« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Did McCain hear Obama's questions at Saddleback?
Now here's something that seems a little unsurprising, considering how well McCain seems to have done (compared to his normal performance in such circumstances). Let me make this clear: it is unverifiable that McCain actually heard Obama's questions. But there's enough evidence to make it extremely suspect.
I would read the article over at FiveThirtyEight. It really raises some huge questions.
In a nutshell: Pastor Warren referred to a "cone of silence" that Senator McCain was in during Obama's time on stage, where he was unable to hear or see Senator Obama and/or hear the questions posed and answers given.
What is now known is that Senator McCain was, in fact, outside of the building and inside his motorcade on his way to the event for at least the first half hour of the event.
McCain said he hadn't heard Obama's answers, or the questions posed. Pastor Warren says he "trusts the integrity" of McCain's answers.
But how are we to know? McCain could have easily been watching.
Not only that, but it seems quite low, if not outright despicable that McCain was NOT inside the Church in the "cone of silence", as everyone was lead to believe.
Now, as with Nate Silver, I'm not implying a conspiracy with Pastor Warren. I'm simply calling McCain's bullshit.
The only thing preventing McCain from watching Obama when he was on was... McCain. The only one who's able to verify whether McCin actually did is... McCain.
No offense, Senator, but you haven't earned my trust, and you've deceived me and many, many others. Absolutely inappropriate.
Comments (50)
I just thought I'd give the last couple parts of Nate's post at FiveThirtyEight, since they really cum up this whole issue:
August 17, 2008 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I so agree with this. There will be an opportunity for the average viewer to ask Warren directly on Larry King's program on CNN tonight, during the call in. Here's what I think should be asked:
"Pastor Warren, did you fail to make sufficient arrangements for the "cone of silence,", or did Senator McCain fail to abide by the terms of the arrangements?"
August 18, 2008 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nathan: he most likely did.
Do you really think it matters? The show is over, how can anyone go back now and cry foul?
August 17, 2008 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not the point. Read Nate Silver's post at FiveThirtyEight, or at least the part I quoted in my comment.
It does matter. You may not think so, but the fact is that certain "rules" were put in place, and people had certain expectations of how things were going to play out.
The MSM all reported at McCain's "brilliant" performance, they all reported that he "won". If he "won" by cheating, it's a bigger deal than you might like to admit.
August 17, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's all fine and true, but why do so many people keep thinking that this is some sort of a high school exam?
McCain did exactly what he was supposed to do, and at this point only people on blogs care whether he did it nobly or not.
I think the time and energy would be much better spent figuring out how to turn the tables.
And I know that you're going to hate me even more for this, but you start sounding a little like Clinton supporters did.
August 17, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. The issue here is knowing the truth, Lalo. Maybe you and the MSM and the majority of the American people don't give a shit, but people like I actually do.
Do you think I cared how well McCain or Obama did at the event? No. I didn't even watch it. It really wasn't a huge thing for me. But now that the integrity of the event has been called into question, I would like to know what really happened.
You can call me whatever you want, but it doesn't change the desire to know the facts.
August 17, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, but when I heard the "Cone of Silence" term that only made me laugh. But that's besides the point.
And now that you know the truth (if it's the truth), ....???
August 17, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly? I'd like to hear some answers to why this happened and why viewers were purposely deceived.
Like Nate said,
That's a good place to start.
August 17, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, fair enough. I'd prefer to close this topic and move on, rather than keep it chewed over and over on TV. It only reminds everyone of the show.
But I'll try to watch Larry King to see what Warren says.
August 17, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's going to die as soon as Obama announces his VP, anyway. And that couldn't be more than a couple days away. So I see no reason not to invest some time in the issue at the moment. It's not hurting anyone and the cause is good.
August 17, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK. What's Rational Progressivism, by the way?
August 17, 2008 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Progressive Rationalism.
August 17, 2008 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on....
August 17, 2008 10:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find a lot of self-professed "progressives" to be irrational in their politics. As in, refusing to practice any pragmatism. But progressive ideals infused with rationality leaves one the ability to make real "progress", which is, after all, the point of being a progressive, is it not?
August 17, 2008 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you trying to fuse ideology with process? Or are you trying to define progressivism somewhat differently? I'm not quite sure what you mean by rational/pragmatic.
August 17, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I'm not trying to define progressivism somewhat differently.
