The LA Times, which has NEVER endorsed a political candidate before, now has endorsed Obama.  So has the Chicago Tribune, which has NEVER endorsed a Democrat candidate.  The Denver Post, which has been a big Bush supporter, now backs Obama.

In a real shocker, two solid Bush papers in 2004, the Houston Chronicle and Austin American-Statesman, also came out for Obama!

On an interesting note, AIG just canceled another $700,000 vacation--yet the Wall Street Journal had an article that AIG wants the government to loosen the reins on the over-site for the government bailout!  When taxes are used to keep a business like AIG afloat, it's called a "bailout."  When the government taxes the wealthy appropriately, it called "socialism!"

When I hear about or read some of the mean spirited and downright hateful accusations being sent by "robo-call" to voters in the so-called swing states, I am aghast!  What shocks me even more are the number of those who believe these incredulous charges.  How can anyone blindly accept that Sen. Obama condones, by association, any terrorist activities?  I would be ashamed of my political party if it spread innuendos such as those about an opposition party's candidate.  Why aren't they ashamed? 

  I have a hunch this reprehensible action on behalf of and approved by Sen. McCain's campaign may have had a part in convincing Gen. Powell to not endorse him.  Anyone who associates him or herself with such unfounded diatribe is not thinking clearly and capable of acting in a disturbed manner.

Awesmom, Sorry but socialism is socialism. The bail out is socialism and extremely high taxes on the wealth to spread that wealth to others is also socialism. Giving tax refunds to people who pay no taxes at the same time is even more socialism. But is raising the tax on those that make more than $200,000 ($250,000 for couples) taxing the wealth? According to the Washington Post Obama's plan would only be an overall tax cut of .3% whereas McCain's would be2%. Then when you go to the wealthy that hire us, Obama is going to increase their taxes to 11.5% and McCain will reduce it by 4.4%. In Obama's plan that means the taxes for the wealth would increase in dollars to $700,000. So where do you think the wealthy are going to counter than increase? Lay-offs of more jobs and/or more outsourcing to countries that cost less.

jer72, say what you will, but deal with it. Obama is the next president irrespective. McCain, unfortunately, does not have a chance. I actually believe it may well be a landslide. I have supported republican positions a majority of the time in my life, but as far as I am concerned the party has moved far, far too right for my taste, and I certainly don't want my morals dictated by a political party. As long as the party drifts that direction, it is doomed to what is happening, and this year is just an example.

Like Bob Dylan wrote, around 35 years ago, "The Times They Are A Changin' " (again!), and a new order, young, and vibrant appears to be poised to take the lead. I realize that none of what I have written will in any way shift your views (and that's not my purpose). Call the "rescue" package what you will, but as far as I am concerned the harm done to the American public would have been far, far, far greater in the end had that bitter pill (and, yes, it was a bitter pill) not been swallowed. There was no solution that would have righted the economic situation without significant pain--none, and we are far from done yet. FDR had his naysayers too, but he did lead us out of the Great Depression (with socialized programs). And, no, personally I don't mind the taxes going up on those with more than $250,000 in income. I work hard too, and don't make anywhere half that much. But, forget all the numbers. The republic is moving on, we have to help the new leadership lead and, if not, then either get out of the road or get runover. I hope this lesson teaches my party a good lesson. That's just the way I feel. When I weigh the two choices that currently exist, my take is that Obama will probably do a better job as President; some of his positions I don't agree with, but the alternative is quite disheartening and disappointing.

Active4people, I agree thatthe Republican party has moved, but not towards the right. Under Bush he moved use closer to socailism than did Clinton or Carter both. He was not conservative in the budget, immigration or economy. It was much more to the left than right.

You say you don't care about those that make over $250,000 a year because you don't come close to that number. Well neither do I, but I see that by increasing their taxes we wil end up hurting more under Obama's tax plan. I say this with full knowledge that I would benefit better under Obama's plan than McCain's. However, I know that if my taxes were raised I would have to make cuts to my life style and expenses. Well those small and large business will have to cut them also, however it is inthe form of jobs and price increases.

I will agree that I am not happy with my party and came very close to voting for a third party. In my opinion, neither have held up to their legacies. The Dems are no longer the party of Jackson and Kenndy. For example, Obama's spread the wealth does not fit well with the Kenndy speech, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."  That one speech goes against Obama's Socialism.

I love all the "titles" that have been heaped on Obama by conservatives. Be afraid; be very afraid: the whispers are deafening. Muslim, Arab, Socialist, liberal elite, pallin' around with unrepentant terrorists, liar, questionable citizenship. Now that Powell has endorsed Obama, the ultra-conservatives I read are dismissing Powell's judgment as "just helpin' out a brotha." He couldn't possibly be voting for Obama because he agrees with Obama's judgment; he's just using reverse racism and covering up his real reason for dismissing McCain.

Makes me so proud of our country, and hopeful that we can finally come together and fix our nation's problems in a bipartisan manner.

*/sarcasm*

:-(

HA HA and the Conservatives are the ones that claim to be so full of Values and Morals............The hate and attack campaign that McCain and the desperate better then you Conservatives are running tells the real story..........Can you say President Obama lol.

"Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them -- in roads and airports and hospitals and schools, And taxes are necessary for the common good, and there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more, who should be paying less. For us to say that makes you a socialist, I think, is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate."  Colin Powell October 19, 2008

Taxes pay for airports, including Tehachapi City Airport.  Yet how many of us have benefited by the airport here in Tehachapi?  Only the wealthy do, as most of us here don't have enough $$$$ to afford a private airplane.  Yet part of the taxes I pay support this airport thru grants from the FAA, among other agencys. So should the over $250,000 workers pay more in taxes?  Yes, I have no problem with that.

 Taxes have always been a form of socialism.  Taxes are collected and redistibuted among the people. But with the loopholes afforded that benefit the higher incomes, they are not paying their fair share. Social Security taxes are an example.  People who make up to $102,000 a year pay 12.4% of their income to S.S. After $102,000 no further S.S. taxes are paid. The tax the lower and middle income has got to stop

The upper incomes are against socialism--yet accept $$$$ in the form of taxpayer paid bailouts.  If the wealthy need financial help, they call it a bailout.  If the less than wealthy need financial help, it's called socialism.

Colin Powells comments on why he is supporting Obama was a breath of fresh air...it makes me think that more an more Americans are fed up with the King collecting the taxes from the working peasants and spending it on the luxuries only afforded to the wealthy.

Obama has stated he will go "line by line" through the budget looking for areas of wasteful spending.  Well, I hope he takes a good look at the Defense Budget, which is now consuming over half of our nation's taxes.  Too much of the budget is spent on tech weapons and their development, which in turn is lining the pockets of the weapons developers in a disproportional way.  Not enough $$$ is spent on the troops on the ground supporting them.  The idea that our soldiers have to PAY for their uniforms and boots, is disgraceful.  Not having enough of or the proper safety equipment  available to soldiers who fight on the ground is shameful. 

 The idea that we have to support our troops by collecting socks, chapstick etc and shipping them overseas is ridiculous--the military should be providing these basic essentials to the troops.  But then again, the defense budget is a representation of the US tax system--the wealthy get wealthier and the workers get little to nothing.

Maybe Powell is trying to make amends for the rather crucial role he played in getting us into this disasterous war and standing idly by being a good soldier while his own State department got run over in the post-war "planning" by Rummy.  When he could have made a big difference then, he didn't.  The guy is no big hero in my opinion.

But to the extent it helps Obama, fine.  Note his remarks expressing concerns over his "friend" McCain's temperment.  In other words, Powell is as afraid of what the nut might do as I am.