First off, Sussman is Field Director for the Loretta Sanchez CAMPAIGN and not District Director for the Congresswoman.
Perhaps Marc is still upset that Jubal was nearly successful in keeping his girlfriend from getting her position with the OC Business Council.

Mau-Mauing!!?? That's a hell of a racist comment, Jubal! You need to THINK before you write!

The entire forum was a set up against Obama. Obama had thoughtful and honest answers. And, McCain's answers came straight from the Republican Talking Points.

McCain has switched, and flipped, on more issues in the past few years than Carter has little liver pills, and yet the majority of the people in this forum refuse to see, or hear, the truth.

He never mentioned how he flipped on gay marriage, how he flipped on torture, how he flipped on Iraq and how he has voted against MOST Veteran funding bills. Maybe you should take a few moments to re search the truth, or maybe you don't want the truth as Jesus would have wanted.

McCain spoke mostly of his time as a POW, in which he capitulated to the enemy, but didn't mention that, and he, of course, will never bring up how he ran out on his first wife after she was terribly disfugured, went out with many women while still married to her, and then found a wealthy Heiress that had enough money to front his political aspirations.

He is a man who even failed at his time at the Naval academy, finishing 594th out of a class of 599.

You people here, are swayed way too much by your religious fanaticism than what is good for this country, as a who. And that is not John McCain.

My wife is very biblical, evangelical, and we both belong to a Christian Church. Most of you haven't got an honest clue what the word "Christian" really stands for.

Jubal, you make some comments here that cause me to want to discuss something I believe many Republicans don't understand very well. IMO, Republicans tend to appreciate unhesitating and unequivocal statements, that's precisely what Democrats do NOT like. In very general terms, Republicans see the world as black and white, Dems see grey.

I sat watching the forum with other Dems. I don't think anyone agreed with all of what Obama said, but my companions and I appreciated what I think we felt was the nuanced tone of his answers. OTHO, while I think we were sometimes sympathetic with McCain's general positions, he made us all cringe repeatedly with his pat responses to complex questions.

So: actual stances aside, Obama's nuanced views are far more appealing to Dems than what you call McCain's "straightforwardness." And I think what you refer to as McCain's lack of equivocation is more appealing to Republicans than Obama's multifaceted appreciation for the complexity of today's world.

As for me personally, I know McCain was once a moderate Republican, but in this forum it was quite plain to me he was reading from the GOP playbook. Obama, however, appeared to be speaking his own mind. McCain seemed schooled, Obama seemed natural.

Eric:

It's Sunday, so I'll be charitable and simply point out that your assertion is wrong. Mind-numbingly, not-even-within-a-1,000-miles-of-the-ballpark wrong.

The entire forum was a set up against Obama.

LOL! You're now tied with Eric for most ridiculous statement of the day.

I suppose it would have been less "set up against" Obama if Rick Warren and the congregation had laid palm fronds at Obama's feet as he entered the auditorium?

Matt,

My sources say you got taken to politics school during the debate by Marc Sussman.
H/T to Marc Sussman for telling it like it is. Make sure you click
on the link in Matt's article.

Though not perfect - a good forum.

Both candidates did well.

Though thoughtful - Obama answered every question, quicker to respond - McCain dodged some.

btw - is there only 2 parties in the USA?

If McCain's abortion answer was so straightforward and without double-talk, and the abortion debate were as simple as McCain and Warren make it out to be, why has McCain not introduced legislation declaring that any doctor who performs an abortion is guilty of murder, any woman who seeks an abortion is an accomplice to murder, and any woman who miscarries may be guilty of manslaughter?

My sources say you got taken to politics school during the debate by Marc Sussman

Sure...if dishonest ambushes, ignorant historical analogies and empty Democratic spin and rhetoric constitute "winning," then Marc was the winner.

Readers can listen to the radio program at the link above and make up your own mind.

I listened to the radio program. Sussman was an ass. Jubal got a little too work up at the start. I don't think he was expecting Sussman to go into snarling attack dog mode right off the bat.

I've listened to Jubal on his RC Radio program. He and Nick Berardino, a union Democrat, disagree, but they do it civilly.

Too bad Sussman could show the same level of class.

Too bad Sussman could show the same level of class.

That should read "couldn't show the same level of class."

Sussman should also learn how to speak without rote reliance on spin and buzzwords. "Greencollar jobs for the 21st Century" What a laugh!

Though thoughtful - Obama answered every question, quicker to respond

Are you kidding me, "Balance"? I got dizzy listening to Obama talk circles around the questions. If you could boil Obama's answers in kettle, they'd evaporate into nothing.

Obama is very skilled as appearing thoughtful without saying anything.

Though thoughtful - Obama answered every question, quicker to respond

Are you kidding me, "Balance"? I got dizzy listening to Obama talk circles around the questions. If you could boil Obama's answers in kettle, they'd evaporate into nothing.

Obama is very skilled at appearing thoughtful without saying anything.

My wife is very biblical, evangelical, and we both belong to a Christian Church. Most of you haven't got an honest clue what the word "Christian" really stands for.

Maybe you ought to brush up on the subject, yourself, Mike. Your attitude reminds me of the Pharisee in Christ's parable: the one who would go to the temple and loudly thank God for not making him like all the sinners around him.

Jubal-

Loretta's staffer sounded angry, bitter, and ignorant, when trying to deflect the focus of the discussion to the past, as opposed to the topic at hand which was the Saddleback forum.

You did a good job of bringing the discussion back to the original subject while Loretta's staffer appeared rude and flustered when he tried to interrupt every single one of your answers.

Good job. *pats Jubal's back*

Missy,

Obviously, partisan Reps and Dems viewed the Civil Forum differently. And for the most part, I agree with your analysis of the different candidate qualities to which Dems and Reps are attracted. Dems, especially liberals Dems, tend to go for "nuanced" candidates. In my experience, they're attracted to the professorial types.

To the extent Reps go for "unhesitating and unequivocal" stances, I believe that's because it's an indication of a man or woman who knows what they think and isn't afraid to spell it out, rather than homogenizing his/her thoughts as they travel through the brain.

I'd also point out that succinctly and quickly answering a question doesn't mean the person hasn't thought it through. Nor are long, "nuanced" and "complex" answers, smoothly delivered, necessarily a sing of intellectual depth, heft or spine. Sometimes I think Democrats mistake complexity for truth, as if the simple answer couldn't possibly be the correct answer.

But the partisans like us already know for whom we're voting. It's more productive for analysis purposes to try, to the extent possible, to step outside our partisanship and look at it through the eyes of a undecided, middle-of-the-road or DTS swing voter. I honestly think that after watching yesterday's forum, most would rate McCain as more suited to be president.

The President is the Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief, and I think most voters view decisiveness as an essential quality in a President, especially in the dangerous world in which we live. McCain fits that bill. Obama, likable, smart, eloquent and charming as he is, has been coming across as more of a professor or philosopher-politician, saying he wants to hear a "spectrum of opinions" and continually "refining" his positions. In my opinion, most swing voters equate what partisan Dems call "nuance" with vacillation and indecision, which aren't qualities they want in a President.

Thanks, D'Anconia.

BTW, you have an open invitation to join the Blogpen, but I don't know how to contact you.

mccain championed the baby's rights; obama championed the mother's rights. you decide who was right.

Jubal called McCain a liar in his blog. Now he is supporting him.
Jubal called Obama a leader and now says he isn't.

If being an arrogant and disingenous is the key to winning I give the debate to Jubal.

If telling the truth and being honest is the way to win then I give it to Marc.

Partisan GOP folks are in denial. Let's see who wins this year.

Thanks Jubal, but I'll stick to commenting. I appreciate the offer though.

Anon-

The topic of discussion for this debate was not whether or not McCain was Jubal's choice in the primary, but rather how the two candidates did during the Saddleback forum.

Loretta's staffer showed up prepared with quotes from RedCounty, meaning that he didn't really care how the candidates did in the forum; he already knew he was going after Jubal personally instead of debating on the merits of the subject at hand.

I think it speaks volumes that Loretta's staffer spent hours researching Jubal's background and doing opposition research on RedCounty, while Jubal didn't even know whether the staffer was a district director or a field director.

Basically Matt showed up to debate the issues. Marc Sussman showed up to mindlessly attack Matt personally with irrelevant arguments and a mountain of strawmen.

What?:

Jubal called McCain a liar in his blog.

That is false. It was false when Sussman made the claim, and it is just as false coming from you. I did not call John McCain a liar.

I looked up the post Sussman was talking about. It was about the Reagan Library debate during the GOP primaries. This is what I wrote:

"There were a number of flash points tonight that pushed me away from going with McCain. First was his exchange with Mitt Romney over his charge that Romney supported fixed timetables for withdrawal. McCain was obviously misrepresenting what Romney said. Even Anderson Cooper pointed out that Romney had not called for publicly fixing deadlines for withdrawal."

"Yet even after his misrepresentation was made plain to him, McCain stuck to his story and continued insisting that Romney had said something that Romney clearly had not -- and at that point it just becomes a lie. And that's significant for a man who has built his campaign on honor, straight talk and honesty."

"Liar" is a character trait. It means a person who is in the habit of lying. McCain's stubborn insistence that Romney said something he hadn't entered the "lie" territory. But it does not make him a liar. To maintain that would mean anyone who tells a falsehood, even once, is forevermore a liar. And unless "What?" and Marc Sussman have never told a lie their entire lives, then that appellation attaches to them as well.

I can't help it if you and Sussman cannot grasp that important distinction.

Now he is supporting him.

Yes I am. Even more recently, Sussman's boss, a Hillary supporter, pointed out "What do we really know about Barack Obama?" and yet he (and presumbly his boss) now support Obama?

So you're point is...?

Jubal called Obama a leader and now says he isn't.

No, I did not. You need to brush up on Research 101. This is what I said in my post about the night of the Iowa caucuses:

"[Obama and Huckabee] talked like winners -- like leaders -- about coming together and moving forward."

I said they talked like leaders, not that they were leaders. I thought Democrats liked nuance?

Iowa was the first time I had listened to an Obama speech, and I was greatly impressed by his oratorical and candidate skills. But in the intervening 6 months, I have also watch the vacuousness of his rhetoric, the ease with which he shifts from one position to another while acting as if no change has taken place, his injection of race into the campaign, and the essential solipsism of his candidacy. I haven't seen evidence that he IS a leader, in addition being able to mimic how a leader speaks in set speeches.

In the future, What?, if you're going to try and hoist me on a petard, makes sure it's mine.

No prob, D'Anconia. Let me know if you change your mind.

Not one question on immigration.

What a sham.

F mc cain and Obama

they are both open border traitors

Will the program be re-broadcast? Date, time, channel!

Can it be viewed on the web?

Thank you in advance for your kind reply.

Perhaps Marc is still upset that Jubal was nearly successful in keeping his girlfriend from getting her position with the OC Business Council.

What the...? He was trying to impress his girlfriend? Is this Sussman guy in junior high?

Same could be said for Matt. He tried to prevent some girl from getting hired simply because she's a Democrat. Matt admitted he had never met her nor knew her personally. I don't call that very mature.

Matt,
I wold not put too much stock into what Marc Sussmans opinions and positions or statements are. It is common knowledge in democratic circles that he is going to be fired from Loretta Sanchez' office at the end of his campaign season. The rude, crass, and abhorent behavior you experienced from him this day is nothing compared to the gang like behavior he has been displaying around Democratic circles of late.

Loretta has recieved too many complaints about him and is firing him on November 5th. Marc knows it too. I hope he has brushed up his resume.

So Mccain answer quicker huh? could it be because he knew the the question before hand? He even answered some before they were asked.
TSK TSK TSK

McCain is and has been the only choice.
Obama is an empty suit who is lost without a teleprompter and someone giving him the answer. He does not have the cajones to be commander in chief....(confront evil vs. defeat it? ). He does not have the morality to be the leader of the US (cannot answer a simple question on when a baby gains rights and even advocates that less than perfect babies be left on the shelf to die right along with partial birth aborted babies.)

The only thing new in the Saddleback forum is that we didn't hear strains of Jesus Christ, Superstar as Obama entered the building with Rick Warren singing "Hosana" and placing palm fronds in his path.

One aside...you can tell how badly Obama did by the press coverage in the lame stream media...(crickets chirping).

OWK,
"Now were stuck with Janet for four years!"

You’ve got to be kidding right? the fact that your are stuck with Janet is because A), The Democratic Party failed completely in getting a candidate to run against her: B) the Democratic party (specifically Melahat, Marc, Alicia,) used Misha as a weapon and mole to cannibalize the only dem to stand up against Janet, C) The Democratic party (Frank Barbaro) was too chicken to stand up against Melahat, marc, Gila, and Alicia.

How you can blame that boondoggle on a campaign manager for Hoa is mind blowing.

Regardless,
Marc Sussman has angered labor, Dem Activists, and his own co-workers from what I understand. He is a goner.

Listening to the interview (was it just my computer, but I could barely hear anyone besides Marc?) Marc did come loaded for bear, while Jubal was more focused and analytical, with his usual partisan twist. Still all Marc's points were valid.

I think Marc succumbed to a temptation I frequently find myself fighting off, that of JUBAL-BAITING. Which, even though it sounds like "Jew-baiting", is more akin to the inhumane medieval sport of bear baiting. It's just irresistable sometimes with Cunningham. You knew those kinds of kids in school... OK, I've said enough. Entertaining debate both of you.

Hmm, while you didn't actually quote it, you posted this:

"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."

What you didn't mention was the hundred "um's" that Obama added into this answer and almost all of his other answers. Whats quite sad is that he couldn't answer this question but gave a answer that wasn't a answer. He was trying to figure out what would sound best and not get him "in trouble". Hes a double talker and will tell you what you want to hear which isn't what we need in a President.

Overall, if there was a winner, McCain was it. Obama was very disappointing to watch, like he always is if hes not reading from a script. Everytime you see Obama, hes a different man. Flip flopping that is.

NO CONE of silence for McCain.

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/08/18/mccains-cone-of-silence/?icid=100214839x1207964610x1200422365

Isn't it easier to answer TOUGH questions quickly . . . . if you maybe know what they are beforehand?

GIGO ...

imo

Adam is right. Obama had a tough and palm sweating "show".

Geez Edgardo! Take some responsibility for losing Hoa's campaign. You can blame all the Dems you want, but at the end of the day, you were in charge, your campaign plan was a disaster and your candidate lost.

Well it is very typcial of republicans to use only a portion of a response and state that its a punt. You only posted 30 words of an over 400 word response. People claim to want complete answers from him, but when he gives them, they call it a punt.

SEN. OBAMA: Well, I think that whether you're 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 that there is a moral and ethical element to this issue. And so I think 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 versus Wade. And I come to that conclusion not because I'm pro-abortion but because ultimately I don't think women make these decisions casually. I think they wrestle with these things in profound ways, in consultation with these pastors or their spouses or their doctors and their family members.

So for me, the goal right now should be -- and this is where I think we can find common ground; and by the way, I've now inserted this into the Democratic Party platform -- is, how do we reduce the number of abortions? Because the fact is is that although we've had a president who is opposed to abortion over the last eight years, abortions have not gone down. And that, I think, is something that we have to ask ourselves.

REV. WARREN: Have you ever voted to limit or reduce abortions?

SEN. OBAMA: Well, I am in favor, for example, of limits on late- term abortions if there is an exception for the mother's health. Now, from the perspective of those who, you know, are pro-life, I think they would consider that inadequate, and I respect their views. I mean, one of the things that I've always said is is that on this particular issue, if you believe that life begins at conception and you are consistent in that belief, then I can't argue with you on that because that is a core issue of faith for you.

What I can do is say, are there ways that we can work together to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies so that we actually are reducing the sense that women are seeking out abortions? And as an example of that, one of the things that I've talked about is, how do we provide the resources that allow women to make the choice to keep a child? You know, have we given them the health care that they need? Have we given them the support services they need? Have we given them the options of adoption that are necessary? That, I think, can make a genuine difference.

I think the way McCain has been doing his politics now is appalling. Back in 2000 I would have voted for the guy, but now he's totally become a GOP hand puppet. As many other commenters said, his responses were straight GOP talking points. In response to Rick Warren's question, "Which Supreme Court Justices would you not have nominated?". McCain quickly ticked off the names of all the liberal Justices. After a short pause, Rick Warren said "Why? Tell me why?". McCain tried to just stick to the sound bite friendly answer instead of giving his reasoning. And as another commenter said about the merit pay question, here's the transcript of McCain's answer:

Q ABOUT 80 PERCENT OF AMERICA SAYS THEY SUPPORT

MERIT PAY FOR THE BEST TEACHERS. NOW, I DON'T WANT TO

HEAR YOUR STUMP SPEECH ON EDUCATION?

A YES. YES. AND FIND BAD TEACHERS ANOTHER LINE OF

WORK.

Q YOU KNOW --

A CAN I --

Q YOU ARE ANSWERING SO QUICKLY.
A CAN I --
Q YOU WANT TO PLAY A GAME OF POKER?

