Tom Ridge Book

[kapkomet]

I don't know Ridge's full story, but I know a bit about Powell, and I don't think he's trying to save face. He pushed against what he saw as a mistake of a war, repeatedy, in the way that he saw as a best possibility - from within the administration that hired him. His speech at the UN, he pounded on CIA and others, to ask repeatedly, is this stuff solid? That resulted in the famous "slam dunk" line. So he did his job, and presented that evidence (but he made frat boy from CIA stand right there next to him, making sure he knew that he was putting his reputation at stake as well).

 

Powell has, in my view, been more honest than most high level guys I've seen work in these administrations in recent years (of the ones I know anything about).

I had respect for Powell right up until the whole "endorsement" thing for Obama. That was calculated bulls*** for the Washington establishment and his ethnicity (unfortunately). PERIOD.

 

[Balta1701]

I had respect for Powell right up until the whole "endorsement" thing for Obama. That was calculated bulls*** for the Washington establishment and his ethnicity (unfortunately). PERIOD.

Going before the U.N. and convincing the country to support a war you yourself don't believe in, and refusing to resign or do anything to change the course of events...totally respectable.

 

Endorsing a guy from the other party who happens to be the same race as him...despicable.

[kapkomet]

Going before the U.N. and convincing the country to support a war you yourself don't believe in, and refusing to resign or do anything to change the course of events...totally respectable.

 

Endorsing a guy from the other party who happens to be the same race as him...despicable.

Oh, so you love him, right? He supports everything you stand for. (yes, that was sarcasm).

 

He's always done what he thought was best, even questioning when he had to. Until he put all politics in front of everything else last late October.

[Balta1701]

Oh, so you love him, right? He supports everything you stand for. (yes, that was sarcasm).

 

He's always done what he thought was best, even questioning when he had to. Until he put all politics in front of everything else last late October.

And you're making the conclusion that he did last october something other than what he thought was best based on what? How are you able to read his thoughts that well?

 

I'm not giving him credit for "Doing what he thought was best" when he clearly wound up being wrong. He thought it was best to show loyalty to people who abused that loyalty ruthlessly to sell their war. I'm not judging him based on his good intentions, I'm judging him based on the disastrous results he was a part of.

[kapkomet]

And you're making the conclusion that he did last october something other than what he thought was best based on what? How are you able to read his thoughts that well?

 

I'm not giving him credit for "Doing what he thought was best" when he clearly wound up being wrong. He thought it was best to show loyalty to people who abused that loyalty ruthlessly to sell their war. I'm not judging him based on his good intentions, I'm judging him based on the disastrous results he was a part of.

Ok, then he's just a total disaster. Forever. Including his assmunch moves last fall. But "loyalty", as you're trying to describe it, was only a part of the equation. He asked questions, he got answers, and that was that.

[Princess Dye]

I had respect for Powell right up until the whole "endorsement" thing for Obama. That was calculated bulls*** for the Washington establishment and his ethnicity (unfortunately). PERIOD.

 

This doesnt add up. Powell, when at the absolute height of his political clout (many said he couldve been President with ease, taking blue states, etc)..........he DIDNT WANT IT.

 

So since he doesnt want the nation's higher offices anymore, he suddenly wants to play politics to get ahead?

 

It seems far more likely to me that he's just fed up with the Bush administration and ready to declare his break.

 

There are so many reasons why he would have preferred Obama to McCain at this juncture. Not just race. Especially shocking you'd say that about THIS guy, who has no past history of making African-American issues his focus.

Edited August 24, 2009 by Princess Dye

[Princess Dye]

But beyond that, it is SO oversimplifying the African-American vote. Everyone who is black voted for Obama because he's black? Totally wrong.

 

Hell, a huge portion of the black US population is socially conservative. There was a difficult decision on the minds of many- whether to vote perhaps on the side of faith or on the side of shared experience....but to say the decision was open and shut oversimplifies it in a borderline insulting way.

 

 

 

Including his assmunch moves last fall.

 

Do you think a politician should endorse the candidate they think is best, or should the endorse the candidate whose party apparently will later feel you're indebted to them..? The quoted text makes it seem you think he owed the GOP a vote, regardless of any other concerns.

Edited August 24, 2009 by Princess Dye

[Texsox]

I had respect for Powell right up until the whole "endorsement" thing for Obama. That was calculated bulls*** for the Washington establishment and his ethnicity (unfortunately). PERIOD.

 

Really. You do not think that Powell thought Obama was the best candidate? Even after saying in another thread that the GOP could have run Jesus (which they have for 20+ years) and lost?

 

So why did Powell do that?

