If anyone watched the two candidates, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain, on Saturday with Pastor Rick Warren the average listener came away with some definite impressions.  Just as bit of background on Pastor Warren and his audience.  Pastor Warren is a conservative, pro-life, republican.  Thus, the questions were framed with a conservative bent. The audience consisted of all evangelicals and tailor made for McCain or any GOP candidate for that matter.  Also, 75% of of his audience voted for Pres. Bush in 2004.  It was actually a brave move for Sen. Obama to participate.  One other quick point:  Only McCain, a man worth $125 million would define rich as someone making $5 million a year.  It’s all relatively elitist I guess.  There are many folks out there who are making $500,000 a year who consider themselves rich.  Okay back to the point of this post.  Having viewed the interviews on CSPAN and listened to the reaction from listeners before I heard any pundit analysis.  My overall impression differs significantly from that of the pundit class.  Many of the listeners who called in said that Sen. McCain’s answers seemed rehearsed and canned and Sen. Obama was more engaged in a thoughtful conversation.   I also noticed several times that Sen. McCain seemed to answer the questions before Pastor Warren could actually get out the question.  This indicates to me that McCain heard the questions beforehand and was not in a “cone of silence.” Come to find out that Sen. McCain was not in the building when Pastor Warren said that he was in the “cone of silence” but had just left his hotel at the time that the statement was made.  Pastor Warren did say that he gave each of the candidates, one question, that is one question, not two questions (as reported by National Review Online)but one question beforehand.  Warren also said that he did give Sen. Obama a second question that he did not get to Sen. McCain, because McCain showed up late, regarding giving the pastor a commitment to an “emergency plan for orphans” similar to the one that Bush initiated for AIDS.  Giving Sen. Obama a single extra question is a different story then receiving a complete preview of the questions and the opposing candidates answers beforehand.  Does anyone believe, with the stakes at risk in this campaign, that the McCain campaign did not at least listen to CSPAN radio on the way to the event and therefore had a heads up with respect to the questions and Obama’s answers before he arrived.  Yea…I didn’t think so.  McCain’s interview also now makes much more sense. The Arizona senator had a ready anecdote for almost every single answer.  I might also mention that those anecdotes are ones that even for the average person who have been only slightly paying attention to this race thus far have heard at least twice.  As someone who has paid a great deal of attention to this race, I have heard each of his stories and McCainisms ad nauseum, including the “cross in the sand” story.  What I have not heard is a real explanation about his moral failing. McCain skipped over this question by saying that his “failure of [his] first marriage” was his greatest moral failure and quickly moved on without giving an explanation as to why.  Sen. Obama answered the question thoughtfully and provided detail.  McCain did however manage to insert “Americans failed to serve a purpose greater than there own self interest” and ”following Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell” when needed.  We have heard McCain say these and other McCainisms sprinkled throughout his interview at town hall meetings, in speeches, in interviews, etc……the exact same phrases.  While I agree with the sentiment, he needs some new material.  We need a president who has the ability to think through the difficult problems and grasp the intricacies of what the repercussions of a bad decision will mean, not someone who constantly repeats the talking points that he has been using since 2000 and has a well documented volatile and hair-trigger history of speaking without thought.  We have had eight years of cowboy diplomacy.

Here’s is a camparison of answers given by Obama and McCain respectively that proves my point that McCain had a heads-up.

Warren and Obama:

Q. OKAY LET’S GO TO EDUCATION. AMERICA RIGHT NOW 23 RANKS 19TH IN HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION. WE’RE FIRST IN INCARCERATIONS.

A. NOT GOOD.

Q. NOT GOOD. 80 PERCENT OF AMERICANS RECENT POLE SAID THEY BELIEVE IN MERIT PAY FOR TEACHERS.

1. I’M NOT ASKING DO YOU THINK ALL TEACHERS SHOULD GET A RAISE.

2. DO YOU THINK BETTER TEACHERS SHOULD BE PAID BETTER?

3. THEY SHOULD BE MAKING MORE THAN POOR TEACHERS?

Now Warren and McCain:

Q ALL RIGHT. LET’S TALK ABOUT EDUCATION. AMERICA 18 RANKS 19TH IN HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATIONS, BUT WE’RE FIRST IN 19 INCARCERATION. EVERYBODY SAYS THEY WANT MORE ACCOUNTABILITY IN SCHOOLS?

A  UH-HUH.

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?

As for the pundits, so I hear the listeners reactions on CSPAN and I have the same reaction as the CSPAN listeners, but I then turn to MSNBC to hear the pundit analysis thinking that they would be echoing what seemed to be obvious with respect to the rehearsed or canned nature of McCain’s answers…and what do I hear?  The pundit class going on and on about how great McCain was tonight.  How McCain was at the top of his game and gave great, quick, and decisive answers (that happens when you know the questions in advance and have answered such questions the same exact way in various other forums).   The same thing was being said on CNN.  Give me a break.  McCain was not being interviewed, he was acting out a play where he received the the script and rehearsal time prior to the performance.  The listeners of CSPAN saw and heard it……why would the pundit class miss such an obvious fake out.  Why…to create more of a horse race people.  Trust your own instincts.