 |
|
| |
|
|
|
 Powell Said What Obama Couldn’tPosted on Oct 20, 2008Colin Powell demonstrated his eponymous “Powell Doctrine” of overwhelming force on Sunday when he endorsed Barack Obama on “Meet the Press.” The one-time chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff systematically marshaled his assets to neutralize the Republican endgame strategy, which is to suffuse the air around Obama with a vague mist of terrorism, socialism and “otherness.” Powell was so definitive that it was easy to forget the disconnect: Obama made his reputation with a speech in 2002 warning against war in Iraq, while it was Powell who went before the United Nations and used his credibility to build support for the Iraq invasion. Powell told Tom Brokaw that he still believes that war was the right course of action, based on what he and other officials knew—or thought they knew—at the time. He said he believes the war was mishandled. And he said he still opposes a “deadline” for withdrawing U.S. troops, though he added that a “timeline” for withdrawal is beginning to emerge. That would be a fair summation of John McCain’s position on Iraq, not Obama’s. Powell framed his endorsement largely in terms of how McCain, Sarah Palin and their supporters have conducted the campaign against Obama—and what that conduct says about McCain’s judgment. It was hard not to conclude that Powell is offended by some of the Republican tactics and that he has decided to fire back in a way that Obama cannot. On the attempt by McCain and Palin to use Obama’s acquaintance with Vietnam-era radical William Ayers to suggest that Obama is somehow linked to terrorism: “This Bill Ayers situation that’s been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign. But Mr. McCain says that he’s a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him? And why do we have these robo-calls going on around the country trying to suggest that because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow Mr. Obama is tainted? What they’re trying to connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings.” On the campaign of lies, spread by whisper and e-mail, to convince people that Obama is a Muslim: “Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some 7-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, ‘He’s a Muslim and might be associated with terrorists.’ This is not the way we should be doing it in America.” And on Palin’s qualifications and readiness to assume high office, an issue that a few conservative commentators have taken on but Democrats refuse to touch, as if it were radioactive: “I was also concerned at the selection of Gov. Palin. She’s a very distinguished woman, and she’s to be admired; but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Sen. McCain made.” As the highest-profile Republican to defect to the enemy camp, Powell knew that his endorsement would create a huge stir. What I found fascinating was how he framed it more as a set of reasons to vote against the McCain-Palin ticket than a set of reasons to vote for Obama and Joe Biden. In talking about the Wall Street meltdown and the economic crisis, for example, Powell spoke of how McCain’s herky-jerky response made it seem that he “didn’t have a complete grasp” of what was going on. Powell went on to praise Obama’s “steadiness”—but mentioned nothing in particular that Obama actually did. To those who would say he is only supporting Obama as a fellow African-American, Powell pointed out that if this were the criterion he could have made his endorsement months ago. Much more important, I think, is the fact that Powell is a moderate Republican who listens to all this innuendo about terrorism and all this rhetoric equating the income tax with socialism and wonders what in the world has happened to his once-grand old party. The rhetoric he used to take his party to task followed the principle he made famous in the first Gulf War: overwhelming force. Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com. © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation 
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
Joe the Plumber to Report on Gaza—Seriously
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By Clash, October 26, 2008 at 4:13 pm #
Colon Powell liar traitor, if Obama is thinking that this gentleman has add anything more to give us than the IRAQ war he is just another one of the idiots trying to run this country into the ground.
3000 dead soldiers, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi’s and for what a bag full of powdered sugar. This man stood before the world and lied he should cower off somewhere and lie down like the beaten dog he is. We need no more patriots such as he.
Report thisBy JNagarya, October 24, 2008 at 5:17 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
In my opinion he is finally getting his chance to do to Bush and the Repubs what they did to him by allowing him appear to be a fool, and take the blame for going in front of the U.N. to convince the world that this was a justified war.
_____
Powell himself said that HE and his chief of staff Wilkerson—and Wilkerson verified this—“cobbled together” the “presentation” he gave at the UN. And he KNEW from doing so that the intelligence DID NOT SUPPORT the claim that Hussein had WMDs.
