Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Powell Doctrine

In his unambiguous endorsement of Barack Obama on "Meet The Press" this morning, former Secretary of State Colin Powell utilized one of the major tenets of the Powell Doctrine: overwhelming force. This wartime edict, employed by Gen. Powell in the first Gulf War, is meant to assure the demolition or capitulation of one's enemy. In a seven-minute torrent of clear, concise and blunt language, Powell used his eponymous principle to divorce himself from his party and the tactics of the campaign run by his longtime friend and Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain.

On McCain's handling of the economic crisis: "He was a little unsure as to how to deal with the economic problems that we were having, and almost every day there was a different approach to the problem.... He didn't have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had."

On the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate: "I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of vice president... that raised some question in mind as to the judgment that Sen. McCain made."

On the McCain-Palin focus on William Ayers: "I think this goes too far, and I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It's not what the American people are looking for."

On some senior Republican Party members who "drop the suggestion that [Obama] is a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists": "What if he is [a Muslim]? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no, that's not America." And then he eloquently told the story of Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan.

On the direction of the Republican Party: "It has moved more to the right than I would like to see it." "Over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower."

On the Supreme Court: "I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that's what we'd be looking at in a McCain administration."

Yes, Powell had many nice things to say about Obama: "He has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president. I think he is a transformational figure, he is a new generation coming onto the world stage, onto the American stage." But Powell's full-throated endorsement gave a loud-and-clear voice to the murmurings of disappointment with the Grand Old Party, the McCain campaign and McCain himself.

By Jonathan Capehart  | October 19, 2008; 5:00 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Move Over, Joe the Plumber
Next: Powell's Predictable Endorsement

Comments

Colin Powell has been waiting to say this for a long time. The GOP is SO OUT OF TOUCH with America and it shows every day. That scumbag Rumsfeld and even scummier bag Cheney ran the war, and ran it and our country into the ground. Powell, the ONLY one of those three that had been in the military and knew what he was doing was shunned by Rumsfeld and Cheney. Now we are $800 billion in the hole and still no end in sight.

Posted by: LuvIndians | October 19, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell has been waiting to say this for a long time. The GOP is SO OUT OF TOUCH with America and it shows every day. That scumbag Rumsfeld and even scummier bag Cheney ran the war, and ran it and our country into the ground. Powell, the ONLY one of those three that had been in the military and knew what he was doing was shunned by Rumsfeld and Cheney. Now we are $800 billion in the hole and still no end in sight. This is Powell's F YOU to the evil empire.

Posted by: LuvIndians | October 19, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

With Colin Powell's endorsement of Barack Obama, John McCain is in DEEP political DOO-DOO.

And so is SILLY SARAH (Palin). OsiSpeaks.com

Posted by: KYJurisDoctor | October 19, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

". . .former Secretary of State Colin Powell utilized one of the major tenets of the Powell Doctrine: overwhelming force. This wartime edict, employed by Gen. Powell in the first Gulf War, is meant to assure the demolition or capitulation of one's enemy. In a seven-minute torrent of clear, concise and blunt language, Powell used his eponymous principle. . ."

. . .and you're not so bad yourself there, Mr. Capehart. Bravo. And thank YOU, Gen.Powell!

Posted by: martymar123 | October 19, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Our choice in Iraq is to accept the benefits of our hard fighting or to quit and give up our gains to fit some preconceived notion of national inferiority. But I wonder how those who can not even define the word "victory" expect to win a close election. Their temptation will be to give up and blame it on some company or the other.

Posted by: gary4books | October 19, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

And it took just a few minutes for Limbaugh & Company to draw the first conclusions why Powell endorsed Obama: because he's black. How else could he dare to do that.

Let me see if I get it right. All those white men and women who are voting for McCain are racist because they are voting for a white man? And all the blacks that are voting for Obama are racist because they are voting for a black man? What about the white people voting for Obama and the blacks voting for McCain?

Would be interesting how many people actually have thought about the reasons Powell has given for his endorsement. Could it be that he just thought Obama would be the better pick? No. He must be wrong. What the heck does Powell know. He's just one of those black guys who can't stand it to see the white guy win. Rather would he risk the ruin of the whole country than to see a white guy win.

Grow up. The only color that counts today is green ( like on a dollar bill ).

Posted by: kmsoftly | October 19, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

I'm a longtime Democrat who has admired General Powell for many years. He is the rare individual who appears to be above politics. He was eloquent and precise in his statement and is to be commended. Hopefully, he will be offered and will accept a position in either a McCain or an Obama administration. Our country is a better place because of General Powell.

Posted by: burkdogs | October 19, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Powell, you are the true American Hero.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

I value the courage Of Mr. Powell to be true to his convictions and the "TRUTH" all of which has been left out of the equation . I would hope that all americans would put their country "FIRST" and the Bias mentality where it belongs (in the garbage) This election is too important to be won by RACIST opinions which will not right the ship for your country. We pray that they will do the right thing and get america back on track "ONLY in america"

Posted by: sieben13 | October 19, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

It always confused me that someone as apparently intelligent as Powell could align himself with the Republican party.

And especially with the clowns that ran the country into the ground over the last eight years.

They've done more damage to America than dozens of Bin Ladens every could do.

Posted by: itchy2008 | October 19, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

I don't doubt that many Democrats will suddenly embrace Mr. Powell now that he's made this endorsement, but whether he picks the right or wrong candidate, he'll never be able to walk away from his role as No. 1 shill for the Bush Administration's illegal and immoral war.

His credibility was zero yesterday and it's still zero today.

Posted by: factota | October 19, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA BIDEN 08...!!!

NETHERLANDS ANTILLES

Posted by: fu_buki | October 19, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Stunning in its truthfulness. Alma should have let her husband run for President or Vice President years ago.

Interesting story about inclusiveness: I'm a Virginian. Today I looked out my kitchen window to see a car with Illinois plates come up my driveway. I assumed they were lost so I went out to help them. Turns out it was an older couple, nicely dressed, who had drive down from Illinois to volunteer their help in spreading the word door to door about Obama. Talk about dedication to a cause. They wanted to assuage the wrong assumptions many Virginians have that Obama has a race-based agenda. I pointed to the Obama sticker on my car and told them not to waste precious time with me.

I thanked th

Posted by: mcleangirl | October 19, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Hamas, Castro and all our enemies...and now and AMERICAN GENERAL! Good move Powell!

I guess you AGREE that OUR MILITARY "raids villages and KILLS CIVILIANS."

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 19, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

factota - Perhaps this is Mr. Powell's redemption. He could have done nothing, or made a less comprehensive, emphatic endorsement.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Stunning in its truthfulness. Alma should have let her husband run for President or Vice President years ago.

Interesting story about inclusiveness: I'm a Virginian. Today I looked out my kitchen window to see a car with Illinois plates come up my driveway. I assumed they were lost so I went out to help them. Turns out it was an older couple, nicely dressed, who had driven down from Illinois to volunteer their help in spreading the word door to door about Obama. Talk about dedication to a cause. They wanted to assuage the wrong assumptions many Virginians have that Obama has a race-based agenda. I pointed to the Obama sticker on my car and told them not to waste precious time with me.

Posted by: mcleangirl | October 19, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Wow! If you don't see how eloquent this endorsement is you are lost in your own bias. Obama not ready to be commander in chief? Ask Colin Powell. Obama is leading us to Socialism? Is that why Warren Buffet is supporting him? I'm just waiting for the Rush/Hannity/Republican response. They loved him when he said what they wanted to hear. Now they will start to smear him. It's over, folks. Obama deserves to be POTUS.

Posted by: phil55 | October 19, 2008 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Powell's most damning comment: when he said that he often had to make decisions during his Army career as to who was the better qualified person for a position at a particular point in time and in this case, he wouldn't choose McCain.

And right on cue, having heard Powell's comments about tolerance and inclusiveness, Limbaugh spouts off about how Powell is a racist for supporting Obama. This in a country in which a black man couldn't have been elected president for 200 years and in which many people thought they were pushing the envelope to vote for a Catholic 48 years ago. This says it all.

Posted by: Bob22003 | October 19, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

The following is a clip from ABC News:

======
Stopping for food at Cape Fear BBQ and Chicken in Fayetteville, Obama was greeted by a 54-year-old woman shouting, "Socialist! Socialist! Socialist! Get out of here!"

The woman, Diane Fanning, who works at a Sam's Club, was among the older and largely white crowd eating lunch after church services.

Sitting next to Fanning, Lenox Bramble, 76, gave her an angry look.

"Be civil, be courteous," he said.

Bramble later told a reporter he's voting for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and doesn't think Obama has enough experience.

Another diner, Cecilia Hayslip, 61, yelled back at Fanning, "At least he's not a war-monger!"
===========

I know, Diane Fanning is probably a angry republican who cannot stand a non-white person going to the white house to take the U.S. President position.

If it is okay to be angry like that, then what should I yell at George Bush when he comes to Dallas to open his presidential library, "Killer!, Killer!, Killer!, Get out of here"?

Posted by: Dave27 | October 19, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

I have always admired Gen. Powell and will continue to do so. In fact, if Powell were running for President, I'd probably vote for him, but the fact is that he's not. Kissinger has endorsed McCain, so has Lieberman. It is deeply disturbing to me that a man who is running for President of the United States can sit inside a church for 20 years and listen to anti-American speeches by his Pastor and only denounce that Pastor when the man is running for President. While I have no intentions of running for President, I will never stand by while someone preeches hateful sermons, that's because I am an American. How come nobody has asked Obama how he could let this Pastor into his private life?

Posted by: shiver | October 19, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"Our choice in Iraq is to accept the benefits of our hard fighting or to quit and give up our gains to fit some preconceived notion of national inferiority."

This sounds like nonsense. Win by staying (and spending and inflicting and suffering more casualties)?? To "win" some sort of withdrawal has to take place, sometime.

In any case it isn't up to the US, it is up to the Iraqis when the withdrawal must take place. They are a freedom loving democracy now, remember. Winning is leaving them in control.

Posted by: pdgnz | October 19, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for a clear and clever summary, and thanks to General Powell for standing forward and speaking the truth.

It’s long since time for the current Republican philosophy to be discarded -- borrow-and-spend fiscal policy, outlawing disagreement with the majority by mob-rule, intrusion of government into the private lives and bedrooms of citizens, exclusion of all that is “other” (whatever that might be) leaves us only looking sad and foolish in the eyes of sensible people here and abroad.

One can only hope that from the ashes of the the crash-and-burn of Dubya’s failed presidency and McSame’s failed campaign that a new and respectable Republican Party will emerge. One that returns to the sensibilities of Eisenhower, Goldwater and, even, Reagan. I would welcome the return of a genuinely conservative movement to American politics instead of the hideous false “conservatism” that has so discredited the right since 1992. It is long since time for rational discussion between the left and right - we each have something to offer the other. Wouldn't it be peachy if good ideas won out over loudest ranting.

Colin Powell and Chris Buckley have already decried the failure of the modern Republican model - Hagel and Lugar are up next.

Posted by: fr3dmars | October 19, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

To Shiver,

It makes me shiver to hear Republicans yell "kill him, off with his head and no one will care if we blow up a plane with Senator Obama and his wife on board". That type of talk is scary, threatening and un-American. You cannot compare the rantings of a misguided preacher with the hate and nastiness at the McCain/Palin rallies. The Republican mob is threatening to kill someone and their family just because they disagree with their views. Senator McCain and Governor Palin haven't denounced any of these statements. Senator Obama at least denounced Reverend Wright. You make me shiver...because there are many more folks like yourself out there who support this type of rhetoric when it comes from Republicans...This is a double standard and a dangerous standard.

Posted by: RMLMG | October 19, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

Wow, the GOP boat is really sinking now. Even conservative media is jumping ship on McCain, and this started to happen well before the Powell statement. This however is an extremely powerful endorsement that may very well be the last nail in campaign's coffin. Those still supporting the GOP ticket are looking more and more like extremists who put their regressive ideals before their country.

It's good to see thinking men can still transcend party lines when the future of our nation is at stake.

Posted by: Robert_politics2 | October 19, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Shiver

Why do you equate Rev. Wright's speeches with anti-Americanism? They weren't anti-American, they were anti-administration.

Trying to incite positive change in one's country does not make one a bad citizen. Rev. Wright spoke many truths.

Dissent does not equal anti-americanism.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

"I will never stand by while someone preeches hateful sermons"
I presume that you are not a fan of Palin, Fox, Limbaugh.

Posted by: pdgnz | October 19, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

" ... and only denounce that Pastor when the man is running for President."

This argument can also be made about McCain and that nutty preacher he disavowed...during the campaine.

But all this guilt by association is nonesense, as Powell said, and is not rational criteria by which to select a President.

Powell basically said that Obama has better judgement and is a better leader than McCain.

He went on to say that Palin is not ready to be president, and that her selection pointed to McCains faulty judgement.

How anyone that cares about this country can ignore what Powell said about qualifications is beyond me.

Posted by: plaza04433 | October 19, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Colon Powell: “And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it,'' he added.

