The Colin Powell endorsement: Triumph of hope over reality
Gravitas.
The media’s in a tizzy over Colin Powell’s Meet the Press endorsement of Barack Obama this morning.
It’s not a surprise to anyone who’s paid attention to his pro-Obama murmurings over the last four months.
How will people outside the Beltway bubble respond?
Yawn.
Here’s the vid:
Powell’s embrace of Barack Obama is a triumph of hope over reality. He told Tom Brokaw that Obama’s “steadiness” and “not jumping in and changing every day” convinced him that The One was ready to lead.
Hello?
Guess Powell relied on Obama’s website after he purged his surge criticism from it.
Powell then goes on to pooh-pooh Obama’s longtime “limited relationship” with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers as an “issue that is not central” to the campaign — just as evidence of the closeness of these two very chummy “neighbors” mounts.
Judgment, schmudgment, eh, Secretary Powell?
Finally, we arrive at the real reason Powell is endorsing Obama: The party, he complains, has become too “narrow” for his tastes. Pro-abortion Powell can’t stand the thought of two more Republican Supreme Court appointments. He thinks Sarah Palin is too conservative. He shares the Obama view of our base as racist and non-inclusive — but has nothing to say about the rabid pack of America-damning preachers who helped make Obama the “transformational” figure Powell has placed his faith in.
Powell also makes reference to all the Obama-is-a-Muslim rumors, blaming the Republican Party for all that. Never mind the Democrat Hillary backers like Bob Kerrey and on down to her grass-roots supporters who indulged themselves and trafficked in those very rumors Powell smears conservatives for spreading.
The orgy of Obamedia attention Powell will receive the next 24 hours is disproportionate to its importance.
The press only loves maverick Republicans when they jump in bed with Democrats.
Just ask John McCain.
***
One last note: I see in comments that many believe Powell supports Obama because he is black. Powell has said electing a black president would be “electrifying.” He is a staunch supporter of government racial preferences.
It’s a mistake, though, to attribute Powell’s endorsement primarily to some kind of race loyalty.
It’s Obama’s social liberalism, not his skin color, that attracts Powell most.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Non-shocker of the morning: Soros monkeys coordinate with Democrats
February 13, 2012 10:03 AM by Michelle Malkin
72 CommentsNancy Pelosi Explains Why Obama Flip-Flopped on Super PACs
February 9, 2012 10:08 PM by Doug Powers
50 Comments
Report: Solyndra Sold Assets Cheap to Entity with Close Ties to Investors
February 9, 2012 10:08 AM by Doug Powers
49 CommentsFormer Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
Middle Class Payroll Tax Cut Extension Comes Courtesy of Mortgage Fees on Home Buyers
February 6, 2012 01:36 PM by Doug Powers
35 CommentsHiring Spree in NYC
February 1, 2012 02:47 PM by Doug Powers
43 CommentsMr. and Mrs. Cranky Pants
January 27, 2012 10:35 AM by Michelle Malkin
138 CommentsStimulus-Backed ‘Green’ Bankruptcy of the Week: Ener1
January 26, 2012 03:06 PM by Doug Powers
67 Comments
Obama and Jan Brewer Have Words on Airport Tarmac; Update: Brewer Book Sales Skyrocket
January 25, 2012 09:54 PM by Doug Powers
165 Comments
Categories: Barack Obama,Blogosphere,Colin Powell,John McCain
Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"JustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False ChoicesHot Air
» GOP budget leaders: The president’s fourth straight budget flop underscores need for reformPundit & Pundette
» Obama's war on conscience, cont'd
Pressed submit too soon…Jesus’ own people used Judaism to accuse Him of blasphemy. So your suggestion doesn’t wash. And it doesn’t negate that the Gospel was given for the “Jews first, and also for the Gentiles.”
yeah for centuries the christian church has relegated the jews to having no role in God’s plan…its led to centuries of anti-semitism, and cruelty to the jewish people.
you must be a preterist. Israel exists again, as the Lord said it would. He is not done with Israel, even if you are.
Explain what you mean. Why does this have to do with anything?
Jesus did preach the Gospel among the Jews first, and they are part of “all mankind”. Christianity does not elevate Jews over Christians, as certain Christian heretics claim. It does the opposite – it says that Jews are unbelievers. That is, they reject the word of God as given by His Son.
No, but He has altered the Old Covenant. That is sort of the whole point of the coming of Christ. It’s a strange sort of Christian who needs to be told this.
Blacks approach that number in every election. On top of that, McCain refused to appear at last year’s debate devoted to minority issues, he has no black surrogates, he never mentions poverty, and his running mate loves to call rural America “real America” (as opposed to urban America, where you-know-who live).
Don’t think for a second that McCain would get any more of the black vote if he were running against a white candidate.
true, most democrats would vote for Hitler as long as he a D after his name!
Which is why I call them slaves to the DNC. They are fools to let the DNC take advantage of them like that.
Ah the race card. Now lets hear you call me racist for opposing the budding dictator…
Oh, that makes it all right then.
What sort of brainless bigot thinks that blacks live in the cities? A big city liberal sort of brainless bigot.
Why would any candidate appear at a debate devoted to “minority issues”? California is a white minority state – are there debates held there to discuss “white issues”?
Do you have any other ADL talking points you’d like to get off your chest?
Please people, this discussion you are having about Colin Powell, Obama, and color will soon be mute. Rumor has it that Powell taped a segment for Oprah to refute these arguments for good. Reportedly, he told Oprah, “My former batman, Sidney, who now is employed as my upstairs butler has analyzed my complexion and determined that it is beige sandalwood with a hint of parchment and a caramel base. Barack’s skin has been vetted by a team of cosmetologists who are in agreement that his color is a light cream mocha with splashes of rich honey and golden autumn. So you can see, the accusation that I support Barack because we are the same color is unfounded and laughable. And that is the truth!”
Sorry Michelle, I have to disagree. He hasn’t said that electing a Marxist (socialist/progressive or whatever) is “electrifying”. It’s race first, with Powell’s liberal social issues being the way he rationalizes it all.
FLENSER: We are expressing our beliefs and opinions here. Your intolerant remark is way off base!
Uh, the point is they’re going to vote Democrat no matter if it’s a white or black on the ticket. You know, because Democrats care about issues that blacks care about. Just like Republicans care about issues that evangelicals care about. Neither group is “fools,” they just vote according to their priorities.
What is the reason for the social liberalism of Powell?
If I’m “black first” than I’m voting for Obama.
Period!
To do otherwise is to deny you are black. (The blacks that are opposed to Obama must keep a very low profile.)
Consequences to our nation be damned.
This very attitude, by one group of folks, proves that socialism can never work.
Never!
In order for socialism to work 100% cooperation is needed.
It is usually impossible to even get a consensus within your own family much less the entire world.
Socialism supposedly does away with any reason for people to have traditional disputes due to their differences. No war,no poverty, no needs unmet!
All current and future needs are planned out perfectly and everyone is affected equally.
Funny how in the natural world this never occurs.
Everywhere that socialism has been tried it has led to a long term suffering except for the ruling class and has not solved societies ills.
Nothing in the history of man has created a more ideal society than our democratic and representative republic.
Even with its share of ills, it is by far the most generous and morally conscious society ever built to the benefit of millions the world over.
Colin Powell endorsing Obama is a sad commentary of the successful fanning of racial embers by black leaders that demand a segregationist mind set within their communities. They are themselves primarily responsible for the fire of racism burning today. Fifty years ago it was the whites and it was very wrong, but today it is a media and the blacks themselves who will not allow us to move past racism. That’s not to say there are not white racist still, but I believe they are very few in comparison to the past.
If I have one iota of racial misgivings about this election it is due to this fact. If elected there is no doubt in my mind that this will not change in either Barack nor Michele Obamas mindset. Black first will be a primary filter in his decisions.
Evidently the “Dove General” was damaged much more than we realized by his endorsement of the Iraq intervention. No longer is his first priority our country and troops.
No, we have a man full of self doubt who has transformed completely.
A few years ago I would have enthusiastically voted for Powell. Thank God he didn’t run, for I now know how wrong I would have been.
Obama has a plan that will increase welfare spending by our government four fold.
His plan will provide a disincentive for productive work. His plan will doom black Americans to more reliance on the government and set back that community by years. This country will fail before his plans could succeed.
