Rick Warren's Forum: How McCain Won The Battle But Lost The War
Consider me not surprised. I had been writing a post on that public vetting over at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church on Saturday afternoon when news of John McCain’s subterfuge came over the wire. Well, no wonder, I thought. McCain and his aides were in the limo on the way over and not under the backstage cone of silence, as was intended. They were picking up the particulars of Warren’s questions and Obama’s nuanced answers, allowing McCain to march in and play John Wayne to Obama’s George McGovern. McCain’s going to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell. He’s going to punch all those darned terrorists right in the nose. He’s throwing red meat to the crowd.
Setting aside for the moment Rick Warren’s failure to police these Republican weasels properly, and the fact that we’ve been listening to this same cocksure cowboy bluster about Iraq and foreign policy for the past eight years, I think a broader reverberation from this event may have taken place, the ignoring of which says volumes about what kind of campaign John McCain is running, what kind of President he’d make and confirms for me why I’m so fearful of seeing his finger anywhere near the proverbial red button. Even more to the point, John McCain’s decision to play to the three thousand church members in the audience provided a stunning contrast between Obama’s candidacy and his own and I think offers further hope for our prospects in November. While McCain was willing to gain an unfair advantage by gaming the rules, and was fixated on winning the battle of the pews, he imprudently lost the wider strategic war. Because, let’s face it. Both candidates are preaching to the choir for the most part, until it comes to that ten or twenty percent of swing voters in the middle, and those weren’t the people in the audience.
Understanding this, and displaying all the methodical, farsighted wisdom we witnessed in President Kennedy during the Cuban missile crisis, Obama framed his answers carefully and to the millions of viewers out there in TV land. McCain was channeling General Jack D. Ripper for the front row.
As to the particulars, I found it especially telling when Warren asked “who were the three wisest people each candidate would rely on in their administrations” that Barack immediately mentioned Michelle Obama. Cyndi McCain’s name never came up. McCain instead lauded General Petraeus and mentioned a trip he had made to Iraq last year with Lindsey Graham, blathering on about all those brave soldiers reenlisting to fight for freedom, the same soldiers who happen to be donating to Barack over McCain at a rate of six to one.
McCain then inexplicably threw out Congressman John Lewis’ name as someone he’d seek for advice, I guess just to cover his civil rights’ bases, then went on to laud Meg Whitman, E-bay’s CEO, as a darling of the new economy. Again, McCain had attempted to hit all the high notes, but his thoughts, as always, lacked a coherent thesis, a thing at which he is depressingly like the current President. In contrast, Obama offered this humble but stirring conclusion, proving he remembered the question and actually understood it. The idea of having diverse opinions around you is to be apprised of any blind spots or predispositions a person might possess. Imagine that. Instead of riding out with the cavalry every time new and some unexpected international conflict gets a burr in your saddle, our President might take the time to consider the matter cautiously and make a sound judgment before loading his cannons.
Having downloaded a transcript of the Warren’s event, and pouring over the text the past two days, there are so many points at which I find McCain’s worldview utterly vexing. Where I’m ready to pull out my hair. Where I am reminded that the John McCain of 2000 would never vote for the John McCain of 2008. But more than anything, I found his answer to Warren’s question about evil in this world particularly alarming. Where I had to stop and think, what a jaded and narrow-minded demagogue this old man has become.
Warren had asked, “does evil exist, and if it does, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it or do we defeat it?” Obama answered the first part of the question to the affirmative, went on to explain evil’s many guises, from Darfur to ourselves and our own domestic policies, spoke in terms of “confronting” it but cautioned about the need for humility. A lot of evil has been perpetrated over the years in the name of good.
When asked the same question, McCain, who we now know was peeking from behind the curtain, channels Charlton Heston as Moses in contrast to Obama’s answer. “Defeat it,” he says to a raucous round of applause and with a look as stern as old prophets.
