TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Colin Powell Endorses Obama
Pages (7): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 »

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Oh, it does. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washin...well-iraq_x.htm

Yeah, I was gonna say - who the funk is Colin Powell? The guy's a retard. The guy who knew exactly the precise locations of all weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the guy who was pressing on for the American militaty establishment (whom he is part of). He's just a turncoat. He realized that McCain is toasted now and its time to wiggle under Obama to continue the old music. I got no respect for Powell and quite frankly, despite the fanfare, Powell's "endorsement" is quite meaningless - surely it breaks the Republican ranks, but, if you look at the bigger picture and from the past of things, not so ...

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Yeah, I was gonna say - who the funk is Colin Powell? The guy's a retard. The guy who knew exactly the precise locations of all weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the guy who was pressing on for the American militaty establishment (whom he is part of). He's just a turncoat. He realized that McCain is toasted now and its time to wiggle under Obama to continue the old music. I got no respect for Powell and quite frankly, despite the fanfare, Powell's "endorsement" is quite meaningless - surely it breaks the Republican ranks, but, if you look at the bigger picture and from the past of things, not so ...

If the guy lied with the Republicans....(insert connection here)....

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Yeah, I was gonna say - who the funk is Colin Powell? The guy's a retard. The guy who knew exactly the precise locations of all weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the guy who was pressing on for the American militaty establishment (whom he is part of). He's just a turncoat. He realized that McCain is toasted now and its time to wiggle under Obama to continue the old music. I got no respect for Powell and quite frankly, despite the fanfare, Powell's "endorsement" is quite meaningless - surely it breaks the Republican ranks, but, if you look at the bigger picture and from the past of things, not so ...

you've obviously never heard the man speak. Powell is extremely independent and very diplomatic. He is respected by almost everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Yeah, I was gonna say - who the funk is Colin Powell? The guy's a retard. The guy who knew exactly the precise locations of all weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the guy who was pressing on for the American militaty establishment (whom he is part of). He's just a turncoat.

if you had done a little research you would know that colin was as misled as the rest of the world re iraq. yes, since he was the one putting forward the case for war in front of the world, he is responsible for his own actions. however this doesn't mean that he belongs in the same 'sin bin' as cheney and bush and others.

powell was assured that the information he was presenting to the UN was rock solid, and since he is the only person to admit being wrong, he's still a cut above the rest of the neocons imo.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN if you had done a little research you would know that colin was as misled as the rest of the world re iraq. yes, since he was the one putting forward the case for war in front of the world, he is responsible for his own actions. however this doesn't mean that he belongs in the same 'sin bin' as cheney and bush and others. powell was assured that the information he was presenting to the UN was rock solid, and since he is the only person to admit being wrong, he's still a cut above the rest of the neocons imo.

Right on - furthermore, Powell ended friendships over that betrayal (namely with George Tenet).

He argued against the war behind closed doors, and only went to the UN under a direct order by his President. I don't think that completely absolves him of course, but I do think his status as an independent voice of reason is still well-established.

quote:

First Colin Powell, Now� Ken Adelman is a lifelong conservative Republican. Campaigned for Goldwater, was hired by Rumsfeld at the Office of Economic Opportunity under Nixon, was assistant to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld under Ford, served as Reagan�s director of arms control, and joined the Defense Policy Board for Rumsfeld�s second go-round at the Pentagon, in 2001. Adelman�s friendship with Rumsfeld, Cheney, and their wives goes back to the sixties, and he introduced Cheney to Paul Wolfowitz at a Washington brunch the day Reagan was sworn in. In recent years, Adelman and his friends Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz fell out over his criticisms of the botching of the Iraq War. Still, he remains a bona-fide hawk (�not really a neo-con but a con-con�) who has never supported a Democrat for President in his life. Two weeks from now that�s going to change: Ken Adelman intends to vote for Barack Obama. He can hardly believe it himself. Adelman and I exchanged e-mails today about his decision. He asked rhetorically, Why so, since my views align a lot more with McCain�s than with Obama�s? And since I truly dread the notion of a Democratic president, Democratic House, and hugely Democratic Senate? Primarily for two reasons, those of temperament and of judgment. When the economic crisis broke, I found John McCain bouncing all over the place. In those first few crisis days, he was impetuous, inconsistent, and imprudent; ending up just plain weird. Having worked with Ronald Reagan for seven years, and been with him in his critical three summits with Gorbachev, I�ve concluded that that�s no way a president can act under pressure. Second is judgment. The most important decision John McCain made in his long campaign was deciding on a running mate. That decision showed appalling lack of judgment. Not only is Sarah Palin not close to being acceptable in high office�I would not have hired her for even a mid-level post in the arms-control agency. But that selection contradicted McCain�s main two, and best two, themes for his campaign�Country First, and experience counts. Neither can he credibly claim, post-Palin pick. I sure hope Obama is more open, centrist, sensible�dare I say, Clintonesque�than his liberal record indicates, than his cooperation with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid portends. If not, I will be even more startled by my vote than I am now.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...uite-colin.html

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Right on - furthermore, Powell ended friendships over that betrayal (namely with George Tenet). He argued against the war behind closed doors, and only went to the UN under a direct order by his President. I don't think that completely absolves him of course, but I do think his status as an independent voice of reason is still well-established.

He is also the only senior Bush member to admit specific mistakes and publicly express regret. I think this had a lot to do with all that. All he needed to do was say "I endorse Obama" but to throw the GOP and the Bush admin by extension under the bus; there has to be a sense of pay back to do that (especially so bluntly).

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN if you had done a little research you would know that colin was as misled as the rest of the world re iraq. yes, since he was the one putting forward the case for war in front of the world, he is responsible for his own actions. however this doesn't mean that he belongs in the same 'sin bin' as cheney and bush and others. powell was assured that the information he was presenting to the UN was rock solid, and since he is the only person to admit being wrong, he's still a cut above the rest of the neocons imo.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Right on - furthermore, Powell ended friendships over that betrayal (namely with George Tenet). He argued against the war behind closed doors, and only went to the UN under a direct order by his President. I don't think that completely absolves him of course, but I do think his status as an independent voice of reason is still well-established.

Interesting. Well, dont you guys think it was in Powell's interests to go fight the war in Iraq because it would finance the military industrial complex, which is Powell part of (Pentagon, US military). Other than that, you guys have good points.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 Is being hanged-to-life a possibility?

Look what if his weight causes the rope to break? That means he should immediatly put on another stronger rope till he 'dies'.

Powell feeds on pity from other people, he makes it sound like he was a victim of the administration, and made that speech because he was the only person in that position of 'secretary of state or whatever' position to go to UN and make that speech.

Well he said he knew Saddam has WMDS on North, South, East and West of Baghdad, and bullshit.. lies.. if he was a real brave person he would have stepped down from his position long before giving that speech.

Admitting a mistake does not make someone undo the mistake he made, people punish to set examples for other people in future. All these people needs to punished to set an example for future generations. Orr bullshit like this will keep on going, Iraq now, Iran later... Syria.. Lebanon, Palestine..

Here is the photo Powell was referring to. Published in the New Yorker??? What's Powell doing reading that magazine?

quote:

This summer, the photographer Platon took pictures of hundreds of men and women who volunteered to serve in the military and were sent to Iraq or Afghanistan. He followed them on their journey through training and deployment, after demobilization and in hospitals, to compile a portrait of the dedication of the armed services today. Sergeant Tim Johannsen, who lost both legs when he drove over an I.E.D. on his second tour of duty in Iraq, made a point of buying an Army T-shirt to wear in his photograph. Of his sacrifice, he said, �It�s just part of the job. You know what you signed up for.� Sergeant Matthis Chiroux, a military reporter who has become a vocal opponent of the Iraq war, says that he and others like him �take our activism as a continuation of our oath of service.� Like many who enlist, Johannsen and Chiroux come from military families. Sergeant John McKay, a marine whose uncle and grandfather were marines, and whose three-year-old son posed in uniform at the wedding of a cousin, also a marine, said, �He�s just waiting till he�s eighteen.� He went on, �I�m scared for him, but if he wants to do it I�ll support him.� http://www.newyorker.com/online/200...platon?slide=16

i've always admired Powell. still do. he's actually a gifted politician as well a soldier.

he says the Republican Party has "narrowed"? gonna have to call bullshit on that. this election we saw the likes of Rudy Guiliani, Mitt Romney as front runners. FFS John McCain is the nominee!!!

anyway, some insight into the man. who again is not a bad man at all.

quote:

