August 02, 2008

Obama flops on drilling

Obama today changed his position on off-shore drilling.

Maybe he is led by the facts after all.

If so, we can expect more flip-flops about Iraq in the offing.


00 said...

Alex is right. Better to tell us about all the benefits of a McCain Administration. Mother Teresa never went to an Anti-War rally..... Hold a Peace Rally and she'd be there. It is odious to constantly make comnparisons. You love to talk flip-flop... Has McCain never changed his position on ANYthing??? Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Jaz said...

As I told Alex in person. You're right, you got me. Clearly I am more alarmed about an Obama presidency than I am excited about a McCain presidency.

Just look at any of the latest polls, despite Obama's rock star world tour, many Americans like myself are not sold on the Madison Avenue advertising campaign that is Barack Obama.

If you clear away all the Obama hype, he is revealed to be the Chicago hack lightweight that many of us already have realized he is.

He is unqualified, unprepared, and generally underwhelming. And if he's at least half as articulate and brilliant as I'm constantly assured that he is by his supporters, then he would be not be afraid to debate the lowly John McCain in a town hall meeting style debate where he can't deliver a speech from the tele-promter!

No matter how many times Obama supporters whine that not enough Republican voters are not as excited as they are about their candidate, the American public is still going to want to know more about whether Obama is actually ready to lead.

John McCain is a known quantity. Whatever you feel about his policies, which are not nearly as nebulous as Obama's, Americans know that he is at least the safe choice. Obama is the one who is undefined. And so far any evidence that anyone can use to figure out what makes him tick is very disturbing.

His 20 year relationship with Reverend Wright, and Reverend Phleger, William Ayers the weatherman underground terrorist, Tony Rezko and his shady land deals with Obama, Obama's politically expedient flip-flops on every major issue, his weakness on foreign policy, his tax raising philosophy, his socialist domestic agenda...

And whenever I ask an avid Obama supporter what specific policies of Obama's they feel makes him worth voting for I'm met with the same sounds that were echoing through the hall when Obama suggested that the best way to combat high gas prices is to make sure that your tires are fully inflated:

(insert cricket noises here)

Obama's fans are in love with his celebrity, not his policies.

And it is not my responsibility to prop up McCain the way the Obamaniacs blindly support their messiah.

I'm waiting to see who McCain picks as his VP before it is even a lock that I would vote for the guy.

However I do feel a responsibility to try to wake Obama followers out of their trance and suggest that they do some actual critical thinking about Obama's credentials, or severe lack thereof.

Jaz said...

Oh and, BTW, thanks for the comment.

Chris said...

Jaz, you have to be the most inconsistent person ever.

Jaz said...

I love this latest tactic by the Obama people to scream "smear" when a series of legitimate political attacks are made against their guy. This past Sunday on the Meet The Press, John Kerry was droning on about "smears" when he took advantage of the untimely absence of Tim Russert by monopolizing and filibustering for entire segments at a time about the subject. I guess "smear" is the new "swift-boating". And it's an example of the dreaded "fear mongering" or whatever other lefty hysterical buzz word gets applied to legitimate political discourse.

And of course, if Obama had had the confidence to debate McCain in the un-scripted, teleprompter-free, town hall meeting format that McCain proposed we could be having the substantive debate that Obama disingenuously claims that he wants so badly to have. If you want to debate so badly, then do so. Otherwise shut up and stop whining. But to point out that Obama doesn't have the where-with-all to debate McCain in a town meeting format is an example of a "smear" I suppose, in this new ultra-sensitive atmosphere the Obama people pray we buy into.

No, a smear is more like when, gee I don't know, one candidate essentially accuses the other of racism the way Obama did when he referenced race on more than one occasion against McCain. And, like on a host of other matters, the campaign is going back and furiously re-interpreting what the candidate said and what he really meant, as in, the new revised interpretation. In this case, the Obama people insist that he wasn't playing the race card at all yet we can't help but notice that the candidate himself feels the need to remind us of his race over and over again. He then sets up the straw man argument that somehow Republicans are going to use his own race against him when the only people who could possibly be accused of doing that so far are the Clintons. Methinks Obama doth protest too much. At this point we are well aware of Obama's racial background, he need not ceaselessly invoke it. What we are unclear on is practically everything else about him. Principally among the concerns regular Americans have for Obama is the question McCain asks in his obviously effective ads: "Is he ready to lead?"

Chris said...

Thanks for the patience. I've finally replied.