The fact is, McCain never even bothered to address the first part of the question, or to frame his answer in terms other than us against them. It is shocking to think this man can’t get beyond a paradigm in which we are forever at war in this world, today, tomorrow and always. After all, where there is good, there is evil. The fundamental nature of conscious reality is one of duality. Our only hope is to transcend this first cause and to view the world in a brand new way. For there to be any hope, we need to get past this foolish, playground nonsense of us against them, or at least to have a lot less of it.
McCain’s failure to see this or move beyond the worldview of another century is shocking enough, but what really set off my alarms, and should set off alarms in the minds of even so-called devout Christians during this campaign, is that McCain is deluded enough to play God upon the stage of this world.
I refer to the Bible.
See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil. Deuteronomy 30:15.
I don’t mean to be cute here and remain unsure whether or not one can possibly call upon logic in these circumstances, but if evil is God’s handiwork, who are we to think we can rid the universe of it? To take the Bible at face value, as I expect John McCain and most Christians do, isn’t it the worst form of demagoguery to suggest we can undo the very nature of the world as God created it? Better what Obama had to say when asked the same question. All we can do is be God’s humble soldiers in that ongoing struggle.
But what the hell. If John McCain’s going to play at God, why bother with channeling that old fire and brimstone God of the Old Testament. Didn’t Jesus say he had come to fulfill the old law? So let’s hearken to something on the subject that is closer to the true spirit of Christianity.
…Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 1 Corinthians 13: 4-7
How fitting it would be if a forum held at a Christian church in America today would lead us to love as the proper way to marginalize evil in this world. How miraculous it would be if John McCain could find that part of his Christian soul, instead of offering us more wars and destruction and bellicose words.
Good points. In fact, having taped and viewed the event, I was immediately struck by the fact that John McCain was playing the prophet, and was echoing the Old Testament approach to reality.
Plays well with Evangelicals, of course, but I wonder how many of those so-called moderates and independents were a bit troubled by the John Wayne persona, as you call it. More important to me:
setting aside personal references (i.e., Vietnam), I can very easily imagine most of what McCain said as coming from the mouth of George W. Bush in 2004. And let's hope that McCain's words get to those low-information (Hillary) women voters who are still laboring under the belief that McCain is either pro-choice or will not be a threat to choice. No? Not when McCain apparently would remove every "liberal" on the Court if he had the power to do it.
I think there's work to be done in educating the public....
August 18, 2008 8:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
They (Hillary women) apparently take "progressives" at their word and assume they were serious when they boasted an upcoming enlarged Democratic majority in Congress that would surely stand up to President McCain.
August 18, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then why not promote real change, and have a president who is intelligent and has good motives with a congress that will allow him to do a good job? Why? They are just sore losers, and want to cut off their noses to spite their faces.
They seriously need nose jobs!
August 19, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for sharing your perspective on the Warren questioning. Again I will state that watching McCain comparing to other times I have seen him speak, my intuition/gut told me that he knew the questions he was to be asked and he was prepared. I don't know how and I don't really care. I see that for what it is and it's not completely unexpected. The republicans like to stack the deck when they play. No surprise there.
I learned something I did not know today. That McCain wanted to go to war in Iraq immediately after the 9/11 incident. Now there is an incident that we may never know the truth about...
Senator McCain is a hotheaded man who desires war. He says he knows how to win wars... which I don't believe. I do believe that he has a lust for waging them. He just seems to have this attitude that he'd like to 'kick some ass' so send a problem his way that he can 'show his metal'. I agree he is a terrifying option.
Which is why I am wondering what we can do to help get out the vote and help make this election far in whatever ways that is possible.
As some new marketing movement creating videos says.... psssttt... do something.
August 18, 2008 11:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain’s absolutist responses were deeply disturbing to me also.
Remember that he has been critical of the religious right in the past and was never considered to be their favorite son. So it was a calculated choice on his part to embrace their absolutist worldview. And by adopting this worldview he also aligns himself with Bush who also pandered to the evangelical flock when he first ran in 2000.
Why would he align himself with the worst instincts of a failed incumbent with a 25% approval rating?
