Gen (ret) Colin Powell endorses Barrack Obama

Yesterday morning, on "Meet The Press," former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during Operation Desert Shield/Storm under then-President George H.W. Bush and former Secretary of State under President George W. Bush, has endorsed Democratic candidate Barrack Obama for President. 

I listened to his deductive reasoning for supporting Obama over his fellow Republican John McCain, but his explaination conflicts with his positions of the past.  Like so many other high-profile leaders and the media, he was soft on Obama's negatives, while hard on John McCain's.  Another indication that the forces running this country and it's perception, have already elected Barrack Obama for us.  I will fall short of using the word "conspiracy," but I find it to be mathematically impossible for the majority of those in a position of influence (meaning those who get their views and opinions seen and heard through the media) are supporting Obama or subliminally working against McCain. 

Gen (ret) Colin Powell is entitled to support whom ever he wants, but to ignore Barrack Obama's lack of qualifications (while highlighting VP candidate Sarah Palin's), ignoring the massive influence of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Democratically-controlled Congress who intend to make disasterous decisions relating to foreign policy, and over-hyping Obama's abilities to cross party lines (which is something John McCain has done, not Obama), just doesn't make sense.  I'm not going to say race is why he is supporting Obama, but I know the affiliation does have a significant influence and his decision has probably cemented Obama's coronation as our next President. 

It's obvious that John McCain is far more qualified to be President than Barrack Obama, but presentation and perception are more important than substance in this day and age.  Obama has that "used car" salesman approach that was so successful for President Clinton and McCain doesn't.  Doing what's right isn't as important to this generation as saying what's right.  Telling people what they want to hear, regardless of the reality, seems to be the wave of the future.  This generation isn't paying attention, isn't doing it's homework on the issues and are supporting positions without examining the consequences.  This is our downfall and we will pay a heavy price for our ignorance.

I hope Barrack Obama does stand up to the far-left wing of the Democratic Party when it comes to Iraq, because if he ignores the advice of Commander's on the ground and we leave a defenseless Iraq to fall into the hand's of Iranian-backed, Al-Sadr, invade Pakistan looking for Osama Bin Laden...causing that government to support Al-Qaeda (or be overthrown for one that does), we could be faced with a crisis even worse that the one he inherited.  The President doesn't have much influence on our economy, even though that is the main reason Obama is going to win this race, but he has significant influence over foreign policy and he seems destined to follow the advice of those who think we are the reason why terrorists have attacked us and our way of life and that if we just leave them alone or sit down and negotiate with them that they will see the error of their ways and stop attacking us.  I hope I am wrong, but listening to his speeches prior to the General Election campaign, he spoke on behalf of the far-left wing of the Democratic Party, and if he wants their support on many of his campaign promises (and get re-elected in 2012), he will have to "compromise" and do what they want him to do.  With bad decisions yielding bad results in foreign policy and a relentless attack from Republicans equal to what President Bush has been experiencing over the past 7 1/2 years, it doesn't appear likely that he will have a successful presidency.  I hope for him and all of us, I am wrong...but reality doesn't recognize party affiliation, promises or hope, so my expectations are grim.

40 years ago, the "idealists" thought that Robert F. Kennedy would change the world and successfully promote peace and harmony, but was shot to death after claiming victory in the California primary election and that generation never got a chance to learn that idealism doesn't supercede realism.  If that generation had seen RFK make the concessions that Richard Nixon and others had to make during such times, they would be much wiser today.  Now, we have a very similiar candidate ready to dispell the myths that RFK never got the chance to teach us.  While I support McCain, since he is by far the wiser of the two candidates, Obama represents a chance to maybe fix this nations inept belief that we can do nothing and reap huge gains for it...and without consequences.  Robert F. Kennedy was going to pull us out of Vietnam, a war that had no long-term consequences to American foreign policy...Barrack Obama is going to pull us out of Iraq, a war that has significant long-term consequences for American foreign policy.  Huge difference and I can only hope that today's children don't have to pay the price for foreign policy ignorance as those in the 50's and early 60's did in Vietnam.  Leaving an unprepared Iraq to defend itself against a tough, seasoned enemy will create a Middle East war that will threaten the global economy and the security of free nations.  Undoing the progress made possible by the blood of thousands of Americans, would be sinful.  I pray that Barrack Obama has enough common sense to override his parties desires and do what is right for America and the free world.

