The Question was: "If gathered here tonight we learn that two American cities have been hit simultaneously by terrorists, and we further learn beyond the shadow of a doubt it had been the work of Al-Qaeda, how would you change the US military stance overseas as a result?" Obama's answer was: The first thing we'd have to do is make sure that we got an effective emergency response, something that this administration failed to do when we had a hurricane in New Orleans, and I think that we have to review how we operate in the event of not only a natural disaster, but also a terrorist attack. The second thing is to make sure that we've got good intelligence. A, to find out that we don't have other threats and attacks potentially out there, and B, to find out, do we have any intelligence on who might have carried it out so that we can take potentially some action to dismantle that network. But what we can't do is then alienate the world community based on faulty intelligence, based on bluster and bombast. Instead, the next thing we would have to do in addition to talking to the American people is making sure that we are talking to the international community because, as already been stated, we're not going to defeat terrorists on our own. We've got to strengthen our intelligence relationships with them, and they've got to feel a stake in our security by recognizing that we have mutual security interests at stake. Whether you are for or against Obama, I want you to read the question carefully and read his answer carefully; the question asked "How would you change the US military stance overseas as a result?" Obama IGNORED THE QUESTION. The question premised the following: "and we further learn beyond the shadow of a doubt it had been the work of Al-Qaeda." OBAMA IGNORED THE PREMISE. If I am going to be swayed by someone who is supposed to be intelligent and articulate, then I want him to answer questions which are put to him; I do not want to see him default to some "hate Bush talking points." At the debate, I felt that most of the questions were excellent; I also felt that about 75% of the answers from ALL the candidates, including Obama, defaulted to "hate Bush rhetoric", and that they often ignored the question put to them. I expected that of Senator Clinton; I did not expect that of Senator Obama. To be fair, one or two candidates clearly presented their views, and answered the questions posed to them (the guys from New Mexico and from Alaska). I may not agree with them, but I respect that they often answered the questions directly without defaulting to their talking points.
NEWS FLASH: George Bush is not running for president in 2008.
Comments are closed for this post.