Because he learned a very cynical lesson when Bush’s approval rating hit 90% after 9-11. The only way to benefit from a massive shift in political approval is to personify certainty and absolutism at a time when the country is confronted by chaos. He is making himself ready to gather in all of the frightened sheep when something horrible and unexpected happens.
Is there any other possible way he could win when he follows Bush’s example in so many respects? No wonder he wants to start up the cold war all over again.
August 19, 2008 12:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks.
I agree with your views of what each candidates preformance told us about them but I have no idea of how the discussion will affect the race.
I'd like to think Joe Lunchpail will be impressed by Obama's willingness to look inside himself and answer sincerely and conversely be annoyed by McCain's dissing him with programmed answers. But part of me fears ,with Mencken, that " No one ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the American people.".
August 19, 2008 7:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mr Corcoran,
You hit the mark when you point out the "demagoguery to suggest we can undo the very nature of the world as God created it." But what astonishes me more than McCain's answer is the question that was asked by a Christian pastor.
The nature of evil and the character of the sinner are the foundation of how Christianity understands itself. The judgment that deals with evil per se is inextricably bound up with the notion of the end of days:
As for the character of sin, it reflects the duality of our earthly existence:
So when Warren asked “does evil exist, and if it does, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it or do we defeat it?”, he might as well have been asking: Do you, a candidate for the highest office in the land, blaspheme the Holy Spirit?
August 19, 2008 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
He won the battle but will lose the war because he went for "feel god" but Obama had concrete goals: Reduce the anathema for him, show he's not a frightening bogeyman nor a glib airhead celebrity, nor a "radical liberal" who lose abortion.
Obama is minimizing his losses with a group he is certain to lose. Avoiding a landslide among those groups is the goal. I think he made progress.
This type of long term strategy is 1) far above the pay grade of the idiot geldings in the MSM and 2) far beyond the intellect of the same clowns who caused the Iraq fiasco precisely because they don't have strategic goals but just shortterm "feel good" tactics.
August 19, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
"feel good"
August 19, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant post.
I hope that Obama has the chance to belt out 1 Corinthians 13: 4-7 every chance he gets.
August 19, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
McLame also helps himself lose the bigger contest is when he EMPHATICALLY reminds women that he will take charge of their reproductive systems, and then tells the scientific community that he will carry on the Bush brand of ludditism. The single biggest depressant in my world is the realization that too many American voters refuse to demand high intelligence in their political leaders. They much prefer a simpleton who pretends that being macho is solution to any/all problems. I'm praying that our youth will rescue us. I thank you all for participating in TPM - it gives hope that some day Reason will prevail.
August 19, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gary, you're rapidly becoming one of my favorite bloggers here. Perhaps I'm being lazy, but you make too many good points (some of which I've also made recently) for me to try to improve on. Thanks for a well-reasoned, wide-ranging look at faith, the forum and the fallout.
August 19, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great Post. I think that you are absolutely right.In order to pander to those he will ultimately get (evangelicals) he lost women and independents. Almost 75% of Americans, want at least some sort of abortion rights. And what the hell? Why hasn't anyone brought up the hypocrisy of McCain in saying he is a pro-lifer, when he supports embryonic stem cell research. I am in Biomedical Engineering, but even a novice knows that an embryo kinda refers to before birth. So in essence he is a pro-lifer, with a choice? WTF?
August 19, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yesterday I watched Glen Beck (on his TV show), of all people, highlight that very contradiction.
August 19, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another weasel moment that got little attention was his position on a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.
Although he said he did not support such an amendment, he threw in a caveat. He would support such an amendment if the federal courts required states like his Arizona to honor same-sex marriages made in other states. That's like saying, "unless the federal courts uphold the Constitution."
What an inconvenient document, that pesky Constitution. It has a clause called the Full Faith and Credit clause which requires states to honor other states' rulings. It's at the top of Article IV, Section 1...
I don't see how the courts have much wiggle room there.
