Capricorn
Colin's Powell's controversial support of Barack Obama has topped the headlines over the last few days, and not just because Powell is rejecting his own party. Hours after the endorsement, popular Republican radio host Rush Limbaugh (the herpes of talk radio, he never seems to go away) released this statement in an email to an editor at politico: "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."
Limbaugh has taken heat for his comments; an Obama campaign spokeswoman called them "disgusting" and liberal blogs have attacked the host. But Limbaugh isn't backing down. Earlier today he released this statement: "I thought it should be about race, I thought you liberals thought this was a historic candidacy because finally we are going to elect a black guy…why hide behind this, why act like it's not about race?"
I hate to say it, I really do, but I sort of see his point. Listen, I still think Rush Limbaugh is a racist, egotistical idiot, but somewhere in his hateful, over the top bluster there's an interesting idea. If we are going to talk about the historic merits of a black president, or how the majority of black voters are voting for Obama, why can't we talk about race affecting Powell's endorsement? Is it so impossible to think that a black man might be proud to have another black man as president? Would that be so wrong? I'm not saying it was the sole reason for his endorsement, but it may have played a role.
COMMENTS (2)
RATE THIS STORY
This story is about my personal experiences at a place...
I went to a protest in Rome, Italy, November 29th, 2008. The police presence was...
Comments
Re: Channel C: Powell's Racy Endorsement
By SmartCookie, October 22, 2008 at 08:14Hi Mike,
Enjoyed the article! Thank you for taking on a controversial subject from your own perspective. I wonder what Powell thinks of the voter fraud, phony Obama donors, and the overwhelmingly negative and biased treatment of McCain and all other Republicans in the media. And Melkor makes some great points, as usual!
Personally, if all other things were equal, I may be more likely to vote for a person of color or a woman. Unfortunately, all other things are not equal for me in this election so I'm required by my conscience to vote for the candidate who I believe will do the best job, regardless of skin color or gender. I considered Obama for my vote, and I really wanted him to be the right one for me, but he isn't.
I think it's interesting that part of Powell's endorsement was based on the success of the surge in Iraq which John McCain called for over 2 years ago, and which Obama ridiculed and opposed ... until it worked, then he was "for it." Funny how you don't hear much in the news about drawdowns and timelines already in place in the current administration. The bias is unbelievable. Here's the excerpt and Powell's extremely politically expedient answer:
MR. BROKAW:
You have some differences with Barack Obama. He has said that once he takes office, he wants to begin removing American troops from Iraq. Here’s what you had to say about that: “I have found in my many years of service, to set arbitrary dates that don’t coincide with the situation on the ground or what actually is happening tends not to be a useful strategy. … Arbitrary deadlines that are snatched out of the air and are based on some lunar calculation is not the way to run a military or a strategic operation of this type.” That was on February 10th of this year on CNN. Now that you have Barack Obama’s ear in a new fashion, will you say to him, “Drop your idea of setting a deadline of some kind to pull the troops out of Iraq”?
General Powell had an interesting response:
GEN. POWELL:
First of all, I think that’s a great line, and thanks for pulling it up. And I believe that. But as I watch what’s happening right now, the United States is negotiating the–an agreement with the Iraqi government that will call for most major combat operations to cease by next June and for American forces to start withdrawing to their bases. And that agreement will also provide for all American troops to be gone by 2011, but conditioned on the situation as it exists at that time. So there already is a timeline that’s being developed between the Iraqis and the United States government. So I think whoever becomes the president, whether it’s John McCain or whether it’s Barack Obama, we’re going to see a continued drawdown. And when, you know, which day so many troops come out or what units come out, that’ll be determined by the commanders and the new president. But I think we are on a glide path to reducing our presence in Iraq over the next couple of years. Increasingly, this problem’s going to be solved by the Iraqis. They’re going to make the political decisions, their security forces are going to take over, and they’re going to have to create an environment of reconciliation where all the people can come together and make Iraq a much, much better place.
Re: Channel C: Powell's Racy Endorsement
By Melkor, October 21, 2008 at 09:44Hi Mike,
It seems to me that this is just Rush once again bellowing divisiveness as he does, being the gigantic windbag that he is – so F. Rush right in the eye socket. I mean, the fact is that Rush is supporting McCain – is he doing this because John is a white guy? Is he voting solely along racial lines? Give me a break, and give people a little credit. This endorsement comes as no surprise to most – the Bush administration spent the past 7 years alienating people, and I think they directly hurt Powell’s own credibility (in his own eyes anyway). I think most of us got in line vis a vis Iraq because of Powell, which will define his legacy, something he (I’m sure) does not appreciate.