Colin Powell to endorse Obama on Meet the Press?

[Thunder]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081017/pl_politico/14665

This may indeed clinch it for Obama. If this former General and Secretary of State feels comfortable and feels safe with Barak Obama as President, then we all can too.

[Cicero]

Please. Powell, West Point graduate, four star general, former CJCOS, Sec of State, is the one who went to the U.N. with Satellite photos and pointed to vehicles that he said contained WOMD's. What credibility does this guy have with liberals or conservatives?

Even if the libs beleive he was bamboozled by Bush 43, who wants the endorsement of a man with convictions of convenience?

[BenBurch]

If that happens, what effect do you folks think it will have?

[XBoxWarrior]

I would assume that some folks might think Powell a little less a traitor...Others will think he has switched teams.

He was duped into that whole UN thing, and came away like a tool. Remember the "Anthrax" vials? Please.

He was a great military leader, that got conned by the Bush/Cheney administration, that can never be forgotten.

However, if he comes out against that UN deal, and the Bush administration, I will forgive him...otherwise, I stiil vote Obama. (and think that Powell was a tool)

[Thunder]

I am a liberal democrat and I deeply respect Colin Powell.

[Uzzy]

Absolutely. Colin Powell is one of the top men for all things relating to military matters and foreign affairs, so his endorsement of Obama, if it takes place, would be a great boon for Obama.

I also consider myself a liberal democrat, and highly respect Colin Powell.

[Cicero]

The only person in the Bush Administration to go unscathed for the Iraq War is Powell. The same guy who sold the bill of goods to the world. Amazing! Liberals are sure fickle.

[Uzzy]

Mainly because he a) Argued with Bush for 2 and a half hours to try to persuade him not to invade and b) Even after that, he loyally did his job. He just resigned later when it wasn't a critical time.

Source for point a. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2042072.ece

[Cicero]

Mainly because he a) Argued with Bush for 2 and a half hours to try to persuade him not to invade and b) Even after that, he loyally did his job. He just resigned later when it wasn't a critical time.

Source for point a. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2042072.ece

You mean pusillanimous Powell could not resign before the U.N. presentation, but could bow out gracefully when it didn't make any difference. Got it.

[Whiplash]

I bet this great respect for Powell only first materialized the moment he got away from the Bush administration.

[Jeff Corey]

The only person in the Bush Administration to go unscathed for the Iraq War is Powell. The same guy who sold the bill of goods to the world. Amazing! Liberals are sure fickle.
Unscathed? Are you confused?

[Uzzy]

Interesting tact there, calling a 4 Star General a coward.

Powell did his job in public, loyally. He argued fiercely in private. He was a moderate, restraining influence on Bush, who at the very least persuaded him to take the case for action on Iraq to the UN. He may be a republican, but a very moderate one at that, who supports more traditionally liberal views.

He's a smart, educated and thoughtful man who supports diplomatic approaches to problems. Further, he supports his commander even if he disagrees with him, and leaves when it will do no harm to his commander. The word you're looking for here is loyal. I'd have thought even a conservative like yourself would appreciate that, no?

[Oliver]

Interesting tact there, calling a 4 Star General a coward.

Powell did his job in public, loyally. He argued fiercely in private. He was a moderate, restraining influence on Bush, who at the very least persuaded him to take the case for action on Iraq to the UN. He may be a republican, but a very moderate one at that, who supports more traditionally liberal views.

He's a smart, educated and thoughtful man who supports diplomatic approaches to problems. Further, he supports his commander even if he disagrees with him, and leaves when it will do no harm to his commander. The word you're looking for here is loyal. I'd have thought even a conservative like yourself would appreciate that, no?


As far I remember, he or one of his staffer said that he was fooled
by the Hawks concerning the WMD-"evidence". I have to look it up ...

ETA: He said that on MTP:
2ZTLmOoPzjs

[SteveGrenard]

I heard tonight on cable news ...can't find back up online yet that the generals on active duty and some retireds have come out saying they will not vote in the election and remain apolitical. Amazing this comes up today. Sounds like they are trying to put pressure on Powell to do likewise.

[DavidJames]

I bet this great respect for Powell only first materialized the moment he got away from the Bush administration.You know, you're not very good at this. You should consider thinking before posting. My respect for Powell was very high until he bought into the WMD stuff. My respect went back up again when he resigned.

I'm also a liberal.

[Cleon]

I bet this great respect for Powell only first materialized the moment he got away from the Bush administration.

Other way around. I agree with Cicero, for once.

Quite a few people on both sides of the isle had considerable respect for Powell, pre-Bush. When he tried to sell the UN on that pile of garbage as a reason to go to war, a lot of that respect went straight out the window. I'm not aware of any significant change in this perception since he finally decided to step down.

The media will play up a Powell endorsement as if it's significant, but I really don't think it will affect the race much at all.

[mr rosewater]

Other way around. I agree with Cicero, for once.

Quite a few people on both sides of the isle had considerable respect for Powell, pre-Bush. When he tried to sell the UN on that pile of garbage as a reason to go to war, a lot of that respect went straight out the window. I'm not aware of any significant change in this perception since he finally decided to step down.

The media will play up a Powell endorsement as if it's significant, but I really don't think it will affect the race much at all.

Agreed.

[DavidJames]

The media will play up a Powell endorsement as if it's significant, but I really don't think it will affect the race much at all.I agree, but it will have an affect on some people, probably a few moderate Republicans (few moderate Republicans, is that redundant?) I sense a little McCain momentum and this will partially help keep that in check.

[Cicero]

Interesting tact there, calling a 4 Star General a coward.

Powell did his job in public, loyally. He argued fiercely in private. He was a moderate, restraining influence on Bush, who at the very least persuaded him to take the case for action on Iraq to the UN. He may be a republican, but a very moderate one at that, who supports more traditionally liberal views.

He's a smart, educated and thoughtful man who supports diplomatic approaches to problems. Further, he supports his commander even if he disagrees with him, and leaves when it will do no harm to his commander. The word you're looking for here is loyal. I'd have thought even a conservative like yourself would appreciate that, no?

The oath he took at West Point is duty, honor, country. Presenting facts to the U.N. that you know to be untrue does not meet any of those standards. Powell was acting as a politician, not as an officer and a gentleman.

Smart, educated , and thoughtful is a trait shared by many Americans. Standing up for what you beleive when doing so may jeopardize your standing is courageous. Telling tales out of school is just being smarmy.

[Cicero]

Other way around. I agree with Cicero, for once.
.

I have to go check the temperature in Hell.

[SezMe]

Other way around. I agree with Cicero, for once.

Quite a few people on both sides of the isle had considerable respect for Powell, pre-Bush. When he tried to sell the UN on that pile of garbage as a reason to go to war, a lot of that respect went straight out the window. I'm not aware of any significant change in this perception since he finally decided to step down.

The media will play up a Powell endorsement as if it's significant, but I really don't think it will affect the race much at all.
Took the words out of my mouth, except I would have expressed a little more trepidation at the fact that I was agreeing with Cicero. :)

[Cleon]

Took the words out of my mouth, except I would have expressed a little more trepidation at the fact that I was agreeing with Cicero. :)

Don't think for a second that I didn't take a shot of JD before typing that.

[BenBurch]

Funny stuff here.

Had he endorsed McCain I am quite certain I would be hearing a different tune from the right-wingers here.

Colin Powell should have been the first African-ancestry President, and would have been had he not helped Bush sell this unnecessary and badly-run war. I think that damaged him enough that this will have a generally neutral effect on this race, but it may help with some number of undecided voters. It won't change the minds of any of the base Repubs, or any of the core Democrats.

Now, the endorsement I think would make a major change would be Condi Rice.

If she endorsed Obama, the election would become a formality.

[jj]

Please. Powell, West Point graduate, four star general, former CJCOS, Sec of State, is the one who went to the U.N. with Satellite photos and pointed to vehicles that he said contained WOMD's. What credibility does this guy have with liberals or conservatives?

Even if the libs beleive he was bamboozled by Bush 43, who wants the endorsement of a man with convictions of convenience?

Indeed, look what happens when somebody realizes the administration he is involved in is deeply, catastrophically unethical, and as a result resigns.

What happens? The "right" smears this man's reputation when he dares to speak out.

[Oliver]

Seems as if the "yet not confirmed rumor" is new to Obama:

Obama doesn’t know about Powell endorsement (http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/10/17/obama-doesnt-know-about-powell-endorsement/)
Reuters - 6 hours ago

[Malerin]

A Powell endorsement would be the final nail in the Mccain campaign coffin. It would dominate the news cycle favorably for Obama for at least 48 hours, boost Obama's national security creds, and be regarded as a repudiation of Mccain's positions and inner circle (most of which are the neo-cons Powell despises). Powell has regained a lot of the luster he lost after his disastrous UN presentation.

"Is Gen. Colin Powell getting ready to endorse Sen. Barack Obama on "Meet the Press" this Sunday? Two sources close to Powell, speaking on the condition of anonymity, predict that he will."

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/racetothefinish/archive/2008/10/17/will-powell-endorse-obama.aspx



"In an August Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, more than three-quarters (76 percent) of voters viewed Powell favorably while just 13 percent saw him in an unfavorable light."

...

"More than one in three voters said a Powell endorsement of Obama would make them more likely to vote for the Democrat. (Hat tip to Jon "The Numbers Man" Cohen for the polling data.)"

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/10/why_the_powell_endorsement_cou.html?hpid=topnews

[JoeTheJuggler]

Colin Powell has no credibility and deserve no respect in my eyes. He stood up and lied to the world.

Frankly, I don't think his endorsement of Obama will help Obama. If it does, it saddens me.

[shemp]

Colin Powell has about as much credibility as Colin Fry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Fry).

[dudalb]

Colin Powell has no credibility and deserve no respect in my eyes. He stood up and lied to the world.

Frankly, I don't think his endorsement of Obama will help Obama. If it does, it saddens me.

Frankly, I just think you don't like the Military or anybody in it.

[dudalb]

Indeed, look what happens when somebody realizes the administration he is involved in is deeply, catastrophically unethical, and as a result resigns.

What happens? The "right" smears this man's reputation when he dares to speak out.


Agreed. And as we are seeing here, some on the Left will never forgive Powell.

[TheJim]

I don't care for Powell mostly for his cover up of the Mai Ling Massacre. But, Obama has had my support since his announcement to run and the only person that might have changed my mind was out campaigning for him today, Al Bundy. That said this is great news for Obama, Powell has something like a 80 percent approval rating with single digit negatives and is one of only two people that can make an endorsement that would be actual news at this point, the other being Ross Perot. Malrein is right this will be the story for the Sunday and Monday news cycle effectively running two days off of the clock. With just 17 days and 5 of those Fridays and Saturdays along with Obama getting at least another two day news cycle for his half hour of network time that leaves McCain only 8 days when Obama is not going to have guaranteed positive press.


