Did you hear Chris Matthews suggest the other day that President Obama should bring Colin Powell into his administration. My jaw dropped, and I almost gasped hearing this. A prime time pundit on MSNBC was actually suggesting that Obama move to the center.

Matthews better watch out. MSNBC likes to coordinate things so that every host on every show expresses the exact same far left view. And this kind of opinion really makes him the odd man out. Too many statements like this, and Matthews will be sent packing. Mark my words on this.

Powell said he heard senior members of his own (ex)party make the suggestion, “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” It would have been nice if he had let us know which senior members made that statement. You would have thought that Keith Olbermann was the one being interviewed on Meet the Press.

And that would be a bad thing? I’m not suggesting that’s what your saying, felixw. Just thinking it would be a very good thing to me, if the network(s) at least would become more centralized.

And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards–Purple Heart, Bronze Star–showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross, it didn’t have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way.

I think this says it all. I have always respected Colin Powell and had hoped he would have run for President, but understood his apprehension. Especially now, how we’ve seen this great country react towards the first african-american who is in office. I realize some of you honestly object to Obamas’ policies but there are so many others that simply object because he is not the right color.

felixw said:
Did you hear Chris Matthews suggest the other day that President Obama should bring Colin Powell into his administration. My jaw dropped, and I almost gasped hearing this. A prime time pundit on MSNBC was actually suggesting that Obama move to the center. Matthews better watch out. MSNBC likes to coordinate things so that every host on every show expresses the exact same far left view. And this kind of opinion really makes him the odd man out. Too many statements like this, and Matthews will be sent packing. Mark my words on this.

It’s lip service Felix. In reality, Obama WILL move to the center, just not yet. Wait until late 2011 when it is campaign time. Then he will do it – but in word only. Just like he did when he campaigned in 2007. I’m sure he believes that people he bamboozled once can be bamboozled again.

MiddleRoader said:
I think this says it all. I have always respected Colin Powell and had hoped he would have run for President, but understood his apprehension. Especially now, how we’ve seen this great country react towards the first african-american who is in office. I realize some of you honestly object to Obamas’ policies but there are so many others that simply object because he is not the right color.

Obama was elected not in a landslide, but certainly with ease. He has not gone from highly popular to more unpopular by the day because people who voted from him suddenly realize he is a black man. As a middle roader surely you realize (if you know the history of the man’s politics in the Senate) that he moderated many of his positions when he campaigned to present himself as a moderate Democrat who would set our economy on the right track. People bought into the bill of goods. He has governed like anything but a moderate since elected. This has turned people off. Racists did not vote for him to begin with. Surely you realize this….don’t you?

But…he’s a RINO, because, you know, he doesn’t toe the hardcore conservative party line and actually makes some fucking sense in discussing complicated issues….Unlike, you know, every single probable GOP candidate in 2012, spare Mitch Daniels (who would probably also be considered a RINO by GordonBlowers, etc.)

Publius219 said:
But…he’s a RINO, because, you know, he doesn’t toe the hardcore conservative party line and actually makes some fucking sense in discussing complicated issues….Unlike, you know, every single probable GOP candidate in 2012, spare Mitch Daniels (who would probably also be considered a RINO by GordonBlowers, etc.)

Hell Ronald Reagan would be a RINO today.

“By today’s standards, the Gipper would easily qualify for status as a back-stabbing, treacherous RINO [Republican in Name Only],” wrote Tax Analysts contributing editor Martin Sullivan, in an article for Tax Notes in May.

http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/110597/taxes-what-people-forget-about-reagan?mod=taxes-filing

Andy Lamb said:
Obama was elected not in a landslide, but certainly with ease. He has not gone from highly popular to more unpopular by the day because people who voted from him suddenly realize he is a black man. As a middle roader surely you realize (if you know the history of the man’s politics in the Senate) that he moderated many of his positions when he campaigned to present himself as a moderate Democrat who would set our economy on the right track. People bought into the bill of goods. He has governed like anything but a moderate since elected. This has turned people off. Racists did not vote for him to begin with. Surely you realize this….don’t you?

But are you really one to judge? From reading your comments, you do not strike me as a moderate/independent, so of course everything he has done is, to you, far left. But, as a moderate/independent, one entirely subjective gauge I use is how often is he pissing off both extremes. And, so far, he seems to be doing a pretty decent job of that.

Since I am not a healthcare expert/economist, I can’t delve into the details of the specific bills with the knowledge that I would like to, but from most things I have read, from independent sources, the HC bill is pretty moderate, and not dissimilar from what Heritage proposed earlier this decade, nor what Romney instituted in Mass.

Obama will be hard to beat in 2012, for a number of reasons. If the economy has recovered, it’ll be nearly impossible. This is the sad truth to the Tea Party, etc., who will see this November’s elections as an endorsement of a continued push to the extreme, ignoring that the electorate in 2010 will be far different from that in 2012. Ultimately, it is America that suffers, because moderates/independents like myself will only be left with one reasonable choice, as is the case far too often.

paulmdoro said:
Hell Ronald Reagan would be a RINO today.

“By today’s standards, the Gipper would easily qualify for status as a back-stabbing, treacherous RINO [Republican in Name Only],” wrote Tax Analysts contributing editor Martin Sullivan, in an article for Tax Notes in May.

http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/110597/taxes-what-people-forget-about-reagan?mod=taxes-filing

I actually wrote an essay several months ago regarding that very topic. There’s no doubt that Reagan would be a RINO in today’s conservatism.

Andy Lamb said:
Racists did not vote for him to begin with. Surely you realize this….don’t you?

Actually I can be no surer of that than you can. People tend to regress back into their true feelings when they get pissed off. Some people just want to be part of the bandwagon, others just voted to be part of history in the making. Not only black history but in the case of Hillary being the first woman president. I can’t tell you how many uninformed people I came across during the campaign that were only voting because of sex or race. It was to say the least disheartening and sickening as well. They no more knew about the issues past color or sex. Just as the some people voted republican, voting against Obama just because he was black and Hillary just because she was a woman. In reality it may have just been a small number of people, I can’t be sure, but it seemed to me a greater number of people compared to the informed people that I came across in my daily rounds.

MiddleRoader said:
Actually I can be no surer of that than you can. People tend to regress back into their true feelings when they get pissed off. Some people just want to be part of the bandwagon, others just voted to be part of history in the making. Not only black history but in the case of Hillary being the first woman president. I can’t tell you how many uninformed people I came across during the campaign that were only voting because of sex or race. It was to say the least disheartening and sickening as well. They no more knew about the issues past color or sex. Just as the some people voted republican, voting against Obama just because he was black and Hillary just because she was a woman. In reality it may have just been a small number of people, I can’t be sure, but it seemed to me a greater number of people compared to the informed people that I came across in my daily rounds.

Stupidity is not limited to one political party. It infects every inch of the spectrum, and poisons our political discourse.

Why are we “revisiting” these allegations now, Colby?

Has the conservatives as Islamophobes angle run out of steam in the Pastor Jones brouhaha?

Time to get the “story” back on track?

Look, Colin Powell shilled and voted for Obama because he was BLACK. Nothing else.
If he shilled and voted for Obama because of his political views, then Powell was and is not a Conservative or a Republican and was a liar for most of his political life saysing he was a Republican.
One or the other.
I go with the first one…. Powell was like 98% of Blacks in the US… they voted by RACE, not by politics.
Is that racist?

Perhaps the tide is turning against the many rightwingers who populate this blog. You say that Obama is a Muslim , racist, socialist, fascist, bad Christian, communist – take your pick. What’s reality is that Obama is a very moderate intelligent person who’s doing his best to get us out of a mess that certainly wasn’t all of his doing. The right certainly doesn’t have a monopoly on patriotism and morality and the evidence is that the right has nothing positive to offer in helping our country and the world. Your mantra is lower taxes for the super rich, privatize social security; make health care even worse than it is; kick ass and waste the lives of our wonderful soldiers while killing thousands of innocent people; deregulate everything; scapegoat Muslims, Mexicans and other minorities, etc. On top of this many of you can’t handle having a black man as our President. Yes, the old racism card, but really amidst all the anger and vituperation expressed in your comments, it’s not difficult to see there’s not much love and compassion in your hearts. I pray for you. BTW, Colin Powell knowingly lied when he spoke at the UN about Saddam Hussein’s WMD’s which is why his political career has gone nowhere, but he at least has apologized.

Publius219 said:
But are you really one to judge? From reading your comments, you do not strike me as a moderate/independent, so of course everything he has done is, to you, far left. But, as a moderate/independent, one entirely subjective gauge I use is how often is he pissing off both extremes. And, so far, he seems to be doing a pretty decent job of that.

In reality, it is the middle that he is pissing off. The far right did not vote for him in 2008, nor will they in 2012. The far left voted for him in 2008, and they will again in 2012. Look at any/every poll out there whether it is FOX News (right leaning) or The Washington Post (left leaning) or any other. It is Independents that Obama is losing, big time. He is profusely bleeding moderate support, that’s why his numbers are so low now. This runs completely counter to your analogy.

Publius219 said:
Since I am not a healthcare expert/economist, I can’t delve into the details of the specific bills with the knowledge that I would like to, but from most things I have read, from independent sources, the HC bill is pretty moderate, and not dissimilar from what Heritage proposed earlier this decade, nor what Romney instituted in Mass.

The health care bill that passed was very watered down. When Scott Brown was elected to the Senate, Dems rushed to get the bill that had ALREADY passed the Senate through the House and signed into law. Health Care that passed is nothing like what Obama eventually envisions for the U.S. – which is single payer, government run health care. This in not my opinion, it is fact. Search the web hard enough, and you will find clips of him saying this himself prior to his run for President. He has said numerous times in the past that one option for health care – the Federal Government – is what he wants.

Publius219 said:
Obama will be hard to beat in 2012, for a number of reasons. If the economy has recovered, it’ll be nearly impossible. This is the sad truth to the Tea Party, etc., who will see this November’s elections as an endorsement of a continued push to the extreme, ignoring that the electorate in 2010 will be far different from that in 2012. Ultimately, it is America that suffers, because moderates/independents like myself will only be left with one reasonable choice, as is the case far too often.

If a Tea Party type candidate is nominated in 2012, then I might agree with you. That scenario has played out in Nevada, where Lowden and Tarkanian siphoned votes from each other, and Sharron Angle (backed by Tea Party) snuck in and won the Republican nomination. Either of the other two would have rolled Reid, but now it’s a dead heat between him and Angle. I doubt a Tea Party candidate will head the GOP ticket in 2012. Things may change, but for now Obama looks worse by the day, even Dems and the left leaning media are bailing on him. Moderate Dems (who there are VERY few of anymore) have already said adios. Evan Bayh is a good example. If the GOP nominee in 2012 is not a Tea Party type candidate, Obama is toast.

For those who think that Obama is a moderate, please view this site –

http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm#results

The numbers are from 2007, Obama’s last year in the Senate. The man is not a moderate in any sense of the word.

philipjames said:
Look, Colin Powell shilled and voted for Obama because he was BLACK. Nothing else.If he shilled and voted for Obama because of his political views, then Powell was and is not a Conservative or a Republican and was a liar for most of his political life saysing he was a Republican.One or the other.I go with the first one…. Powell was like 98% of Blacks in the US… they voted by RACE, not by politics.Is that racist?

This is the same old argument that seems to keep limping along. John Kerry carried nearly 90% of the black vote in 2004 and because Obama got a higher percentage it was because he is black. Recognize the ignorance of the assumption. I know you want to believe that blacks voted for him because he is black, but blacks would have overwhelming voting for anybody other than John McCain and was a democrat-as they always do. It was just icing on the cake that the president is black. The numbers would have been nearly identical had Hillary Clinton won the Dem nomination. So, please take the lame argument back to your cave because it’s just not true.

If Colin Powell ever decides to run as a repub, he will likely split the black vote. And then, I think the argument that people voting because of race will be applicable, because right now blacks have no reason to vote for a repub because repubs dismiss the black vote.

Chris Matthews suggest the other day that President Obama should bring Colin Powell into his administration. My jaw dropped, and I almost gasped hearing this. A prime time pundit on MSNBC was actually suggesting that Obama move to the center.

London Escort Agencies

Andy Lamb said:
Powell said he heard senior members of his own (ex)party make the suggestion, “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” It would have been nice if he had let us know which senior members made that statement. You would have thought that Keith Olbermann was the one being interviewed on Meet the Press.

Are you realistically suggesting Powell was lying?

dcjoe said:
…….because right now blacks have no reason to vote for a repub because repubs dismiss the black vote.

BOTH parties dismiss the black vote.

CosmosDan said:
Are you realistically suggesting Powell was lying?

I think he’s realistically suggesting that Powell should have been quizzed as to exactly who he referred to, just anyone else might be.

he’s always been a Christian? not quite sure of that, though his grandparents brought him to church a few times i think. Exactly though, what if he was Muslim? nothing, sure it’s used sometimes as a bad thing, but it’s also defended as if it is a bad thing. There’s always easier ways to deal with shit and it’s NEVER dealt the easy way in the media because everyone’s so political and self-centered.

So some POLITICAL top Repubs in their party where talking shit, THAT’S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. Destroy the other guy, stretch the truth, invent the truth. Did anyone really expect them to go “oh yeah he’s Christian and we love him”? I believe the Clinton campaign put that stuff out there first btw, but we’ll sweep that under the rug because she’s got a job now working for him. Did Powell say anything to these “leaders”?

Also it’s funny how people say that it’s because of his skin pigment that some people are against him. It’s also true people are FOR him because of it. Powell was hypnotized by the same thing alot of people were, his oratory of reading. It also helped they shared something else. Then throw in some Repubs saying something or other and Powell got nostalgic.

For the record I love Colin Powell. I wonder what he thinks of Obama today. That won’t be posted by lefties.

philipjames said:
Look, Colin Powell shilled and voted for Obama because he was BLACK. Nothing else.
If he shilled and voted for Obama because of his political views, then Powell was and is not a Conservative or a Republican and was a liar for most of his political life saysing he was a Republican.
One or the other.
I go with the first one…. Powell was like 98% of Blacks in the US… they voted by RACE, not by politics.
Is that racist?

Is accusing somebody of voting based on skin color without any evidence at all racist?

jk76 said:
he’s always been a Christian? not quite sure of that, though his grandparents brought him to church a few times i think. Exactly though, what if he was Muslim? nothing, sure it’s used sometimes as a bad thing, but it’s also defended as if it is a bad thing. There’s always easier ways to deal with shit and it’s NEVER dealt the easy way in the media because everyone’s so political and self-centered.

So some POLITICAL top Repubs in their party where talking shit, THAT’S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. Destroy the other guy, stretch the truth, invent the truth. Did anyone really expect them to go “oh yeah he’s Christian and we love him”? I believe the Clinton campaign put that stuff out there first btw, but we’ll sweep that under the rug because she’s got a job now working for him. Did Powell say anything to these “leaders”?

Also it’s funny how people say that it’s because of his skin pigment that some people are against him. It’s also true people are FOR him because of it. Powell was hypnotized by the same thing alot of people were, his oratory of reading. It also helped they shared something else. Then throw in some Repubs saying something or other and Powell got nostalgic.

For the record I love Colin Powell. I wonder what he thinks of Obama today. That won’t be posted by lefties.

A person’s religious beliefs should be personal and private.

People talk so frequently of voters being seduced by Obama’s speaking abilities, but I never hear anyone mention a far more common reason for his win: independent and moderate voters unsure of or flat-out scared of a McCain/Palin White House.

MiddleRoader said:
Actually I can be no surer of that than you can. People tend to regress back into their true feelings when they get pissed off. Some people just want to be part of the bandwagon, others just voted to be part of history in the making. Not only black history but in the case of Hillary being the first woman president. I can’t tell you how many uninformed people I came across during the campaign that were only voting because of sex or race. It was to say the least disheartening and sickening as well. They no more knew about the issues past color or sex. Just as the some people voted republican, voting against Obama just because he was black and Hillary just because she was a woman. In reality it may have just been a small number of people, I can’t be sure, but it seemed to me a greater number of people compared to the informed people that I came across in my daily rounds.

That will be the case for a long tome to come. That’s why politics has degenerated as it has because the emphasis on winning has pushed both parties into catering to voters who react emotionally based on the superficial.

CosmosDan said:
Are you realistically suggesting Powell was lying?

No, but if I was would it be such a horrific thing? You ask your question as if it would be treasonous to make such a suggestion about Mr. Powell. Bill Clinton and George Bush have been publicly called liars so many times it is dizzying.

What I am suggesting is that what Mr. Powell said distorts the truth. Unless someone considers Sean Hannity a senior member of the Republican Party, the last time I checked he was not. Guys like Hannity made the (real) connection between candidate Obama and guys like Jerimiah Wright and William Ayers, who are pretty radical guys in the eyes of majority of people. The associations were questioned, by big name guys in the media. That is a far cry from senior party members suggesting that “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” If you can point me to the party leaders who said that during the campaign, I will stand corrected.

philipjames said:
Look, Colin Powell shilled and voted for Obama because he was BLACK. Nothing else.If he shilled and voted for Obama because of his political views, then Powell was and is not a Conservative or a Republican and was a liar for most of his political life saysing he was a Republican.One or the other.I go with the first one…. Powell was like 98% of Blacks in the US… they voted by RACE, not by politics.Is that racist?

Amazing that you can read Colin Powell’s mind, or for that matter, the minds of the millions of African Americans who voted. And then when you do read their minds, you frame it in a tired old canard that has been beaten to death.

And as for Colin Powell shilling for Barack Obama: I doubt he shills for anyone. Where were you when he was in Iraq, in Vietnam? I think we could his career up against yours anytime. He’s a class act who looks at difficult issues and makes difficult decisions. You simplify issues to fit your stereotype.

philipjames said:
Look, Colin Powell shilled and voted for Obama because he was BLACK. Nothing else.
If he shilled and voted for Obama because of his political views, then Powell was and is not a Conservative or a Republican and was a liar for most of his political life saysing he was a Republican.
One or the other.
I go with the first one…. Powell was like 98% of Blacks in the US… they voted by RACE, not by politics.
Is that racist?

Well according to Pew, until recently 55% of Democrats said the president is a Christian. Now that number is down to 46%.

African-Americans have also shown a shift. In 2009, 36% of African-Americans said they didn’t know the president’s religion; that number is now 46%.

Self-described liberal Democrats who don’t know what religion the president is shifted from 23% to 31%.

There seems to be some confusion across the board, among people who are not affected by the conservatives or by those conservatives in the media.

I think it’s an image problem that is generated by commonly held American perceptions that are based in what has been a standard of presidential religiosity since Jimmy Carter.

paulmdoro said:
People talk so frequently of voters being seduced by Obama’s speaking abilities, but I never hear anyone mention a far more common reason for his win: independent and moderate voters unsure of or flat-out scared of a McCain/Palin White House.

Paulmdoro, if I remember some of your comments on other threads correctly, I believe you lean liberal and I don’t agree with you too often. However, I think you are on to something here. Your point is definitely on target.

jk76 said:

So some POLITICAL top Repubs in their party where talking shit, THAT’S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. Destroy the other guy, stretch the truth, invent the truth. Did anyone really expect them to go “oh yeah he’s Christian and we love him”? I believe the Clinton campaign put that stuff out there first btw, but we’ll sweep that under the rug because she’s got a job now working for him. Did Powell say anything to these “leaders”?

No, it’s not supposed to happen. The problem is we expect it and tolerate it to such an extreme. It’s one thing to spin things a bit when you are simplifying for a campaign speech or ad. It’s quite another to invent outright lies and repeat them as a strategy. At some point it ceases to be “just a campaign strategy” and crosses the line. When that happens people should speak out against the reprehensible politics of their own party. As Powell did. My theory is, of they’ll lie that severely to get elected then they’ll lie just as severely when they’re in office. Is that who we want in there? I’ll take a decent honest person from the opposition over someone who displays that kind of lack of character.

Cecelia said:
Well according to Pew, until recently 55% of Democrats said the president is a Christian. Now that number is down to 46%.

African-Americans have also shown a shift. In 2009, 36% of African-Americans said they didn’t know the president’s religion; that number is now 46%.

Self-described liberal Democrats who don’t know what religion the president is shifted from 23% to 31%.

There seems to be some confusion across the board, among people who are not affected by the conservatives or by those conservatives in the media.

I think it’s an image problem that is generated by commonly held American perceptions that are based in what has been a standard of presidential religiosity since Jimmy Carter.

Who cares? What is the big deal?

Andy Lamb said:
Paulmdoro, if I remember some of your comments on other threads correctly, I believe you lean liberal and I don’t agree with you too often. However, I think you are on to something here. Your point is definitely on target.

I am a pretty liberal guy, guilty as charged. I do think some people are forgetting the political climate prior to November 2008. Bush was extremely unpopular, the economy was going bad, and the GOP candidate was an old man who said more than once that he didn’t understand economics. Then he picked an unknown and extremely divisive VP nominee. Regardless of how you feel about Obama or who you voted for, in November 2008 the McCain/Palin ticket scared many moderate and independent voters. Otherwise Obama doesn’t win, 97% of the black vote or not.

What is the issue? Powell is a liberal, too.

.

paulmdoro said:
Who cares? What is the big deal?

The “big deal” is that this is an aspect of why public perception of the president’s religion has changed.

Cecelia said:
.

The “big deal” is that this is an aspect of why public perception of the president’s religion has changed.

The public doth protest too much.

CosmosDan said:
As Powell did. My theory is, of they’ll lie that severely to get elected then they’ll lie just as severely when they’re in office. Is that who we want in there? I’ll take a decent honest person from the opposition over someone who displays that kind of lack of character.

How do you translate those words to the charge that Powell had severe doubts about WMDs in Iraq, yet argued it before the U.N. anyway?

paulmdoro said:
People talk so frequently of voters being seduced by Obama’s speaking abilities, but I never hear anyone mention a far more common reason for his win: independent and moderate voters unsure of or flat-out scared of a McCain/Palin White House.

McCain was a weak candidate. The combination of the Liberals spending years attacking Bush (personally and other attacks) plus McCain being weak allowed Obama to win.

People expected Obama to work to maike things better. When people heard the word “change”, they really heard “make things better.”

Obama (and the liberals) don’t make things better; they work to make things “equal”. This is why Obama’s numbder are going down.

McCain was really a weaker Bush who somewhat agreed with Obama on a lot of issues in the campaign.

This is why the Tea Party movement has grown. Really, people don’t want McCain’s Republican-lite nor do they want Obama’s hard left Marxism.

Obama can keep saying that voting for Republicans will take them back to Republican-lite, but the real action is with the candidates/people who are more Conservative. It’s a third way in terms of recent politics, but it gets us back to our Founding roots. In any event, this third way is diametrically opposed to liberalism/Socialism and Republican-lite, too.

paulmdoro said:
The public doth protest too much.

Well, since it’s the subject of Colby’s blog here, perhaps he’s protesting too much.

Andy Lamb said:
No, but if I was would it be such a horrific thing? You ask your question as if it would be treasonous to make such a suggestion about Mr. Powell. Bill Clinton and George Bush have been publicly called liars so many times it is dizzying.

with plenty of evidence that they both are. Calling him or anyone, a liar with no evidence is something else.

What I am suggesting is that what Mr. Powell said distorts the truth. Unless someone considers Sean Hannity a senior member of the Republican Party, the last time I checked he was not. Guys like Hannity made the (real) connection between candidate Obama and guys like Jerimiah Wright and William Ayers, who are pretty radical guys in the eyes of majority of people. The associations were questioned, by big name guys in the media. That is a far cry from senior party members suggesting that “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” If you can point me to the party leaders who said that during the campaign, I will stand corrected.

So you’re suggesting he’s distorting the truth because you didn’t hear it at the time? I think Powell knows the difference between party leaders and TV pundits and overall I find him to be an honorable person. I suspect that’s why he decided to get out of politics. If he wanted to make his point why would he need to claim senior members of the GOP rather than accurately point to TV pundits?
There’s no problem in you questioning him , but perhaps you should do your own research before you somewhat publicly accuse someone of distorting the truth.
If you look back to the 2000 campaign you’ll see similar distortions used by Bush against McCain thanks to strategist Rove. personally I think we’d all be better off that kind of severe dishonest politics caused voters to reject the candidate on the grounds of a lack of character.

Cecelia said:
How do you translate those words to the charge that Powell had severe doubts about WMDs in Iraq, yet argued it before the U.N. anyway?

Powell decided to ditch honor and courage and the truth?

Alz said:
McCain was a weak candidate. The combination of the Liberals spending years attacking Bush (personally and other attacks) plus McCain being weak allowed Obama to win.

Not too many liked Bush in the end and that had nothing to do with “liberal attacks.”

Cecelia said:
Well, since it’s the subject of Colby’s blog here, perhaps he’s protesting too much.

One can dream of a day when no one cares what the president’s religious beliefs are.

Cecelia said:
How do you translate those words to the charge that Powell had severe doubts about WMDs in Iraq, yet argued it before the U.N. anyway?

I think that’s why Powell got out of politics. His choice may have been to do as requested or resign. Personally I wish he’d refused to do it and let the chips fall but he didn’t.

paulmdoro said:
Not too many liked Bush in the end and that had nothing to do with “liberal attacks.”

Ain’t that the truth. I have a conservative friend that I talk politics with every few months over beers and wings. He started out defending Bush and conservatives. He ended up saying Bush wasn’t a conservative and was possibly the worst president ever.

CosmosDan said:
I think that’s why Powell got out of politics. His choice may have been to do as requested or resign. Personally I wish he’d refused to do it and let the chips fall but he didn’t.

Well, that certainly mitigates your argument that Powell has been so above reproach that it’s unreasonable to question him in another assertion that he has made.

paulmdoro said:
One can dream of a day when no one cares what the president’s religious beliefs are.

or that he openly says he doesn’t believe and we’re okay with that.

paulmdoro said:
One can dream of a day when no one cares what the president’s religious beliefs are.

I’ll settle for being able to stay on the topic of the blog writer, without your inferring that I’m being unreasonable in doing so.

CosmosDan said:
or that he openly says he doesn’t believe and we’re okay with that.

Right. Religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Cecelia said:
I’ll settle for being able to stay on the topic of the blog writer, without your inferring that I’m being unreasonable in doing so.

LOL. OK Cecilia. Never said you’re unreasonable.

Glad you’re policing whether or not everyone is staying 100% on topic. How’s the rest of the discussion? Pass inspection? Any other citations need to be issued?

paulmdoro said:
Glad you’re policing whether or not everyone is staying 100% on topic. How’s the rest of the discussion? Pass inspection? Any other citations need to be issued?

You’re the one who said “One can dream of a day when no one cares what the president’s religious beliefs are”, on a thread that is expressly about the president’s beliefs. You then chided me for responding to the same thread subject matter.

The only topic police around here is you.

I don’t think obama’s a muslim, but i suspect he discovered his christian right around the time he discovered he wanted to run for high office.

Cecelia said:
You’re the one who said “One can dream of a day when no one cares what the president’s religious beliefs are”, on a thread that is expressly about the president’s beliefs. You then chided me for responding to the same thread subject matter.

The only topic police around here is you.

Can’t I dream? What’s so offensive about that? What are we without dreams? We cease to be human. Cripes almighty Cecilia lighten up. Relax. It’s Friday.

Sean68 said:
I don’t think obama’s a muslim, but i suspect he discovered his christian right around the time he discovered he wanted to run for high office.

Which would make him just like most politicians.

Sean68 said:
I don’t think obama’s a muslim, but i suspect he discovered his christian right around the time he discovered he wanted to run for high office.

Hmm, and your evidence for that is…. ? I guess you would suspect that Ronald Reagan’s religion was kinda lost, because he never went to church?

Sean68 said:
I don’t think obama’s a muslim, but i suspect he discovered his christian right around the time he discovered he wanted to run for high office.

That should read “christian faith”. By the way, I also think that a great many liberal obama supporters don’t believe he’s really a christian either. If they thought his religiosity were genuine, they’d respect him less. I’m sure they understand that it was a political necessity to declare himself a christian.

alamo2 said:
Hmm, and your evidence for that is…. ? I guess you would suspect that Ronald Reagan’s religion was kinda lost, because he never went to church?

His own statements of how he “came to christ” sound unconvincing to me. Christopher Hitchens wrote an excellent anaylysis; though admittedly it confirmed what I had suspected. But you’re right: I don’t know anything with certainty, least of all what’s in a man’s heart. I just know that politicians lie.

Sean68 said:
That should read “christian faith”. By the way, I also think that a great many liberal obama supporters don’t believe he’s really a christian either. If they thought his religiosity were genuine, they’d respect him less. I’m sure they understand that it was a political necessity to declare himself a christian.

You have a way of reading into other’s minds! I guess that you are a CINO, a Christian in name only. For you certainly have a disrespect for a lot of people that is not very Christian!

Sean68 said:
That should read “christian faith”. By the way, I also think that a great many liberal obama supporters don’t believe he’s really a christian either. If they thought his religiosity were genuine, they’d respect him less. I’m sure they understand that it was a political necessity to declare himself a christian.

Who are you to judge his religious beliefs and declare that he only became a Christian for political reasons? What a presumptuous know-it-all.

alamo2 said:
You have a way of reading into other’s minds! I guess that you are a CINO, a Christian in name only. For you certainly have a disrespect for a lot of people that is not very Christian!

Indeed his comments are very un-Christian. And uncool.

paulmdoro said:
Which would make him just like most politicians.

More or less. Though in obama’s case, I think a good many of his left-wing supporters sort of hold their nose and look the other way when he starts in with his religious rhetoric. Ya know, it’s for the masses…and they’re a bunch of asses.

alamo2 said:
You have a way of reading into other’s minds! I guess that you are a CINO, a Christian in name only. For you certainly have a disrespect for a lot of people that is not very Christian!

LOL. Are you a believer in the talking snake?

Sean68 said:
I’m sure they understand that it was a political necessity to declare himself a christian.

Well, if that sort of subterfuge is alright, why isn’t it okay if his opposition portrays him as a Muslim because they consider it a political necessity in getting elected?

The president stated that he’s a Christian because he is one.

Sean68 said:
More or less. Though in obama’s case, I think a good many of his left-wing supporters sort of hold their nose and look the other way when he starts in with his religious rhetoric. Ya know, it’s for the masses…and they’re a bunch of asses.

I think you’re full of you-know-what. You’re making an assumption, and you know what they say about assuming.

Did people ever question the sincerity of Bush’s religious beliefs since he is a born-again?

paulmdoro said:
I think you’re full of you-know-what. You’re making an assumption, and you know what they say about assuming.

Who the hell doesn’t make assumptions? I already said I don’t know it for a fact. I simply suspect that he is, like me–and frankly like most left-wing intellectual types–an atheist/agnostic. People get crazy when it comes to obama. No need to hyperventilate.

paulmdoro said:
Did people ever question the sincerity of Bush’s religious beliefs since he is a born-again?

I assume so. I remember bush being mocked for stating in the primary that his favorite philosopher was jesus christ. I also recall his christianity being questioned for his wars in iraq and afghanistan.

paulmdoro said:
Did people ever question the sincerity of Bush’s religious beliefs since he is a born-again?

Google “Bush Christianity”.

Sean68 said:
Who the hell doesn’t make assumptions? I already said I don’t know it for a fact. I simply suspect that he is, like me–and frankly like most left-wing intellectual types–an atheist/agnostic. People get crazy when it comes to obama. No need to hyperventilate.

I’m perfectly calm dude. You just seem to be making stuff up here as you go along, without really knowing what you’re talking about. Not sure why some people have such a hard time believing he’s Christian and get crazy when it comes to Obama.

Cecelia said:
Well, if that sort of subterfuge is alright, why isn’t it okay if his opposition portrays him as a Muslim because they consider it a political necessity in getting elected? The president stated that he’s a Christian because he is one.

Guess that settles it then.

Cecelia said:
Google “Bush Christianity”.

It generates a wide variety of results. During his presidency I don’t recall many people questioning the sincerity of his religious beliefs, other than some nutjobs. The same seems to be true now.

Cecelia said:
Well, that certainly mitigates your argument that Powell has been so above reproach that it’s unreasonable to question him in another assertion that he has made.

Thats not what I said. There’s nothing wrong with questioning him. The original post with its Olberman reference and the use of {ex}party, suggested it was a partisan lie or exaggeration, but totally lacking any evidence.
I think Powell was also speaking of a lack of correction by GOP members. What I think is unreasonable is a strong implication of lying without evidence.

If it was only an overly assertive question then no harm no foul.

Sean68 said:
Guess that settles it then

It has to settle it.

You can argue whether or not you believe that the president is a “good” Christian according to the tenets of that particular religion, but you must take him at his word that this is his faith.

Otherwise, the entire topic becomes nothing but an exercise in political opportunism masquerading as a mind-reading act.

Cecelia said:
It has to settle it.

You can argue whether or not you believe that the president is a “good” Christian according to the tenets of that particular religion, but you must take him at his word that this is his faith.

Otherwise, the entire topic becomes nothing but an exercise in political opportunism masquerading as a mind-reading act.

Well-said Cecilia. Seriously.

CosmosDan said:
Thats not what I said. There’s nothing wrong with questioning him. The original post with its Olberman reference and the use of {ex}party, suggested it was a partisan lie or exaggeration, but totally lacking any evidence.
I think Powell was also speaking of a lack of correction by GOP members. What I think is unreasonable is a strong implication of lying without evidence.

If it was only an overly assertive question then no harm no foul.

Well, if there’s nothing wrong with questioning him, why did you react so negatively to the questioning of him?

In particular, the writer of the original post implied that the moderator on Meet the Press should have questioned Powell more thoroughly.

Better yet, since THAT post you defended Powell based upon your observation that since there is no evidence that he has behaved in a politically expedient manner, it’s unreasonable to suspect that he has in regards to his Meet the Press comments.

You certainly have mitigated THAT formulation since.

You’ve since

Cecelia said:
It has to settle it. You can argue whether or not you believe that the president is a “good” Christian according to the tenets of that particular religion, but you must take him at his word that this is his faith. Otherwise, the entire topic becomes nothing but an exercise in political opportunism masquerading as a mind-reading act.

If you’r talking about the practicality of reading someone’s soul, then I agree with you. But in terms of the real-life honest question about whether a person’s profession of a particular faith is sacrosanct or an unquestionable a prior truth, then I disagree. Do you think that Constantine REALLY saw jesus in the sky or might he had other motivations behind his road-to-damascas moment?

paulmdoro said:
Well-said Cecilia. Seriously.

Well, thanks, sweety.

Sean68 said:
But in terms of the real-life honest question about whether a person’s profession of a particular faith is sacrosanct or an unquestionable a prior truth, then I disagree.

How would you know for sure? Just a gut feeling?

Cecelia said:
Well, thanks, sweety.

Hey when you’re right, you’re right, and I can admit it.

Sean68 said:
Do you think that Constantine REALLY saw jesus in the sky or might he had other motivations behind his road-to-damascas moment?

I think in such an analogy you have the benefit of a view from the high perch of centuries passed.

Otherwise, passion and expediency very often coincide.

Thank goodness for that.

paulmdoro said:
How would you know for sure? Just a gut feeling?

I already explained that I’ve read obama’s description of how he “found” christ. Obama’s description sounded unconvincing to me coming from a guy who claims to have abandoned reason for faith. Perhaps you can shed some light on this from your own experiences. How does that happen? A flash of light? A burning bush?

Cecelia said:
I think in such an analogy you have the benefit of a view from the high perch of centuries passed. Otherwise, passion and expediency very often coincide. Thank goodness for that.

Hmm. So are you saying that a politician will lie about anything EXCEPT that? Even when that politician claims to have found his faith, coincidentally, right around the time he decided he’d like to run for public office representing a largely christian contituency?

Sean68 said:
I already explained that I’ve read obama’s description of how he “found” christ. Obama’s description sounded unconvincing to me coming from a guy who claims to have abandoned reason for faith. Perhaps you can shed some light on this from your own experiences. How does that happen? A flash of light? A burning bush?

So your contention is based on what you call an unconvincing description? Wow. Amazing. I guess someone better tell Obama to keep looking. According to some amateur prognosticators he actually has not found Christ!

CosmosDan said:
So you’re suggesting he’s (Powell) distorting the truth because you didn’t hear it (senior members of the GOP suggest that, “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists”) at the time? I think Powell knows the difference between party leaders and TV pundits and overall I find him to be an honorable person. I suspect that’s why he decided to get out of politics. If he wanted to make his point why would he need to claim senior members of the GOP rather than accurately point to TV pundits?
There’s no problem in you questioning him , but perhaps you should do your own research before you somewhat publicly accuse someone of distorting the truth.

Geez Dan, c’mon. What research? I should do research to try to find something that was never said? No GOP leaders came out and suggested “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” Powell’s comment was a big stretch – period. If he says something that stretches the truth, I’m more than happy to call him out on it.

paulmdoro said:
So your contention is based on what you call an unconvincing description? Wow. Amazing. I guess someone better tell Obama to keep looking. According to some amateur prognosticators he actually has not found Christ!

Is there any such thing as a professional prognosticator when it comes to such things? You seem defensive. I’m not questioning YOUR beliefs. And I admitted I can’t read the guy’s mind. However, I can speculate based on what I’ve observed; and you can mock me for it. It’s a-okay with me.

Sean68 said:
Is there any such thing as a professional prognosticator when it comes to such things? You seem defensive. I’m not questioning YOUR beliefs. And I admitted I can’t read the guy’s mind. However, I can speculate based on what I’ve observed; and you can mock me for it. It’s a-okay with me.

True that.

CosmosDan said:
Thats not what I said. There’s nothing wrong with questioning him. The original post with its Olberman reference and the use of {ex}party, suggested it was a partisan lie or exaggeration, but totally lacking any evidence.
I think Powell was also speaking of a lack of correction by GOP members. What I think is unreasonable is a strong implication of lying without evidence.

OK, sorry about the Olbermann reference. Colin Powell is no Keith Olbermann, but then (thankfully) few are. I did not at any point call Powell a blantant liar. He said something that clearly was a stretch in the heat of a Meet the Press interview. It was something he should not have said.

I do think that Powell had an axe to grind with the GOP over his testimony in front of the UN, weapons of mass destruction, etc. all of which turned out to be BS. I can’t say that I blame him, I would have been pissed too. Unlike Bush, Cheney, Clinton, Kerry, and about 65% of the public, I was very leery when we went into Iraq and did not want us to, even at that time. I have a feeling Powell did not either, but was being loyal and went to the UN to present the case because that was his job. The way things turned out tarnished his reputation, and again (in my opinion) led to him saying some things he would otherwise have not said.

Andy Lamb said:
Geez Dan, c’mon. What research? I should do research to try to find something that was never said? No GOP leaders came out and suggested “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” Powell’s comment was a big stretch – period. If he says something that stretches the truth, I’m more than happy to call him out on it.

So, did you research it? I did a quick Google and found lots of hateful crap but not a specific GOP member making the claim, then again I spent five minutes tops. Hard to research 2008 so much crap has been said since then. As a member of the party he might also be talking about non public conversations but we don’t really know. You have every right to voice your suspicions.

Andy Lamb said:
OK, sorry about the Olbermann reference. Colin Powell is no Keith Olbermann, but then (thankfully) few are.

Amen

I did not at any point call Powell a blantant liar. He said something that clearly was a stretch in the heat of a Meet the Press interview. It was something he should not have said.

Well, we’re not 100% on that but I get your point. I acknowledge that I don’t know and you may be correct.

I do think that Powell had an axe to grind with the GOP over his testimony in front of the UN, weapons of mass destruction, etc. all of which turned out to be BS. I can’t say that I blame him, I would have been pissed too. Unlike Bush, Cheney, Clinton, Kerry, and about 65% of the public, I was very leery when we went into Iraq and did not want us to, even at that time. I have a feeling Powell did not either, but was being loyal and went to the UN to present the case because that was his job. The way things turned out tarnished his reputation, and again (in my opinion) led to him saying some things he would otherwise have not said.

It seemed to me , after the fact, and trying to remember, that the information was very sketchy, but he was asked to present it as almost positive. Knowing that his words would hasten the path to war, I really wish he’d just said no, but it’s a hard position to be in. I saw it as completely unnecessary and didn’t embrace a war of choice, but none of us, Powell included, knew how it would work out.
I guess I filled in the blanks based on liking Powell and wanting to assume the best. I thought the dirty side of politics didn’t appeal to him and he decided to get out. Just a guess though.

Sean68 said:
Hmm. So are you saying that a politician will lie about anything EXCEPT that? Even when that politician claims to have found his faith, coincidentally, right around the time he decided he’d like to run for public office representing a largely christian contituency?

Well, do you have to use such a skeptical tone?

CosmosDan said:
So, did you research it? I did a quick Google and found lots of hateful crap but not a specific GOP member making the claim, then again I spent five minutes tops. Hard to research 2008 so much crap has been said since then. As a member of the party he might also be talking about non public conversations but we don’t really know. You have every right to voice your suspicions.

Research wise I did about what you did and found nothing. And again, I recall nothing that vitriolic being said by any GOP leaders at that time, and surely anything that bad would have made cable news – and I watch them all, a lot. As I said in my other post, Mr. Powell went to the UN to present a lot of information (weapons sites, mobile chemical labs) that all ended up being crap – a ruse by Sadaam Hussein to give the impression he was a lot stronger militarily than he actually was,because he feared the U.S., Iran, Israel, basically everyone. For that, I do not blame Colin Powell, as I said I would have been pissed too. He was made to look a fool. I do think that left him (understandably) with a big axe to grind. Take it easy, Dan.

Cecelia said:
Well, if there’s nothing wrong with questioning him, why did you react so negatively to the questioning of him?

I just explained that didn’t I?

I suppose I over reacted but the wording seemed on the brink of assertion rather than a question. The author of that post and I have smoked the piece pipe, so, ……now I have the munchies and have to go get a snack. I hope there are some Doritos left.

Andy Lamb said:
Powell said he heard senior members of his own (ex)party make the suggestion, “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” It would have been nice if he had let us know which senior members made that statement. You would have thought that Keith Olbermann was the one being interviewed on Meet the Press.

You can’t have it both ways, Lamb. You write on another thread about how Colin Powell is “called an Uncle Tom” by other Blacks, but you’re here calling him out for not dropping dime on other Republicans. Just admit it…the only minorities you don’t have a problem with are the ones that march in lock step and follow the right winged script to the letter.

–Cobra

How embarrassing. Colby hall is so in love with loving Obama – he is no better than the most slavish Obot blogger from back in the day…

The PROBLEM with Wright and why obama’s relationship has nothing to do with race whatsoever and scarcely religion either (we’ll leave Wright and Obama’s relationship with Farrakhan and the nation of islam out of this) – its about Wrights hate filled deluded ravings and obamas acceptance of them.

Amonst the better known ravings of Wright, when I read that Wright had said and preached the conspiracy nut theory that FDR had allowed thousands of Americans to die (along with the pacific fleet) at pearl harbor on purpose that Aids was created by the US government in order to kill blacks – it was obvious to me that Obama didnt have the sense (or the brains) to be president. Anybody who would sit in Wrights church for a dozen years and call him their “spiritual mentor” HAS TO be dumb as dirt and should have been enough to stop the media’s rush to anoint him the next CIC (Celebrity In Chief)

There truly is no way to get around this – unless your like Colby and just want to ignore the real reality here.

Sorry. Obama was a (unseen, unknown) classmate of mine at Columbia back in the day and that along with my life as a Dem activist makes me doubly embarrassed that this man is in the WH today.

Hillary 2012 (Obama should pull a LBJ and git)

CosmosDan said:
Well, do you have to use such a skeptical tone?

Yes. It’s useful when trying to convey skepticism.

dcmediasux said:
How embarrassing. Colby hall is so in love with loving Obama – he is no better than the most slavish Obot blogger from back in the day… The PROBLEM with Wright and why obama’s relationship has nothing to do with race whatsoever and scarcely religion either (we’ll leave Wright and Obama’s relationship with Farrakhan and the nation of islam out of this) – its about Wrights hate filled deluded ravings and obamas acceptance of them. Amonst the better known ravings of Wright, when I read that Wright had said and preached the conspiracy nut theory that FDR had allowed thousands of Americans to die (along with the pacific fleet) at pearl harbor on purpose that Aids was created by the US government in order to kill blacks – it was obvious to me that Obama didnt have the sense (or the brains) to be president. Anybody who would sit in Wrights church for a dozen years and call him their “spiritual mentor” HAS TO be dumb as dirt and should have been enough to stop the media’s rush to anoint him the next CIC (Celebrity In Chief) There truly is no way to get around this – unless your like Colby and just want to ignore the real reality here. Sorry. Obama was a (unseen, unknown) classmate of mine at Columbia back in the day and that along with my life as a Dem activist makes me doubly embarrassed that this man is in the WH today. Hillary 2012 (Obama should pull a LBJ and git)

The treatment the media gave Hillary (and Bill) during the primaries was atrocious. NOTHING was going to get in between them and their black President. Unfortunately, the rest of America got him too.

paulmdoro said:
Not too many liked Bush in the end and that had nothing to do with “liberal attacks.”

Sorry, it had EVERYTHING to do with LIberal attacks. Just like they do with Palin or anyone in their way.

Liberals preach tolerance, but they are the most intolerant people around.

In every case, it is a coordinated attack in the news media, entertainment industry, etc.

Likewise, they propped up Obama. And they still do.

In Bush’s case, whatever he did was attacked and it worked to tear him down.

In Obama’s case, he is propped up, but Obama;s actions are hurting so many people, that many people are very frustrated.

They don’t know what they voted for.

As I said earlier, people expected Obama to work to make things better, but the Liberal/Marxist quest to force everything to be “equal” ends up hurting people over time.

The core of support for Obama is from people who are dependent on government and who don’t really know how to live without it.

Remember, half of the population doesn’t pay Federal taxes.

Sean68 said:
Yes. It’s useful when trying to convey skepticism.

so you’re kind of a smart alekey skeptic then?

CosmosDan said:
so you’re kind of a smart alekey skeptic then?

I can’t take this any further.

philipjames says:

Look, Colin Powell shilled and voted for Obama because he was BLACK. Nothing else.
If he shilled and voted for Obama because of his political views, then Powell was and is not a Conservative or a Republican and was a liar for most of his political life saysing he was a Republican.
One or the other.
I go with the first one…. Powell was like 98% of Blacks in the US… they voted by RACE, not by politics.
Is that racist?

YES YOU ARE

Cobra said:
You can’t have it both ways, Lamb. You write on another thread about how Colin Powell is “called an Uncle Tom” by other Blacks, –Cobra

Can’t have what both ways? I wrote on another thread about blacks who are Republicans being referred to as Uncle Toms, and named a few guys – Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, and a few others. I clearly do not recall mentioning Powell, but even if I did, so what? My point was that blacks who are conservative Republicans are referred to as Uncle Toms by some liberal blacks. In fact, YOU YOURSELF referred to Thomas and Larry Elder as Uncle Toms. That is what started the dialogue to BEGIN WITH! So, what the hell is your point?

Cobra said:
but you’re here calling him out for not dropping dime on other Republicans.

I called him out for speaking off the cuff and saying something that is a big stretch. Again, for the umpteenth time, Mr. Powell said senior members of the GOP suggested that, “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” No senior GOP member made that statement.

Cobra said:
Just admit it…the only minorities you don’t have a problem with are the ones that march in lock step and follow the right winged script to the letter.

As if you know anything about me personally. I went through this with you already. I live in a VERY integrated neighborhood. My neighbors on both sides are black, they are fantastic neighbors, and I knew what I was getting when I bought my house as they were already here when I bought 4 years ago, so you, sir, are full of it. They are Obama supporters, I am not, and we rarely discuss politics. We agree to disagree, and leave it alone. They are my friends, and I am proud to know them.

I’m done with you, Cobra. Have a good life.

-0bama’s lap dog is pretty good at citing one exception to the rule.

Andy Lamb said:
I’m done with you, Cobra. Have a good life.

So, you’ve finally discovered there is no way to reason with this dimwit. I do admire you for trying, but there were some things even Einstein could not do.

Andy Lamb said:
Can’t have what both ways? I wrote on another thread about blacks who are Republicans being referred to as Uncle Toms, and named a few guys – Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, and a few others. I clearly do not recall mentioning Powell, but even if I did, so what? My point was that blacks who are conservative Republicans are referred to as Uncle Toms by some liberal blacks. In fact, YOU YOURSELF referred to Thomas and Larry Elder as Uncle Toms. That is what started the dialogue to BEGIN WITH! So, what the hell is your point? I called him out for speaking off the cuff and saying something that is a big stretch. Again, for the umpteenth time, Mr. Powell said senior members of the GOP suggested that, “Obama’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists.” No senior GOP member made that statement. As if you know anything about me personally. I went through this with you already. I live in a VERY integrated neighborhood. My neighbors on both sides are black, they are fantastic neighbors, and I knew what I was getting when I bought my house as they were already here when I bought 4 years ago, so you, sir, are full of it. They are Obama supporters, I am not, and we rarely discuss politics. We agree to disagree, and leave it alone. They are my friends, and I am proud to know them. I’m done with you, Cobra. Have a good life.

Sorry, Andy. You’re posting these things on a PUBLIC BLOG. That means people can respond to what you write. Yes, I “went through” your chat about your “Black neighbors.” You made a point then, that you DO NOT DISCUSS politics or racial issues with them whatsoever. That means that the things you say HERE you would NEVER say to them in 3D-real life. That’s why you “rarely discuss” politics with them. You know in your heart you’d probably get a lot of the same answers from THEM as you get from ME.

pyrope said:
So, you’ve finally discovered there is no way to reason with this dimwit. I do admire you for trying, but there were some things even Einstein could not do.

Your idea of “reasoning with” = agreeing with right winged ideology 100%. Sorry. Not for me.

–Cobra

Cobra said:
Sorry, Andy. You’re posting these things on a PUBLIC BLOG. That means people can respond to what you write. Yes, I “went through” your chat about your “Black neighbors.” You made a point then, that you DO NOT DISCUSS politics or racial issues with them whatsoever. That means that the things you say HERE you would NEVER say to them in 3D-real life. That’s why you “rarely discuss” politics with them. You know in your heart you’d probably get a lot of the same answers from THEM as you get from ME.

And on we go. How do you go through old comments from weeks ago? Do you save these for future reference? I’m not THAT into this, so I’ll have to go on memory.

I clearly do recall saying that I do not discuss politics with my neighbors. I do not recall saying that we never discuss race. How often would you suggest we discuss it? Every time we speak? What should we talk about? They know I’m white, I know they’re black. We don’t care. The wife always greets me with “what’s up, playa?” when she sees me. We have fun with it. Should we argue instead? I have no idea what your point is. I would not know their political leanings if the subject never came up. We know where each other stands. I’m not going to make them conservative, they are not going to make me liberal. We went through it once. Should we do it over and over?

I came from a large family in Youngstown, OH, an old steel town where people still talk of the closing of the steel mill over 30 years ago. Almost all of my relatives are liberal Democrats. When we get together for holidays, parties, etc. we don’t discuss politics either. Again, there is no point in ruining a good time arguing. And, believe it or not, all of my relatives are white.

You implied that I do not discuss these issues with my neighbors because they are black. That argument falls flat here.

Cobra said:
Your idea of “reasoning with” = agreeing with right winged ideology 100%. Sorry. Not for me.
–Cobra

You are more wrong than you can possibly know.

Andy Lamb said:
And on we go. How do you go through old comments from weeks ago? Do you save these for future reference? I’m not THAT into this, so I’ll have to go on memory. I clearly do recall saying that I do not discuss politics with my neighbors. I do not recall saying that we never discuss race. How often would you suggest we discuss it? Every time we speak? What should we talk about? They know I’m white, I know they’re black. We don’t care. The wife always greets me with “what’s up, playa?” when she sees me. We have fun with it. Should we argue instead? I have no idea what your point is. I would not know their political leanings if the subject never came up. We know where each other stands. I’m not going to make them conservative, they are not going to make me liberal. We went through it once. Should we do it over and over? I came from a large family in Youngstown, OH, an old steel town where people still talk of the closing of the steel mill over 30 years ago. Almost all of my relatives are liberal Democrats. When we get together for holidays, parties, etc. we don’t discuss politics either. Again, there is no point in ruining a good time arguing. And, believe it or not, all of my relatives are white. You implied that I do not discuss these issues with my neighbors because they are black. That argument falls flat here.

Why do you mention your neighbors at all then, other than as some prop for your arguments? You don’t discuss you opinions on politics with your liberal Democrat relatives. You don’t discuss your opiniions on race with your Obama supporting Black neighbors. Why?
YOUR WORDS: “there’s no point in ruining a good time arguing.”

You know that when you discuss politics and race on an OPEN BLOG, there’s a good chance somebody’s going to disagree with you, right? So what’s the drama, sir? Why should the blogosphere be ANY DIFFERENT than your neighborhood or family barbecue–other than the fact that you don’t have to live with anybody on the blogosphere?

pyrope said:
You are more wrong than you can possibly know.

You’ve branded yourself here, sir. Any conscious minority reader knows EXACTLY what you’re all about.

–Cobra

My guess is that Obama became a Christian about the time he met Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers. In 1970 I was active on the left and worked in Gary, IN innercity. Met Ayers and other Weathermen, and Black Panthers, trying to improve conditions there. I just wasn’t willing to hurt people who had a different belief system than mine, so long as they didn’t try to force me to do something. I’m more of a disillusioned idealist now, and moving away from Obama as well as from all current politicians. My opinion of the Elite Intellectuals is that they are illing to acept collateral damage to just anout anybody so long as they can get control and establish a Utopia on Earth, now. Depressing…