He simply put party before country, party before the lives of his troops, party before TRUTH. Because he’s a “good REPUBLICAN soldier” who puts party before country, and everything else he FALSELY claims to protect and defend CONTRARY to the requirements of the Constitution, and his OATH to protect and defend the CONSTITUTION, not instead his political party.
Powell isn’t fit to clean the toilet leavings of such as the young Kahn, who was suckered into getting killed by such as Powell.
Report thisBy Sepharad, October 23, 2008 at 3:27 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Fibonacci Sequence—I’m so sorry your son was killed in Iraq. We’ve been lucky so far (if “lucky” is the right word; my granddaughter has nightmares every night he’s there). Our Apache-flying son-in-law, an officer, is headed out for the third time, voluntarily. He’s a smart guy and HE believes our presence there is sufficiently worthwhile to put his family—whom he loves deeply—through what your family endured. He’s a scientist by training, and (to my consternation) keeps putting off leaving the military and starting a small research laboratory because he thinks that despite all the politicians and their blunders, it’s important to get this right for our country as well as for the Iraqis, because so much is at stake. He’s NOT out there fighting for big oil, and neither was your son.
If it’s any comfort, Saddam wanted everyone to believe he had WMDs, not just the Americans but his own people and his neighbors. His own generals were very nervous because THEY believed there were WMDs to deploy and their men didn’t have enough masks to protect them for when that happened. It would have been better if the weapons’ inspectors had had more time. But I don’t think Powell thought he was lying about that. We didn’t have to go in, should not have gone in, but once there everything changed and we now have to accomplish what we can. I wish Bush had listened to General Shinseki in the first place, had sent General Petraeus in at the outset, had never given Paul Bremer the power to commit the many blunders he did—but your son, my son-in-law, and all of the other young men and women there have played the bad hand they were dealt magnificently. Some people on Truthdig think I am some sort of a warmonger but I’m not. I hate it as much as anyone can, I hate the loss of life, the waste of resources, but there are wars that have to be fought if Western society and culture are to survive, enemies that must be confronted and not appeased, and we have no real choices. A month from now I’ll be in Israel for awhile, and though I’m not religious will put a note in the Wailing Wall for your son.
I’m a non-registered commenter so my posts take awhile to actually go up—the most recent one was sent many hours before it was actually posted, so I hadn’t read your two-page letter to Powell or I would have responded to it. However, what I wrote in that earlier post about our Afghani friends should also contradict Powell’s or anyone else’s notion of the uselessness of American soldiers’ deaths and other sacrifices. It is harder for Americans to lose their children than it is for Israeli parents, not because Israelis love their children any less but because the conflicts and their meaning for the whole nation is much, much clearer. (And in Israel, when a war is badly waged as was their last effort to dislodge Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Prime Minister as well as the generals are taken quickly to task.) Not that there is no dissent in Israel over the best way to wage war or to wage peace, which are often entwined, but the soldier’s role is always respected. The Iraq war has been excruciatingly painful for American families whose children and husbands and fathers are engaged in it—especially where we live, in Northern California, with so many people reflexively opposed to any war for any reason. I frequently end up in arguments on the subject.
Report thisBy JNagarya, October 23, 2008 at 12:25 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Powell WAS NOT used as a skapegoat, blah, blah, blah. He admitted he KNEW the intellgence, and thus the presentation he made to electorate, Congress, and world, was false.
He admitted lying.
And then there are these facts for those who don’t keep their heads stuff in the sand for bogus “reasons”—
Let’s not forget that the young American Muslim Kahn, killed in Iraq, was killed as direct result of Powell’s successful selling of the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.
And when it came to the war crime of torture: Powell participated in the planning and imposition of it on Muslims—found guilty of nothing except of being ACCUSED of being “terrorists” simply because Muslim.
And not forget that those at the bottom who OBEYED the orders to torture are doing Powell’s prison-time FOR him.
While, as ever, he sits on his ass and gets called “hero” because he SAYS the “right” thing well after the fact when it could make a significant difference.
And not forget that none of this is new about Powell: In 1968 he was the first to “investigate”—and cover up—the My Lai massacre.
