Colin Powell Says What Needs To Be Said
Not his endorsement of Barack Obama. The endorsement is all well and good. It will consume some news cycles and run down the clock, and maybe even persuade a few moderates who are on the fence. But I think we should take a step back from the campaign for a second and look at two things Powell said that are only peripherally related to this election. They are deeply important points and Powell put them very eloquently.
The first is when he was talking about his impression that the Republican Party has narrowed while Obama has reached out to a broader set of voters. While discussing this, Powell said:
All villages have values. All towns have values. Not just small towns have values.
During the short presser following his Meet the Press interview, he also brought up Michelle Bachmann’s recent appearance on Hardball in which she suggested certain segments of the country are pro-American and certain areas are anti-American, and that the media should investigate which members of Congress are anti-American. He referred to this as “nonsense,” which obviously it is.
He’s getting at a notion here that has existed as long as I can remember, and which has reared its head quite recently with Sarah Palin saying she enjoys spending time in the “pro-American” parts of the country, and with a top McCain adviser referring to southern Virginia as “real Virginia,” in contrast to the apparently fictional Virginians I live near up here by Washington. The notion is that ordinary Americans don’t live in urban areas, despite the fact that about 30% of Americans live in cities with a population of 100,000 or more. It’s idiotic and destructive and facilitates the neglect in American politics of urban issues.
The second point Powell made is more important and should be quoted in full. I have nothing to add to it. On the suggestion that Obama is a Muslim:
The correct answer is, he is not a Muslim. He’s a Christian, he’s always been a Christian.
But the really right answer is, “What if he is?” Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some 7-year-old Muslim American kid believing that he or she could be President?
Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop this suggestion, that he’s a Muslim and he might be associated with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards – Purple Heart, Bronze Star – showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death; he was twenty years old. And then at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross, it didn’t have a Star of David, it had a crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could go serve his country, and he gave his life.
Enough said.
His endorsement:
His presser afterwards:
Comment by Joshua on 19 October 2008 at 7:38 pm:
I was also taken with these quotes, especially the second. I hope that Powell will play a prominent role in an Obama Administration
Comment by Gordon the Gnome on 19 October 2008 at 8:55 pm:
I’ve always had a ton of respect for Powell…really wanted him to run back in 1996. He’s played an exceptional role in American history for the past two decades, and this endorsement fits nicely in that legacy. I’m thrilled with every word he said today and hope he ends up as our Secretary of Defense.
Comment by Brian Pierce on 20 October 2008 at 10:05 am:
I respect the hell out of him as well, but I’d be disappointed if he were given a cabinet position. For one thing, Democrats reinforce their lack of credibility on foreign policy issues when they appoint Republicans as Secretaries of Defense or State. It’s like an implicit concession that Democrats don’t have what it takes.
More importantly, Powell lost a lot of credibility around the world due to his role in the lead-up to the war in Iraq. He’s since shown some contrition on the evidence he used at the UN, but he completely stands by the decision to go to war in the first place. It makes me think he’s of the view that the failure of the war in Iraq was one of incompetent implementation rather than a more fundamental strategic mistake. That shouldn’t necessarily disqualify him, I suppose, but when the most important thing we need to do right now is present a new image to the world, I would suspect Powell hurts that effort more than he might help it.
Comment by Buck B. on 21 October 2008 at 8:43 am:
Like you, Gordon, I’ve always had a soft spot for Powell — he seems like an intelligent and reasonable guy.
Buy Brian’s right, he’s lost all credibility over the past eight years, and the only “exceptional role” history will remember him for will be his part in selling the invasion of Iraq, particulalry his disatrous presentation at the UN.
I know that in some ways he was the voice of reason in the Bush administration. But he is also complicit in its mistakes and crimes. What in his record since Bush was elected possibly earns him a role as Secretary of Defense?