WASHINGTON – Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president, describing the Illinois senator as a “transformational figure.”
Powell says both Obama and Republican John McCain are qualified to be commander in chief. But, in an interview Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he said Obama is better suited to handle the nation’s economic problems as well as help improve it’s standing in the world.
Powell expressed disappointment in the negative tone of McCain’s campaign, as well as in his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential nominee. Powell says he does not believe Palin is ready to take over as president,
Funny as hell to me, the Bruddas are sticking together but if “Whitey” chooses not to follow the “Messiah” Whitey is RACIST!!!! :dancinghappy:
I love the way Powell says “Sarah Palin is not ready”, yet Obama has not stepped in an office of leadership other than leading a crew of thugs in ACORN, a Group of LAWYERS, or some “LIKE MINDED” Socialists. BUT Sarah Palin is not ready?
This is a typical race play, Obama is the BLACK Candidate, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Condi Rice came out to support him too…. This is a RACE about RACE now believe it, no matter what the media is trying to say.. IT is a racial power play, have at it my brothers.
Palin vs Biden, Close but Palin wins by MOST accounts.
This was the debate I really wanted to see. Sarah Palin looked good, confident and prepared. So did Joe Biden, but with Biden it was expected, 30 years of Congressional Experience gives you an edge in debates. The problem with Biden is not his appearance, or his delivery, it is his subject matter, it is severely flawed, and his candidate is more liberal than he is…
I was unimpressed by either of them to tell you the truth, I WAS impressed with Palin’s control of her emotions. It really didn’t matter, I was not changing my mind or my vote based on this debate. The reason is simple: Obama, McCain or Biden would scarcely be considered the BEST candidates for the job. PALIN on the other hand, is the BEST candidate for the TOP job.
Palin’s lack of experience in DC coupled with her STRONG moral values, her CONSERVATIVE leanings in the area of Gay Marriage, Taxes, Religion, Abortion, Education, and a host of other things, oh and her RECORD is clear. Compare her to the other three, you see the biggest chance for REAL CHANGE in Washington is Sarah Palin.
I am voting for McCain/Palin but the truth is I am voting for Palin by proxy.
Who will do the least amount of harm? McCain. McCain will at least have a CONSERVATIVE voice in his cabinet, Obama will have Biden, how is that a good thing?
IF that isn’t enough of a reason to vote McCain/Palin… Think of this:
Obama, Biden, Pelosi. First, Second and Third in power. Is there any difference? Where is the voice of reason, the sanity check?
McCain, Palin, Pelosi. First, Second and Third in power. Same Questions and the answer is SARAH PALIN.
A $100,000 state grant for a botanic garden in Englewood that then-state Sen. Barack Obama awarded in 2001 to a group headed by a onetime campaign volunteer is now under investigation by the Illinois attorney general amid new questions, prompted by Chicago Sun-Times reports, about whether the money might have been misspent.
The garden was never built. And now state records obtained by the Sun-Times show $65,000 of the grant money went to the wife of Kenny B. Smith, the Obama 2000 congressional campaign volunteer who heads the Chicago Better Housing Association, which was in charge of the project for the blighted South Side neighborhood.
Smith wrote another $20,000 in grant-related checks to K.D. Contractors, a construction company that his wife, Karen D. Smith, created five months after work on the garden was supposed to have begun, records show. K.D. is no longer in business.
Attorney General Lisa Madigan — a Democrat who is supporting Obama’s presidential bid — is investigating “whether this charitable organization properly used its charitable assets, including the state funds it received,” Cara Smith, Madigan’s deputy chief of staff, said Wednesday.
In addition to the 2001 grant that Obama directed to the housing association as a “member initiative,” the not-for-profit group got a separate $20,000 state grant in 2006.
Madigan’s office has notified Obama’s presidential campaign of the probe, which was launched this week. But Obama’s actions in awarding the money are not a focus of the investigation, Smith said.
Well Well Well… Sarah Palin, has been under fire from libtards across the nation for the so-called “Bridge to Nowhere” but Sarah Palin actually did KILL IT, then used the money for HER STATE. She actually served her people? How insane that is, I guess Sarah Palin should have gotten elected as Governor and then spent 6 months trying to get a better job, all the while just voting “Present” in state matters, and “If they need you they can call you” I hope you can learn Mrs Palin, the Obama doctrine of Politics and leadership dictates you really don’t have to do anything, just keep talking about what you will do, and then if it’s popular vote with “EVERYONE” if it’s an unpopular bill or law, vote present…
Oh and another suggestion, if you ever need spiritual help, call Rev Wright.. or Father Phlegar or Louis Farrakhan…
Obama’s truths are starting to come out, the media is hiding as many as possible and ignoring others… BUT the truth will come out, I just hope it’s not too late.
I was again searching the interwebs for some articles and opinions on various things and I came across this one, and it made my blood boil.
This was written by some nutbasket named Peter Dyer
What if we had never gone to war? What if, after the shocking crimes of September 11, 2001, the United States had pursued a different course?
What if all the blood which has been spilled in the name of justice still flowed in living veins; all the American, Iraqi and other lives shattered were still whole; all the homes destroyed or lost still standing, still occupied by families who never harmed us?
We have spent monumental treasure and energy on two wars. What if, instead, we had invested a fraction of that in a determined, unrelenting effort to bring Osama bin Laden to justice in a fair and transparent trial in a court of law?
Of course, we’ll never know.
When we were confronted with the most heinous series of terrorist acts in our history Americans overwhelmingly lined up behind President Bush’s call for a “Global War on Terror.”
We can only speculate on what might have been the result of a different course of action, guided by a fundamentally different vision.
For two reasons, though, such speculation would not be entirely baseless:
One week after the U.S. began bombing Afghanistan, the Taliban presented us with an opportunity to investigate the possibility of a peaceful, legal resolution to the crimes of 9/11.
On Oct. 14, 2001, Afghanistan’s deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir, announced that if the United States stopped the bombing and produced evidence of bin Laden’s guilt, “we would be ready to hand him over to a third country” for trial.
President Bush, determined to launch and pursue the “war on terror,” refused even to discuss, much less investigate this possibility.
* A different course
Exactly 30 months after 9/11 there was another catastrophic terrorist attack in another country: Spain. On March 11, 2004, 191 people in Madrid were killed and over 1,800 injured when 10 backpack bombs exploded on four morning rush-hour commuter trains.
As with 9/11, “11-M” was the most devastating series of terrorist acts in Spanish history.
But Spain chose the path the U.S. rejected.
The Spanish government addressed the crimes of 11-M with the tools, techniques and resources of law enforcement. There was an investigation, arrests, a trial, and appeals.
This process is today essentially complete.
Spain has demonstrated an effective alternative to war as a means of addressing and resolving the bloody horrors of terrorism.
The Spanish example can thus help us make an educated guess at how things might have gone had the Bush administration not immediately and contemptuously rejected Kabir’s offer of Oct. 14, 2001.
And while such an endeavor can’t undo the past seven years, perhaps it can help us make a better choice next time our leaders tell us it’s time for another war.
Here’s how Spain did it.
Two days after the bombings, the police made their first arrests.
After a 25-month investigation, 29 people – 15 Moroccans, nine Spaniards, two Syrians, one Egyptian, one Algerian and one Lebanese – were indicted on April 11, 2006. The Madrid bombing trial opened on Feb. 15, 2007, and ended on July 2.
Four months later, on Oct. 31, 2007, the three-judge tribunal delivered the verdicts.
Three men were convicted of murder, attempted murder and committing terrorist acts. They were sentenced to thousands of years in prison each, although under Spanish law, none will serve longer than 40 years. There is no capital punishment in Spain.
Eighteen were found guilty of lesser offenses. Seven were acquitted. During the trial all charges were dropped against one of the defendants.
0n July 18 of this year, four of the sentences were overturned on appeal to the Supreme Court. Thus, in the end, 17 out of the original 29 indicted have been convicted.
The Supreme Court also concluded that the real ringleaders of the crimes of 11-M were among seven suspects who, three weeks after the bombs exploded, blew themselves up in an apartment outside Madrid when a police assault began.
The U.S. experience and the Spanish experience are, of course, not identical. But there are arguably enough parallels to facilitate a comparison and enable some credible answers to the question: what if?
There is much more of this ridiculous comparison HERE
UNBELIEVABLE… Ok kiddies and folks with sensitivities to vulgarity you might want to bail now:
Still here? Ok last warning…….
Well Mr Dyer, you seem to be looking for some way to incite the Mulsim readers of that piece of shit rag al-jazeera. Let me help you out with a little history:
Beirut, USS Cole, Several airlines, and 2 US Embassies, WTC1 and WTC 2 9-11..
All of those crimes were committed by followers of Islam, based in ISLAMIC countries against the United States of America. Diplomacy yielded very little in the way of retribution for the atrocities, and there was no end in sight for the murder of innocents to stop. You say we should never have done anything but treat it as a crime? Are you fucking kidding me?