Let me put it this way: in my opinion, rationalism leads to pragmatism in American politics. Progressivism can exist without rationality and pragmatic belief, but when it does, we get people like Glen Greenwald. 'Nuff said.
August 17, 2008 11:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll look this person up, because without some kind of context, I have no idea what you mean by rationalism.
August 17, 2008 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I kind of assumed you knew about his crusade during the whole FISA debacle. Without knowing that contest, my statement means nothing.
August 17, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
context*, not contest. Sorry.
August 17, 2008 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't follow FISA very closely, so
August 17, 2008 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I kind of like that, but, boy....wait till the purity trolls get a hold of you. Ha!
August 17, 2008 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really don't care about trolls. They're free to think what they want, the same as I. If they want to take me up on my ideology and politics, then they're all the more hypocritical for it. =P
August 17, 2008 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see that you were thinking along the same lines as I am, but a day earlier. My apologies for interjecting my comment to Warren above yours in the thread. The way I see it, this situation is not unlike a game of poker in which it was discovered after the game had ended that one player had been able to see the other's cards. At that point, would we rely on that player's "honor" if he said he hadn't looked, or would we say the game was rigged?
August 18, 2008 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about adding it to a long list of dubious and questionable ethical decisions by St. McCain?
August 17, 2008 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It does matter, Chrono. "Enquiring minds want to know" -- how this fits with McCain's posture of honor. Although McCain wins in a sense either way: if it's true, the hardballers will think this demonstrates McCain's tough pragmatism and, conversely, Obama's naiveté.
August 18, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
It does matter, Chrono. "Enquiring minds want to know" -- how this fits with McCain's posture of honor. Although McCain wins in a sense either way: if it's true, the hardballers will think this demonstrates McCain's tough pragmatism and, conversely, Obama's naiveté.
August 18, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently Jonze already posted about this. Oh well. =P
August 17, 2008 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it's any consolation, thanks for the link to 538....I didn't realize Nate had posted anything on this subject, and I really respect his insight!
August 17, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha, thanks.
Yeah, his insight on the matter is really great. The reason this even became an issue for me was the fact that he was mentioning it. He barely ever comments on things outside of actual electoral analysis, so the fact that he took the time out to comment on this, to me, meant it actually had more merit than some might want to admit.
August 17, 2008 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
ChronoSpark,
Thanks for the posting. I am very angry now because it happens for one that the pastor lied last night.
He confirmed to the audience and to the American public, that McBushSame was in the cone of silence, which it was not the case.
This by itself challenges for one the integrity of the pastor, and does challenge the integrity of the forum.
I personally thought that McBushSame for once never took time to think about his answers. It was very odd.
In any case, this is a disgrace for democracy. All the pundits were marveling how McBush did...
Now we have some clarity as why...And Yes, this should not be ignored.
August 17, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're very welcome.
I wouldn't have cared how well McCain did if the idea that he actually cheated wasn't so prevalent. People could have accused him of it without merit, but now it's a very real possibility. I don't like being deceived. I like being deceived less when it comes to politics.
August 17, 2008 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pissed as hell and frankly, I don't believe Warren one bit. He was tap dancing too fast while he attempted to change the subject repeatedly during Rick Sanchez's interview. The forum was SET UP to favor McCain....NO DOUBT!
August 17, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
What was the shot of McCain and Cindy and some religious person who wound up putting his hands on McCain's head ... in what I believe was a moment of prayer. They were standing in some sort of arena and, when I saw it, I assumed it was from the auditorium before the event, before Obama spoke. But obviously not if he was in his car somewhere. Does anyone know??
I, too, would like to know -- it matters to me.
August 17, 2008 11:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
As always good post Chrono!
Rational and pragmatic progressivism...yes, that is just what the doctor ordered.
Rational refers to ratio or having reasons for actions rather than just impulses.
Pragmatic refers to practicality or seeking what works...some social scientists say it is the distinctive American philosophy.
So you are looking for a reasoned, practical, reformist movement.
Yes, BHO certainly fits that bill!
August 17, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Lux. And thanks for the explanation of my own philosophy, haha! I always tend to over-complicate things.
And yeah. If people understand my political philosophy, they pretty much get why I like Obama so much, even when I disagree with him.
August 17, 2008 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
and now the McBush complains about the NBC coverage, and it is accusing NBC of supporting Obama, which does not make any sense since all media including NBC have endorsed McBushSame...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12594.html
Maybe, it is a sign that Phil Gramm will be McBushSame VP...