[NorthSideSox72]

I had respect for Powell right up until the whole "endorsement" thing for Obama. That was calculated bulls*** for the Washington establishment and his ethnicity (unfortunately). PERIOD.

Or, maybe, he did it for the reasons he clearly stated (and that I agree with) - that, among other things, the GOP has swung waaaaaaaaay too far to the right and focused far too much on their social agenda in that regard. Or that Obama is simply a better leader and manager than McCain would be.

 

Couldn't be that.

 

[lostfan]

Powell gave an entire list of reasons he thought Obama was a better candidate before actually coming out and saying it, and I would venture to guess an overwhelming majority of people that say it was about race couldn't name 3 of them without using Google.

[kapkomet]

B B BbbBbbBBBBBBBBB ut... McCain was Powell's PERFECT "MODERATE" candidate! If he would describe a Republican that would WIN, he would describe McCain. Oh, no - Obama's better. And ethnically like said Democrat president whose political ideology was supposedly not his views but more closely aligned with Old Man McCain.

 

Ya'll want to turn this into something else, and the facts just don't support it.

 

[Texsox]

B B BbbBbbBBBBBBBBB ut... McCain was Powell's PERFECT "MODERATE" candidate! If he would describe a Republican that would WIN, he would describe McCain. Oh, no - Obama's better. And ethnically like said Democrat president whose political ideology was supposedly not his views but more closely aligned with Old Man McCain.

 

Ya'll want to turn this into something else, and the facts just don't support it.

 

Great points, I forgot Republicans are never suppose to change their minds about anything.

[NorthSideSox72]

B B BbbBbbBBBBBBBBB ut... McCain was Powell's PERFECT "MODERATE" candidate! If he would describe a Republican that would WIN, he would describe McCain. Oh, no - Obama's better. And ethnically like said Democrat president whose political ideology was supposedly not his views but more closely aligned with Old Man McCain.

 

Ya'll want to turn this into something else, and the facts just don't support it.

LOL, the only "facts" that have been presented ALL support it. You on the other hand have zero facts to support your idea that it was about race - none. zip. zilch.

 

Care to counter that?

 

[bmags]

Man it's hard being a white person in today's world, I gotta tell you.

[kapkomet]

Or, maybe, he did it for the reasons he clearly stated (and that I agree with) - that, among other things, the GOP has swung waaaaaaaaay too far to the right and focused far too much on their social agenda in that regard. Or that Obama is simply a better leader and manager than McCain would be.

 

Couldn't be that.

And McCain was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too far right? BS. McCain should have been his man, but it wasn't enough that he was a "MODERATE", was it?

 

Whatever. Obviously no one will change their minds on anything here.

 

[Balta1701]

And McCain was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too far right? BS. McCain should have been his man, but it wasn't enough that he was a "MODERATE", was it?

 

Whatever. Obviously no one will change their minds on anything here.

John McCain's voting record so far this session is one of the most Conservative/Republican records in the Senate. (Limited data admittedly).

[kapkomet]

John McCain's voting record so far this session is one of the most Conservative/Republican records in the Senate. (Limited data admittedly).

Of course, because this is the most liberal (MARXIST, ) agenda in the history of our country.

[bmags]

well you can't argue with that. For one the 1930s and 1960s never happened in our countries history.

[kapkomet]

well you can't argue with that. For one the 1930s and 1960s never happened in our countries history.

What they are trying to do now makes the 30's and 60's pure stepping stones.

[Balta1701]

What they are trying to do now makes the 30's and 60's pure stepping stones.

You know Kap, we're all given to the occasional rant (see me on W, for example) but really, you're not exactly giving a convincing presentation right now.

[bmags]

Enacting single payer systems is less extreme than not enacting single payer systems. Got it.

[kapkomet]

Enacting single payer systems is less extreme than not enacting single payer systems. Got it.

Context? You want to talk about me and context...

 

GOVERNMENT. Duh.

 

[StrangeSox]

[NorthSideSox72]

Context? You want to talk about me and context...

 

GOVERNMENT. Duh.

I don't even understand this post. Your rants have gotten so far out there that they don't even appear to be on topic.

[EvilMonkey]

What we really need is to wait for the book to come out to find out just what his idea of 'pressured' really is. If Bush and Co went up to him and said "Hey, we have this information about X and Y that we think is serious and we think you should raise the security level", and he said "No", and that was that? Well then, I don't see how any loon can call that pressure. If it turns out that Chaney got him in a headlock while Bush gave him wedgies while trying to get him to change his mind, then you have something. The reality, which is more likely to be in the middle, will of course, be open for interpretation, causing a multi-paged new thread when it does come out, I am sure.