Andrea Mitchell, Kossack Kook
August 18th, 2008 at 05:03am Mark Noonan
I’ve seen this, too - the accusation that McCain cheated, as explanation for why he had a superlative performance while Obama bombed at Saddleback; didn’t know, however, that Andrea Mitchell was also a kook:
…Andrea Mitchell on Sunday’s “Meet the Press” suggested the Obama campaign felt John McCain “may not have been in the cone of silence” during Saturday’s Saddleback Civil Forum, “and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were.”
Although she claimed this was being “[put] out privately” by Obama’s people, CNN is now reporting that his campaign is “not pursuing whether McCain heard any of the other questions,” and that they’re “assuming McCain had the same information they did.”
So where did Mitchell get this idea from? Might it have been a Daily Kos blog posted at 9:22 PM PDT Saturday entitled “McCain cheated? proof he knew the questions ahead of time”…
If you go to the Kos entry in question, you’ll find that the conviction is that McCain had the questions, with the only doubtful thing being whether Obama had them, too.
What seems to have flummoxed Mitchell is just how prepared McCain was - in contrast to Obama. It just will never occur to an MSMer that the GOPer might be the smarter guy…and as far as Obamessiah is concerned, the MSM can’t imagine anyone holding a candle to him, let alone beating him like a drum. I still suspect that some day the MSM and the left will realise that it is they who aren’t all that bright - you’d think that after nearly 8 years of having GW run rings around them they’d figure this out, but the level of obtuseness on the left and in the MSM is extraordinary; its like armour plate…if we can figure out how it works, we can use it to up-armour the Army’s humvees and make them really impervious.
This, though, is just a slight taste of what we can expect if McCain goes on and wins the election - the level of hatred and paranoia on the left will make the past 8 years seem like a tea party. Remember, the left is not just convinced they will win this year, but that they will win big…anything short of a massive victory will be viewed with suspicion, while an Obama loss will be considered proof that we’re living under a dictatorship.
Ed. Note: This counts as “What Media Bias? Part 121″.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Kook Left
20 Comments
1. Teacher's Pet | August 18th, 2008 at 7:23 am
No doubt, that tape is prima fascia evidence of cheating.
2. congressive | August 18th, 2008 at 7:31 am
What did you think we would think, after the Romney “raised taxes” whisper during the debates?
In case you have no short term memory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4J__lq3db0&feature=related
McCain got help. Personally, I think it’s all unbelievably silly, and nothing more than “gotcha” theater to send candidates in without a head’s up. What is the point, really? Does someone think our president is going to defeat Sudanese dictators through spontaneous debate?
Childish, really.
Ted Stevens showed that a politician’s constituents really don;t care if their guy cheats, as long as they get to benefit from his cheating, too. We are a nation of cheaters.
3. Teacher\'s Pet | August 18th, 2008 at 7:43 am
Looks like McCain has bigger problems. Free Republic, a right wing blog, claims McCain’s story about the cross in the dirt was stolen from Solzhenitsyn, and that his account is total fiction.
4. hermie | August 18th, 2008 at 7:53 am
Funny how the trolls keep making fools of themselves by never addressing the actual subject, but rabidly going on the attack and providing ‘evidence’ which tries to divert the discussion to something competely different.
5. SEW | August 18th, 2008 at 7:55 am
Actually teachers pet, Free Republic is simply reporting that liberal blogs are making that claim. Perhaps the NYT has a position for you. The Free Republic reports there were 800 posts on the topic at Daily Kos. What’s another lie to a liberal.
6. David B. Schmidt | August 18th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Solzhenitsyn? Sure it wasn’t a Clinton on the beaches of France?
7. neocon | August 18th, 2008 at 10:28 am
I think everyone is now realizing that the elder, experienced statesman is going to walk away with this election.
Our resident liberals have once again bought into the feel good rhetoric of an inexperienced candidate who can not back up his speech’s with accomplishments, but certainly looks the part and satisfies their guilt.
Can it be anymore transparent?
neocon
8. Richard of Oregon | August 18th, 2008 at 10:58 am
It seems to me that, when someone else is not putting words in his mouth, Obama is the inarticulate one, McCain the articulate one. Listening to Obama speak for himself is becoming a painful experience, given the hesitations, the wandering off message apparent ignorance about key issues for a president. He speaks nearly as poorly as me, but I don’t strive to become the most powerful person in the world. Big difference.
9. Danish Artist | August 18th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Quick answers are a sign of commitment to one’s beliefs and knowledge of the subject.
While, stumbles and hesitations are signs of dancing around the issue and phrasing the answer to avoid be committed to the answer.
Of course to leftists, the only way McCain could have defeated their golden boy was to cheat and the excuses ooze with that poor accusation based on rumor.
10. Xavier Cugat | August 18th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
On CNN, Rick Warren admitted that McCain was in his limo during the first 30 minutes of Obama’s interview. Not in a cone of silence.
11. neil | August 18th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
As far as I am concerned the questions asked are not something either candidate wouldn’t have a ready response anyway. All I can say”its above my pay-grade ” is a lousy way to dismiss a question and a very chicken way out.
12. Richard of Oregon | August 18th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
What exactly is this cone of silence and where can I get one? I have small grandchildren who are really great, but sometimes a cone of silence sounds great - for me.
13. SEW | August 18th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
I bet that was the first time Barry, a “Constitutional” lawyer ever thought about when does life begin! Or, that explains all the duh, uh, you know, uh, duh, responses from this moron. Above his payscale.
Punt [good luck]. Present [really?].
14. Ryan | August 18th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
So it turns out that Pastor Rick Warren, in an effort to increase the candidates’ comfort level with his pioneering format, gave each of them a heads-up on several of the hardest questions he asked Saturday night during his “the Saddleback Civil Forum on the presidency.”
A source close to Warren tells Playbook that the candidates knew in advance they would be asked their own greatest moral failure, America’s greatest moral failure, and the three wisest people in their lives.
GO away, now that you are deprived of your conspiracy theory to explain Obama’s poor performance, ok?
15. Kurt | August 18th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
After the fourm Saturday night, you Obama supporters can see why little empty suit Barack chickened out of McCain’s offer for 10 townhall meetings. Yes he chickened out because in reality it is McCain who is the smart one.
Next time maybe McCain will be nice to Obama and let him bring his telepromter so Obama’s 200 ,yes 200, speechwriters can put words in Obama’s mouth. That way he wont look so slow on his feet.
16. jayhay | August 18th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
It is odd that McCain never told the “cross in the sand” story before the 2000 campaign season. If he has to drop that one what will he use when he wants to play Marco Polo with the fundies?
17. SEW | August 18th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Hold on, Barry knows the question, not the answer, un, hold on, I can’t hear myself…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU
18. Xavier Cugat | August 18th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
… or quick answers are a sign of mindless recitation of talking points, repeatedly measured within focus groups to ensure that movement conservatives continue to bleat like sheep and follow the RNC to the polls.
19. Danish Artist | August 18th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
catgut,
exactly, don’t you see how the mindless obamatons latched onto the “cheating” spin on their golden boy’s fumbled and evasive answers?
Let’s talk focus group terms shall we:
Big Oil, change, change, change, uh, change, fairness, tax the rich, fair share, miserable failure, etc. etc.
Obama’s campaign chief if running Obama as a complete package of IMAGE. How else can he overcome the inexperience and naivete?
20. kmg | August 19th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I asked this in the open thread, but this thread is more appropriate. Why did McCain ask Warren if he could go back to the topic of Supreme Court justices when that topic had not come up yet? It was not one of the topics that Warren told both candidates about beforehand.