McCain's Secret Weapon - He Cheated!

[Michael Tee]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/18/nyt-backs-up-nbc-mccain-w_n_119476.html

So the cat's out of the bag - - the NYT backs the network stories today; "Cone of Silence" my ass!!!  McCain heard every word of his opponent's answers and was surrounded by advisers who told him exactly what to say.

This is some "great debater."  This is hilarious.

It sheds new light on his academic "achievements" as well.  The man is a born cheater.  It was probably his  cheating that got him through, even at fifth from the bottom of the class.  Think where he woulda wound up if he HADN'T cheated his way through school.

This is obviously partly Obama's fault.  He is MUCH too deferential to McCain.  Treats him with kid gloves.  He should have treated McCain like the lying criminal scum he actually is, and INSISTED on 100% verification by his own team of each and every condition of the debate.  OTOH, that might have been seen as churlish at the time.  From this point forward, however, I think he will be fully justified not only in laying down airtight anti-cheating provisions for McCain and his team but also insisting on 100% verification by his own team to make sure that no more frauds by the likes of "Pastor Rick" are ever perpetrated on Obama or the American people again in the course of this campaign.

[sirs]

In the dictionary, you'll find this under desperation

[Michael Tee]

<<In the dictionary, you'll find this under desperation>>

Really?  Oh, sorry, I forgot who I was talking to - - I guess in the Bizarro World dictionary, you WOULD find exposure of cheating defined as desperation, and you'd probably find "cheating" defined as "resourceful" and "winning."

You may trivialize this all you like, but I think the public would be quite interested to find out exactly how this so-called "straight shooter" honours his commitments.  They already know what he thinks of his marriage vows, but that was personal; this is business.

That said, I think a lot of this depends on how Obama chooses to treat this.  Looks like he's already decided to soft-pedal on it.  If so, he's a chump who deserves to lose. 

[sirs]

And of course, we're all waiting with baited breath of this PROOF McCain heard every word of his opponent's answers and was surrounded by advisers who told him exactly what to say.

Please, share with the class.  The story simply had him not in the green room 100% of the time.  The short duration he wasn't was the time was in transit motorcade --> green room.  Surely, you can point out this PROOF of your accusation that McCain heard every word and that his advisers told him exactly what to say.

If not, that would fall under the heading of "desperation".  Or perhaps "Flailing" is more appropriate

Ball in your court

[Amianthus]

I don't think there was an actual "Cone of Silence" - it's more a metaphor for "he can't see or hear what's going on."

Which was true enough.

[sirs]

Precisely.  The pastor was very clear that the jist of the "cone", was that McCain wasn't accessing the questions currently being given to Oblather.  So, until Tee can demonstrate some proof that McCain was hearing every word of his opponent's answers and was surrounded by advisers who told him exactly what to say, I guess we can chalk this up to another Tee lie

[Michael Tee]

<<Please, share with the class.  The story simply had him not in the green room 100% of the time.  The short duration he wasn't was the time was in transit motorcade --> green room.  Surely, you can point out this PROOF of your accusation that McCain heard every word and that his advisers told him exactly what to say.>>

McCain was not alone when he was able to hear Obama's answers.  The people he was with were able to advise him.  We have only his word that he heard nothing.  Sorry that's not good enough when the guy was supposed to be in a "cone of silence."  I don't take his word that he didn't cheat, because he already cheated.  Cheated on the wife who waited for him.  Cheated his constituents by going to bat for a criminal stalling for time so he could milk more of them.  Now we're supposed to take his word he didn't hear anything?  Bullshit.  There was no cone of silence.  And McCain, knowing there was supposed to be one, did not absent  himself immediately from a situation where he could hear what he wasn't supposed to hear.

[sirs]

PROOF Tee.  What PROOF do you or anyone have that McCain heard every word of his opponent's answers and was surrounded by advisers who told him exactly what to say.  Where exactly??  When??  That was the accusation, if I recall.  Time to present the PROOF!!, as we already have heard the accusation
 

[BT]

The issue, of course, isn't whether or not he cheated, but whether he could have cheated.

So even the link you posted takes a more cautious approach to slander and smear than you do.

