meaning powell is a republican. he is pissed off at bush and believes McCain is not different enough from bush so he is going the opposite direction all together.
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
Chicago Tribune, Washington Post endorses Barack Obama
- Thread starter min0 lee
- Start date
meaning powell is a republican. he is pissed off at bush and believes McCain is not different enough from bush so he is going the opposite direction all together.
I understood you said but I wouldn't expect you to say this, but then again you always have been open-minded.
maybe i'm letting emotion rule me here a little bit. Ive always had the greatest respect for colin powell, and i don't want to think of him as voting based on race. he is better than that. I would vote for that guy in a heart beat.
He said our great strength is our unity even though we are quite diverse it just didn't come out well....and he is right. Anytime there is a disaster America snaps together like Voltron....
Same here.
i love the reference
Biden was the mistake.
Biden: Obama Will be 'Tested' by World in First 6 Months of Administration - FOXNews.com Elections
He couldn't have said anything worse for Obama. This guy really is a clown.
Biden: Obama Will be 'Tested' by World in First 6 Months of Administration - FOXNews.com Elections
He couldn't have said anything worse for Obama. This guy really is a clown.
He may be right but that was something better kept to himself.
But...Palin is no better.
Last edited:
Biden outright lies and is constantly saying idiotic things. Palin is not comparable. If she said half the things Biden has been saying than the criticism against her would be appropriate. Meanwhile Joe Biden gets a pass on everything.
Not to mention Obama off teleprompter is worse than either one of them.
'spread the wealth' 'my uncle liberated auschwitz' 'um um um uh uh uh breathalyzer um um uh cost um medicine um uh'
I don't think he gets a pass at all, when he makes a gaffe it's publisized.
More attention is on Palin for her being a female in my opinion....that and McCain and company threw her to the media wolves in order to catch some attention, it worked till she opened her mouth.
MONDAY: Updated Endorsement Tally -- Obama Widens Lead to 112-39
Ken Adelman Backing Obama
Ken Adelman Backing Obama
By Michael D. Shear
First Colin Powell. Now Ken Adelman?
Adelman is the latest Republican foreign-policy heavyweight to endorse Sen. Barack Obama, telling the New Yorker's George Packer that he intends to vote for the Democrat in two weeks.
"When the economic crisis broke, I found John McCain bouncing all over the place. In those first few crisis days, he was impetuous, inconsistent, and imprudent; ending up just plain weird," Adelman wrote, according to Packer. "Having worked with Ronald Reagan for seven years, and been with him in his critical three summits with Gorbachev, I've concluded that that's no way a president can act under pressure."
Adelman was a key part of George Bush's defense agency and has held senior policy positions under Presidents Reagan, Ford and even Nixon. He's a staunch conservative, though he has broken with Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld over the handling of the Iraq war.
But he told Packer that Sen. John McCain's pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate was the last straw.
"That decision showed appalling lack of judgment," he wrote in an e-mail, according to Packer. "Not only is Sarah Palin not close to being acceptable in high office -- I would not have hired her for even a mid-level post in the arms-control agency. But that selection
contradicted McCain's main two, and best two, themes for his campaign -- Country First, and experience counts. Neither can he credibly claim, post-Palin pick."
In today's Post-ABC tracking poll, Obama is winning 22 percent of conservatives. That's his best showing yet among these voters, and if the percent holds on Election Day, it would be higher than conservative support for any Democratic nominee since 1980.
Obama also wins 12 percent support among Republicans in the tracking poll -- exactly double Kerry's 2004 Election Day haul.
Ken Adelman Backing Obama
By Michael D. Shear
First Colin Powell. Now Ken Adelman?
Adelman is the latest Republican foreign-policy heavyweight to endorse Sen. Barack Obama, telling the New Yorker's George Packer that he intends to vote for the Democrat in two weeks.
"When the economic crisis broke, I found John McCain bouncing all over the place. In those first few crisis days, he was impetuous, inconsistent, and imprudent; ending up just plain weird," Adelman wrote, according to Packer. "Having worked with Ronald Reagan for seven years, and been with him in his critical three summits with Gorbachev, I've concluded that that's no way a president can act under pressure."
Adelman was a key part of George Bush's defense agency and has held senior policy positions under Presidents Reagan, Ford and even Nixon. He's a staunch conservative, though he has broken with Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld over the handling of the Iraq war.
But he told Packer that Sen. John McCain's pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate was the last straw.
"That decision showed appalling lack of judgment," he wrote in an e-mail, according to Packer. "Not only is Sarah Palin not close to being acceptable in high office -- I would not have hired her for even a mid-level post in the arms-control agency. But that selection
contradicted McCain's main two, and best two, themes for his campaign -- Country First, and experience counts. Neither can he credibly claim, post-Palin pick."
In today's Post-ABC tracking poll, Obama is winning 22 percent of conservatives. That's his best showing yet among these voters, and if the percent holds on Election Day, it would be higher than conservative support for any Democratic nominee since 1980.
Obama also wins 12 percent support among Republicans in the tracking poll -- exactly double Kerry's 2004 Election Day haul.
Ouch...we don't know much about politics, this being really the first time we get this deep into it and we may not know as much as the IM political crew but these two political heavy weights are pretty critical of Palin.....enough to jump ship.
Maybe they see something you guys don't see?
Maybe they see something you guys don't see?
Wow, RINOs endorse the candidate who appears to be in the lead to jockey for a position in the administration. I'm shocked.
The criticisms against Palin are hilarious considering the lightweight at the top of the Democrat ticket. It is hypocrisy at its finest.
The criticisms against Palin are hilarious considering the lightweight at the top of the Democrat ticket. It is hypocrisy at its finest.
Ken Adelman is not backing Obama. And if the polling is correct Obama is getting a decent percentage of the "conservative" vote and the "Republican" vote.
I do agree, that among a few other factors, picking Palin was a very big gamble that has failed, and it was a very poor decision.
The Katie Couric interview was pivotal, IMO.
I do agree, that among a few other factors, picking Palin was a very big gamble that has failed, and it was a very poor decision.
The Katie Couric interview was pivotal, IMO.
Bernanke Endorses Obama
Bernanke Endorses Obama
There was a time when Fed chairmen feared to even seem political.
Ben Bernanke apparently wants four more years as Federal Reserve Chairman. At least that's a reasonable conclusion after Mr. Bernanke all but submitted his job application to Barack Obama yesterday by endorsing the Democratic version of fiscal "stimulus."
While the Fed chief said any stimulus should be "well targeted," even a general endorsement amounts to a political green light. Mr. Bernanke certainly knows that Mr. Obama and Democrats on Capitol Hill are talking about some $300 billion in new "stimulus" spending, while President Bush and Republicans are resisting. And by saying any help should "limit longer-term effects" on the federal deficit, he had to know he was reinforcing Democratic opposition to permanent tax cuts.
Mr. Bernanke could have begged off -- and would have been wiser to do so -- given how much the Fed has already made itself a political lightning rod with its many Wall Street interventions. He might also have thought twice about endorsing one party's policy preferences a mere two weeks before Election Day given his obligation to preserve the Fed's independence. We can remember when tougher Fed chairmen used to refrain from adjusting interest rates close to an election for fear of seeming to be political; they would never have dreamed of meddling in campaign tax and spending debates.
Perhaps Mr. Bernanke's blunderbuss political intrusion will win him more Democrat friends, and maybe even Mr. Obama's goodwill. To the rest of the world, he has harmed the Fed and made himself less credible.
Bernanke Endorses Obama
There was a time when Fed chairmen feared to even seem political.
Ben Bernanke apparently wants four more years as Federal Reserve Chairman. At least that's a reasonable conclusion after Mr. Bernanke all but submitted his job application to Barack Obama yesterday by endorsing the Democratic version of fiscal "stimulus."
While the Fed chief said any stimulus should be "well targeted," even a general endorsement amounts to a political green light. Mr. Bernanke certainly knows that Mr. Obama and Democrats on Capitol Hill are talking about some $300 billion in new "stimulus" spending, while President Bush and Republicans are resisting. And by saying any help should "limit longer-term effects" on the federal deficit, he had to know he was reinforcing Democratic opposition to permanent tax cuts.
Mr. Bernanke could have begged off -- and would have been wiser to do so -- given how much the Fed has already made itself a political lightning rod with its many Wall Street interventions. He might also have thought twice about endorsing one party's policy preferences a mere two weeks before Election Day given his obligation to preserve the Fed's independence. We can remember when tougher Fed chairmen used to refrain from adjusting interest rates close to an election for fear of seeming to be political; they would never have dreamed of meddling in campaign tax and spending debates.
Perhaps Mr. Bernanke's blunderbuss political intrusion will win him more Democrat friends, and maybe even Mr. Obama's goodwill. To the rest of the world, he has harmed the Fed and made himself less credible.
Min0,
I made a typo in the above post. Yes, Adelman IS endorsing Obama. My bad.
Thanks for the articles.
I made a typo in the above post. Yes, Adelman IS endorsing Obama. My bad.
Thanks for the articles.
That says it all right there. Fiscal irresponsibility and laziness can't be fixed by temporary handouts, unfortunately.
I agree.
Subprime loans should not even been given. Retards borrowed money they could not pay back. Now, we here their "sad stories" when their ARMs re-adjust and they cannot pay it.
Same for the bailout.
Pathetic.
I always felt he was a Democrat a heart, it does explain why he is so popular with the Dems.
^ Do you have a link Min0?
This looks like it's from the 538 polling website.
I visit it, and also visit 7 others every day.
This looks like it's from the 538 polling website.
I visit it, and also visit 7 others every day.
It is.
how can you hold a percentage of a senate seat? and it does not appear to hold up to one hundred?
A Catholic Shift to Obama?
A Catholic Shift to Obama?
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008; A17
It has become commonplace in American politics: Certain Roman Catholic bishops declare that the faithful should cast their ballots on the basis of a limited number of "nonnegotiable issues," notably opposition to abortion. Conservative Catholics cheer, more liberal Catholics howl. And that is usually the end of the story.
Not this year. Catholics, who are quintessential swing voters and gave narrow but crucial support to President Bush in 2004, are drifting toward Barack Obama. And this time, some church leaders are suggesting that single-issue voting is by no means a Catholic commandment.
In an interview yesterday, Gabino Zavala, an auxiliary bishop in the Los Angeles Archdiocese, said his fellow bishops have long insisted that "we're not a one-issue church," a view reflected in their 2007 document "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship."
"But that's not always what comes out," says Zavala, who is also bishop-president of the Catholic peace group Pax Christi USA. "What I believe, and what the church teaches, is that one abortion is too many. That's why I believe abortion is so important. But in light of this, there are many other issues we need to bring up, other issues we should consider, other issues that touch the reality of our lives."
Those issues, Bishop Zavala said, include racism, torture, genocide, immigration, war and the impact of the economic downturn "on the most vulnerable among us, the elderly, poor children, single mothers."
"We know that neither of the political parties supports everything the church teaches," he added. "We are not going to create a culture of life if we don't talk about all the life issues, beginning with abortion but including all of them."
Zavala was careful to say that he did not want to take issue with any of his fellow bishops. But his view contrasts with that of others in the hierarchy.
This month, for example, Bishop Joseph F. Martino of the Scranton (Pa.) Diocese issued a letter warning that "being 'right' on taxes, education, health care, immigration and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life." He added: "It is a tragic irony that 'pro-choice' candidates have come to support homicide -- the gravest injustice a society can tolerate -- in the name of 'social justice.' "
Bishop Zavala's desire to speak out with an alternative view is a sign of how much has changed in four years: Progressive Catholics are now as organized as conservative Catholics were in 2004. At Web sites such as ProLife - ProObama, they are arguing that the abortion question does not trump all other concerns.
The impact of the new Catholic politics could be substantial. Catholics are often a decisive electoral group partly because church membership ranges from upscale to working-class whites, a large group of Latinos, and a significant number of African Americans.
Catholics typically make up about a quarter of the electorate, and they are strategically located. White (non-Latino) Catholics are important in such swing states as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, while Latino Catholics make up a notable share of the populations of New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and Florida.
Polls have varied in measuring the Catholic shift toward the Democrats, but Obama seems to be running ahead of John Kerry's performance in 2004. According to the network exit polls, Bush carried 52 percent of the Catholic vote to 47 percent for Kerry. By contrast, a mid-October Pew Research Center survey showed Obama leading John McCain among Catholics by 55 percent to 35 percent.
Post surveys over the same period have found more modest Catholic gains for Obama. A Post tracking poll released yesterday showed Obama and McCain splitting the Catholic vote at 48 percent each. Obama's Catholic share probably stands somewhere between the Pew and Post numbers. But even a split among Catholics could mark a sufficient improvement over Kerry's performance to tip key states the Democrat's way.
In many respects, Catholics simply reflect the country as a whole in moving toward the Democrats because of frustrations with the economy and the Bush years. But the Catholic debate entails a very particular argument over what counts as a commitment to life. To an unexpected degree, this election could hang on the struggle of Catholic voters with their priorities and their consciences.
postchat@aol.com
A Catholic Shift to Obama?
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008; A17
It has become commonplace in American politics: Certain Roman Catholic bishops declare that the faithful should cast their ballots on the basis of a limited number of "nonnegotiable issues," notably opposition to abortion. Conservative Catholics cheer, more liberal Catholics howl. And that is usually the end of the story.
Not this year. Catholics, who are quintessential swing voters and gave narrow but crucial support to President Bush in 2004, are drifting toward Barack Obama. And this time, some church leaders are suggesting that single-issue voting is by no means a Catholic commandment.
In an interview yesterday, Gabino Zavala, an auxiliary bishop in the Los Angeles Archdiocese, said his fellow bishops have long insisted that "we're not a one-issue church," a view reflected in their 2007 document "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship."
"But that's not always what comes out," says Zavala, who is also bishop-president of the Catholic peace group Pax Christi USA. "What I believe, and what the church teaches, is that one abortion is too many. That's why I believe abortion is so important. But in light of this, there are many other issues we need to bring up, other issues we should consider, other issues that touch the reality of our lives."
Those issues, Bishop Zavala said, include racism, torture, genocide, immigration, war and the impact of the economic downturn "on the most vulnerable among us, the elderly, poor children, single mothers."
"We know that neither of the political parties supports everything the church teaches," he added. "We are not going to create a culture of life if we don't talk about all the life issues, beginning with abortion but including all of them."
Zavala was careful to say that he did not want to take issue with any of his fellow bishops. But his view contrasts with that of others in the hierarchy.
This month, for example, Bishop Joseph F. Martino of the Scranton (Pa.) Diocese issued a letter warning that "being 'right' on taxes, education, health care, immigration and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life." He added: "It is a tragic irony that 'pro-choice' candidates have come to support homicide -- the gravest injustice a society can tolerate -- in the name of 'social justice.' "
Bishop Zavala's desire to speak out with an alternative view is a sign of how much has changed in four years: Progressive Catholics are now as organized as conservative Catholics were in 2004. At Web sites such as ProLife - ProObama, they are arguing that the abortion question does not trump all other concerns.
The impact of the new Catholic politics could be substantial. Catholics are often a decisive electoral group partly because church membership ranges from upscale to working-class whites, a large group of Latinos, and a significant number of African Americans.
Catholics typically make up about a quarter of the electorate, and they are strategically located. White (non-Latino) Catholics are important in such swing states as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, while Latino Catholics make up a notable share of the populations of New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and Florida.
Polls have varied in measuring the Catholic shift toward the Democrats, but Obama seems to be running ahead of John Kerry's performance in 2004. According to the network exit polls, Bush carried 52 percent of the Catholic vote to 47 percent for Kerry. By contrast, a mid-October Pew Research Center survey showed Obama leading John McCain among Catholics by 55 percent to 35 percent.
Post surveys over the same period have found more modest Catholic gains for Obama. A Post tracking poll released yesterday showed Obama and McCain splitting the Catholic vote at 48 percent each. Obama's Catholic share probably stands somewhere between the Pew and Post numbers. But even a split among Catholics could mark a sufficient improvement over Kerry's performance to tip key states the Democrat's way.
In many respects, Catholics simply reflect the country as a whole in moving toward the Democrats because of frustrations with the economy and the Bush years. But the Catholic debate entails a very particular argument over what counts as a commitment to life. To an unexpected degree, this election could hang on the struggle of Catholic voters with their priorities and their consciences.
postchat@aol.com
Mon Oct 20, 3:01 pm ET
The vice presidential candidates are picked. The conventions are done. So are the debates. What's a political watcher to do with the 15 days left before the election?
You can always try to decipher the polls or wait for the October Surprise (if it hasn't already happened yet). Or, you can do what we did this weekend: meander through the avalanche of endorsements that have been handed down from newspapers and other notables during the campaign season.
There have been a few newsworthy endorsements recently as some high-profile Republicans have publicly moved to Democratic territory. Christopher Buckley, William F. Buckley's son, endorsed Barack Obama (and subsequently lost his column at the National Review over it). Colin Powell did the same this weekend. Republican talk show host Michael Smerconish announced he'd be voting for a Democrat for the first time in 28 years. (We should note that even though he's a fixture on the McCain campaign now, Sen. Joe Lieberman jumping parties to endorse John McCain was also news at the time.)
But those are just a few voices that received attention for making unexpected choices. There are a lot of other endorsements out there, so here's a round-up of some nods.
First, the political ones. President Bush, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the NRA have endorsed McCain. Hillary Clinton, Caroline Kennedy and the AFL-CIO have endorsed Obama.
Obvious political endorsements can be boring, so thank Hollywood for giving us Heidi Montag, Matt Damon and the Baldwin brothers. Montag of "The Hills" fame endorsed McCain and then he endorsed her right back. Matt Damon said Obama is his guy and (more famously) noted that Sarah Palin's candidacy sounded like a "bad Disney movie."
Then, there's the dueling political posturing of a couple of the brothers Baldwin. While neither may have explicitly endorsed a candidate, you could probably tell by watching "Saturday Night Live" this weekend that Alec is a loud Democrat and little bro Stephen is an outspoken Republican. (Stephen even went so far as to challenge Obama to a boxing duel for charity.)
Baldwins aside, what you might find more useful is knowing who newspapers endorse. The Chicago Tribune, for example, is backing Barack Obama. It's the first time in the paper's history that they are endorsing a Democrat for the presidency of the United States. A few days after the Trib endorsement, McCain picked up his own big-deal endorsement from a paper in the swing state of Ohio, the Columbus Dispatch.
There's a comprehensive list of newspaper endorsements over at Editor & Publisher, but we've pulled a few of the other key ones below:
Boston Herald – McCain
Los Angeles Times – Obama
New York Post - McCain
Washington DC Examiner – McCain
Washington Post – Obama
The vice presidential candidates are picked. The conventions are done. So are the debates. What's a political watcher to do with the 15 days left before the election?
You can always try to decipher the polls or wait for the October Surprise (if it hasn't already happened yet). Or, you can do what we did this weekend: meander through the avalanche of endorsements that have been handed down from newspapers and other notables during the campaign season.
There have been a few newsworthy endorsements recently as some high-profile Republicans have publicly moved to Democratic territory. Christopher Buckley, William F. Buckley's son, endorsed Barack Obama (and subsequently lost his column at the National Review over it). Colin Powell did the same this weekend. Republican talk show host Michael Smerconish announced he'd be voting for a Democrat for the first time in 28 years. (We should note that even though he's a fixture on the McCain campaign now, Sen. Joe Lieberman jumping parties to endorse John McCain was also news at the time.)
But those are just a few voices that received attention for making unexpected choices. There are a lot of other endorsements out there, so here's a round-up of some nods.
First, the political ones. President Bush, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the NRA have endorsed McCain. Hillary Clinton, Caroline Kennedy and the AFL-CIO have endorsed Obama.
Obvious political endorsements can be boring, so thank Hollywood for giving us Heidi Montag, Matt Damon and the Baldwin brothers. Montag of "The Hills" fame endorsed McCain and then he endorsed her right back. Matt Damon said Obama is his guy and (more famously) noted that Sarah Palin's candidacy sounded like a "bad Disney movie."
Then, there's the dueling political posturing of a couple of the brothers Baldwin. While neither may have explicitly endorsed a candidate, you could probably tell by watching "Saturday Night Live" this weekend that Alec is a loud Democrat and little bro Stephen is an outspoken Republican. (Stephen even went so far as to challenge Obama to a boxing duel for charity.)
Baldwins aside, what you might find more useful is knowing who newspapers endorse. The Chicago Tribune, for example, is backing Barack Obama. It's the first time in the paper's history that they are endorsing a Democrat for the presidency of the United States. A few days after the Trib endorsement, McCain picked up his own big-deal endorsement from a paper in the swing state of Ohio, the Columbus Dispatch.
There's a comprehensive list of newspaper endorsements over at Editor & Publisher, but we've pulled a few of the other key ones below:
Boston Herald – McCain
Los Angeles Times – Obama
New York Post - McCain
Washington DC Examiner – McCain
Washington Post – Obama
This is a detractor for me...not only should the fed chairman shut up about politics, but he has been doing a poor job too.
