Endorsements And Excuses
Posted on October 20th, 2008
by Daniel Larison |
|
The Powell endorsement isn’t all that surprising, and like most endorsements it will have no meaningful electoral effect (especially in an election that is almost certainly over), but it is worth considering for what it says about Obama, Powell and the GOP’s encouragement of media adulation over Powell over the years. As James says, Powell is actually a very conventional figure, and he is also very much an establishmentarian. Even in his call for a “transformational figure,” he is expressing an establishmentarian hope not so much of transformation but of restoration of establishment credibility. Obama is consensus-oriented and accommodating enough to entrenched interests that he offers the best chance of repairing some of the damage that national political institutions and officials, including Powell himself, have done. If Obama represents the “sanctification of the status quo,” Powell is one of many establishment figures hoping to participate in that so-called sanctification.
Powell is a good representative of the moderate-to-liberal Republican Obama voter, and almost the only thing in terms of policy separating him from the Gilchrests and Chafees is that he was a prominent war supporter. That’s a very significant difference, but it is much more muted now. Otherwise, he fits the profile of a moderate Republican foreign policy “realist” pushed away by the aggressive posture of McCain and his advisors and the social moderate alienated by social conservatism and vulgar Americanism. Many of the same social issues that mobilize most rank-and-file conservatives and which acquired such importance in the presentation of Palin as VP nominee are the very issues that have always made Powell an odd fit with the modern GOP and were at the heart of intra-conservative strife over his possible (but never terribly likely) ’96 run. So long as Powell stayed out of domestic politics, the GOP encouraged the media’s creation of Powell as the personification of officially approved, “respectable” Republicanism. For his admirers in the press, Powell was Giuliani without the authoritarian impulses and cruelty; for many conservatives, Powell and, at least until this decade, his Doctrine were examples of the GOP’s credibility on national security.
Now one of their military media darlings has abandoned their other military media darling at the last moment, simultaneously endorsing the (mostly accurate) narrative of a GOP consumed by triviality and bitterness and implying that the party has ceased to be credible on national security, so Republicans are understandably annoyed. That Powell himself was instrumental in making the GOP less credible on national security is conveniently ignored by all sides. Indeed, one might wonder why Obama would want an endorsement from Powell, who receives the same kind of curious treatment that McCain has received for most of his career until very recently: yes, he misled the public at a crucial time, and it’s true that he failed to voice the doubts about the war that he had strongly enough, but what really matters is that he had doubts. Just as McCain’s discomfort telling the whoppers that he nonetheless goes on telling proves that he is somehow a great leader, Powell’s private, unexpressed doubts that might have helped avoid calamity if they had been expressed absolve him of everything he did.
One reason why some Republicans are insisting that the endorsement was primarily a matter of racial solidarity is that it helps to avoid Powell’s critiques of the campaign and of the party, even when those critiques might be refuted. It is easier and therefore better at this point in the campaign to dismiss it by saying, “Race is all that matters here.” It might be that for some Republicans it is genuinely inconceivable that a retired general and former diplomat would throw his support to Obama, as these are the same people who have tried to make Obama out to be a neo-McGovernite peacenik, but it should probably tell them something about where they have gone wrong that Obama keeps racking up such endorsements. Having invested so much in Obama-as-radical-maniac, Republicans are missing the temperamental similarities between Obama and Powell. Likewise, Obama’s admirers are probably consciously ignoring those same similarities to the extent that they imply that Obama, like Powell, will go along with prevailing wisdom and establishment consensus, because that is not what they expect from Obama. Republicans also seem to think that the phrase, ”the Surge is working! the Surge is working!” is a mantra straight out of Oz that will magically transport them back to the salad days of 2002, so they remain baffled by the idea that Obama’s fairly modest withdrawal plan might be appealing to someone like Powell. The inability, or the simple refusal, to admit that the Iraq war was a costly, disastrous mistake has been dragging down the GOP for the last three years, so there’s no reason anything would change now.
Domestically, there’s nothing remarkable about Powell’s opposition to more conservative justices on the Court–on several of the litmus test questions, Powell does not agree and never has agreed with conservative concerns. This is not of the same kind as the pro-lifer’s negative argument for not backing McCain (he might not appoint conservative justices and wouldn’t be able to get them confirmed by a Democratic majority Senate even if he did). This is an expression of a genuine preference for the sort of appointments that Obama would make. Again, this sounds unbelievable to many on the right, who conclude that Powell couldn’t possibly believe that, as if it were impossible for a social moderate to find the preoccupation with overturning Roe to be unsatisfying. Of course, either anti-McCain pro-lifers are right or Powell is, since part of his resistance to McCain is premised on the assumption that conservative justices are guaranteed after a McCain victory.
free viagra
buy viagra online
generic viagra
how does viagra work
cheap viagra
buy viagra
buy viagra online inurl
viagra 6 free samples
viagra online
viagra for women
viagra side effects
female viagra
natural viagra
online viagra
cheapest viagra prices
herbal viagra
alternative to viagra
buy generic viagra
purchase viagra online
free viagra without prescription
viagra attorneys
free viagra samples before buying
buy generic viagra cheap
viagra uk
generic viagra online
try viagra for free
generic viagra from india
fda approves viagra
free viagra sample
what is better viagra or levitra
discount generic viagra online
viagra cialis levitra
viagra dosage
viagra cheap
viagra on line
best price for viagra
free sample pack of viagra
viagra generic
viagra without prescription
discount viagra
gay viagra
mail order viagra
viagra inurl
generic viagra online paypal
generic viagra overnight
generic viagra online pharmacy
generic viagra uk
buy cheap viagra online uk
suppliers of viagra
how long does viagra last
viagra sex
generic viagra soft tabs
generic viagra 100mg
buy viagra onli
generic viagra online without prescription
viagra energy drink
cheapest uk supplier viagra
viagra cialis
generic viagra safe
viagra professional
viagra sales
viagra free trial pack
viagra lawyers
over the counter viagra
best price for generic viagra
viagra jokes
buying viagra
viagra samples
viagra sample
cialis
generic cialis
cheapest cialis
buy cialis online
buying generic cialis
cialis for order
what are the side effects of cialis
buy generic cialis
what is the generic name for cialis
cheap cialis
cialis online
buy cialis
cialis side effects
how long does cialis last
cialis forum
cialis lawyer ohio
cialis attorneys
cialis attorney columbus
cialis injury lawyer ohio
cialis injury attorney ohio
cialis injury lawyer columbus
prices cialis
cialis lawyers
viagra cialis levitra
cialis lawyer columbus
online generic cialis
daily cialis
cialis injury attorney columbus
cialis attorney ohio
cialis cost
cialis professional
cialis super active
how does cialis work
what does cialis look like
cialis drug
viagra cialis
cialis to buy new zealand
cialis without prescription
free cialis
cialis soft tabs
discount cialis
cialis generic
generic cialis from india
cheap cialis sale online
cialis daily
cialis reviews
cialis generico
how can i take cialis
cheap cialis si
cialis vs viagra
levitra
generic levitra
levitra attorneys
what is better viagra or levitra
viagra cialis levitra
levitra side effects
buy levitra
levitra online
levitra dangers
how does levitra work
levitra lawyers
what is the difference between levitra and viagra
levitra versus viagra
which works better viagra or levitra
buy levitra and overnight shipping
levitra vs viagra
canidan pharmacies levitra
how long does levitra last
viagra cialis levitra
levitra acheter
comprare levitra
levitra ohne rezept
levitra 20mg
levitra senza ricetta
cheapest generic levitra
levitra compra
cheap levitra
levitra overnight
levitra generika
levitra kaufen
Filed under: politics
The whining of the far right that Powell’s endorsement of Obama was based on race rather than a whole range of other considerations has been amusing albeit predictable. That Powell might sense in Obama a kindred spirit seems, as you so rightly note, beyond comprehension to them, so caught up are they in they’re meme that Obama is some kind of radical socialist.
Both left and right will be disappointed–the left because Obama will prove remarkably centrist; the right because he won’t be the radical of their wet dreams (which nevertheless won’t stop them from denouncing him as one and should, in fact, make the likes of the Limbaugh crowd as happy as they were when they had Clinton to kick around).
Interesting point: Should Obama really want Powell’s endorsement, given his crucial role in misleading the nation into going into the war in Iraq?
But sometimes it’s not just a matter of endorsing a candidate, but the nature of the endorsement itself. Powell on “Meet the Press” was at his best — reasonable, eloquent, and able to make an argument no one else could make, which is that although he knows Obama is not a Muslim, what if he were? Muslims can be loyal Americans, and fight and die for their country just like Jews and Catholics and other believers long suspected of owing an allegiance to other nations.
It’s no surprise that Obama will find a role for Powell in his administration, but he’s yet another moderate Republican (in the Lugar mold) who will reassure moderate voters about the Democrat. In turn I agree that Obama will be a more conventional figure than the hysterical right (the National Review, Limbaugh, and the Corner) fears, which may disappoint some leftists, but may also be exactly what this nation needs after eight long years of Rove, Bush, and Cheney.
Seems to me Obama, if elected, will be doing a great service for the word “conservative” — i.e., the many Obamacon endorsements and the revelation that “playing to the base” has spent what little fuel it had. The Ron Pauls and Bill Bennetts and Daniel Larisons and Chris Buckleys of of the world may wake up to find that their debate suddenly has, pardon me, a “fierce urgency” and that synonymizing liberal:Democrat and conservative:Republican is oversimplifying in the worst way.
If, however, McCain somehow manages to pull this thing off, “intellectualism” will be a blamed factor, and the coolness of Obama will be throw out with the bath water, reinforcing the Rovian politics of culture, characterization and common denominator.
It’s an important point–Powell and Obama are really quite similar. If there is a difference, it is that Powell is a bureaucrat and Obama an elected official, who has to work the crowds; and Obama’s background is a bit less conventional.
The late Tom Bradley, Mayor of Los Angeles when it was still a “white bread” town, was the archetype of the black politician who must appeal to a mostly white constituency. What is called for is a careful cultivation of General American speech and a demeanor that spells gravitas.
No doubt there is theatrics (”branding” in this year’s phrase) involved, but there is no reason to doubt that the conservative demeanor of Bradley, Sen. Ed Brooke, Powell, and Obama is more than theatrics. The politics of each is corporate center-leftism.
There is not much room in the GOP for this sort of thing. They may have the megachurches, but they’re losing the country clubs. Thus the Powell endorsement makes perfect sense.
Thanks as always for your typically smack on analysis.
As a nit, I note that Gilchrest voted in favor of the AUMF, and AFAIK didn’t express any substantial criticism until 2006 (including apologizing for his AUMF vote). I welcome correction on that, since I haven’t really followed his career in any detail.
One other note re Powell - a way in which he is somewhat similar to Obama and different from most black politicians in the US that I can think of - is that Powell’s parents are not AfAms, but rather Jamaican immigrants (the only other black politicians I can think of whose parents are both immigrants are Louis Farrakhan and Rep Yvette Clarke - I imagine there are others, but are there any with national or statewide profiles?).
Should Obama really want Powell’s endorsement, given his crucial role in misleading the nation into going into the war in Iraq?
In a sane world, no.
But in this world, George Bush is president, and Powell remains very popular. Also, as pointed out, Powell made his case in an extremely well-considered, well-substantiated manner.
Since Obama has endorsed any number of anti-abortion conservatives, I have trouble with the hypothesis advanced by some that abortion was a determinative factor in his decision. People who find preserving abortion rights to be a top issue generally move to the Democratic Party. Racial solidarity flubs for the same reason. In his capacity as an aide, Powell supported the Iraq War. In his case in particular, I think it is a mistake to conflate that with his personal position. I imagine his issue is not so much war as diplomacy. With the Bush administration there has been a shift toward belligerance on the diplomatic front manifesting itself in anger with the French of all people and a worsening of relations with North Korea for no apparent reason. McCain has given every indication that he will continue this, and he has in fact signaled a desire to reignite a cold war with Russia. I believe this is truly at the heart of the Powell endorsement.
An ensuing interview with Powell was very revealing. It seemed that he found McCain’s antics to be over the top. He used the term “steady” several times to describe Obama, and he was quite animated about this. This also dovetails his diplomatic view that M.Z. noted. The world needs steady, adult leadership, not the belligerent theatrics that McCain would certainly bring.
@M.Z Forrest -
Did you mean to write that _Powell_ “has endorsed any number of anti-abortion conservatives”? (otherwise, I’d like to know about the anti-abortion conservatives Obama has endorsed, especially when those anti-abortion conservatives were facing Democrats :} ).
Assuming you meant Powell, has he ever endorsed the anti-abortion candidate in a contest with a pro-abortion Republican? (i.e. either an endorsement in a primary contest or endorsing an anti-abortion Democrat over a pro-abortion Republican)
In Omnivore’s Dilemma, Michael Pollan describes the parlous scene in the family car, a newly health-conscious mom at the wheel, as hunger asserts itself among the children and decisions must be made: McDonald’s or home for a laborious dinner preparation with nutritious, fresh ingredients? Except there’s nothing in the refrigerator. Maybe there was a head of lettuce. Or broccoli. She forgets.
How does McDonald’s win over the wavering, minivan-driving mother who has no choice but a boatload of scruples about nutrition and virtue? The kids know: “It’s all right, mom! You can get a salad now at McDonald’s!” The last defense is demolished.
The political analogy is a little rickety. Obama is clearly not McDonald’s. But like McDonald’s, his campaign knows that wavering voters want to vote for their guy. So the Obama campaign has to address all their excuses and worries. With wavering conservatives–not ideologues, but wavering and slightly timid conservatives, accustomed to the Daddy Party–the Obama campaign can now point to Colin Powell’s endorsement. It’s the salad on the McDonald’s menu. It’s OK to vote there now. You know you wanted to all along.