August 18, 2008 12:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
let's not forget the rovian mechanics behind the mccain campaign. the same rovian mechanics that encouraged W to cheat against gore. recall the NASA photographs of his ear piece.
if he wasn't in a cone silence he cheated.
August 18, 2008 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nathan, as always - great factual, informative post. Rec'd.
McCain may not have 'lied' about listening to or watching Obama. However, no one will ever convince me that either someone else told him questions, etc. or Warren gave him a cheat sheet beforehand.
We all should send emails to Larry King to ask Warren why he lied! I know I am.
Geez, this whole thing is just outrageous!
Shame on Warren! I will never give any credibility to anything he says or does from now on! (Is it horribly wrong to call a pastor a jackass? Oops, too late! Shame on me too.)
August 18, 2008 2:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
This whole cone of silence scandal reminds me of the 1980 debate between Reagan and Carter. Everyone left the debate amazed at how much sharper Reagan was than he was expected to be. In fact the debate is widely credited with helping him overcome one of the major doubts the voters had about his intellectual abilities. Well it turns out he was able to do so well because the Republicans had stolen Carter's briefing notes and none other that George Will used those stolen notes to coach Reagan for the debate. Carter had a list of issues to work from and Reagan and Will had the list of issues as well as what Carter was planning to say about them. Now we have this half dead brain McCain coming off debates much better than expected because the "cone of silence" was a fraud. Everyone who has heard reports of how McCain did so much better than expected needs to know that they were lied to when they were told that the "cone of silence" was in place.
August 18, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your observation is quite astute and pinpoints our so-called liberal media's longstanding history of complicity with Republican election season wrongdoing.
August 18, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Not only that, but it seems quite low, if not outright despicable that McCain was NOT inside the Church in the "cone of silence", as everyone was lead to believe."
That statement by Chrono captures my main concern. It's not so much whether McCain could hear Warren's questions as to whether Warren intentionally led everyone to believe that McCain could not.
I would still fault Warren if he had said nothing at all about whether McCain was or wasn't isolated, but his affirmative "cone-of-silence" language was misleading at best.
August 18, 2008 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
hopefully obama thinks twice before referring to everyone as "friend"...
___
lalo, i am so surprised that you do not think mccain's alleged cheating warrants discussion....let's suppose it was obama being accused of cheating, would you casually disregard the charge with as much aplomb? i doubt it!....;)
August 18, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Because I'm more concerned with winning the WH. The so-called "discussion" (read - whining) is just going to make everyone even more bitter than they are.
My position is simple: Dems fell in love with the "hope" meme - fine. Dems nominated the wrong person - fine. Now everyone is "suddenly" waking up to realize that the party is over and there's a real fight ahead - great.
Talk about the party of whiners... Now, let's stop the crap and win the fucking election. Impotent McCain-hate is not going to do it.
August 18, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
If this bothers you, then you should read how Obama won his first election or how he was spoon fed legislation in the Illinois Senate or how he perpetuated corruption in Cook County, Illinois by endorsing Tod Stroger. Oops, I forgot, we aren't suppose to criticize Obama.
Nobama '08.
August 18, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wrong. Only McCain trolls - which means you -aren't supposed to.
August 18, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Warren lied. He mislead the national audience. He needs to come clean and tell the American public if this is the way it was planned and he simply lied about the "cone of silence," or if McCain was delayed and he failed to come clean with the audience. Either way, he lied.
This kind of deception makes the whole event a sham.
August 18, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I caught a bit of McCain's performance and my first thought was "he had the questions in advance". He was starting his answers before the questions had been completed. That he cheated tells me more about McCain than Warren. I used to have some respect for McCain but his hunger for power has so corrupted him he would be very dangerous as president. He no longer recognizes right and wrong, just winning...and he gets to define that.
August 18, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain is out-Bush'ing Bush. Amazing.
August 18, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is a quote from the forum--it was before the question on the Supreme court justices.
MCCAIN: A union — a union between man and woman, between one man and one woman. That’s my definition of marriage.
Could I — are we going to get back to the importance of Supreme Court Justices or should I mention –
WARREN: We will get to that.
MCCAIN:
WARREN: You’re jumping ahead (inaudible).
August 18, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
exactly this and his answers on education. I am not questioning, it was clear to me that he had prepared his answers. He didn't stop to think about anything. That is not his usual. I am sorry but this was staged and rehearsed.
August 18, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment