Otherwise detained when it was first broadcast, I only got around to watching the Saddleback Church encounter (video; transcript) last night.
Warren did a very nice job. I hope the network moderators were taking notes. No self-aggrandizement, no moronic gimmicks, no ceaseless quest for the gotcha moment. He asked good, searching questions in a spirit of urgent reflection, curiosity and goodwill. So it can be done.
I agree with the take of most commentators: Obama came across as thoughtful--but to a fault. His answers were too long and inconclusive. He came over as smart, interesting and admirable, but indecisive. McCain was just the opposite: direct, peremptory, energetic, impatient to take charge.
If this event were all I knew of the two candidates, I would prefer Obama, though with reservations. McCain crossed the line between concise and simplistic (not to say bombastic) too many times. Obama's answer to the question, "At what point does a baby have human rights?"--"That's above my pay grade"--was an evasion. (What would I have said, I wondered? Words to the same effect. Luckily I'm not running for president.) Then it got worse, as he talked about "theological perspective", "scientific perspective" and (eek) "specificity". Oh dear. McCain's immediate answer, "At the moment of conception," was as crisp and clear as you could wish. Problem is, that answer has implications which I am certain that McCain, consistent though his record may be on abortion, is not willing to confront. If it's a choice between (a) handwringing over specificity and (b) dogmatic certainty on an issue that (in my view) does not support it, I'll reluctantly take (a).
As for the politics, surely McCain won. Much to my surprise, given some of his recent outings, he seemed much more presidential. So I agree with David Gergen:
Heading into the candidates' appearances on Saturday night at Saddleback Church, the conventional wisdom in politics was Barack Obama should have a clear upper hand in any joint appearance with John McCain -- one the young, eloquent, cool, charismatic dude who can charm birds from the trees, the other the meandering, sometimes bumbling, old fellow who can barely distinguish Sunnis from Shiias.
Well, kiss that myth goodbye.
McCain came roaring out of the gate from the first question and was a commanding figure throughout the night as he spoke directly and often movingly about his past and the country's future. By contrast, Obama was often searching for words and while far more thoughtful, was also less emotionally connective with his audience.
Also see this piece by Dick Polman at the Philadelphia Inquirer:
The same stylistic gap - cerebral versus visceral - was evident at several other points in the forum, again to Obama's potential disadvantage. Such as the exchanges about the nature of evil.
Warren asked Obama: "Does evil exist, and if it does, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it, or do we defeat it?"
Obama's response: "Evil does exist. I mean, we see evil all the time. We see evil in Darfur. We see evil in parents have viciously abused their children and I think it has to be confronted. It has to be confronted squarely and one of the things that I strongly believe is that, you know, we are not going to, as individuals, be able to erase evil from the world...Now, the one thing that I think is very important for us is to have humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil, but, you know, a lot of evil has been perpetrated based on the claim that we were trying to confront evil...And I think one thing that's very important is having some humility in recognizing that, you know, just because we think our intentions are good doesn't always mean that we're going to be doing good..."
One hour later, Warren asked McCain the same question about evil and what we should do about it. McCain's response began this way:
"Defeat it."
Jim Fallows, though, makes a very good point. This was a pair of interviews, not a debate. Who knows where the discussion of human rights and abortion would have gone if the candidates had been able to challenge each other--if Obama had been able to test McCain on the implications of his certainties, and say, "Is it really so simple?". Perhaps that would have made things even worse for Obama, or perhaps not. We shall see. The approaching presidential debates will be even more important that I had supposed. Shame they will be back in the hands of the TV professionals.
The appearance of thoughtfulness is sometimes a crutch for ignorance.
I think Obama may have been naive in thinking that a conservative, evangelical audience wanted to hear anything except their regular diet of simplistic and morally absolute sound bytes.
The "Bible-says-it-I-believe-it-that-settles-it" kind of mind doesn't do nuance.
Notice how McCain give substanceless answers, while Obama actually gives us something of value.
All McCain was capable of doing was replying with bumbler sticker talking points. This is the presidency not the 5th grade. Voters should expect our candidates to treat this election as something important not a joke like McCain thinks it is. It is time we move away from the Bush-McCain type of politics of lies, and avoidance of issues and real discussion.
McCain has become the Rove Robot. What happened to Maverick McCain?
I had much rather have someone who will listen..giving thought carefully to each matter. Obama is by far more thoughtful and willing to listen to others. Mc old is most likely to have us in war in a flash (his terrible temper).. All would do well to remember... the draft would have to come back into play if McNut shoud (heaven forbid) be voted into the whitehouse. I think we need to draft all over seventy and add McCain as commander and chief leading his army over the hill and across the world to please his hunger for the only thing he knows...WAR, anywhere, anytime! We have to defeat this one track charlie.. (Insane mccain) with tunnel vision....This is a bit off the subject..but have you noticed how he treats his wife and the ugly names he calls her! WOW Down with Mccain and up up up with OBAMA!
McCain was smarmy. He obviously had heard the questions in advance.
Some people who search for words and appear thoughtful are merely prevaricating to come up with an 'acceptable' answer. And some people who have an immediate reply are honestly revealing their strong convictions.