General Blind Spots Questioning Powell�s judgment and global perception. By Claudia Rosett Colin Powell is the current darling of the media, for crossing party lines on Meet the Press to endorse Barack Obama for �ability to inspire �steadiness...intellectual curiosity...depth of knowledge...intellectual vigor...a definitive way of doing business...reaching out all across America�exceptional,� and numerous other virtues, too many to list here. In sum, Powell embraced Obama as a �transformational figure.� But transformation to what? On this vital matter, Powell was short on specifics. He spent most of his remaining time on camera slamming John McCain and lamenting the �narrowing� of the Republican party. One need not love the Republicans to notice that Powell seems strangely blind to the failings of a Democratic party which has gone so overboard in its broadening that its Obama ticket is attracting the endorsement not only of Powell, but of the terrorist group, Hamas. But Powell has had his blind spots before. Here I am not referring narrowly to his famous United Nations presentation in 2003, in which he argued the case for invading Iraq, based on intelligence at the time about weapons of mass destruction. (Though one might well wonder: Had Powell had endorsed John McCain instead of Obama, would the mainstream media now be writing off the same Colin Powell as a washed-up former Bush loyalist, who misled the world about Saddam Hussein?) No, there was a more troubling dimension to Powell�s Iraq argument in that vital year, 2003. It entailed an enormous omission of highly relevant information, which Powell had at his command, but apparently either missed, or chose to ignore. There has been a considerable lack of intellectual curiosity about it since, not least on the part of Powell himself. Recall that in early 2003, at the time of the heated debate over toppling Saddam Hussein, Powell was secretary of State. He held that post from 2001-2004. In that job, he was boss of the U.S. Mission to the U.N. in New York, and his Department of State manned the Bush administration�s frontlines in dealing with the U.N. and its various programs and resolutions � notably, those involving the center-stage issue of Iraq. Those U.N. activities included the massive Oil-for-Food relief program for Iraq, which ran from 1996-2003, and was wound down after the overthrow of Saddam. During its last three years, which overlapped with Powell�s watch at State, Oil-for-Food swelled to become a cover for billions worth of smuggling, kickbacks, illicit graft income, and dirty global networks for Saddam. Outside observers of the U.N. and its conclaves had only highly limited and erratic access to details of this corruption. But the State Department, whose diplomats sat on the U.N. sanctions committee, haggled at the Security Council meetings, and watched the crooked contracts flow through, was certainly aware of this cess pool. As detailed in congressional hearings in 2004 and 2005, State even made various quiet protests and attempts to curb the rot. But these were mostly off-stage, a muffled struggle behind the scenes. They didn�t gain much traction. Nor was it ever likely that they could have. Saddam Hussein, with U.N. approval, had systematically tipped huge business toward three members of the U.N.�s own Security Council � Russia, China, and France. Out of more than $110 billion worth of Saddam�s oil sales and relief purchases approved under Oil-for-Food, Russia and France were, respectively the number one and number two business partners of Saddam, both for buying lucrative Iraqi oil contracts and selling goods. China ranked in the top ten. In other words, Russia and France, chief veto-wielding wranglers with the U.S. and U.K. during the U.N. debate, were also among the chief profiteers under a corrupt UN program shepherding massive business with Saddam�s U.N.-sanctioned regime. Between them, by 2003, Russia and France had obtained more than $30 billion worth of Oil-for-Food deals, or almost one third of the total program. China accounted for another $4.3 billion. The details needed to document this staggering tilt toward select members of the Security Council were not publicly available at the time. The U.N. kept confidential almost all the relevant details of the contracts, such as the names of the contractors, quantities of goods and size of the deals. Food had come to include companies and characters with close ties to the Kremlin and the French and Chinese governments. State was aware of such oddities as Russian oil companies and Chinese arms manufacturers selling �milk� to Saddam. State knew that these contracts under UN rules were forwarded for approval by the governments of the respective countries. Powell also had long experience with Iraq, and the ways of Saddam, going back to Iraq�s 1990 invasion of Kuwait and the 1991 first Gulf War. Powell had more than enough documentation at his command to challenge � credibly � the motives of Security Council members Russia and France, for blocking U.S. efforts to try to enforce 17 Security Council resolutions against Saddam. Yet Powell, when it came to that showdown on the world stage of the U.N., apparently either missed or dismissed as irrelevant the abundant signs � to which he had privileged access � that the U.N. Security Council itself had been corrupted by the same Iraqi regime whose fate they were debating. Powell raised no public alarm; he made no visible mention of this pivotal problem. If anyone was going to raise hell about this matter at the time, call it to the attention of President Bush, and pursue it as the highly germane matter that is surely was, it should have been Powell, secretary of State. Did he not notice? Did he not care? Was his own vision so narrow that he simply did not understand? Now, here we are, with Powell hailing Obama as a man of �style and substance,� while giving a dismissive shrug to Obama�s record of poor judgment and troubling connections � from Tony Rezko, to Bill Ayers, to Rev. Wright, to ACORN. Nor does Powell seem to have thought through just what it might mean for America�s future power and prosperity, should Obama, with all his vigor and transformational talents, follow through on his promises to turn America into a cradle-to-grave welfare state. There�s no call here to question Powell�s integrity; he may be a fine general, and an upstanding man. It is his judgment in matters of politics, his perception of how the wider world actually works, that is at issue. In 2003, when he was in the spotlight and entrusted with crucial matters of diplomacy and judgment, he appears to have suffered from an enormous blind spot. That worked to the gross detriment of the United States. With Powell arguing the case, but omitting central facts about Oil-for-Food, America was cast ultimately as the rogue of a rule-abiding U.N. community. Not until the following year, after the U.N. die was cast, did the truth about Oil-for-Food, in all its horrifying and dirty magnitude, begin to spill out. Powell at a critical moment had every reason to recognize that the U.N. Security Council debate was effectively corrupted and rigged against America from the start. He either never realized this, or never told us. Now Powell is giving his full-throated endorsement to the candidate who promises to bargain with Iran�s mullahs, remake America�s economy in the socialist mold, and change the world � but how? Is it possible that once again, there are highly germane factors that Powell has missed?

Re: Colin Powell Endorses Obama

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...orses-obama/?hp

How quickly we forgot who he chose as his past employer.

Re: Re: Colin Powell Endorses Obama

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby How quickly we forgot who he chose as his past employer.

yeah - because if he turned down being secretary of state for the US his offer from canada was still open.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov He argued against the war behind closed doors, and only went to the UN under a direct order by his President.

How did you get access to those meetings man? Anyway I agree with Magnetonium... it's just political expediency for Powell; it's obvious he is just positioning himself to get a position in Obama's cabinet. What is this "he had to study the candidates and their issues before making an agonizing decision" business? I can understand if Obama just arrived from another planet, but it's not like he wasn't aware of his policies or McCains' till now. Powell is just another Washington insider at this point and his endorsement isn't going to change any votes. The timing was purposeful because Obama is being hurt now with all these things that we have learned about him. It would have been much easier to endorse Obama before all this garbage came out, when he was the untouchable messiah. But here comes the endorsement right before the election after we've learned all the dirty laundry about Obama? Even that black democrat Juan Williams admits what it was really about. If Powell had endorsed McCain, you know what would have happened? Donna Brazile and the other black elites in the Democrat Party would never have forgiven him.

Powell was bad after the United Nations. Now Powell is good. He broke with the Bush administration over affirmative action too. Massive campaign spending was corrupt, but now since Obama's doing it, it's just fine. Voter fraud was anti-civil rights. Now voter fraud is pro-civil rights. Experience doesn't matter in Obama's case, but it's now the reason why Governor Palin isn't qualified to be president, and so on. In 1995 when he was entertaining running for president, he wouldn't say what party he was representing because his approvals were in the 70's and he knew if his numbers would shrink of he went in a certain direction. Powell owes his name and his ascension to various heights to Republicans. I guess that's not so important anymore.

I don't understand why the Republican party is giving this election away.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis I don't understand why the Republican party is giving this election away.

Maybe they plan to nuke New York before Bush is out of office.

Obviously because he's black.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Interesting. Well, dont you guys think it was in Powell's interests to go fight the war in Iraq because it would finance the military industrial complex, which is Powell part of (Pentagon, US military). Other than that, you guys have good points.

HAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA

fuck.

haaaaaaaaa

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss How did you get access to those meetings man?

I worked for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

quote:

Originally posted by Kinezi Admitting a mistake does not make someone undo the mistake he made, people punish to set examples for other people in future. All these people needs to punished to set an example for future generations. Orr bullshit like this will keep on going, Iraq now, Iran later... Syria.. Lebanon, Palestine..

Not that I'm all aginst public execution of politicians or anything, but do you genuinely believe that some sort of progress will come of this? That capital punishment establishes some sort of lesson or precedence for future generations? That people, as a whole, learn from the mistakes of the past?

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On Not that I'm all aginst public execution of politicians or anything, but do you genuinely believe that some sort of progress will come of this? That capital punishment establishes some sort of lesson or precedence for future generations? That people, as a whole, learn from the mistakes of the past?

It worked in Somalia! And Sudan! And the Central African Republic! And Soviet Russia!

Hendrik Hertzberg:

quote:

