Why did Colin Powell Endorse Obama?

[JohnStOnge]

MSNBC has been full of "Republicans are Racists" stuff lately. One (below) pivoted off of a former Colin Powell aid's statement. Two questions:

1. What do you think is the percentage of the people who would vote for Obama based on his philosophies, etc., but will not because he is Black?

2. Do you think Colin Powell would endorse a candidate for President if he had all of the same philosophies,etc., as Barac Obama but is White?

My answer to question 1 is that I think it is a very small percentage. Not large enough to make the difference between who wins and who loses. I think saying that "the real reason a considerable portion" of the Republican Party wants Obama out of the White House has "everything to do with the color of his skin" is ridiculous. A White guy running as a Democrat and expressing Obama's world view would have the same percentage of Republicans wanting him out of the White House to within way less than a percentage point. I think to within less than 1/100th of a percentage point. It'd essentially be the same situation.

My answer to question 2 is that, in looking at the list of Colin Powell's positions at http://www.ontheissues.org/colin_powell.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, I'm not sure. He's a pretty liberal Republican; though he does reportedly believe the marketplace will thrive if you get government out of it. But I think that it's certainly reasonable to suspect that Obama being Black is a factor. It's not like someone who expresses that opinion is being unreasonable.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaW92c2hqNs[/youtube]

[kalm]

Maybe because he's a pretty liberal republican?

[JohnStOnge]

Maybe because he's a pretty liberal republican?

Why, yes. I alluded to that in saying I don't know. But if I had to bet I'd bet not. Seriously. Ask yourself honestly. Do you REALLY, in your heart of hearts, think that Colin Powell would be publicly endorsing the Democratic Party candidate for President if everything about that candidate in terms of positions and proposals was the same but the candidate was a White male.

Be honest now. Of course we can never know. But what do you really believe if you're honest with yourself about it.

Also, as a general matter, do you think it's unreasonable for people to suspect and/or believe Obama being Black made the difference between him endorsing Obama or not?

To me this is another case where "political correctness" means people can't say something that is totally reasonable for fear of having a big "false indignation" outcry over it and getting shouted down as well as ostracized.

[kalm]

Maybe because he's a pretty liberal republican?

Why, yes. I alluded to that in saying I don't know. But if I had to bet I'd bet not. Seriously. Ask yourself honestly. Do you REALLY, in your heart of hearts, think that Colin Powell would be publicly endorsing the Democratic Party candidate for President if everything about that candidate in terms of positions and proposals was the same but the candidate was a White male.

Be honest now. Of course we can never know. But what do you really believe if you're honest with yourself about it.

Also, as a general matter, do you think it's unreasonable for people to suspect and/or believe Obama being Black made the difference between him endorsing Obama or not?

To me this is another case where "political correctness" means people can't say something that is totally reasonable for fear of having a big "false indignation" outcry over it and getting shouted down as well as ostracized.

It's also politically incorrect for a Republican to admit that Obama is a centrist...aka a pretty liberal Republican.

[HI54UNI]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v4CFjrjBxc[/youtube]

[Chizzang]

Because Powell knows that no matter who the president is they behave virtually identically
Republican / Democrat = same / same
Sure they say different stuff but they actually do the same stuff when in office

[Bronco]

It is shocking to me that a military man after seeing how BHO handled the recent events in Libya could still support him.

[biobengal]

Why?

Powell supported BHO in 2008 campaign; why would he now support a self-described, severe conservative who appears hell bent on repeating GW's foreign policy? Powell is also pro-choice, for gay marriage, for gun control and for affirmative action. Lest we forget, Powell was fired by GW and used as a pawn leading up the the Iraq war.

Is that enough? That sounds like enough.

[Baldy]

Why?

Powell supported BHO in 2008 campaign; why would he now support a self-described, severe conservative who appears hell bent on repeating GW's foreign policy?

Well, our current foreign policy is just killer, isn't it?

[BlueHen86]

Why?

Powell supported BHO in 2008 campaign; why would he now support a self-described, severe conservative who appears hell bent on repeating GW's foreign policy?

Well, our current foreign policy is just killer, isn't it?

And what has Romney said regarding foreign policy that makes you think he'll do any better?

[Grizalltheway]

Why?

Powell supported BHO in 2008 campaign; why would he now support a self-described, severe conservative who appears hell bent on repeating GW's foreign policy?

Well, our current foreign policy is just killer, isn't it?

Significant improvement over the GOP's, and only a partisan hack like yourself wouldn't admit it.

[JohnStOnge]

Why?

Powell supported BHO in 2008 campaign; why would he now support a self-described, severe conservative who appears hell bent on repeating GW's foreign policy? Powell is also pro-choice, for gay marriage, for gun control and for affirmative action. Lest we forget, Powell was fired by GW and used as a pawn leading up the the Iraq war.

Is that enough? That sounds like enough.

So did he endorse Al Gore and John Kerry? Yes I know that when it was Kerry he was working for the Bush Administration. But why was he doing that?

I guess you could say the "used as a pawn" thing became evident later. But if he was going to endorse a Democrat because he's pro choice, for homosexual marriage (and I don't know if he is), for gun control, and for affirmative action why was he not supporting Democratic candidates for President earlier? Heck, why was he a Republican? It's not like the Republican Party suddenly decided to be anti gun control, pro life, and pro traditional marriage when Barac Obama decided to run for President.

[Baldy]

Well, our current foreign policy is just killer, isn't it?

Significant improvement over the GOP's, and only a partisan hack like yourself wouldn't admit it.

Says the partisan hack.

[Baldy]

Why?

Powell supported BHO in 2008 campaign; why would he now support a self-described, severe conservative who appears hell bent on repeating GW's foreign policy? Powell is also pro-choice, for gay marriage, for gun control and for affirmative action. Lest we forget, Powell was fired by GW and used as a pawn leading up the the Iraq war.

Is that enough? That sounds like enough.

So did he endorse Al Gore and John Kerry? Yes I know that when it was Kerry he was working for the Bush Administration. But why was he doing that?

I guess you could say the "used as a pawn" thing became evident later. But if he was going to endorse a Democrat because he's pro choice, for homosexual marriage (and I don't know if he is), for gun control, and for affirmative action why was he not supporting Democratic candidates for President earlier? Heck, why was he a Republican? It's not like the Republican Party suddenly decided to be anti gun control, pro life, and pro traditional marriage when Barac Obama decided to run for President.

Honestly, who cares? Colin Powell is as relevant as an 8-track player.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, here's a quote on affirmative action from Powell's 1995 Book, My American Journey.:

Equal rights & equal opportunity mean just that. They do not mean preferential treatment. If affirmative action means programs that provide equal opportunity, then I am all for it. If it leads to preferential treatment or helps those that no longer need help, I am opposed. I benefited from equal opportunity and affirmative action in the Army, but I was not shown preference. The Army made sure that performance would be the only measure of advancement. When equal performance does not result in equal advancement, then something is wrong with the system, and our leaders have an obligation to fix it. If a history of discrimination has made it difficult for certain Americans to meet standards, it is only fair to provide temporary means to help them catch up and compete on equal terms. Affirmative action in the best sense promotes equal consideration, not reverse discrimination. Discrimination for one group means, inevitably, discrimination against another; and all discrimination is offensive.

I do not interpret that as the classic pro "affirmative action" position. I do not interpret is as consistent with favoring things such as what are effectively race preferences in things like university admissions.

According to that page with his positions he also favors teacher-led prayer in public schools. Yes, he is or was a relatively liberal Republican all things considered. But I think it's kind of being in denial to insist on failing to recognize the possibility that he would not have endorsed Obama if Obama were not Black. It's not an unrealistic possibility at all.

[kalm]

Powell is a member of a dying breed known as moderate Republicans.

[Grizalltheway]

Significant improvement over the GOP's, and only a partisan hack like yourself wouldn't admit it.

Says the partisan hack.

Not a registered member of either party. You?

[JohnStOnge]

Honestly, who cares? Colin Powell is as relevant as an 8-track player.

I think the discussion of Colin Powell that I linked (the video) goes to the larger issue of the way in which we inevitably start to see Democrats begin race baiting, ironically, by accusing Republicans of race baiting. Even though the guy in the video I linked at the start of this thread I consider the display part of the standard Democrat effort. Below is another example. You don't have to look at the whole thing. In fact I wouldn't if I were you. Just the from about 0:45 in through about 5:15 in. You'll get the picture.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TsoCRq8W0U[/youtube]

[BlueHen86]

Honestly, who cares? Colin Powell is as relevant as an 8-track player.

I think the discussion of Colin Powell that I linked (the video) goes to the larger issue of the way in which we inevitably start to see Democrats begin race baiting, ironically, by accusing Republicans of race baiting. Below is another example. You don't have to look at the whole thing. In fact I wouldn't if I were you. Just the from about 0:45 in through about 5:15 in. You'll get the picture.

You start a thread questioning why Powell endorsed Obama, and then accuse the Dems of race baiting. That's precious.

[JohnStOnge]

You start a thread questioning why Powell endorsed Obama, and then accuse the Dems of race baiting. That's precious.

If you want to say I am also race baiting, that's fine. The definition I'm looking at is:

Race baiting is any form of speech, actions, or other forms of communication, to anger, intimidate or incite a person or race of people.

I don't think that what I wrote and the way I wrote it fits that. But if you do I understand.

If I am, it doesn't change the fact the the Democrats reliably start race baiting at some point during any Presidential election. I think the first linked video is an example. Yes they put a Republican on display in order to do it in that case. But the other video I linked depicts something that happened earlier.

Republicans never, as far as I can tell, start it. The typical pattern is that Democrats start spreading the word that the Republican Party is the party of racists; thereby inciting people; particularly people of color.

[mrklean]

You start a thread questioning why Powell endorsed Obama, and then accuse the Dems of race baiting. That's precious.

If you want to say I am also race baiting, that's fine. The definition I'm looking at is:

Race baiting is any form of speech, actions, or other forms of communication, to anger, intimidate or incite a person or race of people.

I don't think that what I wrote and the way I wrote it fits that. But if you do I understand.

If I am, it doesn't change the fact the the Democrats reliably start race baiting at some point during any Presidential election. I think the first linked video is an example. Yes they put a Republican on display in order to do it in that case. But the other video I linked depicts something that happened earlier.

Republicans never, as far as I can tell, start it. The typical pattern is that Democrats start spreading the word that the Republican Party is the party of racists; thereby inciting people; particularly people of color.

Because its true!! So I guess we are going to look this over. When was telling the truth race baiting? But the same ole Repuke line of blaming Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson for this also. You ever wondered why these two men still have so called jobs??? Also, having people like Rush Limbaugh as the spokes person of the GOP does not help. Lord I misss Jack Kemp (May he rest in peace).

[mrklean]

I think the discussion of Colin Powell that I linked (the video) goes to the larger issue of the way in which we inevitably start to see Democrats begin race baiting, ironically, by accusing Republicans of race baiting. Below is another example. You don't have to look at the whole thing. In fact I wouldn't if I were you. Just the from about 0:45 in through about 5:15 in. You'll get the picture.

You start a thread questioning why Powell endorsed Obama, and then accuse the Dems of race baiting. That's precious.

Its what they (repukes) do.........

[AZGrizFan]

If you want to say I am also race baiting, that's fine. The definition I'm looking at is:



I don't think that what I wrote and the way I wrote it fits that. But if you do I understand.

If I am, it doesn't change the fact the the Democrats reliably start race baiting at some point during any Presidential election. I think the first linked video is an example. Yes they put a Republican on display in order to do it in that case. But the other video I linked depicts something that happened earlier.

Republicans never, as far as I can tell, start it. The typical pattern is that Democrats start spreading the word that the Republican Party is the party of racists; thereby inciting people; particularly people of color.

Because its true!! So I guess we are going to look this over. When was telling the truth race baiting? But the same ole Repuke line of blaming Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson for this also. You ever wondered why these two men still have so called jobs??? Also, having people like Rush Limbaugh as the spokes person of the GOP does not help. Lord I misss Jack Kemp (May he rest in peace).

Sharpton and Jackson have perpetuated race wars for 30 years and have gravy-trained off those wars, making a very nice living in the process.

[Wedgebuster]

John basically answered his own question here, and did it without actually saying it.

The answer of course is "because they all look alike"

[mrklean]

Because its true!! So I guess we are going to look this over. When was telling the truth race baiting? But the same ole Repuke line of blaming Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson for this also. You ever wondered why these two men still have so called jobs??? Also, having people like Rush Limbaugh as the spokes person of the GOP does not help. Lord I misss Jack Kemp (May he rest in peace).

Sharpton and Jackson have perpetuated race wars for 30 years and have gravy-trained off those wars, making a very nice living in the process.

LOL THe Great American Race War 1963-2008