Blitzer Interviews Obama

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Barack, Media, Video

Lots of long interviews today.

Part One:

Part Two:

Lots of topics covered. What did you think?


This entry was posted on Thursday, May 8th, 2008 and is filed under Barack, Media, Video. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 Responses to “Blitzer Interviews Obama”

  1. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    I’m curious what Obama thinks about why Hamas would endorse his presidency so adamantly, to the point of actually “liking” him, if his positions on the Israel/Palestinian conflict are not any different than McCain. Of course Obama completely ducks the issue, and Wolf would never think of asking such a relevant question so directly.

    Make no mistake. Obama is Hamas’ candidate of choice. How do we know this? Because Hamas said so.

  2. Bump the Shaman Says:

    It speaks to your convictions as a person that you would decide to vote for someone (or not to) based on the opinion of another. Make your own choice for your own reasons using your own personal judgment. Don’t be typical and try to strike people with fear in order to get them to dislike a candidate. That’s what weak people do.

    Also… Guess what? McCain is BUSH’S candidate of choice. That’s reason enough for a majority of this country to NOT vote for McCain (if we’re going by your standards). Again: make your own choice. It doesn’t matter who anybody else wants as president—it matters who YOU want.

    (I’ll never be back here to see responses to my post, but I hope you will all make intelligent choices when you vote this November. This is a very important year for our country. God bless America!)

  3. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    Well, do you think it is at least noteworthy that one of the worlds most dangerous terrorist organizations feels that Obama as president will more likely enable them to achieve their goals in the region than McCain would?

    Guess what? McCain is BUSH’S candidate of choice. That’s reason enough for a majority of this country to NOT vote for McCain (if we’re going by your standards)

    So you disregard people who will vote against McCain because he is the candidate who members of the Bush administration feel would more likely to continue their own vision for America? Whats wrong with that?

  4. Mike Says:

    First of all, you’re putting words in Hamas’ mouth. They did NOT say Obama will more likely enable them to achieve their goals in the region.

    Hamas is not stupid – I believe, quite on the contrary, that they’re trying to bait the American to vote McCain for president – i.e. they SAY they prefer Obama BECAUSE they want you to vote McCain.

    Because I know, if I were Hamas, the only way to achieve the goal of destroying Israel is to NOT have the peace – I mean, how can you destroy your enemy if you have peace?

    Now it’s quite clear that Barack Obama is for peace and John McCain is for more Cheney/Bush style warmongering. There’s absolutely no question that John McCain is the real choice to enable Hamas to achieve its goals in the region.

  5. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    They did NOT say Obama will more likely enable them to achieve their goals in the region.

    When an interest group – whether it be a union, an anvironmental activist lobby, or a corporation – endorses a candidate for an election it is because they believe that candidate would best enable them to achieve their goals, at least compared to the other candidates. I think that is fairly self-evident. Aren’t you endorsing Obama because you feel he would lead your country in the direction you favor?

    I believe, quite on the contrary, that they’re trying to bait the American to vote McCain for president – i.e. they SAY they prefer Obama BECAUSE they want you to vote McCain.

    Aha… I think you’re on to something. But I would go further. Because they are smart, they realize that people like you are also as smart as they are, and these Americans would be on to their secret plan, so they know we will actually pick the opposite candidate from the one we know they are manipulating us into voting. Therefore, by endorsing Obama, we know that they are trying to manipulate us into voting McCain, so in the end we would be voting for Obama – which they knew we would do, so they actually do want us to vote for Obama.

    Or perhaps they would be aware that we would know about the scenario that I just mentioned, So that by supporting Obama, we would know that they want us to vote for McCain, which would make us vote for Obama which would make us want to vote for McCain. Which they knew in the first place, so they actually support McCain. But now we would vote for Obama, so therefore, wait a second…

    Inconceivable!

    if I were Hamas, the only way to achieve the goal of destroying Israel is to NOT have the peace – I mean, how can you destroy your enemy if you have peace?

    Now it’s quite clear that Barack Obama is for peace and John McCain is for more Cheney/Bush style warmongering

    This is absurd on so many levels. If Hamas wants war, they will make war. Obama cannot force Hamas to “have the peace” through his magic of diplomacy if they don’t want to. The question is, will Obama confront Hamas when they do, in fact, make war? You seem to agree that the answer is no. That would be “warmongerring.”

  6. Mike Says:

    > Aha… I think you’re on to something. But I would go further. Because they are smart, they realize that people like you are also as smart as they are, and these Americans would be on to their secret plan, so they know we will actually pick the opposite candidate from the one we know they are manipulating us into voting. Therefore, [blahblahblah], so they actually do want us to vote for Obama.

    B. O’Reilly, is that you?

    Anyway. I thought you were smart, but it seems you really need an example at home to understand what’s going on.

    Just like how Rush Limbaugh, who, after months of analysis and then preaching how Hillary would be easier to beat, all of a sudden made a U-turn 2 days after, to ask his supporters to vote for Obama because “he is weaker now”? It’s BS. All he wants to do is to cast a doubt of electability of Obama.

    Of course he still wants Hillary to be the nominee – I say it’s Reverse Psychology working at its finest: here’s what it is if you want to learn about it in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_psychology

    Following your logic, you can go ad-infinitum about who’s smarter and guessing the “true” motive of the other side, and it may bring down your and my arguments.

    However.

    What Hamas did, suggesting they somehow has an affinity to Obama, is the same – in fact, if they say ANYTHING about a candidate, it would cast a doubt on his electability no matter how any side spins it. Again, it’s the true intention of Hamas.

    > Obama cannot force Hamas to “have the peace” through his magic of diplomacy if they don’t want to.

    You seem to be capable to only see “want” or “don’t want”, totally disregarding anything in the spectrum between these 2 extremes. Let me tell you something new here. If every single person in Hamas is really that united in wanting war, they wouldn’t be the controlling party of the government now.

    The magic of diplomacy always work, to manipulate the minds between these 2 extremes – from “want war more” to “want war less”.

    >The question is, will Obama confront Hamas when they do, in fact, make war? You seem to agree that the answer is no. That would be “warmongerring.”

    Your absurdity never ceases to amuse.

    Thanks for telling us your shiny new definition of “warmongering”, different from everyone else’s on the face of this planet, who believe “warmongering” means Cheney-Bush style sabre-rattling and actually starting wars like they did.

    Obama is for long term peace, which means, no stupid wars and no sabre-rattling if not absolutely needed.

    Will Obama confront Hamas when they make war? I KNOW Obama has consistently condemned Hamas and defended Israel’s military responses to rocket attacks.

    From the candidate himself:
    “Hamas is a terrorist organization, responsible for the deaths of many innocents, and dedicated to Israel’s destruction, as evidenced by their bombarding of Sderot in recent months. I support requiring Hamas to meet the international community’s conditions of recognizing Israel, renouncing violence, and abiding by past agreements before they are treated as a legitimate actor.”

    So, what’s with all this Hamas-connection noise?
    Answers are here:
    http://thatsrightnate.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/obama-hamas-connection/
    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/05/mccain-obama-ha.html

    McCain is simply using the same despicable old politics that Hillary did when she answered a question about whether Obama is a Muslim, “Not that I’m aware of”.

    It’s unfortunate that you either don’t see it, or more likely, choose not to see it.

    Well.

    Ignorance is a bliss. You should feel happy.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: