Pastor snags Obama, McCain for joint appearance

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Obama seemed to be thinking too much in order to try and give answers that would please the audience rather than simply being honest in his views as well as trying to tell stories to help get around questions that wouldn't fit the mindset of those at the forum.

McCain on the other hand got his answers out much faster and straighter to the point. His honesty on a failed marriage and other subjects was what I wanted to hear and he'll definately be getting my vote.

Interesting because my assessment of it was that McCain was there giving those quick answers with no real thought behind them... to me, it felt like political pandering.

I guess it's sort of in how we want to view it, right?

[Smoot Point Really]

1. I believe the 'pay-grade' comment was referring to the question of 'when does life begin', not about already born children's rights. :whoknows:

2. You don't have to be in the US Senate to oppose a war. He made a speech which was unpopular at the time, and could have ruined his future Senatorial and Presidential aspirations. Fortunately, he was right.

3. Yeah, McCain's puzzling letter to Obama. Let's see Barack's response, shall we?

1) The question was "At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?" The question certainly isn't above Barack Obama's pay-grade... It's about his view... It's a legal question... it's a constitutional question, and he is supposed to be an "expert" in constitutional law. He dodged the question and he deserves to be asked this question again and again until he gives us a truthful response. It's not enough for candidates to sit there and tell us how people struggle with the question... He voted against the born-alive bill on almost every level, including an almost identical bill to the 2002 federal bill that was put before him while he was a member of the Illinois Senate. I will continually insist that no matter what I feel about this guy on other issues, he gives me the creeps on this issue and I consider his beliefs on this topic to be those of a monster.

2) It was not a "decision" that he had to make... The question was about a "decision", and he had nothing to do with the decision to go to war. He re-writes history here. Whether or not he was "right" is up for another debate. He didn't actually answer the question, he just tried to insert himself into the decision-making process of which he did not play apart.

3) Heck, let's just include the whole text from Barack Obama's website: http://obama.senate.gov/letter/060206-sen_obama_and_sen_mccain_exchange_letters_on_ethics_reform/

This includes his Feb 2 letter to McCain... We see all three letters. What is interesting is that the question that Warren asked was about something he crossed party lines on and went against his party. This obviously is incorrect given what these three letters show. He chose to work with his own party, not with McCain. Whether or not he eventually voted for McCain's bill and came on to support it later to get his name on the bill, is beside the point.

My points weren't that Obama was wrong or right in any of his views (except his views on the born-alive bills), but he was absolutely incorrect in how he answered these questions last night. I hear he did fairly well, but I'm looking forward to hearing the pundits tomorrow. I hate it when they have these things on Friday night.

[mardi gras skin]

Interesting because my assessment of it was that McCain was there giving those quick answers with no real thought behind them... to me, it felt like political pandering.

I guess it's sort of in how we want to view it, right?

:laugh:

BOTH candidates were pandering, right?

[Tastes Like Chicken]

McCain briefly touched upon his first marriage but nothing too specific.

Interesting because my assessment of it was that McCain was there giving those quick answers with no real thought behind them... to me, it felt like political pandering.

I guess it's sort of in how we want to view it, right?

This is exactly what I mean.

"What's your biggest regret, John?"

"My first marriage failed. Now, moving right along to the USA's biggest failure...."

Lots of marriages fail, for a variety of reasons. McCain didn't go into any detail at all, like, "yes, I cheated on my wife many times, then left her after her horrible car accident for a younger, better looking, rich girl who could finance my new political career."

But, oh, yeah, that wouldn't have gone over too well with the audience. Best to say it without saying anything, I guess?

[TrumanB]

Obama seemed to be thinking too much in order to try and give answers that would please the audience rather than simply being honest in his views as well as trying to tell stories to help get around questions that wouldn't fit the mindset of those at the forum.

McCain on the other hand got his answers out much faster and straighter to the point. His honesty on a failed marriage and other subjects was what I wanted to hear and he'll definately be getting my vote.

Perfect analysis.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Perfect analysis.

Not really....

[TrumanB]

Not really....

No really, I didn't think Obama was very sincere on many of his answers. A lot of them seemed forced. I think over the next few months, the race is really going to tighten up when people really start to see Obama for what he is (and in my opinion, I see him as an empty suit).

[Tastes Like Chicken]

1) The question was "At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?" The question certainly isn't above Barack Obama's pay-grade... It's about his view... It's a legal question... it's a constitutional question, and he is supposed to be an "expert" in constitutional law. He dodged the question and he deserves to be asked this question again and again until he gives us a truthful response. It's not enough for candidates to sit there and tell us how people struggle with the question... He voted against the born-alive bill on almost every level, including an almost identical bill to the 2002 federal bill that was put before him while he was a member of the Illinois Senate. I will continually insist that no matter what I feel about this guy on other issues, he gives me the creeps on this issue and I consider his beliefs on this topic to be those of a monster.

2) It was not a "decision" that he had to make... The question was about a "decision", and he had nothing to do with the decision to go to war. He re-writes history here. Whether or not he was "right" is up for another debate. He didn't actually answer the question, he just tried to insert himself into the decision-making process of which he did not play apart.

3) Heck, let's just include the whole text from Barack Obama's website: http://obama.senate.gov/letter/060206-sen_obama_and_sen_mccain_exchange_letters_on_ethics_reform/

This includes his Feb 2 letter to McCain... We see all three letters. What is interesting is that the question that Warren asked was about something he crossed party lines on and went against his party. This obviously is incorrect given what these three letters show. He chose to work with his own party, not with McCain. Whether or not he eventually voted for McCain's bill and came on to support it later to get his name on the bill, is beside the point.

My points weren't that Obama was wrong or right in any of his views (except his views on the born-alive bills), but he was absolutely incorrect in how he answered these questions last night. I hear he did fairly well, but I'm looking forward to hearing the pundits tomorrow. I hate it when they have these things on Friday night.

I'll have to re-watch it, I could have swore he was asked when life begins. Later on during the post-interview session he gave a heated response about the late term abortions, stated that okay for states to decide on that and ban them with the exception of the mother's health being in jeopardy.

I understand that he was not in the Senate at the time, but what he's referring to I think is his decision to speak out against the move. This was not the popular thing to do at the time and was a political gamble. He could have decided to say nothing, or endorse the decision to go to war. Were that the case, he'd probably not be the Dem candidate right now.

I don't know what happened during McCain/Obama's little tiff, but reading the letters kinda reminded me of an exchange with that crazy ex-g/f who goes off for no apparent reason, leaving you with that feeling. :laugh:

Just my opinion, but I think the pundits are seeing the same thing most of us saw. Both did well to show more of their positions, McCain excelled and won no doubt, but Obama did enough to dispel Muslim rumours and maybe even showed that common ground can be found on the abortion issue. Certainly the gay marriage issue seemed to be bridged.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

No really, I didn't think Obama was very sincere on many of his answers. A lot of them seemed forced. I think over the next few months, the race is really going to tighten up when people really start to see Obama for what he is (and in my opinion, I see him as an empty suit).

Well, I thought his answers weren't forced at all. But perhaps you and I are seeing things through the prism of our respective politics?

[twa]

Well, I thought his answers weren't forced at all. But perhaps you and I are seeing things through the prism of our respective politics?

I agree with you, his answers are a result of his seeming inability to draw firm conclusions ...whereas McCains short ,direct ones are the result of his being set in his ways....not sure which is better.

Indecisiveness or preconceived notions...which is the greater evil? :chug:

[TrumanB]

Well, I thought his answers weren't forced at all. But perhaps you and I are seeing things through the prism of our respective politics?

Perhaps, but the bottom line is that I'm right and you're wrong.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Perhaps, but the bottom line is that I'm right and you're wrong.

:laugh:

[88Comrade2000]

Mccain didn't go into details about his moral failings. Obama did.

Obama defined rich as 250,000+ . Mccain said 5,000,000. Though I really got the sense Mccain was joking and not really giving a serious answer to it. He will get killed in the ads about that.

Depending on ones political prism; you will see things differently.

I thought Mccain won overall because of the venue he was in. Obama did fine. I've said if this venue were a black church; I think Obama would've won and Mccain would do just okay.

All this did was ease some concerns about Mccain to the base. Obama isn't going to get the evangelical vote if the evangelical voter places abortion and gay marriage as their #1 issues.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

Mccain didn't go into details about his moral failings. Obama did.

Obama defined rich as 250,000+ . Mccain said 5,000,000. Though I really got the sense Mccain was joking and not really giving a serious answer to it. He will get killed in the ads about that.

Depending on ones political prism; you will see things differently.

I thought Mccain won overall because of the venue he was in. Obama did fine. I've said if this venue were a black church; I think Obama would've won and Mccain would do just okay.

All this did was ease some concerns about Mccain to the base. Obama isn't going to get the evangelical vote if the evangelical voter places abortion and gay marriage as their #1 issues.

But Obama says he disagrees with gay marriage but is okay with civil unions so gays can have hospital visits...

[Tastes Like Chicken]

This is exactly what I mean.

"What's your biggest regret, John?"

"My first marriage failed. Now, moving right along to the USA's biggest failure...."

Lots of marriages fail, for a variety of reasons. McCain didn't go into any detail at all, like, "yes, I cheated on my wife many times, then left her after her horrible car accident for a younger, better looking, rich girl who could finance my new political career."

But, oh, yeah, that wouldn't have gone over too well with the audience. Best to say it without saying anything, I guess?

And to make McCain's non-answer on the moral failure question even worse, he knew the question in advance before the interview.

The pastor spoke to each candidate this week, giving the general themes. Warren decided to tell them each the first two questions in advance, about the three wisest people you know, and the biggest moral failings.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/17/warren-mccain-did-not-violate-cone-of-silence/

[88Comrade2000]

But Obama says he disagrees with gay marriage but is okay with civil unions so gays can have hospital visits...

That is one the things that will piss off the democratic base. If you believe homosexuality is a sin and wrong; you won't be for civil unions either.

[mardi gras skin]

Mccain didn't go into details about his moral failings. Obama did.

What details do you think McCain should have gone into? At what point does the answer cross over into salacious tabloid material?

Obama defined rich as 250,000+ . Mccain said 5,000,000. Though I really got the sense Mccain was joking and not really giving a serious answer to it. He will get killed in the ads about that.

In terms of accuracy, that would fall into "McCain wants the war to last 100 years" territory.

I thought Mccain won overall because of the venue he was in. Obama did fine. I've said if this venue were a black church; I think Obama would've won and Mccain would do just okay.

Maybe Rev. Wright could moderate. :poke:

I think we could learn a lot more about both candidates if we had the same type set up moderated by a well respected black minister. I would love to see how the questions differ.

But Saddleback is kind of unique in that they have a pretty good mix of conservative and liberal leaning people in their church. Warren is as different from Rev. Wright as he is from John Hagee. If they were to do this, it would have to be a more moderate black church.

[Zguy28]

What exactly did he say about his failed marriage, can you remind me please? Thanks.

McCain briefly touched upon his first marriage but nothing too specific.

This is exactly what I mean.

"What's your biggest regret, John?"

"My first marriage failed. Now, moving right along to the USA's biggest failure...."

Lots of marriages fail, for a variety of reasons. McCain didn't go into any detail at all, like, "yes, I cheated on my wife many times, then left her after her horrible car accident for a younger, better looking, rich girl who could finance my new political career."

But, oh, yeah, that wouldn't have gone over too well with the audience. Best to say it without saying anything, I guess?

McCain and Obama were asked what their biggest moral failing was in his life.

Obama understandably stated that it was drug use.

McCain stated that it was the failing of his first marriage (That takes big brass one's IMHO when your second wife is in the room :2cents: ).

[Zguy28]

Mccain didn't go into details about his moral failings. Obama did.

Obama defined rich as 250,000+ . Mccain said 5,000,000. Though I really got the sense Mccain was joking and not really giving a serious answer to it. He will get killed in the ads about that.

Depending on ones political prism; you will see things differently.

I thought Mccain won overall because of the venue he was in. Obama did fine. I've said if this venue were a black church; I think Obama would've won and Mccain would do just okay.

All this did was ease some concerns about Mccain to the base. Obama isn't going to get the evangelical vote if the evangelical voter places abortion and gay marriage as their #1 issues.

I thought it was interesting that Obama defined Middle Class as $150,000 a year.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

McCain stated that it was the failing of his first marriage (That takes big brass one's IMHO when your second wife is in the room :2cents: ).

I don't think it takes "big brass ones" at all. It's not like McCain's infidelity was a secret to Cindy.

[Smoot Point Really]

I don't think it takes "big brass ones" at all. It's not like McCain's infidelity was a secret to Cindy.

Neither answer was all that incredible... There was nothing to really gain or lose on this. Who cares now about what happened 20-30 years ago (we assume they've both been drug-free and faithful in their marriage for 20+ years).

I didn't mention this earlier... I've only begun watching it again. I've heard others say this, and it does appear relevant: Obama holds beliefs that are not in keeping with traditional values (I hope I don't have to define these), and he has to dance when he speaks on these issues so as not to come across as too non-traditional and also to not disappoint those whom he will mostly be relying on for votes in November. McCain didn't have to equivocate or dance... On other topics, he might have to dance... On these topics the other night, he didn't have to.

Let's look at the "civil union" issue... It's funny that McCain was asked about California, but Obama wasn't (Warren asked the same questions to both candidates, but with McCain he actually went further and asked about California)... California already had a law supporting civil unions... California voters voted in favor of a more strict definition of marriage, not civil unions. The California judge struck down the will of the voters, and Obama supported the ruling of the court... Therefore, Obama's answer on gay marriage and civil unions at Saddleback doesn't hold water. To side with the court in California, you would have to say that it's a court's decision (not the will of the people) that matters and that civil unions aren't good enough. His answer last night contradicts his own actions.

I have a feeling Dems are going to get more and more "buyer's remorse" as this goes along. The guy they picked is so left-wing, has no record or experience to tout, and speaks like he is more of a social worker on these issues than a President.

[Zguy28]

I don't think it takes "big brass ones" at all. It's not like McCain's infidelity was a secret to Cindy.

I don't know, especially with the tone of regret in his voice. Its like saying "I wish I never cheated on her with you and was still married to her instead of you." That takes big one's especially when you second wife looks like she wouldn't hesitate to cut them off.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

I don't know, especially with the tone of regret in his voice. Its like saying "I wish I never cheated on her with you and was still married to her instead of you." That takes big one's especially when you second wife looks like she wouldn't hesitate to cut them off.

I hadn't thought of it in that way.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

I didn't mention this earlier... I've only begun watching it again. I've heard others say this, and it does appear relevant: Obama holds beliefs that are not in keeping with traditional values (I hope I don't have to define these),

Traditional values as defined by whom?

[Spaceman Spiff]

Neither answer was all that incredible... There was nothing to really gain or lose on this. Who cares now about what happened 20-30 years ago (we assume they've both been drug-free and faithful in their marriage for 20+ years).

I didn't mention this earlier... I've only begun watching it again. I've heard others say this, and it does appear relevant: Obama holds beliefs that are not in keeping with traditional values (I hope I don't have to define these), and he has to dance when he speaks on these issues so as not to come across as too non-traditional and also to not disappoint those whom he will mostly be relying on for votes in November. McCain didn't have to equivocate or dance... On other topics, he might have to dance... On these topics the other night, he didn't have to.

Let's look at the "civil union" issue... It's funny that McCain was asked about California, but Obama wasn't (Warren asked the same questions to both candidates, but with McCain he actually went further and asked about California)... California already had a law supporting civil unions... California voters voted in favor of a more strict definition of marriage, not civil unions. The California judge struck down the will of the voters, and Obama supported the ruling of the court... Therefore, Obama's answer on gay marriage and civil unions at Saddleback doesn't hold water. To side with the court in California, you would have to say that it's a court's decision (not the will of the people) that matters and that civil unions aren't good enough. His answer last night contradicts his own actions.

I have a feeling Dems are going to get more and more "buyer's remorse" as this goes along. The guy they picked is so left-wing, has no record or experience to tout, and speaks like he is more of a social worker on these issues than a President.

Hate to break it to you, but I have a feeling no one cares about "traditional values" anymore.

Oh well...