Colin Powell Endorses Obama

Colin Powell, George Bush’s former secretary of state, today dealt his own party a major blow when he threw his weight behind the bid by Barack Obama to become the next president of the United States.

The four-star general spurned his good friend John McCain to heap praise on the “transformational figure” of Obama, saying America needed a “generational change”.

In a swipe at both Bush and McCain, he added: “I firmly believe that at this point in America’s history, we need a president that will not just continue, even with a new face and with the changes and with some maverick aspects, who will not just continue basically the policies that we have been following in recent years.”

(source)

And it’s necessary. McCain has finally realised his GOP attack machine is still effective, as long as he farms the nastiness out to subordinates:

According to the election analysis site FiveThirtyEight.com, some Pennsylvanians have complained about a call that impersonates Barack Obama and includes racial epithets:

“Over in Indiana, PA and Northern Cambria, PA, volunteers fielded complaints of a massive wave of ugly robocalls both paid for by John McCain’s campaign and those paid for by third parties. The third party call was interactive, and purported to be from Barack Obama himself. The call starts out reasonably, and then “Obama” asks what the listener thinks is the most important issue. Whatever the response, “Obama” then launches into a profane and crazed tirade using “n***er” and other shock language.”

Except today his own nastiness came back:

WALLACE: But Senator back, if I may, back in 2000 when you were the target of robo calls, you called these hate calls and you said–
MCCAIN: They were.

WALLACE: And you said the following: “I promise you I have never and will never have anything to do with that kind of political tactic.” Now you’ve hired the same guy who did the robocalls against you to, reportedly, to do the robocalls against Obama and the Republican Senator Susan Collins, the co-chair of your campaign in Maine, has asked you to stop the robocalls. Will you do that?

MCCAIN: Of course not. These are legitimate and truthful and they are far different than the phone calls that were made about my family and about certain aspects that — things that this is — this is dramatically different and either you haven’t — didn’t see those things in 2000.

WALLACE: No, I saw them.

MCCAIN: Or you don’t know the difference between that and what is a legitimate issue, and that is Senator Obama being truthful with the American people.

(source)

And while this nonsense continues, people are responding to it:

The GOP is getting so panicky at McCain’s imminent failure that they’re lashing out at any political difference, even within Congress! It’s not just racism, it’s now Obama v fascism itself:

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann claimed on Friday that Barack Obama and his wife Michelle held anti-American views and couldn’t be trusted in the White House. She even called for the major newspapers of the country to investigate other members of Congress to “find out if they are pro-America or anti-America.”

(source)

Powell’s intervention is a shot of reason into a fight again lapsed into insanity. I don’t think for a moment that his endorsement is an election-swinger – his participation in the Bush I administration and his discredited presentation to the UN about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq caused his star to wane many years ago, and being the same race as Obama will no doubt not convince loonies like the man in the earlier video to change their allegiances. However as perhaps the most respected military man of the age, who has successfully worked for both Democrats and Republicans, his endorsement is significant, particularly because McCain is still trading on his steadfastness, his military record and foreign policy experience to convince doubters of his suitability as Commander-in-Chief. It will also keep a positive Obama story in the media for days to come (and we’ve only 15 of them left), and reinforce McCain’s negativity, at a time he can ill afford to be seen as erratic and of poor judgment as he’s already demonstrated himself to be.

Advertisements

11 responses to “Colin Powell Endorses Obama

  1. No surprise. About 98% of black people will be voting for Barack Obama. Yet, ironically they are the ones who are complaining about racism.

    Obama is no Bill Clinton. Clinton is a de-regualtor just like John McCain. Clinton was the one who introduced NAFTA, which McCain supports.

    Obama is more of a extreme leftist. $1 trillion in new spending, more government programs and interventions, sending welfare checks to 45% of the 95% of the people in his tax plan because 45% of those people don’t even get taxed.

    Politicians like Obama are such pimps. They promise to spend a trillion dollars on you, but they don’t tell you that they are using YOUR MONEY!

    Obama’s Black Liberation Theology is based on Marxism for black people, the foundations of Communism. Even Bill Ayers was an extreme leftist.

    Our economy is very important, McCain is better for our economy. I hope people get educated before they vote.

  2. As Powell quite rightly points out in the video, taxes are and have always been about redistribution, and the economic outcomes of the last few weeks should show you why that process is still necessary – ‘trickle down’ economics are an illusion which has almost destroyed not just your country but every other one as well. He rightly point out that your infrastructure is non-existent or crumbling and indeed that has always been paid for by ‘your money’. Do you think these things just pay for themselves, should all bridges for example have tolls, or are you happy with yet more crumbling out of neglect?

    I’m not comfortable with your initial racist comment. If you really think Powell’s ever been motivated by race, you’re barking up the wrong tree. How patronising is it to imply that he would base his vote merely on some fellow-feeling based on skin colour alone? Have you not watched the video?

    You hope people get educated before they vote, yet you pepper your argument with racism and don’t even understand the basics of socialism, Marxism or communism. I doubt you’ll do the basic research you need, sadly, before you vote, but I’d encourage you at least to watch the video. The points Gen. Powell makes are the bare basics of government engagement with the public sector and have nothing whatsoever to do with communism.

  3. Suddenly because Powell is endorsing obama he is not as evil as he used to be? Yet, Powell was the one encouraging the Iraq war claiming they had WMD. Anyone with intelligence knows that Powell is endorsing based on race.

    98% of black people are voting for obama just because he is black. White people are split between obama, nadar, and McCain. Think about it.

    The truth is this is a race campaign. The Democrats control the senate and congress and have the lowest approval rating in US history. The Democrats couldn’t even beat Bush in the elections thus why they are going after the black vote in the US, about 45 million blacks. Thus, why obama voted present over 130 times, avoided the tough issues, and never challenged his party leaders on senate to preserve his political career. Only 143 days on state senate when he decided to run for office.

    The Democrats lost because the US is not a socialist/communist system. Americans fought against Nazi Germany, their socialist party, and communist USSR for decades, just to name a few.

    Again, Clinton supported deregulation and introduced FTAs like NAFTA. That is why the US economy was strong during his administration. McCain also supports deregulation and fights for FTAs like NAFTA. These initiatives will help our economy. Our economy is very important, McCain is better for our economy. I hope people get educated before they vote.

    US businesses create US jobs. obama wants to limit the growth of US businesses, which is limiting the growth of US jobs. If you increase tax on US businesses they will either just relocate to a lower tax country taking American jobs with them, pass the added tax cost to consumers or go bankrupt. GM and Ford can barely compete globally and obama wants to tax them more. The smaller businesses that are reliant on GM and Ford will also be greatly affected, destroying more US jobs.

    The US is the land of opportunity not the land of equal outcome. Why should government take your money and give it to people who are already on welfare to spread the wealth?

    What Caused Our Economic Crisis? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4

  4. I agree with this line Sarah, “The US is the land of opportunity not the land of equal outcome”. Giving people money does not cure poverty, nor can poverty be “cured”. The 70′ and 80’s proved the devastating effects of increased social welfare and black incomes fell dramatically during those times. When welfare was reigned in black incomes started to rise.

    Taxation has never created fairness Jason, I’m not sure how you can even agree with that statement. Taxation is simply a way of increasing government coffers, the majority of that money is moved to projects that benefit politicians and small cadres of supporters. The top 1% of tax payers already support over 41% of the tax burden, how much do you think you should pay to others for going to work? That is the real question that is being raised.

    LOL this whole Colin Powel thing is funny cause if he had endorsed McCain he’d be called an Uncle Tom, and been crucified for his stance on the Iraq war, if he supports Obama, he’s a great statesman whose word matters. Even when it was his aide Dick Armitage that caused the whole Valerie Plame fiasco.

    His tenure as head of the State Department was a disaster. His support makes me want to support Obama less.

    @Sarah, technically a job is lost, it is not destroyed.

  5. “I’m not comfortable with your initial racist comment. If you really think Powell’s ever been motivated by race, you’re barking up the wrong tree. How patronising is it to imply that he would base his vote merely on some fellow-feeling based on skin colour alone? Have you not watched the video?”

    Well I’m not comfortable with blacks voting for him in totals over 90% but it’s the truth and it’s happening so ignoring the fact or not raising it is as dangerous as talking about it. Blacks have destroyed their representation by block voting for the past 35 years and look what they have to show for it. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton!

    Hispanics on the other hand support a variety of parties and positions, have a larger say in politics, tons of hispanic representation, and faster growing income. You want to know another ugly fact, Blacks are mo longer the dominant minority, that means their affirmative action numbers that they championed should have been adjusted throughout the country. However they weren’t because blacks screamed bloody murder that they were ENTITLED to those extra positions and money because their ancestors had been slaves. That is the sad state of “affirmative action” and the pitiful and socially stunting results of such programs.

  6. Yet, Powell was the one encouraging the Iraq war claiming they had WMD. Anyone with intelligence knows that Powell is endorsing based on race.

    The first point I agree with, and I remain deeply dismayed at his involvement in the set-up to the Iraq War. It’s the main reason his endorsement wasn’t the utter bombshell in its own right which it otherwise should have been. Your second point is based on thin air I’m afraid, if not outright racism. Unless you have any substance you wish to offer?

    The Democrats lost because the US is not a socialist/communist system.

    If you mean 2004 then your analysis isn’t that sharp. The Democrats lost because a) John Kerry was a wooden public speaker who ran a weak campaign and b) Karl Rove masterminded a GOP campaign which capitalised on identity politics as wedge issues at a time when the country was vulnerable to it. The Democrats are not a socialist party – they couldn’t be less of one I’m afraid.

    You also naively champion deregulation by Clinton and McCain, yet fail to understand how that has led to the near-destruction of your country’s economy. You churn out partisan political mantras as if they are true by their existence, but I’d encourage you to track the current economic chain of events backward to find the true culprits. Clinton? Quite possibly, but to lump Obama in with that? How?

    The US is the land of opportunity not the land of equal outcome.

    Is your name Sarah Palin by any chance?

  7. Giving people money does not cure poverty, nor can poverty be “cured”.

    Of course it can be ‘cured’ – there’s nothing inherent about poverty. Poverty is something which is entrenched by economic and social systems working in concert, and other countries have had notable success in combating it. I’ll grant you that capitalism by definition will always generate winners and losers, but this is where we enter the field of relative poverty – can and should the relative levels of the playing field be raised? New Labour in the UK thinks so, and had some initial successes, although later lost interest.

    Giving people money does work by the way. There are plenty of people living in absolute poverty in the developing world who have been given cash grants to do with as they please and do use it wisely. Your argument then says that America’s poor are either unique in their fecklessness or the third world research data is wrong. I know which I believe.

    Taxation has never created fairness Jason, I’m not sure how you can even agree with that statement.

    I’m not sure how you can substantiate yours as an absolute either. But the question remains fairness for whom? Should governments be content for poverty to remain entrenched whilst wealth (or for the sake of this argument extreme wealth) remains essentially equally transmissible from generation to generation? You could argue that taxation will never succeed, that the middle class will always find levers to keep advantage entrenched, but can you legitimately argue that governments should allow this division to remain untackled? That will leave future offspring from poor households permamently disadvantaged in outcomes. If government doesn’t get involved, who will?

    Well I’m not comfortable with blacks voting for him in totals over 90% but it’s the truth and it’s happening so ignoring the fact or not raising it is as dangerous as talking about it.

    Err I’m not talking about all black people. I was talking about Colin Powell and it was a racist comment which can’t be substantiated.

  8. Well I’m not comfortable with blacks voting for him in totals over 90% but it’s the truth and it’s happening so ignoring the fact or not raising it is as dangerous as talking about it.

    Well here’s someone who’s comfortable talking about it, but who arrives at very different conclusions to you.

  9. If whites voted simply by skin color what would call that Jas? Hope filled change? The leftists argument that blacks and minorities should be forgiven their racism or are not accountable for their racism is tragic failure of the doctrine of multicultural relativism.

    Poverty cannot be cured by giving money, just like being from a rich family will protect you from being a financial or personal failure. Only education can “cure’ poverty and this has long historical veracity.

    No I think you’ll find that giving people grants doesn’t work, giving people micro loans at zero point interest does. When money has no value and you can always get more, than people aren’t careful with it. When it has value and effort put into it, than people with take care of theirs more carefully. Look at habitat for Humanity. the most successful program for putting low income families in first homes and having them keep them. They make the participant save, pay off debt and put together a down payment. Than the person has to put in 200 hours of personal time building homes for others, only than do they qualify for the program. This works. Putting the poor in government apartments for free only creates slums. The same goes for welfare, whether state corporate,or individual. If the sum total of effort that a person has to do is exist, than that is what the majority will do.

  10. Sorry that should read. “just like being from a rich family WON’T protect you from being a financial or personal failure”

  11. Still mulling over the axation question, because essentially you are saying, that those in power should be able to steal as the wish instead of simply as they should to cover their programs. This of course raises the truth of government, in that it is not about fairness but about control and as a manifestation of the group to force it’s power on others.
    Taking from the rich to give to the poor or the reverse is never fair unless one group is preying on the other. Taxes on a whole are not justifiable as a measure of fairness in either regard. If their is social dynamism and members of each social or economical group are able to rise and fall freely why should the government concern itself with taxation in an effort to manipulate social order at all?
    I have known children of rich families that squander their wealth and education, and I know educated poor families that sell drugs not to better themselves but simply for the pleasure of selling drugs. In what way can the government through income redistribution change either of those situations? But Like I said I’m still mulling over it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s