My Take on the Powell Endorsement

I know that that the stakes are high during this election. And I understand that a lot of people view this step by Gen. Powell as an act of redemption on his part.

But I have to ask this:

1)If Kissenger endorsed Mr. Obama, would people say that this was an act of redemption?

2)If Lieberman all of a sudden endorsed Mr. Obama, would people say that this was an act of redemption?

3)If Condoleeza Rice endorsed Mr. Obama, would people say that this was an act of redemption?

Yet, people are so willing to forgive Gen. Powell?

Poignant interview or no, it doesn't erase the fact that Mr. Powell is an opportunist.


Is this the acceptance of Powell made because of principles? Or is this just because of the election? Which one is more important?


I look forward to your answers. :popcorn:


(Disclaimer: I do not hate Gen. Powell. But, I do have mixed feelings about his endorsement and what it means in the long run. I await your answers.)

in an Obama administration. Then we would have to forgive him. Right?

I don't trust him enough to hire him if it were MY administration. Don't know Obama's thinking on the matter, but I would tend to trust it.

It's an individual decision here, we don't all act in lockstep.

it leans toward forgiving this man. My feeling though is that the Powell endorsement is a nice gesture, but we cannot forget what his actions cost this country. Personally, I would not go as far as forgiving him. And if he did have a place in the Obama Administration, then it would be of mixed emotion there as well because of what Powell did in previous administrations in order to further the aims of conservative hawks and neo-cons in a time of war.

That's why I posed this next question: if Kissenger, Rice or Lieberman made the same poignant speech and endorsed Obama, would people be so easy to give the benefit of the doubt?

That said, the point isn't about Powell winning you over, it's about winning over the people that actually do still respect him (i.e. some military folks, some moderate repugs, etc). What Powell did today was tell anyone who still respects him that Obama has the ability and judgment to lead this nation. That is important to the people that needed to hear it from someone they respect.

But I just wonder, in a skeptical sense, what this endorsement will cost us as a country in the long run.

His actions have never demonstrated that he was neutral. Or else, he would have served Democrats in the same capacity as the neo-cons.

you lose the moral high ground.

So since Lieberman deals with both sides, is he viewed as neutral?

isn't he?

But I still don't know why people are labeling Colin Powell as neutral when he clearly isn't.

He's a neo-con hawk.

there are a lot of people in this world I give a certain amount of trust to based on my long-standing relationships with them. If they tell me something is so, I'm likely to believe it's so for quite a while.

I think Powell was played by people he thought he had relationships with... and it took a while before he figured out he was on the outside and that people were gaming the system.

I remember that he has called for criminal investigations of the whole WMD intelligence thing.

When he left the administration he was probably in a difficult position... perhaps one where he believed that it would take a scorched earth approach to get to the truth, and that it could potentially do more harm than good.

It's certainly as plausible an explanation that the man who gave that interview was complicit in fabricating the lies that put us in Iraq. If the man was smart enough to work on that kind of conspiracy, what is the benefit of him endoursing Obama now?


It's just a little far-fetched.

It is what it is... he endoursed Obama, he's not going to campaign for him, and as a resultis probably not seeking any reward for that endorsement.

However, I agree with a poster later in this thread that this endorsement was a slap in the face of the Republicans.

Yes, it is what it is. However, I don't think he was as manipulated as people are led to think. In the military, he was in a leadership position. As Sec. of State, he was in a leadership position. So, what does that make him if he allows himself to be "manipulated" into doing bad things without his input?

Some of his actions are questionable and deserve scrutiny.

Why, last week, he testified for Sen. Ted Stevens. Now do you think Stevens has a "sterling" character like Powell said?

...but at the end of the day, this endorsement was not the act of a man who was on the inside with something to protect.

At the end of the day I'm giving Powell the benefit of the doubt... innocent until proven guilty... I hope there is an investigation, and that we do air it all out eventually.

Thanks for your consideration.

And if you say the UN thing, that doesn't count. Dig deeper.

Secondly,his assistance to Caspar Weinberger in the bombing of Grenada. That leads to his close association with Reagan's Cold War policies. That includes his complicitness with the invasion of Panama to get Manuel Noriega.

Those are some implications to consider in the long career of Gen. Powell.

Again, I ask, why does everyone think this man is neutral when his policies have always been in the tank for the Republicans (and the neo-cons, nevertheless).

He's not a dove.

shouldn't cost us anything. I don't think Powell was looking for "payback" for his endorsement. What his endorsement has the capability of doing is uniting moderate Repugs and Democrats. Now, if Obama were to appoint Powell to some position within his administration and then Powell was brought up on charges, that's another story. Then Obama's judgment would be called to the table.

I don't see Obama appointing him or any other Bush* admin to any offices. Remember, this is about change and appointing anyone that worked for Bush* certainly wouldn't be a change. I don't see Obama going back on that campaign promise.

Of course, it wouldn't make up for all the bad things they did, but I'd still appreciate the gesture itself.

who will be swayed in Obama's favor by the Powell endorsement.

I give Powell credit today.

Maybe in a few months I'll be as angry with him as I was previously.

But in the same lines of Dr. Kissenger, General Powell manipulated evidence in order to start a war for the Bush Administration.

(In the same way, Kissenger fudged evidence to keep the war in Vietnam rolling.)

That's a lot to forgive--especially when this war was used as a tool to steer this country toward nationalism and fear. Not only did our soldiers die, it also bankrupted this nation morally and financially.

General Powell could have not taken the route of Kissenger and stood up for his principles then at the UN, don't you think? As I wrote elsewhere, I ultimately think that Powell looks out for himself. And like there were some French Aristrocrats who sided with the people during the French Revolution, Powell is taking a similar stand in which he is "siding with the people" in order to save his ass in our version of political upheaval.

Would the single act of endorsing Senator Obama redeem them? No, of course not, and neither does Powell's endorsement erase his karmic debt for his past actions. But, it's a step in the right direction, and if he continues to move in that direction then he can, eventually, clean it up. (Note that I believe he has many lifetimes ahead of him to deal with the karma, and that he'll need a lot of them to get it done.)

If Kissinger, Lieberman or Rice were to begin the work off their debts they'd be headed in the right direction, too. They haven't done so a yet.

Was Powell's endorsement sincere? I have to believe it was. He gains no obvious benefit from it in the short run. The depth of his sincerity isn't obvious to me, nor is it important to me; it bears on his redemption, which is his business. If it helps Senator Obama win the election that'll do, from my perspective.

I noted yesterday that it's not a matter of Senator Obama crossing lines to get General Powell's endorsement, it's a matter of General Powell being willing to cross lines in order to offer it. I think he did so quite adequately this morning. Beyond that, we'll see. Kissinger, Lieberman and Rice remain firmly on the other side of those lines, though, and I don't see them moving in this direction.

But even though Powell's endorsement was sincere (which I believe it really was), how do you ignore the historical implications of his actions?

I find that very hard.

His karma is his karma - he can't escape it, no one can. I don't believe in forgiveness in the sense that a person can be made innocent, either through his or her own actions, or through some sort of grace. All one can do is start shoveling, and I think Powell may have done that. If he stops shoveling before the job is done then the pile remains, but at least one shovelful has been moved.

Taken in light of all the actions of all the beings in the universe over all the kalpas of its existence Powell is just another bozo on the bus - as are we all.

(Of course, that's my perspective, if you've got another one, that's your karma. :-)

Why is someone from the middle of the spectrum an "opportunist"?

The man has stated his reasons. Same reasons I'm voting for Obama. I was for our actions in Afghanistan after 9-11, and with regards to Iraq I was perhaps more trusting of the administration than I should have been... I took a wait and see stance based on the news at the time. Ultimately I felt duped... It is not inconceivable to me that there were people, like Powell, pretty close to the top but not in with the criminals who've foisted this neocon BS on us.

That's just me.

Powell is quite open about the circumstances that led to the invasion of Iraq. He doesn't apologize. He didn't apologize today or seek anyone's approval.

The endless parade of hate for Powell on DU is right in line with all the other targets on DU: NPR, Tim Russert, the NY Times (on alternate weeks), Keith Olberman (about once per month), Chris Matthews, etc. There are no shades of gray at DU -- either you are with us completely or we hate you completely. Sounds a lot like George W. Bush, but self-awareness is not big around here.

He fought the Admin at times, and I think he was shafted by them as much as they shafted others.

It is not an unreasonable assumption that your boss isn't lying to you. Ultimately, he did resign.

I wouldn't vote for him if he ran.

I have no love for Colin Powell. The endorsement doesn't affect my view of him or Obama.

Ultimately, I think the endorsement can only be seen as a positive, because it is going to affect some people's votes--especially in places like VA, NC, FL, etc.

Is this redemption? Is it supposed to be redemption? I don't think that was what he was looking for. In some ways, that is a redeemable quality in and of itself.

That's why I am going to wait and see how this action plays out. I would like to believe that Powell is altruistic with this endorsement. But in politics, actions always have a cost.

But vetting isn't the entire issue here. General Powell, as a "figurehead" of both the Bush Administration and of the Iraq War, matters greatly to a lot of people. The war has been going on for about five years. And the costs have been very high. I don't know how people can forget even that with such an endorsement.

That's why I said it all comes down to trust.

I know that Mr. Obama is a very savvy and brilliant individual. He's a tactician of the nth degree. I also believe that he is going to weigh all the implications of this matter and do what's right. This is a question about judgment. And if he is going to be the next POTUS (if the vote turns out right), he will have to make tough decisions.

And the ultimate acceptance of Colin Powell warrants such a position, despite what any of us think.


That's why I will continue to watch how this goes down and what it ultimately means for America.

This endorsement was obviously something Powell thought was necessary for his own conscience. And for someone who has chosen not to speak because of his belief that it would be dishonorable, thats quite a condemnation of McCain et al.
And its the undecided and independents that this matters to, most of whom have the highest regard for this guy.
The fact that freepers are going on and on about "betrayal" and "racist" should tell you what you need to know about this action.
The past is the past..and what Powell does in the NOW is much more important to me. Conservatives cling to the past.
Progressives don't or shouldn't.

It's doubtful that a facilitator of mass murder like Powell has a "conscience". I would rather believe that he's just looking for a job, a chance to get back into the action.

But I feel that sometimes, history has a funny way of repeating itself. If we don't take history into consideration, we are doomed to repeat it.

It all comes down to trust. Can a person be trusted if they have a pattern of violating some very serious principles in the past and refusing apologize for them? Can this person be trusted to do the most sensitive and intimate work after such a flagrant violation of trust?

That's the problem here.

Since all of this forgiveness and redemption is being thrown around, I'd have to wonder.

Long after Powell left the Bush administration, Rice has been lying about Iraq.

It's ridiculous to claim that Colin Powell is a war criminal.

People throw that characterization around with ridiculous abandon, claiming that Democrats who voted for the IWR have blood on their hands. If Hillary had won, would they consider her a war criminal?

the fiasco that was to be come the Iraq War. I also believe that the vote for the war was the wrong thing to do for other Democrats who sided with the war based on faulty evidence.

It is hard to forget that they too have a role into the mess that we have now. And, I don't like it when some Democrats roll over and play dead in order to appease the neo-cons in power.

I also believe that Colin Powell was complicit with enabling this war to happen. He wasn't fooled. If it bothered his conscience then, he should have stood up and done something about it.

The miltiary doesn't train someone to be weak. He knew what was honorable. He should have grown a pair and faced his adversaries with the truth.

And no, my analogies are not so far-fetched.

All three people involved dealt with fudging evidence in order to precipitate negative conditions in this nation's history. All three have not apologized. All three are opportunists.

Out of all of them, Dr. Rice is the most loyal to the Bush Administration.

Powell is not Rice.

Your analogies are far-fetched.

That's all that needs to be said - you are missing the enormity of Powell versus any of those other jokers.

Powell is just as duplicitous and questionable in many ways.

Being rigid and bitter does not contribute to what is needed at this time to win.

You can come back and whine after the election.

But as many people are taking this endorsement with face value, I think there is also the right to ask questions and get meaningful answers.

There is no rigidity or bitterness in seeking knowledge about an issue from a variety of sources.

to all of the Democratic Congresspeople and Senators who voted for the Iraqi War Resolution.


If you cannot forgive Powell then you should not forgive the Dems who could have stood up. They could have voted for a much more restrictive resolution that would still have given them political cover.

I think it all has to do with the level of mistakes, here. Some mistakes are more grave than others.

It all comes down to which mistakes can people live with based on their moral principles.

by reactions to past decisions.


I was against the Iraq war from the begining and went to some demonstrations but I didn't go all in - I could have done more - I should have done more.


Powell fucked up but so did almost all of the Democratic leadership. Enough disgrace to go around. The issue now is how do we put the country back together and Powell has given a powerful statement at the perfect time. I agree with Skinner. I believe in redemption, for Democrats and Republicans.

What it comes down to is that the Iraq War is a painful and complex event in American history. I think it is hard to navigate through the mire of implications resulting from this conflict. But accountability and trust are two factors that must be contemplated when dealing with the actions of any important figure in society. I'd agree that perception counts too, but in history there are some actions even this must be overlooked.

That's why I said in the OP, that my feelings are mixed on this issue. Of course, no one is perfect and a Saint. I'll say again, that I will be very vigilant in how Powell will use his redemption.

but the message and timing of this endorsement is very very strong. You would be hard pressed to script it any better.


Yesterday I was in the home of an African American couple, he is a marine and she works for ICE. He is for McCain. He is also of Jamaican birth. I told him that Powell was going to endorse Obama today and he refused to believe it.


There are a lot of moderate and conservative people that will listen to Powell - especially his devestating condemnation of the attacks on Obama and his denunciation of Palin as a Vice Presidential pick.

:thumbsup:

So the same standard doesn't really apply.

For the record, I still haven't forgiven those Dems either. And Powell's history goes much further back than just the Iraq war, so there is rightfully different standards at play here.

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water, separate these things and look at them individually.

I used to like Powell until he gave that wmd/Iraq speech and lost a lot of respect for him. BUT, his endorsement will help get votes of undecideds and this is good. I don't have to like him to appreciate his endorsement.

If I were trapped in my burning car after an accident and Powell came to help get me out, I wouldn't say "no, I don't like you". I would let him help. That is the situation here.

my tush will need the space.

Powell is redeemed in my eyes and I truly believe he's attempting to right his own mistakes. IMO, Powell recognizes Obama for the great leader he is and he wants him in the WH.

Also, endorsing Obama has enormous benefits. It gives Obama more credibility and will help with getting votes. If nothing else this could have a tremendous impact on the military and their families' votes.

Except, in my point of view, I'd have to watch his actions a bit more before claiming redemption. He'll have to prove himself more along these lines.

It was a slap in the face to McCain.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Add that to the beating that Chris Wallace gave McCain, and what you have is a public repudiation of McCain, his principles and his attitudes.

Out of everything, this does say a lot.

based on the career histories of people who could also possibly give their endorsement to Mr. Obama if they so choose. What if the three persons listed in the OP did give their endorsement to Mr. Obama all of a sudden? Would anyone change their opinions of the individuals, given their track record?

If Dr. Kissinger woke up today, decided to give an interview on MTP and endorsed Obama, I wonder if people would be calling him an American hero and saying that he has redemption.

It's not a logical fallacy. It's more of a hypothetical question.

I'll take an endorsement that makes Republicans scratch their heads. The fact that people are jumping off the GOP ship at this rate bodes very well for Democrats, imo. None of these endorsements would make these people American heroes. But they would go a very long way in bringing the sane factions together. That is, if people would allow it.

I think what you've said is rather practical and true for the complexity of what we're experiencing right now. In the end, politics makes strange bedfellows at key moments in time.
The Powell endorsement is the truth of that notion.

I look forward to seeing how this fares in the polls later in the week. Today's Gallup could only be the beginning of a real ass-kicking. Keeping my fingers crossed.

I'll be watching along with you.

1. He has republican inclinations - so do many others in this country. I don't resent him for that, I merely have a fundamentally different approach to how I see this country progressing. But, I don't "hate" him because we don't agree on this.

2. I was against the Iraq war, he was initially for it. I can not and will not pretend to know what kinds of pressures were put on him by Republicans, the Bush administration, etc. I think he made a mistake in thinking that war was the best policy - but that goes back to #1 (dems v. republicans). I am not a high ranking member of the Bush administration, so I have no way of knowing if he purposly lied regarding WMD's, or if he truly believed the incorrect data that he had recieved.

3. I do respect the fact that unlike 98% of other republicans, Powell has shown that he is willing and able to admit mistakes and go in a different direction when he realizes his errors. This trait is one that he shares with Obama, and is 180 degrees different from the Bush administration. That was why Powell is no longer a part of the Bush administration.

4. Holding grudges, hating someone and never forgiving them for there errors is something I see Republicans doing frequently. Think of their hypocricy in supporting Palin in spite of all of the issues that seem to fly in the face of everything they believe.. yet they do so anyway. Not forgiving Powell because you dislike what he did or stood for in the past, even though he is showing his willingness to change going forward is not how I feel we are going to attract more to the party going forward.

5. Irregardless of all 4 of the issues listed above, Powell is very well respected by many republicans & independants. He's seen as one of the "good guys" who bailed on Bush first... and was one of the first republicans to show his disdain for the Bush administration. His endorsement DOES help Obama. For no other reason, we should thank him for that. Frankly, he could have not endorsed anyone.. and kept his positive image amounst fellow Republicans - he didn't do this. He could have endorsed McCain... and done what he was "suppose" to do. YOu can bet McCain would have offered him a position in his administration.. and the Powell endorsement frankly may have been McCain's last shot of getting the needed momentum to try and flip this (probably wouldn't have worked though). So I do thank Powell for going with his gut on this.

Thanks Colin.

What you said points back to my belief that this is a highly complex situation.

A lot of people have given passionate, fascinating and thoughtful answers to this entire issue of Powell's endorsement. On many levels, his endorsement of Mr. Obama affects everyone because he is representative of what is wrong and right in this country.

I don't have the answer to this question. But, what is ultimately the case is that Powell has given his nod to whom he thinks is the most qualified in this election. There aren't any do-overs on that accord.

We do have an election to win. A lot is riding on it.

But, in the end, America will have to do a lot of self-examination to get its soul back after eight years of hell. That's what matters.

I agree with your statements..
I forgive C. Powell...His words on MTP were gracious and genuine...
I like this quote that you said...
"Holding grudges, hating someone and never forgiving them for there errors is something I see Republicans doing frequently"

My focus is on getting Obama elected; and if Powell's endorsement takes us a step closer to that goal, I'll take it.

Should we turn down their endorsement, too? A lot of them didn't even bother to read the NIE.