You Never Stop Earning Trust

There are a lot of addictions out there and not too many people would argue that one of them is an addiction to trust, but I'm going to risk the wrath of God himself and stick my neck way out there and ask, why are we going to give Rev. Rick Warren a pass on what happened at his "Saddleback Civil Forum?" To start, it was rather confusingly billed as an encounter of some kind between Sen. Obama and Sen McCain.
If you don't know, to save me a lengthy explanation please Google "Cone of silence."
Warren, with his squeaky clean persona promised fairness in the design of this event and in his failure furthered the idea that extending unlimited trust even to his group comes with peril.
Warren has spent most of the day defending himself and in my opinion not very well. In each interview, when asked why Sen. McCain was in fact not in the sound proof room (cone of silence) for all of Sen.Obama's questioning period, he gave answers which were purposefully evasive.
He quickly, and with Warren style charm redirected the questioners by saying these were bogus charges because the secret service was with McCain in the motorcade and when he did arrive he entered a sound proof room, with Saddleback security staff present.
Then he incredulously discounted an examples of a rumor about a monitor in the green room by saying it was disconnected two days earlier by his staff. These are clever responses that in my opinion are crafted. They dodge the issues and redirect the conversation in a hospitable direction. These are classic examples of verbal dances that are designed to make petty the accusation and simultaneously damage the credibility of the accusers.
Then he worked to place the idea that if anything, Sen.Obama had the advantage because by McCain being late Obama received a tip off on a question about relief for orphans he had planned to give both of them. This attempt appears to try to compensate which only continues to incite suspicion. It's also like not having to cook tonight because your house just burned down.
When asked if McCain could have heard anything in the car, Warren responded, not a chance because the secret service would have reported it, and in a beyond everything else manner, Warren places high value on McCain giving his word on the issue. Maybe civil but not a luxury one should blindly extend to a politician especially during an election.
I don't believe that much if anything was answered about the fundamental questions here and I know this because I still have them. Why was McCain late? Warren said that there was an agreement reached between all parties. Considering the event design, wasn't this an important part of the agreement? How late was McCain? Why would one believe that the secret service is responsible to monitor such things? With today's technology shouldn't it be acknowledged that McCain was at least able to receive improper information? Instead impropriety was simply represented as preposterous. I realize that the imagination can run wild here but the lack of rules creates suspicion about everything including the coin toss that determined who would go first. A smart caller asked the question on CNN's Larry King show and amazingly Warren answers that it was done a month ago with his staff without the candidates present. I realize that we are talking about a church here but I'm sorry, I don't like going for this ride without the assurance of a little proof.
With mixed feelings I expect Warren will escape further scrutiny because everyone seems to love this man and by all accounts he has done more for his fellow human beings than any thousand others. And it is hard for me to suspect that this was planned. But his answers were given like a politician instead of a pastor and if nothing else it exemplifies the importance of the separation of church and state.
The politics of the state is a contaminant that if allowed to seep into faith based organizations, will destroy them as it has in many other examples around the world. Unfortunately the same can hold true in the reverse. The founding fathers were well aware of this and took appropriate measures.
Warren says he believes in this separation but re-entwines the two with talk of individual world views that are part and parcel in the equation. It's like just wanting a little protectionism from world market capitalism. In simpler terms, it's flirting with disaster.
In my last post I spoke about the exact players in the McCain campaign staff who were front and center during this controversy. I think you know whether or not I believe this crew is capable of carrying out something this devious. But because of what appeared to be loose rules I can't know the truth and likely will never know it so I hold nothing against McCain for this.
But I do know that if Rev. Warren is going to continue to play a role in the election of my president he had better get his act together because this was harmful and an early sign of the hubris that has spelled doom for many of his kind before him.

Democrats Round Two

A better Democratic debate this time to be sure. But not because of CNN as they would have you believe. Can you imagine Walter Cronkite on the air, basking in adulation from colleagues just for doing his job. Wolf Blitzer did it, and for me whether or not he did his job is questionable. Take his show of hands approach when questioning on such critical issues as firing missiles at a suspected Osama Bin Laden target or the use of force in Sudan. It was thoughtless at best and perhaps purposefully contrived. To her credit, Senator Clinton refused to take the bait.
Then there was the thinly veiled question about how the candidates would use President Clinton in their administration. Why be phony? Why not just ask the question of the person it was intended for, Senator Clinton, and get on with it. Like I've said before, President Clinton is not revered nearly as much as some would have you think and CNN knows that candidates will answer this type of question affirmatively even if it hurts their campaign. I guess this is their idea of cutting edge reporting. Don't hold your breath waiting for a similar question about President Bush asked of the Republican candidates by CNN.
Some of his follow-up questions sounded like Blitzer hadn't been listening to the answers. At one point Rep. Kucinich gave an appropriate answer, right or wrong, to a question about restoring the military, Blitzer says "but the question was..." and repeats it. Kucinich, looking stunned rephrased his answer. Maybe Blitzer preferred another answer but he clearly didn't listen to what Kucinich had just said.
I'm sure they would argue as journalists that these questions were designed to find "the best obtainable version of the truth" but they missed the mark. The whole event seemed out of balance. CNN will have to start getting up a lot earlier if they think they're going to out smart these candidates, Democrat or Republican.
The bottom line is that CNN is chasing Fox news. Hopefully they're only envious of their ratings. They appear to be willing to try anything including heaping kudos on themselves to catch up, maybe thinking that a certain number of people watching will mindlessly agree. It's sad to watch the process of a formerly respected news source go the way of an entertainment show. Particularly when their competition never had to go through such humiliation. Yep and let me just take a moment to say goodbye to any Fox news fans who should ever stumble on this site.
After the debate there was a lot of comparing the candidates to their last performance which is alarming because therein lies some of the negative value of these early parades through the paddocks. I can't tell you how many times over the years I've seen people promoted or bestowed with bonuses, honors or other rewards for being "most improved" and they still didn't meet the necessary standard that those who were overlooked routinely met. The media gets sucked into this all the time. A reference point makes their job easier I suspect but it has no place in evaluating someones performance or abilities.
As usual the most substantive answers seemed to come from what they call the second tier candidates. But the style masters or front runners did well enough to hold their leads. For reasons I'll never understand, we like to play what we think is the safest bet and that's just the way it is. So even if Governor Richardson is a proven diplomat and we badly need one, or Rep. Kucinich is the least war mongering when that might come in handy, all we can hope for is that one of the front runners will remember their names when it comes time to fill positions requiring those skills.
A few other things stuck with me about this debate. First the negatives. I know it occurred on both sides to be fair but I'll never understand how someone could vote on the authorization to attack Iraq without reading the ninety page National Intelligence Estimate. And one of them was Senator Clinton who keeps repeating her famous line "if I knew then what I know now" statement. Go figure. Then there is John Edwards trying to differentiate himself from himself, I guess. He's the one guy who would keep me up at night if his numbers started improving.
And finally the positives. I was glad to see Senator Dodd repeatedly emphasize how grateful Democrats are to our troops. The opposition loves to say otherwise and saying this over and over is the only way to dispel this insinuation. I also liked Senator Bidens perspective on Iran and his attempt to moth ball "regime change" as a policy toward that country.
Then there was Senator Obama, perhaps the best orator of the group who said things like "it erodes our moral claims to act on broader universal principles" or " The strength of our military has to be matched with the power of our diplomacy to build alliances around the world." These are from memory so excuse me if they're not just right but I eat that stuff up and he is still holding my attention.
Finally, it's reassuring that the candidates, both Republican and Democrat are about the smartest bunch I've ever seen run. Most of them, quite likely could do a good job for America. So we have an interesting race with little downside and plenty of upside. It should be fun to watch. Goodnight.