campaign staff

Home » campaign staff

Colin Powell endorses Obama and Sununu yells race

Colin Powell endorses the president.

POWELL: Not only am I uncomfortable with what Governor Romney is proposing for his economic plan, I have concerns about his views on foreign policy. The governor who was speaking on Monday night at the debate was saying things that were quite different from what he said earlier so I’m not quite sure which governor Romney we would be getting with respect to foreign policy.

O’DONNELL: What concerns do you have with governor Romney’s foreign policy?

POWELL: Well it’s hard to fix it, I mean it’s a moving target, one day he has a certain strong view about staying in Afghanistan but then on Monday night he agrees with the withdrawal, the same thing in Iraq and almost every issue that was discussed on Monday night, governor Romney agreed with the president with some nuances but this is quite a different set of foreign policy views than he had earlier in the campaign and my concern which I’ve expressed previously in a public way is that sometimes I don’t sense he has thought through these issues as thoroughly as he should have and he gets advice from his campaign staff that he then has to adjust or modify as they go along.

ROSE: Are you concerned about the people that are advising governor Romney?

POWELL: I think there are some very very strong neoconservative views that are presented by the governor that I have some trouble with.

Sununu has proven that he has lost touch with reality. So he goes on CNN and says that Colin Powell’s thoughtful support of the President is hogwash. It is all about the fact that Obama is Black. If Obama was White and saved the country from a depression and had saved the auto industry and took out Bin Laden than that would have been nothing.

By |2012-10-26T06:52:36-04:00October 26th, 2012|Elections, Race|2 Comments

Newt Gingrich is not a serious candidate

When this whole presidential hoopla started, more than a year ago, I was surprised when Newt Gingrich announced that he was running for president. I figured that his time had passed. He had been out of Washington for more than a decade, during which time he started multiple enterprises. All of his enterprises seem to be tied into his former political life as a US Congressman and Speaker of the House. Upon further reflection, all of these enterprises seem to require rich businessmen handing money over to Newt Gingrich, because, and this is important, he still had access to power. These enterprises seem to require that Newt Gingrich is still important in Washington. Therefore, I concluded that he really wasn’t running for president, but was running so that he could prove to his benefactors that he was still extremely important person.

Over the first several months of his campaign, my theory held up. He never really spent money on infrastructure or campaign personnel. Instead, Newt Gingrich seemed to go from city to city selling books. He had a lot of early upheaval with turnover in his extremely small campaign staff, but this did not seem to faze him. Then, somewhere in Iowa, it seemed that he began to believe the press. It seemed that he was beginning to become serious about running for president. In South Carolina, his stop seemed to be more about campaigning and less about selling books or any of his other products. Newt Gingrich was serious.

Now, Newt Gingrich was a front runner. I don’t know whether he lost his mojo or whether he did not know what to do with his front-runner status, but Newt Gingrich seemed to lose focus. He is in the middle of a knock-down, drag-out fight with Mitt Romney. He needed to sharpen his message. How is he going to improve the country? How is he a better Republican candidate then Mitt Romney? How could he turn the economy around? Can someone explain to me how a “major” Republican candidate in the middle of a tight primary can even suggest America going to the moon? He said it with a straight face. Did he just say this to please a Florida space crowd? Did he think through this lunar colony?

I think that this is yet another example of how Newt is not a serious candidate. This isn’t the 1970s, where the sky was the limit. Our economy is struggling to make jobs. Europe is on the brink of implosion as Greek debt seems to be an unsolvable problem. Yet, Newt is talking about spending billions of dollars not just to go to the moon but to build a colony. Wow. I can’t wrap my mind around how irresponsible a statement that was.

By |2012-01-27T20:25:34-04:00January 27th, 2012|Elections, NASA|Comments Off on Newt Gingrich is not a serious candidate

Obama at Notre Dame

From Obama’s speech:

The question, then — the question then is how do we work through these conflicts?  Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort?  As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate?  How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without, as Father John said, demonetizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?

And of course, nowhere do these questions come up more powerfully than on the issue of abortion.

As I considered the controversy surrounding my visit here, I was reminded of an encounter I had during my Senate campaign, one that I describe in a book I wrote called “The Audacity of Hope.”  A few days after I won the Democratic nomination, I received an e-mail from a doctor who told me that while he voted for me in the Illinois primary, he had a serious concern that might prevent him from voting for me in the general election.  He described himself as a Christian who was strongly pro-life — but that was not what was preventing him potentially from voting for me.

What bothered the doctor was an entry that my campaign staff had posted on my website — an entry that said I would fight “right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman’s right to choose.”  The doctor said he had assumed I was a reasonable person, he supported my policy initiatives to help the poor and to lift up our educational system, but that if I truly believed that every pro-life individual was simply an ideologue who wanted to inflict suffering on women, then I was not very reasonable.  He wrote, “I do not ask at this point that you oppose abortion, only that you speak about this issue in fair-minded words.”  Fair-minded words.

After I read the doctor’s letter, I wrote back to him and I thanked him.  And I didn’t change my underlying position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my website.  And I said a prayer that night that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me.  Because when we do that — when we open up our hearts and our minds to those who may not think precisely like we do or believe precisely what we believe — that’s when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.

That’s when we begin to say, “Maybe we won’t agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually, it has both moral and spiritual dimensions.”

So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions, let’s reduce unintended pregnancies.  (Applause.)  Let’s make adoption more available.  (Applause.)  Let’s provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term.  (Applause.)  Let’s honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women.”  Those are things we can do.  (Applause.)

Now, understand — understand, Class of 2009, I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away.  Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it — indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory — the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.  Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction.  But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature. (more…)

By |2009-05-18T20:57:11-04:00May 18th, 2009|Domestic Issues|Comments Off on Obama at Notre Dame
Go to Top