Obama Questions, Ct’d…

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008

A kind thank you to Boing Boing’s Mark Frauenfelder for linking to my Fox column this week, which was a series of questions for Barack Obama.

I regularly get accused in this site’s comments section of being in the tank for Obama, so it’s fun to see a couple of commenters over there accuse me of being a McCain lackey.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

15 Responses to “Obama Questions, Ct’d…”

  1. #1 |  Steve Verdon | 

    Yes, but did they call you a lick spittle lacky. Until then I’m not impressed. :)

  2. #2 |  John Jenkins | 

    We all know that the current column is a clever ruse meant to distract people from your true sympathies!

    (For those tempted to flame me: it’s a joke, relax).

  3. #3 |  Dakota | 

    If you’ve been accused by both sides of being a lacky or schill then rest assured you are right.

  4. #4 |  dave smith | 

    I love how the act of asking tough questions of one candidate makes you a lackey for the other.

  5. #5 |  André Kenji | 

    Obama is a politician and says whatever people wants to hear.
    When he is interviewed by newspapers in Latin America he defends
    Hispanic immigrants and that he will talk to Chavez and Fidel Castro. To the Chilean newspaper “El Mercurio” he said that he defends a Free Trade Agreement with Peru, but that he opposes the Colombian Free Trade Agreement because of union leaders that are killed. To the Brazilian newspaper “Jornal do Brasil” he shows opposition to these same trade agreements because of the exploitation of workers(The fact that there is more opposition to Free Trade Agreements in Brazil than in Chile must be a coincidence) and praises ethanol.

    It´s hard to believe that´s the same person. And no matter who
    interviews him he ALWAYS evasive when asked tough questions. Like when the Brazilian journalist asked him about his support to agricultural subsidies…

  6. #6 |  Pat Cornwallis | 

    I think all one would have to do is look through the archives and compare what’s said about McC and BO. I don’t think there’s any doubt you love and adore Obama.

  7. #7 |  ktc2 | 

    I think a lot of folks in the press are getting flack about so much Obama coverage but honestly what do you expect?

    They can cover a viable (relatively) young black POTUS candidate for the first time in US history or they can cover yet another doughy decrepit old white candidate who reminds most of us of that doddering old uncle who falls alseep in his mashed potatoes at Thanksgiving.

  8. #8 |  Tokin42 | 

    You are in the tank for Obama, but who cares? You are entitled to support whichever candidate for whichever reasons you choose. Your piece on the foxnews site is labeled as opinion so I don’t see the problem.

  9. #9 |  A. Hitler | 

    If you’ve been accused by both sides of being a lacky or schill then rest assured you are right.

    I was hated by both the capitalist Western democracies and the communist Soviet totalitarians to the east.

    Therefore, I must have been the centrist.

  10. #10 |  anonymous | 

    “I imagine I’ll vote for Obama if he’s the nominee against McCain in November. I sure as hell couldn’t vote for McCain.”

    - R. Balko
    February 12, 2008

  11. #11 |  freedomfan | 

    I don’t know where RB is throwing his support in November. I’m not sure I care. I don’t read this (or other) sites for political endorsements. My only metric for finding candidates I can vote for is that, in aggregate, I think their programs advance my agenda for US governance – that is a limited government of enumerated powers as given by the Constitution.

    I am not a stubborn idealist and I am not looking for perfection. But, I will not “waste my vote” advancing a cause I specifically oppose. To me, that defines “counterproductive” in politics. The goal is that I can make a reasonable evaluation of the programs the candidate will (or won’t) support and determine that he represents forward progress. That is: even if I disagree in certain areas, I think that an overall advance in his agenda represents an advance in mine.

    That said, McBama is out of the running. There is no reasonable evaluation I have been able to make that says either of their agendas represents, overall, an advance for freedom and limited government. Sorry. I know there are some who are interested in vengeance against one party or another or against a current or recent President. That isn’t why I vote.

    Right now, third party candidates are the only ones who (warts and all) represent a step forward. Therefore they are the only ones I can endorse with my vote. There is no way I want to wake up the day after election day and think, “The guy I voted for won. Now we’re fucked.”

  12. #12 |  freedomfan | 

    BTW, my last comment, following some of the others in this thread, was a broad comment. I should say that, specific to this topic, I really like the questions Radley has for Obama and I do to about the same degree I like those he posed for McCain.

    I would love to see those questions posed to both candidates in a forum where the moderator could follow up with, “That did not answer my question. Here it is again…” and then with, “That also was not an answer to my question. Viewers are probably justified in assuming that you don’t have or won’t give a specific and straightforward policy statement on this issue.

  13. #13 |  anonymous | 

    I don’t know where RB is throwing his support in November. I’m not sure I care. I don’t read this (or other) sites for political endorsements.

    Neither do I, which is why Balko’s increasing partisanship over the past couple of months has bothered me.

    Maybe it’s gotten better lately, but I’ve stopped visiting this site on a regular basis several months ago, visiting here only when I’m really bored.*

    Radley does awesome and valuable work documenting law enforcement and justice issues that nobody else does.

    But when it comes to how much the Republicans suck (and they do), and Iraq related issues, he doesn’t contribute anything new that I can’t get from hundreds of other sources (many whom do it better).

    The problem with the increasing partisan tone of this site is that he risks alienating people who might be persuaded on one issue, but are turned off by — or indifferent to — his stance on others.

    I wouldn’t say that Balko’s “in the tank” for Obama, but it certainly seems he’s wading in the pool for him; or at least pissing in McCain’s pool a lot more.

  14. #14 |  Zeb | 

    I don’t know if partisanship is really the right word. It seems pretty clear that Radley supports Obama over McCain. But he is certainly not kissing his boots. As any libertarian minded person should notice pretty quickly, thinking that republicans are generally awful does not necessarily mean that you think Democrats are particularly OK.

  15. #15 |  Buck | 

    If Obama wins I can get up the next morning and say, “My guy won. And I was fucked years before he even announced that he was running.”

    Obama is the kind of candidate who can put his arm around your shoulder and piss down your leg.

    I just happen to prefer that to a candidate who will piss in your mouth while his lackeys pry it open.

    Those are our choices. I have made mine.

Leave a Reply