Endorsement Endorphin Is there a living American whose endorsement would have meant more to the candidacy of Barack Obama than Colin Powell�s? I�m not asking rhetorically. I�d really like to know. Nancy Reagan? Bush the Elder? Henry Kissinger? How about a revered sports figure? There aren�t too many of those any more in this growth-hormone era. Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh? Michael Jordan? Bobby Orr? Tiger Woods? (Or would he just be Powell without the substance?) O.K., some icon of popular culture? Bruce Springsteen, Tony Bennet, Stevie Wonder, Oprah Winfrey? (No, Obama�s got them already.) Clint Eastwood? Dolly Parton? Or a twofer like Arnold Schwarzenegger? Rush Limbaugh, I�m thinking. That would be a real Fat Man Bites Rabid Dog story. But no. The big guy�s negatives are way too high. (And even if you expand the field to include the six billion people who aren�t Americans, you�re hard put. The Dalai Lama? Pope Benedict XVI? Anyone?) It wasn�t just the �who� of Powell�s endorsement, i.e., a r�sum� that includes service as Reagan�s National Security Adviser, Bush the Elder�s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Bush the Younger�s Secretary of State and a history of loyal Republicanism from the Nixon years until, literally, yesterday. (Powell, the most famous black Republican since Frederick Douglass, maxed out as a McCain contributor during the current electoral cycle and was mentioned as a possible running mate.) It was the force and focus of what he said. Powell�s presentation on �Meet the Press� had the casualness of an interview but the structure and pointedness of an argument crafted into a speech. He began by laying out the issues he regards as important: the global economy; Iraq and Afghanistan; the need for better relations with allies and for being �willing to talk to people who we have not been willing to talk to before�; the need for leadership on energy, global warming, and the environment; the plight of the poorest countries, which he linked to the problem of terrorism. Only then did he turn to his choice for President, making it explicit only after expressing his affection for McCain. He said that the financial crisis had constituted a kind of �final exam� for the two candidates, one that Obama had passed and McCain had failed. He cited McCain�s choice of Sarah Palin as having �raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.� He praised the contrasting �steadiness� and �intellectual vigor� of Obama, adding: quote: On the Republican side over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower. Mr. Obama, at the same time, has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He�s crossing lines�ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He�s thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values. General Powell�who is from a small town called the Bronx�then offered a devastating, definitive critique of what he called �this Bill Ayers situation�: quote: Why do we have these robocalls going on around the country trying to suggest that, because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow, Mr. Obama is tainted? What they�re trying to do is connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings. And I think that�s inappropriate. The emotional climax of Powell�s argument came next. It turned on the death of a twenty-year-old Muslim American soldier, and it happens to have been prompted by the magazine I work for, so I can�t help feeling some institutional pride. And his conclusion: quote: So, when I look at all of this and I think back to my Army career, we�ve got two individuals. Either one of them could be a good President. But which is the President that we need now? Which is the individual that serves the needs of the nation for the next period of time? And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities�and we have to take that into account�as well as his substance�he has both style and substance�he has met the standard of being a successful President, being an exceptional President. I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world, onto the world stage, onto the American stage. And for that reason I�ll be voting for Senator Barack Obama. All of it said calmly and gravely, without a single hesitation, and without notes�a stunning performance. Notwithstanding the conventional platitudes about how endorsements don�t really matter, this one does. The McCain campaign�s tactics (it doesn�t have a strategy, and it doesn�t seem to know the difference) have been left in tatters. So much for Obama�s �associations.�

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...sement-end.html

quote:

Originally posted by Nostalgic Obviously because he's black.

Well said. My BFF Lebezniatnikov will love this post (my bet is he doesn't even really read it because it's Limbaugh's words). At least he has the stones to say what nobody on the Democrat side has the courage to admit about Powell. Enjoy:

[In reference to Joe The Plumber] Now, who the hell are the Obama campaign to be investigating a private citizen? He is not part of the McCain campaign. He has had no relationship with John McCain over the years. John McCain never heard of Joe the Plumber 'til Joe the Plumber asked the question of Barack Obama. Now, there are some very questionable people in Barack Obama's past that the media will not investigate, will not look into, will not tell us anything about, but yet they haven't found anything substantive on Joe the Plumber. So you have media propaganda and investigations to help one party. Who the hell are they to be investigating a private citizen? That is an indictment of the Obama campaign and what it is and what it portends. They haven't found anything substantive on Joe the Plumber... yet. But it won't stop 'em if they find nothing from maybe making something up, will it?

What is happening to us? What is happening to our political system here? Average citizens targeted by a presidential campaign, and this average citizen asked a question, made a fool and a buffoon out of the candidate by making the candidate open up and be honest about what he really plans to do. And now we've got Biden out there taking this campaign to the last place the Obama campaign wants it to be. Maybe General Powell, you out there, Secretary Powell, you listening? Maybe now that you've heard what Senator Biden said, that Obama is going to guarantee us a major crisis because he will be tested, McCain would not be tested, they know McCain, Biden in effect said this, perhaps, General Powell, you can explain again why you support Obama and Biden. Not only is Biden a dunce, but he has been wrong on every foreign policy question of the last decade.

General Powell, are you prepared to go out and campaign? I know you said you weren't going to campaign. Are you prepared now to try to clean up this mess by telling us how qualified Obama is to deal with this test that's coming? By the way, General Powell, in a number of other things that he said about endorsing Obama, he said the Republican Party's getting too narrow. Did you catch that? He said the Republican Party is getting too narrow. Now, I'm beginning to wonder about Secretary Powell's powers of perception. That means the Republican Party's nothing but a bunch of right-wing extremists that he doesn't like. He doesn't like people that are against affirmative action, apparently. He doesn't like people who are pro-life, apparently. The Republican Party's getting too narrow? How many monologues have I given saying that with McCain the Republican tent's too damn big? The Republican Party, Secretary Powell, has been out trying to attract people like you!