I thank him for his endorsement. His defense of the right to have a “religion” other than that which passes for “Christian” in this country. And his powerful comments concerning Kahn. But none of that can vindicate his successful greasing of the skids toward the killing of at least hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian Iraqis who couldn’t be cared less about because: Muslim.
Report thisBy irishtornado, October 23, 2008 at 11:16 am #
I would like to see General Powell switch to being an independent and run for president. I have thought all along that he would have been the best choice to deal with the Iraq situation and terrorism. I also believe with a well planned administrative staff he would have best solved our economic condition.
In my opinion he is finally getting his chance to do to Bush and the Repubs what they did to him by allowing him appear to be a fool, and take the blame for going in front of the U.N. to convince the world that this was a justified war. Bush had an agenda and used General Powell as a pawn and a scapegoat, well when it’s all said and done it hasn’t work Bush.
Thank you General Powell for a job well done, for being the real American hero. You are the hero that Bush and McCain claim to be, but were not and never will be. Being captured does not make one a hero, serving with honesty and integrity does, which McCain has none.
God help us if McCain wins and Palin ends up as being President.
Report thisBy noitdoesnt, October 23, 2008 at 5:45 am #
Fibonacci, it took you two pages to say Powell is a racist for supporting Barack Obama?
In 1988, did Powell support Jessie Jackson or Bush I?
Report thisPowell has supported Reagan (white), Bush I (white) Dole (white), Bush II (white).
By JNagarya, October 22, 2008 at 11:40 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Let’s not forget that the young American Muslim Kahn, killed in Iraq, was killed as direct result of Powell’s successful selling of the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.
And when it came to the war crime of torture: Powell participated in the planning and imposition of it on Muslims—found guilty of nothing except of being ACCUSED of being “terrorists” simply because Muslim.
And not forget that those at the bottom who OBEYED the orders to torture are doing Powell’s prison-time FOR him.
While, as ever, he sits on his ass and gets called “hero” because he SAYS the “right” thing well after the fact when it could make a significant difference.
And not forget that none of this is new about Powell: In 1968 he was the first to “investigate”—and cover up—the My Lai massacre.
I thank him for his endorsement. His defense of the right to have a “religion” other than that which passes for “Christian” in this country. And his powerful comments concerning Kahn. But none of that can vindicate his successful greasing of the skids toward the killing of at least hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian Iraqis who couldn’t be cared less about because: Muslim.
Report thisBy Sepharad, October 22, 2008 at 8:45 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
abdo, I don’t know whether General Powell is making his exit from politics, but I certainly hope not. I know he promised his wife not to run for President, but he would make one excellent Secretary of Defense or head of NSA. It’s a rare public figure who’ll say he was wrong without hiding behind or blaming anyone else, to break with his part, endorse a young man who’s not worn the uniform but is throwing all his considerable talent, intelligence and education into trying to serve his country in the top if toughest job in the world—if one does it properly, of course.
There are plenty of people—even, could it be?, among Truthdiggers—who think members of the military are by definition blood-thirsty, pro-war, anti-human being. And I’m sure there are a handful like that. But the armed services need—and have, but never enough—men and women who are there because they believe in the basic principles of this country, which are still pretty good despite the beating the whole system’s taken from greedy, lying, corrupt politicians, financiers, corporations, lobbyists and the millions of other parasites who are committed to nothing more than their lattes and cool lifestyles, with no clue as to what national service means (and if they did know, would not lift a finger to improve the society from which they take so much).
