I don't know how many of you watched the Saddleback Church Forum on Faith and Values last night. Both Obama and McCain spent one hour each with Pastor Rick Warren, who has written the famous devotional The Purpose Driven Life on a one-on-one basis. He asked the same questions to both candidates. One of the questions that Pastor Warren asked both candidates was what current supreme court justice would you not have selected. Obama's answer was Clarence Thomas because he didn't feel like he had enough "experience" and wasn't qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. The funny part is that Clarence Thomas was a federal circuit judge for a little over a year and a half before he was nominated for the Supreme Court. Barack Obama was a senator for about the same time before he started running for President. Irony to anyone else?
Well he wouldn't have selected Scalia, Thomas, and didn't vote for Alito or Roberts, and it has nothing to do with experience. That statement wasn't hypocritical, he just said it to cover up the real reason why he wouldn't vote for him. The last thing he wants to do is to say he wouldn't select originalist judges in front of an evangelical and largely pro-life crowd.
Obama got a very good reception from the evangical audience. That he said he didn't like Thomas or the others appointed recently by republican presidents didn't fool anyone. Tho I do agree with Hunter that it highlighted Obama's own lack of experience. My take is that Obama did fumble a few questions, particularly the one about his 3 most influential advisors (his wife?) and kind of rambled on during some of his answers. He did show a command of the issues and was generally impressive and comfortable. I don't agree that many of his solutions to the issues raised make a whole lot of sense. His biggest problem was in trying to pander to the evangicals while pandering to his base at the same time. McCain cleaned Obama's clock on the foreign policy issues and also looked comfortable and in command of the issues. The differences in how both candidates would manage their economic agenda was quite clear. He was able to relate his POW experience to his ability to lead, and I think he may have put to rest any BS that's about to come his way about his first marriage. It was painfully evident with McCain that he had talking points to get out there and those were the awkward moments, like when he talked about secret ballot for unions. McCain is a pander bear, so his pandering wasn't unexpected. I don't pay much attention to TV preachers, but I liked Warren's demeanor and questioning of the candidates. McCain had a tough act to follow - Obama was very very good. My assessment is that McCain proved he is a worthy alternative to Obama and they're both kick-ass politicians (that doesn't speak to being able to govern well).
Oh yeah, the blogosphere is suggesting that McCain somehow cheated. Take that for the two things it means: 1) They're apologizing for and making excuses for Obama not looking head and shoulders better than McCain 2) McCain more than held his own and proved it's going to be a tough choice for a lot of voters
Thomas was also head of the EEOC for several years, which is far more experience than being a state senator...
I thought they both did well, but I don't understand how McCain put to rest those infidelity issues with this type of crowd. Thing is, that isn't a defining issue anyway so whatever. In that forum, why did McCain do so much better on foreign policy?
People were quick to defend John Edwards' infidelity by attacking McCain's first marriage/divorce. McCain was asked what the biggest moral failure in his life was, and he said it was his first marriage. What more do you want from the guy? Because he has a clue about foreign policy - more than a clue. His knowledge about the situation in Georgia, and the fact he knows many of the world leaders personally, showed. That and his answers generally showed he has a fantastic handle on it.
In that verbal flourish, he didn't directly address what he did wrong, just that his first marriage went "wrong". Seemed a little vague that's all I'm saying. Well I got the impression McCain was just more willing to talk about the Georgia-Russia conflict, not that Obama doesn't have a clear understanding of that situation. I'm sure McCain is savvy on this issue, but I trust Obama will be able to network and create amiable relationships with various foreign leaders, if given the opportunity.
To me, it sounded like he was saying the fact that he got a divorce was a moral failure, he never mentioned any infidelity.
I don't know there was any infidelity. To a moral/Christian man, the failure of a marriage, for any reasons, is a moral failure. What else is there to say on the issue?
People sin, don't they? I don't know how he could apologize for what happened any clearer or succinct than he did.
He called it the greatest moral failure in his life. Bar none. "Moral failure" means he did "WRONG" What did you want him to say, "I quit, let Obama have the presidency?"
In 10-15 years I could say the exact same thing but it would be a very different circumstance. The context matters, a casual voter might not understand. That's all. Yes, obviously.
What context? His marriage failed. He didn't lie to the press 2 weeks ago and get caught in a hotel room with his mistress.
Why do they have these discussions? Can one truly understand the issues in such a short amount of time? These meetings are for casual followers of politics, or people who want to know what kind of man McCain/Obama is. In either case I think he should have clarified why his marriage failed. Did he get dumped for being a cocaine addict? The details affect one's impression.
