Saddleback Forum

[30A Skunkape]

I haven't seen the event in its entirety (I hope CNN will reair it asap). But without having seen it I want to share two random items-

1) The political blogs are being overrun by rumors that McCain wasn't in a "Cone of Silence" during Obama's Q&A (Obama went first) but rather that McCain was in a limo on his way. So folks are saying that he was so concise because he already heard the questions and his opponent's answers...

Interesting...

EDIT: This is not my opinion- I don't have one yet and am only reporting what others are saying on political blogs...

2) Irrespective of how good or bad the forum was (I haven't seen it all yet)-
I have a real problem with a presidential debate (or whatever they call it) being conducted by or in a/the Evangelical Church...

I would say the same thing if it was hosted by Catholics, Jews, Christian Scientists, Muslims, INSERT RELIGION HERE, etc.

It is scary to me that this occurred and reminds me of how powerful and pervasive churches are...

Love Bob's earlier Iran comment...

2 cents,
G

I am interested to hear you expand on why you think it was 'scary' that this forum was conducted by a religious group. 'Pervasive'? It sounds like you are describing (unflatteringly) liquor stores or Wal-Marts instead of assemblies protected by our Constitution.

 

[Linda]

This was mentioned previously, but I thought I heard this while watching the replay last night. Check out Obama's almost slip at the 38 second mark of this youtube clip. He almost slammed Clarence Thomas for his lack of "ex!" Wow that was close. No doubt he did not want to get into a discussion about "experience."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uV538Hqh-k

Heard a guy on the radio perfectly sum up my thoughts today. Based on their answers, John McCain has lived an amazing, fascinating life with incredible experiences as compared to Obama's. I'm not saying his life has been better. The question that seperated these two was the "most gut-wrenching decision you've ever had to make." EVER! Obama said his was the opposition to the Iraq war. He was in the Illinois Senate when the Iraq war vote came up. So he had no "gut wrenching decision" to make anyway (that anyone cared about at the time). Compare that answer to McCain's decision to stay in the P.O.W. camp. One of those responses was slightly more gut wrenching than the other.

I found it incredible that Obama said that Clarence Thomas " was not a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time". He took a shot at Thomas' intelligence. Interesting that Obama thinks that Clarence Thomas did not have the resume to be nominated to the Supreme Court but he thinks he has the resume to be President of the United States.

 

[hnooe]

Succinct answers woo concrete thinkers. Prolonged answers appeal to those who think abstractly. The point of the exercise was for McCain to solidify the concrete thinkers' vote. I'm pretty sure Obama wanted people to see him answering questions about religion without invoking Allah's name. What else is there to discuss?

Exactly: Which explains the Republican and Democratic divide as to who did a better job at Saddleback--succinct and simple answers appeal to the Republicans (all black and white); detailed, big picture thinking appeals to the Democrats (includes important shades of gray).

 

[Linda]

Interesting that when Obama stammered and stuttered and had trouble forming a sentence he is described as thoughtful and nuanced. If McCain's delivery had not been so clear and consice he would have been described as a bumbling, old, idiot with no command of the facts on the verge of full blown dementia. Go figure

 

[scooterbug44]

I'm with Geo in that I don't want major political debates or events taking place in churches.

Far too much influence in our gov't and policies by various religious groups already IMO!

 

[Geo]

I am interested to hear you expand on why you think it was 'scary' that this forum was conducted by a religious group. 'Pervasive'? It sounds like you are describing (unflatteringly) liquor stores or Wal-Marts instead of assemblies protected by our Constitution.

I believe in separation of church and state...

But that is not what I see at all when the two final candidates for POTUS meet for the first real forum of the election on stage in a church with an evangelical pastor grilling them...

This country is so immersed in religion that its citizens see nothing odd about what occurred the other night. But yet many of these same citizens would use words like extremism or fanaticism if they saw leaders of another country sitting on stage in a mosque with a leading cleric (or pastor equivelent)...

I don't dispute that the assembly was protected by the constitution. I wouldn't want it any other way. I just find it scary that the church is so powerful that it can get such a billing...

BTW- I don't get why my usage of the word pervasive brings Walmart or liquor stores to mind but just in case I have misunderstood the word all these years (and to give you the benefit of the doubt) I looked it up...

per-va-sive
spread throughout all parts of; present throughout something

 

[destindreamer]

Exactly: Which explains the Republican and Democratic divide as to who did a better job at Saddleback--succinct and simple answers appeal to the Republicans (all black and white); detailed, big picture thinking appeals to the Democrats (includes important shades of gray).

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

George Orwell

 

[Jdarg]

I am really wondering if the SoWal political forum watched any of this well put together approach to questions Americans on both sides of the aisle have on their minds. It was a good performance by both candidates. I think it is obvious to anyone who watched the whole forum that McCain had the most succinct and precise answers to the questions asked of both candidates. I feel this is so, because for one thing, the silence from the left, usually present on this board, has been deafening. Cat got your tongue?

No cat on my tongue, just a bad taste. I think the answer to why the Dems just didn't jump on this thread and engage with you can be found in these 2 posts!!

Here's my take- if you are McCain supporter, you thought McCain rocked.

If you are an Obama supporter, you thought he was fantastic. Obama answered the questions exactly the way I hoped he would.

Duh.

Don't think we are going to find anyone on this forum thinking that their candidate did not do well.:roll: I need to go back and look at their outfits- maybe I can find something interesting in what they were wearing, since this Saddleback forum was completely predictable in the questions and responses from both candidates.

 

[hnooe]

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

George Orwell

Fine, lets then just throw in the towel, and put up with another repeat of 4 years of the GW Bush type "clarity" of both speech, AND intent." See where that got us all.

 

[Andy A]

Succinct answers woo concrete thinkers. Prolonged answers appeal to those who think abstractly. The point of the exercise was for McCain to solidify the concrete thinkers' vote. I'm pretty sure Obama wanted people to see him answering questions about religion without invoking Allah's name. What else is there to discuss?

You hit it. McCain was concrete in his answers. Obama was absstract in his. Sorry, I don't want someone who thinks in th abstract for my president. My opinion, only of course, but in the world as it is now we need someone who is definite in their actions and I don't mean "knee jerk". Abstract is more suited to philosophers not heads of state, IMO.