Obama vs O'Reilly part 4

Finally Wednesday September 10, 2008, the conclusion of the Bill O'Reilly interview of Sen. Barack Obama aired. The subject of the segment was on Oil and Alternative Energy, which is a subject that should be important to this election. They also touched on foreign policy a little too.

O'Reilly began with, " $150 Billion... over 10 years... TOO WHAT!?!!!! (note more exclaim that inquiry)

Obama responds with, "...wind, solar and hydro..."

O'Reilly throw out, "what if they don't work?"

Obama responds with touts of, and I quote, "similar to ventur capital" and "... similar to the space program".

I find it outrageous for O'Reilly to ask "what if they dont work" but, again, its a mere ploy to see if he can disconcert Obama. What O'Reilly really wanted to get at, was a break down of how much would go where - which would lead to criticisms of which areas should get more funding (blah).

When O'Reilly inquired about Nato and the fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan, Obama responded with,

"Part of the reason is, is that we soured our relationship with the Europeans after Iraq. And, you know, when I went over to Europe, and if you listened to that speech in Berlin... One of the things I said in that speech is you cannot think that the Americans are going to just carry all the freight on this thing. You guys (countries part of NATO) have to step up to the plate."

I just want to remind you, when Obama made this trip, thats when all the grandiloquent "rockstar" and "celebrity" comments were made. Its quite absurd for any one not to see the value of a potential american leader being able to go to another country, an allied country, and get more than just the leaders of that nation to be interested in what they have to say. In my eyes, thats not celebrity luminescence - its a step OUR nation needs to make, its a step in the direction of healing soured relationships that have been maimed by OUR current president, and a step toward world peace. Also it should have commanded respect by the republicans instead of a lot of scoffing and ridicule.


Overall, this was a great interview for Sen. Obama. The Interview showed that Obama can keep his composure under pressure. Furthermore, it displayed the knowledge that Obama has on several policies as well as the multi-faceted government system that american operates under.

I really do not want to delve into the Sarah Palin subject but to say that her newness is equivocal to Obama's is, well, just plain retarded. In respect to her running as a vice president, her knowledge of our governmental system and policies is incomparable to Sen. Obama's. Its Foolish to think that we, as americans, should not be concerned about Palin being next in line behind an aging, over-operated body, known as John McCain (I mean that with no disrepect). This is just my opinion but Palin definately could not handle such and interview, not even a segment - and McCain would not be able to answer questions beyond his coached responses.

enjoy the conclusion below...

comments welcome


Obama vs O'Reilly part 2

On Monday September 8, 2008, part 2 of the Bill O'reilly interview of Sen. Barack Obama resumed. This segment actually entailed political issue of substance - The Ecomony - or as Obama put it, "... lies, damn lies, and statistics".

I must say, this segment touched on about 3 hours worth of info in like 5 minutes - and Obama found it hard to get a word in edgewise. So the basics...

Oreilly: Under President Bush, the economy grew 19 percent more than Clinton.

Obama: there was economic growth. Not as fast as during the 1990s, OK, but there was growth during the Bush administration. But what happened was that wages and incomes for ordinary Americans... their wages and incomes did not go up.

Dafanz: Aye... If the economy grew, why is the real estate market in shambles? Why have so many corporations laid off SO MANY american workers? Why has there been a decrease in the american dollar? Hell, WHY ARE WE IN A RECESSION? OH, and why haven't MY wages increasing?

but all these CEO are, shall I say, "Getting Richer"

Since wages are the same compounded with Inflation, would equate to "Getting Poorer"

Lets continue

O'Reilly: ... Let's get back to taxing the rich... you want 50 percent of my success

Obama: No, I don't. No, I don't.

O'Reilly: if you get elected…

Obama: What I have said is that I would take your marginal rate back to what it was under Bill Clinton (39 %).

O'Reilly: yes. 39

Obama: You(the wealthy) can afford that. That's point No. 1. In exchange, I'm cutting taxes for 95 percent of Americans. 95 percent.

O'Reilly: That's swell, but that's class warfare.

Dafanz: AYE! - Whoa!, hol' on a minute... 95% of americans are poor? Let make it simple...


Y'know its quite obvious that Reagonomics, Trickle-down Economics and Supply-side Ecomonics DO NOT WORK!!!

These people and corporations get the benefit of these tax cuts and it does absolutely NOTHING for the working class citizens - both lower & middle class. Yeah , the wealthy enjoy the tax cuts and it does nothing for the working stiff because they take thte extra money and shelter it and put it into their Estates. These people and corporations do not spend their extra money!!

Now what do we get?... Economic Stimulation?

Yeah, lets pacify the american citizens with hush money!

Lets hand out checks to provide a short-term.... AN EXTREMELY SHORT-TERM solution... Instead of creating the possibility of long-term security for those who yet poses it...


Obama calls this, "... calling the same thing something different."

I would quote the ol' american addage but maybe I'm not american enough to use it...

enjoy interview below


Obama vs O'Reilly part 3

On Tuesday September 9, 2008, the third segment of the Bill O'Reilly interview of Sen. Barack Obama was aired. This segment was focused on the great subject of "Guilt by Association". Let me first say I never seen, or heard of, an presidential canidate that has been slighted SO MUCH for nonpolitical acquaintances - Rev. Jerimiah Wright, Bill Ayers and BLOGGERS? (yeah, 21st century at its best).

For me, the major delima I have about the tintinnabulation this is causing is the fact that this behavior is not indicative of the nonpolitical associations that Pres. George W. Bush had with the oil companies - or the connection Palin (Alaska has the largest supply domestic oil) or Mccain has. Further more I digress because I'm not interested in seeing another "who runs the best smear compaign" or "who is more american" type of election. The real question, even above the issues, is...

Which canidate is going to tryst americans, as a whole, on our needs as citizens?

NOT who is going to run around, like a chicken with their head cut off, in search of new ways to use the extensive military and equipment america poses.

Lets just lump this mess together as a whole, bundle it up, tie it down and throw it in the dumpster where it belongs. Also, LET US NOT allow the rebulicans, and their supporters, to make this into a "who can wiggle out of acquisations the best" campaign.

I am embellished with strife when I see and hear such things. I mean...

Why do rebuplicans think they can dupe WE AMERICANS - for a 3rd election in a row - with their barbarous, conjectural, lethargic, asinine and unscrupulously deceitful grandiloquent rants about democratic canidates?

Or simply put they are Full of Shit!

Well Mr. O'Reilly did say it best when he stated, "I have new respect for Obama, he is sincere in his beleifs and his presence has changed politics forever"

As for Obamas' "associations" we should remember this quote,

“I know thousands of people... So, understandably, people will pick out folks who they think they can score political points with.”

or this quote from Obama, "...It is classic guilt by association.”

My Fellow Americans Let Us Not Forget
For the past 8 year the current president has been
Getting rich with our money
Off the sweat of our brows
From the blood of our families!

enjoy interview below

Conclusion tommorow...


Obama vs O'reilly part 1

On Thursday September 4th, 2008, america's favorite news journalist, Bill O'Reilly interviewed Barack Obama. Let me first say, beyond whatever your (or my) disdain for Mr. O'reilly may be, this is a good thing for Obama to do. First, because no one, probably not even McCain, can challenge Obama on his knowledge of the current political issues and press Obama for answers the way Bill-O can. Secondly, just the mere fact that "The O'Reilly Factor" rating shall bolster for a week then dwindle back down to the regular right-wing extremist audience of old - HA-HA! SO, In order to further boost his ratings, O'Reilly made this 30 minute interview into a series of four 6-7 minute segments to be aired on seperate days. I'm going to disect this 1st segment, which consisted of the issue of the "War on Terror" - or better put National Security.

Now in short, this segment was nothing more than a quiz on weather Obama poses the basic knowledge of americas' national security threats. This bit can be summed up to two issues: what is you plan for Iran and na-na-na-na-na "the surge" did work.

In short on the subject of Iran, O'Reilly questions, "how threatening (do) you feel Iran is?"

Obama responds, "Iran is a major threat" - now this is just the nuts and bolts.

From my perspective, O'Reilly seemingly wants to conjure up a "gong-ho" response from Obama and get him to say we're(america) is going to take Iran out - or either a military strategy.

O'Reilly's real focus was this, "...the next president of the United States is going to have to make a decision about Iran, whether to stop them militarily... a lot of people are saying, look, Barack Obama's not going to attack Iran."

First "a lot of people" is really "a lot of republicans" - I mean...

Do we really need another war raging president at this point in history?

Obama put it best, "Look, it is not appropriate for somebody, who is one of two people who could be the president of the United States, to start tipping their hand in terms of what their plans might be with respect to Iran. It's sufficient to say I would not take the military option off the table and that I will never hesitate to use our military force in order to protect the homeland and United States interests."

Y'kown what I say about this national security subject? I say its quite simple...


And Barack Obama is that Leader, we have already seen the respect he gets here, in the USA, as well as in Europe. We need to reestablish the ties that our current president (and fellow republicans) severed and get the support from foreign nations that we once had.

As for The Surge, O' Reilly looked to make Obama, and I quote...

"...admit it to the nation that now we have defeated the terrorists in Iraq, and the Al Qaeda came there after we invaded, as you know. We defeated them."


"...say, I was right in the beginning, and I was wrong about the surge?"

Now Obama did admit the success of the surge and stated, "I think that the surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated... including President Bush and the other supporters."

Of course, there was no admission of being wrong and my interpretation is that - Its not about being against the surge (which we can call "successful") but, moreso, about being against the war and its exorbitant budget (which can be deemed unnecessary, as well as other things).

Enjoy interview below

Part 2 Coming soon