In my post yesterday, I laid out, by way of a brief but broad historical overview, the reasons I believed that Colin Powell’s support for Barack Obama — the latest in a line of “realist” Republicans to endorse the left-most Senator in the US, a man who has proven ideological ties to radicals like Bill Ayers, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Bernardine Dohrne, et al — was unsurprising: first, because realpolitik, once despised by liberals, has become, for progressives, de rigeur; second, because progressives usurped the label “liberal” and staged an internecine battle for control of the Democratic party, even as they grew from the New Left, who despised the bourgeois liberalism they now pretend to champion; and third, because the end game (if not the motivations) between the paleocons and the progressive left have become, in many ways, indistinguishable, be it on foreign policy or trade.
In short, many classical liberals, once stalwarts of the Democrats, realized, after 911, that the status quo was bad international policy, and that the left, now aligning itself with the Democrats, was presuming to speak for the party. The result was a movement of “neocons” — many of whom were former Democrats and classical liberals, who were surprised to find that their refusal to heap blame on the US for 911 had marked them as “rightwingers” — into the “conservative” camp.
For his part, Colin Powell remained true to his foreign policy realism — the ideology of Nixon, Kissinger, Scowcroft, Bush I — and so found himself increasingly siding with “progressives,” whose views on trade and foreign policy resembled those of Pat Buchanan far more so than those of JFK.
Today, NRO’s Rich Lowry adds some additional analysis — he, like me, is unsurprised with the endorsement — though he focuses less on some wide ranging ideological shift than he does on Powell’s own peculiarities of character and potential personal motivations:
It should have surprised no one, […] that Powell marked his 30th appearance on “Meet the Press” with an endorsement of Barack Obama. Powell’s other favored means of communication  confiding in Bob Woodward and leaking anonymously to newspapers  weren’t suited to the task. Only half an hour with a docile Tom Brokaw would do.
Powell’s reasons for swinging to Obama were a watery stew of all the regnant clichés about the campaign.
Powell argued that John McCain “was a little unsure as to [how to] deal with the economic problems that we were having,†in contrast to Obama’s “steadiness†and “intellectual vigor.†It’s true that McCain flailed around early in the crisis, but he was desperately trying to find something that worked as his poll numbers tanked. If voters had been inclined to mindlessly blame Democrats rather than Republicans for the meltdown, Obama might not have looked so imperturbable.
As for Obama’s vigor, perhaps the Illinois senator has regaled Powell with detailed explanations of how the market for commercial paper has been disrupted by the credit crunch and other nuances. In public, he’s just been blasting eight years of Bush economic policy and deregulation  easy, partisan lines. He hasn’t yet taken a position on the AIG bailout and avoided any leadership role on the Henry Paulson plan one way or another.
Powell decried McCain’s emphasis on Obama’s past with former terrorist Bill Ayers as “inappropriate.†This is part of the fable that McCain is running the nastiest campaign in recorded history. It depends on ignoring all Obama’s attacks.
McCain is borderline senile? McCain and his buddy Rush Limbaugh hate Latinos? McCain is going to raise your taxes? Well, you’ve got to break some eggs to make hope and change.
Imagine if a Republican presidential candidate had pledged to take public financing, but instead dealt the post-Watergate campaign-financing system a blow from which it will never recover. If he raised $600 million and out-advertised his opponent nationwide by 4-1. This candidate’s campaign would be pronounced “an obscene effort to buy the election.†Powell, no doubt, would be “troubled.†But Barack Obama does it and everyone stands back in admiration.
Regardless, mere campaign tactics should be beneath an eminence such as Powell. On “Meet the Press,” he regretted that the Republican Party “has moved even further to the right.†Even if this is true  the Bush administration that Powell served piled up massive spending even before semi-nationalizing banks  it’s an odd brief against John McCain.
McCain has never been a conservative crusader, certainly not since his 2000 presidential run. Powell has endorsed two other presidential candidates in his post-military career, Bob Dole and George W. Bush. McCain is certainly less conservative than Bush, and it’s a jump ball with Dole.
While Republicans tolerate the non-ideological McCain, Democrats nominated a presidential candidate who catered to the party’s base in the primaries and whose election would vastly empower the relentlessly partisan congressional duo of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. The moderate, sensible Powell is willing to take a flier on a unified Democratic government that will represent a drastic leftward lurch.
This is why his purported reasons for endorsing Obama sound more like excuses. Does Powell want to be with the front-runner? Is he hoping to cleanse his reputation after the WMD fiasco? His ultimate motives are known only to him. We must do Powell the courtesy of taking his case at face value and note only how unconvincing it is, if thoroughly conventional. He’ll be back on “Meet the Press.”
I agree with Lowry that there is, attached to Powell’s endorsement, the unseen rider that he wishes to get out ahead of history and maintain his political relevance (while, he hopes, washing away some of the “stink” of the Bush II years — a desire on his part that suggests to me that he still doesn’t understand the left whose favor he now courts). But I also continue to maintain that, beyond mere character issues and self-interest, Powell’s very political philosophy — what was once the kind of GOP villainy despised by liberals, wherein the US supported a strategy of propping up the enemies we know and maintaining a worldwide status quo at the expense of aiding in the spread of freedom — has now moved in line with the cynical application of such a philosophy by contemporary “progressives.”
Which is why it is remarkable that Powell would suggest that “compassionate conservativism” and a Kennedyesque commitment to exporting freedom is indicative of a move “rightward.”
Or, to put it another way, Colin Powell didn’t leave the Republican Party; the Republican Party left Colin Powell, at least on a number of key issues.
And to my mind, they were correct in doing so — as that movement, at least among legal conservatives, was a move back toward the classical liberalism upon whose philosophy this country was designed and built.
Don’t care. Guy was a decent General officer, lousy Sec of State.
Jeff G,
You should be mailing NRO your essays. Many of them are easily of their caliber. Pajamas media; Fugghedabowdit…Send your excellent essays on political philosophy to NRO and AT. I’m sure that they woud get published…
Best wishes…
BTW, Powell is an example of an excellent general that stinks as a politician; he ain’t no Ike, Grant, nor Jackson…
I know, I know…I denounce myself…
FWIW, I saw this coming a mile away. You nailed it when you characterized this move as a cleansing of the “stink” of W. It started when Powell stood silent as the press smeared W with the Plame game. He’s atoning for those UN briefings pre OIF as well. Plus, he’s half black!
I denounce myself.
Washington was the last general who was a good politician. Eisenhower was the last general who was an acceptable politician.
Powell hasn’t quite descended to the levels of, say Grant/McClellan/MacArthur/Clark to name a few, but he hasn’t exactly distinguished himself. In particular, his silence during the Libby affair, where he knew Armitage was the guilty party, was a dishonorable stain on a good reputation.
Occasional inconsistencies in his Bull Moose Progressivism don’t make it a non-ideology. They show that he doesn’t think.
And not thinking isn’t unideological; it’s unphilosophical — which is what “ideological” means.
His positions and rhetoric are predictable. They’re just not logical. Hence the “ideo-.”
The pertinent etymological relative is “idol,” not “idea.”
(This goes for the other asshole, too.)
As a politician, from the history books, he does remind me of Jackson because; even though he made it to be president, I think I remember in school somewhere that he had about the most scandals under his admin…
Good Military—-Bad Politician…
Sort of takes some wind out of the latent hopes that many (?) conservos have of Petraeus going for the top job some day, but he’s already been inadvertently brought into the raw political mudslinging.
If I needed speaker fee money in the next few years so I could find a nice home to stick my batshit crazy wife in I would be all about the Baracky love I think.
Look, the idea that Powell was anything but a mediocre general is completely off base. He was typical of far too many cold war generals, he got his stars by finding a senior officer to act as his sponsor and being a good political officer and going along to get along. He’s been exactly the same since retiring from the military. The few of them that survived the purely conventional gulf war were shaken out by the very unconventional war on terror. Thus we had to suffer the spectacle of a flock of recently retired general officers criticizing the president for waging a war they had no understanding of. the only reason Powell wasn’t in that group is he was still buttering his own dinner roll.
For a moment there, I was afraid you were going to say “parsnip.”
1) quid pro quo: I’ll endorse you, but you endorse me when I run. (Powell as a Democrat candidate would automatically game any questions about military and foreign affairs.)
2) HEY, PICK ME! I can fit right into your next administration.
Good essay. I sure was surprised to be called right wing when I disagreed when people claimed that we brought attacks on ourselves…
SRS – I think the general with the most scandals in his administration was Grant, not Jackson.
Powell was a perfectly conventional general well-versed to fight in the Fulda Gap, but I think many were scarred by Vietnam, where they were junior officers. COIN work is different, far different than mass manuever warfare. That is where the ‘exit strategy’ talk comes from, they did not want to deal with the messiness of COIN.
The danger is concentrating too much on COIN that mass warfare gets short-shrifted. The military has to be trained to do both. Each is, should be, parts of the military thinking and planning.
Desert Storm was Jutland.
So, Powell was W’s step n’ fetchit back in the day, but now he’s a principled statesman? Powell is just another schmuck that let his boss down.
Good lord – how about a little cheese with your whining over-analysis.
Why is it so hard to comprehend Powells word and actions? He felt Obama is the better candidate – just like over 50% of those polled.
It has to be willful ignorance or a serious case of denial.
Time for a reality check.
Obama supporters act as if the polls are a true reflection of what’s going to happen on November 4th. When you don’t have an actual record to run on … and all you can do is point out problems, and blame others, as Obama has, you have to rely on gimmicks that have nothing to do with your actual ability to lead … like early voting …busing and indoctrinating homeless people on the way to the polls … spending 4 to 1 on advertising … having the media in the tank … having Hollywood in the tank, having Acorn in the tank … and, having 98% of all black voters in the tank. But, all of these things are nothing more than a fabricated perception. They have nothing to do with a person’s experience, or ability to lead. They just reveal a candidate who will say, or do anything to get elected. That’s why the Obamabots are so worried. That’s why Obama is telling his disciples not to get over confident. That’s why the Obama campaign tries real hard to make it look like Obama has already won … just like they did in the run against Hillary in the primaries. I happen to believe there are legions of people who are going to vote for McCain on November 4th … unlike the ‘in your face’ Obama supporters, November 4th is when the McCain supporters will express themselves. Keep America safe and strong, elect McCain/Palin on November 4th.
I don’t care who you are, that’s funny right there.