Monday, August 4, 2008

McCain Attacks and Obama's Energy Policy

My reaction to the inane attacks from McCain is mostly confusion. The "Celebrity" and "Messiah" ads from McCain seemed to me more likely to swing a viewer in favor of Obama. After hearing all those people talk about how great Obama is, even in over-the-top soundbites, I think it's hard to walk away without thinking that maybe there is something special about the guy. Do these ads really succeed in belittling Obama, which is apparently their aim?

Then today, just after Obama unleashed his superb energy policy speech with his New Energy for America plan, I received an email from the McCain campaign which said

It's clear Senator Obama has no plan to address the energy challenges we face as a nation.

But my favorite part of the email was this:
John McCain believes we should lift the federal ban on offshore drilling, enabling you to decide where we drill for oil.
Me? McCain wants me to decide where to drill for oil? Sure, I'm honored and all, but I can't even decide where to put that bamboo plant in my living room that never gets enough sunlight, so I think I'm not the guy to be deciding which ocean needs an oil spill. I guess by "we" in that sentence, he means me, McCain, and all our Big Oil buddies who sent him $881,450 last month after he made an about-face and decided that offshore drilling wasn't so bad as he used to think.

Here's Obama's new ad to go with his new offensive on energy policy:


Anonymous said...

There he goes again, promising to solve all of humanity's problems. Please. Let's leave Obamaland for just a minute and come back to reality.

In 10 years, he's going to make us independent of Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil? Right. Anyone here willing to take that bet?

Does anyone, who's heard him talk about nuclear, really believe that he's seriously considering it or is he just giving it lip service so as to not appear too intellectually backward to the educated?

Who here still thinks that using food for energy (biofuels) is a good idea? Anyone? Obama. Oh, that's right; he needs people in the Midwest and Plains states to vote for him.

The difference between the Manhattan project and his Spend-Gobs-Of-Money approach is that we knew because of fundamental research that we could achieve what we desired. In this case, we're just throwing money to the wind and hoping that the technology will sprout up. Not very sophisticated, I know. Expect Obama and congress to select certain technologies that are later found to be poor choices. It's government; what do you expect?

Interesting to see him move to support oil drilling after he realized he was taken a hit in the polls. No surprise. He softened his approach on Iraq and time tables because he though he might get caught looking stupid. He disowned his pastor after he realized he was taking a beating in the polls.

Obama is a political opportunist and he will do whatever is politically expedient to get elected. He does best at giving feel-good speeches that those lacking critical minds drool over.

DirtyHarry said...

To the previous comment:

"Obama is a political opportunist and he will do whatever is politically expedient to get elected."

To some degree you are correct, but when you make that statement without mentioning that McCain is EXACTLY THE SAME, you are clearly shown to be biased and "lacking critical mind" with regard to McCain.

McCain has reversed his more moderate stance on abortion and selected for VP Sarah Palin, a harcore pro-lifer who believes abortion is wrong even in cases of rape. He did this to appease the religious right, plain and simple. McCain also stepped back from his more comprehensive immigration plan to focus now more on border security -- again something he needed to do because the hardcore republicans he needs wouldn't vote for him if he didnt. McCain ALSO REVERSED HIS STANCE ON OIL DRILLING, which years ago he opposed. He previously opposed the Bush tax cuts, now supports them. The list goes on.

And to some degree, I don't fault either McCain or Obama for changing positions. Shouldn't a leader be willing to react to the will of the people? Obama was against drilling, and still is, but is now willing to compromise and allow it in a comprehensive energy plan. When then polls say 80% of people favor drilling, is he supposed to stubbornly oppose it forever, simply to not appear to "flip-flop"? Should he be so stubborn that he would veto a comprehensive energy plan that would benefit America greatly simply because it also includes drilling? No he shouldn't. And same for McCain. When the people who are electing him (republicans) are saying "border security first", should he stubbornly refuse to bend? No.

So tone it back and stop accusing Obama supporters of lacking judgement because right now you sound like you don't have much of it.