McCain answered Yes when the question hadn't even been asked yet. Of course the Yes can be just attributed to mean "I agree", but even Rick Warren here is shocked at the speed of the answer.

And then there was the part about taxes where McCain regurgitated his usual "small businesses are the backbone of America and they're being taxed out of business" schtick. But the problem is that according to the Washington Post, small businesses likely won't see any McCain tax cuts if he's elected, since he's going to tax the bottom %60 of the population.

Political arguments are nuanced and subtle, and Obama's been open about discussing all of his thoughts on an issue, even if it doesn't play well on the news. I thought Obama's responses were honest, amiable, and well thought out considering his lack of a pre-made speech. Obama spoke to the pastor conversationally whereas McCain spoke to the audience persuasively and decisively and you can tell that the audience (which was already skewed in McCain's favor due to the setting) loved it.

Even now the pundits are lauding McCain for being so decisive and having a "set moral compass" when many of these "decisive" answers show a McCain completely different from a year or even a few months ago!

I don't think the Obama campaign should be bringing this themselves though because both citizens and the media are smart enough to pick up on the "Cone of Silence" issue. It's better for the campaign to take the high road in this case. I think the McCain camp's "How dare you insult a vet/PoW" excuse is weak, as another commenter pointed out. How hard would it have been to put McCain in an actual cone of silence for the forum?

As many other commenters said, his responses were straight GOP talking points.

Oh please.

When Obama answers a question, he is lauded as thoughtful, nuanced, sublime, magical...but when John McCain says what he thinks, it is "straight GOP talking points"? Although, given that John McCain is a Republican, it may have occurred to Ruben that his stances on the issues would bear a resemblance to the Republican Party.

The only "straight talking points" I've been seeing are all the liberal bloggers and commenters mewling that McCain's answers were "straight GOP talking points."

I'm wondering if McCain knew the questions ahead of time and simply tried to get off his answers ASAP - before he forgot them!

Jubal, the way McCain responded reminded me of a student who memorized his flash cards. The test came and he knew the answers to the questions but he didn't want to respond to the "Support your answer" part.

And you seem to forget that anywhere between 12 and 3 months ago John McCain had beliefs very unlike the "stances on the issues [that] would bear a resemblance to the Republican Party". John McCain realized he couldn't win with those kind of beliefs so he changed them accordingly.

Ruben:

Really? It reminded me of a guy who knows what he thinks, and is able to communicate those thoughts succinctly. You're confusing verbosity with intelligence.

I'm trying to think of a stance McCain took on Saturday that is new.

You're guy, on the other hand, seems like he's in the constant process of becoming.

Here are the transcripts side-by-side, of the answers from Senators Obama and McCain:
http://www.thirty-thousand.org/pages/Saddleback_16AUG2008.htm

I'm not a big political thinker, but here are my thoughts:

Fist of all, isn't great that we all gather in any number of public places such as this and express our opinions, whatever they may be? God bless the USA! In some countries, we would all be marked for execution by now!

Anyways. I supported Obama in the election, but I found that McCain made some good points. I can't vouch for his motives or intentions, but he has valid points. I found his concession (is that right?) speech after the election, very noble and dignified, amid all the booes and complaining. That scores well in my book.

As far as Obama, there issues that maybe he seems weak, but I feel like those issues are not so cut and dry to always get a clear cut answer. No matter what your stance on the issues is, there is always someone who will be potentially let down. Take abortion for instance. My view: If a young girl is stupid and gets knocked up, and then wants an abortion, tough, deal with. Should've thought about that before you did what you did. On the other hand, a girl is raped, and is not pregnant with the rapist's child. Is she to carry that child to term? Heck no! She didn't ask for that. Anyone seeing my point? Take gay rights. Do I think they should get married. No. Do I agree with what they do? No. Do they deserve human rights like the rest of us. Absolutely.

The point is, many issues have many, many sides and factors. Not giving a cut and dry answer is not a sign of weakness, but of human compassion. Obama isn't just saying what he wants people to hear. He is trying to appeal to the needs of ALL people. Realistically, that's not going to happen. But I believe it his heartfelt desire to do so. I believe that compassion is what is going to make him a great President. This country needs that now more than ever.

OK, I've said my piece. Don't bash me too hard :)

I apologize for the grammatical errors above.....