I saw the original interview as well as some of the reaction to it on Larry King last night. There are many issues in this election. Some are " same old same old". But our job as voters is to pick through the rhetoric as best as possible and decide for ourselves what these candidates are saying.
It is important to know what they believe, but I feel it is much more important to understand what they are going to do with the awesome responsibility of the Presidential office.
It sounds to me like Mcain is happy with the way things are going. Are you? If you are not, even if your beliefs are Christian straight down the line, you must consider the implications of Global warming, wars we do not belong in and the sad fact that many Americans still do not have health insurance...than cast your vote.
McCain says there is evil and we must defeat it .... is he also the judge as to what and who are evil?
There are many who think this country and its leaders are evil and their goal is to destroy us. It's that extremist view that has gotten us to where we are right now.
McCain said he was a maverick against torture - but he voted FOR torture. The exact same methods - stress positions are being used on children in Gitmo right now. It's hypocrisy but no one will call him on it. He mocked DNA testing for Bears (which was not DNA testing) YET HE VOTED FOR IT. He says he is FOR veterans but constantly votes AGAINST benefit packages to them.
McCain shoots from the hip like Bush and look where that got us. He shot us right into Iraq, shot AND MISSED the target in Afghanistan and if he had his way, we'd be shooting through Iran.
Too much dogma. Too much pandering. Too much hypocrisy. And not enough accountability from the media.
As an agnostic, who grew up evangelical, I was most interested by the way in which a number of questions were crafted as spiritual tests, to which Obama gave serious spiritual answers, while McCain merely blurted a single simplistic line (I'm saved and forgiven)and followed up with a well-trodden anticdote. Though religion is NOT a test I'm interested in, I'm sadly surprised that McCain's cliche answer was considered a PASS rather than a FAIL by the majority of those who are.
Excellent post Miami! informed and well stated.
There have been a lot of comments here that are obviously Obama supporters. The fact is that after 911 America wanted somebody smacked for what happened. Perhaps the president made the wrong decision but he made a decision. My fear is that we will have a president that can't make a decision until it is too late. As for the comment about health insurance. Obviously Karen Braverman does not remember that health care was a BIG issue during the Clinton administration and Hillary was not successful in socializing medicine so what makes her think that Obama will change things. Just ask a Canadian how long it takes to get an MRI there (answer 3-5 months). People need to wake up and realize that there are certain things that can't be changed or that the government is unwilling to change regardless of who the president is. I believe that we need a president that has experience and integrity. Regardless of the party if a president is indecisive we are in big trouble as a nation. One last thing if Obama thinks for a second that taxing big oil companies will lower gas prices he is a fool. They will just lay that tax back on the consumer.
Just a quick question...did McCain receive the questions in advance?
From your transcript part 5 text only format paragraph 4
12 ARE WE GOING TO GET BACK TO THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPREME
13 COURT JUSTICES.
14 Q WE'LL GET TO THAT.
15 A ALL RIGHT. OKAY.
16 Q YOU GOT ALL MY QUESTIONS, GOOD.
CNN seem to have missed the "you got all my question, good" comment:
WARREN: We will get to that.
MCCAIN:
WARREN: You're jumping ahead (inaudible).
Just a quick question...did McCain receive the questions in advance?
From your transcript part 5 text only format paragraph 4
12 ARE WE GOING TO GET BACK TO THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPREME
13 COURT JUSTICES.
14 Q WE'LL GET TO THAT.
15 A ALL RIGHT. OKAY.
16 Q YOU GOT ALL MY QUESTIONS, GOOD.
CNN seem to have missed the "you got all my question, good" comment:
WARREN: We will get to that.
MCCAIN:
WARREN: You're jumping ahead (inaudible).
I can smell your bias from here, Clive. You sound like a petulant girl. Listen carefully: McCain cheated; he surprised everybody by being conscious for once, but he cheated. This should give you more pause than it obviously does. Let your morality be progressive, not defensively black-and-white. Do it now.
The candidates were each given specific questions--McCain, two, and Obama, three.
Both were given the topics that would be discussed.
Only Obama's fans were taken by surprise by his deficiencies as an orator.
He's got to get a lot quicker on his feet real soon or the debates are going to be a bloodletting.
This election is going to be a referendum on the American people, IMO. Either the simpletons will win and be ruled by more of the same, or those willing to appreciate the complexity and--dare I say it--"nuances" of the world we live in will finally come out in enough numbers to bring about real change.
I will be very depressed if we lose, but with the way the media is intervening in the process today like never before, at this point there is just no way to tell how it will turn out.
Y'know what I'm hoping? That the nuanced candidate is just holding back, waiting for the right time to do what is necessary to lock this down. I read something somewhere about an "October surprise" that everyone is assuming will be the Republicans' attempt to destroy Obama, but which just MIGHT be what Obama's legions of smart, hip, saavy, modern researchers have unearthed (or just compiled) about all those things in McCain's past which actually haven't been brought to light (like that divorce of his, or, yes, as someone else pointed out, how he has indeed spoken about his wife--and how he treated her...like not bothering to come home when she was miscarrying).
I admit that I will be disappointed in the Obama campaign if they don't have something like this secret weapon waiting in the wings. I am absolutely positive that the ammunition is there, if only someone would dig it up (even if they only sit on it until it's needed).
This election is going to be a referendum on the American people, IMO. Either the simpletons will win and be ruled by more of the same, or those willing to appreciate the complexity and--dare I say it--"nuances" of the world we live in will finally come out in enough numbers to bring about real change.
I will be very depressed if we lose, but with the way the media is intervening in the process today like never before, at this point there is just no way to tell how it will turn out.
Y'know what I'm hoping? That the nuanced candidate is just holding back, waiting for the right time to do what is necessary to lock this down. I read something somewhere about an "October surprise" that everyone is assuming will be the Republicans' attempt to destroy Obama, but which just MIGHT be what Obama's legions of smart, hip, saavy, modern researchers have unearthed (or just compiled) about all those things in McCain's past which actually haven't been brought to light (like that divorce of his, or, yes, as someone else pointed out, how he has indeed spoken about his wife--and how he treated her...like not bothering to come home when she was miscarrying).
I admit that I will be disappointed in the Obama campaign if they don't have something like this secret weapon waiting in the wings. I am absolutely positive that the ammunition is there, if only someone would dig it up (even if they only sit on it until it's needed).
Anyone who watched the forum can easily see McCain knew the answer in advance.The interesting thing is the surprise some people show regarding his cheating.That's what republicans are good at.Did I mention the crowd was an evangelical/republican crowd?
Questions that GOD's middleman Rick Warren should have ask senator John McInsane
1. How many hookers have you slept with?
2. How old is the Earth?
3. Would you be willing to be water boarded?
4. Would you allow Government contractors, who are known to have stolen for the US, to continue to receive no bid contracts?
5. As per the Nuremberg Laws, how many post WW2 Presidents are guilty of war crimes?
6. Would you serve 2 terms as President if elected?
7. Is Israeli life more valuable than Palestinian life?
8. Would you reopen the 9/11 investigation?
9. Is $600,000,000,000 a year enough money to keep our country secure?
10. Were you born on American soil?
Put simply: I don’t see how Warren thought McCain was at the church when he made his claims about this “cone of silence” on TV during the forum… when he now also explicitly says he gave Obama a preview question before the event that he couldn’t give McCain because he wasn’t there yet.
Warren slipped up in my opinion, and has made a huge mistake. If this is the contradiction I think it is, it means he lied (not was confused, but knowingly lied) on TV during the event by saying McCain was in this now mythic “cone of silence”… and he did so in order to protect the sham integrity of his forum for a Republican who he knew may have cheated. And of course he lied on CNN just now as well, a clip and transcript of which are found below. …
There may be an explanation, but my bet is it’s not a particularly good one, and not one that we should necessarily take very seriously at this point if all we have to go on afterwards is his word of honor.
We should also add that if it was a purpose driven lie in order to help McCain in any way, I’ve heard that has tax implications for his so-called church, (ie his political action committee).
Just a quick question...did McCain receive the questions in advance?
From your transcript part 5 text only format paragraph 4
12 ARE WE GOING TO GET BACK TO THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPREME
13 COURT JUSTICES.
14 Q WE'LL GET TO THAT.
15 A ALL RIGHT. OKAY.
16 Q YOU GOT ALL MY QUESTIONS, GOOD.
CNN seem to have missed the "you got all my question, good" comment:
WARREN: We will get to that.
MCCAIN:
WARREN: You're jumping ahead (inaudible).
Obama wasn't naive for agreeing to attend this forum. You nuts are always saying how "we don't know this guy...". Well, he came to talk to people who disagree with him, was sincere, no stump speeches, thoughtful, genuine, honest...and now he's too thoughtful?? Do you guys even hear yourselves?? Turn Rush and Sean off and investigate for YOURSELF. Read his detailed policy statements instead of watching Britney and Paris and then tell me who would be best for this country....keep doing the same thing (definition of insanity, right) OR do it differently as he suggests.
Obama wasn't naive for agreeing to attend this forum. You nuts are always saying how "we don't know this guy...". Well, he came to talk to people who disagree with him, was sincere, no stump speeches, thoughtful, genuine, honest...and now he's too thoughtful?? Do you guys even hear yourselves?? Turn Rush and Sean off and investigate for YOURSELF. Read his detailed policy statements instead of watching Britney and Paris and then tell me who would be best for this country....keep doing the same thing (definition of insanity, right) OR do it differently as he suggests.
I am absolutely shocked at some of the anti-McCain comments on this site. They say a lot more about the intellectual integrity...or just plain moral integrity of the posters than anything else.
P. Wynn Norman, your comments digust me. To call a large number of Americans simpletons is uncalled for. Obviously you believe that a group of elite people (yourself and Obama) are the chosen few.
For the rest of the posters...Neither McCain, nor Obama are perfect. This vote will be the lesser of two evils as the best candidates in both parties were left in the waste bin.
CNN, CBS, MSNBC, ABC, Newsweek, The New York Times and many other members of the Main Stream Media have for months helped to foster a deception upon the American people, that being Obama's true position on many major issues. They have achieved this deception by not reporting on the facts, and not asking the tough questions that need to be asked of a Presidential Candidate. The US Constitution guarantees Freedom of The Press in order to assure that the main stream press is free to ask just such probing questions. The profit motive has now entered into political reporting and major news outlets are skewing their reporting in order to garner favor among certain portions of the population. This prostitution of the Freedom of the Press was never envisioned by our founding fathers. Isn't it IRONIC that a PASTOR and NOT a REPORTER was the main instrument in getting Obama to finally answer some tough, difficult, yet truly relevant questions? Pundints from every major news organization have admitted ON AIR that the venue that Pastor Rick Warren organized was a "Brilliant" one. Rest assured that since the Obama campaign has seen how poorly Obama performed under such a format, that they will do everything in their power to block any further "Debates" from adopting the same format.
The Saddleback experience has firmly cemented the Church's legitimate role in the future of Presidential Debates. Thanks are due to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, Newsweek, and The New York Times for moving aside in your reporting coverage these past months, and allowing Rick Warren to have a place in history. Thank God for people with courage and moral fortitude like Pastor Rick Warren who are willing to examine the issues facing our country without regard to the profit motive. Freedom of The Press Should not be for sale! Take heed CNN. Pay attention MSNBC. Learn something CBS. We've just made news here ABC. Are you reading between the lines here Mr. Editor of The New York Times? Can you figure out the implication of this story Newsweek? I hope all of you are listening. The silence is truly deafening!
Senator McCain got the questions in advance from Elvis when they met on the grassy knoll after being returned to earth by the space aliens that kidnapped them, Raoul, Amelia Erheart, and 22,184 others from the Bermuda Triangle.
GERALD,thats a lie,,,most networks and blogs are now saying Obama was the one who gave sincere in depth questions and sought him as the winner of that night.Read most blogs,the american people are not stupid as the Applach. mountaineers,they have a backbone of there and did not agree with half the medias attempt to portray Mccain as the one on point with answering questions
Anyone who says he heard the answers first are sore losers. McCain was in a car, and then with the secret service. He did not cheat. He doesn't need to.
McCain Shined! He was a true leader, not an confused intellectual. Obama is smart, but, I wouldn't want Stephen Hawking as my president.
Let's wait until the debates.
GERALD,thats a lie,,,most networks and blogs are now saying Obama was the one who gave sincere in depth questions and sought him as the winner of that night.Read most blogs,the american people are not stupid as the Applach. mountaineers,they have a backbone of there and did not agree with half the medias attempt to portray Mccain as the one on point with answering questions
McCain came off decisive, while Obama tried to court new voters while not alienating the ones he already has. Many of Obama's answers were outright lies: His most difficult decision was to vote against the war? He wasn't even a Senator then, and when he was, he has voted FOR funding several times. He worked with McCain on Ethics Reform? That episode ended with an Obama double-cross when it came time to vote. He believes marriage is man-woman? He has written to all of the gay groups pledging support for gm. Troubling for us supporters.
McCain doesn't meet my minimum GPA requirement to be President of the United States. I think it's an entirely reasonable criterion that you should at least be in the top 99% of your class to run one of the most powerful countries in the world. But that's just me.
And I believe what you saw shining, Ben, was merely John McCain's prominent bald spot.
John McCain's campaign is absolutely ridden with hypocrisy, across the board. His energy policy is laughable, his tax cuts make little economic sense, and his integrity and morality are legitimately questionable. Obama is not the perfect candidate. Anyone to deny that is a fool. But at least his positions are thoughtful and engineered to respond to new information. The last thing that America needs is another hard-line President whose perspective is entirely set in stone. And frankly, I'd rather have a now-confused intellectual who would undoubtedly be quick to learn and adapt than a relic of early Bush policy whose blinders are on so tight that his brain is starting to lose circulation.
I find it depressing that most of the discussion about the Saddleback forum is focused on style rather than the substance of what was said. (I'd include in that the discussion about whether McCain cheated outside the 'cone of silence'.
Take for example the discussion of 'evil'. Obama's remarks were 'nuanced' alright but also much more correct from both political and Judeo-Christian ethical point of view. We are charged by our G-d to 'hate evil and love what is good' but also to understand with the psalmist that G-d is the source of both light and dark. We are also charged to 'walk humbly'. Seeking to 'defeat Evil' is anti-Christian presumptiveness and leads to a continuation of the foolishness, destruction and yes, evil, that has been wrought by the Bush administration.
The fact that this was held in a Christian Church and was branded as the "First Debate" is ludicrous. Where is the forum in a Jewish temple or, dare I say it, a Mosque. In one breath Rick Warren says we must promote religious freedom and equality in other countries while there is nothing on the books to see the candidates together in front of a different religious group. The truth is that it's fine in other countries but not here in the U.S., he would love to just nail the cross to the top of the White House and call it a day. The presidential office is a civic role responsible to EVERY member of the country. The president is not the Spiritual Guru of the United States or its’ head Pastor. The truth is that the Christian right can't prove when a fetus is self- aware or that homosexuality is a "choice" like they all believe. Since it's just that "a belief" it shouldn't be made into law. The Jewish Faith believes that pork is a sin so should we make bacon illegal? The Christian Bible thumpers think that divorce is a sin but that's still legal and they don't seem to want to reverse that any time soon. I personally don't want my tax dollars paying a church that won't hire someone to work in thier soup kitchen just becasue they are jewish, or an athiest, or heaven forbid... gay. Church... State they are supposed to be separate. It's just a bunch of wedge issues that are meant to turn our attention from wars, and genocide, and the corporate take over of our country.
