<p>Did you hear Colin Powell’s rebuttal to the charge that Obama is a “socialist”. Pretty accurate - as well as his assessment of McCain’s campaign and choice in running mate. </p>
<p>Shall we be expecting your endorsement of Obama by the end of the week? </p>
<p>Colin Powell trumpets your independent judgment I assume.</p>
<p>This is a Republican that…stands by his decision to invade Iraq…that the war was initially fought incredibly well - in the phase that toppled Saddam…but that then “went south” UNTIL THE SURGE…But that Iraqis are finally better off now.</p>
<p>Barack disagrees in general with all of these, including enabling the surge again if we went back in time, even if he knew it’d be a success, he wanted change for change’s sake. So for Colin Powell to endorse the guy despite Barack’s opposition to the war as the cornerstone of his candidacy that squeaked him past Hillary.</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t think it’s wrong at all to vote for someone that’d be on your economic interests, racial/gender, etc. As Bubba said recently, "You
can’t tell someone else that the ground on which they make their voting
decision is irrational.”. If Colin Powell wants to vote on something besides who’s been right, who’s more of a smooth talker, who’s less blunt, that’s his prerogative, but it’s not mine.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p>Shall we be expecting your endorsement of Obama by the end of the week?</p>
<p>Colin is also a Republican who sees in Barack the potential for a sound, intelligent, and steady leader - no, an “extraordinary” leader, I believe was his exact word choice.</p>
<p>Wise people can disagree on policy issues and still recognize a great leader capable of uniting a nation and restoring a country’s reputation in the world at a time when it is desperately needed.</p>
<p>So, yes, I do see in Powell an independent thinker and wise leader who’s looking forward to 2009 and not back to 2003, like you seem to be doing.</p>
<p>Keep digging, Pug. There has to be something they haven’t found yet…</p>
<p>Yes, potential. Powell sees Barack as good enough!, despite their policy differences, and being Black doesn’t hurt either. That’s his decision, I have mine, and I don’t have to dig hard to express why I prefer McCain.</p>
<p>Why are you guys even debating? At this stage of the race, all this talk is purely academic. This election was over 6 months ago, when McCain was chosen to lead the Republican ticket. I said it before (like over a year ago) and I will say it again, Barak cannot be stopped, especially not by a 72 year old with a completely disqualified running mate. Barak Obama will win the election by quite a margin. He will get 293-364 electoral votes to McCains 174-245 electoral votes.</p>
<p>Colin Powell himself said, when asked about race, "“If I only had that in mind, I could have done this six, eight, ten months ago,”</p>
<p>Now, he did say “If I ONLY had that in mind”. </p>
<p>There is no doubt that a bi-racial person with the middle name “Hussein” represents a new direction for the United States more reflective of the racial and ethnic melting pot our beautiful nation has become. That is a part of why Obama could open doors internationally that have long been closed to us. Race and international relations are not mutually exclusive.</p>
<p>But, as Chris Rock said when Larry King asked him what he thought about an African American presidential candidate, “I’m proud Barack Obama is running for president . . . If it was Flavor Flav, would I be proud? No.”</p>
<p>The election of an African-American president “would be electrifying,” Powell told a George Washington University audience, "but at the same time [I have to] make a judgment here on which would be best for America.</p>
<p>Of course Powell didn’t have only race in mind, other wise, he would’ve endorsed Jesse Jackson a long time ago. My point stands. </p>
<p>“It’s not about race”</p>
<p>“I read Playboy for the articles”</p>
<p>“Really, I didn’t know that was your sister”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, back to the article about Palin,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In NYC, where I’m from, we have people running factories, teaching, fighting, and protecting us in uniform. (We generally don’t have people growing food.) People doing the things Palin likes are not found only in small towns.</p>
<p>I concur with Jon Stewart’s observation that these social conservatives will sweep in to get photo-ops at ground zero and say how proud they are of everybody there, then go back to Middle America and trash everybody from Maine down to DC. </p>
<p>It’s sick, yet understandable. She’s tapping into the fact that we’re globalizing as a civilization and the cosmopolitan cities are making the transition economically and socially. People in such places no longer identify themselves by the arbitrary boundaries of nationality. That really threatens a lot of people not positioned for the global transition, so they hold onto the tight boundaries of nationality and perpetuate a rather tribalistic fear of the “other”.</p>
<p>Another key thing to consider is that when these “patriots” say that Obama criticizes “America”, what exactly does “America” mean to these people? Remember that these people probably trash and bash American cities like San Francisco and New York City and bash Americans like Malcolm X, George Carlin, Jane Fonda, Jon Stewart and whoever else makes them feel uncomfortable. America is as America does, but to these people, “America” has a certain connotation and characteristic. </p>
<p>And no, it’s not freedom or the pursuit of happiness.</p>
<p>To them, it’s an ugly mix of beliefs that characterizes “America” as always a white, Christian nation that shouldn’t have to apologize too much for its past (especially for its misdeeds against non-whites and non-Christians) and shouldn’t have to apologize too much for its potentially aggressive future (especially if it’s against non-whites and non-Christians).</p>