The "cone of silence" that wasn't

Much was made of the so-called cone of silence that John McCain was to be ensconced in while Barack Obama negotiated the questions of Pastor Rick Warren at his plush Saddleback mega church in Orange County, CA.  This was to assure us that McCain, who would answer the same questions, would not have an unfair advantage.  Well, it turns out that McCain, to the contrary, did not even enter the church until midway through Obama's discussion at the "civil" forum.   Yet, this clear violation of the terms of the forum has received little media scrutiny.  There have been a few exceptions.

There was Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."  Hearing Andrea Mitchell mention the Obama camp's private concern that perhaps McCain was able to hear his interview in the "cone of silence" was the first confirmation of my own suspicions as I sat stunned at the conclusion of the Warren event. (Now McCain's people have requested a meeting with NBC executives to protest Mitchell's "bias.")  I'll get to the other reasons for my dismay shortly, but I want to focus for now on the other media scrutiny of the remarkable, dishonorable turn of events at the Saddleback Church.

Sunday evening, I witnessed a very interesting Rick Sanchez interview with Warren. He was visibly uncomfortable and danced around the question of the broken promise of a "cone of silence." He even addressed the adoption question that was clearly, at least to this writer, tailor-made to elicit McCain's story of his adopted Bangledeshi child (but which was not asked of Obama).  He admitted that McCain was in fact not in the "cone of silence" for much of Obama's interview.  He even said that he (McCain) was asked point-blank if he had heard any of his opponent's exchange.  Ultimately, Warren said that McCain was a man of "honor" and there is no reason to doubt this honor.  Wow.  Sanchez left it at that, but you could tell he had more questions.

Pity that more questions are not being raised. The New York Times, to its credit, did run a brief piece on the McCain "cone of silence" that wasn't.  The paper contacted the McCain campaign for an explanation. Their response was to fall back on the Hanoi Hilton: ''The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,'' said Nicolle Wallace, a McCain spokesperson.

The question, notwithstanding Wallace's indignant response, is not McCain's honor, but his non-adherence to the set rules of Warren's forum.  He is not so "honorable" that we can't question, at the very least, why he could not get to the Civil Forum at the appointed time.  John McCain is not above the rules. Period. 

And guess what?  Neither is Rick Warren.  He's got some serious questions to answer too...if only the media will ask them.  Here are just a couple to get the ball rolling: 1) Why did he look so nervous during the Sanchez interview, and why were his answers so dodgy, as the Brits would say?  2) What was the following exchange about, as reported in the Times article: "Mr. Warren started by asking Mr. McCain, 'Now, my first question: Was the cone of silence comfortable that you were in just now?'' Mr. McCain deadpanned, 'I was trying to hear through the wall.'"  I mean, really.

And the Obama campaign is just sitting by and letting this clear infraction of the rules go largely unnoticed, as they have done time and time again with McCain's missteps.  If the tables were turned, and it was Obama who broke the rules, I daresay he would be forever labeled a cheat.  The McCain people would see to it.  They would whip up a media firestorm the likes of which we have not seen in this campaign...because they know how to win!!  And, make no mistake the Republicans will stop at nothing to win. 

If Obama continues to be too much of a gentleman to hit back, and hard, they will win.  Barry will then find himself, come November, back in the so-called Gentleman's Club, the United State Senate.