Powell endorses Obama as 'transformational'

[quote name='bmulligan']Right. Nonsense is only tolerated here when it comes from CAG's leftist consensus.[/quote]


So you agree that Colin Powell is a no good asshole? The funny thing is that I'm defending a moderate Republican. Tell me again how that fits with my "leftist agenda".
 
[quote name='depascal22']So you agree that Colin Powell is a no good asshole? The funny thing is that I'm defending a moderate Republican. Tell me again how that fits with my "leftist agenda".[/quote]
OMG LEFTIES DEFEND REPUBLICAN (HEAD EXPLODES!)
Lol :lol:
 
[quote name='depascal22']It's not just for him. It's for the people that might stumble in and see this garbage and walk away thinking that we will just stand by and let someone spew nonsense without recourse.[/QUOTE]

He was right about Powell being used by the Bushies in the run up to the Iraq war so he has that, some of the other stuff though is a bit batshit.
 
[quote name='camoor']Speed, are you a joke account because you are giving me the biggest laugh I've had all week. I'm impressed at how you're able to dredge up hate for every response - not to mention how you top it off with "Don't be a dick" like it's some shitty catchphrase. :lol:[/QUOTE]
You'd think at some point someone would actually say WHAT THE MAN HAS DONE TO DESERVE THIS LEVEL OF SUPPORT. You'd think it might be you. You'd be wrong.

If anyone else feels this way and yet has nothing to support their position whatsoever, just drop a +1 so I don't bother reading your posts. Thanks in advance.

[quote name='Koggit']I can't believe speed is attacking Powell now... calling him "an affirmative action hire" is almost lolable. Just ignore him...[/QUOTE]
I already addressed that. I was wrong to not clarify and to use the term affirmative action, instead of my intention to point out that it was a military hire, not a hire based on race. I'll point it out again because someone else will again invariably hold onto that little nugget and make the same accusation all over again, like you did.

Now, if you'd like to address the points I'm making Koggit, I'd love to hear it. Certainly someone as far out as I am on this one is little more than low hanging fruit. Make it happen. You're definitely the cut of man needed to put down this terrible insurrection of mine.

[quote name='Msut77']He was right about Powell being used by the Bushies in the run up to the Iraq war so he has that, some of the other stuff though is a bit batshit.[/QUOTE]
Examples of the other stuff I'm wrong on. Please. Thank you.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Examples of the other stuff I'm wrong on. Please. Thank you.[/quote]

That Powell never commanded at the division level or higher before being named to the Joint Chiefs. Please scroll up and see my post #43.
 
[quote name='depascal22']That Powell never commanded at the division level or higher before being named to the Joint Chiefs. Please scroll up and see my post #43.[/QUOTE]
You know, it gets tiring looking for red meat and getting table scrap comments.

You're correct. I was incorrect in my belief he had never commanded a division level unit. I've answered your question directly and succinctly.

See how that works guys?

Now, you've got two precious little jabs in. You capped on me for my abysmal description of him as a affirmative action hire, and you pointed out a single factual statement I was incorrect on. I've dropped loads of information here. What else?

What exactly has Powell done to deserve the level of support he gets from the public?

edit: I edited more on top of you Msut. I'm just gonna go with it instead of another post.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Examples of the other stuff I'm wrong on. Please. Thank you..[/QUOTE]

See depascal's post for one, I was going to say the affirmative action thing but you kinda retracted it.
 
[quote name='depascal22']So you agree that Colin Powell is a no good asshole? The funny thing is that I'm defending a moderate Republican. Tell me again how that fits with my "leftist agenda".[/QUOTE]

Nope, never alluded to that. I think he's justifiably angry at the cold shoulder he's received from the Republican party after they hung him out to dry.


His philosophy has always coincided with Democrat social and welfare policies and was primarily a republican in name only. Defending him isn't really a big reach for you.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Nope, never alluded to that. I think he's justifiably angry at the cold shoulder he's received from the Republican party after they hung him out to dry.


His philosophy has always coincided with Democrat social and welfare policies and was primarily a republican in name only. Defending him isn't really a big reach for you.[/quote]

But don't you want politicians that make up their own mind instead of just following the party line? Why is it so bad to want liberal social policy and conservative foreign policy? It seems to me that if the right fought as hard for freedom in this country, we wouldn't need a liberal agenda.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Nope, never alluded to that. I think he's justifiably angry at the cold shoulder he's received from the Republican party after they hung him out to dry.

His philosophy has always coincided with Democrat social and welfare policies and was primarily a republican in name only. Defending him isn't really a big reach for you.[/QUOTE]
It's probably late in the game to point this out, but I would like to say that I agree with virtually everything I've ever heard out of his mouth (except that absurd Don't Ask crap) about policy. My beef lies in the fact that this guy has had exceptional access to the process by which decisions about policies lie, and is an utter and complete failure at influencing the process and even lent credibility to the same people he now, years after anything can be done, finally rejects. That's not heroism. That's cowardice.
 
[quote name='speedracer']It's probably late in the game to point this out, but I would like to say that I agree with virtually everything I've ever heard out of his mouth (except that absurd Don't Ask crap) about policy. My beef lies in the fact that this guy has had exceptional access to the process by which decisions about policies lie, and is an utter and complete failure at influencing the process and even lent credibility to the same people he now, years after anything can be done, finally rejects. That's not heroism. That's cowardice.[/quote]

How do you know exactly what he tried or didn't try to do behind closed doors? He was given a job and tried to do it. Maybe he made mistakes but you won't get me to say that he's a complete asshole like you did. You come off like he's a traitor because he didn't do the heroic act of making the government change it's course mid stream.

If Powell spoke up, he would've been left to hang and he would have had zero influence in anything. He would've been a pariah. Instead of running like a little bitch, he tried to change things from the inside. Eventually, he gave up when he realized Bush, Cheney, and the boys would never change their minds about Iraq or the world at large.

Again, you have nothing to say about his experience as V Corps commander. You made a big list about everything he isn't and said that he was never a division level commander but you are conveniently ignoring my post about his command experience. Is it because you can't argue with the truth?
 
[quote name='depascal22']How do you know exactly what he tried or didn't try to do behind closed doors? He was given a job and tried to do it. Maybe he made mistakes but you won't get me to say that he's a complete asshole like you did. You come off like he's a traitor because he didn't do the heroic act of making the government change it's course mid stream.

If Powell spoke up, he would've been left to hang and he would have had zero influence in anything. He would've been a pariah. Instead of running like a little bitch, he tried to change things from the inside. Eventually, he gave up when he realized Bush, Cheney, and the boys would never change their minds about Iraq or the world at large.

Again, you have nothing to say about his experience as V Corps commander. You made a big list about everything he isn't and said that he was never a division level commander but you are conveniently ignoring my post about his command experience. Is it because you can't argue with the truth?[/QUOTE]

Powell definitely did raise objections saying what he was told to present as evidence was bullshit but in the end he caved so yes I do see where speedracer is coming from. And I think you are going too far at least on this part.
 
All I'm saying is that if he didn't cave in, he would've been cast out as a pariah. It's easier to change things from the inside instead of being kicked out for standing up for his ideals. Sometimes you have to swallow your pride in hopes of accomplishing something down the road.
 
[quote name='depascal22']How do you know exactly what he tried or didn't try to do behind closed doors? He was given a job and tried to do it. Maybe he made mistakes but you won't get me to say that he's a complete asshole like you did. You come off like he's a traitor because he didn't do the heroic act of making the government change it's course mid stream.[/quote]
I agree. All we can do is look at the product, which was a whole heaping bucket of fail. Is failing a good thing?

If Powell spoke up, he would've been left to hang and he would have had zero influence in anything. He would've been a pariah. Instead of running like a little bitch, he tried to change things from the inside. Eventually, he gave up when he realized Bush, Cheney, and the boys would never change their minds about Iraq or the world at large.
Click to expand...
Again, I agree. The difference being that we have proof that when someone as respected as he is walks away from the administration because they're idiots, the administration is then tasked with addressing their concerns to a curious public. Instead, they kept happily chugging along and Powell's influence stayed at zero.

Elliot Richardson did more for America by simply resigning that anyone anywhere could have done at that point in time. All he did was look in the mirror, decide he couldn't comply with orders he knew were awful, and walked away. That's integrity. Not doing so, slinking into the corner and not standing up for what's right, that's not integrity.

Again, you have nothing to say about his experience as V Corps commander.
Click to expand...
What's to say? You're holding on to that really tight like it's a game changer. I don't get it.