THE REACH OF WAR: THE WEAPONS; Powell Presses C.I.A. on Faulty Intelligence on Iraq Arms Published June 2,2004

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has pressed the Central Intelligence Agency for several months to account for the faulty intelligence that led Mr. Powell to tell the United Nations last year that Iraq definitely possessed illicit weapons, several senior administration officials said Tuesday.

He (Powell) said last summer that the mobile labs were ''some of the most solid'' evidence the United States possessed, but in the past few months he has stepped back from those remarks, and then reversed himself. Two weeks ago he declared ''the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading.''

''And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it,'' he added.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F03E2DF1431F931A35755C0A9629C8B63

_____________________________________

Blair refuses to apologize for faulty Iraq intelligence
Last Updated: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 | 11:03 AM ET

Tony Blair is under increasing pressure to apologize for misrepresenting intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons, but the British prime minister continued to hold his ground against attacks from his political opposition.

On Tuesday, Britain's MI-6 intelligence agency formally retracted statements that Iraqi troops could deploy weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/10/13/blairo41013.html

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 19, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

COLIN POWELL WAS THE REASON WE WENT INTO THE IRAQ.

HE TOLD US LIES ABOUT THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
WHY SHOULD I BELIEVE A MAN THAT INDIRECTLY CAUSED OUR ECONOMIC COLLAPSE
AND THE DEATH OF SO MANY SOLDIERS?

COLLIN POWELL WAS WRONG BEFORE AND HE IS WRONG NOW - OBAMA IS RELATIONSHIP WITH AYER COUNTS!

DEAR COLIN POWELL,
AS MARTIN LUTHER KING SAID, YOU SHOULD NOT JUDGE A MAN BY THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN
BUT BY THE CONTENT OF HIS CHARACTER

Posted by: DemocracyRules | October 19, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

During crisis situations, moderates from political groups take the opportuny to judiciously assess the conditions.

Colin Powell, among other moderates, are publicy and/or privately expressing their views for the over-ll enhance of a nation.

Obama/Biden is the choice for 2008.

Posted by: NorthernPolarBear | October 19, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Hey DemocracyRules, The Secretary of State cannot authorize a war.


Posted by: theodosia1 | October 19, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

GaryBrooks, say what? It's those who want to continue the Iraq war who cannot define victory. Obama defines it clearly: defeating bin Laden and al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where they are centered, and then defeating al Qaeda in nations where it is far more active than in Iraq.

As to Iraq, we aimed to depose Saddam and did so. There is no further "victory" available in Iraq. We are mainly keeping Sunnis and Shiites from each others' throats, a conflict over 1000 years old and not likely to end in the next 100, whether we stay or go. But please, go ahead: define "victory" in Iraq in terms of the actual situation on the ground there.

You can't, of course. Most likely you will misleadingly refer to defeating al Qaeda in Iraq, a small, adjunct terrorist effort drawn there by our invasion for the sole purpose of inflicting injuries on us there, where we made ourselves available. Once we leave, al Qaeda in Iraq will have no further mission and no serious influence. The Shiite majority has no use for it, and the Baathist Sunnis were its enemies, too, in Saddam's time, and have never embraced it. As to standing against Iran, Saddam was doing that better then we are. The invasion itself caused the problem of Iranian influence. Now we simply have to rely on nationalism to trump religion among Iraqi Shiites. There is some chance it will. But nothing we can do can make that any more or less likely.

So, yes, let's please define "victory" in Iraq before we go any further. We've only been waiting over five years. And the reason nobody has is that there is no way to do so without implicitly lying about the nature of that war.

Posted by: NomoStew | October 19, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

You got to give it to Powell. He controlled his anger, and did not blow up --at least not publically-- all these times George Bush rejected his reccomendations and went along with Cheney and Rumsfeld. Powell waited for an appropriate time and made sure his reaction was politically correct, to take his revenge. I think there is a lesson to be learned. Compare to the scattered-brained Sarah Palin who used the state government of Alaska to try to get back at her ex-brother-in-law. Which behavior is more grown-up, and more effective?

Posted by: RegisUrgel | October 19, 2008 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Good point - NomoStew. Everytime I hear Palin so very shrilly address Victory/Defeat I become angry. If you're going to accuse someone of defeat, at least define what Victory would look like.

There is no Victor in an occupation. The US has successfully occupied; therefore they've won. They'll never be out of there.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Powell fought behind the scenes for a more deliberate approach to Iraq. Weh he lost, he loyally supported his President's decision, and was one of several who "sold" the Iraq war. Republicans used to think that loyalty was laudable. Now, suddenly, it was a bad thing. And by the way, if you blame the Irq war on Powell, you implicitly admit the war was wrong. At least we're agreed on that now.

Posted by: NomoStew | October 19, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Something Wicked this Way Comes

Race innuendos, terrorist pew
More Reverend Wright evil brew
No money left, do the sums
And something wicked this way comes

Palin opens her crooked mouth
To fan the hatred in the south
‘Kill him’ blurts from drunken gums
When something wicked this way comes

October surprise will tell the tale
Will Evil succeed or will it fail?
Karl Rove and his degenerate scum
Make something wicked this way come

McCain has shown that there is nothing that he will not do, nothing he will not say to get elected.
A man of Honor?

Campaign First, Country Last.

Posted by: seemstome | October 19, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

I have to thank General Powell for his insight. Have already gone aou have to gainst Osama Obama in my vote. I still think McCain will be the better of two poor choices for both the economy and the conduct of the 2nd Gulf War. President Bush scwrewd us by folloing Rumsfeds' advice. You can't fight a war on the cheap. You have to go for it, and go for it all. Nuking Teheran and any other major Iranian cities (are there?) would have been icing on the cake.

Posted by: ssmorehouse | October 19, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

My more cynical self believes that those who really run the show will never allow an outsider to come in to power and start messing around in their business. I just can't see the "cabal" allowing anyone to end the occupation of Iraq, or start making real changes to their well placed, self-serving financial and foreign policies.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

mcleangirl: Great post. Hearing things like that is so encouraging. Thank you.

Posted by: martymar123 | October 19, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Something Wicked this Way Comes

Race innuendos, terrorist pew
More Reverend Wright evil brew
No money left, do the sums
And something wicked this way comes

Palin opens her crooked mouth
To fan the hatred in the south
‘Kill him’ blurts from drunken gums
When something wicked this way comes

October surprise will tell the tale
Will Evil succeed or will it fail?
Karl Rove and his degenerate scum
Make something wicked this way come

McCain has shown that there is nothing that he will not do, nothing he will not say to get elected.
A man of Honor?

Campaign First, Country Last.

Posted by: seemstome | October 19, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell is SEEING stars instead of wearing them.

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 19, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama does not know the definition of honor.

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 19, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Welcome to the Deceivers Team, one of the greatest of all times!

Remember his UN performance?

The Prophet team is well represented by this lier!

Posted by: trace-sc | October 19, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, at it's core, are based on religion and civil leadership. Option 1 of the Powell Doctrine was not met. Therefore, military force cannot solve the problem.

Victory has to be defined according to the Powell Doctrine. He defeated the Iraqi army in 1991.

Then Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell, 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."

After the end of Persian Gulf War in 1991, Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, outlined his vision for efficient and decisive military action. His plan is now referred to as the Powell Doctrine, although there is not an actual formal document named as such.

Essentially, the Doctrine expresses that:

1. Military action should be used only as a last resort; and only

2. If there is a clear risk to national security by the intended target;

3. The force, when used, should be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy;

4. There must be strong support for the campaign by the general public; and

5. There must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the military is engaged.

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 19, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Texan2007:

Do yourself, possibly, a great favour, define for us your concept of honour?

When a concept is defined, participants would have a common base to formulate her/his views.

=====================

Obama does not know the definition of honor.

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 19, 2008 9:01 PM

Posted by: NorthernPolarBear | October 19, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

John McCain said that his presidential candidacy was endorsed by Alexander Haig.

On March 30, 1981 Alexander Haig illegally seized control of the Office of the President of the United States.

Alexander Haig: What Americans didn’t know about the afternoon of March 30, 1981.

On March 30,1981 President Reagan was shot and underwent surgery. VP Bush was airborn.

Haig answered the reporter:

"Constitutionally gentlemen, you have the president, the vice president and the secretary of state, in that order, and should the president decide he wants to transfer the helm to the vice president, he will do so. As for now, I’m in control here, in the White House, pending the return of the vice president and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course."

Haig was wrong to say constitutionally. The constitution mentions the secretary of state only in an actual transfer of power and then it places him fourth in line.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/04/23/60II/main287292.shtml

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 19, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

democracyrules wrote: DEAR COLIN POWELL,
AS MARTIN LUTHER KING SAID, YOU SHOULD NOT JUDGE A MAN BY THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN
BUT BY THE CONTENT OF HIS CHARACTER.

It's really too bad some people will be unable to see that Colin Powell did EXACTLY what Martin Luther King preached. Powell judged a man, Barack Obama, by the content of his character and not the color of his skin. Powell spoke clearly and plainly enough to make his decision understandable to anyone with an open mind.


Posted by: Ollie4 | October 19, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

What's the point? Powell would have be velified if not lynched by the Black Community had he endorsed McCain. His tarnished record with UN would not have helped either. Now he can sleep peacefully. That is if the RNC would not take revenge and dig up some dirt.

Posted by: par12 | October 19, 2008 10:08 PM | Report abuse

ur choice in Iraq is to accept the benefits of our hard fighting or to quit and give up our gains to fit some preconceived notion of national inferiority. But I wonder how those who can not even define the word "victory" expect to win a close election. Their temptation will be to give up and blame it on some company or the other.

Posted by: gary4books |

Pay attention: Major forces in Iraq do not want us to stay.
WE ARE NO LONGER WELCOME.
They will not extend our lease.
WE HAVE TO LEAVE.
get it?
Its not about Obama now.
The IRAQI's want to have their civil war now and take over the Kurds oil. There has been no negotiated peace, thanks to the Bush wish for a longer stay, we didnt WANT a negotiated settlement. Now there will be ethnic cleansing on a holocaust scale, thanks to Bush.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 19, 2008 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Nuking Teheran and any other major Iranian cities (are there?) would have been icing on the cake.

Posted by: ssmorehouse | October 19, 2008 8:46 PM

Nuking the largest civilian target? Stop using shorthand for mass murder and torture on a horrific scale.

So.. smores, you wanna kill 10 million people?
Why, exactly?
Because their elected leader is a moron and a holocaust denier, so you are going to do ANOTHER holocaust to his people?

I doubt it. You are probably one of maybe 40 or 50 thousand right wing killers who take life so lightly.

The real life solution to Iraq's nuclear ambition + holocaust denial is going to be a flyover by the Isreali's during which they use a tactical nuclear bomb on the Russian built Chernobyl design nuclear plant, like they did before, only with a small 'nuke'. No end of Teheran, sorry buddy. In your dreams.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 19, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Shiver

Why do you equate Rev. Wright's speeches with anti-Americanism? They weren't anti-American, they were anti-administration.

Trying to incite positive change in one's country does not make one a bad citizen. Rev. Wright spoke many truths.

Dissent does not equal anti-americanism.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 8:03 PM

Our chickens DID come home to roost you know. The CIA trained bin Laudin.

Posted by: ottothewise | October 19, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

Obama/Powell Doctrine Point 1. Diplomacy

Taliban, Afghan officials meet in Saudi Arabia, but deny peace talks held

KABUL, Afghanistan — A former high-level Taliban official met last month in Saudi Arabia with representatives of the Taliban, the Afghan government and a powerful Afghan warlord, the official said Monday.

Last week, Karzai said he has repeatedly asked Saudi Arabia's king to facilitate peace talks with the Taliban. Karzai said Afghan officials have travelled to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to that end but there have not been any negotiations so far.
Former Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani, now an opposition leader, told The Associated Press earlier this year that Afghan political leaders have been meeting with Taliban and other anti-government groups in hopes of negotiating peace.

Rabbani said some Taliban are willing to negotiate, but others are opposed.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5h8v0dulttRPAD7oQIVPRJuEy60Ew
The Canadian Press

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 19, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA BIDEN 08...!!!

NETHERLANDS ANTILLES

Posted by: fu_buki | October 19, 2008 7:30 PM

What is the reason you post? The opinion of foreigners is rarely considered to be of value or interest in our affairs.
Why dont you depose your monarchy and buzz off our affairs?

Posted by: ottothewise | October 19, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama/Powell Doctrine Point 1. Diplomacy

Oct. 5,2008
War on Taliban cannot be won, says army chief
Christina Lamb Helmand, Afghanistan

Britain's most senior military commander in Afghanistan has warned that the war against the Taliban cannot be won.

Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said the British public should not expect a “decisive military victory” but should be prepared for a possible deal with the Taliban.

His assessment followed the leaking of a memo from a French diplomat who claimed that Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British ambassador in Kabul, had told him the current strategy was “doomed to fail”.

Sunday Times
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1223198704.html
October 5, 2008

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 19, 2008 10:31 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHAAAAAA!!!!


NETHERLANDS ANTILLES

Posted by: fu_buki | October 19, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Ottothewise, these people have been killing each other for centuries. The only brief periods of peace they have had were when they were working together against a common enemy. Bush if anything only postponed the fighting he didn’t cause it. Unless of course you mean that by removing Sadam he removed their common enemy.

As for Powel’s endorsement I say, good for him. McCain has had some prominent Democrats endorse him just as Obama has had former Republicans endorse him. Powel’s endorsement has long been speculated and just as thought in came in the last weeks of the campaign for that extra push.
Obama is a socialist and that is without a doubt. If you’re a socialist you should be rejoicing right now and if you look around the socialists are rejoicing, some communist as well. Perhaps it is unavoidable that our country to, will travel down the path of socialism. Like with so many other countries it will fail and a better system will take its place.
When you cast your vote for Obama just be sure you know what you are voting for. If you believe that capitalism, the opportunity for financial success, and freedom are outdated ideas then Obama is your man. If you vote for him and only find out later that he is not what he seemed to be, don’t feel bad. You’re in good company. He has fooled a lot of people even great generals.

Posted by: Batgeek | October 19, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

McCain, Hero or Traitor?

It has always been my understanding, that an American service man is to only give Name, Rank and Serial Number... when captured.
Aiding and abetting the enemy... once a POW... is being a traitor.

Today, I read( http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081006/schanberg/2 ) for the first time that McCain... aided and abetted the enemy... as a POW... by making a "confession" to his war crimes against North Vietnam. This confession was used to weaken the moral and resistance to interrogation of other POWs.
These brave men who did not "break" , who did not turn traitor, are the true POW Heros... not McCain. How many of these brave men suffered increased tortures and even death at the hands of their captors... made all the worse by McCain's propaganda confession? How much more determined where the tortures bent on breaking others... once McCain broke and turned traitor?

This all applies to his health as a former POW who suffers from extreme Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. What medications is he on? What is the effect of these medications? What is the state of his damaged mind and psyche?

Yes, McCain was a Vietnam POW, but he was no hero. He turned collaborator with the enemy and became a traitor not only to his country, but all those brave American service men who did die and who did resist. He is both coward and traitor. No hero.

Posted by: coder85173 | October 19, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Stunning endorsement. I have only one thing to add. In watching Meet The Press again this evening, I was able to savor the genuine and sheer truthfullness of Powell's thoughtful endorsement. Then I turned the channels. When I got to Fox news, I was impressed by the stark contrast from all of the other news channels on Sunday. Dark, dramatization music, an overly produced and poorly depicted story with Shawn Hanity on the attack using Rezko, Wright, and Ayers, to challenge Barack Obama's character. This desparate and overdone rhetoric was low class even for FOX standards. It reminded me of the people walking around in dark houses with night vision being shocked looking for "ghosts". Transparent and cheesy journalism, this was a last ditch effort to brainwash the few left in our society not sophisticated enough to see through such hack reporting.

This sensational broadcast, the best they got, on the same day Obama campaign reports a phenomenal $150 million raised for one month in September. They would like you to believe that was money from "shady" characters perhaps, instead of Americans sending in $100 each by millions of people. The mentality of these in the conservative camp just can't grasp the wide impact Obama has on America and abroad. It is what Powell said so well: he inspires, and he is transformational. That's just something they can't talk about on FOX.

Posted by: howard9 | October 19, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Batgeek,

I wish just one of you who are throwing the word Socialism around (monkey hear, monkey speak) would define it, as you understand it. McCain/Palin are using the word as a scare tactic because they know you don't know what it means. They rely on your ignorance and you never disappoint.

There's a big difference between "socialism" and a "tax/spend liberal".

You better ask yourselves, with the current state of your economy, do you want the ever increasing American homeless/hungry population supported by minimal tax increases or breaking in to your homes? You can't have it both ways.

I live in what you would consider a socialist country, but still have every single opportunity you have. And I pay $30 per month for health care. Full coverage - everything.

Civilized societies take care of their own. Perhaps it's time you became one.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

TO OTTOTHEWISE

The reason I'm posting is for
BARACK OBAMA
AFTER NOVEMBER,I WON'T POST ANYMORE.

OBAMA BIDEN 08...!


NETHERLANDS ANTILLES

Posted by: fu_buki | October 19, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Powell has just delivered a huge dose of payback to the wingnut neocons who forced him out of the Bush administration. But we should not relax, because the neocons will not go gently into the night. They know that their last hope of influence is the McCain campaign, and particularly Palin who, with her bubble-headed approach to foreign policy seems ripe for neocon manipulation. It it any wonder Palin has been Bill Kristol's candidate all along. She's Bush in pumps.

Posted by: osullivanc1 | October 19, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

osullivanc1,

Palin is just a pawn - a campaign prop. designed to put a smile on republican faces and tears of joy in their eyes. I'm sure Cheney,Rove et al roll their eyes everytime she opens her mouth and starts screeching.

She's not anywhere near the big boys.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

Ngeisler, I’m happy you’re proud of your country and believe it to be better. I respect that and only wish you could show me the same respect for the love I have for my country and the ideals it was founded on.

The current state of our country is due to the intrusion of socialist programs into our banking industry. In your country society “government” takes care of the people. In mine at least at one time individuals had the freedom to take care of themselves to decide what was best for them not some oversized government.

I would be interested to know what country you live in. Is it truly a socialist country or just one with socialist programs like we have here in the USA? What are your taxes like? Do you have any homeless/hungry people in your socialist utopia? Is everyone employed in your perfect world, or do all the cheap health care and other entitlement programs blur these problems into non existence? Pretty much just like here but with higher taxes and the government wiping your arse for you.

I understand if you don’t answer. If Obama is elected I will get to find out in a few years what it’s like to live in a socialist country first hand anyway.

Posted by: Batgeek | October 19, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

If Powell had any integrity, he should have resigned before his trip to the UN, unless he believed what he was briefed and what he presented (which Bill, Hill, Nanc & Har all did prior to our troops winning in Iraq; funny, they never talk about victory, only defeat). And, wasn't it his Deputy, Armitage, who was really the Plame leaker, which he knew months beforehand, but decided to cover Armitage's butt. Yeah, great integrity really showed through. Whatta guy; no wonder he's backing BHO - same character traits.

CDR, USN (ret)

Posted by: BeanerECMO | October 19, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

VOTE NADER

The Messiah is spending more money than a Wall St. con-artist, and just added GWB's first secretary of Iraqi-WMD-Anthrax-Terrorist-War

What a farce your savior has become

VOTE NADER

Posted by: pgr88 | October 19, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

In the 20th, and 21st, centuries two Secretaries of State stand out as men of principal - George Marshall and Colin Powell.

Both disagreed with the the decisions of their presidents, but - once the decisions were made - loyally implemented the policies selected.

Both men were later disrespected by their national leadership - Marshall was not defended by Eisenhower when attacked by Joseph McCarthy, and Powell was led to folly by the single-minded need of the political forces at work in the administration to provide a framework of justification for an ill-advised war.

Both men, from a military background, cherished above all else their integrity. If they said it, you could reliably count on it being 'true'. The truth is hard, and history is unforgiving. Mr. Powell is correct - the McCain\Palin people are not capable of leading us into a secure future.

Posted by: trnmstr | October 19, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Hey, I love your country too. I lived in Orange County in the 1980s and get to NYC whenever I can. And I'm fascinated by what is going on in your country right now.

I don't understand why you think that the current state of your country, and by that I presume you mean economy, is due to socialist programs in your banking industry. Could you explain? My understanding is that unregulated lending and banking practices are at the root of the problem, a situation exacerbated by high personal credit card debt and opportunistic banks. The only aspect of socialism is the country buying the banks.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

I live in Canada. We, too, are based on a market economy, but the foundations, such as the banking industry, are regulated. You could never get a 0% down 60 year mortgage here. And we only have five major banks, which are competitive, but regulated.

Our government does not take care of us. We take care of ourselves. We do have homeless people here, and our communities do their best to provide shelter for them. No one starves to death here. We need more subsidized housing - that's always an issue. Our funding priorities are health care and education. There are many incentives to start small businesses. My sister is a single mother and when she went back to university, the provincial government paid for half her tuition. I pay the government 40% of what I earn, and feel it's money well spent.

Our government is no larger than yours, and our province currently has a budget surplus. Currently, our national unemployment rate is at about 6%, up from this time last year.

I think you have an oversized government now - don't you? And you didn't have any say on trillions of your dollars that are being used to occupy Iraq.

You know, you are a unique people; half the population think like citizens of a theocracy. Sometimes the rest of the world gets frustrated by the 50% of your population that makes bad decisions because you're afraid - of socialism, people of colour, other religions, ultimately hell fire and damnation. And most of you don't see how your government has maniupluated you. What happens in the US has a profound effect on the entire globe, and in recent years its been a negative one.

Posted by: ngeisler | October 19, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

How lame is this? I actually couldn't sleep last night because I was worried that Powell would shock us all with an endorsement for McCain (October surprise, for sure!). I knew it was extremely unlikely... but... worry, worry, worry. I was thrilled to hear Powell speak -- not just that he offered a solid endorsement of Obama, but that he had the courage to say what needs to be said: the GOP is succumbing/being swallowed up as a whole to the extreme far right faction, Palin is NOT qualified to be VP, McCain has very little understanding of the economic situation we're in, and the McCain-Palin campaign is an out-of-control ugly monster (okay, my words... not his).

Posted by: DogBitez | October 19, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

In the immortal words of Nelson Muntz, bully from The Simpsons, "Haa, Ha!"

Posted by: Grant_x | October 20, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

Here's the truth: Colin Powell is a wonderful endorsement and certainly would make it tougher for John McCain to advance his 3 AM Commander in Chief argument ... if he was even pretending to be making any policy arguments at this point. The real effect of this endorsement is that it will dominate the political talking heads and blogosphere for at least 24-48 hours; meaning that's 24-48 more hours that John McCain will not be driving the campaign talk. McCain already has wasted about 6 days beating the Joe the Plumber gimmick into the ground. Instead of talking about real economic plans, we got a look at Joe's background, Joe's truthfulness, the fairness/unfairness of examining Joe blahblahblah. In other words, with 3 weeks to go, trailing in the polls, McCain and his handlers have squandered a week. Keep it up guys!

Posted by: Omyobama | October 20, 2008 12:44 AM | Report abuse

Oh wow this is amazing! An endorsement form a war criminal....who could ask for anything more..Maybe an endorsement from a home based unrepentant terrorist. Yeah thats the ticket! I can't wait for Obama to get his ass kicked when he gets into a room with Putin. Obama.... Jimmy Carters second term! The good news for Obama is that he will get to blame it on Bush for at least 2 1/2 may be 3 years before the public gets wise to his stupidity. Oh well buy gold that sholuld tide you over.

Posted by: stephen3 | October 20, 2008 12:44 AM | Report abuse

ngeisler,

I know. I am jealous. We could do a lot better, and the 50% (the un-American GOP) hurts us tremendously.

Stop rubbing it in, OK?

Posted by: Grant_x | October 20, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

As much as I welcome Colin Powell eloquent and detailed summary of why he will be voting for Barack Obama, I think the real ground-shaker in his statement on Meet the Press was his equally eloquent and detailed indictment of what the Republican Party has become.

Sensible conservatives have had their Grand Old Party hi-jacked by the Christian Taliban. They should be concerned for the foreseeable future in which these agents of intolerance will shrink to their hardest core, further alienating moderate-minded, truth-loving Americans. They should be concerned that their party is now being led by Sarah Palin, whom Americans in general had never even heard of prior to seven weeks ago; that John McCain, in his all-too-typically reckless manner, elevated this embarrassment to intelligent thought to be his successor; that their rallies have unleashed a tone of irrational anger that is unbecoming a major American political party.

Americans have nothing to fear: Barack Obama will be our 44th President. However, Republicans have much to fear: their party is, before our very eyes, breaking apart.

Posted by: terry1960 | October 20, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Powell, and good, honest, true words about the Muslim patriot who died for our country and is rightfully buried at Arlington. Any of you who question whether he's a patriot are welcome to put on a uniform and go to Iraq or Afghanistan to prove yourself.

Obama IS working to include all Americans in America. Palin, on the other hand, is distinguishing between the "American" and "unamerican" parts of the country. As Sarah Vowell, the author and comedian, recently said, "The East Coast was American enough for al Qaeda on 9/11, so maybe it should be for them [the McCain/Palin crowd], too."

Posted by: treetopflyer | October 20, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

"I don't doubt that many Democrats will suddenly embrace Mr. Powell now that he's made this endorsement, but whether he picks the right or wrong candidate, he'll never be able to walk away from his role as No. 1 shill for the Bush Administration's illegal and immoral war.

His credibility was zero yesterday and it's still zero today"

Precisselly and well stated! Colin Powell is by any measure a War criminal even more so because he knew better and had more information that he knew to be false.

Posted by: stephen3 | October 20, 2008 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Howard9
"Stunning endorsement. I have only one thing to add. In watching Meet The Press again this evening, I was able to savor the genuine and sheer truthfullness of Powell's thoughtful endorsement."

Yeah I remember when somany said the same thing about this war criminal when he set inmotion the fraud for invading Iraq that would permit the killing/murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent people who were in the cross hairs of the lieas of Bush and his cronies including Powell. If he had been a man of honor he would have stood up at the UN and said this is a bunch of crap and I resign. But he didn't. He is a fraud a coward and a liar....perfect company for Obama! Oh and by the way I was prepared to vote for Powell for presidnet when it was being bantied about that he might run. But of course he was just trying to sell a book and now he is just rying to sell the new and improved Colin Powell. You people are really amazing. This is the man who went to the UN and lied for Bush and you are embracing him. Pathetic!

Posted by: stephen3 | October 20, 2008 1:11 AM | Report abuse

Captain America there belongs to a nearly extinct brand of realist conservative Republicans who understood the world and the limitations and consequences of exercising power. The first President Bush was one, and Dick Cheney used to be one. Now the Republican party belongs to the proudly ignorant and maniacal neocons, and it's no wonder Colin Powell, who tried to be a moderating influence on GW Bush and instead lost his reputation by associating with him, is finally stepping in front of the train and telling it to stop.

Posted by: light_bearer | October 20, 2008 1:52 AM | Report abuse

"It is deeply disturbing to me that a man who is running for President of the United States can sit inside a church for 20 years and listen to anti-American speeches by his Pastor and only denounce that Pastor when the man is running for President.
Posted by: shiver"
And the photo of McCain posing in front of a Confederate flag? And Sarah and Todd going to meetings of an organization which hates the American government?
Real life isn't as black and white as you seem to think it is ... sometimes people we love believe stupid things, sometimes people we respect(ed), change.

Posted by: aliden1 | October 20, 2008 2:01 AM | Report abuse

http://www.kxmc.com/News/Nation/287374.asp
CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN????
Let's see if BIG MEDIA will report this.

Apparently, on Obama’s released tax records, he discloses income from speaking fees. The problem? Accepting payment for speaking fees when you’re a legislator is against Illinois state law

Just to sum up, the media can find Joe the Plumber’s tax woes within 24 hours of his having dared to question The One’s narrative, but they can’t find a clear ethical violation in the released records of a man who has been campaigning for President for two years now

Another truth-telling moment brought to you by our fair and objective news media

Posted by: TexasTeaParty | October 20, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

Powell backing OBAMA?
This is not a surprise... what surprising is how you try to downplay the aspect that there is more of a racial component than an ideological one..... how many WHITE, extremely left leaning into the socialist realm POLITICIANS that would cut his military to nuggets has Mr. Powell endorsed before.....


....waiting

Meanwhile, we have no idea how he Barack Obama is...
but when we do, ALL you BARACK followers will look like the JIM JONES Kool-aid drinkers that you are.


...waiting

Posted by: TexasTeaParty | October 20, 2008 2:11 AM | Report abuse

Very good speech. A number of solid points, and I especially appreciated Powell's assertion of something that has been shamefully neglected by the media: The implicit demonization of Muslims, which is neither fair nor helpful.

The Republicans have taken Rovian, win-at-any-cost, slash-and-burn politics to a new low - and it has cost them one of their finest spokepeople. I can only hope that a stunning defeat in November will force the Republicans to take a look in the mirror and return to the GOP that we once knew.

Posted by: PaulG2 | October 20, 2008 2:15 AM | Report abuse

http://www.kxmc.com/News/Nation/287374.asp

CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN????
Let's see if BIG MEDIA will report this.

....waiting

... slurp, slurp.


PS - Tim McVeigh = William Ayers = Barack Obama

Posted by: TexasTeaParty | October 20, 2008 2:17 AM | Report abuse


The Limbaughs of the US are extremely unhappy with Gen. Powell! They feel he is a threat to their grip on the GOP. The welfare of the Limbaughs is not synonymous with the welfare of GOP.

Gen. Powell remarks are infusion of new blood and life into the GOP. Not only that, it is an infusion of life into current thinking and discourse current in the US.

Gen. Powell is to be commended for his timely remarks and support for that which is good in the US.

Indeed, his remarks have the weight of the Powell doctrine.

Demonizing the Other citizen(s) is UnAmerican.

Posted by: wrock76taolcom | October 20, 2008 2:56 AM | Report abuse

"Meanwhile, we have no idea how he Barack Obama is...
but when we do, ALL you BARACK followers will look like the JIM JONES Kool-aid drinkers that you are."

--------

The Cons beverage of choice is always vitriol.

We've had eight years of a Republican POTUS and between 2002 and 2006 his party controlled both houses of Congress (and they had the Senate by more than the 1 vote majority that Democrats have it today). Yet when you listen to these guys they act like they are the ones out of power. Then they blame Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and the Democrats who have only had a real majority in Congress since 1/2007 for all the nation's problem.

And please don't act ridiculous and start criticizing President Obama after only three months in office. It's going to take awhile to undo GWB's damage.

Posted by: CynthiaD1 | October 20, 2008 3:36 AM | Report abuse

Yonkers, New York
20 October 2008

In endorsing Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in "Meet the Press" yesterday, Colin Powell took pains to carefully explain the reasons--all cogent and valid--on why he chooses Mr. Obama over John McCain whom he considers his friend for some 25 years.

The reasons he gave are precisely virtually the same reasons millions of Americans--including Republicans like Colin Powell and Independents--will vote for Barack Obama come November 4th.

But even only one very weighty reason would be sufficient for John McCain to be denied the vote on November 4th--and that is his rash, reckless, precipitate, inpetuous and impulsive choice of Sarah Palin his running mate.

Asked what his basis was for picking Palin for such a position which is only a "heartbeat away from the presidency," McCain flippantly said that he relied on his "gut feeling."

Gut feeling?

Is this the way a President John McCain would make all those momentous and danger-fraught judgments and decisions if the American people make the terrible mistake of voting for him on November 4th--on "gut feeling."

Can we trust a man who relies on "gut feeling" with the Nuclear Button and with the Nuclear Codes?

I don't think so.

Mariano Patalinjug
MarPatalinjug@aol.com

Posted by: MPatalinjug | October 20, 2008 5:09 AM | Report abuse

Ngeisler, I blame socialist policies for the current banking mess because that is what is at fault. Don’t believe the talking points coming from the left. I was involved in the industry. Do you really believe a bank that is in the business to make money will loan money to a person they know can’t pay it back, or better yet make a 0% down loan to a person with bad credit? The answer is of course not. Now you have to ask why they did it? Look to Fanny and Freddie for your answer to that question then look to see the members of which party was running them also look to see which party expanded then and lastly which individuals received the most money from them in donations. It’s all smoke and mirrors put up by the liberals. If you ever wonder what they’re doing just listen to what they are blaming others for.

Posted by: Batgeek | October 20, 2008 5:34 AM | Report abuse

"It is deeply disturbing to me that a man who is running for President of the United States can sit inside a church for 20 years and listen to anti-American speeches by his Pastor and only denounce that Pastor when the man is running for President."
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@Spoken like a true bigot. Sunday morning is the most segregated time in America. I am certain you did not attend Trinity United. So it puzzles me how you have come to the conclusion that the Pastor spoke like this for 20 yrs. To date there is a 30 second loop of Wright rants. You cant say he did an entire sermon like this, if so where is it. Rev Wright has a near 40 yr history of recorded sermons and because you see a 30 second clip the Pastor and former marine is now the anti-christ.

Posted by: CondiRice | October 20, 2008 5:34 AM | Report abuse

part12 wrote What's the point? Powell would have be velified if not lynched by the Black Community had he endorsed McCain. His tarnished record with UN would not have helped either. Now he can sleep peacefully. That is if the RNC would not take revenge and dig up some dirt.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
The point is Powell is not and never will be a Black leader. He is an American leader. He could care less of the Black community vilification of him. What Powell does is done in the country best interests

Posted by: CondiRice | October 20, 2008 5:46 AM | Report abuse

I love reading bitter neo-con whining in the morning. It makes my morning cup of coffee that much tastier.

Posted by: CHICO13 | October 20, 2008 6:47 AM | Report abuse

HHHMMMM? Maybe McCain should of choosen Powel as his running mate?

Posted by: kparc | October 20, 2008 7:09 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA'S DISASTROUS PLAN: DRIVER'S LICENSES for ILLEGALS

Obama wants to give a driver's license to any illegal alien who wants one. The 9/11 plot depended on such licenses.

Nineteen terrorists infiltrate the U.S.

Thirteen get driver’s licenses.

The 9/11 plot depended on easy to get licenses.

Obama’s plan gives a license to any illegal who wants one.

A license they can use to get government benefits, a mortgage, board a plane, even illegally vote.

Go to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbyocX-9_mo

Posted by: sagereader | October 20, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

McCAIN HAS FOUR SECRETARIES of STATE ENDORSEMENTS

John McCain said, “I’m also very pleased to have the endorsement of four former secretaries of state, Secretaries Henry Kissinger, James Baker, Larry Eagleburger and Alexander Haig. And I’m proud to have the endorsement of well over 200 retired Army generals and admirals.”

Posted by: sagereader | October 20, 2008 7:50 AM | Report abuse

I lost some respect for Powell when he spoke to the UN about our need to go war with Iraq; he got it back, however, with his clear, concise and intelligent analysis of why he supports Obama over McCain. He voiced my reasons for supporting Obama far better than I ever could.

Posted by: Bendal | October 20, 2008 8:05 AM | Report abuse

Responding to Batgeek:

"Ngeisler, I blame socialist policies for the current banking mess because that is what is at fault. Don’t believe the talking points coming from the left. I was involved in the industry. Do you really believe a bank that is in the business to make money will loan money to a person they know can’t pay it back, or better yet make a 0% down loan to a person with bad credit? The answer is of course not. Now you have to ask why they did it? Look to Fanny and Freddie for your answer to that question then look to see the members of which party was running them also look to see which party expanded then and lastly which individuals received the most money from them in donations. It’s all smoke and mirrors put up by the liberals. If you ever wonder what they’re doing just listen to what they are blaming others for.

Posted by: Batgeek | October 20, 2008 5:34 AM "

Batgeek, when you say you worked in the industry, are you talking about the Banking industry or something else?

There is no law that mandated loans be made out to people who couldn't afford them, plain and simple. The greed of certain banks and certain mortgage companies creating over-valued pieces of crap paper got us in this mess.

There are banks that did the right thing according to the fair lending laws and they have no problems today, case in point read up on Wells Fargo.

Maybe you can point out the particular clause in the laws that force the banks to lend to people who couldn't afford them. I haven't seen it yet and I've been involved in both banking and mortgage industries.

Posted by: TraderX | October 20, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

coder85173 posted a comment which he entitled "McCain, Hero or Traitor?" and in which he states that it is his understanding that POWs were to give only their name, rank, and service number. Anything more is, according to coder85173, "aiding and abetting the enemy...." which means to do so is to be considered as treason.

coder85173 seems to be parroting some of the all too frequent poltical hatchet nonsense which is filling these comment areas with this sort of garbage. Something that the training given regarding the Code of Conduct makes clear is that every person has a breaking point. The point is to resist and delay making any statements as long as you can. We seem to have forgotten just how ruthless the North Vietnamese were. Virtually each and every one of the POWs that were held for any length of time and then released made confessions of some sort to the North Vietnamese. To label McCain and the others as "traitors" or "collaborators" is utter nonsense.

Let me make it crystal clear that I am not a supporter of the McCain campaign. Indeed, I cannot imagine voting for the McCain-Palin ticket under any circumstances, but the comments made by coder85173 are so completely idiotic that I must take exception to them.

Whatever John McCain might be, collaborator or traitor are certainly not among them.

Read this for a better issue to pursue regarding McCain and the POW experience: http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=00293

Posted by: cappshd | October 20, 2008 8:16 AM | Report abuse

Is this the same Colin Powell that not so long ago was referred to as “Old Step and Fetch” by some other prominent African Americans? Is this the same Colin Powell that made that wonderfully ethical presentation to the United Nations? Is it possible that Colin Powell, now that he is certain that Obama will win election is…sucking up?

Posted by: Provincial | October 20, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Maybe Powell like the rest of us has realized that the differences between McCarthy and McCain are becoming less by the second.

A campaign being waged on hate and fear is not what I or many other Americans want right now, and yes I am an independent white male voter from the Midwest. McCain is quickly turning me into not only an Obama voter but an Obama supporter.

I can already see a McCain society in which anyone accused of being a "socialist" is black listed and a "liberal" media that asks tough questions of its leaders is shut down.

Posted by: Southeasterner | October 20, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

"How come nobody has asked Obama how he could let this Pastor into his private life?

Posted by: shiver | October 19, 2008 7:53 PM"

Where have you been? Did you miss the whole speech on race that Obama gave in the primaries? Did you not watch the news during the primaries? Did you not read the newspaper during the primaries? Where have you been?

Posted by: MMDE | October 20, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

"Hamas, Castro and all our enemies...and now and AMERICAN GENERAL! Good move Powell!

I guess you AGREE that OUR MILITARY "raids villages and KILLS CIVILIANS."

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 19, 2008 7:31 PM"

Like Peggy Noonan wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

“In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics.”

Texan2007, your statements are vulgar!

Posted by: m1kem1lls | October 20, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

I watched Pat Bucanhan and he appeared to be one step away from losing it while discussing the Powell endorsement. He implied that Powell was given the positions over more qualified people and how dare he go against the Republican party. Powell gave very deep reasons for why he made such a decision. Pat Bucanhan and the rest of the Republicans may not like it but Powell was right!

Posted by: jhop1104 | October 20, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Powell's endorsement is an obvious (to the thinking "elite" at least)indictment of the common man mentality as it relates to governing. With that, I'm wondering if Secret Service protection will now be afforded to the General. In any event, he should now steer clear of Palin rallies, Bubba diners in Alabama, NASCAR events, NRA conventions, AIG gatherings in posh hotels, and barber shops in Amite, Mississippi where white guys wearing coveralls and John Deere caps gather.

Posted by: hyjanks | October 20, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Of the many dubious claims made by both campaigns, and their subsequent responses by the opposing campaign and analysis by the media, the one I have found very interesting is the insinuation by the Mr. McCain's campaign that Mr. Obama is a Muslim. I understand why the focus has been on clarifying that Mr. Obama is indeed a Christian, but have been troubled by the fact that not many have questioned in the same breath as to why it should matter.

I commend Mr. Powell for pointing out the import of this subject, and articulating it so eloquently.

He is indeed a great American leader. We are a better nation with him in our leadership.

Posted by: swami1 | October 20, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Powell gave the most powerful critique of the current GOP and the McCain campaign. He is, indeed, the conscience of the GOP.

Posted by: ChrisL1 | October 20, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

John McCain's campaign has been targeted to the "base" of the Republican party, but it's also sent another message: "Hey, all you moderates, and fiscal conservatives who aren't totally on board with the whole culture war thing? Get out!"

I've received that message loud and clear, and it looks like General Powell has as well. He so perfectly expressed some of what I've been thinking as I've watched these campaigns that it's almost uncanny. I'm reserving judgment on whether or not Obama is a "transformational figure", because I think the jury's still out on that, but everything else he said, I have no reservations about agreeing with.

He's just reminded me of not only why I was planning to vote for Senator Obama, but why I've always respected General Powell.

It's time for some tough love for the Republican party. Make it go on a Time Out, and sit in the corner for a while and think about what it's done. Maybe in a few years it can start to act like a grownup party again.

Posted by: LMinOH | October 20, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

I would like to find out how many white liberal, anty war individuals Mr. Powel has endorsed in the past?

Posted by: Plehan | October 20, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Look at all these weepy pro-Obama comments.

I know I will only get attacks but lets try anyway. Can anyone point to ONE THING in Obama's resume that shows his ability to change the world or actually just get any one major initiative accomplished?

Powell mentioned Palin's inexperience but again what is Obama's? He writes books about his favorite subject but no legislation. The legislation he sponsored as a state senator was written for him by the Democrat machine. As an "expert in constitutional law" he authored no books or papers on the subject. He was the only editor of the Law Review to never offer any of his own opinions. But about himself, he is prolific!

Posted by: mgochs | October 20, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

"Do you really believe a bank that is in the business to make money will loan money to a person they know can’t pay it back, or better yet make a 0% down loan to a person with bad credit? The answer is of course not. Now you have to ask why they did it?"

The banks who gave the mortgages had no incentive to care if it would be paid back or not, because by that time they would no longer own the mortgage. It would have been sold and bundled with others into a mortgage-backed security.

Why did they do it? Because there was a very high demand among institutional investors for safe investments (as these securities were supposed to be, thanks credit rating agencies) that would give a higher rate of return than the historically low returns they'd get from things like Treasury bonds (thanks, Fed interest rate cut--I understand there were reasons to do it, I'm just saying.)

Each investment banks naturally wanted to be the one to supply this demand. And if you're going to make a mortgage backed security or one of its derivative products, you need a bunch of mortgages to base it on.

So you had a confluence of demand. People wanted to buy houses, and the investment banks wanted to buy mortgages. Mortgage brokers and mortgage-giving banks were right in the middle, satisfying the demand on both sides. And making plenty of money on it regardless of what happened to the actual mortgage--at least in the short term. No one had an interest in making sure that the mortgages were safe--except for the final buyers, the investment banks and/or their customers, and they thought they knew that the securities were low-risk even if they were made of high-risk mortgages.

Fannie and Freddie played their part, but to assign them the sole blame is beyond simplistic.

Posted by: LMinOH | October 20, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

"Hey DemocracyRules, The Secretary of State cannot authorize a war." theodosia1

According to article one section eight of the constitution and the war powers resolution of 1973 the president can't authorize or make a formal declaration or war.

Authorization of the Use of Military Force is that the Iraq War was voted on my congress which basically gives the president the green light to use force when he sees fit on a certain matter. People like Joe Biden voted for it and said later that he didn't think the president would use it, which if you ask me is a bunch of crap he knew that war was coming and used the AUMF as a way to politic around it same as John Kerry.

Coming back to the matter of Powell, he was one of the front runners in the charge to invade Iraq.. It could be speculated that without Powell and his credibility among both parties there may have been no Iraq war. His was a great influence on that matter.

I think that was DemocracyRules point and not that he was the one that authorize the war, He was a strong lobbyist for it

Posted by: mavric1919 | October 20, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Powell doctrine, my foot!

Was there any doubt in anyone's mind where Powell's sympathies were, all this while? If he hasn't made the public announcement, it once again shows his ultra-cautious, weak-kneed approach, which doesn't allow him to take a bold stand until after that it becomes totally safe. He didn't have to wait until twenty days before the election to make this anouncement, but he sure didn't want take a channce on a possible McCain surge. Now that he is sure, he comes out with his 'seven-minute torrent of clear, concise and blunt language'.

The celebrated general is nothing but an opportunist, who didn't have an ideological preference until he secured a cabinet appointment, and married into the republican party. Now that it suits him, he is seeking a divorce, again to preserve his chances with a potential change in administration.

If he called McCain's handling of the economical crisis as 'unsure', how would he characterize Obama's 'non-handling' of it?

On the selection of Sarah Palin, how does he know she is not ready to be president? By whatever standard that decision is arrived at, would it apply to barack Obama? A strategic and tactical win of the nomination is not a sufficient condition for being a president.

On the Obama-Ayers connection, is the general giving a 'pardon' for the radical professor?

He did make one rational, perceptive argument for Obama, that Obama himself could not see himself. When his religious connection was questioned, Obama protested that he is not a Muslim, that he is a Christian. When Sen. Clinton said that Obama is a Christian, as far as she knows (what else she could do?), she was excoriated by the Obama's campaign for her qualified statement. never did Obama proffer the argument - so what? This, Colin Powell did.

His assertion that the Republican party has moved more to the right is laughable. Where was the party when he was serving as the 'house slave'? Does he mean to say that a McCain is to the right of the Stupid President and his Evil Veep that he 'served'?

How the hell does he characterize Obama already as a 'Successful President', an 'Exceptional President'? This is sucking up to the max. Whatever affected Chris Matthews seems to have worked in spades with Powell.

Joe 'the reporter' Capehart seems to be overwhelmingly taken up by Powell's endorsement of Obama. Blood is thicker than water, in this Ménage à trois.

This is the Powell Doctrine: Don't take a stand until you are virtually certain there won't be any downside to it. The general is a coward.

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

How come nobody has asked Obama how he could let this Pastor into his private life? - Posted by: shiver

Well, some did. But mostly the media gave him a pass on that. Because, the Obaminas successfully established the rule that to be critical of him is to be racist.

Those that didn't feel a tingle up their leg felt a chill in their spine. And kept quiet.

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Once again, I have to ask, how many liberals shudder at the thought of two more liberals being added to the Supreme Court? Yet, Colin Powell, a Republican, thinks adding two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court is disastrous for our nation. This endorsement is fishy. I think this is revenge. His reasoning is suspect. Bush 43's tactics never turned his stomach this much. But now he's a saint?

Posted by: forgetthis | October 20, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Colin Powell makes an IDIOT decision__


Colin Powell Joins Hamas and Iran in Endorsing Barack Obama for President


Iran and Hamas struck huge blows against McCain's presidential hopes when they officially endorsed Obama for president. Now, Colin Powell joins them. Colin Powell officially endorsed Barack Obama for president of the United States. Listen closely, dear comrades, to what Colin Powell said during his press conference. Colin Powell perfectly followed the scriptthat the Obama campaign gave him as he hit all the Obama campaign's talking points. Powell pointed out how that John McCain called Obama a Muslim, Obama is a Socialist in the good way, and he even begged Republicans to stop talking about Obama's ties to Ayers because Americans aren't stupid enough to over look that much of Obama's circle of friends. The man who said Dick Cheney would be a supurb vice president is now saying that Obama will be a superb president. Powell has seen the light. He is right, this time.

All in all, Colin Powell expressed a keen understanding of the events surrounding this election like all us liberals who believe everything that comes from the main stream media. Colin Powell supports closing Gitmo, burning the American flag, and now, he wants Obama to be president.

I'm starting to like this Republican baby killer who raided villages and terrorized women and children in Iraq back during the 1st Gulf war. Wait a minute! What am I thinking? I will like him until we liberals have no more use for him. Just like Cindy Sheehan, John McCain, and Michael Moore, we will dump this guy too once the election is over.

How long before Colin Powell marches with Obama supporters in a pro-partial birth abortion, anti-war, Hamas supporting, flag burning, pro-Socialism parade? That's the crowd he is supporting now. That's my crowd. That's Obama's crowd. Now, it's Powell's crowd, too.

Posted by: Volubrjotr | October 20, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

A key point I think many are missing here is that much of the conservative endorsement of Brother Neo is ultimately predicated on the quality of the Republican Party's ticket rather than on the ideology.

The stage is being set to blame the 2008 defeat on the economy and Honest John's erratic behavior.

Instead of where it belongs - on the delusional ideology.

Some of this may be dread of breaking with the faith of one's fathers (however deformed it may be today). Some may be positioning for the battle for the soul (I use that term loosely in this context) of the Republican Party post the election. And some may be expedient protection of one's credibility and "job security" by acknowledging even grudgingly reality at least once in the past eight years.

Posted by: R49Thomas | October 20, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Yes, McCain was a Vietnam POW, but he was no hero. He turned collaborator with the enemy and became a traitor not only to his country, but all those brave American service men who did die and who did resist. He is both coward and traitor. No hero.

Posted by: coder85173 | October 19, 2008 10:39 PM

________________________

I need to say something about this. While I am a supporter of Obama, I have a great deal of respect for Sen. McCain. First, while he did give a statement after much torture to the Vietnamese while he was a POW, it was given to protect his fellow prisoners. McCain's captors actually threatened more harm to his comrades if he didn't give a statement. Furthermore, what value did his statement actually have? From what I understand, much of what he said in his statement was demonstrably false or ridiculous and incomprehensible. By all accounts, Sen. McCain showed incredible bravery while held captive. All credible reports suggest that his fellow POWs felt that he truly kept the faith with them and with the country.

This type of attack on Sen. McCain is exactly the type of discourse that creates the poisonous political climate that we find ourselves in, the kind of climate that Sen. Obama has said he is fighting against. I support Sen. Obama because I agree with his policies and because I think that he is most likely to end this kind of politics. I have great respect for Sen. McCain both for his service in uniform and in the Senate. I truly think that he has the best interest of the country at heart. However, I think that he has run a bad campaign and his campaign has arguably engaged in some underhanded campaigning. But I am not voting for him, not because of how his campaign has been run, but because I disagree with his policies and because I think Obama has a better plan for the country.

But in no way does this campaign make me think any less of McCain's service to this country. I think both sides need to take a step back and remember that both candidates are patriots and are running because they want to do what is best for the United States of America.

Posted by: DM_Inf | October 20, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

You forgot one:

On WMD: Well I lied to the UN and knew I was lying and even though Sen. Obama called Iraq "a dumb war" based on lies, noone should pay any attention to that now.

Posted by: soupcity | October 20, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

GEN Powell's endorsement was at least as multi-faceted as this campaign has proven to be. He hit the Republican party for having so visibly and outrageously lost their way.

No longer the seat of "less government" (forced upon them by their own lack of self discipline in the last eight years), or of states' rights (abortion, marriage...), they have replaced those tenets with vitriol, divisiveness among arbitrary or incidental factions throughout the nation ("exurbs," racial, use of code-words such as "classes," "pro-American (vs just what?)), and an outright, bold straying from discussion of key issues while engaging in rather nonsensical personal attacks against their Democratic rivals.

The most transparent but apparently favorite campaign tactic has been "projection" of their behaviors and attitudes onto their rivals: Whatever they find themselves doing on the negative or sleazy side, they immediately accuse their rivals of doing. Their hope is that if the rivals strike back, it will be too late in the public's mind---the Democrats will have been tainted by the first, inaccurate characterization. We've seen it time and again.

I don't want to see _this_ kind of "Republican" politics, or individual, ever again. Neither does the world, not even our enemies. To our enemies, in fact, the McCain-Palin playbook could not have served them better in pointing our why the world should fear the U.S. Everyone would rather have us co-exisit, in an interdependent world.

