go along.

In part this is because they're carrying a load on their shoulders. When one of the white guys blows an account, the office line is that he's a loser. But when a black guy does it, it means that they—that's the all-purpose "they," sometimes used interchangeably with "those people"—don't seem to be able to close the deal. Same goes for women, which is one reason the Clinton-Obama rivalry got so pitched during the primaries. Our piece of the pie is small, and often there's only one fork. When someone like Senator McCain says he's opposed to quotas, it sounds like country-club code for "We liked the pie the old way."

It's been rumored that Senator Obama did not include his race on his application to Harvard Law School, but it's probable that at least a few of his classmates would have assumed that his place came to him because he was, in the words of Stephen L. Carter's book title, an affirmative-action baby. That's another weight that successful black Americans carry, the suspicion that they got to wherever they've gone because of special pleadings. Of course there is also affirmative action for well-to-do whites, from legacy college admissions to the old boys' club of hiring and connections. Somehow this is never thought to be the same.

The fallacy at the heart of most discussions of affirmative action is twofold: that it replaced a true meritocracy, and that it means promoting the second-rate. The meritocracy theory requires us to believe that for decades no women and no people of color were as qualified as white men, who essentially had every field locked up. Belief in the ascendancy of the second-rate requires us to demean the qualifications of countless writers, jurists, doctors, academics and other professionals who gained entry and then performed superlatively. Part of the tacit deal for most of them was not that they be as good as their lackluster white male counterparts, but as good as the best of them.

"As good as the best of them" might well have been Barack Obama's slogan as he rose to be editor of the Harvard Law Review, faculty member at the University of Chicago Law School, state representative and U.S. senator. It is easy to see all the ways in which his race could have played a part in his rapid rise, but not necessarily in the way his opponents might suggest. Being an outsider probably taught him how to work well in two worlds, the world of those who take their place of primacy for granted and the world of those who have no such place, or who have to fight for it twice as hard.

Much has been made by Senator McCain's supporters of his history as a survivor of a Viet Cong prison camp, of the broken bones and psychological onslaughts that he withstood for five long years. They argue that such an experience builds character. They should also take note of the challenges faced by a black man in America, challenges that have built Senator Obama's character. These may be harder to quantify than imprisonment and torture, but they are onerous in a different and inescapable way.

The McCain forces have accused the Democratic candidate of injecting race into the campaign. That's silly. The man is black. His candidacy is indivisible from that fact, given the history and pathology of this country. When Senator Obama said that he did not look like the guys on our currency and that his opponents were likely to portray him as Other, he was stating the obvious. Perhaps he was also pointing out that, despite efforts to maintain the status quo by generations of conservatives, this remains a nation so progressive that an American from a group once held as personal property could become president. The suggestion of something untoward was pandering to stereotypes and fear. Senator McCain was playing the Caucasian card.

Does that sound offensive? I suppose it is, just as offensive as styling the race card a pejorative. But any black man or woman in America has heard worse. If people make assumptions about you simply on the basis of your appearance all your life, assumptions ranging from criminality to sloth to unearned opportunity, it can make you bitter and hard and cynical. That none of those things is part of the Obama character means that he has turned his particular version of the race card into an ace and is using it to play with the full deck. That is not a deficit. It is an advantage.



Ahh, John McCain's burning issue!

That's just because for 8 years we have had to listen to such lack of thought, and so many talking points, that some people don't know when they hear someone who THINKS before he talks. I thought Obama did a FABULOUS job and I'm not that big of an Obama fan.

I do think he was rooked by Warren acting like he didn't already know who he supported, when he already did.

I LIKE to hear people stop for a minute and think about what was just asked before they answer! Bill Clinton used to do that when he was running. He would stop, think, put his finger to his lips, and then he would talk. As opposed to the hacks, who just recite what they have been told to say. Worse yet, McCain isn't even comfortable saying the things he says because *I* don't believe he means it. He is telling the truth when he talks about foreign policy and that's his real opinion, but the other stuff, he just recites.

It was almost funny when he had to count off on his fingers the Supreme's he would not have nominated. It was like he was counting off the seven dwarves or something. He voted for almost all of them right? He also does NOT believe that "human rights begin at conception" BS, but was told to say it even though it conflicts with his votes and I don't believe he really believes that.

What Obama says, I do believe he thought about, and came to his conclusions (most of the time) on his own.

That's the main point. It is called Cognitive Flexability.