August 19, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
CurtHess identifies the source of all our problems -- an uninformed, complacent and, let's face it, stupid population driven by greed. During the Cold War the Soviet Union stopped feeding its people, and we stopped educating ours. The fact that 50 per cent or more of U.S. voters marked their ballots for George W. Bush -- not just once, but twice -- is solid evidence that this country is intellectually bankrupt.
August 19, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone posted how intellectually stupid the country was for voting for Bush twice:
Yeah. But you're missing the point.
Sure, a ton of us found Bush intellectually lacking. *WE WERE OUTSIDE OF HIS TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC*.
I'm not calling them stupid. Simply, *Intelligence was not the basis for their decision*. Don't deride McCain as being intellectually simplistic as Bush. If you do so, you're preaching to the converted.
Instead, use arguments that defeat his supporters.
McCain is elitist because he thinks people who only make $4.9Million a year aren't rich. Because he favors tax breaks for the richest americans. Oh, yeah, and he's one of them. McCain is an opportunist because of the Hess Family's sudden 285,000 donations to the RNC the day after his drilling position changed.
I don't know the best arguments to defeat McCain. But I know this: Bush won not on Intelligence, but on *emotional connections to his supporters, who came out strong.*
August 19, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
SonofHistoryProf
You are quite right. For those of us who are probably part of what I call the intellectual left, and maybe in some cases not even that far left, it seems inconceivable that 50% of the people can vote for a dolt the like Geo. Bush, or a bellicose old man like McCain; especially when they have such a sterling alternative in Obama -- a highly educated, intelligent, and thoughtful person. But the answer appears when one carves up the Republcan base and the so-called independents who lean to the Republican view of the world.
First, there are the evangelicals, who vote not on the qualifications of the candidates, but on their positions on a limited number of issues (right to life, same sex marriage) and the candidate's perceived religiosity. Second, there are the jingoists who support whichever candidate seems most macho and willing to smack the rest of the world in the nose whenever it suit his fancy. This candifdate generally will be the Republican. Third, are the business people, especially the affluent, who realize the Republicans are good for business in the sense that the federal government is for sale (See Thomas Frank: "The Wrecking Crew.") This group incudes a lot of small town, middle American business people, it also explains why it is so easy for the Republican candidate to amass a huge campaign war chet. (For the life of me, I cannot understand why McCain went with federal campaign funds.) Finally, there are the racists, who understand that in general the Republicans stand between white America and the "other." (See: U.S. Supreme Court apppointments -- also a big issue with the evangelicals and business people.)
Can one say that these folks are dumb? No, they are just voting what they see as their self-interest, and the Republicans are especially good at pandering to those perceived interests . (See Thomas Frank: "What's the Matter with Kansas.")
Thus, the Republicans have a built-in voting block of 45%+ of the electorate. That's why McCain is hanging around that number in the national polls. The question is where the roughly 10% that truly represents the undecided middle will end up, and that basically is what the campaign is all about.
August 19, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans have two bases:
Their financial base, the ultra-wealthy that supports their Swift-boat campaigns, and keeps the lobbyists going. This is the base that benefits from republican regimes because they are favored with all of their policies; such as taxes and also environmental laws; however, because they are such a distinct minority they cannot gain power by their limited ability within a democratic system.
Which brings us to:
Their voting base, which they appeal to with wedge issues. They inflame them with simple appeals about not killing innocent babies (even though a two-celled gamete is nowhere near a baby). "Do you want to keep marriage holy?" As if it were..."The Death Tax," which only applies to the aforementioned "financial base" but the voting base knows a little --> they know they will all die, so those damn tax and spend Democrats want to chase us to the grave for taxes!
The republican voting base is the most manipulated and uninformed bunch of pawns in history. But they deliver. To buck the system is just too hard when it is framed as black-and-white right vs wrong -- why bother to question it when you have a lovable dolt like Dubya talkin' just like they do?
August 19, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain of 2000 is exactly the same as McCain of 2008.