Colin Powell still has my respect for his past service to our country, it was commendable. This new chapter of his life though has not started out well at all. It begins with a lie. There is no substance to Barack Obama besides his 1) ability to accumulate power, 2) his rhetorical ability to inspire hope 3)his secret dedication to a particular ideal(Marxism).
Our future as a country is now vulnerable to a degree never before experienced. The really frightening aspect of that is just as we were unaware to the danger before 11 September,2001, we are very much in the dark now.
If this election decision selects Obama, it also ushers in the radical upheaval of our entire political system. If we allow it. This, in turn, may lead directly to the total demise of the country.
It matters who we give power to and not because of what they look like but because of what they believe.
yeah thats worked so well for black people in Detroit, New Orleans, Philly, etc. hasn’t it?
all those decades of voting for democRATs and where has it gotten them???
RSS – Most of them are voting for the BLACK candidate this time round. just ask them. I actualy understand them in that, althought I don’t agree with that sort of logic. But I think they are fools to allow the DNC to control thier voting block so absolutely. They would be far more effective in getting what they want if the DNC had to EARN thier votes.
truth hurts doesn’t it flenser? what are you such a jew-hating wacko?
It has gotten them almost nothing of value anyway.
Regarding post #514…AMAZING post dadinseattle!! Thank you!!
Oh geezzz, the survival of Israel is in the intrests of the USA for political reasons not religous ones. Any religous reasons are purely personal issues. If it weren’t in our intrests politicaly, then Israel would have been gone decades ago and the liberals would be decrying the “second holacaust” we did nothing about.
You’re familiar with the story of the Crucifixion? How the Jewish religious leaders urged Pilate to arrest Jesus b/c he was guilty of “blasphemy”? Under Roman rule, the Jews could only request death penalty for violations of their religous code.
Agreed. Generally speaking, many Jews are still looking for the Messiah.
Yes, there is a New Covenant in Christ’s blood, which was shed for ALL for the remission of sin. This means that no longer do we need to offer animal sacrifices to atone for our sin. Jesus has paid the price, one time for all. This doesn’t substitute for the Covenant with Abraham, wherein God said “In your seed, will all nations be blessed.”
Michelle Malkin writes: I see in comments that many believe Powell supports Obama because he is black. Powell has said electing a black president would be “electrifying.” He is a staunch supporter of government racial preferences.
“It’s a mistake, though, to attribute Powell’s endorsement primarily to some kind of race loyalty.
It’s Obama’s social liberalism, not his skin color, that attracts Powell most.”
Two words: Horse manure. The Powell endorsement is all about race. Hillary is just as socially liberal as Obama. You didn’t see Colin Powell rushing to endorse her.
The Powell endorsement is a stunning act of betrayal. First, and most imporantly, it’s a betrayal of the hundreds of thousands of military vets who risked and, in 4000 plus cases, lost their lives in the policy Powell helped bring about. Now he endorses the candidate and oarty that oppsed the strategy that rescued the mission he helped create? He endorses a man who promises to back away from all that’s been accomplished at this late hour and could very well snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? He endorses the same mindset that threw away the sacrifices of Vietnam vets like himself? What could drive a man to such betrayal? Race loyalty, that’s what.
On a personal level Powell’s betrayal reeks just as much. He and Sen. McCain have been friends and allies with a close working relationship for decades. He endorsed Sen. McCain in the 2000 Republican primary. It’s bad enough that he turned his back on his close friend and colleague, but this betrayal timed the announcement to take place at the moment when it could do his old friend the most possible harm. What could make a man engage in such treachery? Race.
It’s understandable that black people are excited about the first black man running for president. Irish Catholics felt the same about John Kennedy. But when race becomes such an overwhelming factor it trumps principle and personal loyalty, it’s a sickness. Colin Powell just personified that perversion.
Why would Powell endorse any Democratic candidate in the primary, especially since most of the reasons he claims for not endorsing McCain occurred during the general election phase( i.e., the negative tenor and selecting Palin as VP)?
Red State Skeptic said:
That still doesn’t explain why 90% of the Democratic primary vote went to Obama over Hillary. I’ll wait for you to address that inconvenient fact…
that whole bit about blaming mccain for saying obama is a muslim is laughable!! remember the picture of his highness (pbuh) in the muslim garb? that was during the primary, and probably a little ‘present’ from hillary.
lets see, the prescription drug benefit, the bailout, spending through the roof….I guess I missed this rightward lurch…
If we all agree that Powell’s endorsement of Obama is strictly about race, can we also agree that the only reason Clarence Thomas was picked by Bush the elder was also because of race? Intellectual integrity, anyone?