Sorry I forgot to mention this. McCain has also used up one of his last late nite appearances too with Obama still presumably having another Letterman plus a Leno while McCain presumably has just a Leno. So again he is at disadvantage here also. It also seems that likely that Obama will have an NBC nightly news interview after McCain.

[Oliver]

I don't care for Powell mostly for his cover up of the Mai Ling Massacre. But, Obama has had my support since his announcement to run and the only person that might have changed my mind was out campaigning for him today, Al Bundy.


Reason: "NO MA'AM" :D

[jj]

Agreed. And as we are seeing here, some on the Left will never forgive Powell.

And in this case the right is counting on that.

After what the 'W' administration did to Powell and Whitman, to name two people ruined by their corruption, someone has the nerve to castigate the victim, and hope for a similar reaction from their reactive opponents.

[Cain]

Powell has always been a press untouchable, and nearly everyone in the mainstream media fawns over his loyalty to superiors even if it's at the expense of truth. And had Powell resigned in the run-up to war, I'd have bet money Cicero would have talked **** about him then.

From a metaperspective, the endorsement is important because it solidifies the view that the adults are in charge. It gives Obama another stamp of approval from the establishment, and on the military-side from this highly respected figure. What we're actually talking about here is political currency, which is valuable because people think it's valuable.

I waver on Powell. I very clearly remember overhearing people on Feb. 6th (Ronald Reagan's birfday) saying Powell sold them. This young white woman in an economics class said, "Well, I was unsure, but he changed my mind." I think it was U.S. News and World Report who quoted Powell saying "this is ********" when he was vetting evidence to put forth at the U.N. Liberal Powell lovers want to sell this story about the guy deceived and bullied; a well-meaning but unwilling enabler, and perhaps that's partially true. Powell's loyal aide Larry Wilkerson has been on a bunch of documentaries criticizing the administration, but mostly focusing on post-invasion incompetence.

You have to separate the man from the position. I know people who hate their job, hate having to be dishonest to customers, or be complete aholes and bitches, but it's basically a job requirement, they need to eat, and it's not something they want to do forever. Powell decided not to go on for a second term, but he was still lying. He might be a nice guy, but he also made the decision to undermine his own credibility.

Ben and Chris Rock are both right -- he could've been president. In retrospect I think we can say he's not up to the job (Donald Rumsfeld walked all over him).

[mhaze]

If that happens, what effect do you folks think it will have?Ah...it would prove he is gullible and easily duped ?

[Puppycow]

If that happens, what effect do you folks think it will have?

Not much.

Ah...it would prove he is gullible and easily duped ?

That has actually been proven already. George Tenet and the CIA duped him that they had reliable intelligence when in fact it came straight from "Curveball" a congential liar whose story kept changing.

[Dragoonster]

I would assume that some folks might think Powell a little less a traitor...Others will think he has switched teams.

He was duped into that whole UN thing, and came away like a tool. Remember the "Anthrax" vials? Please.

He was a great military leader, that got conned by the Bush/Cheney administration, that can never be forgotten.

However, if he comes out against that UN deal, and the Bush administration, I will forgive him...otherwise, I stiil vote Obama. (and think that Powell was a tool)

I won't forgive him. Once again he'd be johnny-come-lately. First he's duped and sells the Iraq justification and the war effort. Then he announces his resignation ten days after Bush gets re-elected. Now he'd be endorsing a guy with a substantial lead three weeks out. It's like he has a pathology of loyalty or something that makes him only speak up or take a stand well after doing so would actually change things. Same thing with Scott McClellan's book--why didn't you do this when it actually mattered???

Ignoring my personal views, the endorsement would be a net boon for Obama. A lot of liberals that were and are staunchly against the war wouldn't care or it wouldn't affect their support of Obama; but those who are more ambiguous or supportive of the war would probably see it as slightly significant.

[Pookster]

I don't see it changing anything. His Bush years hurt him significantly with many Democrats. It could have helped McCain though.

[Nova Land]

I don't care for Powell mostly for his cover up of the Mai Ling Massacre...


Do you perhaps mean the My Lai massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre)?

[Dr Adequate]

What if he said sorry?

"With the benefit of hindsight, I can see that Senator Obama was right about Iraq, and I was wrong; frankly I was duped by the Republicans whom I foolishly chose as my colleagues."

Now that would be an endorsement. Not that it's likely to happen.

[Jimbo07]

"With the benefit of hindsight, I can see that Senator Obama was right about Iraq, and I was wrong; frankly I was duped by the Republicans whom I foolishly chose as my colleagues."

Just to reiterate, there's a difference between duped and coerced...

[chipmunk stew]

Powell has always been a press untouchable, and nearly everyone in the mainstream media fawns over his loyalty to superiors even if it's at the expense of truth. And had Powell resigned in the run-up to war, I'd have bet money Cicero would have talked **** about him then.

From a metaperspective, the endorsement is important because it solidifies the view that the adults are in charge. It gives Obama another stamp of approval from the establishment, and on the military-side from this highly respected figure. What we're actually talking about here is political currency, which is valuable because people think it's valuable.

I waver on Powell. I very clearly remember overhearing people on Feb. 6th (Ronald Reagan's birfday) saying Powell sold them. This young white woman in an economics class said, "Well, I was unsure, but he changed my mind." I think it was U.S. News and World Report who quoted Powell saying "this is ********" when he was vetting evidence to put forth at the U.N. Liberal Powell lovers want to sell this story about the guy deceived and bullied; a well-meaning but unwilling enabler, and perhaps that's partially true. Powell's loyal aide Larry Wilkerson has been on a bunch of documentaries criticizing the administration, but mostly focusing on post-invasion incompetence.

You have to separate the man from the position. I know people who hate their job, hate having to be dishonest to customers, or be complete aholes and bitches, but it's basically a job requirement, they need to eat, and it's not something they want to do forever. Powell decided not to go on for a second term, but he was still lying. He might be a nice guy, but he also made the decision to undermine his own credibility.

Ben and Chris Rock are both right -- he could've been president. In retrospect I think we can say he's not up to the job (Donald Rumsfeld walked all over him).
Very well said. Powell made a tragic error in speaking at the UN. His loyalty became a devastating weakness. That said, I don't believe he'd make that kind of error if he were in charge, and his history of decision-making where he was in charge bears that out.

I disagree with you on one point: I don't think this decision proves he is not up to the job of President. It just guarantees that he'll never have the chance to prove that he is.

[Cicero]

Just to reiterate, there's a difference between duped and coerced...

There sure is. But you have no evidence to support that Powell's presentation to the U.N., using photos that did not show what he said it showed, was a victim of duping or coercion.

[Jimbo07]

There sure is. But you have no evidence to support that Powell's presentation to the U.N., using photos that did not show what he said it showed, was a victim of duping or coercion.

Agreed. I do not.

However, the discussion seems to be lining up along the lines of "administration's liar" on one side, and "gullible idiot" on the other and I just wanted to throw in the reminder that there's at least a third option, if not more. Frankly, we may not ever know what was going on in his head.

The best glimpse we can get is in candid memoirs, but I'm sure they're targeted by whichever side comes out looking unfavourable, as being untrue. :boxedin:

[Uzzy]

Save for Colonel Wilkinson's interview with PBS. Source. (http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/wilkerson.html)

He was the Chief of Staff for the State Department, and worked closely with Powell on many matters, including his testimony to the UN in Feb 2003.

A few interesting quotes from the interview.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: And they didn't give you any inkling that--
LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Not a bit.
DAVID BRANCACCIO: -- there was this debate about some of this information?
LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Not a bit. In fact it was presented in the firmest language possible that the mobile biological labs and the sketches we had drawn of them for the Secretary's presentation were based on the iron clad evidence of multiple sources.


DAVID BRANCACCIO: We've been talking grand policy. The then director of the CIA, George Tenent, Vice President Cheney's deputy Libby, told you that the intelligence that was the basis of going to war was rock solid. Given what you now know, how does that make you feel?
LAWRENCE WILKERSON: It makes me feel terrible. I've said in other places that it was-- constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. My participation in that presentation at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life.
I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council. How do you think that makes me feel? Thirty-one years in the United States Army and I more or less end my career with that kind of a blot on my record? That's not a very comforting thing.


What do you suggest Powell should have done, given that he was told by the CIA that the evidence was rock solid? Powell's only real mistake was trusting those men.

Even after it was clear those men were not to be trusted, he stayed on until he could resign at a point when it didn't hurt his boss.

[Uzzy]

The oath he took at West Point is duty, honor, country. Presenting facts to the U.N. that you know to be untrue does not meet any of those standards. Powell was acting as a politician, not as an officer and a gentleman.

Except he was told that the evidence was 'Rock Solid'. This by the head of the CIA. He acted with honour, and trusted the information given to him by the CIA. That was his mistake, trusting dishonourable men.

The CIA didn't even tell him that the information was being debated!

Smart, educated , and thoughtful is a trait shared by many Americans. Standing up for what you beleive when doing so may jeopardize your standing is courageous. Telling tales out of school is just being smarmy.

Smart, educated and thoughtful is indeed a trait shared by many Americans. Save Palin.

And he did stand up for what he believed when he tried for 2 and a half hours to convince Bush that invading Iraq would be a mistake.

Anything else you want to smear an honourable, courageous man with?

[Cicero]

Save for Colonel Wilkinson's interview with PBS. Source. (http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/wilkerson.html)

He was the Chief of Staff for the State Department, and worked closely with Powell on many matters, including his testimony to the UN in Feb 2003.

A few interesting quotes from the interview.





What do you suggest Powell should have done, given that he was told by the CIA that the evidence was rock solid? Powell's only real mistake was trusting those men.

Even after it was clear those men were not to be trusted, he stayed on until he could resign at a point when it didn't hurt his boss.

Wilkenson didn't cover himself with glory in these comments. He and Powell look at photos that might as well have shown Tonka trucks and from the photos they both agreed that the CIA's analysis of this photo reconnaissance was that WOMD's existed inside the trucks. Please.

The whole point in showing a photo as evidence is that it shows the evidence. Why did Powell not ask for the evidence that showed what was supposedly inside these trucks? There is no excuse for this and neither Powell nor his apologists can lay the blame on Powell's naiveté, loyalty, or blind trust. That was a defense common at Nürnberg.

How many other photo recon pics has Powell looked at in his career and green lighted bombing missions based on what he saw in the photos? Surely he didn't just roll over and see things that were not there just because the guy who took the photo said there were. Then again, maybe we should look at past strike decisions Powell made using evidence from recon photos. There may be a pattern of inept analysis.

[Cicero]

Except he was told that the evidence was 'Rock Solid'. This by the head of the CIA. He acted with honour, and trusted the information given to him by the CIA. That was his mistake, trusting dishonourable men.

The CIA didn't even tell him that the information was being debated!



Smart, educated and thoughtful is indeed a trait shared by many Americans. Save Palin.

And he did stand up for what he believed when he tried for 2 and a half hours to convince Bush that invading Iraq would be a mistake.

Anything else you want to smear an honourable, courageous man with?

Bashing Palin doesn't get Powell off the hook, as much as you would hope it would.

If the evidence is not in the photos, but in the mind of George Tenet, then why bother to show the U.N. photos that do not show the evidence? Why didn't Powell go to Tenet and get the real poop before going to the U.N.?

Please explain what courageous exploit Powell engaged in since Vietnam, where he was awarded a Purple Heart and Bronze star after he stepped on a punji stick in 1963. You make it sound if Powell's life was in the balance if he didn't go to the U.N.

[BenBurch]

This is Hilarious. Repubs bashing a guy that, before they learned he might endorse Obama, they would have built a shrine to.
:D

[Malerin]

This is Hilarious. Repubs bashing a guy that, before they learned he might endorse Obama, they would have built a shrine to.
:D

Let the swift-boating of Colin Powell....Commence!

[Cicero]

This is Hilarious. Repubs bashing a guy that, before they learned he might endorse Obama, they would have built a shrine to.
:D

I have said this about Powell since 2003. I couldn't care less if he endorses Obama. Obama is going to win regardless. Why would he want Powell to jump on his bandwagon at this late date? Powell should just fade away as old soldiers are supposed to do.

[dudalb]

Let the swift-boating of Colin Powell....Commence!

From some of the attiudes expressed here, the Repubs won't have to; certain people on the left will do it for them.

[chipmunk stew]

From some of the attiudes expressed here, the Repubs won't have to; certain people on the left will do it for them.
Ah yes. "Certain people." Such as...(*scans thread*)...:con2:

[SezMe]

What's amazing to me is the interest this possible endorsement has created. Has any other possible personal endorsement on either side generated this much interest? As far as I can remember, only Gore during the primaries comes to mind and that was far less than in this case. I don't get it.

[XBoxWarrior]

Bottom line...."Who Cares"?

Obama will win the election with only one "red" state victory from the '04 deal.

That is the facts...

McCain has to steal a "blue" state?

Argue that point of the election?

Obama has won...if there are No shenanigans in the courts.

[Uzzy]

If the evidence is not in the photos, but in the mind of George Tenet, then why bother to show the U.N. photos that do not show the evidence? Why didn't Powell go to Tenet and get the real poop before going to the U.N.?

Uh. What? Who brought photos up?

The CIA provided Powell with the information regarding Iraq's WMD programme. Powell believed that the information was more then adequate, as did many people.

It wasn't his fault that he was misled, that he wasn't informed about the dubious nature of the information. He was told it was 'Rock Solid' information. Surprisingly enough, he believed the experts.

[Uzzy]

Wilkenson didn't cover himself with glory in these comments. He and Powell look at photos that might as well have shown Tonka trucks and from the photos they both agreed that the CIA's analysis of this photo reconnaissance was that WOMD's existed inside the trucks. Please.

The whole point in showing a photo as evidence is that it shows the evidence. Why did Powell not ask for the evidence that showed what was supposedly inside these trucks? There is no excuse for this and neither Powell nor his apologists can lay the blame on Powell's naiveté, loyalty, or blind trust. That was a defense common at Nürnberg.

How many other photo recon pics has Powell looked at in his career and green lighted bombing missions based on what he saw in the photos? Surely he didn't just roll over and see things that were not there just because the guy who took the photo said there were. Then again, maybe we should look at past strike decisions Powell made using evidence from recon photos. There may be a pattern of inept analysis.

You're kidding right?

Intelligence experts are, surprisingly enough, the experts in regard to these things. If a commander is told by his intelligence chief that said buildings contain said items, who is the commander to disbelieve him?

Rightly, he should query him as to how he gained the information. Which Powell no doubt did. Clearly, he was satisfied as to the explanations given by the CIA. Further, he should ask how certain he is of the information. As we know, the CIA told Powell the information was 'Rock Solid', and from multiple sources.

If the CIA told Powell that there were doubts about the validity of the information, things may very well have turned out differently. We do know that once the truth of the matter came out, Powell called, rightly, for reform of the intelligence services.

Incidentally, he himself feels terrible about his address to the UN. There's a good interview here (http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Politics/Story?id=1105979&page=1)about it.

[MattusMaximus]

Ah...it would prove he is gullible and easily duped ?


That's obvious - he did, after all, cheerlead the whole "Iraq is an imminent threat" fallacy to the United Nations.

[SteveGrenard]

You mean these photos of WMD in Iraq:

http://www.museumofconceptualart.com/un_proof/un_proof5.html




By comparison check out the photographic evidence for the Cuban Missile crisis (1962):

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/photos.htm

[XBoxWarrior]

You mean these photos of WMD in Iraq:

http://www.museumofconceptualart.com/un_proof/un_proof5.html




By comparison check out the photographic evidence for the Cuban Missile crisis (1962):

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/photos.htm

Well, after looking at those pics, I am convinced that I should NEVER pay any more taxes...We need a new "Photo General".

If any Gubmint is relying on that non-sense, they should be hanged.

(Like that dude in Iraq)

[SteveGrenard]

I forgot to mention that the WMD satellite pics are deliberate staged phonies using toys.
The photos Powell showed to the UN weren't much better ...that's the satire.

[LostAngeles]

Do any of you realize how that rumor got started?

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/15/colin-powell-fuels-speculation-possible-endorsement/

Colin Powell has his dancing shoes on, fueling speculation that he's gearing up to do the Obama Two-Step.

The normally staid former U.S. secretary of state and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff performed an impromptu hip-hop dance alongside well-known rap stars Tuesday following a speech at a festival in London celebrating African-American music and fashion.

His address at the "Africa Rising" celebration inside London's Royal Albert Hall fueled speculation that an endorsement of Barack Obama is imminent.

Powell -- who has yet to back a candidate -- told the audience: "I stand before you as an African-American. Many people have said to me you became secretary of state of the USA, is it still necessary to say that you are an African American or that you are black? And I say yes, so that we can remind our children."...

[T.A.M.]

This is a tough one, because...

1. Powell is a Huge endorsement in terms of Foreign Policy and muster.
2. Powell was either (A) Deceived by intel, wrt WMDs, or (B) was part of a willful deceit of the world, and the american public in particular, with regards to WMDs.

I think it will help Obama in terms of those who are uneasy about his ability to lead the USA from a foreign policy pov. However, I also think 90-95% of the USA population is already heavily leaning one way or the other in this election, and that overall his endorsement is too late for real impact.

TAM:)

[dudalb]

Do we really need two threads about this.? I suggest this be merged with the "Powell on Meet The Press " thread.

[Cicero]

Uh. What? Who brought photos up?

The CIA provided Powell with the information regarding Iraq's WMD programme. Powell believed that the information was more then adequate, as did many people.

It wasn't his fault that he was misled, that he wasn't informed about the dubious nature of the information. He was told it was 'Rock Solid' information. Surprisingly enough, he believed the experts.

So you are completely unfamiliar with Powell's presentation to the U.N. OK. I can understand why you would still attempt to alibi the guy who never thought to get the goods on WOMD's before going to the U.N.

It is of course Powell's fault for not demanding unequivocal evidence before going to the U.N. Did the CIA not trust him with top classified info? Didn't Powell have the proper clearance? He was Sec of State, not some third assistant to an assistant at the state department.

[moon1969]

Colin Powell only promotes PNAC agenda. He doesn"t like that people like Obama care about the real problems like Afghanistan. Didn"t Powell say that Saddam had WMD"s and even showed pictures at the UN?

[Mercutio]

What effect?

People who, a year ago, would have licked Powell's feet clean and thanked him for the privilege, will now challenge his patriotism, his intelligence, his loyalty, his iconic stature... and will report that those particular grapes were sour anyway, and they never wanted them in the first place.

[a_unique_person]

Colin Powell only promotes PNAC agenda. He doesn"t like that people like Obama care about the real problems like Afghanistan. Didn"t Powell say that Saddam had WMD"s and even showed pictures at the UN?

Apparently throught gritted teeth, even though he knew he was being used. Then he quit at the end of that term, and didn't continue into the next term.

[davefoc]

Powell's endorsement would do little for Obama although even a little at this point might decide the race.

But a Powell endorsement of McCain would be huge and it might be enough to overcome Obama's current lead in the polls.

I don't see any personal benefit for Powell to endorse anybody. If he endorsed Obama, it will be perceived by McCain supporters and many independents as a sort of racial quid pro quo as one black man supports another and it might even hurt Obama.

If he supports McCain the resentment against him would be huge by some people and it would submit him and his family to risk.

I don't think he'll do either, but he might decide that out of some sort of duty or maybe just political expediency he wants to take a pulbic stand. I'd listen to what he had to say, but for me, I can't imagine what could be said or done that would make me vote McCain/Palin.

[LostAngeles]

Do any of you realize how that rumor got started?

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/15/colin-powell-fuels-speculation-possible-endorsement/

I'm quoting myself here for a reason...

[T.A.M.]

Powell's endorsement would do little for Obama although even a little at this point might decide the race.

But a Powell endorsement of McCain would be huge and it might be enough to overcome Obama's current lead in the polls.

I don't see any personal benefit for Powell to endorse anybody. If he endorsed Obama, it will be perceived by McCain supporters and many independents as a sort of racial quid pro quo as one black man supports another and it might even hurt Obama.

If he supports McCain the resentment against him would be huge by some people and it would submit him and his family to risk.

I don't think he'll do either, but he might decide that out of some sort of duty or maybe just political expediency he wants to take a pulbic stand. I'd listen to what he had to say, but for me, I can't imagine what could be said or done that would make me vote McCain/Palin.

If he does endorse, it will be Obama. The backlash from him on a McCain endorsement would be, albeit unfair, HUGE.

I suspect you are right. I think he will not officially come out and endorse either, but I think he will comment very strongly about Obama, which may get played as an indirect endorsement of him. It will make little difference in the polls.

TAM:)

[GeeMack]

Done. As predicted.

[gdnp]

Done. As predicted.

It's true (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/19/colin.powell/)

[Uzzy]

It's on the BBC News Site too. Right here. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7678788.stm)

Clearly it's big news.

[Undesired Walrus]

'The really right answer is, what if he is [a muslim]? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answers no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some 7 year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be President?'

Finally, a voice of reason.

The video:
aiLIWTs2Suo

[Pookster]

The way Powell did it was rather stinging for McCain and Palin. It will throw them off message for several days when he can not afford it.