What Spain did was turn tail and run, rather than help to install some sort of “Other way” to the masses. I personally wish GWB would have nuked Mecca, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, on 9-12-01, I would have danced in the streets like YOUR READERS did on 9-11.
Hows this for a WHAT IF”
What if the Redneck Mafia decided to DESTROY MECCA during the pilgrimage? Would it be a crime, should it be handled by strictly law enforcement? I think your readers would agree that it would be an act of war… but that would be wrong huh?
I find it hilarious that you would assume that the Taliban would turn over UBL, or that they would help in the hunt for UBL… UBL is not the only problem, Islam is. Your readers are, and idiots like you are.
I suppose the recent bombing in Pakistan is of no concern to you based on your logic, we should not treat that as an attack but just a law enforcement issue? We are at war and personally I think every fucking dead Muslim is one less problem the world has to deal with. I think that entire religion should be wiped off the map I think the US Armed forces are doing a tremendous job of sending Muslim radical fuckheads to meet that pedophile fucknozzle Muhammad.
You might get your wish too Peter Dyer, if Barrack Hussein Obama takes the reins in America, you will see a “Spain like” response, I imagine we will surrender faster than you drop to your knees 5 times a day. (Maybe 6 depending on which Sheik you are blowing)
I would like to remind my readers and friends that I spoke about where things were going when McCain pulled even with the “Chosen one”. Like I said, it is going to get worse… Al-Qaeda wants Obama to win, Al-Jazeera readers want Obama to win, France, Russia, China, North Korea, Mexico, Venezuela ALL want Obama to win this election for a reason. It is not economic. IT is their best chance at getting a surrender at all cost leader in charge, and in Al-Qaeda’s case the ONLY chance of claiming victory.
All Muslims should have to drive Volkswagons…. :rotflmao:
Sarah Palin on Friday accused “Democrat partisans” of pressuring the organizers of an anti-Iran rally to block her from attending the event in New York next week.
Palin had planned to speak at the Monday rally, but the organizers said Thursday that no elected officials would be allowed to attend. The announcement came after Hillary Clinton pulled out of the event, having discovered that Palin would also be attending.
“I was scheduled to appear at a rally with Senator Clinton whose commitment to this I appreciate. This is a critical issue and it should be an issue that unites all Americans,” Palin told supporters Friday in Blaine, Minn. “Unfortunately, though, some Democrat partisans put politics first, and now no elected official will be able to appear at that Stop Iran Rally.”
The rally, organized by major Jewish organizations and sponsored by the National Coalition to Stop Iran Now, is designed to protest Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s presence at the United Nations.
Organizers said they weren’t being partisan, and that they decided to bar all elected and federal officials from the rally to avoid a “media feeding frenzy.”
John McCain issued a statement Thursday blaming both “Democratic partisans” and Barack Obama for pressuring the groups to rescind Palin’s invitation. An Obama spokesman dismissed that suggestion.
On Friday, Palin blamed only “Democrat partisans,” though it was unclear to whom she was referring.
She said Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons should not be a matter of “partisan politics.”
“John McCain and I are committed to drawing attention to the danger posed by Iran’s nuclear program, and we will not waver in our commitment,” she said. Source
Funny how the politics of party control the democrats movement as well as world views. I think it’s a damn shame that Hillary couldn’t appear because Sarah was going to be there. I think her “Handlers” saw a potential problem with Hillary supporting Obama and voicing strength, the two don’t mix.
Sarah Palin would walk on stage and say one sentence “Iran will not have nuclear weapons on her watch.” and leave the stage. Hillary would spend an hour bashing Bush, and then say “We need to curb global warming and raise taxes for healthcare, and that Obama was going to fix all the damage done, oh and Obama is a friend to Israel”. There would not be a mention in there anywhere about Iran or Nuclear ambitions. That is the Democrat way…. Evasive.
Hillary is a mouthpiece for Obama now, it is her duty to toe the line. She will do that but I think secretly she is envious of Sarah Palin. Obama screwed up IMO, if Obama picked Hillary he would have won the election, I think Obama figured his race would carry him and he could put Biden in the closet when he gets elected.
The one thing I really hate about this election is, Race is the issue that will most be called into it. Think to Nov 5, McCain wins by 2% get ready for RACIST America headlines, The world will feel cheated. And our own liberal media will want vindication, so they will be finding all the white folks they can and asking them why they didn’t vote for Obama…Kind of like when Kerry lost, except they will prod for a “racial” answer.
The idiot consultant Carville. the dude looks like Monte Burns from the Simpsons, has already dropped that little bomb. He said ” The only way Obama loses is if White America is still as racist as it was in the 60’s” That is the underlying problem, it is not the “Rally” it is not the “Hillary vs Palin” it is not even McCain vs Obama… It’s going to be, at least in the liberal mind “The progressive BLACK man vs the Old white Racist” Sad really when you think about it…
The liberal nutbags are all in a twitter, they are worried about Sarah Palin’s impact on the McCain’s ticket. I stumbled across this at the Huffington (Too stupid for words) Post:
McCain’s Court: Change We Don’t Need
There has been much debate about whether Sen. John McCain is a candidate of change. But in one area, McCain is unquestionably a reformer. He would almost certainly make fundamental changes in the direction of the U.S. Supreme Court.
McCain has said that, should he be president, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito “would serve as the model for my own nominees.” He regularly attacks what he calls “activist judging,” and he described a recent ruling vindicating the right to habeas corpus as “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.” McCain has repeatedly said that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overruled.
If McCain is elected, change would clearly be coming to the U.S. Supreme Court. And in constitutional law, the Republican presidential nominee is anything but conservative. Once skeptical of the idea that the court should overrule Roe v. Wade, he now invokes the clichés and code words of the extreme right. His votes have matched his words, for he has been a proud and enthusiastic supporter of President George W. Bush’s most extreme appointees to the courts of appeals.
Recently McCain complained of “the common and systematic abuse of our federal courts by the people we entrust with judicial power. For decades now, some federal judges have taken it upon themselves to pronounce and rule on matters that were never intended to be heard in courts or decided by judges.”
In his view, the “system of checks and balances rarely disappoints,” but “there is one great exception in our day”: the Supreme Court. McCain aims to eliminate that exception. It is more than mere speculation to suggest that with judicial appointments, McCain may well follow the extreme right-wing of his party.
The court is already dominated by Republican appointees, and in the last 20 years, it has shifted dramatically to the right. The next president is expected to be able to appoint at least one — and possibly as many as three — new members. Even a single appointment would likely shift constitutional law in major ways.
The right to choose remains sharply contested within the Supreme Court — and the Republican Party and the pro-life movement have long sought to eliminate that right. The McCain-Palin ticket plans first to “return the abortion question to the individual states” and then “to end abortion at the state level.”
This is the real deal guys, the most idiotic liberal trash like Hufpo readers even see it. They know why this election is so important, it is truly a matter of life and death.
I want the next SCOTUS judges to be more to the RIGHT than the ones departing. The robe wearing elitists that will be leaving have RUINED our nation, they have been responsible for GENOCIDE, they have been responsible for the moral compass of our nation dropping below the gutter level.
IF the HUFPO Readers see the real issue why is it so hard for US on the right side of the aisle to see it? Vote McCain/Palin if for no other reason than to see if Ruth Bader Ginsberg can hang on another 4 years so her seat is filled by someone as liberal as she is.
We need a hard RIGHT turn from the SCOTUS, this court has left the reservation on several issues and it has made the “Thug life” easier, Enemies of America stronger, and killing the innocent seem normal.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE?
There is no guarantee that McCain will pick a solid Conservative judge, but he sure as hell won’t pick a Ruth Bader Ginsberg type libtard.
McCain did what he had to do, he managed to get me a little pissed off at a couple of things he said; but overall he nailed his biggest speech ever. If half of his story is true, and half of his record as an elected official is true, this should be a landslide in McCain/Palin favor.
Unfortunately, the powers of the liberal belief structure has been in play for many years, such as removing religion from schools, frivolous law suits, removing words like honor, integrity, and responsibility from the vocabulary of our youth, and making excuses for the kids that misbehave. WE have successfully made the voters of today so stupid that Obama is actually being considered to lead the free world.
What worries me is this:
California has a “Maverick” so to speak in charge. A RINO by all measures. Arnold S. has tried to work across political lines to get things done in California, he has succumbed to certain laws, bills and other legislation or should I say compromised, and now HE needs some help from the very same Democrats he has been reaching out too… They are quickly stabbing him in the back for party and career sake, the whole time looking into the media’s camera and blaming the Republicans….
I am concerned that we are seeing a mini-DC preview in California.
Look at California Politics to see what happens when you have a RINO in charge, dealing with a Liberal Congress. Think McCain, Pelosi and Reid… ugh. There is one bright spot though, Arnold doesn’t have Sara Palin in his corner, Arnold has a super liberal LT Governor John Raymond Garamendi (idiot)
Some might say, well if they were both LIBERAL it would be better… Uh HUM.. Been there done that.
