I'm disappointed to hear the forum was canceled. I think in a live debate without teleprompters and written notes we would be treated to more "You didn't built that" remarks from Obama and he would do himself great damage.

Warren is disingenous in the extreme. The "lack of civility" comes from Faux News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and their ilk. Warren also places his thumb heavilly on the anti-Obama scale by repeating the canard that there is a "war on religious liberty." This war is completely imaginary, but does serve the political purposes of the right wing.

Thank you Jim and Jon, for demonstrating the point.

I wish the forum would not have been canceled. I believe Pas Rick could have been a positive help to stop the irresponsible personal attacks, mean-spirited slander, and flat-out dishonest attack ads at least for a few hours.

I believe cancelling the forum was likely the most powerful thing Rick Warren could have done to illustrate America's disgust with the lack of civility in the current political debate. Both candidates seem to have dispensed with truth in their attack ads. Sad.

And thank you Greg, for further demonstrating why we can't have nice things. Jim's "incivility" was to repeat two lies, one of which has a strong racial subtext. Jon's "incivility" was accurately describing the Republicans and Warren's perspective. Warren also tips his hand by describing the campaign's "incivility" using almost exactly the same words as the Romney campaign. And let's be clear - Warren was forced to cancel BECAUSE NEITHER CANDIDATE AGREED TO APPEAR, a key detail that Ms. Weber chose to leave out. And notice, too, that the assertion that the first forum was well received lacks any links. Could that be because in the view of many Warren ambushed Obama by taking the questions in a direction that was helpful to McCain and away from previously agreed up format? Talk about thumbs on the scale...

I must say this sounds like a cop out at first blush and a means to avoid controversy. Maybe Rick could have been instrumental in a civil discourse that many are longing for.

I too sense more of an evasion than a reason here.

Whatever happened to the old saying, do not curse the darkness, but light a single candle? Why not model the behavior desired?

I agree completely with Pastor Rick... Nastiness has nothing to do in a Church preaching the Gospel.

And thank you Bob, for exemplifying and illustrating in great detail why "we can't have nice things". You may remove your foot from the scale now. Thank you, Rick, for your efforts past and present.

So Joe, can you explain, please, at least for my sake, if not for others, do we disagree because one of us has misunderstood the facts, or because one of us has decided that facts that are inconvenient to our point of view don't matter? Just to start, do you believe that the President is rather dense and lost without a teleprompter. Do you believe the "you didn't build that" line accurately represents what the President said, in context? Do you believe that Warren canceled the event when neither candidate had agreed to come? Do you deny that Warren's language mirrors the Romney campaign?

Bob,
(1) “Disagreement, etc.”? -- Most frequently the later.
(2) “Dense” in the intellectual sense? -- No.
“Lost”? -- Upon the rare occasions when the President is “off-prompter” on policy issues, yes, at times, of which the “you didn’t build that” instance is an example.
(3) Reading the entire context of the speech in the entire context of President Obama’s policies, life and stated socio-economic and political philosophies? -- Yes, without a doubt.
(4) Re Rick Warren’s actions and motivations I have no information that would lead me to think either way and would not be terribly surprised if both came into play. But, more to the point, what does it matter?
(5) The term “incivility” has been used in abundance by all candidates and all of their “minions” in all races for as long as I can remember and I do not believe any candidate has ever had a monopoly, either on the use of “incivility” itself or the use of the term.
Thanks, Joe

"Alternative" explanation? What Warren did is the exact equivalent of this:

"After learning no one wanted to come, Sixteen-year-old mean girl cancels party - says 'Those girls really weren't my friends anyway".

This is a big deal. Rick Warren...
- Misrepresented what happened
- His language closely mirrored the language of the Romney campaign
- He used this as a jumping off point to rant about "religious freedom".
- His rant showed he's not interested in discussion but advocacy.

Warren is clearly a partisan now.

There is a real story here if you want to cover it.

