Sunday, October 19, 2008

Powell: Just another member of the identity politics brigade

Former general and secretary of state Colin Powell endorsed Barack Hussein Obama today. What a shame and sham, but it is yet one more incidence of identity politics. Considering his statements about having an african-american president would be "electrifying", one could come to come to that conclusion. two things the general doesn't address, and one is important to note: One, While he disparages McCain for going negative on Obama, he doesn't give the same shrift for the negatively and outrageousness done to Palin, which in some ways was much worse. Obama can get cover on this as Team Geppetto was in full force, so Obama's fingerprints were not on it, but he is complicit. Had Obama been subjected to the same ferocious vetting the MSM did, he wouldn't be where he is. Two, Powell may think that Obama has a better grasp of the economy than McCain, and he has a solution. I would ask Powell if it is possible that Obama is wrong in his assessment (both candidates are off the mark in their solutions) is it possible that what he may call intellectual curiosity is an elitist or facile cockiness? I think you could make the argument that McCain knows his limitations and would ask for help (Romney would be great here), whereas Obama is conceited enough he would not. Who do you trust at that point? Being a leader is more than white knuckling the bus over a cliff. I respect General Powell for his service, but he is wrong here, or at the very least facile and or a priori, but he is within his rights. I wish him well. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 


Chris said...

I'm surprised that republicans are actually willing to attribute Powell's endorsement to the fact that he and Obama share the same race. Buchanan, Limbaugh, and other pundits have claimed that as the true motivation. I'm surprised because that is the greatest possible insult to General Powell. You could claim instead that he is doing it because he thinks Obama is going to win and wants a position in his administration. You could say that it is just to spite the republicans for their falling out. Instead you say that it's racially motivated, and that Powell, despite being an incredibly smart man who has served his country honorably as a soldier and a statesman, is incapable of comparing the candidates on anything other than the color of their skin. I say that is the worst accusation that could be possibly made by Republicans to explain why their beloved General turned his back on their candidate, without admitting that maybe it's because he believes Obama would do a better job, because it's also calling Powell a liar. He has said explicitly, many times before the endorsement, that he will not support Obama on the factor of race alone. I urge everyone, every self identified Republican who feels offended or betrayed by Powell's endorsement: Listen to what the man is saying. Take a moment, before you discount him as a liberal pawn, and consider a little "what if" scenario. "What if Powell is a man who puts country first? What if his endorsement of Obama comes about because, after being a four star general, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of State under G.W.Bush, working in three Republican presidential administrations, speaking at the RNC and after a lifetime of dedication to his country, he really thinks Obama would be a better president?" I think that if you do ask yourself that question, before claiming that it's because General Powell can't help but vote for the black candidate, you might start to understand what General Powell already understands, what millions of people around our great nation understand, that we need change and Barack Obama can bring us that change and lead us in a better direction for America.

Jim Lagnese said...

My browser crashed and now I have to start from scratch. Look. I know black people that are voting for Obama only because he is black. I am sure Powell has other reasons, but race figures into it. Lastly, I cannot vote for someone just because they promise change. Hitler promised the same things, so did Mao, and Fidel. This guy is cut from the same cult of personality cloth as those men. I cannot vote for someone that thinks babies born during a late term abortion should not receive medical care so as to live, but instead should die as that was the mother and doctor's wishes, I cannot vote for a person that does not believe I have a natural right to protect myself, I cannot vote for a socialist, one who believes in unwanted obligations, taxing unfairly and is such an elitist to believe that "he will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism, that you put down your division, that you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones, that you push yourselves to be better, and that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual - uninvolved, uninformed." What an arrogant, elitist, socialist, utilitarian, marxist scumbag. And you believe this is good? Just thinking he might do a better job is not good enough. It's the type of job he'll do, which is to ask us to grab our ankles and say thank you, you ignorant asshole. What change will he bring? How is it good? Who will pay for it? What liberties, freedoms, and time on this planet that I will give up? None of you changaholics can answer that honestly or concisely, just that change is a coming and it is good. Change for change's sake is the good intentions that the road to hell is paved with. So go head, vote for your messiah that will deliver you, and you'll get all you deserve and more, but I will not have any of it. He's the wrong man, at the wrong time and no one is asking the tough questions, and digging into his past like they have with Palin or even Joe the plumber. Like Hitler, if Obama gets in, it will be truly regrettable and many millions understand that as well.

Chris said...

First of all, I admire your skepticism. I personally do not believe everything, or even most things, any politician says despite their party. Second, I'm glad your willing to have this discussion on your blog. Now, that said, you brought up a number of points that I take issue with.
What really bothers me about the statement "I know black people that are voting for Obama only because he is black" is that it isn't true. Not all black people are voting Obama this November. But something else bothers me about it as well. What it seems to imply is "reverse racism" or the idea that black people are blindly voting for him because of his race. I strongly disagree with that sentiment. First of all, African Americans vote democratic consistently and in great numbers election after election. On average they support liberal candidates and in the past have done so despite both candidates being white. Second of all, black people who vote based on race is different then when white people do it. A white mother can tell her children that they can be anything they want to, and point to history to prove it. A black mother doesn't have the support of history when they tell that to their child, only the hope that one day it will be true.
All that other stuff is way to hostile to deserve response. Obama isn't Hitler, he doesn't want doctors to let babies that have been born die, and he isn't a socialist. Those things just are categorically false. Powell, a man you claim to respect, didn't just say he thinks Obama should be president, he also said all those things were false and purposely misleaing. This is America, and you are allowed to believe whatever disgusting, horribly untrue, and terrifyingly ignorant things that you want, and thank God for that, but right now we should all be focused on more important things that the front page of the National Enquirer.

Plus man, he's going to be the president.

Jim Lagnese said...

You are correct that I made a generalization, and I probably shouldn't have, but as far as reverse racism? Not really. Just calling it the way I see it. As far as blacks being democratic, that is only something of relative recent vintage. Did you know MLK was a republican? Frederick Douglass? Did you know if it were not for the republicans, that the civil rights act of 1964 would not have passed? Did you know that current democrat, senator Robert Byrd voted against it? Well, it is not surprising, as he was once a grand dragon of the KKK. As far as the fairy tale about a white mother and black mother and telling their kids what they can be, it's about outlook, and making someone president so they can say anything is possible is at the height of affirmative action racism, which is what it is and identity politics. Obama is a socialist. His answer to Joe Wurzelbacher proves it. He believes in the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. That, by it's very definition is socialism. To each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities. If you can't face the truth about your messiah, then when the shit hits the fan, I'll get to say I told you so at the very least. Lastly, inevitability does not make something right or correct, just that it will happen. FWIW, I might vote for Powell over McCain, but I don't think his choice of Obama is a purely rational decision and I may even question that it is a priori.

You also might like:

Related Posts with Thumbnails