You made a big list about everything he isn't and said that he was never a division level commander but you are conveniently ignoring my post about his command experience. Is it because you can't argue with the truth?
Click to expand...
I didn't see it until you just mentioned it. Unlike you, I directly address points. So let's address your "point":

Those were all the units under his command in the late 80s. If you recall, V Corps was headquartered in the Abrams Building in Frankfurt. The prime responsibility of V Corps was to protect the Fulda Gap which was seen as the main entry point for a Soviet and East German invasion of West Germany. Now would you put a moron in command of arguably the most important field unit in Europe? Would you ask an idiot to protect free Western Europe from the Soviets? You think that any old political hack would be given such an important position in the Army? Get your facts straight and we'll go from there.
Click to expand...
I seriously don't get what you're arguing here. You're saying he was competent enough to lead V Corps. I'm saying he's a pussy that hides out when the political shit hits the fan and is somehow loved for it.

I'm also not saying he wasn't a competent general. I'm saying he was competent but not spectacular. If you're telling me his hooking up with the Veep that became president didn't seriously influence the decision to make him JC, you're crazy. I'm also saying that with the wealth of talent in the general corps the last 20 years, the contrast is stark and apparent to anyone that's actually looking. Thing is, no one seems to want to look.

To say the same thing for the 100th time in a different way, I'm saying that the level of support he gets from the public is irrational and unfounded. Leading V Corps or being the JC or the Chief of Staff or the President of the United States doesn't mean you're a superstar human being worthy of praise. You should be judged by your actions. Powell's actions, at virtually all points in which his hide has been on the line, has failed. Yet he has an intuitive knack for appealing to the common man, especially at points that seem important but aren't, like his endorsement of Obama.

Show me I'm wrong.
 
[quote name='depascal22']All I'm saying is that if he didn't cave in, he would've been cast out as a pariah. It's easier to change things from the inside instead of being kicked out for standing up for his ideals. Sometimes you have to swallow your pride in hopes of accomplishing something down the road.[/QUOTE]

Powell at the time had an almost unfathomable amount of credibility even across the aisle.

The Bushies knew this, certainly Powell knew this.

The Bushies used him and Powell for whatever reasons went along with it using his credibility to push things he knew was shaky at best.

I am not saying it makes him a total ass for the rest of his life but I can understand the sentiment.

Being kicked out is what speed is defining as being honorable even though I can see where you are coming from as well. It would be holding Powell to a standard pretty much no one else is.

An interesting what if scenario (or a movie) is what would have happened if Powell called a press conference or whatever and told everyone how many lies and bullshit Bush et al. was peddling. My guess is that they would have found some way to marginalize Powell and nothing would have changed but who knows?
 
[quote name='Msut77']Powell at the time had an almost unfathomable amount of credibility even across the aisle.

The Bushies knew this, certainly Powell knew this.

The Bushies used him and Powell for whatever reasons went along with it using his credibility to push things he knew was shaky at best.

I am not saying it makes him a total ass for the rest of his life but I can understand the sentiment.[/quote]
Yes.

Being kicked out is what speed is defining as being honorable even though I can see where you are coming from as well. It would be holding Powell to a standard pretty much no one else is.
Click to expand...
No. Gen. Shinseki held himself precisely to that bar at precisely that same point in time. He was attacked by the administration at the highest levels directly and ridiculed publicly. That is a man that is worthy of the praise Powell gets, and the crux of my position.

An interesting what if scenario (or a movie) is what would have happened if Powell called a press conference or whatever and told everyone how many lies and bullshit Bush et al. was peddling. My guess is that they would have found some way to marginalize Powell and nothing would have changed but who knows?
Click to expand...
Elliot Richardson did exactly what you're wondering about (without the press conference to my knowledge). He walked out but the damage was done. Without Richardson's credibility (which was nowhere ever near Powell's), Nixon was a dead man. Richardson looked at himself and decided to do the right thing.

It's precisely what makes Elliot Richardson an American hero. That's the bar. It's been done before by supposedly lesser men.
 
[quote name='speedracer']He was the first JC to never lead a division level unit. Is that a point in his favor? I certainly don't think so. [/quote]

That's why I bring up V Corps. Did I forget to mention he also commanded the 101st Airborne?

You want to sit there and argue that he hasn't done anything but you keep making up facts to fit your argument.

You bring up Shineseki as an example of a great soldier and I agree with you. But where did that get him? He brought up great ideas and instead of working for small victories in the background, he got the boot.

So what's better? Standing up and being casted out but eventually being proved right later at the cost of thousands of lives or toeing the line while working in the background to ensure that we don't get bogged down in a bad war in Iraq? There's alot of grey area in this argument and you seem to be comfortable with just damning Powell instead of trying to understand any of his motivations.
 
