Barack Obama impressive on The O'Reilly Factor

[AFJROTC_c/SSgt]

Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkiRgCyCN0E

Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpSxVdzQMW4

Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sGwY45HC0g

Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAxdUFSmVxc


I thought Obama was fairly successful at dispelling the notion held by many that he is a radical leftist bent on socializing the United States.

Your thoughts?

[Ðiego]

I agree, just so long as he doesn't go on Hannity and Blowjob..


Ð

[vernarial]

Would have been better without that asshat O'Reilly.

[Mazer]

It would not have been better without O'Reilly, and here's why. Obama, despite being a politician, has high standards for himself and when he says, "I expect to be held responsible for the things I say and do," I believe him. When O'Reilly put the screws to the senator he made him make unequivocal statements (most politicians try to avoid doing that). He probably went back to watch the broadcast to hear his own statements and, since avoiding the flip flop moniker is important to him, he's going to stand by his statements.

Here are a few things I heard Obama say during the interview:

• Iran is a major threat.
• [The surge] succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.
• Lets say we go up to 20% [capital gains tax].
• I went to church to worship God.
• I'm not against nuclear energy.

Right-wingers get attacked for making some of the same assertions Obama made during this interview, and I'm not saying it's a double standard, but when you hear Republicans make these same statements you can't say they're wrong if you think Obama is right. During the primaries he had to appeal to the extreme left wing of the Democrat party to get nominated, and he is liberal, but not as liberal as he lead on. It takes tough questions from a strict interviewer to reveal these things, and now that they have been revealed Obama will appeal to the center because that's where most of the voters are. He might even get me to vote for him.

Still, he couldn't concede the fact that the Bush tax cuts preceded an increase in federal revenue, and until he does I think he's not the right man for the job.

[vernarial]

I agree that the candidates need to be asked the hard questions and be made to give real answers. I still would rather someone besides O'Reilly ask the questions. I don't like O'Reilly. That's just my opinion.

[Ðiego]

the candidates need to be asked the hard questions and be made to give real answers

Indeed, and ALL the candidates. Why is Sarah Palin hiding and why did she have to be 'coached'? If Obama had picked a VP and kept them away from the press and coached them for an interview then they, and he, would have been laughed off the stage.

It's pathetic and shouldn't be put up with.


Ð

[theknife]

Originally Posted by vernarial

I agree that the candidates need to be asked the hard questions and be made to give real answers. I still would rather someone besides O'Reilly ask the questions. I don't like O'Reilly. That's just my opinion.

Agreed. it's a shame because the Obama interview just lends credibility to such a colossal dickhead.

[Nicobie]

Originally Posted by theknife

Agreed. it's a shame because the Obama interview just lends credibility to such a colossal dickhead.

Hahahhhahaaaa.....

Obama came from the corrupt Daly Chicago machine.

Do any of U dillweeds pay attention?

[Nicobie]

I'd like to see Mcain on Oprera.

But I guess that would not be fair

[AFJROTC_c/SSgt]

In my opinion Bill wanted to DEBATE rather than actually give a proper interview....

[malvachat]

Originally Posted by Nicobie

I'd like to see Mcain on Oprera.

But I guess that would not be fair

Well not on Oprah anyway

Spell check still not working Nic??

[JackSpratts]

i use opera and mccain's on it often. doesn't help tho, he's still a twit.

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by AFJROTC_c/SSgt

In my opinion Bill wanted to DEBATE rather than actually give a proper interview....

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Ðiego]

It is a bad thing. O'Rielly isn't an investigative reporter, he's a hack looking to make himself look tough. He's not a journalist trying to get information out of the interview, but a bully playing up to his audience.

He's also a moron who knows nothing about economics, even something so simple a question as how the price of a barrel of oil is set:

D’AGOSTINO: Well, OPEC sets the supply for what they can produce. The price of oil is actually set in exchange at trades in New York and in London, as well.

O’REILLY: Is there a guy who says $121 a barrel?

D’AGOSTINO: No. There’s a huge market. It’s filled with hedgers. It’s filled with speculators. It’s filled with moms and dads, average Americans. It’s a big market that sets this price.

O’REILLY: Somebody has to put the $125 a barrel on the barrel. Who does it?

D’AGOSTINO: They’re taking it from this market. They’re just like…

O’REILLY: Who is “they”?

D’AGOSTINO: The producers. They’re looking at this, just like when you decide how much a share of IBM is worth. You look at the settlement price in the New York Stock Exchange.

O’REILLY: The CEO of Shell or the CEO of ExxonMobil say, “We’re going to pay $125 a barrel.” Is that what they say? I thought it was the sheiks and Hugo Chavez saying, “We’re going to charge you $125 a barrel.”

D’AGOSTINO: No. They’re all looking to the exchanges or the free markets to set that price point. The free markets right now are saying the price of crude oil is about 120 bucks a barrel. It’s been going up. It continues to go up.

He's simple and knows nothing and doesn't try to learn. He is what would be called a 'typical American'. We have several 'typical Americans' here on this dead and dying forum.

Are you a 'typical American'?


Ð

[JackSpratts]

Originally Posted by Ðiego

He's simple and knows nothing and doesn't try to learn. He is what would be called a 'typical American'. We have several 'typical Americans' here on this dead and dying forum.

Are you a 'typical American'?


Ð

try to learn? you say that like conservatives have a choice. according to the latest science, presenting conservatives with factual evidence disproving their beliefs only makes them cling to them more.

this explains much.

the advice? don't use logic with them, it simply makes it worse. save rational thought for those who are intellectually equipped to handle it, starting with undecided independents.

- js.

[Nicobie]

Originally Posted by malvachat

Well not on Oprah anyway

Spell check still not working Nic??

hehe...
not on chrome anyway..........

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by Ðiego

It is a bad thing. O'Rielly isn't an investigative reporter, he's a hack looking to make himself look tough. He's not a journalist trying to get information out of the interview, but a bully playing up to his audience.

You wouldn't argue with Obama yourself so you don't want journalists arguing with him on your behalf. That's understandable, but I'm curious why you wouldn't want to debate Obama. He is a politician after all, he's not perfect. If you had been in the interviewer's chair instead of O'Reilly, what would you have said?

O'Reilly is a typical (though famous and wealthy) American, of the kind that swarm polling places every election day. He asked questions that tens of millions of voters want answered. Acting as the voice of one half of the electorate O'Reilly did a fair job. He also played up to his audience, but Obama knew he would do that going in so props go to him for giving the interview (Hilary would never have had the guts to talk to O'Reilly for 3 minutes, let alone 30).

[Ðiego]

The point being a journalist will give the subject time to answer and not step all over the interview. O'Reilly wasn't very interested in what Obama had to say. A shame really, as it could have been a good interview.


Ð