On Saturday night, Rick Warren, the popular evangelical minister who authored the best-selling book The Purpose Driven Life, hosted the Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency at his church in Lake Forest, California. John McCain and Barack Obama were both there, which is notable because this is the first time that both Presidential candidates have appeared together during the campaign season.
I watched the coverage of the two-hour event, and I was really impressed with how it was conducted. One hour was devoted to each candidate; Pastor Warren interviewed Obama during the first hour and McCain during the second. The only time that the two senators appeared onstage simultaneously was at the half-way point of the forum as Obama was leaving and McCain was entering.
The atmosphere of the event was very casual; Rick Warren and the candidate whom he was questioning at the time were both seated, and no time limits where imposed except for a one-minute answer at the end. I liked the relaxed environment of the forum; I think it allowed senators Obama and McCain to be a bit more genuine with their responses, not merely reciting points from their campaign speeches. The official debates ought to be structured much like this, with the exception of having both candidates on stage at the same time.
For the most part, Pastor Warren asked the same questions to both men. On average, Obama tended to be more verbose with his answers than McCain, so Warren was able to pose an additional question or two to McCain during his hour. Because both candidates were questioned separately about the same topics and neither heard the other speak (more on the “cone of silence” controversy later), this forum made for an excellent opportunity to analyze their responses and see where Obama and McCain agree and where they obviously differ.
Below, I have paraphrased the questions that Rick Warren posed to the two Presidential candidates (because of the conversational style of the interviews, the wording used by Warren for the questions was not necessarily identical for each candidate), and I will give a brief summary of each man’s replies — and maybe offer a few thoughts of my own. The full transcript of the event is available here.
Who are the three wisest people you know in your life? Who are you going to rely on heavily in your administration?
Barack Obama and John McCain gave starkly different responses to this question, and I believe that is primarily the result of Pastor Warren wording it differently for each candidate. For Obama, the two parts of the question were separated by an “and”, so the implication was that the wisest people he knows might not necessarily be advising an Obama administration. As much as I would like to make fun of Obama for naming his wife and his grandmother as people who would influence his Presidency, in his case, the response was appropriate (and the senator did have some very sweet things to say about the women in his life). Regarding his Presidency, Obama threw out several names, a mixture of Democrats and Republicans — Sam Nunn, Dick Lugar, Ted Kennedy, Tom Coburn — I presume to show how bi-partisan he is (or is it post-partisan?), although I seriously doubt he would he take any policy advice from Senator Coburn.
John McCain, who — as I said — received a slightly re-worded question, listed three people whom he would rely upon if he became President. His picks were quite fascinating: General David Petraeus, Congressman John Lewis, and former eBay CEO Meg Whitman. I might want to analyze McCain’s choices in detail — especially considering that there might be a Vice-Presidential pick in there — if not for the fact that this is only the first question of the forum, and we have many more to go through.
What has be the greatest moral failure in your life? And what do you think is the greatest moral failure of America?
Obama spoke about his youth, specifically about his problems with drugs and alcohol, which he has talked about before. McCain surprised me with his answer to the first question by simply stating that the breakdown of his first marriage was his greatest moral failure. He said it with such sincerity that it made me a little sad.
Regarding America’s greatest moral failure, Obama’s and McCain’s responses were actually very similar as they both talked about how Americans should do more to put the needs of others ahead of their own needs.
Can you give me a good example where you went against party loyalty, and maybe even against your own best interests, for the good of America?
Obama actually talked about working with John McCain on campaign finance reform, an issue which does not endear me to either one of them. Unsurprisingly, McCain had a laundry list of topics: climate change, torture, and wasteful government spending. He spent the most time talking about his opposition to sending Marines into Beirut, Lebanon in the 1980s.
What is the most significant position that you held ten years ago that you know longer hold today.
For Obama, the position change which he mentioned was something to do with welfare reform. I don’t fully understand what his flip-flop was, nor do I really care, but there it is. McCain used the question to jump into a stump speech about offshore drilling, which he opposed not too long ago. “We’ve got to drill now and got to drill here,” the senator said. “And I know that there’s some here in California that disagree with that position,” he continued, pronouncing California like Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger does, which I thought was kind of a cheap shot. McCain moved on from there to talk about other kinds of energy, including nuclear power.
What is the most gut-wrenching decision you ever had to make? And what was the process that you used to make it?
Senator Obama talked about his opposition to the war in Iraq. Honestly, I appreciate that Obama wrestled with the decision and that he acknowledges that Saddam Hussein was a horrible man. I believe that Obama’s position on the war is wrong, but at least his opposition (according to him) was not a knee-jerk reaction.
McCain told the story from when he was a POW in Vietnam about the North Vietnamese telling him that he could go home and his refusal to leave. I have heard the senator give his account of the event several times now, but it still manages to choke me up a bit each time I hear it.
What does it mean to you to trust in Christ? How does faith work out in your life on a daily basis?
I think that Obama gave the best response to this question: “I believe … that Jesus Christ died for my sins, and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis.” He also paraphrased Micah 6:8, which is a favorite of mine.
But Obama said something which I found a little curious. Referring to his faith, the senator said (emphasis mine), “it means that those sins that I have on a fairly regular basis hopefully will be washed away.” Hopefully? Isn’t he sure as a Christian that Jesus has paid the full price for all his transgressions? I can’t examine the words of someone speaking off-the-cuff too closely, but his slight uncertainty struck me as peculiar.
McCain said that being a follower of Christ means he is “saved and forgiven.” He then told another story about Vietnam, this time about sharing a moment of worship with one of his captors on Christmas Day. I heard the tale last year when McCain ran it as part of an advertisement during the primary season, so like the previous story, it wasn’t new to me, but unlike his previous one, I wasn’t too moved by it. I wish McCain had spent a little more time explaining his faith rather than telling anecdotes from his past.
At what point does a baby entitled to human rights, in your view?
This was the big question to me. Abortion is a complex issue, no doubt, but like so many problems facing the country, it has an easy solution. I was eager to hear what kinds of responses the two candidates would give.
Obama’s response was… well — how should I say it? — lacking. He started off, “Well, you know, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”
Although I could easily write a lengthy blog post on that statement alone, I am going to leave it without further comment except to say that I’m certain Republicans will be using it in ads in the near future.
The senator then meandered verbally for a while, talking about the tough decisions women have to make and how we should strive to reduce the number of abortions. He admitted that he is pro-choice, but other than that, he did not really say anything of substance.
Rick Warren asked a follow-up question: “Have you ever voted to limit or reduce abortions?” Obama then proceeded to ramble on for a little while longer about supporting limits on late-term abortions (something his voting record doesn’t show) and how he respects the views of those who are pro-life and how both sides should work to reduce unwanted pregnancies and how women should be given proper health care, support services, et cetera.
I feel that Pastor Warren was unsatisfied with the whole response as well when he said, “There’s a lot more I’d like to ask on that.” But pressed for time, he move on.
John McCain, on the other hand, gave an excellent answer to the question. I have to admit that I was surprised because I did not think he would be so straightforward considering I rarely hear him discuss social issues. In fact, while I was listening to Obama’s rambling reply the hour before, I said to my wife, “McCain better not drop the ball on this one.” And he didn’t.
“At the moment of conception,” he stated matter-of-factly about when a child should have rights. “I have a twenty-five-year pro-life record in the Congress, in the Senate. And as president of the United States, I will be a pro-life president. And this presidency will have pro-life policies. That’s my commitment. That’s my commitment to you.”
And that is all I needed to hear. Thank you, Senator McCain.
Define marriage.
Obama and McCain both concur that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Obama also added that he supports civil unions.
Neither candidate supports the idea of an amendment to the United States Constitution in order to preserve that definition of marriage. Obama basically said the Constitution is not the place for it (a point on which I agree). John McCain proclaimed that he is a federalist and thinks states should be free to make the decision of what marriage is. McCain did say that he would support a marriage amendment if a federal judge ever ruled that his state of Arizona had to observe the same definition as Massachusetts.
Given the scientific break-through of pluripotent adult stem cells, would you favor or oppose the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research?
Here is a subject on which I believe both men are dead wrong.
Barack Obama said he favors using nonimplanted embryos from fertility clinics where attempts at in vitro fertilization have occurred. Obama’s reasoning is that if the embryos are going to be discarded anyway, it is better to use them for research. While this argument may sound rational on the surface, the truth is these embryos should never be considered waste to begin with. Protecting embryos within fertility clinics is an area where the pro-life movement has faltered, and that is really a disgrace because it has allowed the door to open wider for misguided research on human life.
John McCain said that he has also “come down on the side of stem cell research,” and I assume he means embryonic stem cell research. McCain’s response troubles me more than Obama’s because at least Obama was being consistent with his pro-abortion views. But McCain said a couple of questions prior that his administration “will have pro-life policies.” Favoring deadly research on human embryos is certainly not a pro-life position.
To their credit, both candidates said they are hopeful about adult stem cell research, which has no moral opposition.
Does evil exist? And if so, do we ignore it? Do we negotiate with it? Do we contain it? Do we defeat it?
This was a good question and really showed a clear contrast in how the two Presidential hopefuls think.
Obama affirmed that evil does exist and mentioned genocide in Darfur and child abuse as examples. But the senator also talked a lot about having humility, which I found interesting. Obama said that a lot of evil things have been done in the name of good and that having good intentions does not necessarily mean that good will be done — both of which are true — but the point that he was trying to make seemed to be that people shouldn’t be quick to declare things around them as evil. I thought this was a rather weak position for him to hold, especially as a Christian.
McCain, on the other hand, came out swinging with his two-word answer: “Defeat it.” He then railed against Islamic extremism, particularly al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, saying that he would “follow him to the gates of hell” and “bring him to justice.” The vast difference between McCain’s forceful response and Obama’s mild one was startling, and it raised questions in my mind about how a President Obama would react to terrorism.
Which existing Supreme Court Justices would you not have nominated?
Senator Obama did not think Clarence Thomas was a good pick, because — according to Obama — he was not a “strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time.” That is a curious statement to make because if Justice Thomas did not have enough judicial experience to be qualified for the position, what does that say about Obama and his lack of any executive experience? Obama also included Antonin Scalia because he and Obama “just disagree.”
Pastor Warren asked about John Roberts, and Obama expressed concerns that Chief Justice Roberts was allowing the executive branch to have more power than the Constitution gave it.
In contrast, Senator McCain listed every liberal member of the Supreme Court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter, and John Paul Stevens. When Warren asked why he chose all of those Justices, McCain said because they have legislated from the bench.
Although not asked about them, McCain also mentioned John Roberts and Samuel Alito as being two of his favorites. Anthony Kennedy, typically considered the “swing vote” on the Court, was the only Justice who received no mention by either candidate.
According to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, faith-based organizations have a right to hire people who believe like they do. Would you insist that faith-based organizations forfeit that right to access federal funds?
Obama generally thinks that faith-based institutions should be allowed to hire whomever they want, but not necessarily when “offering services to the public.” I thought he was being very careful with his words and deliberately vague. He said that “the devil’s in the details,” and talked a lot about discrimination and “a level playing field.” In my opinion, Obama did not want to come out and reveal in front of a evangelical crowd that he believes that Christian groups receiving federal funds should not be permitted to tell share their faith when helping people outside their walls.
McCain was once again straightforward in his answer. “Absolutely not,” he said, regarding whether religious organizations should lose access to federal money if they only hire like-minded people. McCain explained that if these groups could no longer hire people with common beliefs, “it would mean a severe crippling of faith-based organizations and their ability to do things so successfully.” He then proceeded to tell yet another anecdote, this time about Katrina relief.
Do you think better teachers should be paid better?
This time, I am going to begin with McCain’s response. “Yes,” declared the Arizona senator. “And find bad teachers another line of work.”
Obama’s answer wasn’t nearly that simple, but he did agree that excellence should be rewarded.
Define rich.
I thought this was a great question simply because Democrats constantly decry tax cuts for the rich but never really state precisely who rich people are.
Obama was rather coy with his response to Rick Warren. Referring to the impressive sales of Warren’s The Purpose Driven Life, he said, “if you’ve got book sales of $25 million, then you qualify.” He then talked about how rich is a relative term but that people making $250,000 are doing pretty well. Obama went on to explain that the government has to pay for things and that costs money, and we should not leave behind “a mountain of debt” for the next generation to deal with. I agree with the point about debt, but Obama’s whole premise is based upon having to fund a massive federal government. I say let’s have a much smaller, limited government, then we wouldn’t need to pay so much in taxes.
McCain stated that some of the wealthiest people he had ever known were also some of the unhappiest. He said that rich should not be define by how much money one has but by other factors such as a having a home, an education, and a good job. He then claimed, “I don’t want to take any money from the rich — I want everybody to get rich.” Jokingly, he eventually settled on a income in excess of five million dollars as being rich.
As an American, what is worth dying for? And what is worth committing American lives for?
This is an excellent question, and one I am sure that many Americans have pondered.
Obama said American freedom “obviously” and “America’s national interests,” then talked a little about forging alliances with other countries.
McCain said freedom (but did not qualify it with American as Obama did) and national security. He also made it clear that we should fight tyranny, but “we can’t right every wrong.” American blood is “the most precious asset we have,” and much has been spilled defending the freedoms of other countries. Whenever possible, we should try to win “without firing a shot” like in the Cold War.
Both were decent responses, but I liked McCain’s more.
What would be the criteria for which you would commit troops to, for instance, end the genocide in Darfur or what is happening in Georgia?
Once again, Obama did some waffling, saying there is no “hard and fast line.” He then spoke yet again about working with the international community to stop conflicts. In case you haven’t gotten the message, Barack Obama really likes working with other countries to solve problems.
McCain said he would commit troops if the nation’s security was threatened. Regarding conflicts in other countries like Darfur which do not directly affect the United States, McCain suggested we should do more by supplying equipment and logistics but mostly let the countries themselves manage the situation.
Rick Warren then asked him a follow-up question which Obama did not get, “Now… you are seeing Russia reassert itself in Georgia and maybe now Poland. What’s happening?” McCain talked a little about the killings and village burnings that have happened in Georgia. He spoke of Georgia being one of the earliest Christian nations and what a wonderful country it is and what a good man Mikheil Saak’ashvili, the President of Georgia, is. McCain said we should get humanitarian aid to the people there as quickly as we can, but he also made it clear that Russia’s actions in that country are “not acceptable in the twenty-first century.”
Would you be willing to consider and even commit to doing some kind of emergency plan for orphans, like President Bush did with AIDS, to deal with this issue?
Obama thinks having a plan for orphans is a great idea and wants to work with national institutions to make it happen. He also said that we should figure out how to prevent more children from becoming orphans, but he gave no specifics on how to do that.
McCain said that adoption should be made much easier in this country (I wholeheartedly agree). He then predictably told the tale of how his wife Cindy brought their soon-to-be-adopted daughter Bridget to their home from an orphanage run by Mother Teresa (a good story, but I have heard it a few times).
What do you think the U.S. should do to end religious persecution in other places, like China or Iraq, whether it is Christian or any other faith?
Obama said Americans should speak out and not pretend like persecution isn’t happening. Unsurprisingly, he also think we should work with international partners to point out where persecution is taking place. He then brought the issue home and discussed leading by example and making sure we practice religious tolerance in the United States. Obama mentioned that we should follow the rule of law and threw in a denunciation of torture for good measure.
McCain said that the President’s best weapon in this cause is the “bully pulpit.”
There are about 27 million people living in slavery right now. How do we speak out and what do you plan to do about that?
Obama declared that this must be a top priority; prosecutors must be given “more effective tools” in order to crack down on human trafficking networks. And once again, we should also make alliances with international partners to make this happen.
Looking over the transcript, it appears that McCain was not asked about the slavery issue, so he may have gotten off on this one.
