An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Colin Powell: GOP Should Be More Inclusive And Stop Listening To Rush Limbaugh

2964250146_f12febe1fd.jpg

When former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed then-Democratic Presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama it was big news, not just because of his name but because to many independent, centrist and moderate voters Powell often articulates how many of them feel.

Now Powell, in an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria for Sunday’s “GPS” program, is doing it again, making two points in public that will make independent, centrist and moderate voters nod their heads:

1. The GOP should be more inclusive.
There’s nothing wrong with being conservative. Conservatism can be a big umbrella. The party should stop shouting and start listening.

2. Does the Republican party REALLY have to keep listening to conservative Rush Limbaugh, who could never be confused with a consensus and broad-base coalition builder?


CNN reports:

The Republican party must stop “shouting at the world” and start listening to minority groups if it is to win elections in the 21st century, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday.

In an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria for Sunday’s “GPS” program, President Bush’s former secretary of state said his party’s attempt “to use polarization for political advantage” backfired last month.

“I think the party has to take a hard look at itself,” Powell said in the interview, which was taped Wednesday. “There is nothing wrong with being conservative. There is nothing wrong with having socially conservative views — I don’t object to that. But if the party wants to have a future in this country, it has to face some realities. In another 20 years, the majority in
this country will be the minority.”

According to CNN, Powell said Republicans need to try to see what is in the “hearts and minds” of minority voters such as African-American, Hispanic and Asian voters, “and not just try to influence them by… the principles and dogma.”

He’s calling on the party to do some serious self examination:

“I think the party has to stop shouting at the world and at the country,”Powell said. “I think that the party has to take a hard look at itself, and I’ve talked to a number of leaders in recent weeks and they understand that.” Powell, who says he still considers himself a Republican, said his party should also stop listening to conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

“Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh?” Powell asked. “Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?”

The question about Limbaugh — which would also include Sean Hannity and some others — is not a trivial one. During campaign 2008 there were several instances where losing Republican Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain seemed to make decisions at variance with how he behaved in past campaigns — decisions that seemed to be in line with what the conservative talk show hosts who originally considered McCain anathema were loudly demanding. McCain seemed to spend a lot of his time trying to woo the Republican party’s base. And conservative talk radio is a kind of gathering point for many partisan Republican conservatives.

The bottom line is whether the GOP can extricate itself from being such an integral part of the talk radio political/media culture which doesn’t seek consensus and cooperation as much as it seems to arouse emotions via hot-button issues and outrage-tinged rhetoric. Talk radio hosts can’t get ratings talking about programs and solutions: they must arouse passions to attract and hold audiences and deliver them to advertisers. The best — such as Limbaugh — are also talented broadcasters and know how to do just that.

This has fit in well with Karl Rove’s strategy of mobilization elections, where the main goal was to get out the party’s base by making them feel the election was critical to their party’s and the nation’s future. Rove’s sometimes successful political formula was outgrowth of the 1960s political strategy used so well by Richard Nixon.

The problem with that strategy as a long term one is that it slams shut doors so that groups that are excluded by often angry, red-meat rhetoric don’t feel they have a place…and in 2008 some of these groups walked right into the open arms of Barack Obama and the Democrats for a big, fat hug.

Powell isn’t arguing for the Republican party to become a moderate party — just a party that values building bridges and expanding its coalition, instead of demonizing or ignoring groups not already in its winning coalition.

Rush, Sean and the others can’t get mega ratings by appealing to diverse ideologies and viewpoints. But the GOP can win more votes and enhance its image if it tries to do just that — and if the party is more appealing to the country’s center. By appealing to the center, it can help define the center; in election 2008 it was left behind by the center.

  • AustinRoth
    You know, I have listened to Rush maybe a total of 10 times in my entire life, but man, it is getting so ridiculous litening they way people try to treat him, and Rove, as the boogieman.

    The Republican party has real problems, but it isn't Rush. It is a lack of true leadership.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Joe, you have identified exactly the conundrum Conservatives find themselves in. While, responsible conservatives would like to appeal more to the center, to be more inclusive, the likes of Rush Limbaugh can continue to make big bucks by ,as Colin Powell says, appealing “to [the Republicans'] lesser instincts rather than [Republicans'] better instincts”

    As long as Limbaugh and his ilk keep raking in their millions from those "lesser instincts" (Powell's words), not much is going to change.
  • meB
    Please General! You turned your back on a moderate to suport a radical member of the other side. You abandioned your fellow military officer and a gentleman for what.? Now you want back in... because you won't be the only repblicn in Barry's cabinet, maybe. Forget it, sir. If you ask me, The GOP will be back if they sick to the conservative principals and don't deviate to the middle. Minority groups will catch on when there is a leader who can eloquently expalin why the constituion and conservative values, are their interest as well.. He's not on the radar yet......any suggestions?
  • superdestroyer
    Maybe Powell did not notice, but the Bush Adminsitration tried the big spending, racial pandering, compassionate conservatism and it did not work. All conservatvies received for supporting a non-conservative Repubicans is higher taxes in the future, bigger deficits, more government, open borders, and a more intrusive government.

    Now Powell wants to double down on the idiotic idea of Democratic-lite. Powell is more out of touch than Rush is. Pandering to blacks and Hispanics means abandoning any pretense of being conservative and means that Powell just wants Repubicans to be a brand that will change with the times and pander to whoever needs to be pander to to win.

    Maybe the Republicans would be better off paying less attention to quota blacks who jumped on the Republican bandwagon for careerist reasons and then jumped off for racial reasons.
  • kritt11
    Joe is exactly right. I've been trying to make this point all along on some other threads-- but some conservative always comes on and says that the GOP will REALLY become extinct if it becomes too much like the Democrats.

    Under the Rove strategy, Republicans have united their party on issues that matter greatly to a few, but not much or at all to the rest of us. The last election was lost because they did not know how to address the current economic downturn and its effect on the middle and lower classes.

    Picking divisive issues necessarily angers key segments of the population who then take their revenge at the polling booths. The best example of that was McCain's failure among Hispanic voters who blamed Republicans for xenophobic immigration policies- even though McCain himself favored immigration reform.

    I would like to be able to vote for a non-ideological Republican like Powell, David Gergen, or Bobby Jindahl. But the GOP wants to run candidates like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.

    As long as the Republicans kowtow to the social conservatives they will continue to lose moderates and independents. That means that unless Obama does something really stupid or is involved in a massive corruption scheme- he will probably win reelection in 2012.
  • AustinRoth
    I cannot believe someone was so offended by my remark about the Republican Party needing leadership, rather than focusing on media figures, as the way for the party to get better that they felt the need to mark me down.

    Just goes to prove that too many of you are fixated on Rush = Devil.
  • Kathryn
    Look, if Rush (and it's not just him Austin, that was Joe's point) was content to play a gadfly type role like John Stewart, we wouldn't be having this conversation. However, he, Anne Coulter, Hannity, the National Review, Bill O'Reilly and the rest of Fox news are constantly drawing lines in the sand and constantly saying they won't accept a nominee unless the nominee was ok with torture, blamed the divorce rate on gays, believed that the Bible is the last word in science and believed a tax rate of zero will close the deficit.
    Superdestroyer, yes BushGOP is pro-big government but pro-big government intrusion. Erosion of civil liberties and invasion of bedrooms is not moderate. Most conservatives, like the Club for Growth only define big government in terms of tax cuts. If you spy on your nation's citizens but offer tax cuts to the top percent, you are by their definition, not a "big government" conservative. If you are a so-con, big government, if it involves nanny-state commands, like forcing women who were raped to go through a pregnancy, seems to be fine. So don't try to pretend that the GOP has attempted to be moderate. Statism and Christianism are big government but they are the opposite of moderation.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    It wasn't your comment about them needing leadership but your thinking that because you don't listen to him he doesn't hold a great deal of influence with much of the core Republican base, AR. It just doesn't hold up.
  • AustinRoth
    Jim - Your constant need to reflect your biases onto my comments is getting tiresome. I don't mind being challenged on what I do say, but I do mind having to defend what people want me to have said so they can attack me.

    I was not and did not say because I don't listen to him, he does not have influence when I said I have listened to him very little. I was just making the point I am not a Rush fan, and was not defending him in particular.

    It doesn't change my point, though. Rush or not, Ann, Hannity, etc., the real issue is not people like them in the media. It is the lack of leadership within the party, the lack of vision. At most, Rush and his cohorts are a symptom or a bellwether, but not a source, of the problems in the Republican party.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    Rush and the pundits are what passes for leadership in the current GOP. The base follows them and agrees with them. This is the nature of what currently passes for both Republicanism and conservatism in this country. The Republican media is a reflection of the party, both its membership and its leadership.
  • AustinRoth
    Jim - you are now agreeing with me, it seems, which is good. :-)

    Leadership does not follow the base - it takes them where they need to go. The media is a reflection of the base, and LACK of leadership, which was my point.

    No party should be driven by the base or media. It was the failure point for the Democrats for years, and it is the failure point for Republican now.

    Take all the pundits off the air, and nothing will change. To get out of the woods, so to speak, Republicans do not need to worry one whit about Rush and such; they need to find strong leadership.
  • @AustinRoth - Well, that's the idea - as long as Rush Limbaugh has the ear of 20 million base Republicans (as he claims), the Republican party will go nowhere fast. We can debate about causality - whether Rush is responsible for keeping the party behind, or whether people listen to him out of laziness and lack of a better example, or some of both - but one way or another Rush's continued commercial success means Republicans will have a hard time getting out of these woods.
  • kritt11
    Excellent point, davigoli!

    Limbaugh used to be considered a wingnut kook, that almost no one listened to. After Clinton was elected people began listening in earnest. His audience grew by leaps and bounds during the Bush 43 years- to the point that Rove faxed RNC talking points to him, and he was called to the WH with other conservative hosts on more than one occasion to help get out the word. Many conservatives see him for what he is a --- party hack-- but many others would never question anything he said.

    When Chuck Hagel was recently interviewed he said that Rush and others like him are ruining the Republican party. And in truth conservative talk radio hosts are quite capable of drumming up citizen outrage- as they recently have on the immigration issue and on the Dubai ports issue. Any Republican who works with Democrats is crucified on those shows, and almost every Democrat is portrayed as ultra liberal , socialist or communist. How can that possibly help us unite as a nation or the GOP regain its standing in national politics?
  • Jim_Satterfield
    davigoli beat me to it. It's a chicken and the egg question. And kritt is right about how the bile spewed by the Republican media works against having a nation that can work together towards anything. When they make compromise an obscenity they make governing effectively a virtual impossibility.
  • kritt11
    Jim-- Your last sentence should be tattoed on the forehead of every partisan politician who has obstructed progress in dealing with the massive problems Americans are facing.
  • jeff_pickens
    Although, (and I agree with the flow of the conversation here,) Glenn Greenwald has some surprising things to say about bipartisanship that I think makes a lot of sense, and my hope for our new Congress is not necessarily "agreement" on issues, but government processes put back in place, and genuine debate and dialogue and reason and evidence as virtues. Maybe that's a pipe dream.

    Here's Glenn's article from Nov 18th:

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/...
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC