powell

One of the more entertaining news stories from the last week is the squabble between RINOs Colin Powell and Dick Cheney.  Cheney observed on a talk show that he didn’t realize Powell was still a Republican.  Powell retorted that he was a Republican because he had voted for Republicans Reagan and Bush II as well as Democrats Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Obama.  Powell’s response makes as much sense as Cheney’s reputation for being a conservative, which nonsensically appears to be based on his advocacy for business interests and war in Iraq.

In itself, watching two big-government RINOs argue over which can claim the mantle of “Republican” is as meaningful as professional wrestling, but what is at stake today is what, if anything, it means to be a Republican.  In 1994, the Republican Party was on the brink of a ushering in a political realignment that would have made it the majority party for the first time since 1932.  Republican leaders won power by talking a big game of small government, but they didn’t mean a word of it.  As they gained power in Washington, the beltway Republicans proved that what they believed in was big, intrusive, lawless government.  The result is the last election in which big-government Republicans got the whipping they earned by years of misrule. 

Powell and Cheney should be irrelevant, so it matters that people listen to their “debate” over which is a Republican, precisely because neither of them should be a Republican.  Powell and Cheney illustrate two visions of a Republican Party without principle. 

Powell’s vision is one in which the Republican Party should seek electoral victories by appealing to the same people who vote for Democrats, so that the difference between the two parties is one of brand name only.  His view appears to be that competing parties foster debate and that debate is good as long as it is not based on any ideological difference.  This is the voice of one who came up through the federal bureaucracy and distrusts political principle absolutely. 

Cheney’s vision is one in which the sole governing principle is reason of state:  that the interest and well-being of the state itself is the value government exists to serve.  What matters to someone like Cheney is that the “right” people hold the reigns of power, and provided the right people are in charge, there should be no legal or moral restraints on government’s power.  This is the voice of the second Bush administration. 

Fortunately, we don’t have to accept either Powell’s or Cheney’s vision.  In fact, we can tell both of them that, however they may regard themselves, we do not consider them Republicans.  “I may be out of their version of the Republican Party,” Powell said of his critics, “but there's another version of the Republican Party waiting to emerge once again.”  Indeed, and therein lies our hope.  We have the benefit of two hundred years of political history in which successive leaders articulated and defended the principles of individual liberty, limited government, and constitutional government.  The likes of Cheney and Powell will be forgotten in a generation, and it is up to us to recapture our Party and provide the principled leadership our country needs now as much as ever. 

Scott Boykin is Chairman of the Alabama Republican Liberty Caucus.

The man Colin Powell supported for President has just declared his government broke. He has turned this country toward socialism as its guiding political light. And now Colin Powell has the chutzpah to suggest if only more Republicans were like him, the party would be more successful.

Please tell me Mr. Powell, how can the Republican Party be politically successful by voting for the other guy?

Nothing about Powell's call for moderation makes any political sense whatsoever, other than simply being used by the MSM as yet another one of their poor, misguided fool of a Pied Piper, much like John McCain was, and still is, with the same predictable results. He's going nowhere, fast, tryng to take as many Republicans down with him as possible.

However, I wouldn't be a bit surprised at this point to see Eric Cantor invite Mr. Powell to join his also-going-nowhere-fast NCNA group, so they can all find their political navels together while the country's economy goes into the tank.

God help us!

But, in an effort to meet Mr. Powell halfway, as a good Republican; I would also like to invite him to the next Tea Party I am going to in Rome, Georgia on the 4th of July so he can see some real fiscal conservative "moderates" at work. He can also help me hold up my poster, which has a Gerald Ford (another good Republican) quote on it, "A Government big enough to give you everything you want" -- on the reverse side -- "Is strong enough to take everything you got."

ex animo

davidfarrar

This morning, former (Republican) Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama for president. 

This may be a major blow to the credibility of John McCain's candidacy, but is it a major blow for the Right?  That depends on how closely aligned you think McCain is to the Right, and how much you feel your vision of the Right would be represented by a President John McCain.

While Conservatives certainly do not want an Obama presidency--especially when Democrats control both houses of Congress with growing (possibly filibuster-proof) majorities--we must note that very few Conservaties actually want a McCain presidency, either.  Consider the language used by Secretary Powell today (0:40):

I have some concern about the direction the Party has taken in recent years; it has moved more to the Right than I would like to see it...

These kind of comments by a prominent Republican help to set the stage for a productive conversation about the future of the GOP--the very conversation that The Next Right was created to address.

I do subscribe to Jon Henke's view of the Republican Party having three main factions, and that the Party is at a crossroads of defining its mission and its message.  This is not just about new packaging of an old recipe.  There are many people who care more about specific ideals and goals than about which political party delivers them.  For example, while I (and probably Powell) identify with Henke's description of a Goldwater Republican, I am not particularly wed to the Republican brand--nor, clearly, is Secretary Powell.

Personally, I will support any Republican who can deliver on the principles of limited government, individual liberty, and strong defense.  I would also support any Democrat who could deliver on these principles.  And absent Republicans or Democrats who can deliver on these principles, I will be disenfranchised and support neither.  That is a situation that does not benefit any faction of Republican, so all Republicans should be looking to avoid it.

But perhaps the most important point for Republicans lies in what Powell says at the conclusion of the clip.

Because of his ability to inspire; because of the inclusive nature of his campaign; because he is reaching out all across America; because of who he is, and his rhetorical abilities (and we have to take that into account); as well as his substance--he has style and substance--he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president.  I think he is a transformational figure, he is a new generation coming onto the world stage, onto the American stage.

Is Barack Obama truly a transformational figure in the sense that Secretary Powell thinks he is?  If so, and if he is elected, America will be a much better place over the next four years, and many of us who opposed him will be surprised.  Republicans will be forced to rethink the Big Government policies that have not worked for the Bush administration.

But realistically, the world is likely to see that while Barack Obama's image and brand are among the hottest in the world, he just can't live up to these expectations.  As the bar is set higher and higher, and as he is awarded a mandate on election day, and as the world rejoices and dances, there will be a distinct lack of rainbows and ponies in our daily lives.  Sure, the specter of Bush/Cheney will be there to blame for all ills, in the same way that some Republicans still haven't let go of the Carter administration, but eventually people will have to see that the government is still bloated, the budgets still don't balance, and powers are still abused.  Even under Obama, children will die of horrible diseases and rogue states will still threaten our security and our lives.

Now is the time for the Right to decide whether they will be Democrats Lite for the next decade, or something more.