Gray Davis and Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante. BOTH DEMS. Recalled because of poor performance (Just like every Governor in California faces a recall attempt by someone, Gray Davis was the only one unseated in Cali History and only the second one in US history)
So WHAT DO WE DO BUSHWACK?… I’m glad you asked:
The Solution is simple:
In this election we need to give McCain the tools he needs to accomplish, what he says he wants to accomplish, I have heard very little in his speeches that would lead me to believe that he would destroy our country, hell if Bush didn’t accomplish that, McCain sure the hell wont. I think McCain is RIGHT on in most instances and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
In order to do that, WE need to make sure he has a WORKABLE Congress.
Going into this election, the Democrats are at an advantage because most of the seats (22) are held by Republicans. Thus, they have fewer seats (12) to defend.
Eight of the 33 are first-term Senators; only one of these is a Democrat. One, Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) was re-elected in 2002 after retiring in 2000.
There is one special election, in Wyoming (which will elect two Senators in November).
Five senators have announced retirement.
And 1-Tim Johnson (D-SD) is still recovering from brain surgery.
* Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO, announced 1/15/2007)
* Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID, resignation announced then rescinded)
* Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM, announced 10/3/2007)
* Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE, announced 9/10/2007)
* Sen. John Warner (R-VA, announced 8/31/2007)
Here are some seats up for election and We need to turn the D’s to R’s and Keep the R’s.
I believe we need experience and wisdom at the top, we have some real problems in the world and sitting around a camp fire chanting koom-by-ya is not going to fix them.
Under an Obama White House, I am absolutely 100% positive he will be a party first president, so what we would have is; in essence the same thing we have in California. The Republicans would then go on the offensive/defensive mode, and Obama has a very shady record as it pertains to reaching across the aisle, which would produce another DO NOTHING CONGRESS.
McCain has put HIS party on notice that he is willing to go against them to get things done. Obama has NOT done anything like that, even though HIS party has been in charge of BOTH House and Senate for the past 2 YEARS, AND DONE NOTHING!
I think we as VOTERS can vote change as in Obama, which in my humble opinion will be more like California politics, only on a much larger scale. OR we can give McCain a shot at fixing whats broke, and IMO after his ordeal, his sacrifice, and his experience I think we are in good hands with John McCain. (Sarah Palin will be there too and that makes me very comfortable,)
The Democrat party should defer the election until such time they come up with a REAL PLAN. The Democrat party has pointed out every bad thing America has done, or every bad decision GWB has made. YET they have very few workable plans to repair or “Change” anything.
The Democrats have chosen a platform of “CHANGE” and I think that slogan was muted when Barrack Hussein Obama picked Joe Biden as VP, the “Change” Mantra was thrown out the window.
The facts are simple:
McCain: War Hero, proven character, bucked his party on numerous occasions, has a victory mentality, is pro-liberty and freedom, he is pro-competition and Anti-Taxes.
Obama: Community Organizer, Senator, and he has changed.
Changed his mind, changed his religion, changed his ethnicity… but really hasn’t changed anything else; Obama has voted Democrat in 97% of his votes as senator, yet he is a CHANGE agent? Where is the ability to work with Republicans to create change?
I agree with the vast majority of Democrats that say Washington is broken. I don’t agree that it will be fixed by having more Democrats in office. I believe it will take someone that will work with the other side to accomplish things, and Obama has not done that, he has not led by example, John McCain has.
The best lines of Sarah Palin’s speech was: “Only one man running for President has really ever fought for you”. That is the truth, and there is NO DOUBT who has more character.
We as Americans believe talk is cheap, well at least normal Americans do, maybe not Code Pink and the Berkeley crowd, but most of us know that a record mean more than a speech.
McCain is not my favorite, but he has demonstrated that he is leading by example, that he is walking the talk and that deserves respect.
Obama is saying he will walk the walk but he is closer to Harry Reid politically than he is to Bill Clinton. Obama makes Bill Clinton look like Ronald Reagan and that is not the way America needs to go.
So again, why is this election so close?
Part of the reason is the Media. I watched the speech of Sarah Palin on Fox the first time. I saw camera views of the crowd in the hall showing ALL ethnicities, women and men, young and old, and veterans as well as active military. Then later in the evening I watched CNN’s coverage of the same speech, Camera views of Sarah’s Family, and NOT ONE Diversity view in the bunch unless it was in the background.
CNN made it a point to show mostly the OLD WHITE guys and gals, and the most “Not to bright looking” folks the camera crew could find.
This could be just an opinion or just a slightly tilted view, but I seriously see some back door type “Liberal” media at work. During the DNC, the diversity camera views were front page. During the RNC, they went the other way….