cann4ing and cyrena, at least the NYTimes printed the entirety of Powell’s anger that Muslim American citizens should feel excluded from aspiring to the Presidency or anything else. I also appreciated both of your comments regarding Muslims you know personally and what they have to go through these days. Some of the Muslims I know are not quite as sanguine about their adopted country, but an Afghani family we’ve known for years are solidly behind even Bush’s bumbling policies and screw-ups because they say even if it’s not working well, at the very least the Americans are trying to help Muslim people, which is more than most fellow Muslim countries have ever done. They know, from conversations over the years, that my husband and I think that for Bush and Bechtel and the oilpeople—and the rest of the world for that matter—it really has been all about the oil. But they also know that for my son-in-law and many other American soldiers doing the heavy lifting in Iraq and Afghanistan, it’s mainly about wanting to help the Iraqis and Afghanis as well as protecting the U.S. We don’t have a TV but they watch all the political and news shows avidly, and post-Iraq-invasion they told me about this sometimes-talking-head Fouad Ajami, at Johns Hopkins’ Middle East Research Institute, and suggested I read his books, which I did (“The Arab Predicament”, “Dream Palace of the Arabs” and “The Foreigners’ Gift.”). The wife’s sister is still in Kandahar—the husband set out on a rug-buying trip hoping to bring her back, but he was still in Egypt when 9/11 hit and had to return to the States. They’ve still not heard from her and fear she’s dead; no way to know for sure. My husband thinks that the Taliban are, for all their oher bad habits, at least pure. This Afghani family hates them, say they turned their village’s world into a hell, so husband keeps that opinion to himself. They are so much less critical of our government than we are—it’s sad to contemplate what they’ve gone through to make them come to that conclusion.
Report thisBy Fibonacci Sequence, October 22, 2008 at 8:38 pm #
Part 2
At first I wondered why you would even think we would believe you again. But I found myself wondering, “Why would you do such a thing? Why would you endorse a man that is so opposite of everything my son fought and died for?” I absolutely reject your claim that you just decided in the last few weeks to endorse him…. You might sell that story to some people, but not to a military family. You are known as a precise person who leaves nothing to accident. And the General knows to hold his reserves, and commit them at the moment they will have the greatest impact. The timing of your announcement was calculated to help you achieve an objective - as always
Your condemnation of John McCain for questioning Obama’s relationship with Ayers is shameful. You know better than most Americans what Ayers represents. His bombings in the 60’s are not the issue. It is his continued work as a Socialist revolutionary. His trips to Venezuela to flirt with and encourage the revolutionaries in Central America. His crusade to indoctrinate teachers and students behind the closed doors of our schools. If there is even a possibility that Barack Obama does have ties to this man we have a right and an obligation, to ask questions. And it frightens me that people are being attacked for asking questions in our free society
Need I remind you that you justified the invasion of a country on less evidence of terrorism ties! You killed a man because he “had the intent” to build weapons of mass destruction - as if you are God himself, who can read peoples’ thoughts. We learned most of our anti-terror rhetoric under your watch.
The questions about Ayers were originally asked during the primaries, by Democrats. When Obama was finally forced to answer, he told us things that we knew to be untrue. You can’t blame John McCain for that, or for giving voice to our lingering questions. “We The People” demanded that he ask them. And you, sir, have no right to condemn him for doing his duty to the country. You should be doing the same.
You say the Republican Party has grown “too extreme”? You are obviously marketing to the 18-year olds who don’t remember who you used to be. You were a prostitute for an ultra right-wing conservative, and now you have become a prostitute for an ultra left-wing liberal. Barack Obama is the single most liberal member of our Senate, which makes him more extreme than Nancy Pelosi and just right of Hugo Chavez. You don’t give a ‘darn’ about ideology
Your endorsement speech was carefully crafted for the maximum effect, with its not-so-subtle racial undertones. Did you think we were too stupid to notice? Barack Obama can cross boundaries (because he is “of color”, and John McCain is not.) Barack Obama will value the life of a Muslim soldier (because he is “of color”, and John McCain is not.) You don’t like the vitriol coming from the Republican side (because it is racially motivated). Those sentiments are unworthy of John McCain, of the uniform you wear, and of our country…”
Report thisBy Fibonacci Sequence, October 22, 2008 at 8:36 pm #
Part 1
There is much to be said to such a turncoat but the following quotes from another fellow American about sums it up: “Words from an Army mom - How dare you Colin Powell? :
General Powell,
You told us that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and that “Iraq harbors a deadly terrorist network”. We doubted George Bush, but we believed YOU. And my son went to Iraq to serve his country, and protect democracy. There were no WMD’s, but you assured us that Saddam “had the intent and the capability” of making them. Of the missing terrorists, you assured us that you “had seen some links and connections between Iraq and terror groups over time.” And my son died believing in your words, and the value of his own service.
