Was Saddleback a Blooper?

What the heck was going on at Saddleback?

I've been reading that Obama has accused McCain of cheating...
They say he somehow knew what the questions were going to be beforehand.

And McCain firing back that Obama couldn't answer the tough questions about abortion, saying that 'It was above his pay grade"!

Who Cares?!

And what the heck were the two Presidential candidates doing by having a quasi debate at a church? Who does this guy Rick Warren think he is that he can stage an event like this without proposing a winner and a loser?

Everybody says their guy won! So what was the point?
Who DID win? And, were there any losers - anywhere?

My money is on nobody... and US!

Nobody won because the event wasn't a contest, it was merely one man's(Warrens) attempt to inject himself into the presidential race. But why did he do this? Was it ego? Was it money? Was it really necessary?

The American people lost because we were exposed to a rather farcical portrayal of the election process. It was more like Dr. Phil interviewing Oprah, then Martha Stewart. What's up with that?

I don't think the event was necessary, but I do think something like this was a valuable lesson for us all.

It was unusual to say the least, but this has been a very unusual election season. First we had the right reverend Wright and his anti-American, black liberation theology on the front page of every newspaper and every TV for weeks. Then we had McCain denouncing Rev Haggee and any other preacher he could see from his limo.

We heard talk of Obama having a Muslim childhood - and that's still not resolved completely - and then that goofy priest, then the bomber Bill Ayers, then Michelle Obama dissing America.

We heard McCain say that he wanted to run a clean campaign and disavowed everyone who said BHO was a black man and from Chicago.

So somebody had to bring both of these fools down to earth. This is the first election I can remember in which religion was such a central issue. I guess it made sense for a well known pastor like Warren to try to mediate a truce or cease fire or at least a common understanding.

Did it work? I don't think so.

I think all it did was to give McCain a false sense of completion, a false sense of reason, a false sense of who BHO really is.

I think it emboldened BHO. It gave him credibility and confidence. It really didn't matter if he won or lost, he got to talk to a preacher who had compassion for him and made him look good and respectable. Unlike the image rev Wright gave us.

All in all, I think it was a bad idea. The founding fathers would not have approved of holding a presidential debate in a church - unless that was the only building available.

I don't think Washington would have approved, nor Jefferson, nor any of the others. It was way too touchy feely. Not Governmental, not Presidential at all.

Did we Americans approve? Frankly, I don't believe anybody really thought about it. It was just another TV event about the election. Some watched, most didn't.

Did Americans concern themselves with the implications of a minister refereeing a debate in a church?
I dare say... not one bit.

But maybe after all is said and done it will sink into the American consciousness that this election IS about religion.

Not about which religion, but about religious values - religious values that will be decided by the high court, the Supreme Court.
It's a choice between a Pro-Life guy like McCain... Or a Pro-Choice guy who thinks making decisions about abortion is 'above his pay grade'?

I know who I want to be choosing judges, and his name is John McCain.

EDIT: Here's what Bill Kristol had to say about the event