As for calling this the "first Debate"... this was an interview format. Even Rick Warren called it that. He specifically said "I don't want your stump Speech here" but most of McCain's answers were directly from his stump speeches or from the scripted answers he spits out at his invitation only, prescreened, town meetings. I'm shocked that people are brave enough to say "Obama seemed too thoughtful". Don't we want our President to think? Maybe we forgot that this is supposed to be a quality belonging to our leads. 8 years of George Bush can do that to a nation I guess. You don't think that Thomas Jefferson, or Ben Franklin were thoughtful? I'm pretty sure that our constitution was the product of some pretty thoughtful leaders. If America wants two word answers and tag line solutions to the very complex problems America and the rest of the world face then we are in a darker period of time then I thought.
McCain did not need to have the questions in advance - they are always the same for evangelicals. Evangelicals are not concerned with the 15% of Americans living below the poverty line, the increase in foreclosures, global warming, affordable health care, eliminating dependency on foreign oil, nor the loss of life in an endless, unwinnable war.
Obama stated his case, which I think excellently defines the voters' choice. He wants to be president because the American opportunity is becoming harder to realize for all Americans. If you don't care about anything other than criminalizing abortion, preventing gays from marrying, persevering in war, and protecting the tax status of the wealthy, vote McCain.
Spitting venom Obama supporters: It's not going to get any easier for you.
Even though your guy says " Don't worry. I will win"
In the end the voters will decide. Now you can panic.
At this point, I'm not so sure conservatives have any right to mandate a liberal panic. At all.
If as Annole contends, McCain Cheated, do Americans really want him as President.
America should be looking for a President that has statesman like qualities; a university educated; calm under pressure; thoughtful; decisive when he needs to be; conciliatory when he needs to be; honourable; a gentleman; not prone to bouts of explosive anger; a family man; a man of the people; a man who will govern for the people.
Sorry John McCain does not cut the mustard.
Of course John McCain will do well in a conservative forum. This is news?
Write in Ron Paul!!!!! Do it or reap the whirlwind created by one of these two numbnuts!!
GIVE ME A BREAK FOLKS!
JOHN McCAIN WAS HALF AN HOUR LATE! WHAT WAS HE DOING DURING THIS TIME?
LISTEN UP FOLKS! JOHN McCAIN HAD ACCESS TO TV, RADIO, WALKIE TALKIES, AND OH BOY THE MOST IMPORTANT COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY! THE CELL PHONE! IT DOES NOT EVEN HAVE TO RING ANYMORE, SO NO ONE WILL EVEN KNOW THAT YOUR PHONE IS RINGING, THAT IS EXCEPT YOU THE OWNER!
THIS MAN KNEW ABOUT THIS FORUM FOR AT LEAST A MONTH, HE KNEW THE TIME, AND THE SCHEDULE, AND YET HE ARRIVED HALF AN HOUR LATE, RIGHT INTO BARACK'S QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. I FOR ONE AM SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DISGUSTED WITH THIS DELIBERATE SNUBBING OF THE RULES, AND AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, PASTOR WARREN KNEW ALL ABOUT THIS, HE WAS IN CAHOOTS WITH JOHN McCAIN AND JOHN McCAIN'S TOP ADVISERS, SORRY YOU CANNOT GET ME TO BELIEVE OTHERWISE! THIS WAS A SET-UP PURE AND SIMPLE!
JOHN McCAIN CHEATED PURE AND SIMPLE! PLEASE TELL ME JUST WHO FRISKED JOHN McCAIN TO ENSURE THAT WHEN HE ARRIVED AT THE SADDLEBACK CHURCH HALF AN HOUR LATE, THAT HE DID NOT HAVE A CELL PHONE HIDDEN ON HIS PERSON!
DON'T YOU EVEN TRY TO TELL ME THAT SOMEONE DID, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE TO CALL YOU A LIAR!
JOHN McCAIN CHEATED, END OF STORY!
GIVE ME A BREAK FOLKS!
JOHN McCAIN WAS HALF AN HOUR LATE! WHAT WAS HE DOING DURING THIS TIME?
LISTEN UP FOLKS! JOHN McCAIN HAD ACCESS TO TV, RADIO, WALKIE TALKIES, AND OH BOY THE MOST IMPORTANT COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY! THE CELL PHONE! IT DOES NOT EVEN HAVE TO RING ANYMORE, SO NO ONE WILL EVEN KNOW THAT YOUR PHONE IS RINGING, THAT IS EXCEPT YOU THE OWNER!
