Rick Sanchez is the poster boy for what is wrong with the MSM...

I'm still laughing about the statement by Sanchez, "...this is CNN. We try to be as exact as we possibly can."  Who is he kidding?  Isn't this the same network who kept their mouths shut about what Saddam Hussein was doing in Iraq so their reporters wouldn't get kicked out of Baghdad?  And are these reporters and commentators too young to understand the reference to the "Cone of Silence" being the old TV show "Get Smart?"  Give me a break and stop carrying the Dem's water.

So, was Pastor Rick Warren telling a lie in that McCain wasn't in a cone of silence?

I'm blonde, after all.

So McCain wasn't in the cone of silence, right?   But he was better prepared because he had the batphone to clue him in on his better answers.

And furthermore, that McCain isn't qualified to be president because he doesn't have a crackberry, and doesn't know how to use one?

And Rick the Idiot Sanchez is "going to respect that" after slinging mud?

(I may have to tell my Rick Sanchez story on BT & USA's bar forum, someday).

These librals are PATHETIC!  If they lose (anything)....it's always someone else's FAULT!

George Bush stole the election, and the Swift Boaters screwed F'ing out of the Presidency.  And Barack can't talk without a script, but it's GEORGE BUSH's fault.

Got it, never mind.

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

This is getting funnier by the week. 

Over the past month we were hearing that McCain was a Luddite of sorts due to his inability to master the intracies of current communications technology (Blackberries & Internet).  Now he's mastered them so he can gain a competitive edge.

 "Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"

Apparently it never occurred to anyone in the MSM that whether one had the questions in advance or not, there was nothing hard about them. Which of the questions was a "stumper"? "When does life begin"? If you can't answer that without a crib sheet (which Bambi couldn't), you sure as heck don't deserve to be president. How about taxes, foreign policy, gay marriage, I mean where was the obscure question that a "heads up" would help? Since McCain's always been pro-choice how would he have answered any differently even if he had heard Obama? It would be more telling if he'd answered DIFFERENTLY than he has in the past, duh. Clearly Obama was the one who knew he was in "hostile" territory being a proponent of INFANTICIDE and all, and knew that if his real answers were known, he wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell of getting any of those people to vote for him. Imagine if he'd said, "Well in Illinois I voted to kill a bill that would stop the MURDER of babies even AFTER they're BORN, Rick. So when life begins is a mere bag of shells to me, I'll kill 'em even if they're sittin' on a shelf CRYING for food!"  

So clearly, the "uh's and umm's" and stops and starts were because this LIAR was trying to figure out how to FOOL the silly evangelicals with some cleverly cloaked, " I believe in Jesus too" junk, while not angering his blood fanged, baby killing, BASE! Or is that too harsh? LOL. 

If this is a preview of what's to come in the national debates, I think that Obama is in trouble.  I've noted early on that Obama is not very eloquent when he is forced to think on his feet.  He says a LOT of "uhs" and "uhms" which causes people to fall asleep.  I admit that Obama has a great voice and it plays well when he delivers a script, but when he shoots from the hip in a debate or Q and A setting he falls apart.

HEY RICK,

HOW ABOUT A DRINK AND A DRIVE?!

Mr.L

This whole Cone of Idiocy flap is completely absurd, at about the same level of maturity as that Paris Hilton video but without the nice suntanned legs. It also makes perfect sense when you look at WHO is making a big deal about it: Liberal leaning news media personalities. The way I figure it since the Liberals do not win elections and instead employ devious little tricks, subtrafuge and if all else fails take their complaints to court, it makes sense that they expect that everybody else does the same thing.

So since their own playbook would have called for Obamarama to get some sort of an edge on McCain had the latter gone first, they not only naturally expect the reverse but actually view it as a foregone conclusion that McCain had to have been listening in somehow. It's exactly what they'd want their boy to do. The whole pathetic idiocy of Andrea Mitchell suggesting that McCain had a James Bond shoe phone and had someone at least funneling him the questions also makes perfect sense because these people think & behave just the the 9/11 conspiracy pinheads:

1) Come up with a theory (re: McCain cheated), 2) exclude all evidence or information to the contrary as tainted or untrustworthy (re: the denial is coming from  the McCain people) and 3) then find an explanation of how it could have happened, no matter how utterly preposterous (re: McCain had a special mini cell phone secreted in a hollow compartment in his shoe). Next, 4) leak just enough of a suggestion to the masses that sounds plausible but leave out the utterly absurd & improbable details as to how they decided he must have done it (re: no mention of the James Bond shoe phone, just a suggestion that McCain may have done something to stack the deck in his favor). Then 5) allow innuendo, inaccurate repetition of their thesis and zealous mis-representation of the facts amongst their attack dog moonbat idiot base to get the basic suggestion of impropriety with no proof to back it up out into the general populace.

Presto: One absolutely idiotic, absurd and demeaning suggestion of unfair tactics by a guy who was clearly prepared and rehearsed and sincere in his performance, trouncing their chosen victor. Since Obama did not come out on top McCain **MUST** have done something unfair -- the peformance cannot possibly be a sincere representation of his preparedness and superior grasp of the issues at hand. All you have to do is come up with some dingbat explanation of how he done it and work backwards. Also whether or not there is any proof of the allegation is irrelevant (a reversal of the John Edwards story), all that matters is the allegation plus coming up with a zinger angle that cannot be proven or disproven simply because of the nature of how it happened; McCain arrived after Obama's questioning started -- which was an inherently stupid way for this to have been allowed to proceed -- and wasn't searched for a shoe phone gizmo on his way out the door. The allegations can neither be proven or disproven, with only the pinheaded, ridiculous rumor left for people to mull over. Those with a penchant for cynicism & conspiracy thinking will tend to believe it, those who think rationally and explore all sides of  the dilemma will conclude that Ms. Mitchell and all of her lap dogs have zero credibility. The only determining factor is how many of the audience receiving this information are bent towards cynicism and/or already have an ax to grind for John McCain.

And that to me is where the damage here lies: I know a lot of decent, well meaning people who suddenly cannot stand John McCain because the press is making a concerted effort in teaching them to despise, fear & misunderstand him. It's a complete crock of steaming lizard feces, but if you're of the mindset it just gives you one more reason to not even bothering to listen. Andrea Mitchell should be fired for even suggesting any of this, which proves once again that as far as they are concerned this election is going to be decided by the press. The voters can't be trusted to make up their own minds and furthering complete BS like this will make sure they don't bother trying to.

I guess when McCain continues slapping around Bambi in future debates, he will be "cheating" in those as well.

It's pretty easy explaining why Bambi stutters "uh uh uh uh" alot when he speaks off script.  His handlers have made it very clear to him that he can't shoot his mouth off like the black liberation "community organizer" that he once was.  Bambi has about four or five filters between his brain and his mouth.  By the time his hard leftist rhetoric comes out, it is mangled beyond recognition.  His shrew of a wife is even worse.

McCain, on the other hand, is much more fluid and relaxed, because he doesn't have to triple-filter every single spontaneous word that he offers.

But... McCain is a cheater.  Check.

Preacher Man INTENTIONALLY gives Obama a question pre-forum, so he wouldn't be surprised, yet did not give McCain the same consideration.

Has the definition of cheating changed?

This is how logic is formed at CNN:

CNN: Didn't you allow "A" to happen?

Guest: Um no, actually "B" happened. I was there and saw the whole thing.

CNN: Well facts are facts, and we know "A" happened.

Um Guys, something I haven't seen mentioned yet... how were McCain's answers in this forum any different from his answers to questions at all his town halls?? Seems he got unknown questions thrown at him and answered them with straightforward, honest answers, why was this any different. Can you answer that Uh uh uhbama? That's right! YOU didn't attend any town hall's with McCain!

"Nuke 'em 'til they... oh hell, just shoot 'em!"