Posted by: rdepontb1 | October 20, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

One more thing, it seems there are a lot of people attacking Gen. Powell for a lot of things. They attack him as a "war criminal" and call him a liar and use that to impugn his endorsement of Obama. How does that logically track, exactly? He is a liar because he argued for the invasion of Iraq, supporting the president for whom he worked, a war that republicans seem to support, a war that Obama would like to end, and so Powell's endorsement of Obama is thus somehow suspect? Is it that clear cut? So was the war a good thing or a bad thing? Is it right for Obama to want to end it or does that make him somehow less than McCain?

Or could it be that Gen. Powell is actually a thoughtful man who after meeting with both candidates and watching their respective campaigns and investigating their respective policies came to the conclusion that Sen. Obama was the better man to lead the country? No, probably not. It must be that Gen. Powell is a liar and a war criminal and a racist. I am sure that is the most likely conclusion.

So if someone doesn't agree with you, he must be evil, is that it? No wonder we are in such a bad state...

Posted by: DM_Inf | October 20, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Fannie and Freddie played their part, but to assign them the sole blame is beyond simplistic.
Posted by: LMinOH | October 20, 2008 10:33 AM
Agreed, and I earlier attempted to post and explanation of the causes, but since it took up two pages I guess it got thrown out. The gist of my post was that initiating socialist programs into our form of government creates fertile ground for corruption and expensive bureaucracy. Fannie and Freddy were not the sole cause of the problem, but just one of the many instruments of the socialist policies, which were the true cause. These policies are the ones that created the market and gave value to these over valued mortgage securities.

The ways our government and markets are set up are not conducive to socialist policies. Legally the government cannot act directly to enact many of these policies. The founding fathers set it up this way intentionally as they did not believe in a powerful federal government. To enact socialist policies involves going through many doors and a lot of red tape. That is why everything the government does is so expensive. The only way to cut down the costs of these programs would be to abandon the Constitution, take away the rights of the states, and the people, and placing all governing power in the hands of the federal government.
Socialist policies become fertile ground for corruption to grow in our current system. Just look at every socialist program we have in this country for proof of this. Now we have a candidate in Obama who wants to grow and expand these programs even more. That’s why McCain calls Obama the change we can’t afford. He will either bankrupt this country or have to destroy the ideals it was built on to enact his agenda. Powell was foolish to give his endorsement to Obama.

Posted by: Batgeek | October 20, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

"But in no way does this campaign make me think any less of McCain's service to this country. I think both sides need to take a step back and remember that both candidates are patriots and are running because they want to do what is best for the United States of America."

This was very nicely said. Thanks for saying it.

You also made me realize that in my own comment, I focused completely on what I felt John McCain's campaign had done wrong, and not at all on any positive reasons to support Obama. That was a disservice to Obama, I think.

If I signed on to the Reagan Revolution--and I did, at least to a certain extent--that doesn't mean that I thought those principles were the eternal and only answer to any economic conditions ever. That was in 1980, and if I still think he was right about (at least some of) what was wrong with the country then, it doesn't follow that I think he'd be right to do the same things in 2008. And the Republican party has strayed pretty far from some of those principles anyway.

But there I go again with being negative about the Republicans instead of positive about Obama. The main reasons I'll be voting for him are the things he's said, in debates, books, and speeches. Doubtless the more conservative conservatives will scoff at this, and come out with something about "actions speak louder than words" and "the most liberal person in the Senate." But at this point, I don't even know that their definition of "most liberal" has anything to do with what my own would be. It certainly doesn't seem to. If messing around with the marginal tax rates is "socialist", then all bets are off anyway.

He does seem to at least want to move past some of this divisiveness. Both parties have their bad influences, but Obama's role has been to mitigate the worst influences on his party, while McCain's has been to encourage the worst influences on his.

Posted by: LMinOH | October 20, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Apparently the general's strategic and tactical senses are still sharp--the timing of this announcement was chosen with the precision of a cruise missile to land on the calendar where it would do the most destruction to McCain's chances. We'll see whether it carried a big enough warhead to silence the barrage of illiterate babble which fanatics and racists have thrown up across all the blogs to defend their candidate's position...

Posted by: razzl | October 20, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Mr Capehart for your excellent summary of General Powell's endorsement of Sen. Obama.

Thank you General Powell for your leadership. You are an example to the generations who are coming behind us of how we can disagree without tearing each other down with attacks on a person's character.

May this generation celebrate the diversity that is America, come together and edure the challenges we face as one nation under God. This is my prayer for America.

Our Children are watching and learning from how we deal with the challenges we face in our Nation today. Let's leave them a great legacy.

Posted by: tamInDC | October 20, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

rdepontb1 - No longer the seat of "less government" (forced upon them by their own lack of self discipline in the last eight years), or of states' rights (abortion, marriage...), ....

OK. So he finds the Republican party ditched those values. So he switches his support to the Democratic party nominee! Why? Is the nominee or the party subscribe to “less government”, “states’ rights”? No. on those scores, they should be less palatable to the general than his beloved republican party. So what’s the logic?

I know: Expediency. The general is looking for relevancy, and perhaps a plum diplomatic post.

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

isnt it a little late in the game for a belated endorsement.

this guy, Powell, destroyed his own credibility before the United Nations.

i dont believe a word he says.............

Posted by: kennytal | October 20, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

So, does this mean the elite media and Hollywood are no longer going to be calling Colin Powell "Uncle Tom"?

Posted by: cadeck | October 20, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

It is interesting that Powell believes that the Republican Party of 2008 has gone too far to the right. I tend to think that they're less extreme now than they were back in 2003, when they had huge amounts of (apparent) public support.

So yesterday's Powell 'Profile in Courage' consists of:
2002-2004 - When Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are busy shredding both International Law and the US Constitution, say nothing.

2004 - A capable and respected war hero who would have pulled us back from the insanity is nominated by the Democrats. Continue to say nothing. (Close election, Kerry could've really used the help... note that every single one of Powell's reasons on Meet the Press yesterday applied even more strongly in 04. Powell's lack of conscience then makes him a silent partner to the swiftboaters.)

2004 - Resign from your own trainwreck of an administration immediately after the election. Continue saying nothing.

2008 - With the election two weeks away and the Democrat looking to get 350 electoral votes or more, get a public attack of conscience just in time to hitch your wagon to a winner!

I'm floored that people still think of Powell as a man of courage. Tell me one time he's been courageous. Name once when he's done the right thing.

Posted by: factota | October 20, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

redemption at last for selling out to the crazed republican warmongers and for forcing powell to lie to us and the world.

hopefully, this won't happen again...

Posted by: glenknowles | October 20, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

DEAR COLIN POWELL,
AS MARTIN LUTHER KING SAID, YOU SHOULD NOT JUDGE A MAN BY THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN
BUT BY THE CONTENT OF HIS CHARACTER
Posted by: DemocracyRules | October 19, 2008 8:21 PM
____________________________________
So, in judging Barack Obama for serving on education reform boards in Chicago with Wm. Ayers and many other prominent republicans/democrats, I guess you would also feel outraged about a candidate who cheated on his disabled wife; divorced her to marry a much-younger heiress; was implicated in the Keating 5/Savings & Loan ethics violations; and "pals around" with G. Gordon Liddy, a criminal from the Watergate days, Pat Hagee (a freak preacher who said 9/11 was caused by gay people, among other atrocious comments); and has a lobbyist on his transition team who did work related to Saddam Hussein? That candidate would be John McCain. Nope, I'm guessin' you don't care about those little infractions because the judgment only goes in one direction to justify your deep discomfort with Barack Obama's race, class/accomplishments in life, and political views. As Colin Powell said, Barack Obama has explained his interactions with Ayers, they are casual at best, and the MSM isn't doing more digging because the story is OLD NEWS and has already been told. Grow up.

Posted by: bethechange1 | October 20, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

although mystery surrounds why general powell didn't resign as secretary of state or how he was hoodwinked by false intelligence, one can only admire his lifetime experience and intelligence. he can be easily compared to another statesman/soldier, general george marshall - perhaps one of our greatest patriots.

it's likely, if obama becomes president, colin powell will be asked to join his cabinet. he could become a superb ambassador at large or better yet, secretary of the army...america would benefit from his public service.

alan reubel

Posted by: areubel | October 20, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

I'm floored that people still think of Powell as a man of courage. Tell me one time he's been courageous. Name once when he's done the right thing. - Posted by: factota

I couldn't have said it better. I tried.

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

An endoresemnt by Collin Powel for Obama helps McCain more than Obama. Let us not forget it was Collin Powel who stood before the UN and told us all about the evidence for Weapons of Mass Destruction i n Iraq. In short he towed the his administration;s line even though personally he had serious doubts about the existence of the weapons. Rather than break with his party when the country needed him to do so, he lied to the American voters. Now when he thinks he can obtain another cabinet post he tells us to support Obama. I beleved him then about the weapons and mass destruction and I was lied to by Mr. Powell. I won't beleive him again. I am votong for McCain..

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | October 20, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Powell - Defense.
Richardson - State.
Reich - Treasury.
Whitman - Interior.
Clinton - Labor.

Posted by: jennandgus | October 20, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

An endoresemnt by Collin Powel for Obama helps McCain more than Obama. Let us not forget it was Collin Powel who stood before the UN and told us all about the evidence for Weapons of Mass Destruction i n Iraq. In short he towed the his administration;s line even though personally he had serious doubts about the existence of the weapons. Rather than break with his party when the country needed him to do so, he lied to the American voters. Now when he thinks he can obtain another cabinet post he tells us to support Obama. I beleved him then about the weapons and mass destruction and I was lied to by Mr. Powell. I won't beleive him again. I am votong for McCain..

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | October 20, 2008 12:49 PM
============================
Vote for who you like but to malaign a great man for doing what any, any good soldier would do is ignorant.

You must remember that Powell is a soldier and as such will obey the command of the commander in chief. Which is what he did. You would have been more outraged if he had at the time gone against his commander and called him out for what he is. Colin Powell is not a politician; he is a soldier. When it was the right time he resigned his position without fanfare. He came quietly and left quietly.

The fact that he endorsed Obama is great. I happen to believe him when he says that he weighed and considered his decision. If Colin Powell had not be a black man would you judge his opinion any higher?

Posted by: justonevoice | October 20, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Ok, now lets see you open up your cannons (eloquence) on GWB and why you supported an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. Until then you dont get off the fence.

Posted by: mendonsa | October 20, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

An endoresemnt by Collin Powel for Obama helps McCain more than Obama. Let us not forget it was Collin Powel who stood before the UN and told us all about the evidence for Weapons of Mass Destruction i n Iraq. In short he towed the his administration;s line even though personally he had serious doubts about the existence of the weapons. Rather than break with his party when the country needed him to do so, he lied to the American voters. Now when he thinks he can obtain another cabinet post he tells us to support Obama. I beleved him then about the weapons and mass destruction and I was lied to by Mr. Powell. I won't beleive him again. I am votong for McCain..

Posted by: politicalobserver1 | October 20, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

"While I have no intentions of running for President, I will never stand by while someone preeches hateful sermons, that's because I am an American."

It appears that you are also barely literate, "shiver."

In one sentence, you made a spelling error, a comma splice, and a completely incomprehensible argument.

Posted by: kjohnson3 | October 20, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

We can all see what Powell got out of backing Obama - a spot in his cabinet.
But as I always state - EVERYONE NEEDS TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES....

Posted by: djmiller1 | October 20, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

We can all see what Powell got out of backing Obama - a spot in his cabinet.
But as I always state - EVERYONE NEEDS TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES.... - Posted by: djmiller1

My guess he is wangling for a plum diplomatic job. Lots of perks, no real responsibilities, away from the rat race, time to build his 'legacy', write a(nother) book...

London or Paris. At least Japan.

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

"On the selection of Sarah Palin, how does he know she is not ready to be president?"

Maybe by the sounds that come out when she opens her mouth?

Posted by: JoeBewildered | October 20, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Democrats will praise Powell for his wisdom and judgment. Republicans will condemn him for his betrayal. Several points are worth mentioning:

1. Powell was the architect of the "weapons of mass destruction" basis for the invasion of Iraq. Now he supports Obama. Does that mean an Obama presidency will be the Bush third term?

2. Powell had the opportunity himself to have been either a presidential nominee (1996) or on the ticket (2000) had he had the desire and willingness to do so. He did not. Now, however, he suddenly wants the US to have its first African-American president when his own "leadership" on this front has been sorely lacking.

3. Powell faults McCain for having a vice-presidential candidate who supposedly lacks sufficient experience to be president. Yet, Powell conveniently ignores the fact that Obama has no foreign policy experience and has only been on the national stage as a Senator for three years. Hmmm ... who was the last President with no foreign policy experience? George W. Bush. Once again, Powell seems to be promoting another Bush term with a political newcomer like Obama.

4. Finally, every party has its Lieberman. Powell is the GOP's.

Posted by: 1986JD | October 20, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Although I appreciate Gen. Powells statement, he has lost some credibility. If he did not agree with the Iraq invasion he should have resigned immediately instead of staying on and selling it at the U.N. He could have spared us the whole eight year debacle of the Bush years by running himself, but he chose to sit it out and accept an appointment as Sec.State which he seems to have viewed as more honorary than one requiring honor.

Melvyn Polatchek

Posted by: mpolatchek | October 20, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

"On the selection of Sarah Palin, how does he know she is not ready to be president?"

Maybe by the sounds that come out when she opens her mouth? - Posted by: JoeBewildered

Well, Powell 'knows' that Sarah Palin is not ready for President. He also 'knows' that both McCain and Obama are patriots.

Let's see.

McCain served in the Armed Forces, and was a POW. These two facts somehow are usually taken as a confirmation of one's patriotism.

What did Obama say or do to deserve similar assessment?

He worked as an activist. He sat in a church listening to the pastor invoking the wrath of the god on the nation. He gave a rational answer as to why he is not wearing a flag pin. And then when he needed it, stood dwarfed by oversized flags giving his speech on 'Race', where he blamed everybody but himself for his then lackadaisical showing in Pennsylvania.

Voila, Obama is a patriot.

Makes perfect sense.

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Can it be that race is more important than political philosophy? Powell should have helped guide the Republicans if he felt so strongly about the issues he raises. His jumping ship at this critical time exposes his motives to the worst, racist interpretations and forever casts doubts on his character. Since I have been suspicious of his loyalties for some time, I am not surprised.

Posted by: CaliforniaSpeaks | October 20, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Damn right you can’t trust Palin! What has she done except lower Alaska’s budget, cut the governor’s office expenses by more than half, and created a budget surplus in just under two years in office. Oh yeh, she also went after and took out corrupt politicians in her own party. She knows how to play the game, but can’t as of yet talk the talk. Amazing that once we judged people on their achievements and now we judge them on how entertaining they are. Comments such as he explains his plan better or seems more intelligent than so and so are thrown around as reasons to vote for Obama. Powell even used comments similar to this to explain his endorsement.

Why won’t they talk about what he’s done? Oh yeh, he hasn’t really done much except run for various political offices and other things he doesn’t want investigated. How many of you have looked at Obama’s voting record, what there is of it? How many of you have looked into what legislation he has written? Wait a minute; he has never written any legislation. With such a meager record how can any of you honestly say you know what the man stands for? One way to figure out a man’s character when there is a lack of accomplishments is to look at his associations. The people that we choose to befriend is telling of who we are. Why don’t we do that with Obama? Oh yeh, Obama has disavowed, denied, and distanced himself from everyone in his past. All the shady characters he once called friends are now strangers. Well since he’s not hanging around them anymore I guess he’s a stand up guy.

Posted by: Batgeek | October 20, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

"Obama does not know the definition of honor."

Posted by: Texan2007

He knows it better than you or McCain do. What a sorry post. Feel better now you got that immense thought off your chest?

Posted by: edwcorey | October 20, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama not only was a setback to John McCain, but it was a beloved conservative Republican's statement to the world that not only John McCain's judgment was lacking and put America's future at risk with his selection of Sarah Palin as his V.P., but that a legitimate Republican with the gravitas of Powell has publicly come out against the negativity, race baiting and fear mongering that other republicans had quietly tried to distance themselves from but hadn't had the courage to publicly say it. Powell showed the courage as any former general would by denoucing John McCain and his campaign for the increasingly disrespect and fear mongering in association to Barack Obama. This was a public indictment of John McCain and his Campaign and his views and governing style by one of McCain's closest friends.

Posted by: rmattocks | October 20, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

I am not an American therefore my views are mine alone. At best they may be reflective of how the whole Powell-Obama issue is being seen by a section of non Americans with a keen interest in the ongoing Presidential elections. I may be wrong but the tone of some of the comments posted here appear to suggest that McCain seems to be having some kind of lien on the loyalities of the US Armed Forces. And that Gen Powell appears to have breached this Holy covenant by declaring his support for the rival camp. How is support for McCain from the US military being taken as a given? Is it because he 'Has been there, done that' and is therefore more likely to be sympathetic and empathetic to their cause? While a certain soft corner for the former brothers-in- arms may be expected but it would be irrational to believe that regardless of his protestations, McCain, once(and if) elected will behave as anything but a politician with a totally different set of compulsions. The advice he gets in military and security matters will also be very important(people he surrounds himself with). Also, to assume that the entire US Military establishment will vote en-block for a particular candidate just because he is a Vietnam veteran and was captured does not speak very highly of its collective mental faculty. I refuse to believe that American soldiers will behave like sheep. Each man and woman will vote according to his conscience and independant views on the subject. As it is, there have been enough departures from the traditional and breaking of norms and patterns in these elections. (In that regard, it has been a watershed election). If the above be correct, it automatically follows that Gen Powell too has the right to follow his heart's dictates. I read a comment wherein he was made to sound like a traitor for supporting Obama. We in India think very highly of Gen Powell who apart from obvious military leadership qualities and deep strategic understanding,also comes across as a thinker and a visionary. I doubt a man of that stature will lose sleep over what McCain thinks of his "defection". Gen Powell's decision may or may not influence sections in the US military. But ultimately, any one voting for Obama will do so because he considers him to be the best of the available options and not because Powell said so. While I dont have any inclinations either way as both are good and dedicated men eminently qualified for the job but at times McCain does appear somewhat gung ho and cowboyish, who would have been more suitable as President during the Cuban missile crisis or during the height of the Cold War but is somewhat jaded and obsolete now. Any way, I have no expectations from Sarah Palin despite her ambitions except as a light hearted and non-serious person. Biden on the other hand is a totally different kettle of fish.He is realpolitiks personified.

Posted by: pmukherjee | October 20, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Two things from Wikipedia about "Colon" Powell.
No1
In the early 1980s, Powell served at Fort Carson, Colorado. It was there that he had a major clash with General John W. Hudachek, his commander. Hudachek said in an efficiency evaluation that Powell was a poor leader who should not be promoted. Powell’s rising military career was unhindered by Hudachek’s evaluation report

No2
Initial investigations of the My Lai operation were undertaken by the 11th Light Infantry Brigade's commanding officer, Colonel Henderson, under orders from the Americal Division's executive officer, Brigadier General George H. Young. Henderson interviewed several soldiers involved in the incident, then issued a written report in late April claiming that some 22 civilians were inadvertently killed during the operation. The army at this time was still describing the events at My Lai as a military victory that had resulted in the deaths of 128 enemy combatants.

Six months later, Tom Glen, a 21-year-old soldier of the 11th Light Infantry Brigade, wrote a letter to General Creighton Abrams, the new overall commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam, accusing the Americal Division (and other entire units of the U.S. military) of routine and pervasive brutality against Vietnamese civilians. The letter was detailed and its contents echoed complaints received from other soldiers.

Colin Powell, then a 31-year-old Army Major, was charged with investigating the letter, which did not specifically reference My Lai (Glen had limited knowledge of the events there). In his report Powell wrote: "In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between Americal(sic)[25] soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent." Powell's handling of the assignment was later characterized by some observers as "whitewashing" the atrocities of My Lai.

Posted by: greg3 | October 20, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I have no expectations from Sarah Palin despite her ambitions except as a light hearted and non-serious person. Biden on the other hand is a totally different kettle of fish. He is realpolitiks personified. - Posted by: pmukherjee

Being light-hearted and non-serious are no impediments to being a president. A president has access to all sort sof heavy-hearted and serious people to study the issues and make a presentation to the president and offer alternative courses of action.

Ok, Biden is a 'different kettle of fish', and 'realpolitiks personified'. I don't quite get what you mean, but I guess you mean it as a compliment to his acumen.

What does it make Obama? A stinking fish? A fish out of the kettle? Fakepolitik?

Posted by: pKrishna43 | October 20, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

As for Rush Limbaugh, there's no chance he made his comments about Colin Powell's race because 99% of his listeners are white, is there?

No, didn't think so.

Posted by: amaikovich | October 20, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell is an appeaser in a general's uniform. He is a fine man but he was against removing Saddam from Kuwait. Had he been in charge or Obama Saddam would now be occupying Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Hitler took the Rhine, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland without the Brits firing a shot at him.
Churchill was right. In 1946 he told us in his famous Iron Curtain Speech that they could have stopped Hitler in 1935 without firing a shot because he was bluffing with a very weak army and little money. By the time the Brits declared war on Hitler he had a strong army, millions of slaves, murdered and shipped off the Jews and enough gold to support his war machine.

Powell is a fine man. Obama is a stealth who consorts with fixers, felons, terrorists, racists, bigots

Posted by: mharwick | October 20, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

if Obama's policies as others here have said, is supported by Warren Buffet is socialist than is wire-tapping private calls from U. S. citizens democracy? allowing our national debt to rise and drove our finance wagon into Grand Canyon free market? okie!
well, i rather follow Mr. Warren Buffet's pick than having a divided party's candidate and his running mate who violated the ethic law do the job. we need Change or we will be changed, like McCain's daily change of policies and agendas.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/164498

Posted by: abc2008 | October 20, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Collin Powell is an opportunistic politician , riding the tide

When the repubs were on the top , he was with them , now , in his opinion , the dems are winning ( he's wrong because he reads the polls , who mean nothing in advance when the race is tight )

Eventhough I admire his doctrine of using overwhelming force , in this present case , he used his administrative bureacratic instinct of survival , in which he excells

his choice is political , not from the heart

Posted by: michel1835 | October 20, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Why should anyone listen to Colin Powell? Remember when he thought George W. Bush was the right person to lead this country. That worked out great!

Posted by: roxanna1 | October 20, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Batgeek, your arguments on our "socialistic" society are downright bizarre. The last 8 years has been a mass deregulation or regulatory gutting in almost any department you want to look at: Interior, EPA, SEC, FTC, FEMA, HUD, etc. The Republican mantra is deregulate and privitize, the government does nothing right, private business does everything right and (my favorite) they can and will police themselves. Business will *never* police itself if it cuts into profits in any way.

I work in a heavily regulated industry (health insurance). And when people like you start talking deregulation, I always ask, "So, you would prefer insurance companies not be regulated? You would actually trust the insurance companies with all the power to do as they please?" Here's a perfect example. By law in my state, group health insurance must cover maternity. There is no such law for individual health insurance. I'm sure you'll be shocked to find out that not one company covers maternity.

I also think its disingenous for you to talk about the abuses in our "socialized" programs. I am assuming you mean there are abuses in Medicare/Medicaid, unemployment benefits and welfare. Well, guess what? There are so many abuses in the private insurance sector that each company has entire units to combat fraud. Does that mean we should get rid of all insurance, period, because fraud is committed on a daily basis?

I don't think government has all the answers to our problems. But neither does the private business sector. Certainly, there has to be a happy medium here.

Posted by: msmith2 | October 20, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

I do enjoy the nuts screaming about "socialism." They remind us of the failure of our educational system. I recently asked my college freshmen to read a chapter in which socialist ideas and movements in the late 19th and early 20 centuries were discussed along with welfare state reforms. Today on an essay test, it was clear the vast majority of them either did not read the material or failed to understand it. Point: never think that the number of years of schooling Americans have indicates that they know anything.

So, what is socialism? As best as I can tell, socialism is the government asking you to do something or pay some taxes that you (at any moment) don't want to do. Socialism can be anything from speed limits to income taxes to providing unemployment benefits to regulating the sale of meth. Face it folks, socialism is everywhere and growing, growing like some cartoon monster

Posted by: rusty3 | October 20, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

About Jonathan Capehart's point -- that Powell is disenchanted with the GOP as well as being in favor of Obama for President -- one should also notice just how many intelligent, moderate, formerly pro-conservative writers have come aboard the Obama ship. Republicans ought to look at themselves rather than attack Obama over and over, in such illogical ways.

Powell says it's terrible for McCain/Palin to allow their supporters to call Obama a Muslim -- partly because it implies that there is something wrong with being a Muslim American. The GOP is getting more and more homogenous, representative of only the far right, white, evangelical, largely angry male voter.

And many attacks are completely illogical. For example, there's the allegation that Obama is somehow connected to terrorists (ie, anti-government) and at the same time, they call Obama a "socialist" (a big government type). What?

It amounts to nothing more than name-calling. It's illogical.

No wonder the Republicans can only appeal to the least educated, the least enlightened, and the most angry.

Posted by: cturtle1 | October 20, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

By the way, Hillary Clinton is giving a speech right now saying Barack Obama is the best choice -- and she sounds passionate!

All you Hillary supporters who inexplicably switched to McCain, you're betraying Hillary and all she stands for. And I say, what a strong, dignified, experienced leader she is! Completely unlike Sarah Palin.

Posted by: cturtle1 | October 20, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

I stopped listening to Colin Powell the day he went to the United Nations and showed them a picture of a warehouse in Baghdad that had a truck parked in the driveway and then showed another picture of it with no truck and said we had to invade Iraq because someone moved the truck. Then he held up a little jar of what looked like sugar and said it could kill a whole city. Now BO is considering him as an advisor. Wow, what a bad idea.

Posted by: XLiberalJack | October 20, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Hey. The man is broke and needs a job... Looks like Mr. Obamba will give him one... Maybe Sec of State.. Ironic isn't it.. One of the hated Bushes folks working directly for Mr. Obamba... Sounds like no change here..