In 2006, when they proposed a surge, you re-emerged and told us that a surge would not work. You said that we were losing in Iraq, and our army was worn out. I thought my heart would break. It was like losing my son all over again, because I felt like his death had been for nothing. Because we still believed you. You told us we could believe in you
We started to hear that the surge was working - but you kept saying that it was not, and it never would. So we doubted the other reports, and worried that we were being lied to. (Even though we could not actually remember a time when you were right.) Because we still believed you
Then came the talk of a Presedential campaign. You did an interview, where you were described as a “political animal”. Your wife announced that “George Bush used you, because people would believe you” - as if that absolves you of responsibility. But it doesn’t. It means that you betrayed the trust we gave you - that my son gave you. I want to cry when I think that your “mistakes” may have just been politics
Now you have re-appeared again, to endorse Barack Obama. The Obama who told us that entering Iraq was a mistake and our son’s death was for nothing. The Obama who wanted to cut off funding from our troops. The Obama who agreed with you that a surge would not work. The Obama who wants to spread the wealth, like the Socialist leaders we have struggled against around the world…
(continued in part 2)
Report thisBy Marc Schlee, October 22, 2008 at 3:44 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Powell helped trick the US public into going to war in Iraq. His best bet would be to stand around looking elderly until after the election.
FREE AMERICA
REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY
Report thisBy Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, October 22, 2008 at 2:31 pm #
@cyrena:
“I guess folks really DON’T get it, when Barack Obama says that this election isn’t ABOUT HIM. It’s about US! And, the “Generational Change” has already begun, thanks to his lead. But, that’s ALL it is. It’s a LEAD. Now he’s been at the forefront of the movement to involve millions of New Generation citizens, and that includes some old ones as well, for whom this is STILL a ‘new’ generation, because they’ve been intentionally disenfranchised for decades. So we have a Generational Change here dihey, just because we have millions of new participants in the system, no matter what their age. (though certainly this includes a majority of a younger generation than my own).”
You go, girl!
Report thisBy noitdoesnt, October 22, 2008 at 11:04 am #
It would have been impolite for Secretary Powell to mention that the McCain campaign has been inciting people to assassinate Obama.
Report thisAs an American politician, Powell truly is a black man you can trust.
He bit his tongue when he was being overruled by creatures like Feith, now he bites it when a more courageous black man is endangered by the McCain campaign.
By WriterOnTheStorm, October 22, 2008 at 8:23 am #
Here’s an excerpt from an article by David Swanson:
“Americans consider Powell only marginally more credible than how the rest of the world views him, and the rest of the world thinks he lies like a rug. Powell either wholeheartedly backed the biggest crime thus far this century, or he secretly opposed it but worked to make it happen anyway. I’m not sure which is worse, but either disqualifies him for future office.”
How disappointing it must be for Obama fans to hear him now say he would like to make a place for Powell in his cabinet. Is this really great decision making? Is this any better a choice than McCain choosing Palin for VP?
Just a thought.
Report thisBy sloopman111, October 22, 2008 at 6:41 am #
General Colin Powell has reached out to Senator Barach Obama in support of his candidacy for the presidency of the United States. In so doing he has reached out to his country and it’s millions of disenfranchised citizens. Those citizen’s have been the colateral losses of the policies of this terrible Administration. As a retired middle class American, I am worried about the future of FDR’s visionary programs that have worked for decades. Social Security is paid for by years of work and contributions from those who get a monthly check after they retire. I paid in for over 35 years. Medicare is part of Social Security. Since General Powell is supporting Senator Obama, I am sure that he supports the cessation of the raiding of Social Security funds. This has been going on for decades. He is for a timely withdrawal from Iraq, has a brilliant mind, and stands head and shoulders above the right-wing Republican’s who have compromised the very core of our country, both here and abroad. The corporations, the military, and the top 5 percent of our citizens prospered. This has driven the poor and middle class to near perdition. Thank you General Powell for caring about our country and thank you Senator Obama for preparing to lead our country back to prosperity and decency.
