Powell to Run for President?
by sarabeth at 6:00 am on January 10th, 2006 in Podium Spin, PoliticsI have been asking myself for a while now: What’s the deal with Colin Powell?
He used to be regarded as an honorable man before he joined the Bush administration. Many people continue to regard him as an honorable man. Some have asked why he stayed in bed with the Bush-men for so long before he hopped out, why he stayed long after he should have realized what these men were all about. And others have argued, on his behalf, that he stayed in the hope that he might be able to moderate some of their excesses. And who knows, he might even have succeeded to some extent…
But the question that’s been on my mind recently is: why has this man been silent the last few months? With public opinion turning the way it has, he has been in a position to enormously influence the public debate (over Iraq as well as the administration’s draconian anti-terror strategies) by speaking out. And he has chosen not to. The latest reminder of Powell’s enigmatic silence was the Bush administration’s PR stunt at the White House on Thursday, January 5, when they rounded up past Secretaries of State and of Defense. They tried to bill it as an unprecedented consultation, but it clearly played out as an extremely feeble just-listen-to-us-tell-you-how-well-Iraq-is-going-and-please-pretend-that-we-also-listened-to-you stunt.
David E. Sanger in the New York Times:
Colin L. Powell said nothing — a silence that spoke volumes to many in the White House on Thursday morning.
I refuse to award brownie points to Powell just for maintaining a meaningful silence. Not when speaking out would be infinitely more meaningful.
And I insist on asking: why doesn’t he speak out? I refuse to believe it is because of some kind of misplaced loyalty to the president. I do believe that Powell is clear-headed enough and sincere enough in his patriotism to put his duty to the American people and the country above blind loyalty to the ex-boss.
Why doesn’t he speak out? The trouble with that question is that one can certainly raise it, but one can only speculate at the answer. So I have engaged in some free-wheeling speculation. All the way from “What do Karl Rove and Co. have on him that he dare not speak?” to “Omigod, he’s planning to run for President!” And the more I think about the run-for-President answer, the more sense it seems to make.
When we last heard from Colin Powell on the subject, he had declared very unambiguously that he was not going to run for President, then or in the future. If he does in fact still maintain that position, then I find his continued silence really hard to understand. So I find myself thinking, could all the stuff that has happened in the five years of this Bush presidency have caused Powell to change his mind? I find myself asking, could an honorable man, one with a real sense for what public service can mean, one who has seen this administration from the inside with its guard down, could such a man be sickened enough to feel he has a duty to try and take back the Republican party from these people if he can? The more I think about it, the more sense it makes to me. Powell’s recent silence wouldn’t be incomprehensible any more if he had already decided on, or was seriously considering, running for President.
Of course, this is just pure speculation on my part. There’s nothing to it at all, except for how peculiarly persuasive the argument is.
Jim Battle wrote:
A few times in the past few months, Colin Powell’s long time number one man, Lawrence Wilkerson, has come out swinging against the administration.
Don’t you think Wilkerson is, to a large degree, speaking for Colin Powell? Powell hasn’t really distanced himself from Wilkerson from what I remember, but having that go-between lets Powell later on distance himself or bind himself to Wilkerson’s statements, depending on which way the wind blows.
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 6:47 am ¶
Nick in Beantown wrote:
>Don’t you think Wilkerson is, to a large degree, speaking for Colin Powell?
Sure, there’s very likely something to that. However, I would like to caution that Colin Powell was discussed (by and large by the press) as a possible candidate in ‘96 & ‘00. It never happened. Also, I would think that some of our wildest dreams would need to come true in order for the GOP to place him on the ‘08 ticket, otherwise the status quo would prevail.
That said, it could be a good year for wild dreams.
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 8:03 am ¶
matt wrote:
>Don’t you think Wilkerson is, to a large degree, speaking for Colin Powell? Powell hasn’t really distanced himself from Wilkerson from what I remember, but having that go-between lets Powell later on distance himself or bind himself to Wilkerson’s statements, depending on which way the wind blows.
not good enough, and unbecoming a soldier
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 8:15 am ¶
AndresB wrote:
I also highly doubt that the GOP would offer Powell their ticket (simply just not loyal enough). But yeah, I would definitely vote for Powell despite being a Republican, over some asshole democrat a la John Kerry II.
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 8:28 am ¶
Myself wrote:
Lets keep in mind that this is a man who helped to keep the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War “hush hush” and told the public there was no wrong doing after his investigation of it ordered by the government; although we find out differently from some of the soldiers and further investigation. Not to mention if you take a look at the Geneology Tree, he is a distant cousin to the Bush’s. .. Hmmmm makes one wonder why he doesnt speak out???? I am sure there is more stuff they could go public about our dear Colin Powell, he is just as bad as the rest of the administration!!!
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 9:59 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
I’m with Myself on this one, and not just because I’d be diagnosed with schizophrenia if I said otherwise. People think they like Powell because he doesn’t have a voting record, so they really don’t know a thing about him, so there isn’t anything to dislike him for. He could be in favor of government-mandated puppy-rape for all we know. At the same time, he could be for harsher penalties for puppy-rapists. We simply don’t know.
I could be out of line, but AndresB, what things about Powell make you prefer him to the Democrat du jour?
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 10:15 am ¶
screwtape wrote:
I have to agree that Powell seems likable, but I cannot say exactly why. Maybe it is enough that he does not come across as an hysterial, bible-thumping dominionist, corporate-whore. That seems to be the standard GOPer these days, so it is refreshing to see some one that comes off as moderate.
But I am suspicious of him. Mainly because he towed the line for Bush for so long and still refuses to say anything negative. One way or the other, show some balls already.
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 12:44 pm ¶
eric wrote:
Why should we expect anything else from Colin Powell? What indications has he given that he would be anything but a line-toting Republican?
Posted 10 Jan 2006 at 6:08 pm ¶
tom wrote:
the main thing about powell that puts him above other conservatives is that he actually shows signs of high level brain activity. obviously, this is a trait lacking in many dems as well, hence their interest in him. its amazing what having some idea about something can do for peoples’ perceptions of you…..
Posted 11 Jan 2006 at 10:33 am ¶
Matthew Tobey wrote:
The soft bigotry of low expectations?
Posted 11 Jan 2006 at 10:41 am ¶
tom wrote:
i think its low expectations based on the general trend of politicians in general, not anything race related. its the same kind of thing people did when nader was involved and talking about issues that youll never hear other politicians discussing because theyre just too far gone up their own asses….
Posted 11 Jan 2006 at 2:07 pm ¶