To begin their article titled Powell endorses Obama on Politico.com, Mike Allen and Jonathan Martin write, “Retired Gen. Colin L. Powell, one of the country’s most respected Republicans, stunned both parties Sunday by strongly endorsing Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for president on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ and laying out a blistering, detailed critique of the modern GOP.”

I’m not sure why they think so many people were stunned by this endorsement.  He has been praising Obama since at least early summer, so this, to me, just seemed like the voicing of the inevitable.  I think most people who pay attention to political news saw this coming from a mile away.  I could be wrong, but I’m not exaggerating when I say I haven’t heard anybody besides the writers of this article talk about this as if it was a big surprise.

What surprised me a little bit was his reasoning for endorsing Obama.  I have always respected Powell and thought that he was really a stand-up guy who really believed in conservatism and the ideals of the Republican Party (not to be confused with where the Republican Party is today), so I was shocked when I saw that the reasons he gave for endorsing Obama contained almost no substance whatsoever.  According to the article, he said the election of Obama would “electrify the world” and that Obama “is a transformational figure” and “a new generation coming … onto the world stage and on the American stage.”  He then said that this is why he was endorsing Obama.  He also said:

And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities — and you have to take that into account — as well as his substance — he has both style and substance, he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president.

I’m not sure what substance he is talking about, but Obama definitely has rhetorical abilities.  He can talk and talk and talk.  Unfortunately, he doesn’t ever seem to tell us how he’s going to accomplish anything.  That Powell was drawn in by this rhetoric really disappoints me.

He also said that he thinks John McCain made the wrong decision in picking Sarah Palin as his running mate and that he doesn’t feel she is ready to become the president.  He doesn’t feel she is experienced enough; yet, he is fine with Obama being president.  Something is just not right with that picture.  Powell has said that his endorsement has nothing to do with race, but I think Rush Limbaugh might have been on to something when he said:

Secretary Powell says his endorsement is not about race.  OK, fine. I am now researching his past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal, white candidates he has endorsed. I’ll let you know what I come up with.

The fact of the matter is that Obama, in many ways, has even less experience than Palin.  He does not know what it is like to be the Commander-In-Chief of anything; she, on the other hand, has been the governor of a state, which is an executive branch position.  Each of them has different types of experience, but to discredit Palin while endorsing Obama reeks of hypocrisy.  I seriously doubt anybody who becomes a president for the first time is fully prepared for the job upon assuming the office.  If the issue is Palin’s lack of foreign policy experience, then I guess we should have dismissed Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, as well.

Finally, in what is perhaps the most disappointing statement made by Powell on Meet the Press, he said, “I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that’s what we’d be looking at in a McCain administration.”  Seriously?  Was he ever a conservative?  I really wonder why he wanted to be a member of the Republican Party in the first place.  I’ve heard some people say that his endorsement of Obama is a way for him to protect his legacy after the association he had with the Bush administration.  Powell was the one who delivered, in detail, the information on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.  He made the case for why we needed to go in there, and now he feels like he was used as scapegoat to get us into the war, since we did not end up finding the weapons that he said were there.  I think he feels betrayed by the Bush administration, and he feels like his reputation was greatly harmed in the process.  So by endorsing Obama, who is largely believed to be unstoppable in his quest to make history as the nation’s first black president, I believe Powell sees an opportunity for a kind of redemption.  If Obama wins, he will forever be associated with his endorsement for Obama, and a large number of people will once again look upon him favorably.  But the fact that he has so abandoned the Republican Party, to the point of not wanting more Republicans on the Supreme Court (which is something that pretty much EVERY Republican wants), is really a shame.  I just don’t know what has happened to him.

Maybe I was duped.  I’ve heard people say he wasn’t ever very conservative, and if that is the case, I was, in fact, mistaken about him all along.  I, along with many other people, really wanted him to run for president in 2000, but he claimed he wasn’t interested.  All things considered, if he really isn’t conservative, I guess that was for the best after all.

So now he can put on his blue coat and ride in upon the donkey as his decision to endorse Obama is celebrated by Democrats far and  wide.  If Obama wins, I think he probably will be looked upon favorably by a large number of people in this country, so, to that end, maybe he will be happy.  But when our country turns to socialism, the economy starts to falter, and our Constitution is largely ignored or interpreted as a “living document,” I hope he at least takes the time to reflect upon what this movement he has now joined is really all about.

What a wretched excuse for a debate last night.  Neither candidate really said anything worthwhile in what could possibly be the most boring presidential debate I’ve ever seen.

All things considered, I think McCain probably lost this debate.  While neither candidate really gave us anything to make us feel good about how they can make America better, it was McCain who had the more urgent need to really stand out.  He is down in the polls and needed to make up some ground.  Based on his performance last night, I doubt that will happen.  He was too laid back, and he didn’t go after Obama when he needed to.  By not clearly winning this debate, I think he lost.

In addition to all of that, McCain also proposed a $300 billion plan to force the federal government to buy all of the bad mortgages in this country and allow financially troubled homeowners to keep their homes.  So instead of admitting he made a mistake by voting for the $700 billion bailout plan, he wants to spend MORE taxpayer money to pay for people’s bad choices.  Unbelievable.  I wish he would stop calling himself a maverick and actually BE a maverick.  The Republicans are on par with the Democrats in the wasteful spending category now.  The maverick thing to do would be to return to conservative ideals by getting the government out of our lives and wallets.

McCain’s handlers better get a grip and tell him he needs to actively go after Obama if he wants to win this election.  If he is as passive during the third and final debate as he was in the one last night, it’s over.  He also needs to care more about what matters to his conservative base.

I’m still conflicted.  I’m less enthusiastic about McCain now than I was before the debate.  That new $300 billion plan really made me angry.  But I still see him as the best chance for keeping Obama out of office so that we can at least avoid all-out socialism.  And I still like Palin and wish I could vote for her instead of McCain.

I just wish she could consistently pronounce the word “nuclear.”

(UPDATE: According to Michelle Malkin’s blog, the $300 billion proposal is part of the $700 billion proposal.  Not that that soothes my soul any.  It’s still, as she calls it, a “crap sandwich.”  I recommend you read the whole blog, as it is good information.

Also, as promised in one of my comments on this blog, I have the information showing how McCain’s proposal isn’t exactly original except for the fact that he put an actual price tag on it.  He said that it is not Obama’s or Bush’s idea—it is his idea.  If you read to the end of this AP article, however, it says:

In fact, at a news conference on Sept. 24, Obama said, “we should consider giving the government the authority to purchase mortgages directly instead of simply purchasing mortgage-backed securities.”

Days later, in a news release, he said he would “encourage Treasury to study the option of buying individual mortgages like we did successfully in the 1930s.”

“Senator Obama has been consistently calling for policies that would buy up mortgages and restructure them so that families can stay in their houses,” Obama economic adviser Jason Furman said. “He continues to support that and believes Treasury should use its authority in whatever way it can to bring about that goal, including buying mortgages directly.”

Welcome to the Republicrat / Democlican party.)

In a blog entry on abcnews.com, Alcee Hastings, a Democratic Congressman from Florida, is quoted as saying what is perhaps the most idiotic thing of this entire election season.  Maybe the most idiotic thing of this entire decade.  What is his quote?  Well, here you go:

“If Sarah Palin isn’t enough of a reason for you to get over whatever your problem is with Barack Obama, then you damn well had better pay attention.  Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through.”

And if that wasn’t enough, he went on to say things like this:

“Just like Jews, blacks care about affordable health care, energy independence, and the separation of church and state, and just like blacks, Jews care about equal pay for equal work, investment in alternative energy, and a woman’s right to choose.”

When questioned about Hastings’s criticism, realizing that such a statement was nothing short of disastrous for Democrats and could pretty much do nothing but backfire, Maria Comella, the spokeswoman for Sarah Palin, simply stated, “We’re taking a pass.”

I, for one, am very glad that Barack Obama chose Joe Biden as his vice presidential running mate.  This guy is definitely the comic relief of this whole election process (though, admittedly, some of his gaffes aren’t that funny).  Let’s take a look at some of the fun we’ve had with “Anvil Joe” (as some have dubbed him) thus far.

Actually, let’s get some of the not-so-funny mistakes out of the way.  Then we can have some fun.

  • In an article titled Biden, Obama helped keep ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ alive, we are shown the hypocritical side of Biden (and Obama, for that matter).  Almost immediately after Sarah Palin’s VP nomination was announced, both Obama and Biden started harping on and on about how she had originally supported the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska.  They say she supported it before she opposed it.  And this is true.  She did support the earmark while she a gubernatorial candidate, but after becoming governor, she realized it had become a monstrosity and a horrible waste of taxpayer dollars, so she told them, “Thanks, but no thanks,” and that was it.  But Obama and Biden wouldn’t let it go.  Biden has been especially fierce in his criticism of her.  Now, we come to find out that Obama and Biden both voted to keep the “Bridge to Nowhere” project alive on two different occasions.  A case of the pot calling the kettle black?  Indeed, it is.  Though, with liberals now trying to say that if Obama loses it will be because of racism, I will probably get in trouble for saying that.  That’s how ridiculous things have gotten lately.  Anyway, I digress.  The article says:

    Both Biden and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama voted to kill a Senate amendment that would have diverted federal funding for the bridge to repair a Louisiana span badly damaged by Hurricane Katrina, Senate records show.

    So not only did they vote to keep the “Bridge to Nowhere” earmark alive on the transportation bill,  they did so at the expense of funds that would have been used to repair a bridge that was badly damaged during Hurricane Katrina.  And Democrats have tried to say that President Bush didn’t care about those hit by the hurricane.  Also, when all was said and done, Obama and Biden both voted for the final transportation bill, which included the $223 million earmark for the Alaskan “Bridge to Nowhere” (which Governor Palin then rejected).

  • This one is decidedly the least funny of all the stupid things Biden has said.  In an article titled 1972 crash still haunts driver’s family, Delaware Online tells how Biden, on more than one occasion over the years, has told the story about how a drunk driver struck his wife’s car, killing her and their infant daughter and badly injuring their two sons.  The article then goes on to point out that the man who hit them was never accused of nor charged for being drunk.  The actual recorded facts of the case do not line up with Biden’s story.  And to make matters worse, the driver who hit them is now also dead and cannot even defend himself.  The man’s family, still grief-stricken by his death, has had to also listen to his name being slandered all across the nation.  Biden’s spokesperson has since said that Biden accepts the rumors about the man’s insobriety being false, but that still doesn’t explain why he ever said the man was drunk in the first place.  I understand that the whole incident was painful for him, but to lie and slander another person is never acceptable.

Ok, and now for the funnier stuff.

  • Biden tells Missouri State Senator, Chuck Graham, a paraplegic, to stand up:
  • Biden tells crowd that Hillary would probably have been a better VP choice than him:
  • Biden, during the primaries, also gave us his thoughts on Obama and McCain:
  • Help me out, Joe.  What is the name of the man at the top of your ticket?
  • FDR was not president during the Great Depression, so it also stands to reason that he did not address the nation on television when the stock market crashed.
  • Biden on the growth of Delaware’s Indian population and 7-Eleven:

The election is still more than a month away.  Stay tuned.  I’m sure there will be plenty more where all of that came from.

  • RSS Bible Gateway Verse of the Day

    • Matthew 16:25
      “For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.”
  • June 2017
    S M T W T F S
    « Nov    
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    252627282930  
  • Archives

  • Categories

  • $700 billion 2008 election abortion antwaan randle el back pain bailout barack obama belmont belmont university bengals biden bush christian cincinnati congress conservative conservatives constitution party debate democrat democratic party Democrats election election '08 fantasy football football funny george bush homeless house jennifer brunner jesus joe biden john mccain karl marx liberal liberalism liberals marx mccain murder nashville neck pain news obama ohio pain palin paul politics president president bush radical republican republicans ron paul sarah palin second presidential debate secretary of state senate senators shoulder pain socialism socialist socialists spread the wealth state fair steve slaton stock market subprime mortgages supreme court tennessee third party candidates titans voter fraud
  • Recent Comments

    Levitigus on Do you approve of slavery? Wou…
    vino blanco on Biden’s Bloopers and Pra…
    Maura on Biden’s Bloopers and Pra…
    Tim on My thoughts after election…
    meggo on My thoughts after election…
  • Blog Stats

    • 8,168 hits
  • Meta