What? Mid-level government bureaucrats get appointed to the Supreme Court all the time!
Hillary actually polled much better than Obama for a long time with blacks, but when she supported Robert Johnson for making fun of what Obama was doing “in the neighborhood,” and Bill denigrated Obama’s South Carolina win as racial, they jumped ship pretty quick.
Are you sure this wasn’t the “reverse Bradley effect”?
Jesus didn’t alter the Old Covenant, He “abolished it” in His flesh (Eph. 2:15), put it “to death” (Eph. 2:16), and nailed it “to the cross” (Col. 2:14).
Romans 7:4 teaches that the Jewish believers died to the Law of Moses (the Old Covenant) “through the body of Christ.” That is, when they were baptized into Jesus’ death, they died with Him (Rom. 6:3-6). That is why Rom. 7:1 says one is under the law for as long as one lives. When you die, you are set free from it.
The Jews were under the Law until faith in Christ came. But now that faith in Christ has come (the New Covenant), then we are no longer under the Law of Moses (the Old Covenant) – Gal. 3:23-29. God doesn’t care if you are physically descended from Abraham or not, it is about being a spiritual descendant of Abraham.
To say otherwise is to flat out contradict John the Baptist’s teaching: “Do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’… the axe is already at the root of the trees.” Matt. 3:9-10
Jews who reject Jesus are not saved. “Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 10:32-33).
The Powell endorsement is pretty disappointing but expected at this late stage of the presidential campaign. I think there are a couple reasons why he’s endorsing Obummer. One reason is he doesn’t want to see any more conservative or Republican Supreme Court nominees. Now, why is that? Does this guy even believe in the Constitution?
I think another reason for Powell’s endorsement is political revenge. I don’t know if anybody hit on this but Powell left in “shame” (in the eyes of the world and the media) and will never live down the Iraq War (in their view anyway). He’s ashamed of his role during the build up to the Iraq War and therefore blames both Pres. Bush and the Republicans.
Powell’s endorsement is also indicative of his political inclinations. He’s dismissive of conservatives, especially conservatives/Republicans in the military. Though Powell was once a great general, he is a lousy statesman. He possesses no core convictions except when it’s politically expedient or convenient to jump on the new political phenom’s bandwagon.
Again, Powell’s endorsement is disappointing but not surprising. He’s always been dismissive, as have many liberal, RINO, and country club Republicans of conservatives. He’s part of the establishment Republicans that have turned the party into the joke it is now. The problem isn’t that the Republican Party isn’t narrowly focused, it’s that it’s parted with its core values and become too accommodating to the whims of Dems.
If Powell is uncomfortable with his Republican affiliation he is welcome to leave. He is not a man of principle but rather an opportunist. That’s what happens to those who sometimes enter politics from the military ranks and forget who they are and where they come from.
There are far stronger men of principle leading the military today. We need that kind of approach rather than the short-sighted, political bandwagon jumping of Powell.
Sure, if Bush picked Thomas because he and Bush are both white.
Red State Skeptic said:
What happened was, Hillary had (relative to her later numbers) better numbers among black voters until they realized that Obama had a chance. Then BOOM! You see them voting for him over Hillary, the wife of the “first black president”, in the same kind of overwhelming percentages that we see now. Those numbers aren’t random or coincidence.
emjem may be on to something here. Just like teams trade players, parties should trade members.
We will offer you Lieberman and a DINO to be named later in exchange for Powell and cash consideration (believe me, your guy needs it).
The dirty little secret is Joe the Plumber has had 100 times the effect of Colin Powell.
The lesson of Joe the Plumber that all can see is dare ask a question of the Annoited One and even if the result is the Annoited One making the equivalent of an unforced error, what is the result?
The Obama campaign, the Democrat party and the MSM put Joe the Plumber under a microscope. They dig up his past, tax liens, etc. etc. when the issue was not the question, but the response.
That response tells you all you need to know about the Liberal Left, the MSM, and what elites like Powell think of people like Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin.
Nothing could be clearer.
imjustsaying said:
That doesn’t follow. Obviously, Bush “had” to pick a black nominee to take the place of another black Justice. That still doesn’t mean he had to pick Clarence Thomas. Bush could have selected any black judge. Presumably, Bush picked Thomas because he believed Thomas was the best black candidate for the job.
Powell, on the other hand, is not under tremendous pressure to pick a black candidate. Nice try though…
My theory on Obama is that he was never the black candidate but really the liberal yuppie candidate.
When you go back and look at it, the last time the “yuppie” demographic was in control was with JFK (yes, no one called them yuppies back then, but they were their ancestors). Before that, you had a small town habedasherer and a small town General as president.
After JFK you had:
1. LBJ — who was an old time hardscrabble southern Democrat (and who got us into Vietnam)
2. Nixon — who was a small town grocer’s son
3. Ford — who was a rural Republcian
4. Carter — like LBJ from a traditional southern Democratic backgtround (and who in some ways ran right in 1976)
5. Reagan — who took his practical small town beliefs to Washington
6. Bush 41 — a member of the old line Eastern GOP establishment
7. Clinton — who promised power to the yuppies, but instead governed like a moderate Republican
8. Bush 43 — who they hate.
Given the demographic and economic changes in America, the liberal yuppies feel it is their time, to take back what was taken away from their parents and grandparents 45 years ago.
Speaking as someone who actually knows black people, you’re wrong. My friends loved Hillary and took a long time to warm to Barack, but the once Hillary and Co. pulled the shennanigans in South Carolina, it was all over for them.
Why do liberals always assume I don’t know black people?
What a stupid assumption.
To put it another way, Bush “had” to pick a black conservative judge. Not many to choose from there.
In fairness, he was at least as qualified as Sandra Day O’Connor, who was a state appellate judge, not exactly blue chip material, had no judicial philosophy to speak of, and left more questions than answers in her decades on the court. They were both “token” picks, but Thomas — in this liberal’s opinion — has been far more distinguished, consistent and thoughtful justice. He is often called Scalia’s sidekick, but he is actually more consistent and rational in his philosophy than Scalia, who loves his “originalist” label, but really decides from the gut and legislates from the bench as much as any justice.
Red State Skeptic said:
Actually, you just reaffirmed my point that you don’t know what you are talking about. You don’t know me or the people I know. And I know you are wrong. Not such a good try this time, “my friend.”
Done. Though our guy is within his Public Financing limit I believe – how’s your guy doing with his Public Financing promise?
Red State Skeptic said:
Bush wasn’t forced to pick a conservative judge, he thought it was better to pick a conservative judge. Conservative judges, unlike liberal, activist judges, understand their constitutional role to interpret the law, not legislate the law.
We can give the cash to his compliance fund, if you so wish.
And Obama broke that promise, no ifs ands or buts. I should feel ashamed about this, but obviously can’t since I am both a stinking liberal and a heartless lawyer.
It Proves Obama can not be trusted to stick to his word. He is a liar.
“Ashamed” isn’t the word I would choose. Obama should be ashamed, but I have a feeling he doesn’t know what that word means. As for all Americans to whom lying by politicians has become so prevalent, we should be ANGRY.
No way. The conservatives on the bench legislate when they decide that state and local bodies can’t decide for themselves to have race-based quotas in education, can’t decide for themselves to have gun control, and can’t decide for themselves to allow medical marijuana. If that’s not being “activist” judges, I don’t know what is.
Powell always was a RINO and consistently undermined Bush. He’s just another liberal/moderate bureaucrat, one of thousands who have infested our government since the days of FDR. So his last-minute “conversion” to promote the Messiah is not exactly a thumping shock.
BTW, if the young man-child does ascend his throne, and fires all 93 federal attorneys, does anyone think even a tiny ripple will mar the mirror surface of the Obama presidency?
Fat freakin’ chance.
conservatives don’t make things up out of thin air, like the ‘right’ to kill babies.
following the constitution is ‘activist’ but making up your own constitution is OK…uh huh!
you must be the devil himself.
liberals ALWAYS say this…its so condescending…try marrying one, and then we’ll talk.
Are you actually going to address my comment or just mock it like you always do?
When did Powell ever stand up to the Republican party? When? Now, compare Powell to Lieberman whose party now can’t tolerate him for standing up to them regarding the Iraq War and foreign policy and treats him like a pariah. Did that happen to Powell?