[quote name='speedracer']No. Gen. Shinseki held himself precisely to that bar at precisely that same point in time.[/QUOTE]

I was talking about being punished (i.e. laughed at) for being pro-war.
 
So because Shineseki did the right thing, it doesn't mean that Powell should be demonized. Like I said, sometimes you have to work behind the scenes to get real work done. Not every general can puff their chest and act like they're doing what's best for the country. What would have been best is if Shineseki was still in charge.
 
[quote name='depascal22']That's why I bring up V Corps. Did I forget to mention he also commanded the 101st Airborne?

You want to sit there and argue that he hasn't done anything but you keep making up facts to fit your argument.[/quote]
I've said a bunch of times that I thought he was a competent but unspectacular military figure. It's not really a debatable point. You think being a JC inherently means quite a bit can be inferred about the person, almost all positive. I'm saying the political process means competence, integrity, and the like have no bearing. I mean, if they did matter, why did Shinseki get the boot? Why was Keane tapped to replace him, only to be passed over?

Politicians don't want good soldiers. They want people they can put on the teevee. Being on the teevee does nothing for me.

You bring up Shineseki as an example of a great soldier and I agree with you. But where did that get him? He brought up great ideas and instead of working for small victories in the background, he got the boot.

So what's better? Standing up and being casted out but eventually being proved right later at the cost of thousands of lives or toeing the line while working in the background to ensure that we don't get bogged down in a bad war in Iraq? There's alot of grey area in this argument and you seem to be comfortable with just damning Powell instead of trying to understand any of his motivations.
Click to expand...
What I'm saying is that (and history supports me tremendously) if Powell had simply resigned, the level of public support he has would have forced a public referendum on the issue. If you believe in something enough, you do that. What possible issue on this planet could be more important than the one that faced Powell?

You're saying he tried to change it from the inside. I'm saying that if you have the power to force change from the outside and choose to go inside, you damn well better have at least the same effect as if you went outside. Otherwise, you're a yes man plain and simple.

Colin Powell is a yes man.

This is not without precedent. Elliot Richardson did exactly the same thing and brought the administration to its knees. He did it without the love of the people and without even a hint that it might slow down any of the actions by the executive. Powell knew he had overwhelming power in both arenas.

He changed nothing. He failed. And yet, he is loved. I don't get it.
 
I can't argue with that. I still like the man but I understand where you're coming from.

My counter point is that a good soldier doesn't run away from a fight that he's losing just to make a point. Maybe he thought he could do good by staying and swaying the administration's opinions. Also, you're assuming that the public would've been behind him. Don't forget that America was overwhelmingly behind the war in Iraq. Admittedly, that was partially because of Powell's stink up of the UN but there was blood in the water and someone was going to get invaded no matter what.
 
I don't think endorsements have much of an impact, but as far as endorsements go this one is pretty big.

Among the informed undecided, this should help with moderates and should help alleviate concerns about his ability to be commander in chief. Powell thinking he's ready is a strong statement on that front, not withstanding the silly comments above.
 
[quote name='sonicfreak5']ok. it isn't because hes black? like oprahs support for him?[/quote]

So you support McCain because he's white? You white people are so damn predictable.
 
[quote name='sonicfreak5']ok. it isn't because hes black? like oprahs support for him?[/quote]
:roll: Why is that even an issue. Somebody has been listening to Rush "Pillsbury" Limbaugh.
 
[quote name='sonicfreak5']ok. it isn't because hes black? like oprahs support for him?[/QUOTE]
Having gone into what seems to be viewed on this board as one of the more unhinged rants in a good while, I think at this point I'm pretty well positioned to pass positive judgment and say that it seems pretty damned absurd to believe that Powell is supporting Obama because he is black.
 
Obama's stated foreign policy is more congruous with what he tried to bring to the Bush administration but his diplomatic approach was gagged, double-crossed, then dismissed during his tenure. His take on Iraq, from what I read, was that the administration was going to do it half-assed instead of with overwhelming force, and it turns out that he was right.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him named Sec of State again, or Defense, which wouldn't be such a bad thing, IMO. I'm sure that a bit of brokering had something to do with his public endorsement. Either a position or a promise to funnel some money to his foundation.

Funner thing is that I seem to recall not too many years ago left leaners lambasting Powell and referring to him as an "Uncle Tom". If this feeling is still pervasive in Democrat circles, I fail to see how this endorsement can be considered a plus for the Obama campaign. And any republican already knows that Powell was only a Republican in name only, so it's not like he's going to change a lot of people's minds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top