Sunday, October 19, 2008
Is there anybody with less political courage than Colin Powell?
Colin Powell endorses the candidate who claims he always opposed the war that Powell did not oppose when it might have made a difference. The only question that remains is when will Bob Woodward get the "background" story that divulges all the ways in which Colin Powell struggled for months with this difficult decision. Why? Because Colin Powell never makes a move without Woodward there to ventriloquize his inner anguish.
41 Comments:
By 
knighterrant, at
Sun Oct 19, 11:32:00 AM:
Why Hawk, you are Reading like a serious case of sour grapes.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun Oct 19, 11:44:00 AM:
For a talented, bright, and accomplished conservative like Powell man who was once seriously considered (and even offered, if the scuttlebutt was to be believed) the position as RNC Presidential Candidate for 1996 to endorse the single most radical *and* least experienced Democratic candidate in the history of the nation makes no sense at all.
Until you remember that they're both black.
*sigh*
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Sun Oct 19, 12:08:00 PM:
Hmm, Senator Obama and his supporters say that the Bush Administration lied to get us into Iraq. Misled us about pre-war intelligence. They are war criminals.
Secretary Powell was one of the chief architects for that action.
Does Obama believe Powell lied about pre-war intelligence? Does he believe that Powell was at meetings where the intelligence was cooked?
One thing for sure: if Powell endorsed McCain the press would be running endless loops of Powell's UN presentation on Iraqi WMD capabilities.
All down the memory hole now that he's supporting Obama.
By JPMcT, at
Sun Oct 19, 12:09:00 PM:
It looks like General Powell has finally gotten permission from his wife to re-enter politics.
This is an excellent example of why the Republicans will lose. It typifies the kind of focus that the party has placed on centrist mush. It's the same addled thinking that has placed Mr. Powell in a position of "respect" in the party.
In reality, he deserves no more respect from the conservative perspective than John Warner or Olympia Snowe.
I admired the guy as a military commander. Politically he is a "wobbler". This was a safe choice for him.
Unfortunately it is a disastrous choice for our country.
By 
, at
Sun Oct 19, 12:14:00 PM:
This is what I expected from Powell. Question: Has ANY black politician endorsed McCain?
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 12:26:00 PM:
Michael Steele and Kenneth Blackwell are two that come to mind.
Michael Steele spoke at the Republican National Convention.
Powell has lost standing in the Republican party because he and Armitage let Scooter Libby twist in the wind. The Bush Administration has shut him out since 2005. He's done what he has done to innoculate himself from the Iraq War Inquisistion trials in 2009.
-David
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Sun Oct 19, 12:36:00 PM:
He's done what he has done to innoculate himself from the Iraq War Inquisistion trials in 2009.
Perhaps Obama offered him a pardon? (tongue in cheek, now)
Yep, it's going to be interesting hearing from the left over this endorsement from a "war criminal" who "lied us into war."
As I said, if he had endorsed McCain we would be hearing all about his "lies".
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 01:22:00 PM:
He didn't just endorse Obama. He offered a harsh indictment of the Republican party, damned the campaign's Ayers/terrorist strategy, and slammed McCain's judgment for selecting Palin.
I suspect that's enough red meat for the Democrats to forgive him his earlier, errant ways.
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Sun Oct 19, 01:32:00 PM:
He didn't just endorse Obama. He offered a harsh indictment of the Republican party, damned the campaign's Ayers/terrorist strategy, and slammed McCain's judgment for selecting Palin.
And yet, despite this harsh judgment, he won't campaign for Obama.
Hmm, something is amiss.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 01:45:00 PM:
And yet, despite this harsh judgment, he won't campaign for Obama.
After the praise he heaped on Obama (and his critical rebuke of McCain) on MTP today, who needs him on the stump?
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 01:45:00 PM:
I became disenchanted with Powell during the Wilson-Plame supersecret agent fiasco.
He knew full well that it was his subordinate Armitage who had divulged (though apparently inadvertently) Plame's identity. He knew it and still allowed his Commander in Chief to take the blame, which nearly cost the President re-election.
I believe Powell had a duty to come forward, for the good of the country, regardless of whatever it may have cost him personally.
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Sun Oct 19, 01:53:00 PM:
After the praise he heaped on Obama (and his critical rebuke of McCain) on MTP today, who needs him on the stump?
In three days - probably less - in our current accelerated news cycles - this story/endorsement will be gone with the wind.
Going out and campaigning, particularly in key battleground states where the "race" question still unfortunately remains, may make a difference.
And I'm still puzzled as to why Obama would accept an endorsement from someone who supposedly "lied" us into war.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 01:55:00 PM:
Gee, I guess McCain "didn't get the memo" that Powell is a loser who can't be trusted when he was considering Powell as a potential running mate
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 02:03:00 PM:
Going out and campaigning, particularly in key battleground states where the "race" question still unfortunately remains, may make a difference.
Yeah, so people like Dawnfire can be reminded that the only reason that General Powell endorsed Obama is because he's black.
I wouldn't worry about Powell getting lost in the accelerated hr news cycle. I'm sure campaign ad clips of his delicious Meet the Press comments will be airing across home theaters for the next two weeks.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 02:20:00 PM:
And yet, despite this harsh judgment, he won't campaign for Obama.
Hmm, something is amiss.
Of course Powell won't campaign for Obama. If he did, that would open him up to all kinds of inconvenient and embarrassing questions about why he's endorsing a guy who essentially thinks he's a war criminal.
Colin Powell could have been our first black President. Instead he decided to "go along to get along." The fact that he didn't was worse than a tragedy: it was a mistake.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 02:21:00 PM:
Okay - Colin Powell can vote and endorse whomever he pleases. If the candidate happens to be black. SO BE IT! White people have been supporting each other for centuries. The minute a black person wants to support another black person white people take issue with it and make comments like he is only supporting Obama because he is black. Do you know how you sound? Is there a problem with a black person supporting another black person? This is white America's worst fear, black people coming together to support each other. Why? Because you believe if black people support each other they will not support your interest or that our interest are somehow different. Well they are NOT. Let us be reminded that this is America and you can support whomever you chose regardless of race, religion, national origin, etc... Racist bigots greatest don't want to see equality in this country. The have professed equality but don't really mean it becasue their worst fear is coming to past and they can't deal with it because they know their past actions and history against minorities has always been dishonorable. Their worst fear is that the tables will be turned against them because they know the hatred they have always had in their heart. They want you to believe everything is equal and to forget slavery and jim crow but it wasn't until 1965 that blacks were even given the right to vote. You see my parents and grandmother who are still living today have vivid memories of being hosed down, beaten, and threatened because they were fighting for equality. 1965 was not a long time ago and I have been taught to never forget this history and to fight for what is right and what I believe in without fear, hatred and bigotry in my heart.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 02:23:00 PM:
Students of recent history will know that Powell was at least a "reluctant warrior" under GHW and a poor SecState later on. He was scared silly of Saddam Hussein and is another example of the Bush families failure to KNOW their appointees.
A stab in the back to conservatives and the military. But, I fully expected this.
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Sun Oct 19, 02:24:00 PM:
I'm sure campaign ad clips of his delicious Meet the Press comments will be airing across home theaters for the next two weeks.
Well, with $150 million raised last month, Obama can buy Powell his own cable network if he wants.
MSNBC is already taken.
All of this talk by our press and political elites about the need for public financing to level the playing field is nowhere to be found.
It's amazing, frankly, that Obama only has a 5-7 point lead. And race, it seems to me, isn't the reason it's that small.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 02:36:00 PM:
He knew full well that it was his subordinate Armitage who had divulged (though apparently inadvertently) Plame's identity. He knew it and still allowed his Commander in Chief to take the blame, which nearly cost the President re-election.
I believe Powell had a duty to come forward, for the good of the country, regardless of whatever it may have cost him personally.
Good grief, are you guys still carrying on and misrepresenting the facts of the Plame Leak? As soon as Armitage learned that he might be source of Novak's article he went to Powell, who in turn went to State Department attorneys. Fitzgerald knew of Armitrage's involvement shortly after his appoinment as Special Counsel but asked Armitage not to divulge his involvement during investigation. This was all made very clear through sworn testimony, and if I remember correctly, the right slammed Fitzgerald for continuing the investigation when he knew all along that Armitrage was original leaker, albeit not the only one. . Here's a summary to bring you up to date with the facts.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 02:47:00 PM:
It's amazing, frankly, that Obama only has a 5-7 point lead.
Heh. Then maybe you can explain why two weeks before the election McCain spent day campaigning in Virginia, and Obama drew a crowd of 100,000 people in Missouri!
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Sun Oct 19, 03:01:00 PM:
Heh. Then maybe you can explain why two weeks before the election McCain spent day campaigning in Virginia, and Obama drew a crowd of 100,000 people in Missouri!
And Mondale and Kerry (et cetera) drew hundreds of thousands of supporters during their campaigns.
It's a big country.
Anyway, anecdotes aside, most of the polls show that Obama has (and has since the meltdown) a 5-7 point lead.
Before the market meltdown, they were essentially tied.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 03:04:00 PM:
Political pundits suggest that Obama's skin color will cost him 6-8 points however, that's already baked into the numbers. If that's the case, his 5-7 point lead is fairly significant, particularly , given the fact that we are a 51-49 nation and have been for some time.
For more in depth analysis of polls and numbers, check this out
By SR, at
Sun Oct 19, 03:07:00 PM:
Powell went to State Dept. Attorneys ?!?
What a disreputable human being. He and
Armitage should have called a press conference immediately, and called for the end of the whole investigation, but instead, let his CIC hang there to
be eviscerated by his political opponents. If he didn't want to work for GWB anymore, he should have just
retired.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 03:14:00 PM:
Fitzgerald knew of Armitrage's involvement shortly after his appoinment [sic] as Special Counsel but asked Armitage not to divulge his involvement during investigation.
True, but irrelevant. The relevant point--which I thought I'd clearly made--was that the American Public didn't know the single most pertinent fact, i.e. that the leak came from Armitage.
Again, Powell did know as obviously did Armitage as did Novak as did Fitzgerald--who as you point out also did his best to perpetuate the injustice and allow the impression of the President's involvement to fester.
At least Novak had the decency to be incensed by this state of affairs, though he neither served at the pleasure of the President nor worked under any particular expectation of loyalty to him.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 03:18:00 PM:
[Powell] let his CIC hang there to be eviscerated by his political opponents.
LMAO. Rove and Libby did a pretty good job of that all on their own.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun Oct 19, 04:58:00 PM:
"Okay - Colin Powell can vote and endorse whomever he pleases... I believe in without fear, hatred and bigotry in my heart."
Jesus Christ, what is it with you liberals and your complete and utter inability to see the world through anyone else's eyes, to misrepresent those visions, and THEN get into a self-righteous tizzy about it? Does it give you a high? Or is it just a cognitive failure?
Supporting, or opposing, any candidate anywhere based on their race is wrong. And given the enormous differences in Obama's policy goals and background and their compatibility with Powel's, and McCain's and their compatibility with Powel's, how else do you explain this?
I always thought that, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character," was pretty fucking clear, but I guess not. There's apparently a caveat to the effect of, "Except for when blacks support other blacks out of a sense of racial solidarity, despite political or ideological differences, or the suitability of the supported party for the office they seek. That's cool."
It boggles my mind that the same people who absolutely FREAK OUT at the idea that white voters might not want to vote for a black guy purely because of his race are completely ok with the idea of blacks voting for a black guy purely because of his race. Why isn't that viewed as blacks NOT voting for the white guy because of his race? Same effect, right?
What's the difference? Or it just another double standard?
"Political pundits suggest that Obama's skin color will cost him 6-8 points however, that's already baked into the numbers. If that's the case, his 5-7 point lead is fairly significant, particularly , given the fact that we are a 51-49 nation and have been for some time."
Or, given that 6-8 and 5-7 are pretty much the same, that could just be a bunch of bunk they sell to make their guy look like a plucky underdog overcoming some sort of handicap. Because for that to be true, Obama would have to be like 15 points ahead based on policy. I don't even think that's true in New Jersey.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 04:59:00 PM:
I am just sure that the ringing endorsment of Obama by Powell hadn't been discussed before and that the calls were just being made. Talk about talking points... Does he not see how many people see him for what he is? A weak man willing to do anything to save his own sorry weak self. Does he now say that he lied? Maybe he did after all. You never know with someone who shows such a lack of courage. He took the easy way out!
By fly women, at
Sun Oct 19, 05:08:00 PM:
I am repulsed by people who make a living spouting values they don't really have. It is just as well we know who he really is...just another Peggy Noonan blowing in the wind and taking up with causes they pretended to support. Does he never think that some day he will be called to account for his actions and words? Apparantly not! Or so it seems he is hoping no one will ever call him into account.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 05:22:00 PM:
Anon 2:21 ... that's why 91% of blacks 'support' obama?
if 91% of whites did the same, Obama wouldn't be able to get a job washing dishes ...
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 05:26:00 PM:
Was Powell ever actually a Republican at heart, or was his party affiliation purely a matter of political convenience and personal gain, and he's always been a Democrat at heart?
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 07:10:00 PM:
smgalbraith writes:
And yet, despite this harsh judgment, he [Powell] won't campaign for Obama.
Secretaries Kissinger and Baker have endorsed McCain, and yet I haven't seen either of them on the campaign trail. You?
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 07:45:00 PM:
As a fellow veteran of Colin Powell, his endorsment of Obama is nothing less than his spitting in the face of every servicemember past and present. Any Al Qaeda attack on the U.S. would eventually be overcome. An Obama Presidency would destroy America forever. This is because America is more than just a place on a map. America exists entirely due to the belief in certain philosophies, and an Obama Presidency would be an abandonment of all those philosophies. America is not supposed to be a Socialist nation. Powell's efforts to help make it so are a direct betrayal of the nation he once served.
By TigerHawk, at
Sun Oct 19, 08:44:00 PM:
Anon: 7:10 -- Kissinger and Baker are both old as the hills, and not really fit for campaigning. That said, Kissinger did lend himself to an extended photo op and meeting with Sarah Palin, presumably at the request of the McCain campaign.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 08:45:00 PM:
Wow. Nice to see there's no hint of the "politics of personal destruction" on this side of the aisle.
TH -- here's a poll question for you:
"Who would you rather be this week, Joe the Plumber or Colin Powell?"
By Georg Felis, at
Sun Oct 19, 08:55:00 PM:
Or to put it another way, if Powell had endorsed McCain, you can bet the venom would be waist-deep in the New York Times, and he would be called every name in the book and some they would make up on the spot, as well as reserving him a special place on the Obama Inquisitional Tribunal schedule in 2009. Powell has always displayed a good sense of self-preservation, and I would read nothing more into his decision now than just blowing with the wind. (and another cabinet position possibility)
By JPMcT, at
Sun Oct 19, 10:16:00 PM:
Obama = Liberal
Powell = Conservative
Obama = Hawk
Powell = Dove
Obama = WMD's fictional
Powell = publicly made the case
Obama = Black
Powell = Black
So, tell me again, this wasn't a racial decision...
Five years ago, Colin Powell was being eviscerated as George Bush's "porch monkey". Now, according to Politico, he is a venerable conservative icon.
The only good thing about all this mess is that the people who were alive in 1935 and tried to warn us about Hitler are safely in their graves and won't have the pain of seeing history repeat itself.
By JH, at
Sun Oct 19, 11:16:00 PM:
I'll take a different tact.
If the One becomes President, Powell is looking for a deal so he doesn't get prosecuted for war crimes.
Guess who the star witness will be.
Who knows, who cares. He's a General out of the loop. Give me who Petraeus thinks would lead best.
By , at
Mon Oct 20, 03:01:00 AM:
This is an excellent example of why the Republicans will lose. It typifies the kind of focus that the party has placed on centrist mush.
I'd say the Republicans are going to lose because they aren't providing "centrist mush". McCain lost the day he picked Palin in yet another kowtow to the wacko right. Yep, there's a wacko left AND a wacko right.
I'm a Republican, though you'd probably drum me out of the party, branded as a RINO, and that's the reason we're going to get creamed this year. You want Ayatollah Romney in four years? He ain't gonna win, either.
Give me somebody who really upholds conservative principles without thinking we own the world and have the right to kill anyone in another nation who thinks we don't. Also, I don't want someone who wants the government out of the economy but thinks its okay to insert government rules in people's most difficult decisions.
I don't care what Colin Powell says or who's what color, but stop telling me I'm not a good American if I don't believe everything in lockstep with you.
By , at
Mon Oct 20, 08:22:00 AM:
What Anon at 3:01 said! Thank you.
By , at
Mon Oct 20, 09:14:00 AM:
Anons ... compare and contrast to running the left-most Senator for President, with his offset to Palin's Down baby in the retarded senior Senator from Delaware.
Christ almighty. I'm past my taxes right now, I'm thinking WW3 is approaching.
Blacks celebrate and act out angrily the same way: they loot businesses, burn cars, riot. If Bambi wins, they'll do it. If he loses, they'll do it.
If the One gets in, we will be tested here and/or abroad. Things will not mellow down, that much is certain to me.
AS for Obama's blackness, and the solidarity of blacks, get real. Anyone who thinks blacks aren't racist need to get out of suburbia and go see the rest of the country. Powell just sealed his legacy in my view.
By JPMcT, at
Mon Oct 20, 08:08:00 PM:
@ Anon 3:01:
"stop telling me I'm not a good American if I don't believe everything in lockstep with you"
I'm reading my original post over and over...and,gee,I can't seem to find where I said that.
As far as Palin goes, the only time McCain surged ahead in the polls was when he actually appealed to the Republican Conservative base with Palin.
I'm sure it's possible to be "good American" and not be a conservative...difficult, but possible.
One thing is clear...the occasional constructive dialogue between reasonable liberals and reasonable conservatives that we saw in the 1950's and 1960's and the Reagan era with his 80% approval rating has given way to a congress of wacko leftists and centrist conservatives.
All that has earned us is the current fiscal crisis and the 10% Congressional approval rating...with worse on the way.
But worry not....I'm sure the definition of a "good" American will be conveniently drummed into your kids heads so that the next generation will have no remorse.