[Cain]

Well, he certainly came with prepared remarks. He did hit the right notes: 1) Obama is more than qualified. 2) Obama has the right temperament to lead as evidenced by the recent financial meltdown (an intellectual curiosity and equanimity versus McCain's chicken-with-its-head-cutoff); 3) McCain's judgment has been further undermined in his pick of Sarah Palin who is a fine woman blah blah blah blah blah, cut the nice crap, but not ready to lead, contrary to what cultists would have you believe. 4) Speaking of crazy right-wing cultists, McCain is running a campaign based on smears while Obama's is more inclusive. The direction of the Republican Party is not good for this country. 5) Tops it off with a demonstration that a person can be a Muslim and die in some pointless war of imperialistic aggression a patriot.

The problem for the McCain campaign is that Powell has credentials. They can't attack the guy. He's a General, a loyal member of the Bush administration, and he sounds calm, rational. This is terrible because his arguments will not only get a lot of publicity, but they're kinda true. He just sounds so reasonable. Not only has he given money to the McCain campaign, but like a lot of undecideds, he's come to his conclusion recently, in light of recent events. He gives people cover to vote Obama. Of course, he also gave people cover to sign on to a stupid, pointless war of imperial aggression, not that the amnesiac American public will remember, or that Republicans can bring it up in their attacks. "You trust Powell? Remember how he totally got the evidence in Iraq all wrong?"

Geez, ya think people are setting up expectations with this "right man for now," "transformational figure in history" stuff? Chances are he will be around average. It's all about hype anyway (look at Reagan especially).

[T.A.M.]

The biggest impact this will have, IMO, is as others have said, by forcing the news cycle onto it for 1-2 days or more...

TAM:)

[not_so_new]

It was a RINGING endorsement. No way to mince words here.

We know that he is going to take a lot of flack for this endorsement but it was a big deal.

I disagree with others on this thread, this will have some effect. Powell is a pretty serious figure and there are some pretty substantial sound-bites in his interview.

Powell spoke some pretty level headed points, hard to dispute if you take out bias on either side.

[Meadmaker]

Wow. Just wow.

Ok. I was already going to vote for Obama, but listening to Colin Powell endorse him in the way he did makes me feel good about the vote.

[not_so_new]

Wow. Just wow.

Ok. I was already going to vote for Obama, but listening to Colin Powell endorse him in the way he did makes me feel good about the vote.

Yep, I agree.

And I think this is going to go long way to help pull in military people. It makes it "okay" for a military man or woman to vote for a Democrat. As someone said on Meet The Press, this is the leading military leader of our time.

[Cicero]

Maybe Obama can give Powell a special cabinet positon as his interpreter of national security reconnaissance photos. Powell will be going to the U.N. with a photo of Saturn saying it is actually an alien spaceship.

[davefoc]

If he does endorse, it will be Obama. The backlash from him on a McCain endorsement would be, albeit unfair, HUGE.

I suspect you are right. I think he will not officially come out and endorse either, but I think he will comment very strongly about Obama, which may get played as an indirect endorsement of him. It will make little difference in the polls.

TAM:)

FWIW, I thought you were exactly right.

I underestimated his ability to make an endorsement that would significantly help Obama and without that I just didn't think he would take a highly public stand.

Obviously I was wrong, the endorsement was perfectly done and it is likely to appeal to a wide range of Americans. Powell's endorsement might turn out to be the most important one to date for Obama. Although, arguably, the Ted Kennedy endorsement might have been more important in that without it Obama probably wouldn't have won the Democratic nomination.

I think I'll go see how Fox News is spinning this. It will force them to take a break from their 24/7 Bill Ayers/ACORN coverage, but I'm sure that will resume after a suitably brief interlude while they deal with this.

[Nogbad]

I thought Powell one of the more articulate and thoughtful of Bush's first cabinet, GW himself would have done better to have paid more heed to Powell than Rumsfeld.

Actually, Obama could do a lot worse than ask Powell to play a role in his Government.

[Cicero]

I think I'll go see how Fox News is spinning this. It will force them to take a break from their 24/7 Bill Ayers/ACORN coverage, but I'm sure that will resume after a suitably brief interlude while they deal with this.

Don't hold your breath if you think the msm will suspend their 24/7 coverage of "Joe's" tax problems, driver's license problems, plumber's license problems, and overall outrageous behavior for asking Obama a question, just because Powell has endorsed Obama. They will manage to handle both simultaneously.

[Meadmaker]

Although, arguably, the Ted Kennedy endorsement might have been more important in that without it Obama probably wouldn't have won the Democratic nomination.


I think the Oprah endorsement was more influential. It was what vaulted him up in the polls just in time to win Iowa.

However, I'm a lot more enthusiastic about the Powell endorsement than the Oprah endorsement. I would vote for Powell in a second.

[davefoc]

I think the Oprah endorsement was more influential. It was what vaulted him up in the polls just in time to win Iowa.

However, I'm a lot more enthusiastic about the Powell endorsement than the Oprah endorsement. I would vote for Powell in a second.

Good point, I didn't think about the Oprah endorsement when I made my post. I was never that sure how valuable her support was. The Ted Kennedy endorsement resonated with me. Not because we are in sync politically, I am well to the right of Kennedy on many issues. It resonated with me because Kennedy clearly wasn't angling for a job or political support from Obama. He did it either because he genuinely believed Obama would make a good president or because he didn't like the Clintons. I chose to believe the former.

I'm not as enthusiastic about Powell as you are. He played the good soldier in the Bush administration and as such he served as an enabler for their excesses.

[Dr Adequate]

Don't hold your breath if you think the msm will suspend their 24/7 coverage of "Joe's" tax problems, driver's license problems, plumber's license problems, and overall outrageous behavior for asking Obama a question, just because Powell has endorsed Obama. They will manage to handle both simultaneously. The mainstream media, huh? Let's take a look.

CNN's top stories ...

1 Colin Powell endorses Obama
2 Sarah Palin appears on 'SNL'
3 Obama raises record $150 million
4 U.S. student accused of slaying
5 Official: Sarkozy's account hacked
6 Ex-Beijing official gets sentenced
7 NATO warships to deter pirates
8 Rescued climber ate centipedes
9 McCain ramps up attacks on Obama
10 Taliban bus attack kills 31

Meanwhile a search on their website for "plumber" (http://search.cnn.com/search.jsp?query=plumber&type=news&sortBy=date&intl=true) reveals no such stories as you describe. Indeed, searching for a story involving the words "Joe", "plumber" and "license" (http://search.cnn.com/search?query=Joe%20plumber%20license&type=news&sortBy=date&intl=true) turns up exactly one story, from 1997.

Still, don't let the facts stand in the way of a good paranoid rant.

[joobz]

Don't hold your breath if you think the msm will suspend their 24/7 coverage of "Joe's" tax problems, driver's license problems, plumber's license problems, and overall outrageous behavior for asking Obama a question, just because Powell has endorsed Obama. They will manage to handle both simultaneously.
Powell endorses Obama, and your only response is to reference Joe the Plumber. Instead of being on topic, you are doing exactly what you accuse the "MSM" of doing.

[varwoche]

The mainstream media, huh? Let's take a look.

CNN's top stories ... [snip list of stories that omit Joe]

Meanwhile a search on their website for "plumber" (http://search.cnn.com/search.jsp?query=plumber&type=news&sortBy=date&intl=true) reveals no such stories as you describe. Indeed, searching for a story involving the words "Joe", "plumber" and "license" (http://search.cnn.com/search?query=Joe%20plumber%20license&type=news&sortBy=date&intl=true) turns up exactly one story, from 1997.

Still, don't let the facts stand in the way of a good paranoid rant. C'mon Dr. A. CNN is just one channel. Surely there are other MSM outlets that are hawking Joe 24x7, otherwise why would Cicero make such an assertion?

MSNBC? Nothing (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/).

CBS? Nothing (http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/politics/main250.shtml).

ABC? Nothing (http://abcnews.go.com/politics).

Oops.

[T.A.M.]

Don't hold your breath if you think the msm will suspend their 24/7 coverage of "Joe's" tax problems, driver's license problems, plumber's license problems, and overall outrageous behavior for asking Obama a question, just because Powell has endorsed Obama. They will manage to handle both simultaneously.

Yes, likewise, do not hold your breath while you wait for the Palin/McCain ticket and Fox News to stop making this would be "Joe Six-Pack" in sheeps clothing, into McSame's connection to the "common man". Maybe Johnny can invite him up to one of the seven houses, or let him borrow one of his many cars...I mean they are kindred spirits and all...

TAM;)

[FaisonMars]

Amazing. I found his description of the photo of the mother at the Muslim soldier's grave and his defense of American Muslims as "real Americans" particularly moving. I've had the same thoughts (not as eloquently expressed) when McCain said that Obama is not an Arab, he's a "decent family man."

Despite his selling of bad intelligence at the U.N. to justify the Iraq War, I've always admired the guy, and today my esteem for him went through the roof.

[chipmunk stew]

Well, he's done it (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/colin-powell-endorses-oba_n_135895.html). We'll see in a few days whether or not the voters care one way or the other.

[varwoche]

Ah yes. "Certain people." Such as...(*scans thread*)...:con2: Some posts (e.g. Dublab's posts, relentlessly) assume a posture that staking out middle ground somehow absolves the poster of the expectation that claims be grounded in the empirical world. You know, that pesky evidence stuff.

(I suspect that Dublab and I would find a great deal of common ground as to our views on extremism coming from both sides. But still.)

[tomwaits]

FWIW, Christopher Hitchens has called Powell the most overrated figure in American politics. Personally, I think he's a pretty smart guy who knew the implications of the Iraq war when he famously told Bush about the "Pottery Barn Rule". Unfortunately, his advice was ignored.

[BenBurch]

Frank Zappa was of Arab descent... And you just don't get more American.

[Dr Adequate]

So you are completely unfamiliar with Powell's presentation to the U.N. OK. I can understand why you would still attempt to alibi the guy who never thought to get the goods on WOMD's before going to the U.N.

It is of course Powell's fault for not demanding unequivocal evidence before going to the U.N. Did the CIA not trust him with top classified info? Didn't Powell have the proper clearance? He was Sec of State, not some third assistant to an assistant at the state department. Yes, if only he'd had the courage and wisdom to speak out like this (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech):

I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

Still, I guess the next best thing is to endorse the guy who did. I take it you must be a big fan of Obama, yes?

[davefoc]

...
I think I'll go see how Fox News is spinning this. It will force them to take a break from their 24/7 Bill Ayers/ACORN coverage, but I'm sure that will resume after a suitably brief interlude while they deal with this.

Well, I did pretty good on that prediction. We had Fox News on in the background as my wife and I went over the ballot propositions. During the period I was listening:

30 minutes or so of ACORN is terrible stories.

About 20 seconds of Powell endorses Obama
About 20 seconds of gas prices have dropped below $3 a gallon in places

30 minutes of Weatherman/Bill Ayers coverage with a big picture of Obama at the end of the detailed coverage of Weatherman's violent actions. This segment was still going when I turned Fox off.

Wow, 40 seconds (excluding commercials) of non anti-Obama programming in an hour. Fair and balanced programming at its best.

[LostAngeles]

Well, while the rumor may have started with awesome Fox racism, I'm glad to see that it's true.

Because if McCain's campaign tries to start (i.e Palin starts) they're in for an ass-kicking.

[Cicero]

C'mon Dr. A. CNN is just one channel. Surely there are other MSM outlets that are hawking Joe 24x7, otherwise why would Cicero make such an assertion?

MSNBC? Nothing (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/).

CBS? Nothing (http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/politics/main250.shtml).

ABC? Nothing (http://abcnews.go.com/politics).

Oops.

Time to make an appointment with an optometrist, or take a rudimentary reading class.

From your links:

MSNBC:

Question on debates
Would 'Joe the plumber' fare better under a John McCain or Barack Obama presidency?

CBS:

"Joe The Plumber" Lashes Out At Media"


ABC:

WATCH: 'Joe the Plumber' Fans Protest Obama Rally
"Joe The Plumber" Lashes Out At Media

This is too easy.

[Cicero]

FWIW, Christopher Hitchens has called Powell the most overrated figure in American politics. Personally, I think he's a pretty smart guy who knew the implications of the Iraq war when he famously told Bush about the "Pottery Barn Rule". Unfortunately, his advice was ignored.


Hitchens is spot on in his appraisal of Powell.

Actually, that idiotic "Pottery Barn Rule" sound bite that Powell invoked as some doctrinaire for military action, only made him appear superficial instead of thought provoking. Had the U.S. military left after deposing Saddam, which Powell was against doing back in 1991, when the U.S. had spent half a trillion and put 500,000 in the Gulf, and not moved in to be targets for IED's and babysit the Iraqi government, the U.S. could have accomplished its goals in Iraq back in 2003.

[BenBurch]

Well, while the rumor may have started with awesome Fox racism, I'm glad to see that it's true.

Because if McCain's campaign tries to start (i.e Palin starts) they're in for an ass-kicking.

Would appear they have started already.

[gdnp]

If McCain had chosen someone as thoughtful and eloquent as Powell was there, apparently talking for 7 minutes without notes, as his VP candidate, McCain would have much more independent voters in his column. Whether the conservative base would show up is another question, however.

[gtc]

He gives people cover to vote Obama.

He also gives people cover not to vote against Obama.

[dudalb]

I don't know which is more boring:
Fox with it's incredibly slanted news coverage.
Conservatives who deny Fox is slanted.
Liberals who endlessly bitch about how Fox is slanted.

[gtc]

I think the Oprah endorsement was more influential.

Powell's endorsement was just starting to make me think that an Obama Presidency wouldn't be as bad as I feared and you had to go and remind me that Oprah likes him. Thanks a lot.

[dudalb]

If anything, Mistress of Woo Ophrah endorsing Obama made it harder for me to decide to vote for him.

[varwoche]

Time to make an appointment with an optometrist, or take a rudimentary reading class. Thank you for pointing out my oversight of these items -- items that did not appear in the 'top stories' sections on the respective pages.

In other words, the point still stands that you exaggerated by no small measure.

[varwoche]

Dublab... I don't know which is more boring:
Fox with it's incredibly slanted news coverage.
... meet dublab: ;)
Liberals who endlessly bitch about how Fox is slanted.

eta: Crikey, I'm not even consistent with my errors. Sorry dudalb and thanks gtc.

[gtc]

He is dudalb. And he made a good point.

[gdnp]

I don't know which is more boring:
Fox with it's incredibly slanted news coverage.
Conservatives who deny Fox is slanted.
Liberals who endlessly bitch about how Fox is slanted.

Or skeptics who bitch about all three? ;)

[Cicero]

I don't know which is more boring:
Fox with it's incredibly slanted news coverage.
Conservatives who deny Fox is slanted.
Liberals who endlessly bitch about how Fox is slanted.

I don't know which is more immutable:

MSM with it's incredibly slanted (left) news coverage.
Liberals who deny MSM is slanted (left).
Liberals who are oblivious to the MSM slant.

[chipmunk stew]

I don't know which is more boring:
Fox with it's incredibly slanted news coverage.
Conservatives who deny Fox is slanted.
Liberals who endlessly bitch about how Fox is slanted.
The guy who endlessly bitches about liberal and conservative bias.

[XenonII]

Just heard on Sky News UK the mongrel has backed Obama! Hasn't Rice done the same? Funny how these so-called "conservative" Blacks run back to the Democrat plantation when one of their own is running for president. Perhaps Powell's a racist?! After all, according to the lamestream media, a white Democrat whose planning to vote for McCain is a racist, so what does that make this Uncle Tom Colin Powell? TNB if you ask me!

[XenonII]

Just confirms my suspicions that there is no such thing as a black conservative, with the possible exception of Alan Keyes and even he has a raised a homo for a daughter (although at least he doesn't accept her wicked lifestyle choice). Palin/Keyes 2012!

[RandFan]

:rolleyes:

[Jimbo07]

Just heard on Sky News UK the negro has backed Obama! Hasn't Rice done the same? Funny how these so-called "conservative" Blacks run back to the Democrat plantatiton when one of their own is running for president. Perhaps Powell's a racist? After all, acorrding to the lamestream media, a white democrat whose planning to vote for McCain is a racist, so what does that make this Uncle Tom Colin Powell?

What the hell? Is my ha ha broken today? Was this post meant to be sarcastic?

[davefoc]

Just heard on Sky News UK the negro has backed Obama! Hasn't Rice done the same? Funny how these so-called "conservative" Blacks run back to the Democrat plantatiton when one of their own is running for president. Perhaps Powell's a racist? After all, acorrding to the lamestream media, a white democrat whose planning to vote for McCain is a racist, so what does that make this Uncle Tom Colin Powell?

I was unfamiliar with the stylings of XenonII and wasn't sure whether this post was meant to be sarcastic or not. I just read through the last 15 or so of his posts and for better or worse it appears the above post was meant to be serious.

[XenonII]

What the hell? Is my ha ha broken today? Was this post meant to be sarcastic?

Waiting for the mainstream media to label him a racist like they would if he was a white Democrat jumping ship to vote for McCain. Waiting...but not holding my breath (don't want to commit suicide!) :rolleyes:

[Ausmerican]

Oh yeah Xenon is Australias worst ever English import. Our own version of MaGZ. Actually, and I throw up just a little in my mouth saying this, MaGz is more rational.

[Jimbo07]

Waiting for the mainstream media to label him a racist like they would if he was a white Democrat jumping ship to vote for McCain. Waiting...but not holding my breath (don't want to commit suicide!) :rolleyes:

Can you cite a single mainstream media outlet as having branded any one person a racist?

What's going on here?

[gdnp]

Since Powell's great sin seems to have been his UN speech on WMD, I wonder where our great WMD theory proponent BeAChooser is in Powell's defense?

[XenonII]

:rolleyes:

The "Black Republican" group thinks MLK was a Republican. Have you ever heard of anything so preposterous? :jaw-dropp

[Hokulele]

I thought Powell one of the more articulate and thoughtful of Bush's first cabinet, GW himself would have done better to have paid more heed to Powell than Rumsfeld.

Actually, Obama could do a lot worse than ask Powell to play a role in his Government.


Powell has already stated that he is not interested in any official role in the next administration during his "Meet the Press" appearance, but I can see him in an advisory role.


ETA: Add quote and link.

I served 40 years in government, and I--I'm not looking forward to a position or an assignment. Of course, I have always said if a president asks you to do something, you have to consider it. But I am in no way interested in returning to government. But I, of course, would sit and talk to any president who wishes to talk to me.

Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266223/page/3/).

[Cicero]

Since Powell's great sin seems to have been his UN speech on WMD, I wonder where our great WMD theory proponent BeAChooser is in Powell's defense?

Yet for liberals, it is amazing, or actually predictable, how fast that "sin" was forgiven once Powell resigned from the Bush Administration and became a critic of the Iraq War.

Powell follows in the steps of John Dean, David Brock, Scott McClellan, etc who were reviled by liberals until they repudiated the Republican Party and genuflected towards left wing ideology.

[RandFan]

Oh yeah Xenon is Australias worst ever English import. Our own version of MaGZ. Actually, and I throw up just a little in my mouth saying this, MaGz is more rational.Damn.

[Dr Adequate]

Time to make an appointment with an optometrist, or take a rudimentary reading class.

From your links:

MSNBC:

Question on debates
Would 'Joe the plumber' fare better under a John McCain or Barack Obama presidency?

CBS:

"Joe The Plumber" Lashes Out At Media"


ABC:

WATCH: 'Joe the Plumber' Fans Protest Obama Rally
"Joe The Plumber" Lashes Out At Media

This is too easy. Judging by the headlines, not one of these has anything to do with the fantasies expressed in your previous post. Remember what you actually said? ---

Don't hold your breath if you think the msm will suspend their 24/7 coverage of "Joe's" tax problems, driver's license problems, plumber's license problems, and overall outrageous behavior for asking Obama a question This paranoid blather is not substantiated by, for example, the headline "WATCH: 'Joe the Plumber' Fans Protest Obama Rally".

[RandFan]

The "Black Republican" group thinks MLK was a Republican. Have you ever heard of anything so preposterous? :jaw-droppCocktail olives without pimentos.

[R.Mackey]

Powell has already stated that he is not interested in any official role in the next administration during his "Meet the Press" appearance, but I can see him in an advisory role.

He'd be a swell NATO Permanent Representative, ambassador, perhaps even National Security Advisor.

If he wants it, and if Obama feels like offering it to him, that is. Were I him I'd never work Government again, but he is his own man. (Finally.)

[geni]

Yet for liberals, it is amazing, or actually predictable, how fast that "sin" was forgiven once Powell resigned from the Bush Administration and became a critic of the Iraq War.

Powell follows in the steps of John Dean, David Brock, Scott McClellan, etc who were reviled by liberals until they repudiated the Republican Party and genuflected towards left wing ideology.

Suggesting that the Iraq war could have been done better is now left wing?

[Cleon]

What credibility does this guy have with liberals or conservatives?

Yet for liberals, it is amazing, or actually predictable, how fast that "sin" was forgiven once Powell resigned from the Bush Administration and became a critic of the Iraq War.

You really need to get your story straight.

[ZenFountain]

Yet for liberals, it is amazing, or actually predictable, how fast that "sin" was forgiven once Powell resigned from the Bush Administration and became a critic of the Iraq War.

Many of us "liberals" (seriously, can we stop using this as an implied derogatory term?) forgave Powell when the truth came out later that he had been duped into the UN presentation, not fully aware of how suspect the evidence he presented was. Perhaps that was wrong of him to allow his credibility to be taken advantage of but the alternative was resigning his post and allowing Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz to dominate the shaping of Iraqi policy and the larger war on terror. Powell knew that was lunacy and as such felt compelled to go along with the inevitable. Had he stood up and said "this is crazy" at that moment it wouldn't have changed anything other than guaranteeing his advice and that of the State Department was sidelined in postwar Iraq.

[Cicero]

You really need to get your story straight.

My first post was before Powell endorsed Obama. The second post was after the JREFer libs creamed their knickers over Powell's endorsement of Obama.

If you mean I should have not given liberals the benefit of the doubt, you are right.

[Cicero]

Many of us "liberals" (seriously, can we stop using this as an implied derogatory term?) forgave Powell when the truth came out later that he had been duped into the UN presentation, not fully aware of how suspect the evidence he presented was.

In order for Powell to be forgiven by libs, they had to beleive he was "duped" into pointing to trucks supposedly containing WOMD's, but in fact, contained porta potties. Thanks for confirming that Powell needed to be forgiven by libs for his "sin." But for true forgiveness to be granted, doesn't Powell have to take responsibility for his actions and not play the victim game?

[Cleon]

My first post was before Powell endorsed Obama. The second post was after the JREFer libs creamed their knickers over Powell's endorsement of Obama.

If you mean I should have not given liberals the benefit of the doubt, you are right.

That's a weak excuse, and you know it.


ETA: It's not even remotely close to accurate:


Yet for liberals, it is amazing, or actually predictable, how fast that "sin" was forgiven once Powell resigned from the Bush Administration and became a critic of the Iraq War.Powell resigned in 2005. You made the preceding post (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4131663#post4131663) two days ago. See the problem with your feeble excuse?


At this point, I'm convinced that you don't actually care what you say, as long as you find some reason to disparage "liberals" (where "liberals" are defined as "people Cicero doesn't like").

Prove me wrong.

[Cicero]

Judging by the headlines, not one of these has anything to do with the fantasies expressed in your previous post. Remember what you actually said? ---

This paranoid blather is not substantiated by, for example, the headline "WATCH: 'Joe the Plumber' Fans Protest Obama Rally".

It comes under the heading of: overall outrageous behavior for asking Obama a question.

I figured you would be proud that your liberal msm programs could manage to do two things at once: hype the Powell endorsement of Obama, and continue to vilify "Joe."

[Gurdur]

What's amazing to me is the interest this possible endorsement has created.


Hysteria seems to be overly in evidence. I can't wait for all the misery to be expressed when Obama wins. Next 4 years on the board will be much fun, I think.

[joobz]

Time to make an appointment with an optometrist, or take a rudimentary reading class.

From your links:

MSNBC:

Question on debates
Would 'Joe the plumber' fare better under a John McCain or Barack Obama presidency?

CBS:

"Joe The Plumber" Lashes Out At Media"


ABC:

WATCH: 'Joe the Plumber' Fans Protest Obama Rally
"Joe The Plumber" Lashes Out At Media

This is too easy.

So, you have no comment regarding Powell's endorsement of Obama?

Yet, you continue to do eactly what you claim the MSM will do, harp on Joe the Plumber instead of dealing with the Powell story.


I find the irony delicious. It's almost nutty with a hint of sage.

[Malerin]

I watched Chris Wallace this morning, and he hit Mccain with some pretty hard questions. It's not all fluff on Fox.

[gdnp]

Yet for liberals, it is amazing, or actually predictable, how fast that "sin" was forgiven once Powell resigned from the Bush Administration and became a critic of the Iraq War.

Powell follows in the steps of John Dean, David Brock, Scott McClellan, etc who were reviled by liberals until they repudiated the Republican Party and genuflected towards left wing ideology.

Powell was one of the few people in the Bush administration that I had a fair amount of respect for. I actually watched his speech to the UN, and I don't watch a lot of TV, political and otherwise. He convinced me that the WMD story was probably legit, although not that it justified the invasion. To me, Powell's sin (if there was one) was presenting the information with a higher degree of certainty than the evidence justified. As has been explained by others, the evidence supports that he did so because he had been lied to by others in the administration: he did not know the intelligence was suspect. If you have evidence he knew his UN statements were lies when he made them I would like to hear it. In the absence of such information, my respect for Powell remains. The thoughtfulness and eloquence of how he made his endorsement--6 minutes or so, as best as I could tell without notes--caused it to increase. As with most endorsements, the reasoning behind it is as valuable as the statement itself. He supports Obama not just based on policy, but intangibles such as leadership style, temperament, and intellectual depth, characteristics I also see and value in Obama. I hope Obama finds a place for him in his administration. A reprise as secretary of state or national security adviser would not be out of the question.

[BenBurch]

Cocktail olives without pimentos.

BLASPHEMY. Thats like serving a Martini with little onions! :jaw-dropp

[gdnp]

Waiting for the mainstream media to label him a racist like they would if he was a white Democrat jumping ship to vote for McCain. Waiting...but not holding my breath (don't want to commit suicide!) :rolleyes:

Yes, I think it is just criminal what the MSM did to Joe Lieberman for endorsing McCain. At the Republican convention, no less. All those charges of racism. References to Jewish slave traders. Lynchings. KKK.

Oh, I forgot. That didn't happen.

Never mind. :o

[RandFan]

BLASPHEMY. Thats like serving a Martini with little onions! :jaw-dropp:)

See Ben, Obama isn't the only thing we agree on.

[XenonII]

Powell is showing his true colors (no pun intended). If only whites were as loyal to their race as blacks are (and are allowed to be) to theirs. McCain would win with a landslide. Whites have lost their racial consciousness.

[Hokulele]

In which case it is just as loyal for whites to vote for Obama as it is for blacks.

Just as it is just as loyal for people of Thai ancestry to cheer for Tiger Woods.

[XenonII]

Cocktail olives without pimentos.

Say what?

Never mind...LOL.

[XenonII]

Yes, I think it is just criminal what the MSM did to Joe Lieberman for endorsing McCain. At the Republican convention, no less. All those charges of racism. References to Jewish slave traders. Lynchings. KKK.

Oh, I forgot. That didn't happen.

Never mind. :o

Lieberman is an (left-leaning) independent. McCain is a RINO, so it's not really all that surprising Lieberman would endorse him. Powell, is also a RINO (or was) but decides to back the far left Obama anyway. Evidently Powell, like the vast majority of Blacks, is too far to the left for the Republican party. No great surprise there either. And lastly... Jews aren't white! (I was talking about the racial double standard the media exhibits between Blacks and Whites). White - technically Caucasian - is a race, not a skin color!

[XenonII]

In which case it is just as loyal for whites to vote for Obama as it is for blacks.

Just as it is just as loyal for people of Thai ancestry to cheer for Tiger Woods.

No whites have Obama's "exotic" (for want of a better word) racial makeup. I believe there is no such thing as being half black and half white, there is a name of course for this uncovential racial mix - Mulatto. Obama has a race and that race is black, just he is not pure race like most people (and by pure race I don't necessarily mean 100% pure just close enough to 100% before anyone alleges no one is pure race, most Europeans are 97-98%+ pure race for example which sets the standard.)

White genes are believed to be recessive and black genes believed to be dominant. Therefore when a white woman mates with a Negro, such as in the case of Obama's mother, we can see the result in the offspring is an individual that looks far more black than they do white.

Tiger Woods is also black, one of these rarer Mongoloid-Negroid types compared to Obama a Caucasoid-Negroid. These people are technically hybrids, but because of the dominance of black genes, this is the race we classify them under. Otherwise, you would have people without a race. Tiger Woods is not of Thai ancestory, his mother is.

[a_unique_person]

Malkin is always good for a laugh.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/19/oh-these-are-the-people-in-your-neighborhood/

[Tricky]

Tiger Woods is not of Thai ancestory, his mother is.
LOL! Oh golly! This is sig material! Are you telling us that Tiger Woods is not descended from his mother??!! You are a pip, you are!

[XenonII]

LOL! Oh golly! This is sig material! Are you telling us that Tiger Woods is not descended from his mother??!! You are a pip, you are!

What I ment of course is that he is not of Thai ancestery exclusively, he is of mixed racial ancestery which is Thai in part. The point is there are a thousand and one reasons why Whites shouldn't vote for Obama, regardless of the race of the man. But if Blacks voting for Obama because he is black is a perfectly legitimate reason and is not racist, then the same applies for Whites voting for McCain because he is White.

The hypocritical MSM has no problem with Blacks using racial considerations in deciding for who to vote, and so has no business in getting all twisted out of shape and savaging Whites for allegedly doing the same. They should shut up, they must be feeling desperate that their candidate is gonna lose if the AP's attack dogs are being released on their fellow liberals who just so happen to be white.

[gdnp]

No whites have Obama's "exotic" (for want of a better word) racial makeup. I believe there is no such thing as being half black and half white, there is a name of course for this uncovential racial mix - Mulatto. Obama has a race and that race is black, just he is not pure race like most people (and by pure race I don't necessarily mean 100% pure just close enough to 100% before anyone alleges no one is pure race, most Europeans are 97-98%+ pure race for example which sets the standard.) White genes are believed to be recessive and black genes believed to be dominant. Therefore when a white woman mates with a Negro, such as in the case of Obama's mother, we can see the result in the offspring is an individual that looks far more black than they do white. Tiger Woods is also black, one of these rarer Mongoloid-Negroid types compared to Obama a Caucasoid-Negroid. These people are technically hybrids, but because of the dominance of black genes, this is the race we classify them under. Otherwise, you would have people without a race.
Suddenly it is all clear. We must keep the black men away from the white women, lest our inferior white genes are overpowered by the dominant black ones.


Tiger Woods is not of Thai ancestory, his mother is.

I guess race is carried on the Y chromosome. How did I miss this in genetics class?

[RandFan]

No whites have Obama's "exotic" (for want of a better word) racial makeup. I believe there is no such thing as being half black and half white, there is a name of course for this uncovential racial mix - Mulatto. Obama has a race and that race is black, just he is not pure race like most people (and by pure race I don't necessarily mean 100% pure just close enough to 100% before anyone alleges no one is pure race, most Europeans are 97-98%+ pure race for example which sets the standard.) {snipped} Really poor form on my part. Sorry.

[Hokulele]

<blather>


You do realize Tiger Woods is only 1/4 black, yes?

Genetically speaking, by your standards, there are no such thing as white people. (97%, my foot!)

[gdnp]

What I ment of course is that he is not of Thai ancestery exclusively, he is of mixed racial ancestery which is Thai in part. The point is there are a thousand and one reasons why Whites shouldn't vote for Obama, regardless of the race of the man. But if Blacks voting for Obama because he is black is a perfectly legitimate reason and is not racist, then the same applies for Whites voting for McCain because he is White.

But a black voting for Obama because his is black is not a perfectly legitimate reason, it is racist. A black voting for Obama because they believe that he is the candidate that best reflects their values and who they feel would best lead the country is a legitimate reason. How many of the 90-95% of blacks expected to vote for him will do so for racist reasons, how many for legitimate reasons, and how many for a combination of the two is unknown.

Is your premise that I as a white person should vote for McCain/Palin over Obama/Biden even though Obama better reflects my values? That if some people vote based on stupid racist reasons that I should vote against my own perceived interests to balance the equation?

[Tricky]

What I ment of course is that he is not of Thai ancestery exclusively, he is of mixed racial ancestery which is Thai in part. The point is there are a thousand and one reasons why Whites shouldn't vote for Obama, regardless of the race of the man. But if Blacks voting for Obama because he is black is a perfectly legitimate reason and is not racist, then the same applies for Whites voting for McCain because he is White.
It is not as if Blacks voting for Democrats is a brand new thing. Most Democrats, since Lyndon Johnson, have carried a strong, even overwhelming majority of Black votes.

People vote for the person that they think will make their own situation better. The Republican party has done little if anything to indicate that they have any concern for the plight of Black Americans. So to imagine that Black Americans think that Obama will be more likely than even other Democrats to make their situation better, is hardly a startling proposal.

By contrast, Whites, have no indication that voting for McCain will make their situation better. Indeed, many think just the opposite. So you see, that while politics may follow some racial alignments, in the end it is just politics. Sure, there are a number of Black people who will vote for Obama even though they might disagree with his politics. There are certainly as many White people who will vote against him for purely racist reasons, and since Whites outnumber Blacks, likely they will have the advantage of the purely racist vote.

But if you are assuming that all of the Blacks who are voting for Obama are doing so because he is black, then you are yourself making a racist assumption that is not based on politics. If you are saying "it's okay to be racist because they're even more racist", then you are one of the reasons why racism is still so prevalent. Until you are able to say, "I don't care what they do, I will vote on the issues," then you will never be free of your chains.

[RandFan]

Xenon, are you being serious?

If so then you should understand that anthropologists are moving away from the notion that there are different races of people. Our differences are superficial. Race is largely a social construct not a biological one.

[BenBurch]

Malkin is always good for a laugh.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/19/oh-these-are-the-people-in-your-neighborhood/

And I hear she does a trick with ping-pong balls...

[BenBurch]

Suddenly it is all clear. We must keep the black men away from the white women, lest our inferior white genes are overpowered by the dominant black ones. ...

A bunch of Bavarians and Prussians had that idea early in the 20th century. It didn't turn out well.

[BenBurch]

It is not as if Blacks voting for Democrats is a brand new thing. ...

What is new this time is the number of poor inner city black folks who have registered and who are now voting. For once they don't have to choose between two privileged white men.

[ZenFountain]

Thanks for confirming that Powell needed to be forgiven by libs for his "sin." But for true forgiveness to be granted, doesn't Powell have to take responsibility for his actions and not play the victim game?

My post was somewhat sarcastic as I don't consider myself liberal, more a centrist, buy hey that's moonbat land these days right?

All I'm going to say about Powell is that I have always respected him, even in heat of the Bush administration when many labeled him sellout or just another Bushie. It speaks volumes that Obama courted him with a visit and half a dozen lengthy phone calls while McCain hasn't spoken to him in over a year, a member of his own party and someone who McCain agreed with on the desperate need for change of policy in postwar Iraq. Powell isn't exactly a hero of the left and it only confirms my belief that Obama will govern as pragmatic centrist that isn't dogged by ideology .

[Dragoonster]

Just caught the Meet the Press repeat. My opinion of Powell hasn't changed. He has poor judgement, overvalues loyalty, and is unwilling to commit to something until the outcome no longer matters.

Still, good news for Obama.

If only whites were as loyal to their race as blacks are (and are allowed to be) to theirs. McCain would win with a landslide. Whites have lost their racial consciousness.

I think mine's underneath a couch cushion. I'll probably find it again when I need laundry change, but that might be after the election. Sorry.

[leftysergeant]

After all, according to the lamestream media, a white Democrat whose planning to vote for McCain is a racist, so what does that make this Uncle Tom Colin Powell? TNB if you ask me!
The only reason a white Democrat would votew for a hot-heasded lame-brain who would probably knock W out of his seat as the worst POTUS in the last hundred years is because he doesn't want to vote for a black dude.

Powell's endorsement of Obama is probably due to the fact that Powell is a soldier and a damned sharp one and he knows that McCain is not fit for command because of his personality disorders and lack of understanding of basic military strategy.

It is racist to claim that being black is an essential determinant in a person's capabilities, or that one race is in any way bound to vote for people of their own kind. White or black, no rational person votes for a known lunatic, else we would have had blacks joining the GOP to elect Alan Keyes.

[Cuddles]

Threads merged. Apologies for any confusion this causes from mixing posts up.

[Dr Adequate]

In order for Powell to be forgiven by libs, they had to beleive he was "duped" into pointing to trucks supposedly containing WOMD's, but in fact, contained porta potties. Thanks for confirming that Powell needed to be forgiven by libs for his "sin." But for true forgiveness to be granted, doesn't Powell have to take responsibility for his actions and not play the victim game?Colin Powell in 2005 (http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Politics/story?id=1105979&page=1):

It was Powell who told the United Nations and the world that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and posed an imminent threat. He told Walters that he feels "terrible" about the claims he made in that now-infamous address -- assertions that later proved to be false.

When asked if he feels it has tarnished his reputation, he said, "Of course it will. It's a blot. I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and [it] will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now."

As for your dreary whining about "libs", you could leave it out of your posts without reducing their information content. A time-saving hint.

[chipmunk stew]

George Will, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, and other members of the conservative establishment, agree with XenonII that Powell's endorsement was race-based:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/limbaugh-george-will-powe_n_135968.html

I wonder how they feel about white conservatives who have turned around and endorsed Obama. Hell, George Will practically endorsed him himself.

[joobz]

Xenon II helped confirm my only thought when I saw Powell's endorsement. "Great. We'll now have more racists claiming the blacks are sticking together."

At least this will function at routing out that thought and expose it's shallowness.


I'm just wondering if any more mainstream current of McCain's Campaign will pick up this argument.

[DavidJames]

I'm just wondering if any more mainstream current of McCain's Campaign will pick up this argument.Thanks - I was thinking the same thing.

[chipmunk stew]

Xenon II helped confirm my only thought when I saw Powell's endorsement. "Great. We'll now have more racists claiming the blacks are sticking together."

At least this will function at routing out that thought and expose it's shallowness.

I'm just wondering if any more mainstream current of McCain's Campaign will pick up this argument.

Thanks - I was thinking the same thing.

Well isn't that exactly what's happening? Blacks are sticking together? Who would expect that black Republicans would jump ship to support a Democratic Black running for President? Is it too much to ask Republicans who are black to show some loyality to the party like we expect no less from white Republicans? I don't think white Republicans are abandoning the party to vote for Obama? It's not just the blacks that are sticking together, even the mulattoes are getting in on the act, Powell being a fellow mulatto.

No. He gave a lot of non-racial reasons for supporting Obama. None of which seemed false.

Which others have done so? And what were their reasons?

Loyalty isn't to the party, but to the country. If a person feels that a candidate of another party is better, then they should vote for that person. From Powell's statements, it was clear that he viewed the direction the republican party was taking was exactly opposite of what the country needed. As such, he supported Obama.

Are you so sure? http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/gopendorse/

Out of curiosity, how many generations removed from a black ancestor must one be before they are "no longer black"?
Several prominent conservatives appear to agree with XenonII that this was a race-based endorsement:
George Will, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, and other members of the conservative establishment, agree with XenonII that Powell's endorsement was race-based:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/limbaugh-george-will-powe_n_135968.html

I wonder how they feel about white conservatives who have turned around and endorsed Obama. Hell, George Will practically endorsed him himself.
What's ironic is that Powell cited in his endorsement many of the very same arguments for Obama and against McCain that other conservatives have: Buckley, Noonan, Brooks, and Will himself, for example--all white.

[chipmunk stew]

Here's another conservative who agrees with XenonII:
The only reasonable explanation for such a public political "about-face" in the midst of this important election is that Colin Powell, perhaps understandably, wishes to see someone who looks like himself in the White House.
You can see the charming image of Colin Powell as Benedict Arnold here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/20/powell-arnold/

[DavidJames]

Here's another conservative who agrees with XenonII:

You can see the charming image of Colin Powell as Benedict Arnold here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/20/powell-arnold/ We can bring in outside opinions from all ends the crazy sides of spectrum. My preference is to hear what McCain supporters on this board have to say. After all, this is a forum for skeptics and critical thinkers right :)

[chipmunk stew]

We can bring in outside opinions from all ends the crazy sides of spectrum. My preference is to hear what McCain supporters on this board have to say. After, this is a forum for skeptics and critical thinkers right :)
This was a follow-up to my other post, in response to inquiries, showing that the view that Powell's endorsement was primarily race-based is a mainstream conservative view, even among prominent conservatives. See upthread.

[BenBurch]

The new rumor (and this one is dubious in the extreme) is that Condi Rice will endorse. I'll believe that when I see it in the Tribune.

[DavidJames]

The new rumor (and this one is dubious in the extreme) is that Condi Rice will endorse. I'll believe that when I see it in the Tribune.Yeah, her and Alan Keyes have a press conference scheduled.

I don't think so. :)

[Jimbo07]

The new rumor (and this one is dubious in the extreme) is that Condi Rice will endorse. I'll believe that when I see it in the Tribune.

It's the new Repub strategy. It will be the kiss of death for his campaign, when G.W. Bush finally endorses Obama!

:D

[BenBurch]

Yeah, her and Alan Keyes have a press conference scheduled.

I don't think so. :)

I think Keyes is pretty much the Anti-Condi. If they shook hands there would be a cataclysmic explosion as they annihilated each other.

[joobz]

Several prominent conservatives appear to agree with XenonII that this was a race-based endorsement:

What's ironic is that Powell cited in his endorsement many of the very same arguments for Obama and against McCain that other conservatives have: Buckley, Noonan, Brooks, and Will himself, for example--all white.

the argument (that it's only because he's black) exposes a rather low opinion that a person would have regarding a black person's intellect. The entire argument Powell presented was clear and rational. It's one(as you said) other's have already used. Yet, when Powell uses it, it must not be the "real" reason. That Black people only base things on race. It's simply an insult.

It's very similar to when Palin was announced as VP. When feminists derided Palin on her poltical stances and views, we had a number of conservative pundits claiming that this was wrong. That if feminists were really pro-woman, they should vote for Palin since she is a woman. However, why would a feminist vote for a woman who didn't share thier same feminist views.



I get the feeling that conservatives still don't get what it means to be liberal. They've bought too hard into the stereotypes that repubs have painted and haven't considered why liberals are liberal. They've created a strawman and continue to avoid the reality.

[BenBurch]

It's the new Repub strategy. It will be the kiss of death for his campaign, when G.W. Bush finally endorses Obama!

:D

LOL!

[Nyarlathotep]

t
I get the feeling that conservatives still don't get what it means to be liberal. They've bought too hard into the stereotypes that repubs have painted and haven't considered why liberals are liberal. They've created a strawman and continue to avoid the reality.

The Strawman Political (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StrawmanPolitical) exists on both sides of the aisle and (the source of my link aside) isn't confined to TV, Movies, etc, but instead lives on in the hearts and minds of a goodly chunk of the citizenry.

[jj]

My, my. Powell got over the republican bongwater, and now look at how they treat their former hero.

For simply telling the truth, Powell is to be vilified, falsely accused, dragged through the mud, and probably worse by election time.

And why? Because he dared to speak his concience on this election.

As far as I'm concerned, the Powell bashers need to consider their own perfidy. (That goes for both sides of them)

[Cicero]

My, my. Powell got over the republican bongwater, and now look at how they treat their former hero.

For simply telling the truth, Powell is to be vilified, falsely accused, dragged through the mud, and probably worse by election time.

And why? Because he dared to speak his concience on this election.

As far as I'm concerned, the Powell bashers need to consider their own perfidy. (That goes for both sides of them)

Powell a Republican hero? Since when? He advised Bush 41 that Schwarzkopf should not finish off the Iraqi Army back in 1991 purely for political reasons. Was Powell lying to the U.N. and the media about WOMD's in 2003, or is he lying about his reasons for supporting Obama now?

As late as June 2003, Powell was still clinging to the invisible evidance he sold to the U.N.

QUESTION: Secretary Powell, this morning on Fox News, you've defended
the intelligence and the presentation you made before the United
Nations.

SECRETARY POWELL: Right.

QUESTION: Critics are saying that the intelligence, so far, has been
bogus. How would you answer those critics?

SECRETARY POWELL: I would tell those critics that it is nonsense, it
is not bogus, and there can be no question that Iraq had and has had
weapons of mass destruction. And now that we are sending in a
1,300-man team, I am sure we will be uncovering more of that
capability.

You have to remember that in my presentation on the 5th of February, I
also made the point that they had one of the best deception and --
deception and hiding efforts known, and that is what we are going to
have to go and look at. And I think all the documents that are now
coming forward, the people who are being interviewed, will tell us
more about what they have hidden and where they have hidden it.
And I think the mobile labs are what I think is a good indication of
the kind of thing they are doing. If those mobile biological weapons
vans that we discovered were not biological weapons vans, if they
were, as some suggest, nothing more than a device to produce hydrogen
gas for weather balloons, I can assure you that the day after my
presentation the Iraqis would have had that van out there producing
hydrogen gas for a weather balloon.

They had never acknowledged that they had it. They lied about it. And
we found it. And the Director of Central Intelligence, Mr. Tenet, is
confident that it is what we said it was: a biological warfare van.
And so that tells you the nature of this regime. This regime could
have come clean. This regime could have destroyed its weapons of mass
destruction. It chose not to. And the United Nations and a willing
coalition of nations acted appropriately in accordance with
international law derived from UN Resolution 1441.

We took the regime out, the world is better off for it, and the Iraqi people have been liberated. There will be no weapons of mass destruction once we get through in Iraq with --

QUESTION: How can you assure the American people that the intelligence
that you were using is credible, that it's not bogus?

SECRETARY POWELL: The American people are quite assured. It is the
media that invents words such as "bogus."

Now Powell endorses a candidate that never thought removing Saddam from power was a good idea or even a legitimate pursuit for the U.S. Powell may beleive that this endorsement will redeem his failed Secretary of State tenure, but it will only do so in the liberal community where chameleons are on their endangered species list.

[Uzzy]

Powell a Republican hero? Since when? He advised Bush 41 that Schwarzkopf should not finish off the Iraqi Army back in 1991 purely for political reasons. Was Powell lying to the U.N. and the media about WOMD's in 2003, or is he lying about his reasons for supporting Obama now? Yawn. Here we go again.

Firstly, most in the Bush administration didn't want to go in and finish the job. Someone quite high up said this.

"And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth? And the answer is not very damned many. So I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."
That was Dick Cheney in 1992. How times change. Source. (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/192908_cheney29.html)

Further, the UN mandate that held the coalition forces together did not allow for the occupation of Iraq and/or the overthrow of Saddam Hussain. What do you suggest, that the US break international law and violate a UN mandate whenever they feel like it?


As late as June 2003, Powell was still clinging to the invisible evidance he sold to the U.N.As late as June 2003? You do remember that Bush declared major combat operations over in May 2003? So he was still defending the evidence he was PRESENTED with by the CIA a month after the end of the war. Big surprise.

Only later, when a more detailed picture occur, did Powell (and the world) learn just how flimsy the intelligence was.

[Cicero]

Further, the UN mandate that held the coalition forces together did not allow for the occupation of Iraq and/or the overthrow of Saddam Hussain. What do you suggest, that the US break international law and violate a UN mandate whenever they feel like it?


The coalition was in no danger of collapsing had Schwartzkopf been allowed to take another 48 hours to go to Baghdad and remove Saddam from power. U.S. violate UN mandates? Perish the thought. Only Saddam could get away with that. International Law? So after Saddam was toppled, Geneva/Oslow would demand he be put back in power? Sure.

How does Powell retreat from his position of regime change in Iraq, even if he was Milquetoast on invading Iraq? How does he reconcile supporting a candidate that believes Saddam was fine where he was?

[leftysergeant]

How does he reconcile supporting a candidate that believes Saddam was fine where he was?

Probably from military history which he clearly understands than does a certain dim-witted former airplane driver. Google "Dunkirk," "Seelowe" and "Barbarosa."

[Uzzy]

The coalition was in no danger of collapsing had Schwartzkopf been allowed to take another 48 hours to go to Baghdad and remove Saddam from power. U.S. violate UN mandates? Perish the thought. Only Saddam could get away with that. International Law? So after Saddam was toppled, Geneva/Oslow would demand he be put back in power? Sure.

Which is why only US, UK and French national forces crossed the border into Iraq. Most of the rest of the coalition stood down.

Removing Saddam would have been a good thing, yes, but illegal and in violating of UN mandates. You mention that only Saddam is able to get away with it, but you're forgetting one key issue.

Moral force. If the US went around breaking UN mandates whenever they decided it was convenient, what right would they have to tell other nations that they shouldn't break UN mandates. Countries like Iran, North Korea etc.

By the way, I don't see Powell changing his mind on removing Saddam. Saddam was a tyrant and the world is better off without him. However, I see him regretting that the intelligence he was given to take to the UN turned out to be faulty. I see him being highly frustrated by the failings of the US after the war in winning the peace. But feel free to put words in his mouth.

[Cicero]

Probably from military history. Google "Dunkirk," "Seelowe" and "Barbarosa."

You forgot Dieppe. You equate The Iraq War to these military defeats? Not to mention you equate the U.S.'s military incursion into Iraq with Nazi Germany into Russia. Wow! But since when is Obama a military historian?

[leftysergeant]

By the way, I don't see Powell changing his mind on removing Saddam. Saddam was a tyrant and the world is better off without him. However, I see him regretting that the intelligence he was given to take to the UN turned out to be faulty. I see him being highly frustrated by the failings of the US after the war in winning the peace. But feel free to put words in his mouth.

Remooving him on BS evidence is damaging to our moral authority. Kind of like a lynching, rather than an arrest and trial and execution, in that order. I can see why a black guy might find that offensive.

How quick are other countries now to get on board with us against Iran?

[Cicero]

Which is why only US, UK and French national forces crossed the border into Iraq. Most of the rest of the coalition stood down.

Removing Saddam would have been a good thing, yes, but illegal and in violating of UN mandates. You mention that only Saddam is able to get away with it, but you're forgetting one key issue.

Moral force. If the US went around breaking UN mandates whenever they decided it was convenient, what right would they have to tell other nations that they shouldn't break UN mandates. Countries like Iran, North Korea etc.

By the way, I don't see Powell changing his mind on removing Saddam. Saddam was a tyrant and the world is better off without him. However, I see him regretting that the intelligence he was given to take to the UN turned out to be faulty. I see him being highly frustrated by the failings of the US after the war in winning the peace. But feel free to put words in his mouth.


It is illegal for the U.S. to use their Browning Ma Deuces on anything other than armored vehicles and aircraft. Yet they do. Don't see the U.S. jammed into Geneva courtrooms defending the use of this weapon.

You place way more importance on the U.N. than it deserves. We all regret the faulty info about WOMD's. But that is not how Powell supporters characterize his part in the U.N. presentation since he left the administration.

[Uzzy]

Remooving him on BS evidence is damaging to our moral authority. Kind of like a lynching, rather than an arrest and trial and execution, in that order. I can see why a black guy might find that offensive.

How quick are other countries now to get on board with us against Iran?

Indeed. An argument could have been made for removing Saddam on humanitarian grounds (He's an horrible tyrant who abuses his own people), but that runs into lots of problems. Not least the problem of not going in and removing every horrible tyrant.

And yes. It has weakened America's international standing, lessening the ability of the US to deal with actual difficulties, like Iran.

[SezMe]

Now Powell endorses a candidate that never thought removing Saddam from power was a good idea or even a legitimate pursuit for the U.S.
There's your problem, Cicero. I don't think Obama ever thought that removing Saddam from power was a bad idea, he just thought that the invasion of the country was the wrong means to achieve that end. Big difference.

[Grizzly Bear]

There's your problem, Cicero. I don't think Obama ever thought that removing Saddam from power was a bad idea, he just thought that the invasion of the country was the wrong means to achieve that end. Big difference.

As easily as Saddam fell from power I doubt just talking him into stepping down would have worked. He was quite adamant about remaining in power despite the then "threat" of war/invasion... Can't say in hindsight I agree with us going in there, given we had other priorities at the time... I'm sure you're already aware of what we were already doing without me having to say anything...

Either way... Powell's endorsement doesn't change my vote... life moves on...

[Dr Adequate]

Powell a Republican hero? Since when? "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia."

[Cuddles]

I've just split out most of this thread. If it goes off topic again, it will just be closed.

[a_unique_person]

Lieberman is going to be so jealous he didn't get the coverage Powell did.

[gdnp]

Yeah, her and Alan Keyes have a press conference scheduled.


They are holding off until they can fit it in with Clarence Thomas's schedule. He doesn't want to be left out. ;)

[Oliver]

George Will, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, and other members of the conservative establishment, agree with XenonII that Powell's endorsement was race-based:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/19/limbaugh-george-will-powe_n_135968.html

I wonder how they feel about white conservatives who have turned around and endorsed Obama. Hell, George Will practically endorsed him himself.


Rush repeated his point about Powell:

8gBw8PQDmHE
Is he a racist?

[Matteo Martini]

Powell, was not he the guy who endorsed War in Iraq in first place?
Now, how it comes that Obama promises him a place in the administration?
So, what is the difference between Obama and McCain?