McCain Knew Questions at Saddleback - at least some of them-PROOF
REV. WARREN: I know it is. The courts -- let me ask it this way. Which existing Supreme Court justice would you not have nominated?
SEN. OBAMA: That's a good one. That's a good one. (Laughter.)
I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. (Applause.) I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation, setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the Constitution. I would not nominate Justice Scalia, although I don't think there's any doubt about his intellectual brilliance, because he and I just disagree. You know, he taught at the University of Chicago, as did I, in the law school.
REV. WARREN: How about John Roberts?
SEN. OBAMA: You know, John Roberts I have to say was a tougher question only because I find him to be a very compelling person, you know, in conversation individually. He's clearly smart, very thoughtful.
I will tell you that how I've seen him operate since he went to the bench confirms the suspicions that I had and the reason that I voted against him.
And I'll give you one very specific instance, and this is not a stump speech. I think one of the --
*******************************************
SEN. MCCAIN: At the moment of conception. (Cheers, applause.) I have a 25-year pro-life record in the Congress, in the Senate. And as president of the United States, I will be a pro-life president and this presidency will have pro-life policies. (Cheers, applause.) That's my commitment. That's my commitment to you.
REV. WARREN: Okay. We don't have to go longer on that one. (Laughter.)
Define marriage.
SEN. MCCAIN: A union -- a union between man and woman, between one man and one woman. That's my definition of marriage. (Applause.)
Are we going to get back to the importance of Supreme Court justices, or should I mention it? (note the GET BACK statement)
REV. WARREN: We will get to that.
SEN. MCCAIN: Okay. All right. (Laughter.) Okay.
REV. WARREN: Man, you're jumping ahead. You know all my questions.
SEN. MCCAIN: No, no, that's -- when we speak of the issue of the rights of the unborn, we need to talk about judges. But anyway, go ahead.
Senator John McCain KNEW at least SOME of the questions being asked or he wouldn't have asked to go BACK to a question he NEVER HAD.
I might also note that the whole questioning seemed to give McCain the ability to push his strong suits (military, experience in gov, correct his moral failures (wife), etc..) -- anybody notice that?
Unless anybody can prove it, it's a dead issue. More disturbing is how it was regarded as a win for somebody to sit there and bark out simplistic responses to complex issues. The only up side that I can see is it will make his probably performance in the debate seem less victorious if people have "heard" that he did great at Brokeback face-off.
August 19, 2008 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think this proves anything. I think McCain was simply asking if there was going to be a separate question about Justices. It has been reported that he was prepped and coached, and both candidates were given some ideas of the topics, so this is not a surprise.
August 19, 2008 9:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay - what evangelical Christian debate do you foresee where the following questions are not asked:
1. When do you think life begins?
2. What kind of judges will you put on the supreme court?
3. Where do you stand on gay marriage?
Those are no brainers. That's all they think about and to go into the forum not having an answer for those questions is ludicrous. Of course McCain was prepared and waiting for those questions. I should hope Obama was too. If he had said I'll wait until you ask me that question, you'd have a point.
If he did hear the questions in advance, there's no excuse for botching the question of the 3 people he'd consult with in office and saying Meg Whitman. That was truly throw the first name out that came into his head. This whole thing about cheating just looks desparate and the sign of the cross thing as well. Are we really trying to Swiftboat McCain and think it will work? Let's be honest - Swiftboating worked against Kerry because he came back from Vietnam and was a fierce critic of the war alienating some of his fellow veterans. This crap is not going to fly against McCain and it's making liberals look both hypocritical and desparate.
Can we cut the bull already and get back to focusing on actual issues that McCain is more vulnerable on? This debate is helping him by letting him play for sympathy and slide on the more important issues of 5 million dollars being rich, etc.
August 19, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
You guys are ignoring facts -- McCain KNEW and cheated.
His being out of the cone of silence and being able to foresee questions - put me in mind of Bush when he had OTHER FACTS about Iraq but allowed Congress to vote on war without those facts.
If McCain would stoop to this level with forum questions -- what else will he stoop to?
http://coonsey.wordpress.com/
August 19, 2008 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
"......what else will he stoop to?"
That's a rhetorical question, isn't it? If not, you haven't been paying attention.
And I agree with you....he knew and he cheated - those are the facts that most are now quick to 'forget'. Repubs talk over the noise of the outrage and soon, the yells become whispers and too soon, as if it never was............
Again, they lead, we shut up!
August 19, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tortured logic. You're in denial. But they told me McCain was really stupid and ignorant. How did he do so good? Oh. He must have had the questions. Typical Progressive blog parsing of statements. Get back to? Please. Are we going to come back to this topic which is really about the Supreme Court? See, my friend, he was about to follow "my commitment to you" with a commitment to appoint conservative judges to the court, and Warren interrupted him. What you have here, my friend, is one of those famous dogs that won't hunt.
You are going to see mcCain pound Obama again in the first debate. Apparently, you've never seen McCain live before. Did you watch the Saddleback event or just parse the transcript? Just curious.
August 19, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"You are going to see mcCain pound Obama again in the first debate."
Apparently, you have never seen Obama in a debate. The best McCain can hope for in that first debate is a draw, IMO.
August 19, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
From what I've seen of McCain's live speeches and Q&A, it's a pretty big leap of faith to expect him to pound Obama in the debates.
McCain did well at Saddleback, but if you're pinning your hopes on him beating Obama in the real debates then good luck.
August 20, 2008 1:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
In the last 2 elections, the American people voted for an intellectual lightweight.
John McCain graduated 5th from the Bottom of his class, and only made it through the Academy because he was the son and grandson of 4 star Admirals. Clearly, having a mediocre mind is not in itself a disqualification for a presidential candidacy.
Bill Clinton was brilliant, but he was successful in politics because he never sounded like a pedantic professor.
Obama will get pounded in the general election debates if he doesn't get better at giving direct, short answers in terms that a 5th grader could understand, without sounding patronizing or condescending.
Being a shallow charmer is the real McCain -- and don't ever forget that John McCain is a veteran pol with over 25 years' experience doing the rubber chicken with ordinary joes.
August 19, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama spoke directly to Pastor Warren. McCain spoke to the cameras and the audience.
Obama gave thoughtful answers. McCain told discredited stories and shot off platitudes. Nothing new from McCain: I've already heard the two stump speeches where he got the bulk of his material. Obama's emphasis on humility and traditional values was not in any stump speech. Guess which one got dinged with a litany of "no stump speeches"?
It seemed that Obama was truly thinking about his answers and speaking from the heart. I don't doubt that McCain knew what was coming, because the only time I've ever heard him that glib without a speech in front of him was when his handlers were talking in his good ear all the way to the lectern.
As a Catholic, I was interested that Obama's answer to when life begins was the same as three Popes who have spoken on the subject. We truly do not know. There is nothing in the Bible that adequately defines that moment. Pope John Paul II went so far as to say that his stand against abortion was based on his own morality, not on any Biblical of canonical basis.
McCain was quick with the catchphrases, but you don't expect thoughtful answers from him, so his performance showed nothing new.
August 20, 2008 4:38 AM | Reply | Permalink