August 19, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome points Gary and I do agree. The Church is done a severe disservice when it panders into the political space. God isn't elected and none of the patriarchs and matriarchs of the OT and NT and throughout history were 'elected' either.
Barack's answers were deep, thoughtful and came from a person who has meditated on those issues and found revelation for his own life. John, sounded like a robot and was happy to get the Pavlovian response from the crowd.
God isn't some big Happy Face in the sky. He's God and beside Him there is no other. Were it not for Christ, we'd be condemned by the very fact that we came from Adam. But along with the 'fire and brimstone' God is the loving Father, who loves and corrects His children. He expects us to reflect His patience, love, compassion, forgiveness as well as His judgment. Wisdom is knowing when to use what and how.
Barack gets this, John McCain doesn't.
August 19, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
um, have you READ the old testament? seems to me that if you believe the bible, the big guy changed his mind. If he's all-knowing, why would he do that?
August 19, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
cafferty asks a lot of the same questions over at cnn:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/18/cafferty.mccain/index.html
it's about time some in MSM start connecting the very large and abundant dots that mccain doesn't have the goods.
we've tried the 'average' guy approach. doesn't work. dealing with such complexity requires an 'above-average' intellect. let's get back to having the president be one of the (if not THE) smartest people in the room.
August 19, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
A good friend of mine posted a great article in relation to this
" I have a serious problem when a right-wing preacher like Rick Warren (author of the best-selling pop-theology oeuvre, The Purpose Driven Life) is able to outline the political terms of the first major appearance by the two major presidential candidates. And Obama’s decision to participate in Warren’s Christian Right infomercial once again shows his willingness to allow the Right to define the terms of the election and to define him." Read more>
http://queertoday.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2057108%3ABlogPost%3A6928
August 19, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Repeat: "Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." -Pudd'nhead Wilson
I don't imagine that Obama can stoop to McCain's lowbrow tactics and still retain the credibility and genuine respect that he has thus far garnered.
I think that one of the reasons Obama has lost a few points is due to McCain's posturing on energy "policy" ("drill here, drill now"). Few Americans understand that more drilling does not equate to relief at the pumps - not now and not ten years from now, which is how long it will take to see any results from McCain's so-called effort to free us from foreign oil.
Obama should make this perfectly clear in ALL of his ads, perhaps by quoting our own Energy Departmart as a rebuttal to McCain's claims. He seriously needs to pound this one home.
There is also a possibility of retaining a copy of the "Meet the Press" airing during which representatives of the oil industry took to cackling like old crones when asked if Big Oil couldn't please cut the American public a break seeing as they were earning obscene profits.
Otherwise, someone else on the blog had suggested that a good ad campaign would be to highlight McCain's failure to support the troops in any meaningful way short of "straight talk": i.e., have McCain discuss his military heroism and concern for our soldiers while in the backgound scrolling the mind-numbing totality of his nay votes on veteran/military benefits.
These are the two leading issues that appear to be scoring points for McCain. It's time to let the air out of his sound bytes ... get to educating the public in some really creative ways and get off the defensive.
August 19, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
For anyone interested in reading some well-researched, highly informative political articles go to http://www.alternet.org/
August 19, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Better yet: "drill here, drill now" featuring McCain strapped to a labotomy table.
Sorry, I digress ... do not take this advice.
August 19, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
A fantastic post!
August 19, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Despite your eloquence above, your assertion that "defeat it" automatically means war says a lot more about your thought process than anything else.
But let's pretend you are right in any case. . .
I wonder if Vladimir Putin recognizes the "fundamental nature of conscious reality." I'm pretty sure the Georgians aren't thinking about it right now. I think they are wondering if anyone is going to come and help them.
But if you're right, let's go ahead and adopt your thesis. Once it is all over, let's go talk to the people of Georgia who have lost family members, and let's tell them that the sacrifice was worth it. . . beacuse we were honing our understanding of the "fundamental nature of conscious reality."
We are very fortunate to have the safety and security to spend time contemplating such things.
August 22, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink