Political world’s eyes turn towards Saddleback Church
The WaPo’s Dan Balz noted the other day that the next three weeks are going to be unusually hectic for the political world, going so far as to say “there has never been quite as concentrated a dose of potentially campaign-altering events” in the modern era. That seems like a fairly reasonable assessment — in the next three weeks, we’re going to get running-mate announcements, conventions, and acceptance speeches from both sides.
And the kickoff point for these three blistering weeks begins tonight at a California megachurch.
The Rev. Rick Warren said Thursday that his upcoming forum with Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama will be aimed at asking them tough “heartland questions.”
The author of the best-selling book “The Purpose-Driven Life” is to interview McCain and Obama on Saturday.
The candidates will appear together at Warren’s 20,000-member Saddleback mega-church in southern California.
“Well, I’m a pastor, not a pundit,” he told CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux on Thursday’s “Situation Room.” “One of the things we’re going to do is I’m going to ask identical questions to both candidates, which will be different. I’m not going to play ‘gotcha’ with one candidate and not with the other. This way, it will be totally fair. You compare apples to apples,” he added.
It will be the first time McCain and Obama will be at the same place at the same time in quite a while, but it’s not a debate — we may see the two exchange pleasantries, but Warren will interview each candidate separately for one hour.
The questions may get at least a little provocative. Warren acknowledged this week, “I’m going to deal with their personal life – because character matters. Their personal life does matter as a leader. God says so.”
This is the kind of event that matters.
Time’s Amy Sullivan helps set the stage.
Obama’s last visit to Saddleback was in December 2006 when he and Kansas Senator Sam Brownback spoke at Warren’s annual conference on HIV/AIDS. Brownback went first and joked to the crowd that the last time he and Obama shared a stage, it was at a meeting of the NAACP and he didn’t receive the most rousing of welcomes. Turning to Obama, he said, “Welcome to my house.” The crowd laughed, but when it was Obama’s turn, the Democrat had a message for his Republican colleague. “With all due respect, Sam,” said Obama, “this is my house, too.”
That refusal to cede religion to Republicans has characterized Obama’s presidential campaign as well. He has a larger and more comprehensive religious-outreach operation than any Democrat in history. According to an August poll from the Barna Group, Obama leads McCain in every religious demographic — mainline Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims — except for white Evangelicals.
And in TNR the other day, Alan Wolfe explained the broader significance of tonight’s event.
Politically, the joint appearance is good news for both candidates — but better news for Obama. Politicians rarely lose votes by appearing in church. But since the Republicans have had something of a lock on the votes of white evangelicals, McCain’s appearance at Saddleback is not big news. That Rick Warren has invited Obama, and for the second time no less, is. Warren is America’s anti-Falwell. If he has little interest in removing evangelicals from politics, he has taken the lead in removing them from automatic identification with Republicans. Equal time in a megachurch is a decided advantage for any Democrat, especially one like Obama, who has been polling relatively well among religious voters. In fact
, according to the Barna Group, which routinely surveys Christians, Obama leads McCain among every group except those who call themselves evangelical; even those who prefer the term “born-again” give the edge to Obama. […]
The joint appearance of McCain and Obama at Saddleback is only one event in a long political campaign. But it is also a significant antidote to the poison that the religious right injected into American politics. The United States is unlikely ever to be as secular as Western Europe. If a better balance between religion and politics is to come about, it will because of what religious leaders do, and not because of what non-believers such as myself want to happen.
CNN will air the event live, starting at 8pm eastern. Stay tuned.
Dee Loralei
says:Asking them the same questions and being able to compare answers will be good fodder for you in the next few days SB.
This is going to be mostly a big plus for Obama, he and Hillary both came across very well in the Faith Forum a few months ago. And McCain is decidedly uncomfortable talking about religion.
Oh, and give Ms CarpetBagger a reminder to tivo Primeval tonight, and if she tivo’s the hour before, she can get last weeks series premiere. ( Just my little addition to the geeky/nerdiness of the CB household, LOL)
Capt Kirk
says:The MSM will certainly find plenty of snippets to fill the week. Any McCain senior moments or outbursts of profanity will, of course, be off limits out of respect for his age and manly hero-ness.
“Obama leads McCain among every group except those who call themselves evangelical; even those who prefer the term “born-again” give the edge to Obama.”
Christian Evangelical = Islamic Ayatollahs. McCain has the religious radical fundamentalists support right down the line because when he sang “bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran”, he was playing their song.
Capt Kirk
says:Yes, I agree this should be very interesting, Dee, but to correct you: And McCain is decidedly uncomfortable talking.
Equal Opportunity Cynic
says:Christian Evangelical = Islamic Ayatollahs.
As mentioned in the other God-thread, I don’t think that’s fair to Evangelicals and particularly that this statement errs by missing the dynamic aspect at work here. Many younger Evangelicals* are moving away from the strong identification with Republican dogma.
Then again, maybe only 80-90% of the Islamic Ayatollahs are unglued, just like 80-90% of US Evangelicals. If that’s what you meant, then the comparison is apt. 🙂
—
*FWIW I’m 35, Evangelical by most definitions, and Libertarian.
Hannah
says:Should be interesting to hear from McCain, who skipped the earlier event. I wonder if he’ll bumble his way through.
~~~~~
“With all due respect, Sam,” said Obama, “this is my house, too.”
LOVE IT.
doubtful
says:“With all due respect, Sam…”
I’m pretty sure we all have an idea just how much respect Sam Brownback is due.
eric
says:look for pointed questions on the environment. I believe that Warren is a stewardship christian, so that global warming and fossil fuel issues.
OkieFromMuskogee
says:Pardon me if I don’t expect Rick Warren to be fair to the pro-choice liberal tonight. I hope he surprises me.
The first lesson you ever learn about speaking in public is to earn the right to speak on the subject. Obama has earned the right to speak about his faith, but his thinking is complex. On the other hand, McCain’s faith seems very shallow to me. (He’s not sure what denomination he belongs to!) So McCain will probably be better at reducing complex questions to the kind of simple answers that the “evangelicals” (whoever they are) who favor him will find satisfying.
Whatever happens, it’s must-see TV.
Prup (aka Jim Benton)
says:Capt Kirk @2:
C’mon, James Tiberius, you’re better than that. To paraphrase you
Capt. Kirk’s comments on Evangelicals=LGF’s comments on Muslims.
We discussed this on the other thread, but there is a very wide range among evangelicals — even American Evangelicals (European Evangelicals consider most American Evangelicals — or their spokesmen — as nutty as most of us do). To use your logic all American Catholics should be anti-abortion zealots who were just waiting to ban ‘sinful’ birth control. After all, that’s what their spokesmen say, and there is much more discipline in Catholicism than in any Protestant denomination except the really scary ones.
In fact, the rate of abortions and of birth control use among Catholics is just about the same as among the population at large.
Obama already has a substantial level of support among evangelicals, and, as I’ll discuss later, it will probably double after the forum tonight — evangelicals talk among themselves so those who don’t watch it will hear about it.
(Oh, and yes, there is a very small group of Evangelicals — the reconstructionist/dominionists — who DO seek to establish a theocracy, but they really don’t have a big following — and if they ever get much stronger, the support of their intellectual leader, the late Rousas Rushdoony, for ‘geocentrism’ should be enough to laugh them back into insignificance.)
joey
says:What bullshit. Identical questions in the attempt to be fair means no follow up so McCain is free to lie at will without worry of being challenged..
What I am most angry about is ,,,THIS IS AMERICA AND WE ARE HAVING A MAJOR CAMPAIGN “DISCUSSION”/EVENT IN A CHRISTIAN MEGA-CHURCH MODERATED BY A PREACHER. I find the whole event offensive to my sense of democracy. This is not a “Christian” theocracy and this event is setting a precedence for future campaigns to be all about religion. Next election will it be held in a Catholic cathedral, a Jewish temple or a Muslim mosque?
I see no way of stopping it but view it as a warning of things to come because already the minister is telling us what God wants and what he says(according to whom?) with this comment…”…Their personal life does matter as a leader. God says so.”…”
History has shown us what happens when religion and government mix and it’s never been good. The pressure to pander for Christian votes by allowing political campaigns to debate issues in front of the cross and the ten commandments instead of the constitution and the flag is an insult to our democratic republic and our founding fathers. The damage from this will be irreversible no matter how well it goes now. It welcomes the idea that “when fascism comes to America it will be draped with the flag and carrying a cross”. Get your cameras out.
Simon
says:This event could be a complete catastrophe for McCain. It’s bad enough when McCain looks confused and unconvincing when he’s talking about ecocomic issues or foreign policy issues (or any issue, really). However, this inability to talk coherently about the issues is usually just something that might concern voters. I think McCain’s attempt to fake it on faith issues is going to end up really insulting a lot of voters who take their faith seriously.
Rielle Lovechild
says:At the considerable risk of having the usual eye-glazingly, ponderous, pontificating of doubtful aimed at me (you know, criticizes my handle (it’s a JOKE, d-man), calls me childish, says I have nothing to add to the (one-sided) “discussion” he has with himself on here all the time – then says all I do is hurl insults . . . anyway . . .
I agree wholeheartedly with joey.
beep52
says:“What I am most angry about is ,,,THIS IS AMERICA AND WE ARE HAVING A MAJOR CAMPAIGN “DISCUSSION”/EVENT IN A CHRISTIAN MEGA-CHURCH MODERATED BY A PREACHER. I find the whole event offensive to my sense of democracy… History has shown us what happens when religion and government mix and it’s never been good. The” — joey @ 10
Yep. I can appreciate that the current climate requires Dems to do this, but that still doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.
hark
says:“The United States is unlikely ever to be as secular as Western Europe. If a better balance between religion and politics is to come about, it will because of what religious leaders do, and not because of what non-believers such as myself want to happen.”
As secular as Western Europe? We’re going in the opposite direction, it seems to me. For thirty years the Democrats have been moving to the right politically, and that hasn’t produced a “better balance” between right and left. Similarly, I don’t see a seismic shift toward the religious sector, as exemplified by Obama’s pandering (sorry, that’s what it looks like to me), producing a “better balance” between church and state.
I guess I’m completely alone on this, but I’m seeing too much church and too little secular in politics. Count me out for this event. Yes, could be that Obama has to pander to religious America in order to win, but is that good? It’s good in the sense that maybe he will prevail, and he’s a far better choice than McCain, but I don’t think it’s good for the country. If this is what it takes to dethrone the right wing, then God help us. 🙂
Look, even now, with the political environment so favorable to the Democrats, they still have to run and hide from the “liberal” label. Liberalism is dead in America. If it can’t rise from the ashes after a disastrous eight years of right wing rule, when can it ever?
So I see this as losing on the separation principle as well. But it’s more than that now. One can’t get away from religion anymore. It’s everywhere. Isn’t anyone else sick of being preached at?
jhm
says:I’m with joey on this one as well. It’s a crying shame that this is happening at all.
That said, I hope that Hon. Sen. McCain’s performance generates some negative media meme that has legs for the coming week (hopefully an ecumenical one, not some debate on scripture or some such nonsense).
I can’t bring myself to watch the event for three reasons:
1) I hate to be reminded that Hon. Sen. Obama probably believes this idiocy.
2) Senator McCain is just painful to watch. I have yet to se him speak coherently on any topic, and I’ve a feeling that the hypocr-o-meter will red-line tonight.
3) They will probably show repeat excerpts for days on news shows that I watch. Once would be bad, twice is way way too much.
carl
says:I wonder if evangelists holding political events could cause them to lose their “non-profit” status. The oath they take on a IRS FORM 1023 clearly states that non-profits cannot partake in political events. Since they are of the high and mighty elite in this country the IRS is not going to touch them, are they?
Prup (aka Jim Benton)
says:And I agree with Simon — except that I’d change ‘could be’ to ‘will be.’ (Which is why, though philosophically I am sympathetic to Joey’s position — though he, as usual, overstates it absurdly — I am welcoming this and strongly suggestring that everybody get their religious friends to watch it.)
Remember the truth of the cliche that “Politics is all about expectations.” After years of their leaders and pastors pushing the line that ‘Republicans are true Christians — just like us’ — and even the ones who weren’t, like Reagan and GHWBush, knew how to ‘talk the talk’ and convince them that they were at least sympathetic to their positions — and, conversely that ‘even if Democrats were Christians, they were liberal Christians; i.e., ‘not like us’ this is what the RR audience will be expecting to see — and won’t.
Obama is a beliving Christian, from a theologically conservative background — Wright might have political positions, but even they were based in theologically-conservative positions. He knows exactly how to ‘talk the talk’ and the audience will be shocked to hear these images coming from a Democrat — for some, but not all — many evangelical churches are racially mixed — from a Black Democrat.
But McCain is as secular as we, for the most part, are. (You don’t switch, casually, from Episcopalian to Baptist, if you are concerned with religious doctrine, besides, religion implies principles — which McCain is totally lacking in.) He not only doesn’t walk the walk, he doesn’t understand this group enough to even come close to ‘talking the talk.’ Oh, he’ll try, and he’ll have a ton of ‘talking points’ on his cue cards.
For those of you to remember the sad absurdity of LBJ trying to ‘talk to the angry youth of America in their own language’ take that and multiply it by ten times. More improtantly, this will ‘scratch the religious teflon’ that people like James Tiberius thinks attaches to him.
Once they see what a religious phony he is, then Sturgis will begin to snowball, and his repeated suggesting of non-‘Christians’ — in their use of the term — like Romney, Jindal, Crist and the like — and maybe even his (to the RRmind) horrible appearance on Ellen — simply being there, and his failure to defend his position all will keep growing. (Hopefully with a few pushes from us.)
The ONLY two groups McCain is doing well in are ‘evangelicals’ and the ‘over-50 group’ (and people forget how big an overlap there is between these two).
John McCain, your place in history awaits, and Alton B. Parker, Alf Landon, Mike Dukakis and George McGovern are waiting to welcome you — to the Hall of Losers.)
But please, again, I beg you, call your neighbors and friends and GET THEM TO WATCH!
Keori
says:I’ll be watching, though due to my distaste at the idea that America wants a political event in a megachurch, I’ll be watching it with a bottle of Don Julio close by.
I agree wholeheartedly and vehemently with Joey. It’s a damn crying shame that this is happening at all. Maybe it’s the cranky Bostonian in me, but I hold separation of church and state as a sacred trust (pun intended). I have nothing but contempt for those who think the First Amendment is optional.
Prup, it’s true that politics is about expectations. I expect my candidates for political office to be able to represent all their constituents, not just the ones that send money to the same church. I expect my candidates to recognize that all American citizens are equal, not just the white, straight, wealthy christian ones. I expect that my government leaders will be able to govern based on common sense, not on some perverted desire to bring about an apocalypse so their imaginary friend in the sky will come back and save them. I expect to be governed by the rule of civil, democratic law, not an interpretation of 2,000-3,000 year old folk tales written by a bunch of nomadic goatherds on another continent. Those are my expectations of politics, and my expectations are not being met.
Dick M
says:Why are Obama and McCain submitting themselves to interrogation by this flake Rick Warren? Rather, they should interrogate him, if they must deal with him at all.
Dave H
says:Contrary to popular expectations, if Warren does press the character issue in front of an evangelical audience, the advantage is decisively to Obama. He’s still with his first wife and family; he’s worked his way up from poverty; he’s never had a sex scandal; and he can talk about faith comfortably. McCain has none of that. He’s going down.
zeitgeist
says:I am somewhere between athiest and agnostic, stuck with my saturation in Christian culture from my upbringing and roughly in the same personal philosophy as the early colonial Deists, so I am hardly a fan of intertwining chuch and state.
That said, while I see where Joey and those agreeing with Joey are coming from, I think it is an overreaction to this particular event (although I will say that Obama’s level of playing the faith card in general bothers me).
Obama is running for President. He will meet with and speak before many, many groups – some define their connections to one another in ways that would make me want to be a member, others would not. While it would be a problem if he spoke mainly to “church” groups, it makes no sense that groups of voters whose connection to one another is a church should be excluded. Whether the less religious among us like it or not, Warren has a large following — meaning a large number of voters pay attention to Warren. A candidate should expect to make his or her pitch to all kinds of groups this large, including Warren’s.
Indeed, the beauty of this is that Warren is essentially endorsing the idea of what has long been a fairly monolithic voting block opening their minds and ears to Obama and his message. Set aside that it is a church — if you are Obama’s campaign manager and someone says “look, we can share a stage and have a fairly direct comparison with McCain in a place where we have done well before (Obama’s last Saddleback visit was well received), live TV coverage, 1000s of opinion leaders who appear to be if not swing voters at least persuadable and they would be a direct steal from the traditional Republican vote count” you seriously would turn that down just because it happens to be a church? That would be the campaign cutting off its nose to spite its face.
This isn’t pandering, this is forcing McCain to defend traditionally Republican turf, under circumstances where it will be hard for McCain to do so effectively. It is very shrewd of Obama to take this invitation.
Molly Weasley
says:Obama’s church was UCC, the United Church of Christ. Not exactly theologically “conservative,” as Prup says in Post #17. It’s the most progressive of all of the mainline Protestant churches.
And let’s face it — many will be watching Michael Phelps win his eighth gold medal. No doubt some will tune in for Obama but will switch back to the Olympics in time to see the swimming relay, thus missing McCain.
olo
says:Simon is correct that this could be a catastrophe for McBombIran…because he is a natural born liar & a scumbag who thinks calling his wife a trollop & a cunt in public is KooL.
I would like to add however that mixing electoral politics with religious pandering is a continuing constitutional catastrophe. “Well, I’m a pastor, not a pundit,” is a crock.
I’d like it if BO got in McSlime’s face a bit and caused the well known McTemper to go off on Big Time TV.
Gaucho Politico
says:The event has real implications for McCain and may affect his VP pick. If he has a poor showing he might feel the need to go to a CC candidate who is aligned with the Huckabee sector of the GOP. Right now i think he is leaning towards Romney, someone to bolster his economic credentials. Romney makes sense as he was the runner up in the primary and we know how much the GOP likes to use the primary runner up the next time around. Huckabee only plays in the south so the odds of him making the ticket are pretty slim so he and his cohorts def want some leverage to get their type of guy on the ticket.
Hannah
says:Perhaps we should all wait and see what this event will produce instead of overreacting about Obama “pandering” to people of faith (is he pandering to himself?) or that this forum steps across the church and state separation.
Look, we Dems/Progressives are supposed to be open-minded. I am a Christian but will allow that perhaps my beliefs are ill founded. I’ve gone through the whole “there is no God” thought process and found it didn’t ring true for me. But I’m fine if others don’t believe.
Yet jhm above says that Obama and I and all people of faith believe in “idiocy”. Gee, thanks. Never EVER would I say the same about you.
Because I do not seek to have my beliefs imposed on others, nor do I want their imposed on me, I do want there to be separation of church and state. Anyway, I’m glad Obama is doing this, because it WILL affect how some believers feel about him, in a positive way, I’m sure.
Nanuq
says:“With all due respect, Sam,” said Obama, “this is my house, too.”
A better reply would have been, “With all due respect, Sam, Rick, my understanding is that this is neither your house nor my house: this is GOD’s house.”
And I was a born-again evangelical for some years in my young adulthood. Now firmly agnostic and not much in favor of any organization that professes to help and care for the poor but spends more on its buildings than on its mission.
Miss Landers
says:Their personal life does matter as a leader.
Frankly, I think this is b.s. Our culture’s Christian-based (so-called) litmus test is assinine.
McCain doesn’t give a rat’s ass about poverty, puts Big Oil above the preserving our planet’s food chain and water supply and seeks to bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.
I don’t why anybody needs any help from Rick Warren. McCain flunked my Christian litmus test long ago.
Equal Opportunity Cynic
says:A better reply would have been, “With all due respect, Sam, Rick, my understanding is that this is neither your house nor my house: this is GOD’s house.”
I agree with this.
It also gives a me a rather humorous (err, OK, humorous to me) flashback to Sunday school when I was age 4 or 5. I was climbing around on the toys in the classroom and was proud I had claimed some structure as my own. “This is my house!” I exclaimed to the other kids.
Just then the teacher happened to approach. “No, this is God’s house,” he corrected.
With the perspective of adulthood, I have a vague sense why it was so important to him to be theologically correct, albeit a bit inappropriate to the context. But I never really liked that Sunday school.
Keori
says:Hannah @25,
Our distaste for this event is rooted in our disgust for the religious litmus tests that the American public keeps imposing on political candidates despite such a practice being both unconstitutional and un-American. We’re angry that hucksters play on people’s religious fears to make money and maintain a status quo where the rich, straight, white Christian men are the only ones in this country with any real political power. This type of event only plays into that culture rather than try to move beyond it. If it ends up being a forum in which Sen. Obama can win votes away from Sen. McCain, then so be it. It doesn’t mean we’ll stop being angry that it has to happen in a tax-exempt megachurch rather than the public square to be as effective.
As for “believing in idiocy,” I don’t care what a person’s beliefs are so much as how those beliefs are manifest. Matthew 7:16 “By their fruits ye shall know them.” A politico-religious culture that seeks to marginalize the poor, the outcast, the “other” while maintaining the promise of wealthy exclusivity is not a culture I as an American care to see manifest. Any ideology, religious or otherwise, that discourages critical thinking is the worst thing that can happen to a society, especially in a democratic country where critical thinking is paramount to progress.
Daniel
says:This is going to be a show of who is more Christian than the other.
Why can’t we have a president who is free from the burden and constraints that religion places on people? I wish we had a free thinking politician to choose from who does not show preferential treatment toward any one cultural group. Someone who is able to be congenial toward everyone, considering this country is so diverse, it is a bit disengenuous toward all those people who do not practice Chrisitanity, so I think it would be a great idea to choose someone who is not constrained by any one belief system. Religion should be separated from government.
Hannah
says:#29 Keori: Thanks for your thoughts. A religion such as you describe is not one I would affiliate with. It worships not God/Jesus, but weath, power, keeping the masses in their place, dehumanizing them.
A true Christian follows the two basic commandments of Jesus: Love God, Love your Neighbor as Yourself. For those of us in the mainstream of Christianity, we use those commandments as a calling to serve our fellow humans. Without preaching, without asking anything in return. As we believe all people are children of God, we try to get past the us vs them mentality.
On another thread on CB earlier today I wrote:
I’ve always maintained that God must be disappointed in people who refuse to use the brains he gave us.
My pastor said something last week that at first made me think of the presidential campaign: “Fear keeps us from seeing what is true”.
I thought of those who believe the smears against Obama because it plays to their fears, that Obama is unknown, foreign, not one of us. The smears just reinforce their view that their first impression is correct. Some refuse to believe the truth when it does come their way, they are so stuck in their mindset.
That statement about fear applies to so much more than political campaigns, of course. Fear of the unknown, fear of what we have yet to discover, afraid that our world and/or God view, that is all set and pat in our minds, could possibly be untrue or far more complex than anyone could imagine. It’s a challenge to think “outside the box”.
~~~
I hope what I’ve written will tell you where I’m coming from. Worshipping power and money is not faith but idolatry. Subjugation of humans is not loving one’s neighbor. Not using our talents (incl our intellect) is an insult to God.
I think Obama has a HUGE opening tonight to counter the fundamentalist mind-set. He is thoughtful, he is intelligent, he doesn’t talk down to people, he is gracious. I believe he has the opportunity to turn the tide against the hucksters, the fearmongers. Would that be a bad thing?
Hannah
says:#30 Daniel: I think Obama, above any other presidential candidate in our history, has the ability to bring together those of all faiths or disbelievers. Of all races and classes.
One more thing: we as a country and a people need to get it together and fast, for all of our sakes. But if religion is going to be a cudgel those who do not believe use against those who do, how in the world are we going to move forward?
For example: What do I want for this country to strive for? Education for our kids, health care for all, good jobs, secure retirements, peace (!), a clean environment, alternative energy, no more giveaways to the rich or the war profiteers, etc. Isn’t that what we all want? Are those of you who say I believe in “idiocy” not going to work with me because I’m a person of faith, to try to accomplish these goals?
matt
says:What a jip. They aren’t appearing together. I thought that was the whole point to have them both there at the same time. And I hate soft ball questions that anyone could lie about. One more thing what is up with the ‘extreme’ close ups.
matt
says:I cant stand to watch this, Obama has no idea what he’s saying. These are the most pie in the sky ideas ever. He’s making no logical sense. He’s stumblin, bumblin, fumblin.
olo
says:“With all due respect, Sam,” said Obama,
What’s up with this all due Respect BS. Brownback is a scumbag & deserves no respect.
What he deserves is to be called out for hiss association with the lying & murdering committed by his RepOilican party.
Jesse
says:Watching this thing now, and I have two thoughts:
1) Until McDouche got here, I thought it was impressive that an event being held in a church, hosted by a religious entity was geared as fairly as it was. Now I can see that while Obama was answering the questions excellently, they are certainly designed to get a bigger response for McCain.
2) I’m disappointed that John is being coherent. I was really hoping that he would leave huge breaks in his answers, make a couple of gaffes here and there, etc.
w
says:I’m disappointed that this forum had multiple applause segements for McCain. It was just because he’s a Repulican and its expected that evangicals will support Republicans and not accept Democrats. Its very disappointing that people stick with the steteotypes, and anot accept change is good.
Tom Cleaver
says:Just watched Round 1 (or as much as I could without turning my stomach). McCain’s sitting there like a wind-up toy. As SWMBO remarked the other day when she heard him interviewed on NPR, “He sounds like a Saturday Night Live parody of himself.” It only took five minutes to see how un-heartfelt this is for him.
Gonna be interesting when Obama comes on a 7pm (Pacific) – I suspect he will speak knowledgeably and from the heart, which will suprise hell out of the audience.
This could be a game-changer.
Tom Cleaver
says:Whoops – gonna have to go get it on tape at 9 to see Obama.
Bruno
says:Although I didn’t watch the event, I’m just wondering how McCain performed.. after all this is his FIRST big audience of the campaign.
A little bigger than his town hall style meetings 🙂
Ray Poke
says:Poor Mr.Obama–what a neck injury–it was placed at fifity degrees AWAY from the interrigator. And his eyes searched the DESK…his eyes…so used to a teleprompter…lost, and why was every third word uttered by him “UHHHHYHH”???
Hortenze
says:Regarding #41, I was also wondering why he couldn’t sit up straight, dammit! And while I’m on it, I wish the man could get a speech coach to help him with the stammering! It is depressing.
William
says:This whole event is depressing, here we have people with no “moral fiber” (unless they’ve been eating Bibles) interviewing two people running for political office. Moral character that excludes others based on who they’re fucking or their social background is completely immoral and lacking any character. Sorry, Christians are idiots, no exceptions. I guess on that note so is John McLame and Barack Obama, I’ve got to get the fuck out of this nation of clinically delusional, self aggrandizing idiots. But let me tell you how I really feel!
Algernon
says:Hey Captain Kirk and anyone else who takes an interest:
The equation of “Christian evangelicals” with “Islamic Ayatollahs” is an inaccurate stereotype. I happen to be married to a Christian evangelical whose political views lean liberal (registered as an independent, and supports Obama this year for a number of thoughtful and intelligent reasons), although she doesn’t identify as liberal or conservative because, check this out Captain Kirk – she thinks for herself and formulates independent judgments!
It saddens me to see Christians steadily take a beating because of stereotypes. If we want to think we’re better than those awful Republicans, we’d better take a long, hard look at our own garbage first.
Blake
says:People looking for “gotcha” points, McCain “won” the night because of his approach to the questions. Obama was treating the night like the other forums he had been on by trying to show his intellectual and knowledgable sides. McCain treated the forum as a debate by really trying to speak to the crowd and win talking points. Both did very well, but McCain did morso because he went beyond what was expected by him, while Obama is always held to very high standards.
For people truly looking for which candidate to support, both candidates were very different in their approach to things and appeal to different tastes:
Obama was very calm, thoughtful, realistic, was great at agreeing to disagree and showed the rare and often unrealized trait of being able to clearly understand where others come from who disagree with him. It’s hard to attack him for being without substance or depending on teleprompter, when he clearly shows a higher understanding of issues and only talked substance. Unfortunately for Obama, many don’t hear nuance and only see their side of the story, therfore they only hear blabbering. This is what hurt Al Gore when running against George Bush.
McCain was direct, forceful and seemed emotionally invested in his answers. He came off really well like he was having a good time and was able to connect with voters via very emotional stories. The media underestimated his personality and how it may help him in debates instead of on a podium. Unfortunately for McCain, he may have came off a bit too right wing for independents, might have been too direct/unwavering in a post Bush administration era, seemed a bit arrogant/hopeful and seemed to be giving political attack lines he’s been using for weeks. His emotions might get the best of him during debates so he will have to channel it towards putting Obama on guard.
Ironic that they seem to be guilty of the exact opposite character qualities in this forum than the media portrays them as every day. Obama was the humble, quiet and realistic guy while McCain seemed to be the fiery, overconfident and charasmatic guy. A good forum for what is was, I personally liked Obama tonight because being a political junkie for many years has made me fairly immuned to poltical emotion stories etc and I like hearing someone who shows there’s a lot going on inside his/her noggin. Both showed good leadership quialities.
Bruno
says:Blake @45 said:
You’re forgetting about that half of the country that does NOT like someone who uses big words and talks too much. If it doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker, or the ‘news-anchor’ can’t give the cliff-notes withing 20 seconds, or the sound bites don’t have a good ring to them, then… well they are not interested, because they think the person talking doesn’t understand them.
Republicans have figured that out a long time ago. From what I’ve been reading here, McCain had the canned paragraphs down pat, even if they didn’t really have anything to do with the question. As long as the audience applauds, he’s doing a good job. Whether you like his ideology or not. Looks like he made a good sale.