It doesn’t speak well for the future of public financing when Obummer raises cash he can’t even distinguish which money is legit and which isn’t coming into his coffers. That’s for after the election to figure out.
Why does Obummer need so much cash? How is this a fair fight when one candidate takes public financing and the other candidate breaks his word and doesn’t?
Does the word honor and integrity mean anything in your world? Or do Dems trot those words out when they’re defaming the military and conservatives in general?
Thanks for not addressing anything I say. It really means a lot.
I have no interest in addressing the substance of your comment, or the substance of this thread in general, nor was I mocking your comment. It was a launch pad for a freakin’ joke, little miss touchy.
But hey, the Bills won. Can’t we just get along?
I had a black friend once, I thought he was a pretty good guy. He married a white women, had a baby, cheated on her, she divorced him, and I dumped him as a friend.
I suppose decisions like Brown v the Board of Education only work in one direction, eh? What if that same local body decided that the race-based quota for a particular race was zero? Why does the reverse thinking of applying minimums make any more sense? Shouldn’t we be protecting equal opportunity and not equal outcomes?
Quotas, in general, are just a bad idea. Legislating anything that has race involved is equally bad and should be considered by a federal court as it applies to the 14th amendment.
Gun control is a second amendment issue. Also, I’m not sure where you’re from, but there are plenty of local based restrictions on gun control. In Illinois, a citizen’s head can spin trying to keep track of them all.
I assume you’re thinking in terms of DC v Heller. Whether or not you agree with the decision, it worked its way up due process to the Supreme Court.
You’ve heard of California, right? Last I knew, medical marijuana was legal there.
Please cite a specific case which supports your argument. I don’t believe the three generalities you mentioned pass muster.
I’d like to see a debate between Colin and son Michael who supports McCain. This is like the Civil War, father against son. Powerful stuff!
Rob…I hope you are not painting all blacks with a broad brush! They are all unique individuals, just as the other races are. Bad apples in every race, and good apples too!!!
Except Icelanders. They are a very shifty people who would sooner slit your throat than look at you.
He did break his pledge, and I gave him hell on this blog for it. However, I’m glad he broke his pledge. It wasn’t a lie, unless anyone can prove he was lying when he made the pledge. He just changed his mind. Why? I don’t think he really believed that he would make it out of the primaries. He also had no idea that he’d be able to raise so much money. Lastly, he learned a lesson from John Kerry to make sure he has enough cash on hand to defend himself from any and all attacks.
Making the public financing pledge was a little naive. In the end it was smart to break the pledge. He has spread the RNC all over the nation and spending money in traditional red states. After reading the $150million figure from last month alone, I decided Obama doesn’t need any more of my money for this election. He broke his pledge, but it was smart thing to do. I don’t anticipate seeing any future candidates taking public money unless the terms are changed. Obama’s campaign will change the way future presidential campaigns are run. Plouffe and Axlerod will become disgustingly rich as pundits and consultants. There is so much money left, we’ll all be seeing, and hearing Obama non-stop for the next two weeks.
It’s all about the Benjamins baby……
You are a strange person, Chapoutier!! But you can be funny at times. Too bad nuance and tongue-in-cheek doesn’t play well in written word. But I got it!
O/T? Not sure, but you guys do realize that no one will EVER be allowed to make a caricature of Capt. Big Ears EVER don’t you? While it has been De Riguer for the Liberals to make all sorts of caricatures of President Bush…in painting, cartoon, effigy, any number of ways, should anyone who is protesting a Tarnished Bovine Presidency choose to act on the same level and create something depicting a taxi driving down the street with both doors open, they will forever be labeled a racist and more than likely arrested, accused, tried and convicted of executing a “hate crime”.
The Liberals have created the perfect candidate. One who is exempt from any and all criticism else the criticizer be labeled and condemned for life as a racist.
I tried to pick the most benign people I could think of so there would be no doubt.
Also, I rolled the dice that there were no Icelanders reading this blog.
Democrat lying = changing their mind
Republican changing their mind = lying and must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, life ruined and name drug through the mud for all eternity.
Yup…sounds about fair to me.
Of course he lied. He said he would not take the money but he did.
BTW where did all that money come from? How much was from overseas? How much was illegal?
How many fraudulent votes has Obama the fraud gotten already? How amny more on election day? Obama is generating quite a record of fraud and lies.
Approximately 300 from me FWIW.
Far more bizarre than the Colin Powell endorsement of Obama is Ken Adelman saying he too is jumping the McCain ship. Bizarro world, indeed:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2008/10/not-quite-colin.html
great, and the other
499,999,700???
all untraceable small donations…. I smell fraud and legal donations….
Ask Alan Keyes and Michael Steele how much being black helped them get the black vote. If some people here really believe that blacks will support blacks, as opposed to base on ideology, I’d like to hear an explanation about folks like Steele and Keyes.
Don’t give me the “house nigger”, “uncle tom” crap. If blacks support blacks, strictly based on race, Alan Keyes should be a senator from Illinois right now, and Michael Steele should be representing Maryland.
Blacks support democrats in overwhelmingly large numbers. Will they support a black democrat over a white one? Generally, yes.
White seniors and white women supported Hillary in the primaries.
Seniors tended to support McCain.
Mormons supported Romney.
Cross-dressing adulterers supported Rudy.
There has been, and always will be a level of indentity based voting. However, black folks are democrats first, generally speaking. If we vote strictly based on blackness first, try running Steele or Keyes on the GOP ticket. Actually, I’m begging you please run Alan Keyes. Please?
legal = illegal. ugh
I have been asking that question myself and I pray it will be answered! This is very suspicious. How can we allow him to get away with that? I don’t know if it is illegal to contribute to a campaign as a foreigner, but it would be very telling to find out who they are! Saudis? Iranians? Just who is funding this campaign? If he is elected, will we EVER find out?
More fool them for voting for the party of slavery.
Yes, it will be similar to any mention or drawing of Mohamed in Islam, punishable by death from the “party of the perpetually outraged”….ie: DEMOCRATS!
You have lost it too Michelle. It’s pure and simple loyalty to black race. Would he endorse a similar white ‘social liberal’???
White people are doomed forever without another revolution.
I’m actually travelling to Reykjavik this winter to meet up with some friends from London and an Icelandic friend. We planned this trip a bit ago (before the walls began crumbling down), and lately we’ve just been watching the Iceland news closely and trying to figure out how insane this whole thing will end up being. My Icelandic friend maintains the standard Scandinavian dark humor about the whole situation, but, we’ll see how funny it is in the end.
If you are an originalist, you look at how an amendment was viewed when it was ratified. No one ever considered that the 14th Amendment would outlaw affirmative action, and in fact there were affirmative action programs in the District of Columbia at the time of it was ratified in 1868. But instead you have Scalia, Thomas and the rest, whose value judgment is that black folks shouldn’t get a leg up, and they don’t let communities to decide otherwise. See Gratz v. Bollinger.
I don’t care how it “worked its way up,” I just care that members of the court who believe they have a “humble” role in “deferring to the electorate” can decide that a community can’t make its own gun laws.
Medical marijuana is legal under California law, but illegal under federal law, so pot pushers there have to worry about raids from federal agents. See Gonzales v. Raich.
You can make a good argument for or against how any of these decisions came out, but you can’t say they aren’t examples of Scalia legislating from the bench: twisting the Constitution to overturn democratically enacted laws on the local level because of his personal values.
The MSM will never fulling investigate Obama like they did with Palin because that would be RRRRAAAACCCIIISSSSTTT.
Obama, the leader in fraudulant votes, lies, and illegal donations could become the countries first Fraudulant President.
I mean I get what you are saying, but come on. Obama’s fundraising juggernaut is objectively impressive.
And there is no reason to think that Obama is actively soliciting illegal or foreign donations.
In fact, according to opensecrets.org, in terms of disclosure of donations, Obama is outpacing McCain easily.
Obama
Full Disclosure $241,496,372 (92.4%)
Incomplete $5,645,434 (2.2%)
No Disclosure $14,294,243 (5.5%)
McCain
Full Disclosure $149,978,607 (86.8%)
Incomplete $5,347,819 (3.1%)
No Disclosure $17,504,399 (10.1%)
So 13.2% incomplete or no disclosure for McCain vs. 7.7 for Obama.
Aren’t you the same one who said the community can’t make thier own marriage laws?
How do you know he was lying at the time?
I tell you I’m going to eat steak for dinner tomorrow. Tomorrow comes, and I decide I’d rather have fish. I had no plans on eating fish, but my mood/view changed, and somebody convinced me to try this amazing salmon.
How is my initial statement that I plan on eating steak tomorrow a lie? Can’t facts and circumstances change ones plans? How will you prove to me that Obama was lying simply because he changed his mind? You need more, right, right? Riiiighhttt.
Watch out for those shifty characters in Iceland. Chapoutier said so.
And probably illegal. Obama the fraud.
The same way you know Bush was lying at the time about the WMD’s…
mistressjustice: He lied about taking public money. He vowed not to. He is dishonest and a fraud.
Which is why this whole idea of contributors to Obama’s campaign being so sketchy is just silly. Since John McCain’s unidentified donors number roughly TWICE those of Obama’s, I’d really like to see where all (and I mean every. single. one.) of McCain’s funds are coming from.
What is going on is Iceland? What’s the bad news over there? Sorry to be nosey, but now I’m just curious about what “trouble” you’re typing about. I hear it’s beautiful over there.
I don’t follow you. Why would Colin Powell run to Obama after McCain selected a VP with more experience than Obama and who is more qualified than Obama?
It would seem that Powell had his mind made up months ago. Years ago in fact, about his support for whichever democrat made it. Though he put a nice phony pretense by sending some cash to McCain. That was a nice touch.
There have already been multiple examples of illegal funds being funneled to the fraudulant one. This along with all the voter fraud from the organization that Obama directly funded, thats a nice package you’ve got there.
Obama the fraudulant candidate.
You are joking…right? Do you actually think this is a valid comparison? Changing your mind about what you are having for dinner? I doubt that anyone promises they are going to eat a certain thing for dinner. But Obama made a promise. It used to be that a man’s word was his bond. That is a concept the liberals have destroyed. Wow. Just wow.
NJ-Aviator,
Someone offered as proof of the race based basisof Powell’s decision the fact that he did not endorse Hillary in the primaries. All I was saying is that the reasons he gave for deciding to endorse Obama and not endorse McCaim were issues that arose post-primary. Therefore, it is silly to conclude that his non-endorsement of Hillary is any proof.
You seem to have trouble explaining how it was a “lie”. Maybe you should quit calling Obama a liar over this issue, when you have not, one shread of evidence that he lied. All you know is that he changed his mind, and he certainly explained why. If you honestly have no proof that he lied, we should just drop this, because you’re just playing “Miss Cleo”. If you have proof that he lied at the time of making the pledge, I’ll check it out, and will be happy to admit that I’m wrong. Now, I’ll be casually waiting for that proof, but I won’t hold my breath.
Huh? Moonbats like me want communities to be able to enact their own marriage laws; it’s y’all who want a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as a man and a woman.
But sure, there are plenty of areas where I feel the Court should strike down local laws that violate someone’s Constitutional rights, such as the right to engage in any kind of consensual sexual activity you want (unlike the conservatives in Lawrence v. Texas).
I just don’t like conservatives claiming that there’s any difference in judicial philosophy where they only “interpret” the constitution. Conservative justices play fast and loose with the Constitution all they want and make and break laws all the time.
On October 20th, 2008 at 4:58 pm,
Just a joke. Read posts #560, 562 and 564.
if mao-bama wins will all be dear leaders slaves….
H.S.:
I’m discussing the word LIE with Sonofdy. I freely admit that he broke his pledge, he broke his promise. I typed about that in my initial post. Go check.
See. Now my issue is with people calling Obama a liar on this issue. There is no evidence that he lied. He broke his pledge/promise/bond by CHANGING HIS MIND. Where is the lie?
Oh, jeez. Their financial fiasco makes our credit crunch look almost harmless. Banks collapsing, complete disregard for foreign debt, int’l pols like Gordon Brown flying over and desperately looking for ways to protect the funds of British entities/investors…they’re kind of on the verge of going bankrupt, basically. It’s a particularly harsh state for a country so small. I imagine the impact will be felt faster than we’ve seen here or in parts of Europe.
He clearly lied, he said he would do something then he did something else, thats a LIE. Obama is a fruadulant liar.
Obama the fraudulant candidate.