Rick Warren's interview w/ Obama

Like many of you, I watched the interview on CNN this weekend between Pastor Rick Warren, of Saddleback Church in Orange County, The Messiah himself, Obama, and John McCain. And, also like many of you, I found Our Lord and Savior's performance to be fairly pathetic, though wholly predictable, and was pleasantly surprised to see McCain do well. Very well in fact. I would even go as far as to say as he completely wiped the floor with Obama, which very few expected. The forum, if you are unaware, was designed to highlight the candidate's worldview, character, and morality, by asking them the same, simple and direct questions. Naturally, hilarity ensued, as would obviously happen when trying to pin His Mercifulness down to an actual answer. I would like to offer a few, hopefully short, impressions on some of the responses from the candidates.

Perhaps the issue that sticks out most in my mind was Obama's answer to the question "At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?" Like anyone I know His Lordship to be staunchly pro-choice, even to the point that he twice voted in the Illinois State Senate against a bill that would have required doctors to save the lives of babies born after botched late term abortions. Keep in mind very few other people voted against that bill, he was standing on some serious principle on that one. So I naturally assumed this would be a fairly easy question to answer, as to hold such a extreme position (live babies should not be saved) he must have a pretty well thought opinion on it. He answer was, and I quote from the transcript (which has it in all caps... sorry, I'm not going to re-type it):

WELL, I THINK THAT WHETHER YOU ARE LOOKING AT IT FROM A THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OR A SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE, ANSWERING THAT QUESTION WITH SPECIFICITY, YOU KNOW, IS ABOVE MY PAY GRADE. BUT LET ME JUST SPEAK MORE GENERALLY ABOUT THE ISSUE OF ABORTION BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING OBVIOUSLY THE COUNTRY WRESTLES WITH. ONE THING THAT I'M ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED OF IS THERE IS A MORAL AND ETHICAL CONTENT TO THIS ISSUE. SO I THINK THAT ANYBODY WHO TRIES TO DENY THE MORAL DIFFICULTIES AND GRAVITY OF THE ABORTION ISSUE I THINK IS NOT PAYING ATTENTION. SO THAT WOULD BE POINT NUMBER ONE. BUT POINT NUMBER TWO, I AM PRO-CHOICE. I BELIEVE IN ROE V. WADE AND COME TO THAT CONCLUSION NOT BECAUSE I'M PRO ABORTION, BUT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY I DON'T THINK WOMEN MAKE THESE DECISIONS CASUALLY. THEY WRESTLE WITH THESE THINGS IN PROFOUND WAYS. IN CONSULTATION WITH THEIR PASTORS OR SPOUSES OR THEIR DOCTORS AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS.

So, let me decode this for you. Firstly, while he obviously has a belief about when he thinks life begins, he refuses to answer the questions. Secondly, he changes the subject and rambles on about how the reason that he is pro-choice is because it's a hard decision to make? Seriously? That's the best thing he can come up with? No crap it's hard! Does he really think anyone comes to that conclusion lightly? What a bunch of BS. I thought he was a man of principle and conviction, not to mention the most wonderful public speaker this world has ever seen. Apparently they didn't let him have a teleprompter on this night, since he sounded ridiculous.

Most importantly, I would like to point out some massive hypocrisy. He had just got done explaining, a mere 5 minutes before, about how the greatest moral failure of America was

THAT WE STILL DON'T ABIDE BY THAT BASIC RECEPT IN MATTHEW THAT WHATEVER YOU DO FOR THE LEAST OF MY BROTHERS, YOU DO FOR ME.

Really. Too bad that doesn't apply to babies. McCain, strangely enough, actually answered the question, that he believes that human rights apply at conception. Interesting, we actually can see what he thinks without having to break out the code breaking books.

Another question McCain trounced Obama on was the issue of taxes. The question was "how would you define rich?" His Gracious Lord stated that if you make $150,000 or less, you might be poor or middle class, and if you make $250,000 that you are doing pretty well. Then he reminded us that we have a lot of things to pay for in America, and if we want them we're going to have to pay for them in taxes. First off, I can think of about a million things that we don't need that get paid for with my taxes. Why not cut a few of them back first. Obama's plans involve massive increases in the government's budgetary needs. Which obviously means massive tax hikes, and for him, means raising taxes on the "rich," which of course is something defined by him. I like McCain's answer, which was that he wants everyone to be rich and won't play into this "class warfare and wealth redistribution game." Which is of course exactly what His Perfectness does all day, in his apparent dream to turn American sharply into socialism. Why does it always have to be about tearing down success instead of teaching and helping the unsuccessful get to that level?

Lastly, and I'll be real quick on this one since other people have said it much better than me (see the following news articles), Obama's answers about the Judges was pathetic. The question was "which current judges would you not have nominated?" To which McCain simply named the 4 obviously liberal judges (Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter, and Stevens), and that he believed their role is to interpret the constitution and instead the choose to legislate from the bench. Totally acceptable answer. His Majesty, however, chose to ramble on and on about how he didn't think Thomas is exper... I mean strong enough (he actually started to say experience and then stopped... obviously experience is not a word he wants associated with himself) and then said he doesn't agree with Scolia. (someone who would crush Obama with his mind in 2 seconds flat, as a side note) Only after Warren mentions Roberts does Obama talk about how he doesn't agree with him either. As pointed out on Powerline,

Obama did not name Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito. This is odd. Obama voted against the confirmation of both men, so clearly he would not have nominated either one. But Obama realizes that Roberts and Alito were popular nominees, which probably explains why he declined to name them.

Once again, a forum designed to give Obama a chance to show some character, and he chooses to be a disgusting politician over, and over again. What a complete load. Sources:

The Roger Hedgecock show today

Official Transcript

He's dancing as fast as he can from Powerlineblog.com

A tortured answer to an easy question from Powerlineblog.com

The purpose driven candidates from Powerlineblog.com

Required Reading: Obama Ready to Soak the Rich from the Weekly Standard

For Obama, Taxes Are About Fairness from The Wall Street Journal