I watched the forum and I watched Larry King's interview of Rick Warren. I was impressed with the attempt Rev. Warren made to be balanced and ask the same questions of each. I did note a sense of familiarity with Sen. McCain. Mr. Warren called him, "John," from the beginning. It seemed that he called Sen. Obama, "Senator," and that was a subtle deference towards one over the other. It was clearly different in the ways that the two responded and perhaps those comments are for another time as you asked about opinions on Rick Warren. Other than his own clearly stated leaning and his familiarity with Sen. McCain, I felt he made an effort to be fair. His comments about tolerance and open dialog and civility and acceptance of differences were well taken. My sense was that both candidates knew very well with whom they speaking and who was in the audience. I was surprised by Sen. Obama's candor and disappointed with Sen. McCain's pat simplifications. As mentioned above, I was pleased with Rev. Warren's effort to get at substance. I would have liked more time and more follow through on answers but as Rev. Warren later explained on King's show and CNN, he chose breadth over depth. I am frustrated by horse race politics and reporting. I have seen nothing as deep as Rev. Warren's attempt. I would like to see more of this kind of discussion in all media. How can anyone make informed choice without information that goes beyond the internet, the ads, and the superficial media reporting? The answer is that we can't. So, we get caught up in the mist.
More information about text formats