Colin Powell endorses Obama.

I won't question the former Secretary of State's motives, nor will I reduce them to race. I will say I believe he's wrong. 

Some of the reasons he gave I'll address. 

As a key reason, Powell said: "I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that's what we'd be looking at in a McCain administration."

I think this is a bit questionable. Liberal Justices keep finding hidden rights or power in the Constitution. One of the more questionable recent decisions was Kelo. In that decision, as we all know, private property rights and Eminent Domain were redefined to mean things they were never meant to.

In Kelo, we find that corrupt politicians have the power to take your property, and give it to developers, all in the hopes that the resulting property will have a higher property tax base for the government. This is NOT what the Founding Fathers meant when they talked about Eminent Domain. They intended that the Government would take the land only for real Government use, like roads, schools, and Government use. Not for the dubious hope of a higher property tax base.

In Kelo, we see the dangerous Conservative Judges saying that Government shouldn't have the power, and the understanding compassionate Justices claiming that Government should. Perhaps Former Secretary of State Powell can explain how enlightened Liberal Justices like this are helping the nation.

I have railed against the Supreme Court more than once. While I find I haven't posted much on this blog, I can easily tell you that I have questions about the foundation of the court.

The Court's power is self assigned. The Constitution didn't give the Supreme Court the power of Judicial Review, and that power may have to reside somewhere. However, to have the court decide, "There is a hole here, and we're going to fill it by God." is questionable to say the very least.

Like Politicians, they gave themselves the power, unlike Politicians, they didn't have to stand for re-election after the event. 

Powell said that he is "troubled" by the direction of the Republican Party, and said he began to doubt McCain when he chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.

"Not just small towns have values," he said, responding to one of Palin's signature lines.

That is true Sir. However, it's also true that everything I've read about Sarah Palin show she has a personality trait which is somewhat lacking in Politicians. She's honest. Not sort of honest, not kind of honest if you close one eye and bang your head on the wall to rattle your brain and see what the Politician sort of meant. She's honest. 

I respect Former Secretary Powell's opinion. However, I must disagree. His reasons are flimsy in my opinion. It's noted that over a year ago, he gave the maximum donation to McCain. 

Mr. Secretary, I believe you're wrong in this one. I think the last answer our nation needs is another four years of Unleashed Socialism, which is what we'll get from Obama. 

Of course, the way I look at it from here, I figure we can't lose with an Obama Presidency. If he wins the election, he's going to run amok with Socialism, which will have the predictable and historically demonstrated results. Weaker economy, more unemployment, and let's not forget, the inevitable censorship that follows. So when all that happens, when the elections of 2012 come around, Sarah Palin will be in the cat bird seat for it. She'll win like Reagan did in 1980 over the last huge Socialist we had in office, Jimmy Carter. 

Then the unfortunate tag for the "historic President Obama" the first Black President would be abject failure. 

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin has a very insightful piece on this. 

Worst kept secret revealed.

I found the link at Hot Air, and followed it. The New York Times has revealed in a startling article, that Iran is training and supporting the terrorists who are killing not only the American Troops in the country, but the Iraqi Civilians. 

American officials have long cited Iranian training and weapons as reasons for the lethality of attacks by Shiite fighters in Iraq. Iranian officials deny that such training takes place.

Now, more than 80 pages of newly declassified intelligence documents for the first time describe in detail an elaborate network used by Iraqis to gain entry into Iran and train under Iranian supervision. They offer the most comprehensive account to date to support American claims about Iranian efforts to build a proxy force in Iraq. Those claims have become highly politicized, with Bush administration critics charging that accounts of Iranian involvement have been exaggerated.

Wow, the New York Times has finally reported that there are terrorists trained by the Iranian Government. This daring report by the Times probably just about wiped out their investigative skills for the decade. 

The prisoners’ accounts cannot be independently verified. Yet the detainees gave strikingly similar details about training compounds in Iran, a clandestine network of safe houses in Iran and Iraq they used to reach the camps and intra-Shiite tensions at the camps between the Arab Iraqis and their Persian Iranian trainers.

Well, while you all in New York are serving cheese and wine to the Iranian President next time he's in town, why not ask him about this? You could probably manage to ask him before his ticker tape parade, if you're not too busy beating up on McCain supporters to get around to it.