I'm really pleased that so many of us watched the "Saddleback Show" last night. It will be one of the few times between now and election day when each of us can see each of the candidates answering unscripted questions, not making stump speeches, and definitely not being defined by what their handlers say, the interpretations of the media, or some of the offensive and really dumb ads currently being broadcast.

I watched the whole 3-hour show in its entirety. I made it a point to not only listen to the candidates' answers, but look at their faces and expressions while being questioned. Oh, there were a few things said by both candidates that I don't necessarily agree with, but nothing that would cause me to be terribly unhappy if either one was elected President.

I respect John McCain and tend to believe that what he says can be believed. That's a big difference from many other candidates for political office. At times I wished Obama would have responded with the certainty of McCain. I say that even though I think all would agree that we would value thoughtfulness as an important personal trait of anyone sitting in the White House.

While McCain has been in the Congress for many years, I don't think his experience makes him significantly better qualified than Barack Obama. Both have spent their entire lives in the employ of one agency of government or another. Neither of them have ever held a job in the private economy. Neither of them have ever had to manage and motivate large groups of people with disparate interests. Neither of them have been in positions where their decision and their decision alone would affect the lives of millions of people. In that sense, both of them will have to do some OJT if they are elected.

McCain is older and more experienced in government. However, he has experienced difficulties managing his campaign staff and financing. Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two and has done what is broadly viewed as a great job of running a 21st century political campaign without utilizing negative tactics. Neither have made it very clear who their key advisors will be if they are elected. Both have endured criticisms for a few people that they had relied on during their campaigns. Bottom line: the management skills of both candidates remain an open question, as is who "the administration" will actually be for both candidates. I surely hope that question gets some clarity before election day.

On the question of leadership, neither candidate has been in much of a position to lead and motivate people. Both have organizations which can "turn out" large groups for campaign events. Between the two, Obama seems to have distinguished himself in motivating large, even huge groups of people. He seems to have gotten an entire generation of Americans re-awakened and involved in the political process. How wonderful for all of us. The crowds of foreign residents who turned out to see and hear him speak during several stops on his recent European tour was amazing. Certainly his political handlers could not have arranged those crowds. Has Obama awakened a large segment Americans to the political process? Are the crowds that turned out in Europe an expression of their interest in a change in the role the U.S. wil play in the world? Could Obama extend that enthusiasm throughout America and the world if he were elected, ala John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan? I don't have the answer to that question, but that's surely something to consider when we enter the voting booth in November.

Politically, Obama will have a greater opportunity to create the change that is the basis of his campaign than will McCain. Obama wil work with a Congress controlled by his own party. McCain would have attempt to promote his platform with a Democratic Congress. It's possible that McCain would have to work with a Congress which could actually over-ride his veto of legislation. While McCain is widely respected, by his own description he is a bit of a political maverick and would never win the "congeniality award". So our choice seems to be one candidate that will actually be able to get things done politically, which carries the risk that he might get some wrong things done. The other candidate will have his difficulties accomplishing much politically, particularly if his VP represents the far right and if he were to populate his administration with those from the far right of the political spectrum. This contrast makes for an interesting choice on our part--a lot of risk that some things will get done that might not turn out so well, or not much of a chance that anything meaningful will be accomplished legislatively.

Maybe the most important comments made by both candidates had to do with the type of people they might consider for nomination to the Supreme Court. While I tend to agree with McCain's definition of the proper role of the Supreme Court, the justices he admires were for the most part the most strident opponents of many of the legal decisions that have been so important to our country in the past several decades. If McCain could unilaterally appoint 2-3 replacements, I'd be very concerned. But with what is certain to be a pretty heavily Democratic Senate, he'll have to nominate candidates that are somewhere more towards the middle of the jurisprudence spectrum, so what McCain says now regarding candidates he might nominate isn't very meaningful given the political process they would have to survive in order to be confirmed. I think we need to pay a lot of attention on who Obama might nominate because his choices stand a much better chance of approval in the judiciary committee and confirmation by the full Senate. I'll be watching that one. I wouldn't want a Supreme Court canted heavily to the liberal side any more than I want a far right wing majority on the Court.

Some of the questions regarding when life begins and stem cell research were a little irritating to me because those issues don't seem to compare in importance to many of the economic, social, health and foreign relations problems facing our country. I recognize that the questions were framed by the pastor of an evangelical megachurch and that those issues are important to many of his members and other evangelicals who lean to the far right. But in my opinion, those issues pale in importance in the grand scheme of how the U.S. should be governed and how important problems facing us are resolved.

These candidates both have positive and admirable qualities. I know who I will vote for--after reading all this, you probably know too. But as I said at the outset, and unlike some recent presidential elections, I wouldn't be unhappy with either candidate.