Bob, not to encourage the incivility, but you sound like a Democratic strategist thumping for Obama. This is a Christian forum and 95% of the commentators above other than you, Jim and Joe, simply felt a cvil debate between the candidates would be helpful to all of us. You on the other hand are bent on bashing Pastor Rick Warren (by the way I am not a Protestant or Evangelical, but I admire Rick Warren) and thumping for Obama, even though Warren said "both" campaigns were uncivil. So could you please not be rude and take over the forum?

By the way, you are free to believe whom you want and believe CNN or the campaigns. Some of us here choose to believe Warren. Our decision. Case closed.

The comments contain a large number of words. I also detect a great deal of sarcasm. My children learn in debate competition that sarcasm is not helpful to their case. It is a cheap shot, designed to be quickly effective, but does not really deal honestly with the issue. It implies anger and shows that the speaker has difficulty in expressing oneself clearly.

My perception is that there is more to this than can be said in a short article--or ever will be said in a public venue. There is much about this that we will never know. It is possible to come up with many reasons for Warren wanting the forum in the first place, as well as many reasons for canceling it. So let the debate and discussion continue--about Warren, about the political candidates, about issues of any ilk. But we will all benefit when people are wise and godly in their speech and conduct; true and fair in their assessment; and constructive and helpful in their suggestions.

It's disappointing in the extreme to see someone as respected as Rick Warren be so dishonest here. The actual reason the debate didn't go through was that neither Mr. Romney nor Mr. Obama agreed to show up for it! To pretend to be suddenly concerned about 'civility' instead of giving the actual reason is quite disingenuous and unbecoming of a church leader.

Civility? I read above where your typical unsaved deceived professing christian who some how pretends that "Faux" is acting uncivill and the rest of the conservative media while Maher, Matthews, Stewart, and the rest of those reprobate devils on the left get a pass? Have you listened to Oberman lately? Uncivil is an understatement too say the least. But the secrets of mens hearts will be revealed on that great day when Jesus comes in flaming fire to judge the world in righteousness! Then they will say to the mountains and rocks "hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the "WRATH OF THE LAMB" for the great day of His wrath has come and who shall stand! Not everyone who says "LORD LORD" will enter the kigdome of God etc... And I will say to them "DEPART FROM ME" you workers of iniquity into the FIRE prepared for the DEVIL and his MESENGERS! Few find the road that leads to life my unregenerate friends! Anyone who claims Christ as their Lord and supports the party of MURDER will have that blood on their hands! Any professed believer who has no righteous indignation toward the world of godless entertainment who regularly take Our Lords name in Vain and do all they can to shame and disgrace it (mostly democratic devotees) will one day join them in eternal damnation. Republicans deserve their fair share of blame and criticism but make no mistake about it the Gospel is far safer when they hold office than the when its the other way about! AND THATS A FACT! A wise man sees evil and hides himself but the simple pass on and are punished for it.

@Joe Chip, I appreciate that you are an advocate of honesty and integrity. It is a standard that applies to those who call for it (which certainly includes me). That said, would you reconsider your accusations? Dishonest? Do you "honestly" know Pastor Warren's motives? If not, what does your assertion imply? Paul (Rom 14:4), exhorts us to watch way we might say about other believers. Just as I can't judge your motives, perhaps you might think about what you are assuming about Warren.

How different US politics would be if, instead of having an famous actor take center stage, talk to an empty chair, and fantasize a conversation whose purpose was to bring glory to one political party and its candidates while attacking the platform and candidates of another, politicians and citizens together invited Jesus to be the Unseen Guest in that chair, gave Him center stage, and, in humility, began a conversation that allowed God to speak for and of Himself, and whose purpose was to bring glory to God through reconciliation, forgiveness, and cooperation between opposing factions in government in order to begin the long, hard work of seeking justice for the widow, the orphan, the stranger, and the poor; building community; healing the nations; and establishing true peace (Shalom) on earth.