Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I heard about some of the comments. It was something along the line of "Well what other white liberal candidate has Powell supported in the past? None, see he only supports him becuase they are both black". This of course ignores the fact that different campaigns were run in different times under different circumstances, but what is a little thinking ever done for anyone?

Besides what I think is really happening here is that Powell hasn't endorsed and conservative or liberal Asian for any office, so he must really really hate them. Maybe lost some money at Mahjong.

dienekes96 wrote:And intelligence gathering is not, and should not, be the job of the military. They should be trained to crack heads.

Now that isn't a very nice thing to say...both my Dad/Grand Dad and myself were/are MI types. We do a damn good job "gathering the info" and still get trained to crack heads.

You Sir probably are just listening to the Military Intelligence is an oxymoron crowd. Hate to say it but you are wrong and offensive. I might know a little something about mil-intel after a few years of doing it. Been there done that since I was right out of school...have the cub scout medals to prove it.

Who better to gather and vet the intelligence than the folks who have to go put their butts on the line over it. I consider myself to be professional and careful to only give the best vetted information that I can to my superiors. It bothers me that some folks out there think it's not the military's job. I work hard and long hours....spent most of the last 7 years away from home in some fashion or another doing my job. Missed births (my daughter was born while I was in Iraq), birthdays, wedding anniversarys, first days of school... hell you name it...because I am a professional and take great pride and honor in what I do. You are entitled to your opinion but so am I and I think your opinion isn't Scottish so it's crap!

Okay that's enough of that rant...So Gen Powell endorsed the Chairman Obama-Messiah...good for him. He used his right to choose as he saw fit. He has a reasons and good on him for it. I actually liked the man and liked the time when he was the CJCS. Do I like OBot? Not really but I think that who ever gets the job of President has their work cut out for them.

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:I don't even know why the press is bothering to cover the election anymore (excepting an overriding love for Obama).

I agree the press has given Obama a huge pass, blinded by their own feelings on the subject. But they gave Bush a pass in 2003, so it's just representative of the failure of our esteemed Fourth Estate. It's not as if Obama wouldn't be winning right now regardless.

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:If Obama isn't elected in anything less than a landslide it will be a truely woeful performance for him and the democrats.

As I am sure my Democratic friends will attest, the DNC specializes in truly woeful performances But they'll be fine this year. Obama is running the smartest Dem campaign in some time.

dienekes96 wrote:I don't know, dogma. I get to the Pentagon a lot, and it's still mostly military. The private sector deals with the technology and strategic thinking (in terms of investment dollars and scheduling), so the day to day stuff and the tactical can be handled by the military. Most of that privitization is by people just out of the military. And that is hardly new.

Its not so much that the private sector is not effective in managing the military. Indeed, the armed forces would crash in on themselves if not for the private defense techs that support our engagement platforms. The problem is that private consulting firms can be, and have been, used to obscure larges swathes of military activity from government scrutiny. This leads to major inefficiency in terms of contract deadlines, objective prioritization, and foreign relations. This is further compounded by the DoD's newfound ability to circumvent the DCI in order to obtain favorable 'intelligence' for its operations of choice. Operations which have been proposed by private military contractors that are subsidiaries of major corporate bodies (Halliburton). This is fine if corporate good equates to public good, but I don't believe it does.

dienekes96 wrote:
And intelligence gathering is not, and should not, be the job of the military. They should be trained to crack heads.

I agree, at least in terms of strategic intelligence. In theatre operations require the kind of aggressive intel provided by groups like the various MI branches of the armed services. The DIA is also a pretty legit entity, at least in its designated role as an assessor of foreign military strength. Indeed, I think the DIA should be much larger, and more public, than it currently is. The trouble comes when the DoD defines pretty much the entirety of the planet as 'in theatre'. That's how they sold they sold the creation of the Office of the Undersecretary of Intelligence for Defense to oversee the NSA, NRO, and elements of other organizations. Essentially undercutting the authority of the CIA.

dienekes96 wrote:The election isn't over because Powell endorsed Obama. Powell endorsed Obama because the election is over. I hope that distinction is clear.

If the race had been close, I think Powell would have kept his peace. But, as it stands, he can endorse who he wants, and not have it REALLY make a difference and hurt his friend.

Too true, Powell kept his mouth shut in 2000, positioning himself for a place in either Gore’s or Bush’ cabinet. That was a close race, and Powell was prominent and well respected and could walk into either cabinet

But this is a little different. First up, like you pointed out, the election is probably over. More importantly though, Powell's reputation was untarnished moving in to 2000, but not so much since his time in Bush' first term cabinet. He needed to put himself back into the public light to give himself a posting in the new administration, and this endorsement is aimed at doing exactly that.

Personally I’m a little more wary of Powell these days. I think he’s a good guy, but I’m less convinced about his talents. The guy was out-manoeuvred by the neo-cons to use his reputation to sell the Iraq war at the UN. They got him up there telling a bunch of lies, burning his reputation to sell their war… I’m not convinced that’s the kind of political savvy that demands a second chance.

sebster wrote:

dienekes96 wrote:The election isn't over because Powell endorsed Obama. Powell endorsed Obama because the election is over. I hope that distinction is clear.

If the race had been close, I think Powell would have kept his peace. But, as it stands, he can endorse who he wants, and not have it REALLY make a difference and hurt his friend.

Too true, Powell kept his mouth shut in 2000, positioning himself for a place in either Gore’s or Bush’ cabinet. That was a close race, and Powell was prominent and well respected and could walk into either cabinet

Powell endorsed Bush/Cheney at the 2000 Rep. National Convention...rather brazenly;

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/republican/transcripts/u000731.html

An excerpt;

The Bush-Cheney team will be a great team for America. They will put our nation on a course of hope and optimism for this new century. The century historians will look back on and record not that it was the American century or the European century or the Asian century, instead let us pray that when they look back, they will call it the century of democracy, a time when America led the world that wants to be free to an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity.

For all our children's sake, above all, let us as a party strive from this moment on to make that century a reality.

Fellow Republicans, fellow Americans, let's elect George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

AgeOfEgos wrote:Powell endorsed Bush/Cheney at the 2000 Rep. National Convention...rather brazenly;

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/republican/transcripts/u000731.html

An excerpt;

The Bush-Cheney team will be a great team for America. They will put our nation on a course of hope and optimism for this new century. The century historians will look back on and record not that it was the American century or the European century or the Asian century, instead let us pray that when they look back, they will call it the century of democracy, a time when America led the world that wants to be free to an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity.

For all our children's sake, above all, let us as a party strive from this moment on to make that century a reality.

Fellow Republicans, fellow Americans, let's elect George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Ah, I didn't know that, thanks for the correction.

I remember a few commentators talking about Powell being a chance of a cabinet post in either a Gore or Bush admin, and must have assumed he didn't endorse either.

Powell was made by republicans, Reagan and Bush. Kinda ironic.

It's like Oprah

I get all my election coverage from Chocolate News...

Yea baby. He's da man since In Living Color.

Ahtman wrote:At this point in time in 2000 Gore was ahead by double digits and still lost. Nothing is for certain. Even believing that Florida was stolen it still went from a double digit lead to omfg™ this is close. That is one reason why Obama/Biden have been trying to get people to recognize that it is not over. Sad, but true, people thought Gore had a lock and so didn't vote figuring that they could stay home/get an extra hour of work/ect with the problem being a lot of people did it and then it turned out to be closer then expected, and those votes could have helped.

I don't think that's true. Gore had a decent lead coming out of the conventions, but I don't think it was double digits in anything other than a few polls. Gore started losing ground during the debates. Those debates hurt Gore immensely just because some people didn't like his mannerisms. At this point in the campaign, I'm pretty sure things had tightened up considerably. Voter turnout in 2000 actually showed a big jump over 1996, when people really did stay home because it was a foregone conclusion.

Obama's people will get out the vote. He's put a ton of resources into voter registration and that type of thing. The Dems need to beat the drum just because, but I don't see the GOP as being particularly energized right now. I believe they poll as being less enthusiastic than the Dems about the election.

gorgon wrote:

Ahtman wrote:At this point in time in 2000 Gore was ahead by double digits and still lost. Nothing is for certain. Even believing that Florida was stolen it still went from a double digit lead to omfg™ this is close. That is one reason why Obama/Biden have been trying to get people to recognize that it is not over. Sad, but true, people thought Gore had a lock and so didn't vote figuring that they could stay home/get an extra hour of work/ect with the problem being a lot of people did it and then it turned out to be closer then expected, and those votes could have helped.

I don't think that's true. Gore had a decent lead coming out of the conventions, but I don't think it was double digits in anything other than a few polls. Gore started losing ground during the debates. Those debates hurt Gore immensely just because some people didn't like his mannerisms. At this point in the campaign, I'm pretty sure things had tightened up considerably. Voter turnout in 2000 actually showed a big jump over 1996, when people really did stay home because it was a foregone conclusion.

Obama's people will get out the vote. He's put a ton of resources into voter registration and that type of thing. The Dems need to beat the drum just because, but I don't see the GOP as being particularly energized right now. I believe they poll as being less enthusiastic than the Dems about the election.

I hear this all the time and you are partially correct. There was one outlier in a Boston poll that showed Gore with a solid lead (At the start of Oct). Towards middle and later Oct, Gore was usually even/behind in every poll (He had a horrific debate). In addition, the battleground states had polls within margin of error in 2000.... Obamas numbers are huge~!

(Archived polls from 2000)
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/10/27/cnntime.poll/index.html
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/10/06/cnn.poll/index.html

even bigger endorsement

First bit ( the black and white bit) leaves me a bit , which show is that from/supposed to be then ? But you can't get a bigger endorsement than the second one. You can't !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayberry_RFD

Thank you.

Suddenly a whole lot of references in various DC comics make a whole lot more sense. So that's who Gomer Pyle was eh .


..... was a documentary series right ? RIGHT ? !

Al Qaede back McCain

ZOMG ! Terrorist then ! ..

It wasn't from Mayberry RFD, that was the spin-off of the original show and lacked the component that was in the video: Andy Griffith. That was from the Andy Griffith Show. Heck the pic from the opening on the Wiki page is what they were aping in the vid. I didn't realize Griffith was still alive. I always enjoyed the dichotomy of conservatives that love the model small town life that the show represented while also knowing the Andy Griffith is a huge huge Democrat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Andy_Griffith_Show