7 Comments

1. 
   1

   Barack Obama is a douche. He can’t stand on his own feet, why would anyone vote for him? He can’t even hold his own against O’Reilly??!!?? Not a single answer was straight forward or sensible.

   Comment by Tuetis — September 6, 2008 #

2. 
   2

   Tuetis,
   Just because Barack’s answers are more complicated than Bill is willing to consider doesn’t make him a douche. People like Bill LOVE asking (extremely “loaded”) simple sounding questions and then dismissing the complex answer half way through, insinuating that “complicated” is avoiding the obvious simple answer he was demanding. The big theme I see with the majority of conservatives I run into is that they are unwilling to listen to or consider complexity. They appear to think complex answers imply weakness and sissiness. Unfortunately, the world isn’t simple and choosing simple solutions to complicated problems can have very complicated, very dangerous consequences.

   Comment by The Paradox — September 6, 2008 #

3. 
   3

   Its very simple, Obama has no idea what to do about Iran or iraq, he has no foreign policy experience and is going to cut Military spending. And O’Reilly had very specific questions that he failed to answer

   Comment by John — September 8, 2008 #

4. 
   4

   I’m sorry John… what questions did Obama fail to answer? You mean the ones that Bill interjected rudely while Obama was speaking?

   I have so much more respect for Obama after subjecting himself to Oreilly’s circus of abuse, and he totally came out on top without taking his bait or losing his temper. It is unfortunate, however, that Oreilly has degraded the journalist’s interviewer position to one of such disrespectful banter, rather than anything of substance.

   And -by the way- cutting military spending would be the BEST THING any president could ever do for this country. Unless you’re excited about owing a few trillion more to China…

   Comment by Erich — September 9, 2008 #

5. 
   5

   In response to John on September 8, John, I am not sure if you have been paying attention to the contributions of active duty soldiers overseas. The Center for Responsive Politics documents up to 6 times more soldier donations going to Barack. Also, with McCain’s ideas of privatizing the VA, there is overwhelming support of Barack’s plan. Now, as a Democrat with complex issues, I will attempt to convey them in a simple fashion for you: I would think that you should be most concerned with what your fellow Americans and members of the military are thinking. Further, I don’t think there is a clear and rational plan in regards to Iran foreign policy. But, John, it has been a maverick’s idea to go things alone. That is something that we as a country cannot tolerate.

   Comment by brian — September 9, 2008 #

6. 
   6

   In the Bill Oreilly interview of Barack Obama, regarding the discussion
   about Obama’s energy plan, in response to Bill asking
   Barack, what if the development of alternate energy
   sources don’t deliver. Obama compared his approach
   to John Kennedy’s space program, and how if you go
   for it , the answers will come. But, the distinction between
   our space program and our energy challenge is … If had taken
   us longer than we thought to get to the moon … or, if we hadn’t
   gotten to the moon … no big deal. But, if we put all our hopes
   into alternative energy, and it doesn’t happen in time … or, if
   it doesn’t work, our entire economy, as well as our national
   security could end up in ruins. This is an important reason to
   secure our energy needs with oil drilling and mining oil shale,
   while we try to develop alternate energy. Obama seems to be
   playing fast and loose with our country’s future … gambling
   with our future, all based on hope and faith … with consequences
   which could be dire. Obama’s plans, or lack thereof are
   extremely irresponsible. Not suprising from a candidate who
   does not have the experience or qualifications to lead, as
   President of the United States of America.

   ***HG says***

   Excellent point Howard. Well said. If we took Obama’s approach to solving our energy crisis, and the devastation it is causing to our economy, and applied that approach to medicine it would be like getting bacterial pneumonia. Obama would say you don’t need antibiotics (don’t drill), we’ll just wait and see if alternative medicines work, as the patients dies (i.e. our economy).

   Comment by Howard — September 12, 2008 #

7. 
   7

   Howard,

   The difference between your pneumonia analogy and Obama’s is the same difference between Nixon’s War on Cancer and JFK’s Moon Shot.

   The Moon Shot was almost purely an engineering problem. Finding a cure for cancer was/is not. Cures require scientific breakthroughs from research.

   Energy Independence is primarily (although not purely) an engineering problem.

   The vast majority of the technology to become energy independent already exists - it must simply be improved through more research (the part that makes it not a “purely” engineering problem).

   For example, doubling the energy storage capacity of batteries would more than make plug in hybrids practical enough for the majority of consumers.

   That just shifts the problem from oil to coal, which would then be solved by an increased efficiency in solar/wind/whatever.

   All of these things can/will be solved with relatively minor scientific advances from a lot of research and then a whole lot of engineering application.

   Necessity is the mother of invention, but even a mom’s gotta eat.

   Feed Mom enough research dollars and you *will* get a solution in time.

   ***HG says***

   In the meantime, the U.S. economy still runs on oil, so we need to drill now, and use alternative energy solutions as they become realistically usable.

   Comment by LoneStar — September 13, 2008 #

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.