I caught most of the interviews last night between Rick Warren of Saddleback and Obama and McCain. I think how you respond to the debate depends a lot on your age and, obviously, your political positions.
But let me suggest broadly how people would respond based on their age, trying to remove the political positions part from the equation. In this case, I think how you respond breaks around 40-45 years old.
Those older than 40-45, like Pat Buchanan afterwards, see McCain as a hands down winner. (Of course Buchanan has become a spin meister too.) McCain had clear cut answers, which this crowd sees as leadership. He decisively jumped in even before Warren could get the questions out. He was confident, unlike Obama, who hemmed and hawed and, in Buchanan's mind, surprisingly didn't seem to know Theology 101.
Those younger than 40 might see it differently. McCain wouldn't have even needed to show up because his answers were so scripted to the party line, especially the sterotyped evangelical party line, that anyone could have given them for him. He had the answers memorized like an old time school boy who can hardly wait to get the question right. Oo, oo, can I tell you the right answer to that question too, now, or do I have to wait.
Obama, on the other hand, gave his real answers in the face of a hostile audience. He tried to find common ground with an opposing position. He was authentic, not canned. He gave realistic answers rather than the kinds of dreamy idealistic ones that got us into the Iraq War (you defeat evil--yeah, that's worked for us, hasn't it).
4 comments:
I only caught the McCain half. Yes, he kept it simple. Which was both encouraging and scary - like when Warren asks how we should react to evil. Then McCain talks about going head-to-head with militant Islam and I was left thinking about where the slaughtered lamb fit into his world.
That puts you right at the middle of the divide, no? ;)
42 next month... :-)
I will be the inverse of that, next month as well. Cheers!
Post a Comment