The Republican Party, General Powell, has been trying to throw people like me out of it. The Republican Party, with Senator McCain, has been trying to get independents, trying to get moderates, people like you. We have been trying to get independents and moderates and Democrats, by the way, to come into our party as Democrats, not conservatives. We've been trying to get independents to come into our party as independents, which means Democrats, not as Republicans. That's what the McCain campaign is all about; that's what the McCain nomination was all about. General Powell, for you to say that you don't support McCain because the Republican Party is getting too narrow is a dead giveaway, sir. That's the last thing anybody would say about John "Amnesty" McCain. When you go down the list of McCain's Democrat positions, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, to say that McCain's campaign is narrow because of Sarah Palin? And of course Tom Brokaw wasn't going to call him on any of these things. He wasn't going to call him on the surge or anything of the sort.

Yeah, the party has moved too far right. Look here: "Schwarzenegger to Campaign for McCain in Ohio." Schwarzenegger! He's not exactly your pro-life, anti-affirmative action hick hayseed going to NASCAR races, General Powell. Isn't this, by the way, the Colin Powell who was first appointed to a big job by Mr. Conservative, Ronald Reagan? Wasn't it Ronald Reagan who pinned the four stars on General Powell? It was, ladies and gentlemen. And wasn't it George H. W. Bush who named him chairman of the Joint Chiefs, another Republican? And wasn't it George W. Bush who named him secretary of state? Yes, another Republican. By tomorrow this time, the political impact of the Powell endorsement will be mostly irrelevant, but his betrayal will be forever. And you people in the media who have been out there claiming that my disagreeing when Powell says his endorsement of Obama is not about race, and I say, yes, it is, it's totally about race, is a transformational figure, what else is transformational about Obama if not his race?

Everybody knows that Democrats in the media think history is being made here. What's so hard to admit you're supporting a guy because of race? And they're trying to tell me that I'm being racist and that 'm accusing Secretary Powell of being a racist. I'm not accusing him of being a racist. The Democrats have gotten away with defining our language or redefining our language for far too long. You bring up William Ayers, you are mean-spirited. You bring up Wright, you're a racist, and now you say that General Powell's endorsement of Obama is because of race? "You can't say that, who do you think you are? Who does Limbaugh think he is?" Let me tell you a little story. A friend of mine has a daughter in a high school. Yesterday, the daughter shows up, it's a history class, a constitutional history class or some such thing. She's a senior in high school, shows up, and the teacher starts lambasting me to these seniors in high school. "Did you hear what Rush Limbaugh said about Colin Powell? Can you believe Rush Limbaugh's a racist? Rush Limbaugh is as racist as anybody I ever -- I can't believe that Rush Limbaugh would say that about Colin Powell, that's horribly racist," and apparently there are a lot of black students, and the teacher is asking, "What do you think of Limbaugh? Do you think he's racist?" All their hands go up.

So what you have here is electioneering going on in a high school history class, citing what I said. These kids are 18, some of them are 18, they can vote. So you've got this teacher who's electioneering. What I said, my simple quotes to Jonathan Martin. "Jonathan, he says it's not about race. Okay. I'm going to search all the inexperienced white liberals that he's endorsed. I'll get back to you with what I find." Not only is that not racist, it's brilliant, if I say so myself, because it expresses it in a number of ways. What I'm saying is, well, this is interesting. He says it's not about race, but where all the inexperienced while liberals? Of course it's about race. And then when I said -- now, nobody brings this one up -- but he said he couldn't deal with two more Republican appointments to the Supreme Court. I said, "I didn't know he disliked John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia." I guess he also doesn't like the fact that it was Republicans that made him who he is. This is betrayal.

What General Powell did is betrayal, and of course he's gonna say it's not about race, but if Biden were the nominee you think he'd be endorsing Biden? Do you think he would endorse Hillary? It's possible. I'll tell you why. Because in addition to the race factor here, what's most important to Colin Powell is Colin Powell. And that means what's most important to Colin Powell is his standing in the New York-Washington elite corridors of power, and he has been on thin ice since the Iraq war and since he went up there to the United Nations and made the case for Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. So this gets him back in good graces, this gets him back in good stead. In addition, do you think General Powell knew that Scooter Libby had not leaked anything, that his own assistant, Richard Armitage did? And do you think that General Powell might have just sat on the sidelines during the Scooter Libby investigation as a way of getting back at the Bush administration because he thinks they embarrassed him by sending him up there to make that statement, which so threatened his relationship with the people he most covets, the New York-Washington power elite? So with the endorsement of Obama, takes care of that. Look at what he had to look past, by the way, too.

Claudia Rosett, National Review Online, big, important piece. He had to ignore the United Nations oil-for-food program in making this endorsement, a number of other things. It's clear that General Powell is looking out for General Powell, which a lot of people do.

But to say that my saying that he's choosing to endorse Obama is racist, I never said that. I said he's making the choice based on race and a number of other things. Plus now the Republican Party's moved too far to the right. How does that strike you, you conservatives who think the Republican Party is trying to do everything it can to disavow conservatives running the party. So, by this time tomorrow, the political impact of the Powell endorsement will be mostly irrelevant, but his betrayal will be forever. And I would still love to hear what General Powell has to say about what Biden said. Maybe he can explain again why he supports Obama and Biden after what Biden said.

Just one more stab at this, folks, this Colin Powell business. It's not about racism. It's about his lack of candor. He can't admit what's obvious. Race plays a huge role. The whole campaign is about race. It's "historic." Why is it historic? There's only one thing that makes it historic, and that's the race of the Democrat nominee. It's certainly not his issues, not his policies. He's not The Messiah. He didn't come from a virgin birth. There's nothing out there that makes this historic other than that. Why can't you Democrats acknowledge this? What's so hard about it? Just say it! Be proud of it! It would have been refreshing if Secretary Powell had stated the obvious, not danced around it. But, see, if he'd admitted it was about race it wouldn't have helped him with the media. So... You know, in all these things you gotta take 'em into account.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Well said. My BFF Lebezniatnikov will love this post (my bet is he doesn't even really read it because it's Limbaugh's words). At least he has the stones to say what nobody on the Democrat side has the courage to admit about Powell. Enjoy: [In reference to Joe The Plumber] Now, who the hell are the Obama campaign to be investigating a private citizen? He is not part of the McCain campaign. He has had no relationship with John McCain over the years. John McCain never heard of Joe the Plumber 'til Joe the Plumber asked the question of Barack Obama. Now, there are some very questionable people in Barack Obama's past that the media will not investigate, will not look into, will not tell us anything about, but yet they haven't found anything substantive on Joe the Plumber. So you have media propaganda and investigations to help one party. Who the hell are they to be investigating a private citizen? That is an indictment of the Obama campaign and what it is and what it portends. They haven't found anything substantive on Joe the Plumber... yet. But it won't stop 'em if they find nothing from maybe making something up, will it? What is happening to us? What is happening to our political system here? Average citizens targeted by a presidential campaign, and this average citizen asked a question, made a fool and a buffoon out of the candidate by making the candidate open up and be honest about what he really plans to do. And now we've got Biden out there taking this campaign to the last place the Obama campaign wants it to be. Maybe General Powell, you out there, Secretary Powell, you listening? Maybe now that you've heard what Senator Biden said, that Obama is going to guarantee us a major crisis because he will be tested, McCain would not be tested, they know McCain, Biden in effect said this, perhaps, General Powell, you can explain again why you support Obama and Biden. Not only is Biden a dunce, but he has been wrong on every foreign policy question of the last decade. General Powell, are you prepared to go out and campaign? I know you said you weren't going to campaign. Are you prepared now to try to clean up this mess by telling us how qualified Obama is to deal with this test that's coming? By the way, General Powell, in a number of other things that he said about endorsing Obama, he said the Republican Party's getting too narrow. Did you catch that? He said the Republican Party is getting too narrow. Now, I'm beginning to wonder about Secretary Powell's powers of perception. That means the Republican Party's nothing but a bunch of right-wing extremists that he doesn't like. He doesn't like people that are against affirmative action, apparently. He doesn't like people who are pro-life, apparently. The Republican Party's getting too narrow? How many monologues have I given saying that with McCain the Republican tent's too damn big? The Republican Party, Secretary Powell, has been out trying to attract people like you! The Republican Party, General Powell, has been trying to throw people like me out of it. The Republican Party, with Senator McCain, has been trying to get independents, trying to get moderates, people like you. We have been trying to get independents and moderates and Democrats, by the way, to come into our party as Democrats, not conservatives. We've been trying to get independents to come into our party as independents, which means Democrats, not as Republicans. That's what the McCain campaign is all about; that's what the McCain nomination was all about. General Powell, for you to say that you don't support McCain because the Republican Party is getting too narrow is a dead giveaway, sir. That's the last thing anybody would say about John "Amnesty" McCain. When you go down the list of McCain's Democrat positions, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, to say that McCain's campaign is narrow because of Sarah Palin? And of course Tom Brokaw wasn't going to call him on any of these things. He wasn't going to call him on the surge or anything of the sort. Yeah, the party has moved too far right. Look here: "Schwarzenegger to Campaign for McCain in Ohio." Schwarzenegger! He's not exactly your pro-life, anti-affirmative action hick hayseed going to NASCAR races, General Powell. Isn't this, by the way, the Colin Powell who was first appointed to a big job by Mr. Conservative, Ronald Reagan? Wasn't it Ronald Reagan who pinned the four stars on General Powell? It was, ladies and gentlemen. And wasn't it George H. W. Bush who named him chairman of the Joint Chiefs, another Republican? And wasn't it George W. Bush who named him secretary of state? Yes, another Republican. By tomorrow this time, the political impact of the Powell endorsement will be mostly irrelevant, but his betrayal will be forever. And you people in the media who have been out there claiming that my disagreeing when Powell says his endorsement of Obama is not about race, and I say, yes, it is, it's totally about race, is a transformational figure, what else is transformational about Obama if not his race? Everybody knows that Democrats in the media think history is being made here. What's so hard to admit you're supporting a guy because of race? And they're trying to tell me that I'm being racist and that 'm accusing Secretary Powell of being a racist. I'm not accusing him of being a racist. The Democrats have gotten away with defining our language or redefining our language for far too long. You bring up William Ayers, you are mean-spirited. You bring up Wright, you're a racist, and now you say that General Powell's endorsement of Obama is because of race? "You can't say that, who do you think you are? Who does Limbaugh think he is?" Let me tell you a little story. A friend of mine has a daughter in a high school. Yesterday, the daughter shows up, it's a history class, a constitutional history class or some such thing. She's a senior in high school, shows up, and the teacher starts lambasting me to these seniors in high school. "Did you hear what Rush Limbaugh said about Colin Powell? Can you believe Rush Limbaugh's a racist? Rush Limbaugh is as racist as anybody I ever -- I can't believe that Rush Limbaugh would say that about Colin Powell, that's horribly racist," and apparently there are a lot of black students, and the teacher is asking, "What do you think of Limbaugh? Do you think he's racist?" All their hands go up. So what you have here is electioneering going on in a high school history class, citing what I said. These kids are 18, some of them are 18, they can vote. So you've got this teacher who's electioneering. What I said, my simple quotes to Jonathan Martin. "Jonathan, he says it's not about race. Okay. I'm going to search all the inexperienced white liberals that he's endorsed. I'll get back to you with what I find." Not only is that not racist, it's brilliant, if I say so myself, because it expresses it in a number of ways. What I'm saying is, well, this is interesting. He says it's not about race, but where all the inexperienced while liberals? Of course it's about race. And then when I said -- now, nobody brings this one up -- but he said he couldn't deal with two more Republican appointments to the Supreme Court. I said, "I didn't know he disliked John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia." I guess he also doesn't like the fact that it was Republicans that made him who he is. This is betrayal. What General Powell did is betrayal, and of course he's gonna say it's not about race, but if Biden were the nominee you think he'd be endorsing Biden? Do you think he would endorse Hillary? It's possible. I'll tell you why. Because in addition to the race factor here, what's most important to Colin Powell is Colin Powell. And that means what's most important to Colin Powell is his standing in the New York-Washington elite corridors of power, and he has been on thin ice since the Iraq war and since he went up there to the United Nations and made the case for Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. So this gets him back in good graces, this gets him back in good stead. In addition, do you think General Powell knew that Scooter Libby had not leaked anything, that his own assistant, Richard Armitage did? And do you think that General Powell might have just sat on the sidelines during the Scooter Libby investigation as a way of getting back at the Bush administration because he thinks they embarrassed him by sending him up there to make that statement, which so threatened his relationship with the people he most covets, the New York-Washington power elite? So with the endorsement of Obama, takes care of that. Look at what he had to look past, by the way, too. Claudia Rosett, National Review Online, big, important piece. He had to ignore the United Nations oil-for-food program in making this endorsement, a number of other things. It's clear that General Powell is looking out for General Powell, which a lot of people do. But to say that my saying that he's choosing to endorse Obama is racist, I never said that. I said he's making the choice based on race and a number of other things. Plus now the Republican Party's moved too far to the right. How does that strike you, you conservatives who think the Republican Party is trying to do everything it can to disavow conservatives running the party. So, by this time tomorrow, the political impact of the Powell endorsement will be mostly irrelevant, but his betrayal will be forever. And I would still love to hear what General Powell has to say about what Biden said. Maybe he can explain again why he supports Obama and Biden after what Biden said. Just one more stab at this, folks, this Colin Powell business. It's not about racism. It's about his lack of candor. He can't admit what's obvious. Race plays a huge role. The whole campaign is about race. It's "historic." Why is it historic? There's only one thing that makes it historic, and that's the race of the Democrat nominee. It's certainly not his issues, not his policies. He's not The Messiah. He didn't come from a virgin birth. There's nothing out there that makes this historic other than that. Why can't you Democrats acknowledge this? What's so hard about it? Just say it! Be proud of it! It would have been refreshing if Secretary Powell had stated the obvious, not danced around it. But, see, if he'd admitted it was about race it wouldn't have helped him with the media. So... You know, in all these things you gotta take 'em into account.

One of the most un-informative and boring diatribes I have ever had the misfortune to read.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN One of the most un-informative and boring diatribes I have ever had the misfortune to read.

That's because Rush Limbaugh is a neocon Republican mouthpiece. What did you expect? The man would go to hell and back for W Bush.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.