Tags: rick | warren | obama

Obama Reels Under Rick Warren Questions

By Monday, 18 August 2008 08:56 AM Current | Bio | Archive

Saturday’s questioning of both major presidential candidates by a progressive evangelical minister was heavily promoted by the mainstream media. But Sunday’s reporting about its aftermath by the dominant media scarcely mentioned what had been billed beforehand as a big event.

Two reasons for the liberal media’s sudden silence seem obvious:

This close encounter left the liberal candidate looking weak and indecisive, but the conservative candidate looking both strong and likeable.

Democratic presumptive candidate Sen. Barack Obama in this event came off as glib but abstract, and either morally confused or evasive. At best he seemed to be what Christian scripture describes as a “lukewarm” person, neither hot nor cold, who should be spit out (Revelation 3:15-16).

Republican candidate Sen. John McCain, by contrast, came across as mature and decisive, an honors graduate of the real world’s school of suffering who learned the hard way what he believes and is unafraid to speak directly and honestly.

But the second reason why the mainstream media apparently now wants Americans to forget Saturday’s event is even more telling.

Questioner Rick Warren is author of the best-selling book "The Purpose Driven Life" and founder-minister of Saddleback Church south of Los Angeles, America’s fourth largest megachurch with 22,000 members.

Warren had been expected to boost Obama’s standing with evangelicals, and to shame McCain with questions about the need to provide more government benefits to the poor here and abroad.

Instead, Warren sounded like a reincarnated Tim Russert, challenging both candidates evenhandedly with fair but tough questions.

The Rev. Warren’s direct, on-target interrogation not only revealed seldom-seen facets of the candidates but also exposed what shamefully inadequate reporting the mainstream media has been doing.

The liberal media wants this interview forgotten because it was even more embarrassing for them than for their favored candidate. Why, viewers were left asking themselves, has the mainstream media avoided asking Obama such blunt, penetrating questions? (Yes, this is like asking why only the National Enquirer tabloid was willing to chase down widespread rumors of former Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards’ adultery and potential lust-child. Does anybody in America still doubt that CBS, NBC, ABC, Time, Newsweek, The Washington Post, and The New York Times are themselves in bed with the Democratic Party, serving as its propaganda organs, and hence are untrustworthy?)

Let’s zero in on a few specific revelations from Warren’s excellent parallel interviews with the candidates.

In 2004 the white evangelical vote went 78 percent for incumbent President George W. Bush and was larger than the vote total delivered to Democrats by organized labor and the African-American community combined.

This year Democrats are trying desperately not to win this vote — a near impossibility — but to peel off five to 15 percent of what born-again Christian President Bush won. To this end the Democrats’ liberal media allies have featured endless stories about, e.g., evangelicals who favor environmental stewardship over our earth.

The Friday before Warren’s weekend questions — at least one of which would likely touch on abortion — one network featured interviews with purported young evangelicals, not from the American heartland but from liberal New York City.

This network replayed again and again one of these evangelical kids dismissing Obama’s pro-abortion position by saying “That’s only one of a host of issues” that should be weighed in the balance.

Huh? Suppose, hypothetically, that the liberal candidate had declared himself in favor of child molestation, or white supremacy? Would this young evangelical declare such positions “only one of a host issues?” No, the young liberal would declare these to be deal-breakers that made a candidate unfit to be president.

This network never asked the young evangelical if there is any worse form of child molestation than murdering an unborn child via abortion?

To his credit, Warren put his question strongly to both candidates, framing it in the context of 40 million American abortions since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, “a holocaust to those who see abortion as murder.” When, Warren asked Obama, does life begin?

In Christian scripture religious leaders try to trap Jesus, asking by whose authority he preaches. If he answers “by God’s,” then Jesus could be accused of committing blasphemy.

But Jesus turns the tables, saying they must answer his question first: Was John the Baptist sent by God or not? The leaders are caught, as they acknowledge among themselves, If we say John came from God, Jesus will ask why we did not follow him? But if we say John did not, we will anger all those Jews who believed in John.

“We cannot say,” the Temple leaders replied. Then I will not tell you, said Jesus, by whose authority I do these things (Matthew 21: 23-27; Mark 11:27-33; Luke 20:1-8).

Similarly trapped between human rights of the unborn and his own atheist pro-abortion supporters, Obama answered Warren’s question about when life begins almost as evasively as the leaders who challenged Jesus: “That question,” said Obama, “is above my pay grade.”

During Warren’s forum, Obama revealed himself to be a racist when he called the Supreme Court’s only African-American Justice Clarence Thomas unfit. He said he believed marriage should be between one man and one woman but, when pressed, that he would do nothing to cement such a definition into law.

In one puzzling reply, Obama blurted out in response to one specific question about an emergency plan to help orphans: “I cheated a little bit. I looked into this.” Was Obama revealing that he somehow received Warren’s questions in advance and had time to prepare answers while McCain did not?

Bottom line: Obama came across as a callow show horse, and McCain as an experienced workhorse.

One of Obama’s most partisan left-wing media supporters, MSNBC’s David Shuster, seems to believe that Obama won because he invoked God and Jesus more often than McCain did. Or were these invocations merely more evidence that Obama’s answers were calculated political propaganda to seduce voters?

If you missed this forum, Google it and watch.

© 2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
Saturday’s questioning of both major presidential candidates by a progressive evangelical minister was heavily promoted by the mainstream media.But Sunday’s reporting about its aftermath by the dominant media scarcely mentioned what had been billed beforehand as a big...
Monday, 18 August 2008 08:56 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved