Left Saddam in power; undermined Iraq War and now prefers an appeaser as Commander in Chief
[This column assumes that Colin Powell will endorse Barack Obama this morning on Meet the Press. That he hasn't already endorsed John McCain justifies his denunciation in any event.]
Colin Powell’s story of heroism as a soldier; personal story of achievement and message of conservative America values amidst derision as an Uncle Tom from the liberal Democrat Civil Rights crowd; and service under President Ronald were exemplary.
He was great at following orders in Vietnam; President Reagan’s orders as National Security Advisor and President George H.W. Bush’s orders during the first part of the 1991 Gulf War.
But when President Bush asked for his advice as Saddam Hussein’s army was fleeing a liberated Kuwait, he lost his way. At that moment, he rose above his pay grade and failed President Bush 41 and America.
Today, we are told, he is poised to endorse a man who considers making a decision on when a baby is entitled to human rights is above his pay grade.
Of course, lawyer Obama has decided, by his actions, that a baby has no right to life while in the womb and no right to life-saving treatment outside the womb if it survives attempted murder at the hands of an abortionist. Millions have perished due this notion thanks to Obama’s ideological lawyer allies that wear robes.
Powell’s decision to let Saddam remain in power in 1991 caused hundreds of thousands of adults and children to lose their lives and was a major rationale for Osama bin Laden’s conclusion that America did not have the stomach to win wars that require more than the 13-week period given TV pilots or that require more than 150 patriots sacrifice their lives.
In fact, his famous “Powell Doctrine” that states we should not go to war unless we can win quick with overwhelming force actually invites aggression that can’t be defeated Powell’s way.
As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs he had famously vowed, when asked about his military strategy against the Iraqi army in the Persian Gulf War of 1991:”First we’re going to cut it off, then we’re going to kill it.”
He failed to do so.
In 1991, when Saddam Hussein’s army was fleeing Kuwait, Colin Powell advised his Commander in Chief to let Saddam survive.
Fast forward to the bushlied era in September of 2006, former Secretary of State Powell wrote that “The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism.”
In response, I wrote that the Conservative World Beginning to Doubt Moral Basis of Colin Powell’s Acts and Omissions. An excerpt:
Colin Powell, in a rare departure from Armitage-aided anonymous leaks to the press attacking his Commander-in-Chief, released a public letter he sent to John McCain opposing President Bush’s request that Congress clarify the meaning of vague language in Common Article III, as pertains to prisoners of war, and, as recently ordered by a brain dead Supreme Court, to illegal terrorist enemy combatants as well, prohibiting “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.”The letter reads in part: “The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism,” Powell observed. “To redefine common article 3 [of the Geneva convention] would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk.”
We are not “re-defining” the treaty. The treaty does not define “outrages”, “humiliating”, or “degrading.” Powell would allow anti-American World Court judges to define those terms to imprison American interrogators of Khalid Sheik Mohammad who extracted information that saved thousands of lives.
If an American criminal statute contained such language, the law would be thrown out for vagueness. One must be fairly put on notice concerning prohibited conduct for which one may be lose their liberty.
Powell’s policy would leave our military, CIA and innocent civilian lives at risk and have allowed Al Qaeda to have carried out many more terrorist acts inside the United States.
The public letter from Powell comes on the heels of years of silence despite his having information that could have prevented Scooter Libby from being indicted.
What happened to Colin Powell?
Any world that doubts the moral basis of our fight against terrorism has much larger problems that can be addressed by leaving in place litigation inviting vague language in a treaty.
Any student of the history of war teaches that you don’t strike the King unless you intend to kill him. Didn’t he learn anything from our own failures in Korea and especially the Vietnam War that he fought in and which Obama’s ideological allies lost via liberal democrats in the 1975 Congress?
Any man, whether its Louis Farrakhan or Colin Powell, that could endorse Barack Obama for President over John McCain, has lost their moral compass and good judgment. In Farrakhan’s case, he never had it. In Powell’s case, it appears he lost his after The Gipper left Washington.
His behavior in his last days in office and weeks and months after leaving the State Department, were despicable betrayals of the public trust with his leaks and defeatist rhetoric.
Let’s make sure we win one more for The Gipper. Reject Powell’s latest bad advice and elect John McCain, a man who learned the lessons of Vietnam.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
October 19th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Either watches too much or not enough SNL.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
I for one am unconcerned about Gen. Powell’s endorsement. If this had happened in August during the Russo-Georgian War when foreign policy was a key issue, then it could have given Obama a huge boost in the polls, but not now. The Democrats have tried to frame this whole election about the economy, are they now going to shift it back to foreign affairs because of this? I doubt it.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
When a totalitarian regime is crumbling it begins to collapse onto itself because of its paranoia and it strikes out at its friends, further isolating itself. I am reminded of Ceausescu of Romania who could not even leave his palace as his regime collapsed. I see signs of that in parts of the GOP as it lashes out in all directions.
Saying Northern Virginia is not the “Real Virginia” and claiming cities and burbs are not “Pro-America.” Chasing Moderates away for dissenting on Palin and campaign tactics. Is this the behavior of a party that deserves the right to govern a nation in a crisis?
October 19th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
#3:
The Ceausescu regime, really? That is the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard. When the FBI is the Securitate and the White House is a Presidential Palace that is almost as big as the Pentagon; when the Congress is nothing but a Politburo and the President has been in power for 30 years; when the 2nd most powerful person in the country is his wife and when protesters are shot down in the streets and a minority community is jailed for being a minority, then we have the Ceausescu regime. Until then begone troll, you have taken up enough space with your prattle.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Colin Powell endorses the most liberal, inexperienced major party nominee for President in history, citing concerns over the kind of United States Supreme Court justices John McCain (who has said he would appoint more justices like Roberts and Alito) would appoint, while continuing to espouse such left-wing causes as pro-abortion and affirmative action. Since Ronald Reagan, Powell’s political benefactor, died, the only public feelings Powell has expressed for the Republican Party have been of concern.
This is a person who was clearly miffed that President George W. Bush chose him to argue the case before the United Nations for Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction and then fired him. Yet the leaks from the State Department he ran, which included those causing the Plame Scandal, however meritorious, were disloyal to the administration he served and deservedly resulted in such a political parting. And his public Obama endorsement may be the most disloyal stroke of all given how the Republican Party made his career.
Powell has played the GOP like a cheap banjo and is no Republican. His Obama endorsement is a tendentious and petty act that reflects a much smaller man than has been previously portrayed. And this ought to be said for the record rather than hushed up under a shroud of racial blackmail and intimidation of the type Congressman John Lewis and other Democrats have been successfully deploying against the McCain campaign this election cycle.
I was chagrined in 1996 when a group of high profile Republican activists called a Washington, D.C. press conference to preemptively trash the potential GOP White House bid of Powell (another slight undoubtedly motivating Powell today on Meet the Press), who I thought could serve as a vehicle to broaden the party base and attract more people of color to it. But it turns out the instincts of these conservative activists, though arguably perhaps not their methods, were totally correct.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
I like Powell and because he endorses Obama wont change that. He has known McCain for 25 years and Obama two. His endorsement as I believe him to be an honest man Mccain would vouch for that, and his reaction was not even a put down to his friend Powell were these:
1)Palin
2) Ayers Wright/ Accorn
3) Him saying he was going to temp suspend his campaign
The negs have hurt Mccain and made Mccains negs go up. The real McCain was the one who said that this campagin should be on the issues etc he hated it when bush in 2000 drove him into the mud. He and cindy said it would be an issue campaign.
Well, if mccain presents a positive view on the encon show his self as he did on letterman and the comedy thing his favs will go back up.
Conserv keep saying let McCain be McCain, because McCain is not Steve Shcmidt or Karl Rove. If he keeps on the Ayers or Accorn path, he wont win. its backfiring
October 19th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
This doesn’t help McCain, but it doesn’t much hurt him either. At least, not vote wise. The real traitorous nature of the erstwhile ally Powell is that the news cycle he’s dominating is one of 16 before the election. We can ill afford to have such news cycles dominated by messages other than ours during this crucial period prior to the election.
We’ve gotten all the disenchanted Republicans back into the fold. Now we need to swing the independents back our way. If we can do that, we can still win.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
read War and Decision by Doug Feith, he talks about how Powell and Armitage would never take a stand or advocate a position the President should go with, they would just nitpick and criticize whatever Defense suggested, so they could come out looking good whichever way it went
October 19th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
not once did Powell or Armitage say, this is wrong, we shouldn’t invade, there are no WMDs, etc.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I thought Powell seemed a bit miffed during his on camera endorsement, but then it could have been the liberal MSM.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
#10
I haven’t seen him look anything BUT miffed in years.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
The Republican Pharisee attacks on Powell today (and the attacks yet to come) are exactly what Reagan fought against when he advocated a big tent. Leave him alone.
McCain should react to this news by saying he’d welcome Colin Powell into his administration with open arms.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
8, Joel. I don’t care. Looooooong before Feith even thought about wirting War and Decision, books had already been written about Rumsfeld saying the exact same thing.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Where are all the folks that wanted Powell to be McCain’s VP ??? Is this the SAME Powell you had in mind folks ?
October 19th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Congratulations, Gamecock.
The second an intelligent and honorable man who happened to be appointed by and serve under Republican presidents comes out and expresses an honest opinion, you try to shove him to the ground? This post is despicable and I recommend you rescind it immediately. Such an attitude is precisely why we are posed to lose the White House, as many as 9 or 10 Senate Seats and as many as 20 House seats.
Starting November 5th, I hope we can purge the Republican Party of this kind of thinking.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
#15
Are you sure you don’t mean you hope we can purge the Republican party from THINKING?
Let’s see, you would like a “Party” where it’s most celebrated members have no allegiance to it or its platform? You want a party that is a “big tent”. So big that it accepts everyone. Except social conservatives, of course. We need to get rid of them. They just muck things up with their insistence on maintaining some sort of moral standards. You want a party that embraces diversity and change? Guess what, you’ve got one. It’s called the Democrat Party.
I have no problem with someone expressing an “honest” opinion, but if that opinion means he or she is in line with the thinking of the other party, they should just go join it. I am so sick of everyone decrying partisan politics. You know what you call a nation without partisanship? A dictatorship.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
let me add a “ditto” to #15.
I have immense respect for Powell. He’s made mistakes, but unlike other certain GOP leaders *cough cough*, he’s been willing to admit them.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
I like this comment by Rush Limbaugh regarding Powell’s endorsement:
“Rush Limbaugh said Colin Powell’s decision to get behind Barack Obama appeared to be very much tied to Obama’s status as the first African-American with a chance to become president.
“Secretary Powell says his endorsement is not about race,” Limbaugh wrote in an e-mail. “OK, fine. I am now researching his past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal, white candidates he has endorsed. I’ll let you know what I come up with.”
As for Powell’s statement of concern this morning about the sort of Supreme Court justices a President McCain might appoint, Limbaugh wrote: “I was also unaware of his dislike for John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Antonin Scalia. I guess he also regrets Reagan and Bush making him a four-star [general] and secretary of state and appointing his son to head the FCC. Yes, let’s hear it for transformational figures.”
And according to Zogby: “McCain now trails Obama by 2.7 points, down from the 3.9 point deficit he faced 24 hours earlier.”
October 19th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
I don’t know what’s surprising about a liberal endorsing another liberal for office.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Come on. This is just making GOPers look petty. The guy’s not great but he’s got image. Why make hay over this?
October 19th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Doug,
That’s hysterical! You’re right. He may call himself a Republican and I once thought he was, but I found out he was no conservative a long time ago. As my redneck, white trash Grandma used to say, “The cat can have kittens in the oven but that don’t make them biscuits!”
October 19th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
I am concerned right now. I think Gen. Powell has a strong appeal to moderate republicans. What he said about the “narrowing repulicans” is right. We lose a lot of moderates and libertarians (because of the patriot act, high government spending since 2001 and a lot of other things).
It is one of the most unpatriotic thing to accuse someone of being a muslim. What is wrong about being a muslim???
I agree upon most of the things Gen. Powell said except for the conclusion: I’ll still support Sen. McCain.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
IBD/TIPP got a little better…41.5% 46.6%
October 19th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Amazing how Obama who staked his campaign on being against Iraq and his superior wisdom there, has no problem appointing Biden his VP who pushed the Iraq War in the Senate and voted for it and accepting the support of Powell who was its #1 cheerleader in the court of public and world opinion and whose UN sppech was the most important pr push for it. I guess no dems seem to care that all the pro war folks are jumping on board. And I thought Obama keeps talking about more of the same and how bad Bush is. Yet he takes on Bush’s top cabinet offcial.
As for Powell, his comments on the Court disturbed me. Maybe it was for the best he didnt run in 1996.
October 19th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
I remember listening to live reports of the Itaqis retreating in disarray in Gulf War I, I screamed into the radio “DON’T LET THEM GET AWAY!”. I was thinking about the Republican guard, who smugly thought they were safe far behind enemy lines, but we snuck up on their backside and pounded them. I was listening to this with some of my co workers as we were doing some lab bench work and I was in complete oblivion to those around me, just totally absorbed in the moment. My co workers were quire shocked by my outburst, and I guess I would have been too, had I been in their place. But my feelings then have been vindicated since.
Part of the reason HW Bush lost is because he didn’t finish the job in Iraq and CBS news harped on this continually leading up to the election, led by Dan Rather (who tried but failed to pull off a similar feat in 2004).
Colin Powell has often expressed admiration for Obama and I am sure he feels a kinship with him because of race. This is to be expected and nothing for us to snicker at. I am sure they share some humiliating experiences which most of us will never be able to understand.
Powell, after making the case for WMDs, invited us to consider the benefits of having a democratic Iraq. I did, and I liked what I saw. It just took a while to begin realizing those benefits. But I don’t want to put them in jeopardy by voting for Mr. Obama.
I admire Mr Powell, although I don’t agree with him on many things. I agree more with Gamecock and hope he is right about the mood of the electorate and the outcome of this election.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
The ad: “General Powell sold America on Iraq, now he is trying to sell America on Obama. Who is General Colon Powell? (then cut away to clip of Powell saying that he doesn’t want two more conservatives on the court). (Then show a picture of Powell shaking hands with Khadafi or Arafat).”
October 19th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Granted, my above ad suggestion is tough (real hardball politics). If McCain wanted to take a different approach he could cut an ad with clips of Powell praising McCain and showing that Powell donated money to McCain’s campaign. That would be the more positive, less harsh tact.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Wow. So it goes from “who is Obama?” to “who is Powell?” Vietnam vet, Reagan NSA, Bush 41 chairman of joint chiefs, Bush 43 Sec of State and his patriotism and authenticity are questionable? That’s not tough; its stupid and transparent.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
#28 –
Maybe your right. That’s why I offered option B in comment #27.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
#28
No one is questioning his patriotism, just his agenda. And, perhaps, his horse sense. All I’m saying is he was never a conservative. Republican does not equal conservative. More’s the pity.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Hmmm. . .could North Korea be the source of the October surprise? Big announcement coming from Pyongyang tomorrow: speculation that Kim Jong-Il may have died. An announcement on that scale could shift things back to national security and international affairs for McCain.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Kim-Jong-Il-Speculation-Over-Health-Of-North-Korean-Leader/Article/200810315123891
October 19th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
We just need to let it go. We can’t run ads against Powell because it’s not going to do any good. Barry is going to win. It sucks. We just need to gear up for the next battle. The Dems will overreach. They always do.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
McCain won’t attack Powell. He’s too good for that. McCain should come out praising Powell, announce his utmost respect for his choice, and move on. Over the next few days, as Obama throws Powell’s name around, McCain could use the time to showcase all his support from military leaders and soldiers in general. Besides, I’m not sure Obama wants too much focus taken off the economy right now, so Powell may not be seen as much on the campaign trail anyway.
October 19th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Will Condolezza Rice be next?
October 19th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
#5 Great point, but also, Powell made great arguments FOR the second Iraq war that intel was not necessary given Saddam’s public violations of the ceasefire. His attitude is inexplicable.
October 19th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
I actually think that McCain would be very smart tomorrow to get a public endorsement from Joe the Plumber. It would knock Powell off the front page and establish the media narrative for the next week.
October 19th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
nos. 8 and 9 thanks Joel, I did read that. great point
#11 LOL and true
#14 I was NEVER one of them!
#15 Powell purge himself from the GOP today, affirmimg his despicable backstabbing of President Bush and ethical violations in his leaking with Armitage re Scooter Libby. He purposefully undermined the war effort when he should have resigned in protest.
THANK YOU NUMBER 18!!!!
Ditto #19
October 19th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Just wondering….would you have written the same article if you thought Powell had or would endorse McCain?
October 19th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Um Phantom, of course not.
The attack on Colin Powell is absolutely pathetic. The guy is a respected figure across america, and is that rare politician who had the decency to not sell his soul to win the White House.
Mike, your attack of him reminds me of the MoveOn General Betray-Us. Just cos you don’t like what he says gives you no right to attack him like this.
Next up, will you attack Warren Buffett’s economic credentials? That evil man has also endorsed Obama…
October 19th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
#34, I do wonder if the Obama camp has another lined up for next week. Perhaps Rice, or Hagel (the latter would remind people of the error of going into Iraq, as well as the usual bipartsian looking forward leadership blather)
October 19th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Powell said he is not going to campaign.
October 19th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
When is this site going to stop the personal attacks on individuals who dare to say things that don’t help John McCain?
Attacking Powell is so low, its scary.
October 19th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
I’m not attacking Powell. Powell is a liberal. Obama is a liberal. Of course Powell would endorse Obama.
This is a no-brainer. That Obama would be the 1st half-black President is just icing on the cake for Powell.
October 19th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Remind me JA weren’t you claiming that Powell was going to be McCain’s VP and help him win the election?
Any way you look at this it’s bad bad news for McCain.
October 19th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
#63 –
“Remind me JA weren’t you claiming that Powell was going to be McCain’s VP and help him win the election?
Any way you look at this it’s bad bad news for McCain.”
No, never suggested that Heath – I was promoting Ridge or Lieberman or Fred, but I am quite pleased with the choice of Palin – the Future of the Party.
October 19th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Socialism came up tonight on 60 Minutes when Leslie Stahl asked the CEO of Bank of America whether the Bush/Paulson purchase of ownership stakes in large banks was socialism. A few weeks ago it was Senator Bunning and some others calling Bush and Paulson socialists. Ownership of the means of production is the textbook definition of socialism, not raising taxes.
October 19th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
However, HEath, some people were promoting Powell as VP. Can’t recall who though.
October 19th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Not me. I respect Powell’s service but I have little use for his views.
October 19th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
No matter what you think about Obama v. McCain, you’re completely out of touch with the American mainstream when you say Powell lacks a moral compass and good judgement.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
I like how Conservatives have been lectured by Liberal Republicans like David Brooks and Bill Kristol etc, etc… about how a McCain-Powell or McCain-Lieberman or McCain-(Liberal Democrat or Republican) ticket would be killer. These people have no idea what conservatism, classical liberalism, principles, truth, actual government=result facts are/is. They have no clue what America has prospered as it has. Ask any of these dumbasses to explain the perspective of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and you’ll get an undisciplined worldview that incorporates a random aspect of Totalitarianism (Mixed with a bit of Populism to make it seem okay, mind you). There is no cohesive understanding of government behavior and consequences. Natural rights be damned.
A defense of Powell’s endorsement is a defense of Obama’s Marxist policies. If Powell embraces Marxist policies.. then why is he in the Republican party? We have far too many of these types. They must be purged.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
This is for all those in this thread and others who wonder why we should be making something big out of this.
Please notice that the mainstream media is portraying this as a key and bona fide Republican who feels he must bolt his party to support Obama. The way the story is being spun by the mainstream media it gives credence to the concept that Obama, who has never reached across the aisle in a unifying or bipartisan manner because he is so far off on the left fringe, appeals across party lines and will in fact coalesce the nation.
This all could not be further from the truth.
Powell is no Republican. He has always been a left-wing liberal who used the GOP to accelerate and enhance his career in government. But the Republican Party has done such a poor job broadening its base and bringing in people of color that they felt the need to acquiesce in the ploy.
And Obama will divide rather than unite this country based on his gilded ascension to the presidency and far left ideology.
Once the GOP hits rock bottom on the morning of November 5 it will be important for them to clarify and commit to what they really believe in, which will mean refusing to associate with opportunists like Powell and Dick Riordan who have no loyalty to the cause and would only like to borrow the label and cover of Republican to suit their own personal objectives.
The Republican Party has to stand for something other than re-election if it hopes to gain adherents. And refusing to cower to the charlatans like Powell and Riordan who refuse to claim the label in tough times will be a great start, which is why all of this matters.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Republius #51 – excellent assessment. All you heard on MTP after the Powell endorsement was exactly what you are saying. Andrea Mitchell was practically orgasming talking about how Powell was the “game changer” that Obama needed and that this election is now for all intents and purposes over.
October 20th, 2008 at 2:57 am
Please! Powell was the 96 fav to beat Dole before he pulled out in late 95.
Bush wanted Powell for his VP in 2000.
He is a republican.
I know I’m no fan of “Gamecock” but this post is really beyond the pale and should be repudiated by those who run this site (who does run this site? Is in Kavon – who was praying for Powell to be VP btw?).
October 20th, 2008 at 5:39 am
The GOP is in need of some major revamping. The party in its present form can never again win a national election. We’ve lost too much ground. We wrote off the northeast. It’s gone. Same thing with the west coast. CO is trending left in a hurry and so is VA. There is not enough “Middle America” left to run an urban versus rural campaign and come out successfully anymore. That’s a huge problem for our party because we’ve depended on that strategy for victory since 1968. It’s over. We need to go back to the drawing board.
October 20th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Nos. 38 and 39 I linked to and excerpted a column of MINE criticizing Powell for betraying President Bush by leaking info to undermine the war and protecting Armitage in 2006.
Yes I would have.
October 20th, 2008 at 7:36 am
#54 I don’t know what the GOP’s “purest form” is. I know it won landslides when it was MORE conservative, not less.
October 20th, 2008 at 8:10 am
Gamecock,
It’s not 1980 anymore. The demographics are different. The youth don’t care about social conservatism. Taxes aren’t as high so the idea of tax cutting doesn’t have the resonance it once did.
I don’t know about “purest form” but I do know that the urban vs. rural baiting and culture war rhetoric isn’t selling anymore. Something has got to give.
October 20th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I always wished more republicans had fighting spirit like gamecock, but this is absolutely over the top. Powell is an honourable man of moderate, certainly not leftist (READ Ayers) views. Reading him out of the party is worse than a crime, it is a mistake.
Instead, we should all downplay this -countering perhaps with pointing to Lieberman- and play up the fact that even in his endorsement Powell did not support Obamas plans for withdrawal from iraq and actually articulated what probably comes closest to McCains position on iraq- go in and do it right.
October 20th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Adam, we also won with more conservative platforms in 1984, 1988, 2000 and 2004. And now the moderates who wanted McCain are turning on him. It is the moderates that bait the culture war and then when we defend ourselves and Reagan , you guys call us angry white males, yet, the most angry white males and females are brooks and parker and dems lewis and Obama’s campaign that call Palin a cancer.
October 20th, 2008 at 8:41 am
#58 Powell “is” vs what Powell “does”, specifically. That he is overall an honorable man means we can’t judge some despicable acts?
October 20th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Glad we agree on Powell’s being an honourable man, as far as the despicable acts after his leaving the State Department go, I agree with you on the merits and disagree with Powell, but that is just that. A disagreement To call Powells position a despicable act would to my knowledge, which may well be deficient since I did not follow the matter closely, also implicate McCain who like Powell opposed the Bush administration on torture.- wrongheaded in my view, but not despicable.
Calling Powell and his acts despicable is both wrong and wrong-headed in terms of winning this election and also weakens our argument with regard to the truly despicable acts like the attacks on Sarah Palin etc. No wish to hurt you, but that’s my view and maybe of some undecided voters as well.
October 20th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
The same conservative platform that got us overwhelming victories in 1980 and 1984 only allowed for a fluke victory in 2000 and a very narrow victory in 2004. And other states have slipped away since then, notably VA. We either need to come up with a better way to sell the product we have or we have to sell a new product. What we’re doing is not sustainable.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
#61 Sebastian, I respect your opinion and agree with much, but not all. later bro
#62 narrow and fluke gop victories keep obamas away from the oval office
yes, we could sell the product better if david brooks at al quit callinf palin a fatal cancer