Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama appeared together for the first time during the presidential campaign season at Pastor Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif on Saturday. The forum explored the candidates’ positions and personalities through the lens of their Christian faith. And on Monday, talking heads, pundits and bloggers are picking apart the candidates’ words and positions.
Warren is seen as a “rising star” in the evangelical movement, thanks to his success in bringing the candidates together to talk faith. Viewers were able to “see what happens when a thoughtful adult takes over from the goofballs, windbags, con artists and media whores who have led most of the battles until now,” wrote Rob Eshman, editor in chief of The Jewish Journal in Los Angeles, of Warren’s ability to question to candidates.
But the format got called into question when it was revealed that McCain was not in an on-site “cone of silence” as he stated during the forum, but was instead en route to the venue when Obama began his discussion with Warren. As both candidates were promised the same questions, the revelation has caused some to charge that McCain may have gained an unfair advantage by listening in.
The questions were tough, with both candidates asked to discuss their own moral failings. McCain owned up to cheating on his first wife; Obama talked about his use of drugs and alcohol as a teen.
One stark difference came during a question about abortion. When asked when life begins, McCain bluntly said “at conception.” Obama said he’s not the man to make that determination. He took some hits from the media for his reply. The New York Sun called into question his vote on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, while his numbers on abortion rates were false.
On same-sex marriage, both said they are opposed, but Obama supports civil unions.
Warren asked the candidates to define “rich.” McCain joked, “I think if you’re just talking about income, how about $5 million?” He never answered the question. “I would argue that if you are making more than $250,000, then you are in the top 3, 4 percent of this country,” Obama said. “You are doing well.”
Interestingly, McCain didn’t mention God or Jesus once during the faith forum.
McCain shared a story from his time as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, when a prison guard exhibited a few glints of humanity and drew a cross in the dirt while standing with McCain. That story, fairly or unfairly, has been called into question — first by staunch conservatives and currently by liberal bloggers. The issue? The story bears a striking resemblance to an account by a Christian prisoner in the Soviet gulags.
So who “won” the debate at Saddleback? That depends on who’s making the call. Democrats say Obama performed well before a tough crowd for Dems. Republicans say McCain performed well for a key part of his base he has struggled to woo.





6 Comments »
Comment posted August 18, 2008 @ 12:02 pm
If McCain was a Democrat, Republicans would be playing up the Solzhenitsyn story, as well as the way the Green Bay Packers starting lineup suddenly became Steelers when McCain repeated that story in Pennsylvania. Maybe he's pandering, or maybe he really doesn't recall. I don't know, but I'm suspecting the latter. However, Democrats aren't Republicans, and until it's proven McCain lifted his story, we're not going to do more than look into it. Don't expect a swiftboat ad on soon. Seems like he should be vulnerable enough for not knowing Sunnis from Shias, and for saying “Next stop, Baghdad!” in January 2002.
Comment posted August 18, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
If McCain was a Democrat, Republicans would be playing up the Solzhenitsyn story, as well as the way the Green Bay Packers starting lineup suddenly became Steelers when McCain repeated that story in Pennsylvania. Maybe he’s pandering, or maybe he really doesn’t recall. I don’t know, but I’m suspecting the latter. However, Democrats aren’t Republicans, and until it’s proven McCain lifted his story, we’re not going to do more than look into it. Don’t expect a swiftboat ad on soon. Seems like he should be vulnerable enough for not knowing Sunnis from Shias, and for saying “Next stop, Baghdad!” in January 2002.
Comment posted August 19, 2008 @ 7:27 am
If they can't trust Warren to play it straight with the “cone of silence” just ask the Right Reverand to sear on the bible.
Scene 2:Conversation with long-dead close relative…
“What in Sam Hill were those two religiously-challenged candidates doing; having their first public debate in front of a pulpit, not a public podium?”
“It wasn't a debate. It was a question/answer session with the Right Reverend himself.”
“The Who? You mean that saddleback snake-oil joker selling his bottles of holy elixir?”
Watch your tongue. You can't defame charactar here. But sure, I'm worried about what's happening lately with compromising the separation of church and state; and the Constitution looking like it's ready for the nearest dumpster.”
“Next thing you know down there, you'll be living in an authoritarian theocracy. What-would-Jesus-do politics is a strange way to go in the 21st century.”
So what would Sam Hill do, Dad?”
Comment posted August 19, 2008 @ 7:29 am
second line correction: “swear on the bible.”
Comment posted August 19, 2008 @ 12:27 pm
If they can’t trust Warren to play it straight with the “cone of silence” just ask the Right Reverand to sear on the bible.
Scene 2:Conversation with long-dead close relative…
“What in Sam Hill were those two religiously-challenged candidates doing; having their first public debate in front of a pulpit, not a public podium?”
“It wasn’t a debate. It was a question/answer session with the Right Reverend himself.”
“The Who? You mean that saddleback snake-oil joker selling his bottles of holy elixir?”
Watch your tongue. You can’t defame charactar here. But sure, I’m worried about what’s happening lately with compromising the separation of church and state; and the Constitution looking like it’s ready for the nearest dumpster.”
“Next thing you know down there, you’ll be living in an authoritarian theocracy. What-would-Jesus-do politics is a strange way to go in the 21st century.”
So what would Sam Hill do, Dad?”
Comment posted August 19, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
second line correction: “swear on the bible.”
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment