Colin Powell was an enthusiastic backer of Obama’s presidential candidacy. Asked on Face the Nation if he regrets it — the shared assumption being that he might, because Obama’s presidency has been a bust so far — Powell insisted that he didn’t regret a thing. But “I’m afraid he put too much on the plate for the American people to absorb at one time.” And on national security:
He admitted he was “surprised” by the lack of coordination among different agencies in dealing with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the suspect in the Christmas Day bombing attempt of an airliner.
“Should he have been given his Miranda rights either after 90 minutes or 15 hours? The story kept changing,” Powell said. “I would have thought after all these years we would have had a process in place – either in the previous administration or in this administration – that when you get somebody like that, we all know how to respond and how to interrogate him, or not interrogate him. But he’s in jail. He’s facing trial. I don’t think it will be a difficult trial to handle. And also he’s still talking. They found other ways to interrogate him.”
Well, that’s Powell for you — as Max memorably said when the general endorsed Obama, a bit “incoherent” in his rationale. Powell’s reasons for endorsing Obama were never all that compelling. But now that Obama has proved to be none of the things Powell and his co-validators claimed (not moderate, not competent, not post-racial), what’s the general going to say?
Powell’s not alone, of course. There were those Republicans (Powell included) who claimed that they couldn’t vote for John McCain because his VP choice showed such poor judgment and they couldn’t bear the thought of such a person just a heartbeat from the Oval Office. Despite Biden’s gaffe-a-thon and Obama’s frequent disdain for his own VP, we’ve seen no mea culpas on that front. Then there were those who proclaimed Obama’s fiscal moderation and careful approach to governance. Despite the spending jag and the serial extremism of one left-wing agenda item after another, we haven’t heard many recantations on that front. And what of those who were convinced Obama would be a stalwart defender of Israel and tough on the mullahs? They sure went out on a limb, only to be proved tragically gullible. (Or are we to believe that “This was all predictable from the day Obama won the election. Only innocents thought otherwise.” Oh, really?)
The pundits and pols who vouched for Obama are in a bind. Maybe that’s why you hear such wailing that America is ungovernable and too partisan. It can’t be Obama’s fault, after all — that would mean that Obama’s supporters were badly snookered. It’s never easy to say you were wrong, especially when the stakes are so high.
Linda, there are many mistakes Republicans can make throughout this campaign season–and, I’m sure they’ll make them–but the greatest would be to try to make Michelle an issue. Forget about her!! Ver few care about what she represents. Most Americans–I being among them–do find it somewhat unseemly and irrlevant to campagin against a candidate’s spouse.
If her husband had a real resume and actual qualifications to be President, she’d be irrelevant. Because he doesn’t, his wife and others like his 20-year pastor, mentor and spiritual advisor, take on much more significance, IMO, in order to form a judgement as to who Obama is.
Mrs. Obama inserted herself into her husband’s campaign. She isn’t a candidate, yet because of Hillary Clinton, we are now electing a royal family instead of a President.
Michelle Obama is a bitter anti-european racist. This is clear from the record. Her husband needs to be stopped in order to prevent her from being anywhere near a position of power.
It’s ironic that Linda Chavez of all people points this out.
“Most Americans–I being among them–do find it somewhat unseemly and irrlevant to campagin against a candidate’s spouse.”
What are you talking about? Michelle Obama is not doing her best to stay in the background. On the contrary, Mrs. Obama is deliberately pushing herself out to the front and center! Is she supposed to get a free pass? Mrs. Obama deserves to be taken to task if she says or does something dumb. There is no way to ignore someone who goes out of her way to attract attention to herself. No, Republicans only need to make sure their criticisms are relevant and just. Exaggerated responses will backfire.
No matter what the Reps do, Michelle will continue to alienate people. She is incapable of seeing differences in humans as differences; they must be the fault of someone. She had a hard time fitting into rich Princeton, but I too had difficulties fitting into a far less prestigious college. It wasn’t because of color; it was because I came from the boonies and had to find my way in a world with people from urban, upper midle class backgrounds. People from my family had it a lot harder than her, but they don’t whine. They count their blessings. She has a basic worldview that divides people in to Hyde Park lawyers and victims. She won’t be able to hide that.
Michelle will have a powerful ally in the MSM which will do all within its power to conceal the hard edges of this grievance industry powerhouse. Incidentally, why have Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson fallen silent in this torrid election season? Did somebody put the word out?
If it is the Republicans who must point out the obvious fact that Michelle Obama is a racist, anti-American, then SO BE IT. Certainly the fawning press will never make an issue of anything that may prevent their candidate, Obama, from winning this election! Neither his total lack of experience nor his long, close relationships with less than desirable individuals will ever be reported. Instead, we will be spoon-fed propaganda from now until November; and concerned citizens dare not ask a single relevant question of either the candidate or his wife! This election is already taking on all the trappings of a coronation, or even an ordination! Obama, the messiah, will lead the nation to the promised land! We know this because he said so himself.
FTA: “Judging from the quality of thinking and writing exhibited in her Princeton thesis, Michelle would not likely have been admitted to Princeton (and later Harvard Law) had she been white.”
I recall a speech in which Michelle railed against standardized testing (No Child Left Behind is “strangling the life out of most schools”). She said, “If my future were determined by my performance on a standardized test I wouldn’t be here. I guarantee that.” And, “Every step of the way, there was somebody there telling me what I couldn’t do. Applied to Princeton. ‘You can’t go there, your test scores aren’t high enough.’ I went. I graduated with departmental honors. And then I wanted to go to Harvard. And that was probably a little too tough for me. I didn’t even know why they said that.”
Obviously it was affirmative action that got her where she wanted to–and thought she should–be (she, of course, succeeded on her own). So, what’s her point? That we should throw out objective standards and award admittance to university based on…what? How would non-minorities fit into this picture? What should determine eligibility for the limited slots available at elite schools like Princeton and Harvard? Whatever her further thoughts are, she didn’t share them.
The waters were further muddied by B Obama’s remarks on education the other day. He seemed to suggest that success will be achieved once we give teachers their creative head. One gets the idea that in the Obamas’ perfect world, objective standards and merit will not count for much. But beyond one’s race and ethnicity, I’m not sure what will.
“It’s ironic that Linda Chavez of all people points this out.” -Doctorfixit
Why is it “ironic”? Because Chavez is Hispanic?
Doctorfixit, you have slandered Linda Chavez on numerous occasions on Townhall.com with willful distortions of her positions and total fabrications of comments she has made. Your have called her an “anti-European racist” several times even though you provide no proof nor reason to make such an outrageous claim, and even though according to her biography Chavez’s ancestors from both sides of her family come from Europe.
So, Doctorfixit, please do us all a favor and go and slander some other columnist. Linda Chavez’s columns obviously go way above your head.
Linda,
nice article, but Barack Obama is definitely not trying to transcend race in his campaign. His campaign is based on it. His slogans about post racial America are meant to deceive moderates and other racially tolerant voters. Meanwhile, he is working overtime for the racist vote–and getting close to 100 percent of it.
Michelle is Barack’s true face.
Michelle Obama was a *legacy* admission to Princeton, never mind affirmative action. She got in because her brother was a star basketball player.