Dec 14 2008
Colin Powell, Four-Star General of the Obamacons
So what’s new in the world today, Animal?
Well, my fellow politicitizens, your humble and esteemed reporter has dug up a recent story about Colin Powell from the bowels of the Drudge Report. Apparently, the retired general and former secretary of state gave an interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN last Thursday. Powell had quite a bit to say on the GOP’s defeat in last month’s election and what the party should do to regain power.
As everyone knows, Powell, a long-time Republican, crossed party lines and endorsed the Democratic candidate in the final weeks of the campaign. Although greatly disappointed, many conservatives were hardly surprised, as they had long considered the general to be a RINO (Republican in Name Only).
When he was secretary of state during the first administration of George W. Bush, Powell was constantly at odds with Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and the other warmongering neocons. These people exerted an enormous amount of influence over the president in the foreign policy sphere and had little use for Powell, a realist in the mold of James Baker, Brent Scowcroft, and Laurence Eagleburger, who were all foreign policy hands in the administration of Bush’s father.
On the domestic front, Powell is a liberal on issues such as abortion, gun control, and affirmative action – a position that hardly endears him to the Christian conservatives who make up the base of the GOP.
So given Powell’s outlook on things and the conservative-ish campaign of former “maverick” John McCain and up-and-coming nutcase Sarah Palin, it’s little wonder Powell voted the way he did.
Then there’s that pesky race thing. Some of the more blunt conservatives like Pat Buchanan claimed that the general backed Obama because he was looking at a picture of the Illinois senator one day and suddenly came to the realization that he, like Powell himself, is black. As a matter of fact, Powell himself doesn’t deny that race played a factor in his decision, although he claims it was only a minor one.
While Powell can support whoever he wants, I do agree with Buchanan that the man’s rejection of McCain could, if looked at a certain way, be seen as an ungrateful slap in the face to a party that practically made him who he is today. Ronald Reagan chose Powell as the nation’s first black national security advisor while he was still in the Army, George H.W. Bush chose him as the first black chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and his son chose him as the first black secretary of state.
Powell still considers himself a Republican, but don’t expect members of his party to listen to any advice he has to give them!
So Animal, what is this great advice?
Well, let’s see. (Opens virtual newspaper)
According to the general, McCain lost to Obama because Republicans’ attempts “to use polarization for political advantage” backfired on them in a major way.
That is incorrect, Mr. Powell. You lose 50 points. McCain lost because we are in the biggest economic crisis this nation has seen since the Great Depression, we’re fighting two endless wars in Third World cesspools filled with people who hate our guts, and the man presiding over (and responsible for much of) this is a Republican who just happens to be the biggest idiot to occupy the Oval Office since Jimmy Carter. No Republican could have won this election. Not even you.
And I might also add, Mr. Powell, McCain was hurt in the election by his stalwart support of the highly unpopular Iraq War, which you sold to the American people and which never needed to be fought in the first place.
Enough with your rants, Animal! What else does the Generalissimo have to say?
“I think the party has to take a hard look at itself,” Powell stated in the interview. “There is nothing wrong with being conservative. There is nothing wrong with having socially conservative views — I don’t object to that. But if the party wants to have a future in this country, it has to face some realities. In another 20 years, the majority in this country will be the minority.”
Powell also goes on to say that the Party of Lincoln needs to “see what is in the ‘hearts and minds’ of African-American, Hispanic and Asian voters ‘and not just try to influence them by… the principles and dogma’.”
Speaking of hearts and minds, the general knows what he’s talking about, because not only did he serve two tours in Vietnam, he tried to whitewash the My Lai Massacre with all this “hearts and minds” talk.
40 years ago, when Powell was ordered to investigate a detailed letter from a soldier that supported rumored allegations of the atrocity, the future general wrote: “In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent.”
There’s your “hearts and minds” for you, GOP!
Anything else, Animal?
“I think the party has to stop shouting at the world and at the country,” Powell continued. “I think that the party has to take a hard look at itself, and I’ve talked to a number of leaders in recent weeks and they understand that. Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh? Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?”
I agree that not listening to Raving Rush is a great idea. But who, pray tell, are conservatives supposed to tune in to? Sorry, but Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann wouldn’t be much of an improvement. Don Imus would though, but a thoughtless tongue and white guilt has all but ensured that he will never again be the big media star he once was.
As far as this blogger is concerned, Powell lost a lot of credibility when he backed a war he must surely have known was unnecessary, and then did everything he could to salvage his own tarnished reputation when things went south. The general has some good advice for Republicans, but I wouldn’t blame them if they chose to give him the silent treatment. After all, animosity is a two-way street.
how did you manage to sneak a nappy-headed-ho’s reference in here…. Oh you’re good, animal, you’re good lol
“40 years ago, when Powell was ordered to investigate a detailed letter from a soldier that supported rumored allegations of the atrocity, the future general wrote: “In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent.””
Lol - have you asked Powell about that lately?. Sorta similar to tagging Obama with Ayers from 40 years ago.
This is the most ridiculous assessment of Powell’s endorsement of Obama yet. Powell is exactly right on when he asserted that McSame’s Rovian managers had screwed it up for McCain with their “business as usual” attempts to polarize the nation and their ad hominem attacks on Obama and anyone near him. I saw John McCain on David Letterman the other night. THAT John McCain could have won had he but stayed true to himself instead of selling his soul down the neo-con river. McCain could have gotten himself away from Bush and the economics situation if he had only had a plan. Instead he attacked Obama for being a socialist, a Rovian claim that in now way, Joe the Plumber or not, reflected the reality of what Obama was offering. And, to top off everything else, he selected the worst possible running mate OTHER than Joe, Sarah Extreme-Right-Wing-Floozy Dumb-As-A-Box-Of-Rocks Palin. Instead of moving towards the center, he and his handlers let Obama take that position. And it creamed him. So, yes, Powell was incredibly correct in his analysis - 50 points to him and another 50 to make up for the 50 you took away.
Thanks Guitarman!
Oldfart, I don’t deny McCain did a lot of stupid things during the campaign, but he was screwed regardless.
You can defend Powell all you want, but to me, he’s just another political general and “inside” man who constantly went against his better judgment to help bring about two misbegotten wars and then ducked out and tried to save his own skin (meaning reputation) when things went horribly wrong with Iraq. I’m surprised you’re so defensive of him, given his used-car salesman job at the UN in the run-up to the Iraq war. If he had doubts, and it’s clear that he did, he should have resigned.
Yes he had some good advice, but I don’t blame conservatives for not listening to him. Time will tell if he’s right.
Powell’s a good guy–nobody will argue that he possesses ill intentions or anything–but I don’t think he’d be able to ever handle presidential politics (though he gave that up long ago, anyway). He’s like one of these politicians who tries to play both sides of the fence, and then refuses to utter anything than a particular endorsement or any reasoning/explanation for what his positions are. Come on, Powell, tell us more than vague arguments and opinions (which, because of the lack of specificity, he can always backtrack to a large degree later). But, hey, he’s got what he wants–little controversy, rather good support and respect from people of all sides, considerable experience to insert into the history books, and very minute attention from media or anyone else (especially considering he’s a former Secretary of State, who you’d think would be solicited quite often). At this point, I don’t think he’s even interested in politics.
The Secretary of State serves at the will of the President. We all lost respect for Gen. Powell when he went out there and grudgingly made the case for war with Iraq on intelligence he had to have known to be faulty. That in no way changes the order of command, though.
While resignation seems like the easy thing to do, I would wager that it’s harder in practice than theory. Especially if you believed that Saddam Hussein posed any kind of threat, which Powell has stated himself.
And yes, the GOP has gone too far right to be anything other than a regional party that draws votes from religious zealots and people that still believe Democrats raise taxes. And after eight years under Bush, it’s hard to imagine anyone still thinking that.
“And yes, the GOP has gone too far right to be anything other than a regional party that draws votes from religious zealots and people that still believe Democrats raise taxes.”
I do agree that the GOP’s problem is that its center of power is based in the White South, which itself is changing demographically, as we saw this past election.
Speaking of taxes, there’s nothing wrong with lowering them, but you need to lower spending as well, and Republicans, despite their rhetoric, will never do that.
I realize that as secretary, Powell serves at the pleasure of the president. Nevertheless, i can’t help but feel a little disappointed that he felt he had to go along with this charade. Then again, he was always the loyal soldier, wasn’t he?
Well, in Powell’s defense, he DID resign eventually.
But Oldfart was right, Powell WAS right, it was that Rovian divisiveness thing that killed it for McCain. The election WAS pretty close, in that just a few percentage points in enough States would have swung things McCain’s way.
But two things sunk him - Palin and his insistence on attacking Obama in ways that emphasized that divisiveness. Socialist? What idiot came up with that one? Any idiot knew it wasn’t, and it was insulting to a lot of Americans to hear that label so misused. It was insulting that McCain thought that I’d fall for it! He should have been telling us what HE stood for, not what he wanted us to think Obama stood for…
…and Palin. Dear Sarah Palin. Let me count the ways that Obama should thank McCain for THAT choice! On second thought there’s probably a character limit here, so I’d run out of room!!
Powell is right on another count that you ignore, and that is in the Republicans’ shoddy record in appealing to minorities. Good heavens, don’t these people read census reports? Any idiot can see that in twenty years, minorities are going to be very competitive with whites in many areas of the country, and an insistence by the Repubs in ignoring THAT demographic is going to doom them to a permanent opposition role, if not the outright death of the party if they continue.
In the end, his assessment is right on the mark - they need to take a long hard look at what they stand for - AND what the American people will WANT them to stand for. In the final moment, it is that representation that will determine what the Republican Party can and will do, because if nobody wants what they are selling, the party WILL die.
“and that is in the Republicans’ shoddy record in appealing to minorities.”
Powell’s probably about this as whites are shrinking as a part of the electorate, and as i’ve already said, McCain made some huge blunder, particularly Sarah Palin, but he was never going to win, not with everything he had to deal with.
“they need to take a long hard look at what they stand for”
This kind of talk happens every time a party loses an election but the winner always screws up and the losers always bounce back. it was only 4 years ago that people were saying the exact same thing about the Dems, and they said it about the GOP in 1976 and 1964.
Except for the Clinton interregnum, Republicans have been in charge for a long time (1980), either in the Whitehouse, in charge of Congress or both. As far as I’m concerned, their fantasy economic doctrine failed with Reagan right off the bat. But Americans kept sucking it in and some of them are still drinking Reagan’s kool-aid today. Outside of cutting taxes, spending and services and failing to maintain critical infrastructure Republicans have little or nothing to offer anyone except racism, divisiveness, theocracy and some kind of anti-American dream world colored white.
I think, overall, Reagan was a great president but the one thing i hated about him was his embrace of this so-called “supply-side economics.” As far as i can tell, cutting taxes while not reducing govt spending only creates enormous deficits that have to be paid off by future generations. I prefer the more traditional fiscal conservatism that preaching cutting spending before cutting taxes and raising taxes to reduce the deficit. (which is, ironically, what Reagan did when he first became governor of California) As much as i hate to say this, Clinton was far better on this than the Gipper was.
The first thing I ever remember about Raygun was when he became Governor of California. One of the first things he did was cut education funding. That put him in my doghouse, a place from which he never ascended.