Now we have to hope that the MSM dissects what was said and puts into perspective so that people realize McCain was talking out of his ass and lying a lot…. (we can only wish – it will be up to Steve Benen and his fellow reality bloggers)
Schlomo
says:From the outset, it was obvious, ”my friends,’ that the questions were known beforehand. Mcgaffe had ready “ain’t I tough??!!” answers, much unlike the normal Mcgaffe.
The whole thing is a waste of time in this format, previous knowledge of questions, answer the question practically before it’s done being asked, and stare at the audience instead of the person who asked the question.
In the words of Jon Lovitz on SNL: “Acting!!!”
Faith of My Fathers? That title refers to the fact that he always had faith that his father’s and grandfather’s legacies would pull his dead brain from the slumps to earn him a spot at the Naval academy, then make everyone forget he was in the BOTTOM 1.5 percent of a 900-person class. That’s faith.
More faith is on the part of HITS (head-in-the-sand) believers who think the son of the Admiral in charge of the war would ever be tortured. He wasn’t offered anything to refuse and be a hero about. Why do 100’s of fellow POWs hate his fake guts? Could it be they hardly saw him ’cause he was being tortured, this son of the Admiral prosecuting the war as PACOM Commander? Or because he was getting special treatment? Early release: his commanding officer (lead POW) had other facts on this.
Howard
says:I wish we could see more debates between Obama and McCain. This was a great opportunity to actually compare the two candidates on several levels. Although I think they both did good jobs in presenting their points of view, John McCain came across as the more seasoned, experienced, and decisive of the two candidates. When it comes to leadership and solving the numerous problems facing this country, John McCain stood head and shoulders above Obama.
jude simon
says:This shows that there’s alot going on in Obamas mind compared to the one believe system mind of McCann which is very dangerous because it’s this one believe system that made president Bush and Dick Cheney the worst persons to ever manage those offices,no wonder McCann is shouting war war war war like Bush and Dick Cheney.America open your eyes and be wise,we are the ones the American people and our world image that suffer from arrogant leader
Daniel
says:As biased as the framing was for the setting of this Q & A session was for the candidates, I must say Rick Warren asked some pretty good questions. Unfortunately due to the framing of the setting, they were trying to be more Christian than the other… which always gives the false impression of one candidate faking their Christianity amongst skeptics.
I simply wish we separated church from state… when did being Christian become a prerequisite for being President? I think the direction the US is heading in will respect a future presidential candidate, even if he was atheist. No one candidate should try to have to curry favor from one group of crazy people who believe in an invisible man high in the sky, afterall it’s all in your biased, susceptible, gullible heads anyway.
Williwam D. Pearson
says:I watched the Saturday night event between McCain and Obamma and I was appauled at the pat answers that MCCain used to questions by Pastor Rick Warren. Somehow, McCain had advance knowledge of the question, either by listening to Obamma or by some staff member at the church.
I feel sure that the Church is a non-profit, tax exempt corporation and aass such, how does it get by with not having its tax execpt status revoked for using the Church for political purposes on National Television?
McCain very carefully did not mention why his first marriage ended. It was because he , by his own admission, cheated on his wife while she was in the hospital recovering from a serious car accident. Is that a moral situation which the Evangelicals will support? It didn’t take him long to find a “Dolly” with over a 100 million dollars, 10 Houses, etc. NOt exactly the folksy environment that McCain evoks on the campaign trail.
I voted for McCain in the primary but since then, hearing and watching him lie just like G. W. Bush, I will not vote for him in November. Here in the Texas Hill Country, Republican territory, people call McCain John McBush.
I am an eighty three year old WW II Veteran of the South Pacific and I do not like politicians play up their military career. If John MCCain had been paying attention to his radio before he was shot down, listening for the SAM Missle’s beep, beep he would have know when the missle was near and taken evasive action and never been in prison. My son flew Navy A-6 Bombers over Hanoi and Hiphong and othet North Viet Nam targets. He recorded the radio transmissions on one of his missions and gave me a copy. I heard the longer spaced beeps of the missle when it was launched and the very clse beeps of the missle when it was close to my son and his wing man. They took evasive action and survived to fly future missions. My son Retired from the Navy as a Navy Captain with over 800 carrier landings, 300 of which were at night. A little trivia for you.
I am an Independent voter who has voted for 6 Republican and 5 Democratic Presidents.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to be heard.
William D. Pearson