Oh well the big noise machine resurrects. Started with Katrina and hasn't stopped since. Lies and innuendos then below the fold when the truth outs.

[Michael Tee]

<<PROOF Tee.  What PROOF do you or anyone have that McCain heard every word of his opponent's answers and was surrounded by advisers who told him exactly what to say.  Where exactly??  When??  That was the accusation, if I recall.  Time to present the PROOF!!, as we already have heard the accusation>>

We have powerful motive and opportunity following McCain's breach of the debate conditions.  We know he wasn't alone, that members of his team were with him.  Very suspicious to me is the fact that despite the seriousness of the allegations of cheating,  McCain STILL has not released an account of his whereabouts and companions at all times when he was supposed to be in what "Pastor Rick" had twice assured everyone was a "cone of silence."

Circumstantial evidence in the form of the facts cited above and McCain's previous lying and cheating leads me to conclude with reasonable certainty (although certainly not beyond any reasonable doubt, the standard of proof of the criminal justice system) that McCain cheated.  He's cheated and lied before.  Why wouldn't he again?

The level of proof demanded by sirs is absurd and unrealistic.  Who could ever prove that McCain heard every word?  What if he only heard half, or a third?  Would anyone ever think that a student who cheats on an exam could escape punishment by proving that he didn't cheat on every single question, that some of them he had answered on his own to the best of his ability?

sirs also asks us, "Where exactly"  "When?" and similar nonsense, stuff that would only be known to the cheater himself and his entourage - - who so far have steadfastly refused to produce a detailed account of their whereabouts and doings at the time in dispute.  No, I'm satisfied on the circumstances that have emerged to date that in all likelihood, McCain cheated in this Saddleback debate.  Probably with the connivance of "Pastor Rick," the Evangelical host.

[sirs]

In other words....no proof.  The level of "proof" for sirs is simply 1 eye-witness, that saw or heard that McCain heard every word of his opponent's answers and was surrounded by advisers who told him exactly what to say  Otherwise, it's just another in your long list of your lies, supported by nothing more that your overt circumstantial hatred of anything and everything Republican.  Chalk it up to SOP, I guess

[Plane]

Circumstantial evidence in the form of the facts cited above and McCain's previous lying and cheating leads me to conclude with reasonable certainty (although certainly not beyond any reasonable doubt, the standard of proof of the criminal justice system) that McCain cheated.  He's cheated and lied before.  Why wouldn't he again?

I have reasonable doubt, but every thing you point to as motive would apply to Obama also , do we have any proof that Obama didn't listen in while it was McCains turn?

By the way "I will beleive anything as long as it is negative" is desperate.

[Michael Tee]

<< . . . do we have any proof that Obama didn't listen in while it was McCains turn?>>

That's hilarious.  We have some evidence (motive plus opportunity plus history plus lack of any detailed statement of denial accounting for the time when he should have been in the "cone of silence") that McCain likely  cheated.

We have NO evidence that Obama had the opportunity or the history to cheat.  Since OBAMA went first, how could he have cheated anyway?  Speaking of desperation, your question is a prime example of desperation.

So you ask anyway:  "Do we have any evidence that he DIDN'T cheat?"  In other words, in your eyes, Obama (very much unlike McCain) is "guilty until proven innocent."  Weird and very unconvincing.  Desperate, in fact.

[Plane]

<< . . . do we have any proof that Obama didn't listen in while it was McCains turn?>>

That's hilarious.  We have some evidence (motive plus opportunity plus history plus lack of any detailed statement of denial accounting for the time when he should have been in the "cone of silence") that McCain likely  cheated.

We have NO evidence that Obama had the opportunity or the history to cheat.  Since OBAMA went first, how could he have cheated anyway?  Speaking of desperation, your question is a prime example of desperation.

So you ask anyway:  "Do we have any evidence that he DIDN'T cheat?"  In other words, in your eyes, Obama (very much unlike McCain) is "guilty until proven innocent."  Weird and very unconvincing.  Desperate, in fact.

Of course it is hilarious , but that didn't stop you at all.

[BT]

Didn't the dems say Bush cheated during his debates with either Kerry or Gore by being wired and the proof was a photoshopped view of his jacket.

You guys are in a rut.