THIS MAN KNEW ABOUT THIS FORUM FOR AT LEAST A MONTH, HE KNEW THE TIME, AND THE SCHEDULE, AND YET HE ARRIVED HALF AN HOUR LATE, RIGHT INTO BARACK'S QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. I FOR ONE AM SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DISGUSTED WITH THIS DELIBERATE SNUBBING OF THE RULES, AND AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, PASTOR WARREN KNEW ALL ABOUT THIS, HE WAS IN CAHOOTS WITH JOHN McCAIN AND JOHN McCAIN'S TOP ADVISERS, SORRY YOU CANNOT GET ME TO BELIEVE OTHERWISE! THIS WAS A SET-UP PURE AND SIMPLE!
JOHN McCAIN CHEATED PURE AND SIMPLE! PLEASE TELL ME JUST WHO FRISKED JOHN McCAIN TO ENSURE THAT WHEN HE ARRIVED AT THE SADDLEBACK CHURCH HALF AN HOUR LATE, THAT HE DID NOT HAVE A CELL PHONE HIDDEN ON HIS PERSON!
DON'T YOU EVEN TRY TO TELL ME THAT SOMEONE DID, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE TO CALL YOU A LIAR!
JOHN McCAIN CHEATED, END OF STORY!
The fact that Mccain answered his questions quickly convinces me that he did NOT cheat. Anyone who had the advantage of having the questions given to them ahead of time would have taken care not to blow that advantage by doing the exact opposite of what Mccain did. They would have hesitated and pretended to think about the answer. The reason that Mccain was able to answer these questions the way he did is because he is decisive and knows what he believes, unlike Obama. Besides, he's had plenty of practice answering questions at the town hall meetings he has held. The same meetings, in fact, where Mccain has repeatedly invited Obama to debate him. Obama is afraid to debate Mccain and has agreed only to the standard three presidential debates. After seeing Obama's performance at Warren's forum, I can see why. Obama has no real positions on most issues, and if he does, he is afraid to stand up for them. That is not the type of person I want for President, no matter how eloquently he repeats the words, "hope and change".
Whether you want to admit it or not Obama has been afraid to go up against McCain in any type of debate. Now if your arguement is McCain heard the questions prior to the event Obama openly admitted to seeing one of the questions. Even imo. Obamas answers were long yes now did he actually even answer any of the questions? Obamas answers were either neutural or I dont want to give an answer. McCain was direct with his answers no divertions or jumbled intellecual words that amaze you. McCain won the debate no questions asked.
God forbid a thoughtful man sit in the oval office. Better to have someone who can shoot off those answers with nothing behind them but the objective of telling you what you want to hear.
Some of you people never learn. And you will get the President you deserve.
You can lead an American to a conclusion, but you can't make him think.
God forbid a thoughtful man sit in the oval office. Better to have someone who can shoot off those answers with nothing behind them but the objective of telling you what you want to hear.
Some of you people never learn. And you will get the President you deserve.
You can lead an American to a conclusion, but you can't make him think.
Your party sucks and so does mine! They're both pathetic. If Hillary is not the nominee then I will vote for Barr or Nader. Besides, Gonzalez is the bomb!
McCain about evil: "defeat it!" ... what? ... Did I hear right?
Was Saddleback the trailer for a new superhero movie... or about the new resident of the oval office?
Like Obama said: There is a pro-life president in the White House since 2000, but nothing has changed concerning abortion. Because one half of the country is in opposition to anything W. says or does. Simplistic answers like the one I mentioned will keep this status quo alive, there won´t be less abortions, or less evil or less anything.
Obama will negotiate reasonable solutions. He thinks before he speaks. The US is facing problems of epic size, accually Roosevelt should be back for a few years. McCain is no Roosevelt. Obama might turn out to be a dissapointment, but he could also very well turn out to be the person we need right now for this job.
If he believes that human rights begin at conception, does that mean McCain would send the FBI into fertility clinics to liberate all those soon-to-be destroyed frozen embryos?
I think while McCain probably got more out of this debate than Obama this debate bodes well for Obama. The audience erupted into applause when McCain said life began at conception. But nationally this is a minority view. I think both candidates performed better than expected. The thing is McCain overcame personal adversity. He was less bad than people had thought he would be. Of course he did so by telling people in the dumbest way possible what they wanted to hear. Obama over and over again had to tell the audience things that they didn't want to hear.
There is a reason bad sitcoms have a laugh track. You hear other people laugh and it makes things seem funnier than than they are. This crowd was on McCain's side. Their cheers made McCain seem better than he was. I think in a normal debate with an open audience McCain will lose his only advantage.
I remember I was in a TA in an economics class and this kid after like 15 minutes strode up really confidently to hand in his final. I looked at the answers and they were all wrong. That kid reminds me of McCain sure his answers were stupid but he's so assured of their truth! That's gotta count for something? Hopefully not.
"Evil does exist. I mean, we see evil all the time. We see evil in Darfur. We see evil in parents have viciously abused their children and I think it has to be confronted. It has to be confronted squarely and one of the things that I strongly believe is that, you know, we are not going to, as individuals, be able to erase evil from the world...Now, the one thing that I think is very important for us is to have humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil, but, you know, a lot of evil has been perpetrated based on the claim that we were trying to confront evil...And I think one thing that's very important is having some humility in recognizing that, you know, just because we think our intentions are good doesn't always mean that we're going to be doing good..."
Can somebody please explain to me what this means? I graduated from college in the top 99% of my class, and I still can't figure that out.
For those of you stating that McCain was obviously going to do better, because this is a Christian forum, have you forgotten that Obama also claims to be a Christian?
And I do agree that there should be a seperation between Church and State, as was laid out in the Constitution. However, a lot of people are influenced by the beliefs of their particular religion. Rick Warren opened up this forum as a way for Evangelical Christians to assess the candidates' views in relation to their own. Nobody has said that this can be the only forum of its kind. I invite leaders from any and all religions to host similar events to afford their followers the same opportunities.
Jessica graduating in the top 99% of your class is not as impressive as you seem to think. I know Obama is a Christian but he is not out to appeal to the sensibilities of the audience in the same way that McCain is.
The political bottom-line is that Obama needs to more directly address his audience, be it hostile or favorable, and snap out answers that are both intellectually honest AND emotionally compelling.
Like too many politicians these days, Obama is too well versed at the high wire act, not speaking with conviction, that it's easy to discount his commitment. (His vote on FISA, his tiptoeing around the need to end the war that's sucking our national vitality, and his dance on religion and spirituality -- what does he believe? -- have already distanced him from his base.)
American politics, for better or worse, are all about style as much as substance. Playing "Mr. Cool," on all sides of issues, is not a winning strategy for Obama. McCain and what he represents is such an easy target; yet so far, Obama has yet to take convincing aim.
I have asked this question many times and have not yet recieved an answer. So here goes again: Who annointed Rick Warren as American's new moral authority and why?
The guy obviously has an agenda in line with that of the Republican Party that has been taken over by the right-wing religious nuts who can only see the morality in their own beliefs. Rick Warren is the voice of those who seek redemption but cannot think for themselves.
I tried to read the Purpose Driven Life book. It's dreck. Rick Warren does not have all the answers. He has an agenda to make everyone the same, to wipe out free thought and individualism.
Rick Warren is not so much a preacher as he is a marketing genius. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Jessica: Does that mean you also graduated in the bottom 99 percent of your class?
Michael, I was referring to a statement made by someone earlier that he/she expected his/her president to have graduated within the top 99% of their class. That leaves only 1% of the class to do worse. I know that is not impressive.
If you don't agree with someone's opinion, defend your own opinion. Don't attack the person.
Jessica, I interpreted obama's comments about evil to relate to the Iraq war.
The majority of you supported the Iraq war believing you were fighting evil. Your collective intent lacked humility. Evil begat evil.
(1) Even if there was no cheating involved, McCain benefited greatly from having homefield advantage.
(2) As far as abortion and same sex marriages are concerned. That has nothing to do with who is president. For the record, Roe vs. Wade was Jan 1973 Nixon was president a republican. The first legal same sex marriage in the U.S.A was in 2003 Bush was president a republican.
Obama's comments about evil make sense once you take a moment to think about them. Like Nancy said, we supposedly invaded Iraq to liberate its people from tyranny and oppression. But what resulted? Thousands of innocent lives lost, thousands of American soldiers dead, and a country that is in a remarkably precarious position overall. We sought out to rid the world of one kind of evil, and injected it with another. And liberals aren't the only ones to recognize our actions as a form of evil. Just take note how the international community views the American people and the Iraq war. Sometimes, no matter how good your intentions are, the outcome can be disastrous.
John McCain, on the other hand, wants to defeat evil. That sounds perfect on paper, and yes, he did in fact answer Rick Warren's question. But what the hell does THAT mean? You can't just look for a candidate to answer a question. As American citizens, you have to take into account the implications of that answer. If you take just one moment to think about McCain's response, you will see that it is hollow and absolutely ridiculous. It reminds me of George Bush's conquest to defeat terrorism. Terrorism and evil are completely intangible. They can't just be defeated. The bottom line is, as long as there are good people in the world, there are going to be bad ones. It's part of the worldly balance.
And, god forbid, the United States ever show a shred of humility! I'm not sure if John McCain even knows what that is.
McCain was able to make concise answers because he knows what he believes. He has actually thought about and discussed these things before. Obama can't think on his feet, he was hemming and ha-ing because he doesn't know what he thinks or believes. He changed the subject a couple of times right in the middle of an answer.I don't know why people say he is smart. He can't remember the question by the time he gets half way throught the "answer."
I think it's clear that many of you have not heard John McCains entire answer to the evil question. The evil John McCain was speaking about was Osama Bin Laden and Islamic extremists. When placed in full context, John McCain's answer is a powerful statement and shows his focus on what is the greatest threat to our national security. Obama's answer seems to focus on everything BUT the greatest singular act of evil ever witnessed in the United States. While it is important to address the problems Obama menioned, I certainly don't believe the federal government's main concern should be that "parents have viciously abused their children", not to diminish the severity of that issue but it is a problem that must be addressed by each state and local government. Obama's thoughtfulness is something that should not be looked down upon, but the fact that he ignores the main "evil" that is in the minds of many shows his disconnect with the American people.
How can we define our human affairs as completely evil or good? There is no simple, direct cause for the evil affairs in the world, and there is no trace of history or policy that everybody would call "justice." McCain's clean answer to Warren's question may seem instructional and presidential, but when we think about it, the leadership that can arise from such mindset could only cause more "I'm right, you're not" type of solutions to the problems we are facing. Obama's answers are, yeah, long and "cerebral," so it may seem pretentious and self-conscious...but let's listen to his words. His answers contain attitude that accepts negotiation and discussion, which is what our future leader needs. McCain is too firm in his own belief and definitions about things that are happening. How can one leader define what is evil and what is righteous for the US citizens as well as for the rest of the world? The leader we need is someone who would listen to and absorb the different opinions and perspectives of the people.
And, Jessica,
let me try to explain what Obama means. I might not make sense but let me try. What he means is that sometimes we assume our policies and decisions to be perfectly moral, just, and righteous while quickly judging through the traumatic affairs around the world.
We can not simply assume that US is the Warrior of Justice born to eliminate the evil and protect the good.
We need to reflect on our own past policies and involvements to find fault in them; we need to have humility when we approach numerous issues. We are not the only valuable inhibitors of the Earth although we have led democracy throughout its history. We have to carefully think about the cause of what we call evil before jumping in to give violent solutions that only take care of the surface of the problem.
I've read all the comments. Overall, it appears (although there are exceptions) that those having a liberal point of view tend to attack those that speak with a more conservative view. If we want to get to the "truth," personal attacks need to cease.
No one is ever all right or all wrong. No action is all good or all evil. How someone views something is based upon his or her BIAS. Every human being has a bias. We have to work hard to overcome our bias to listen thoughtfully.
Obama supporters do Obama a disservice when they personally attack a McCain supporter. The SAME IS TRUE for McCain supporters. Personal attacks do not get to the meat of an issue.
For those of you that believe that the world AND THE US is far worse than it has ever been before -- I say you need to THOUGHTFULLY read some history. Go see where this country was in the time of the Lincoln/Douglas debates. Think about the immigrants in the early 1900's -- men, women and children working in the factories and meat processing plants. Think about the failure of Yorktown (before we were a nation). Think about infant mortality on the frontier, in the factories, even in the 1920's. Is life so horrible now? But even though in some ways life is better now, that doesn't mean there are no problems.
I think both men shone (shined?) in the Rick Warren format. I was truly impressed with both. Obama's strength was his ability to thoughtfully consider his answers. The issues facing us ARE complex. But I agree with many -- what is he going TO DO? He doesn't say because he DOESN'T KNOW. It will depend upon the issue facing him. That's not necessarily bad.
If he is elected president, his best modus operandi will be to ALWAYS have a "devil's advocate" who is willing and able to express the opposite point of view. If he surrounds himself with yes-women/men, he will lose his best quality.
He says he will reach across party lines. He doesn't have as much of a track record of it ONLY BECAUSE he is not a career senator. Maybe we should give him a try and elect him. But WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT HE WILL DO! We really don't. We can pray (yes that does WORK) that he makes really good decisions. At least his "State of the Union Addresses" should be interesting -- but I suspect very wordy.
Anyone remember Abe Lincoln? Compare him to the great orator of his time -- Stephen Douglas. Whose speeches survived? Don't kid yourselves that it is ONLY because Douglas was not elected president.
Now to McCain. He didn't HAVE to know the questions before hand. He is pretty smart, and has some decent advisors. What kind of questions should he expect in such a forum? Of course Warren would ask about abortion! A church man WOULD ask about EVIL! You don't have to be Einstein to figure that out.
McCain knows the media grabs sound bites. So should Obama. Hasn't it been happening with regularity for the past 10 years (if not more)? McCain KNEW that the media would jump all over his answer about what makes a person rich -- wasn't his answer $2M? What was Obama's answer? I think it was $250K. But McCain's point was that the NUMBER DOESN'T MATTER, because he believes that the average American spends his or her own money BETTER than the GOV'T does.
Generally speaking Democrats believe in more social programs and Republicans believe in personal initiative. The truth is somewhere in between. How much initiative can a person have when s/he is starving to death? That's why there are food stamps. The problem comes in when people are too proud to get food stamps. The answer is not to have more social programs. Having another program is not likely to be the answer when the first program didn't work either. Or maybe it could be -- no one wants to be embarrased by showing food stamps at the grocery store. So is the answer to have it delivered to your door by someone else? Is it the government's responsibility to assuage a person's pride?
This type of if/then/but is where things get complicated. So is McCain better off not going into the little bitty details? Probably. Do you see my point yet?
I would challege all of you to thoughtfully consider BOTH sides before "personally attacking" someone. There is some truth on BOTH sides of any issue. The challenge is to MAKE A DECISION, and to realize that there is no positive without a negative and there is no negative without a positive.
The family is always going to be more efficient and more caring than a federal government. But a family of incest and domestic abuse needs to be corrected. We already DO have laws against that behavior.
We can dream big, but it is in the small things and the small relationships that most of us are most deeply affected.
First, I find it amazing that folks would object to the questions listed. They were good honest questions. Second, it is natural for people to assume that McCain had the answers to the question since Obama did so poorly.
I thought it was telling that Obama spent a lot of time musing about evil and did not mention bin laden once.