Report thisBy cyrena, October 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm #
dihey
• “If Senator Obama truly wanted “Generational Change” why did he chose an “Old Geezer” as his VP whose record on Iraq is worse than that of Hillary Clinton and who is likely to run in the primaries (if there are any then) of 2012?”
Just a thought…
Maybe his “Generational Change” (or at least what some of us perceive him to mean by that) doesn’t have anything to do with Joe Biden, just like he’s consistently said that this isn’t about HIM.
I guess folks really DON’T get it, when Barack Obama says that this election isn’t ABOUT HIM. It’s about US! And, the “Generational Change” has already begun, thanks to his lead. But, that’s ALL it is. It’s a LEAD. Now he’s been at the forefront of the movement to involve millions of New Generation citizens, and that includes some old ones as well, for whom this is STILL a ‘new’ generation, because they’ve been intentionally disenfranchised for decades. So we have a Generational Change here dihey, just because we have millions of new participants in the system, no matter what their age. (though certainly this includes a majority of a younger generation than my own).
So that’s what I personally think he means by a ‘generational change’. Even us older folks could use such a thing..don’t cha think? Still, if the term or the language bothers you, (kinda hard to think of it as a ‘mantra’) then call it something else. Like…whatever blows your hair back. I mean, just because it’s being ‘thrown at you’ (if that’s what you think) doesn’t mean you have to catch it.
As for Hillary running in 2012, that would be a rare thing indeed, though not unheard of. Typically though, the incumbent party doesn’t run against themselves in a presidential election. That’s not to say she couldn’t run as a Republican or something else. But, I read something not long ago that claimed she wasn’t planning to pursue that particular office again. But, who knows. Things change.
Report thisBy WARIS SHERE, October 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
According to several experts Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama will go a long way to help the Democrats among Independents and Centrists. “This was a stunning blow to John McCain,” said the director of the UVA Center for Politics, Dr. Larry Sabato. “He had hoped that Powell would simply stay silent. There really wasn’t much of a chance Powell would endorse McCain.” It appears that there still exist animosity between Colin Powell and the Bush Administration. The timing of the endorsement also means that Powell thinks Barack Obama is qualified to be Commander in Chief. “Our great strength is in our unity, and in our diversity, and so that really was driving me,” said Colin Powell. “To focus on people like Mr. Ayers, at the purpose of suggesting that Barack Obama has some sort of terrorist inclinations—I thought that was over the top.” “If you look at the people they admire, Colin Powell is near or at the top of the list,” said Dr. Sabato. Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama and by declaring the Senator to be a “transformational figure” at this juncture has reinforced the sense of momentum Senator Barack Obama has been building. Colin Powell said: “I think that Senator Obama brings a fresh set of eyes, a fresh set of ideas to the table. I think we need a generational change, and I think Senator Obama has captured the feelings of the young people of America and is reaching out in a more diverse, inclusive way across our society.” “The endorsement is not only symbolic but, in terms of timing, it is of great tactical importance. Powell is a brand unto himself in American politics, and clearly transcends the media’s tendency to hype endorsements over their actual importance to voters. However, the announcement’s indisputable benefit is that the former Secretary of State and general is sure to block any chance John McCain has of winning the next two or three days of news coverage, as the media swoons over the implications of the choice. It is simple political math: McCain has 15 days to close a substantial gap, and he will now lose at least one-fifth of his total remaining time. Powell’s decision brings other clear benefits as well. He is so trusted for his judgment on national security (even in the wake of his role in the current Iraq war) that his confidence in Obama to become Commander in Chief will resonate with many élites and voters. The Democrats’ ability to play the Powell card for the next two weeks makes it much harder — even if there is an unexpected international crisis — for Republicans to suggest that Obama isn’t qualified to protect the country. Powell reinforced Obama’s qualifications on Meet the Press: “Senator Obama has demonstrated the kind of calm, patient, intellectual, steady approach to problem-solving that I think we need in this country.” If some voters still see Obama as a nebulous, unknown figure with questionable associations and liberal tendencies that makes them wary of voting for an African American, Powell’s decision may ease their minds. In some ways his image is the perfect complement to Obama’s. Unlike the newly arrived Obama, Powell is an establishment figure with over a decade of experience in the national spotlight regarding military and international affairs, first as a career Army man, then in a variety of national security roles, culminating in his service as Secretary of State”, concludes Mark Halperin of Time Magazine.
Report thisBy cann4ing, October 21, 2008 at 2:44 pm #
Cyrena, thanks for adding one more poignant account of a Muslim/American who, like all other returning vets, deserves better than he has received from the Bush regime.
Report thisBy dihey, October 21, 2008 at 2:24 pm #
“Generational Change” is a vapid mantra. There is zero justification that “Generational Change” is better for our country than “Keeping the same Generation.” If Senator Obama truly wanted “Generational Change” why did he chose an “Old Geezer” as his VP whose record on Iraq is worse than that of Hillary Clinton and who is likely to run in the primaries (if there are any then) of 2012? That is exactly why JFK picked LBJ! Like JFK’s record before his election, that of Obama is paper-thin.
Report thisI am getting tired of the meaningless mantras thrown at me. I hope that I am not living in a sort of Soviet Union whose people were kept dumb by mantras and slogans.
Abdo: Senator Clinton was “chosen” by roughly 1/2 of all primary voters whom you cheaply insult by attaching them to “a large fraction of the democratic party at the convention.”
As always, history is written by the poorly thinking victors.
Powell? I need some real “mea culpa’s” from him before I can even forget his miserable speech at the UN. I still have little if any respect for him. He should have exited a long time ago and kept silent in this election.
Just in case you guess wrong, I will vote for Obama. Mrs. Palin changed my intent not to vote at all this time.
By Purple Girl, October 21, 2008 at 2:16 pm #
I had no doubt that Powells clout was being used as camoflague and deception to egg on this Illegal war.
Report thissorry folks but I thought th ebuild up to the War was BS then and which has been confirmed ever since.
But I knew Powell was getting his strings pulled and his sense of duty to the presidency made him the perfect patsy. Really Powell should have run for Pres in ‘00, He would have been our first Black President…could be our second if he is able to pull the Republican party and it’s platform out of the Cesspool.
I may not always agree with Powell, but I have the Utmost respect for him.
Funny I told my hsuband Months ago I also liked Smerconish- don’t always agree, but have a good dose of respect for him too. The differentiation between republicans like thee two (and Hagel) are that they never resort to kneecapping their opponent by dirty tricks or Insults. They are able to discuss their point of view with intellectual vigor and Decorum, Becasue they have a Point worth defending. such things as insinuating ‘terrorist’ proves you have no Point- Obleeo
So thank You Fair minded Old School Republicans… Such sacrific for Country over party will be remembered and perhaps we can help you regain your party Back from the Corp back Religious Fanatizism which has Plagued your party for Decades, and Brought our country and Her values to it’s knees.
We showed the Clintons the Door, it’s time you guys show the top 1% and their zealotry the same.
By cyrena, October 21, 2008 at 10:46 am #
By cann4ing, October 21 at 8:07 am #
cann4ing…
“It is unfortunate that both Eugene Robinson & the Washington Post left off the most moving aspect of Powell’s denunciation of the “Muslim” smear. Powell referenced a poignant picture of a tearful mother resting her head against the headstone of her son’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery. Her son was killed fighting for the U.S. in Iraq. At the top of the headstone one could see not a Christian cross or a Jewish Star of David, but the Muslim crescent.”
~~~~
I read this part, and I immediately thought of an encounter I’d had on Sunday. I’d been to one of the local stores (a mini-mart of sorts) where the proprietors are a Middle Eastern family. (I’m not sure from where). I always inquire from the main ‘boss’ of the business (a mother and grandmother) about the welfare of the rest of her family, because her son has been serving in Iraq for the past 4 years. (we always knew of his brief furloughs and homecomings well in advance). Anyway, when I was there on Sunday, the son was working in the store. He was injured there, and has been discharged. (lucky for him I guess, considering the various other possibilities). His war scars are quite visible, from the ringing in his hears, to the other visible and less visible marks. He explained that he couldn’t find a job because of these things, (I didn’t mention that others can’t either) and that he was awarded a measely $700.00 a month to live on. He has a wife and two children.
