With 12 days to go before the presidential election, Powell publicly endorsed President Obama for re-election on “CBS This Morning” Thursday
“I voted for him in 2008 and I plan to stick with him in 2012 and I’ll be voting for he and for Vice President Joe Biden next month.”
Powell explained his choice to Charlie Rose and Norah O’Donnell:
When he took over, the country was in very very difficult straits. We were in the one of the worst recessions we had seen in recent times, close to a depression. The fiscal system was collapsing. Wall Street was in chaos, we had 800,000 jobs lost in that first month of the Obama administration and unemployment peaked a few months later at 10 percent. So we were in real trouble. The auto industry was collapsing, the housing was start[ing] to collapse and we were in very difficult straits. And I saw over the next several years, stabilization come back in the financial community, housing is now starting to pick up after four years, it’s starting to pick up. Consumer confidence is rising.”
Summarizing the past four years under Obama, Powell said “Generally we’ve come out of the dive and we’re starting to gain altitude.” He acknowledged that problems remain, saying “The unemployment rate is too high, people are still hurting in housing but I see that we’re starting to rise up.”
Turning to foreign policy, Powell said he saw “the president get us of one war, start to get us out of a second war and did not get us into any new wars. And finally I think that the actions he has taken with respect to protecting us from terrorism have been very very solid. And so, I think we ought to keep on the track that we are on.”
He goes on in this story to bash Mitt Romney and his policies. What gets me, is that the man just cannot be honest and say that he support President Obama because he is black. What is so hard about just saying, “He’s a black brother and I support him.”? It just does not make sense.
Of course, if a White man like me says this; then the left likes to yell, RAAAAACIST! Which is what they are truly good for anymore. Just ask Chris Matthews.
As someone who has lived through two terrible Presidents, one Republican and one Democrat; I have to say, we can do better. Mitt Romney will be the President that will be the one to do better. I really believe that.
I am going to tell you all something. I do believe I have seen it all now. I have been blogging since 2006. I have been around this political stuff for 6 long years, and this is the first time, that I have ever seen a progressive talking-head accuse the American people of being racists for not supporting a President. This, as they say, is absolutely unreal.
Liberal pundit Chris Matthews explained Mitt Romney’s support among conservatives, despite the candidate shifting toward the center on a number of issues, as a product of “racial hatred.”
Speaking after Thursday night’s debate on MSNBC, Matthews accused Romney of “pulling back” from many of the foreign policy positions he had taken during the primary. When host Rachel Maddow wondered why Romney might be “reversing himself” from his stated positions during the primary and whether that could dampen his support among his conservative base, Matthews dismissed such a possibility.
“I think they hate Obama. They want him out of the White House more than they want to destroy al Qaeda. Their No. 1 enemy in the world right now, on the right, is their hatred, hatred for Obama. And we can go into that about the white working class in the South and looking at these numbers we’re getting the last couple days about racial hatred in many cases … this isn’t about being a better president, they want to get rid of this president,” he said.
Matthews also dismissed Romney’s position on potentially taking military action against Iran if the nation acquires nuclear weapon capabilities.
“Any jackass can talk about bombing Iran, but they never talk about the consequences,” he said.
First of all, I do believe that Mitt Romney said that he would only use the Military as a last resort. Which is a very large departure from the Bush Administration’s insistence that we just had to go into Iraq to stop the WMD’s. As for calling Mitt Romney a “jackass,” any jackass can support a Presidential candidate because of his skin color too, as it seems that Chris Matthews did. Furthermore, any jackass can run for President as a community organizer; but if you are black, you have better chance of winning! So there! Mr. Matthews, you make a mockery of the Progressives and the Democratic Party! You should be kicked off the air for good.
I’m certain that this is what makes Matthews feel more comfortable about an election that clearly is being lost by Barack Obama. It’s not about median household income dropping faster during the Obamanomics recover (4.8%) than during the recession (2.5%). It’s not about having the lowest civilian population participation rate in the last 31 years (63.5%, down from 65.7% at the beginning of the recovery). It’s not about 1.3% GDP growth. It’s not about skyrocketing deficits and budget proposals so ridiculous that no one in Obama’s own party would vote for them. No, Matthews can’t bring himself to it’s about America rejecting the President who delivered this economic performance not because of his failures, but because of the color of his skin — even though the same electorate made him President despite a lack of experience over a long-known and long-serving politician four years ago.
That says nothing about America. It says everything about Chris Matthews.
Agreed. My friends, as I have written on this blog, and on my old one many times. I am a former Democratic Party voter, I left that part for this very reason right here. Because I knew that this sort of stupidity would be coming down the pike, once President Obama was elected. It is a sad state of affairs for the Democratic Party, their leader has failed horribly and now, they are trying to hold on to the “dream,” if you want to call it that and they will be dragged into the dustbin of history, kicking and screaming all the way.
Again, it is sad to see; but I knew it was coming, long ago.
Today the U.S. Navy must prepare for two major wars–one against Iran in the Persian Gulf, the other against China in the Western Pacific–while also combating piracy off the coast of Africa, dealing with unexpected wars such as the one in Libya last year, supporting ground operations in Afghanistan and other theaters, combating drug runners in the Caribbean, and showing the flag in the Mediterranean, Indian Ocean, and other seas. The operational tempo dictated by these requirements is terrific, as I have seen for myself in the last few years in visits to the 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf and the 7th Fleet in Japan.
The ships we have are, when not retrofitting in port, almost constantly at sea and they are struggling to keep up with threats ranging from Chinese “aircraft-killer” ballistic missiles and submarines to Iranian mines and cruise missiles–not to mention the ever-present threat of cyberattack and terrorism (of the kind which crippled the USS Cole). Yes, the capabilities of each naval ship are greater today–but so are its range of potential missions and so are the capabilities of our potential foes. China is expanding its maritime capabilities at a rapid clip; the U.S. Navy is struggling to keep up and the balance of power in the Western Pacific is shifting against us.
That is in large part why the bipartisan Hadley-Perry Commission concluded in 2010 that the Navy should have 346 ships. Yet today it has only 282 ships–and falling. As former Navy Secretary (and Romney adviser) John Lehman noted in April: “The latest budget the administration has advanced proposes buying just 41 ships over five years. It is anything but certain that the administration’s budgets will sustain even that rate of only eight ships per year, but even if they do, the United States is headed for a Navy of 240-250 ships at best.”
That is a looming strategic disaster–and one that no amount of quips about horses and bayonets can wish away. If we don’t build more ships, our global maritime dominance–the basic underpinning of the world’s strategic and economic stability–is in real danger of slipping away.
The only thing that I have a quibble with, is that he actually forgot Russia. If Max thinks that Russia is not a threat to our National Security; he is nuts. As long as Putin has his hands in the Government in Russia, the United States should be very worried. Putin is a holdover from the communist era in Russia and he would just love to take Russia back to the old Communist era. So, they are a threat, as a matter of face they were just testing missiles yesterday.
Reagan always said, when it came to Russia; “Trust, But Verify” and Reagan always did try and independently verify anything that the Russians were saying or doing. All of the Presidents since then have not been so careful, as far as I know. As much as I know that it is going to make me sound like a conspiracy theory kook; I really do not believe that Russia is to be trusted at all. Communism never quite dies, it just takes on new shapes and names. Sort of like what we have here in America, as it is called —- imperfect Marxism.
However, over in Russia, I believe it to be a bit more sinister and complex; those who would want to bring back old soviet-style communism, have plenty of funding, as many in the Russian Business and underworld, would stand to make a good deal of money, if the old Communist Party came back to power. So, that is a threat and I believe our Military should always be on the ready, for when the Russians decided to show muscle.
I hate to be the one to say it; but, anyone who thinks that there are not threats to the security of this Country and others in the region, is at the very least highly uninformed. This is why I always had a quibble with Ron Paul’s foreign policy. As Paul’s foreign policy was just simply not rooted in the realities of the time. Ron Paul seems to be stuck in a utopian era, before World War 2. Truth is, times have changed, and we must be responsible as a Nation to protect this great Republic of ours, from those who wish to cause it harm. This is not a “Neo-Con” foreign policy, that is a reality based, Pro-American foreign policy.
Sadly, Ron Paul refuses to accept that argument and that is why I always had trouble taking him seriously, except maybe on matters of fiscal policy. Even then, some of his ideas are just not rooted in reality. Nice ideas, but a bit out of step for the realities of today.
WASHINGTON — Victims of the Fort Hood shooting are rallying in a grassroots effort to get the rampage classified as an act of terrorism.
A coalition of 160 victims and family members released a video Thursday detailing what happened at the Texas military base on Nov. 5, 2009, and why they believe it was a terror attack.
In “The Truth About Fort Hood,” victims give testimonials about their experience and express their frustration at the government calling the incident “workplace violence.”
They point out that the accused shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, consulted by email with top al-Qaida leader Anwar al-Awlaki about whether an attack against American soldiers was justified to “protect our brothers.” Until his death in an airstrike in 2011, Yemen-based Awlaki was considered one of the United States’ top enemies.
The shooting for Hasan “was his jihad,” Staff Sgt. Alonzo Lunsford, who was shot five times that day, said in the video.
Another victim, Shawn Manning, said that the soldiers at the readiness center “were killed and wounded by a domestic enemy, someone who was there that day to kill soldiers to prevent them from deploying. If that’s not an act of war or an act of terrorism, I don’t know what is.”
“We’re working pretty hard for our guys right now to get them the recognition and compensation they deserve,” said Kathy Stalnaker, whose husband has severe post-traumatic stress disorder from the incident. “We want to keep it in front of the public.”
This above, if anything else — is why as a people must vote different on November 4, 2012. These brave people have put their damned asses on the line for us, to protect this Republic of ours and this is the thanks that they get from this Marxist President? This is an utter outrage and if there was any sort of justice in this Country, this President would be asked to resign his position and if he did not, impeachment proceedings would be started against him.
Now, I am not saying that our President is a Muslim, like some of the right argue. However, I will say this; at the very least he is empathic to the Islamic cause and does empathic with those who use violence to react to the United States invading their lands. I am not saying he agrees with their actions; but what I am saying is that the President feels that because we did invade their lands, that somehow their actions are justified —- or at the very LEAST the President empathizes with this position.
This is a very dangerous place for a President to be in. Even if we did invade their lands; the invasion of Afghanistan was totally justified, considering that Al-Qaeda hit our homeland on September 11, 2001. Whether our occupation of their lands was the cause, or whether they hit us, because of a Christian and Capitalistic society; the fact is, they attacked us first and we replied back with Military force.
I will say this; this attack here is one of the reasons why I believe that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld and the rest of them made a serious miscalculation about the war on terror. I do not think that the former President, Vice President and his staff realize just what they were uncorking, when they decided to fight the war on terror and just how far reaching it would be and what sort of blowback that they would encounter.
Furthermore, I do not believe that the former President calculated on people, who happened to be Muslim, in his own Military turning on their own Country for the sake of Jihad either. However, now, none of that matters; Bush and Cheney are gone and now we have a President, who will not even call terrorism for what it truly is. I say this as someone who rejects Wilsonian foreign policy, as someone who is not too keen on the idea of a continual war in he middle east for the sake on a so-called ally. I also say this, as unrepentant realist, who see things for what they really are and what they have become over the last three and a half years. Bush created this so-called “Arab Spring” mess and now we are into it deeply.
I also happen to believe that Bush and Co. made another fatal mistake of saying that the war that following 9/11 was not a religious war. It is, in fact, a religious war. It is war between civilized religions of peace; such as Christianity and Judaism and a savage, backward religion, which is quite fascist and intolerant towards those who dare criticize its so-called “prophet.” For those who would say that Christians do the same thing; I simply say to you, the last time I checked, I do not see Christians threatening to blowup buildings or anything for the sort —- for the mere offensive remarks about Jesus Christ or Jews blowing themselves up over insults to the Torah either. For those who point to Timothy McVeigh: He was not a Christian and he was not angry about insults to his religion either. He was a lone wolf crackpot who was angry at the Government. Big Difference! McVeigh might have also been suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome as well, as he was a first gulf war Veteran.
I said all that up there to say this right here: This is why we have to vote different come November 4, 2012. Because we need a steely-eyed leader, who will look at this situation that we are in and make some serious decisions. Not decisions based on political correctness, not based upon popularity polls or any other of that silly stuff. But decisions made for the good of this Country and the future of this Republic of ours. Admittedly, some of those decisions will most likely will make me want to hide under the bed, see I am not that big on war. But, I will feel much better knowing that Mitt Romney, who I am voting for and praying does win — will be that person in charge.
I pray that the Lord God of the Heavens is merciful to this Nation once again and allows a man to be elected — who believes, what I and many of the people who read this blog —- believe. That America and this Republic are worthy of defending, against enemies; foreign and domestic. Who also sees what previous President’s have done, and what needs to be done, to finish the job —- with honor — once and for all.
This video is quite damning to the President. In last night’s debate, President Obama basically said that he was not going to fight for so-called “Low Skill” jobs. Here is a newsflash for the President; a good part of Michigan is filled with people who would work these “low-skill” so-called “low-income” jobs. Not everyone in America has the skills or the ability to get the skills to work those high-tech jobs. There are people, like me; who have disabilities, like A.D.H.D. which affect their ability to do math very well and because of this, we are unable to get a high school diploma.
This video is damning for a number of reasons; first, when he said, “Some jobs are not coming back.” It makes the President sound as if he really does not give care about those who cannot get, because of lack of education; one of these sort of jobs. Those who are on the far-right would say that basically the President wants these people to be on the Government dole. Furthermore, it also makes the President sound like he is basically saying that he is not going to fight to bring general labor jobs back to the United States; and with as many people as we have that are out of work, some of which do take those “low-wage” and “low-skill” jobs — that just sounds very bad.
You can try and spin this and try to wrap it up into a contextual argument or even try to say that the President is being realistic. But, as far as this voter is concerned, Obama just threw in the towel for the average, everyday, unemployed, general laborer. Something that I have been for a good part of my life. Which is why I plan to vote for Mitt Romney in November. Romney might not be perfect, but, he knows what makes this economy work and that there people who do not have degrees, like me; who simply need a 40 hour a week or more job. The only workers that President Obama cares about, are the Unionized workers at the big three, something my Father was, he also wants to tax their pensions as well, something my Father is not happy about too.
But for the non-unionized workers, like me. President Obama simply does not care; Obama would rather focus on the high tech jobs, because those people would be more inclined to vote for him. This is the difference between President Obama, and Governor Mitt Romney — Governor Romney knows that it takes ALL kinds of workers and getting those workers back to work is what he wants to carry out.
Here is Mitt Romney’s message to the middle class: (Via HotAir.com)
Most of the people that come here and read, know that I have been unemployed now for 8 years. Some of that, is my fault; a career change that did not work out like I planned it. But the majority of it is due to the piss poor economy in Michigan. The President has helped take care of my Father and seen to it, that his pension is preserved and that he will get everything that he needs — for this I am very grateful. My question to the President and to the Democrats, as an American, is this: What has President Obama done for people, like me? What has President Obama done for people, who do not have the unions standing in their corner? What has the President done for those who are “low-skill” workers, who are not minorities?
The truth is, The President has done nothing and will do absolutely nothing for us. Which is why, if you are a general laborer and you are voting for President Obama again; you are a fool. Trust me, as the above video shows, President Obama does not give a remote damn about we, who use our backs and our bodies to work. This is because he never had to do it, ever.
I close on this note here: I realize that many working class folk might not like Romney. He is far from perfect, I know what Bush did; and I cannot change that — But, I believe that with Romney it will be much different. So, I ask you, as Americans:
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
1 minute
_gac_
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.
Mr. Matthews, you make a mockery of the Progressives and the Democratic Party! You should be kicked off the air for good.