On January 20, 2009, the next President of the United States will be sworn into office.  Since September 11, 2001, our country has been through some difficult times, but not all of it has been due to President George W. Bush and his administration.  The Bush Administration was dealt a bad hand in 2001 and not just the 9/11 attacks.  This administration inherited a recession that began at the end of the Clinton Administration, but since the data confirming it wasn't available until months after the fact, everyone assumes it was caused by President Bush.  The other major mistake they inherited was NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) that was passed in 1993, which is responsible for many major corporations moving factories and jobs out of the country to Canada and Mexico.  Also, President Clinton significantly opened trade with China and India in the late 90s, which sent even more factories and jobs to Asia...but once again, President Bush was blamed.  Democrats constantly brag about the economic boom of the 90s, but while big business was making record profits for the American economy, corporations were really earning these profits by outsourcing jobs to other countries to avoid paying higher salaries, health benefits, EPA regulations, etc.  Our greatest strength is also our greates weakness.  We like cheaper products and innovative new gadgets, but in order to have these benefits, corporations need to lower "overhead" costs (meaning, they must reduce the cost of running the business to increase profits).  It's about supply versus demand, Research & Development, and of course, cheaper labor with limited environmental restrictions (aka, fines).  You won't hear politicians talk about these things, because ALL of them benefit from big business.  It's about votes and money.  Our votes are "bought" by major corporations, which in turns buy elections for candidates (primarily incumbents).  If you ever wonder why politicians can be very mean spirited to one another and very subjectively "spin" their version of events; then be as close as brothers and sisters the next, it's because they are all on the same boat.  Comparing it to the game of chess, they are Kings and Queens, corporations are Bishops, Knights and Rooks...and we are just pawns.  Democrats and Republicans are two parties united by one goal...to keep Americans divided.  As long as we are divided, we cannot take away the wealth and power that was once ours.  Think about it...has there really been that huge a difference in social policies under either Democratic or Republican control in the history of this nation?  Democrats have over 90% of African-American voters in their hip pocket, claiming to be the party dedicated to eliminating all barriers that have held them down...but they have had overwhelming control of our government several times in the past half century (under President's Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton) and while many gains have been made under each (as well as under Republican Presidents), many problems of poverty, discrimination, etc, still exist.  Why?  Do some research and search your souls...you'll see what I am talking about.  Race has been a huge advantage for Democrats and the stranglehold seems to be more peer pressure than fact-based.  In our society, African-Americans fall into two types of voters: Democrats and "Uncle Tom's"...and they must choose which side they are on.  I remember hearing in 2000 that African-Americans were told to go to the polls and "vote line B."  What kind of an election is that?!  Certainly not an intelligent one and we get what we vote for.  If those who are dissatisfied with their elected officials or the way this country is run...look in the mirror and find the problem. 

I hope in 92 days, we are prepared for another 4-8 years of tough times, because neither candidate is going to make things better than the last; because the more they try to fix things, other problems will emerge as they take from one thing and give to another.  That has been the plan of both candidates and neither will create significant change in the short-term.  So, tighten up your chin-strap and get in the game!

Why we SHOULD NOT get Osama Bin Laden

Since late mid-September 2001, just days after 9/11 and everyone became familiar with the name Osama Bin Laden, almost all Americans have wanted to "get" him.  I felt that way, too, but I have learned the value of keeping him on the run, rather than capturing or killing him. 

First, Osama Bin Laden is only a "Spiritual Leader" and needed to have clear lines of communication to get his message out before 9/11.  Since that awful day, Al-Qaeda has become decentralized and no longer directs terror attacks around the world.  As long as he is on the run and unable to directly communicate with his fragmented organization, he is not the linchpin to ending Global Terrorism. 

Second, if we capture him, he will inspire his followers to fight for his release, or launch waves of attacks to pressure nations to urge his release.  If we kill him, he becomes a martyr and they will fight for him and what he represents.  Muslim Extremists will use any excuse to continue fighting non-Muslims and to destroy modern civilization. 

We must also consider where Osama Bin Laden would stand trial.  He isn't a United States citizen and therefore, does not qualify for equal protection under our law.  We must also consider how we would feel to be tried under a foreign legal system, because I don't think any American would want to stand trial in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, China, Russia, etc.  While our legal system may seem fair to most Americans compared to other countries, foreigners would probably feel better to be tried under their countries system.  If you don't understand cultural differences, this point would be hard to understand.  Unfortunately, most Al-Qaeda members are not aligned with any country and those who are, we don't trust their legal system to serve justice.  Many will acquit them and put them back on the street to commit future acts of terrorism. 

Another flaw in attempting to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden, is the unnecessary loss of American lives looking for him in an area where we "suspect" he is hiding.  What would happen if we sent thousands of American troops across the border into Pakistan, sustained hundreds of casualties, only to come out with nothing?  No one know where he is...we can only guess.  Would that be worth it?  What would happen if Pakistan turns on us and aligns itself with Al-Qaeda or the current government is overthrown by those loyal to Bin Laden...could we accept such a regime gaining control of that countries nuclear arsenal?  How safe would we feel then?  Thinking this one all the way through to conclusion might be sobering experience, but it's one we can't afford to dismiss or overlook. 

Osama Bin Laden is one of the worst criminals in history, but we must consider the consequences for putting him back in the spotlight, either captured or killed.  For now, he can only make sporadic appearances to try and get his message out to his followers.  I say, let him remain in hiding...out of sight, out of mind.  Only when he is captured or killed, will he become a significant figure for Al-Qaeda and those who wish to see liberty die.