No doubt his own mother and his children are glad to have him back. But of course he worries. How will he provide for them? I had no answers, knowing full well that there were so many others that have not made it back. Yep, they too are Muslims.
Report thisBy noitdoesnt, October 21, 2008 at 10:28 am #
Colin’s “Powell Doctrine” also called for him to wait until he had a sure thing, with McCain trailing by double-digits.
Report thisHe waited for weeks while the McCain campaign attacked Senator Obama as “not one of us” and friend of terrorists.
This man, who declined to run in 1996 because (he said) his wife had deep concern for his safety, kept mum while a more courageous man was being set up.
Colin Powell has always put his career first, ahead of duty to country, duty to our soldiers.
By jason, October 21, 2008 at 10:26 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
“he has decided to fire back in a way that Obama cannot.”
Why can Obama not fire back in this way? Why can’t he stand up and defend Muslims? The obvious reason is that he can’t do anything risky at this point to jeopardize his all but inevitable election. It says something very sad about the low-politics of campaigning that Obama can’t stand up for human rights and descency just because he is running for president.
The more accurate statement is that Powel decided to fire back in a way that Obama did not.
Report thisBy cann4ing, October 21, 2008 at 8:11 am #
Powell’s actual words on this subject bear repetition.
“I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards—Purple Heart, Bronze Star—showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross, it didn’t have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way.”
Report thisBy cann4ing, October 21, 2008 at 8:07 am #
It is unfortunate that both Eugene Robinson & the Washington Post left off the most moving aspect of Powell’s denunciation of the “Muslim” smear. Powell referenced a poignant picture of a tearful mother resting her head against the headstone of her son’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery. Her son was killed fighting for the U.S. in Iraq. At the top of the headstone one could see not a Christian cross or a Jewish Star of David, but the Muslim crescent.
Muslim-Americans have served this nation with honor in our armed forces just as Japanese Americans did so during World War II even as their families were incarcerated at Manzinar. Indeed, atheists as well as individuals of just about every religious domination—save those whose pacifism precludes such service—have served in this nation’s armed forces, many making the ultimate sacrifice.
The din of hate speech delivered by the Christian right has been so heavy that many lose sight of the fact that ours is a secular government; that the First Amendment bars the establishment of religion (freedom “from” religion) as well as the right to freely exercise religion and that our constitution expressly forbids the use of any religious test for holding federal office.
I, for one, am ever so grateful that Gen. Powell would use the occasion of an endorsement to directly confront the divisiveness of Karl Rove wedge politics.
Report thisBy cyrena, October 21, 2008 at 12:21 am #
abdo writes:
”..In his concise testimony, he took the liberty of a retiring statesman to evaluate and judge the candidates and their parties. Powell said “It is time for generation change”, remarkably identical to the last words of Ted Kennedy in his party’s convention. Kennedy also broke with a large faction of the democratic party, by choosing Obama’s side, since most of his peers favored Sen.Clinton.
Powell also told us he wanted to vote for a presidential candidate who is highly educated has intellectual capacity and supports national healing and unity…”
~~~~
And…I THANK you for these equally concise and oh so very insightful comments. I too see these as the comments of a RETIRING Statesman.
Thanks again.
Report thisBy abdo, October 20, 2008 at 10:00 pm #
I believe that general Powell,as he broke with his party, is making his exit as political figure. In his concise testimony, he took the liberty of a retiring statesman to evaluate and judge the candidates and their parties. Powell said “It is time for generation change”, remarkably identical to the last words of Ted Kennedy in his party’s convention. Kennedy also broke with a large faction of the democratic party, by choosing Obama’s side, since most of his peers favored Sen.Clinton.
Report thisPowell also told us he wanted to vote for a presidential candidate who is highly educated has intellectual capacity and supports national healing and unity. Powell’s not only choose the future he also condemned the policy of beer drinking gun toting cowboys who turnished his uniforme.