Posted by: robinhood2 | October 20, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Typical of McCain supporters, they can only attack. But seriously, attacking Colin Powell? That just makes the attackers look small and sad.

Posted by: cturtle1 | October 20, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Like with Lady Macbeth's "Out, damn'd spot! out", Mr. Powell will never be able to run away from his own "spot"-- he was the point-man for the selling of the Iraq War. He was the one that sold to the UN the lie that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Also, I think that Mr. Powell's endorsement so late in the game is very cynical: he waited until Obama looked like a sure thing to join the "train of history". If Mr. Powell agrees with Obama that the War was a disaster and an unjust one, has Mr. Powell publicly apologized to the world for being the mouthpiece of the big lie?

If Obama is right about the War, then Powell has blood on his hands.

Mr. Powell, you are a traitor to your party, your country and yourself.

http://www.mccain08-hillary2012.blogspot.com/

Posted by: dcpsychic | October 20, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Powell was a Republican as long as he could sue them to get ahead in his career. He is RESPONSIBLE for the DEATHS of our troops - we have no respect fo Powell anymore. Like OPRAH he is backing Obama based on his skin color - another total racist !!! Get lost Powell - how do you sleep at night after sending 4,000 men and women to their deaths based on faulty information that YOU KNEW was wrong !!! RACIST, TRAITOR, LYING IDIOT !!!!

Posted by: JUNGLEJIM123 | October 20, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

Junglejim123, your vitriol and illogic only make you look small and sad. Colin Powell is one of America's true heroes. And he continues to be that military hero regardless of his political party. For him, and for Obama, there is no "us" versus "them" as there seems to be with you. We're all Americans. I'm sorry McCain has fueled these divisions among fine Americans of all different ideas, and in being divisive, he is following the example of George Bush. It isn't necessary, and it's small and sad. Most of us cannot wait until a brighter and more open and inclusive day dawns!

It's a lot more optimistic and much happier on the Obama side.

Posted by: cturtle1 | October 20, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

The McCain campaign continues to plumb new depths in their search for the answer to the question of "how low will they go?"

Now the slime-ball-weasel-Limbaugh accuses Colin Powell of endorsing Obama on the basis of race alone.

I've always considered myself Independent - I've often said I'm an American first and last - not a member of ANY political party - but the absolutely horrifying behavior of Republicans this election season is pushing me hard to declare myself a Democrat to avoid any confusion that I might ever align myself with the amoral mess that the Republicans have become.

The buffoonish ineptitude of the Bush administration, made me an early supporter of Barack Obama.

The latest antics of The Geezer, Gidget and their proxies which can only be described as disgusting - threaten to make my Democratic Party leaning - into a more permanent position. I feel certain I am not alone.

Posted by: dww322 | October 20, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell's worst assessment for the security of this country was in the first gulf war when he was the joint chief of the armed services, just when General Schwartzkoff and his army had Sadam Hussein and his regime outflanked and defeated, he recommended to President George Herbert Walker Bush for Saddam to live and his regime to stay in power which in turn gave us a greater threat for our current President to go before the UN and with UN forces invaded Iraq for not complying with the UN resolutions to inspect for weapons of mass destruction. I personally blame Colin Powell and his judgement for the lives and the cost for having to go back to Iraq today, and I believe his assessment and judgement for endorsing Obama as a leader of this country and the free world is wrong and if elected Obama and his left wing socialist regime could be a bigger threat to the security of this country.

Posted by: michaelW01 | October 21, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Frankly, Powell was an unremarkable general and a failure as secretary of state. His loss to the left is inconsequential and will have no impact on the race.

Posted by: rplat | October 21, 2008 7:10 AM | Report abuse

post by Batgeek: "The gist of my post was that initiating socialist programs into our form of government creates fertile ground for corruption and expensive bureaucracy. Fannie and Freddy were not the sole cause of the problem, but just one of the many instruments of the socialist policies, which were the true cause. These policies are the ones that created the market and gave value to these over valued mortgage securities." These social welfare programs also produce the current economic disaster as stated by Michael P Tremoglie of The Bulletin, who wrote on 9.26.2008:
"Blame for the current financial crisis has been leveled at Wall Street greed, deregulation, and the free-market system. However, government policies - formulated and promoted more than 30 years ago by community organizations like those affiliated with Barack Obama - are the root cause of the problem. Economists and financial experts interviewed pointed especially to the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA) and the Associated Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) as major culprits."

Posted by: ypcchiu | October 21, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

I love it. Only "real" Republicans may participate. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party has renewed its commitment to reach out to all Americans and bring them into the big tent. Mr. Novak makes another good argument for undecideds to support the Democrats and particularly Mr. Obama.

Posted by: dricks | October 21, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

I would say that Novak is not much of a reporter or an American,he did expose and endanger Valerie Plame. If it does not go their way republicans have to put a spin on the story. What this shows is that not even McCain's republican friends can support this hot head for president.

Posted by: fotoartiste | October 21, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The Powell Doctrine is simple and very clear.

Vote for the black guy.

Posted by: KMichaels | October 21, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

batgeek: "The gist of my post was that initiating socialist programs into our form of government creates fertile ground for corruption and expensive bureaucracy. Fannie and Freddy were not the sole cause of the problem, but just one of the many instruments of the socialist policies, which were the true cause. These policies are the ones that created the market and gave value to these over valued mortgage securities"

Does anyone ever come back to these? Probably not, but oh well.

In your previous post that I responded to, you certainly seemed to be implying that there were no reasons, other than government policies, why a bank would choose to give a mortgage to someone if there was a great deal of doubt about their ability to repay. I strongly disagree there--I gave what I believe are financial incentives *created by the market* for a bank to be willing to give a mortgage without caring about ability to repay.

But before any discussion could possibly go forward, I'd have to know exactly what you mean by "socialistic policies." I have good reason to believe that the current usage of "socialist" and "socialistic" in Republican/conservative circles is very much broader than the traditional definition of the words.

Well, as long as it's been, there's no reason to expect a reply here. Just putting it out there anyway.

Posted by: LMinOH | October 22, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Obama promised "justice" during his campaign and now he has, apparently, pardoned Powell for his crime of treason. Until Powell and the Bush junta are tried and convicted and put in front of a firing squad where all can see they receive their just punishment - deat - there can be no justice in the land. Fixing intelligence and then using it to wage war against a country that was no threat to us is a crime of treason. Sadly, few in the press have the courage to speak truth to power.

Posted by: hawk1 | October 22, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Catholic Bishop Against Obama Obama sicks the IRS on HIM
WASHINGTON — A church-state watchdog group has asked the Internal Revenue Service to investigate whether the Roman Catholic bishop of Paterson, N.J., violated tax laws by denouncing Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama.
In a letter sent to the IRS on Wednesday (Oct. 22), Americans United for Separation of Church and State accused Paterson Bishop Arthur Serratelli of illegal partisanship for lambasting Obama's support of abortion rights.

In a column posted on the Diocese of Paterson's website and published in its weekly newspaper, Serratelli also compared Obama to King Herod, the biblical monarch who ordered the death of John the Baptist.

The bishop did not refer to Obama by name but only as "the present democratic (sic) candidate."

Under federal tax law, nonprofit groups — including religious organizations — are prohibited from intervening in campaigns for public office by endorsing or opposing candidates.

FIND MORE STORIES IN: New Jersey | Catholic Church | Roman Catholic Church | Sen. Barack Obama | Catholics | Internal Revenue Service | Washington-based | Baptist | New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani | United for Separation of Church | Rev. Barry Lynn | King Herod | Diocese of Paterson | Freedom of Choice Act
Serratelli wrote that Obama has pledged, if elected president, to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, abortion-rights legislation the Catholic Church vehemently opposes.

"If this politician fulfills his promise, not only will many of our freedoms as Americans be taken from us, but the innocent and vulnerable will spill their blood," Serratelli wrote.

The Rev. Barry Lynn, president of Americans United, said it is "impossible to interpret this passage as anything but a command to vote against 'the present Democratic candidate' because of his promise to sign a certain piece of legislation disfavored by the Catholic Church's hierarchy."

The Paterson diocese said Serratelli's column was focused on proposed abortion legislation, not the upcoming presidential election.

Posted by: 4elise | October 23, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

JOE THE PLUMBER WANTS YOU TO SPREAD THE WORD.

OBAMA IS A MARXIST SOCIALIST.
AMERICAN SOLDIERS FOUGHT AND DIED AND SHED BLOOD FIGHTING MARXIST. WE WILL NOT ALLOW IT HERE. OBAMA GAVE ACORN OVER A MILLION DOLLARS TO STEAL YOUR VOTES. WITH THE STOLEN VOTES HE THEN CAN HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY IN THE SENATE AND HOUSE (VETO PROOF) HUSSAIN OBAMA'S PLAN IS TO STRIP YOU OF YOUR FREEDOM, RELIGON AND YOUR BELONGINGS! THEN HE WILL GIVE IT TO HIS MARXIST SOCIALIST FOLLOWERS. HE THEN BECOMES YOUR MARXIST EMPEROR! THIS IS WITH OUT A SHOT BEING FIRED.

Posted by: 4elise | October 23, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008

Posted by: hclark1 | October 23, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama ‘Morally Justified’ for Votes Against Helping Aborted Babies Born Alive, Say Dems

Posted on Friday, October 24, 2008
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was morally justified to oppose legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would have ensured that a child who survives a failed abortion received medical attention, according to Democratic leaders.
While in the Illinois Senate, Obama opposed three bills that proposed protection in three different legislative votes, a decision that Republican presidential candidate John McCain said was wrong in the last presidential debate.
After the debate, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said that Obama did the right thing and defended his position.
Watch the Video.
“If you looked at those little meters, McCain lost that debate,” Schumer told CNSNews.com. “Most Americans are pro-choice. Most Americans don’t want to repeal Roe v. Wade, and I thought Obama was great there. He had his views but he was very respectful of the other side. Sometimes the left is a little too condescending to the other side.”
Earlier this month, CNSNews.com Editor-in-Chief Terry Jeffrey reported that, in 2001, Illinois State Senator Patrick O’Malley introduced three bills to the legislature. One said that if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present “to assess the child’s viability and provide medical care.”
Another bill gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child’s rights. A third bill said that a baby alive after “complete expulsion or extraction from its mother” would be considered a “person, ‘human being,’ ‘child’ and ‘individual.’”
Obama voted against all three.
During the last presidential debate, Obama responded to McCain’s allegation that his votes aligned him with the most “extreme aspect of the pro-abortion movement in America.”
I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion is already born”. Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: 4elise | October 24, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

.S. Catholic Bishop Rene H. Gracida Releases Radio Ad Stating no Catholic can Vote for Barack Obama in Good Conscience

MEDIA ADVISORY, October 24 /Christian Newswire/ -- Today - perhaps in an eleventh hour answer to prayer for the unborn - Bishop Rene H. Gracida has released a stunning radio ad concerning Catholics voting for Barack Obama. His ad is recorded in English and Spanish.
Bishop Gracida boldly states:
"This is Bishop Rene H. Gracida, reminding all Catholics that they must vote in this election with an informed conscience. A Catholic cannot be said to have voted in this election with a good conscience if they have voted for a pro-abortion candidate. Barack Hussein Obama is a pro-abortion candidate."
The commercial can be heard in English and Spanish at www.randallterry.com.
Bishop Gracida has offered this radio spot without charge for all who want to use it. All faithful Catholics are invited to download the mp3 file, and place this ad on their local radio station(s).
They must simply contact their local radio station(s), and pay for the ad as an "independent expenditure." The station can download the audio file to play on the radio. The mp3 file is also available at www.randallterry.com.
Moreover, permission is granted for the ad to be downloaded, sent as a file, or posted on any web site in America.
If this ad receives the airplay it deserves, it could sink Obama's campaign by jolting Catholic voters back to their senses and moorings. Over 50% of Catholic voters have been seduced into ethical quicksand by errant Catholics who are partisan supporters of Obama and have betrayed the lives of innocent unborn children.

Posted by: 4elise | October 24, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

LIBERALS HATE THE TRUTH. THEY WILL LIE AND ATTACK OTHERS TO HIDE THEIR FAILED BANKRUPT POLICIES. CENCORSHIP CAN NOT STOP FREEDOM. THE LEFT IS 99% OF ALL TERRORISTS THROUGH HISTORY. COMMUNISTS ARE LEFT WING OR CODE WORD LIBERAL. THE LEFT WILL LOSE THIS ELECTION BECAUSE OF THEIR BLATANT CENCORSHIP OF THE TRUTH AND HATE FILLED SPEECH. THE SAME WAY YOU TREATED JOE THE PLUMBER YOU HAVE DONE TO THE MIDDLE CLASS.

Posted by: 4elise | October 24, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA IS A MONSTER FOR VOTING TO MANDATE THE MURDER OF LITTLE INFANTS, BORN ALIVE, HAVING SURVIVED AN ABORTION ATTEMPT!
NO ONE WHO VOTES LIKE THIS CAN POSSIBLY RESPECT THE LIFE OF OTHERS. EVER.

Posted by: 4elise | October 24, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company