In one minute, tell me why you want to be president.
This was the only question with a time limit, but despite that, Obama spent half the time talking about his mother. He then said that he felt the American dream was “slipping away.” Washington is broken, big decisions need to be made, and Obama thinks he is the one the make them. He also said that he has the ability to “build bridges” between different groups and get people to work together.
John McCain wants “to inspire a generation of Americans to serve a cause greater than their self-interest.” He talked about the challenges the country faces, but how its best days lie ahead. He briefly mentioned his time in the military and in Congress and how he has always put his country first. In fact, he actually said the exact phrase “country first” five times in three paragraphs. McCain also said that he can reach across the aisle to the other party, which I think is a lot like the bridge-building Obama wants to do.
What would you say to people who are opposed to me asking you these questions in a church?
This was the final question that was asked of both men, and I thought it was appropriate given the current hostility by some groups toward any mixing of faith and politics.
Obama said that we need to have conversations in forums like Saddleback, and they allow the American people to make informed decisions. McCain said that he wants “to be in every venue in America” and correctly noted that this nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values.
When our right to privacy and our right to national security collide, how do you decide what takes precedent?
This was a question that only McCain was asked. It is a good one, and I wish that Obama had gotten the chance to respond to it.
McCain said that privacy and security are “competing priorities” and that privacy is a fundamental right which every person has. But the technological advances of the past few decades mean that laws need to be updated so that the communications of enemies can be monitored. McCain basically said that members of Congress need to stop fighting and work together to protect the country.
What would you tell the American public if you knew there wouldn’t be any repercussions?
Obama was the only one to be asked this particular question. His response was that big problems cannot be solved easily, and everyone needs to take part in the solutions. He specifically mentioned energy and said there is a price to pay in order to transition the current economy into a more energy-efficient one. According to Obama, the changes will not be free; it will require sacrifice from all Americans.
On the surface, this was a nice sentiment. But for some reason, I have a sneaking suspicion that Senator Obama expects the wealthiest Americans to pay more than their fair share of this “sacrifice”.
Was the cone of silence you were just in comfortable?
After Senator Obama’s hour was up, Senator McCain came out, and Pastor Warren jokingly asked McCain about the “cone of silence.” This was because McCain was apparently put in a location during the first hour of the forum where he would be unable to hear the questions and Obama’s answers and therefore, not have an unfair advantage.
After the forum was over, the general consensus among most viewers was that McCain performed better overall than Obama. I agree with that assessment; McCain came across as being quite confident in his responses while Obama often faltered — sometimes on very critical issues. Unable to accept that John McCain could do so well, bloggers on the left immediately began claiming that McCain must have heard some of the questions in advance because he often responded very quickly.
I think this is simply ludicrous. McCain’s speedy responses can probably be attributed to the fact that the man knows for certain what he believes. For instance, any pro-life person ought to be able to answer immediately when asked when life begins — it begins at conception. Similarly, anyone who recognizes the existence of evil and the threat it is to the world should not need to hesitate before proclaiming that it must be defeated. For these liberals to imply that McCain cheated merely because he was quick on the draw is shameful.
Unfortunately, it did not end there. Andrea Mitchell repeated the claim the next morning on Meet the Press, which only gave the charge validity. Then the McCain campaign admitted that they were a little late getting the senator to Saddleback Church for the forum and that the event had already begun when they arrived. McCain’s people tried to assure the doubters that he had not heard any of Obama’s interview, but people will believe whatever they choose to. So there are still some liberals out there who say that McCain cheated even though there is not a shred of evidence to prove it.
The cheating charge is completely meaningless, but I wanted to mention it since it did cause a minor controversy earlier this week.
All in all, I think that both candidates performed fairly well at the Saddleback Civil Forum, but it was John McCain who stole the show by doing far better than was expected by most people (myself included).
I am so glad that Rick Warren hosted the forum, and that both parties’ presumptive nominees were in attendance. It provided a unique opportunity to get into the minds of these two American leaders, one of whom will certainly be the next President of the United States.
