Dissing the Alamo (National Review columnist says Powell Should be Fired)

National Review Online ^ | David Frum

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Not going to happen, my friend. Powell is an American hero, right or wrong, and a black American hero in a Republican administration.

Bush will not, repeat, not fire him, no matter what.

He might, however, make it extremely uncomfortable behind the scenes.

[Mr. Lucky]

Whether we agree with his personal beliefs or not, Powell knows who his Commander-in-Chief is and he has more testosterone than all of the girlie men at National Review combined.

[Dems_R_Losers]

Come on, why would anyone believe anything written by Bob Woodward??? I haven't read a word of his latest trash and I don't plan to. I can form my own opinions of Colin Powell and anyone else without reading more fiction from the fevered imagination of Bob Woodward!

[Doctor Stochastic]

The real news in this article is that David Frumm considers Bob Woodward's reporting to be accurate.

[Hodar]

Question my source if you wish ... but Drudge had an article in which Bob Woodward gave voice to several thoughts that Condolesa Rice (appologies for misspelling) allegedly had, while she was watching TV alone. Wow ... Bob Woodward must be a fantastic reporter, reading minds of our country's highest officials; without even having to bother talking to them. With 'interviewing' skills such as this, I tend to dismiss his book as pure fiction.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I agree with Behind Liberal Lines that politically it would be virtually impossible for W to fire Powell.

Regarding your claim that Powell knows who his Commander-in-Chief is, the column seems to provide some strong counter-evidence, showing Powell maneuvering to undermine the President's policies.

[Zviadist]

He denigrates Rice, snidely observing that “she had had difficulties” keeping up with what Bush was doing.

This is hilarious. Everyone knows Condi is not the brightest banana in the bunch. Now we know that even Powell knows it! Ha ha ha!

[Burkeman1]

You are correct. Powell cannot be fired. But Bush could "fire" him from his duties by assigning them to others while making Powell do idiot work - like attend funerals or personally perform minor diplomatic duties.

[Zack Nguyen]

You are right, Bush will never fire Powell. The media would insinuate (or perhaps just outright say) that Bush is a racist for firing him.

Some have maintained that Bush likes having Powell around for a contrarian opinion, that Bush has things "under control" and listens to Powell's dissenting view to placate the media and hard left, or that Powell is being used as some kind of public relations gambit.

I cannot believe that to be true. Powell believes himelf to be bigger than the Administration. Powell's viewpoints of the War on Terror conflict with the viewpoints of defense specialists in the Administration.

Never hire someone you can't fire.

[Cicero]

David Frum's credulity is showing. I don't doubt that Woodward found leakers at the State Department, which is a nest of liberals some of whom probably go all the way back to Harry Truman, and of which the latest layer consists of clintonoids. But it's extremely unlikely that any of this stuff came direct from Colin Powell, or that it accurately represents what he thinks.

[Zviadist]

My wife and I took the Acela train from Washington to New York City on Sunday morning. My wife, who is not quite so convinced of her personal invulnerability as I am, was more than a little disturbed by the total absence of any security procedures. The conductors barely glanced at our tickets; they never asked for any ID

Oh boo hoo hoo, I guess your sheep of a wife would be thrilled if our government issued Soviet internal passports, so that the authorities could keep track of her every movement. Unbelievable how quickly stupid Americans like this embrace authoritarianism.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I'm interested to see the focus in many responses on Woodward's credibility or lack thereof.

Beyond the details from Woodward that Frum cites, I believe the record is fairly clear that, even dating back to his service to GWHB, Powell has been a relative dove, and one tending to pursue his own agenda.

[Zviadist]

Powell knows who his Commander-in-Chief is and he has more testosterone than all of the girlie men at National Review combined.

Amen!

[CaptainK]

"In the Woodward piece, Powell scorns the president for his “Texas, Alamo macho.”

Did Woodward received this information from Powell's mouth or was it transferred via telepathy?

[Aquinasfan]

I said it then and I'll say it again, you can't trust the judgement of an abortionphile. Ever. Period.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I'm actually surprised by the amount of support Powell receives from a number of posters on this thread.

I simply don't see much of anything that Powell does to help the President. In foreign affairs, he often seeks to undermine him.

Domestically, I suppose the theory is that Powell's presence in the administration should help the GOP's "outreach" efforts. But I haven't seen that reflected at the polls. Instead, black voters still seem to be supporting Dem candidates by the same overwhelming margins as ever.

So where is Powell's contribution? In fairness, I have heard reports that he did work successfully behind the scenes to line up support for the UN Resolution.

[Common Tator]

National Review.

When it comes to believing the Bush Administration or the Washington Posts Woodward, NATIONAL REVIEWS SWEARS ALLEGIANCE to the proven LIAR BOB WOODWARD.

Typical.

In his book on Iran Contra Woodward claimed to have direct quotes from CIA director William Casey. At the date and time Woodward claimed to have interviewed Casey, Casey was comatose on his death bed in the intensive care ward at the hospital. NO VISITORS WERE ALLOWED.

Woodward is a proven liar. National Review believes Woodard. That tells you all you need to know about National Review.

My favorite issue of National Review was the issue just before the 1980 election. It went to great lengths to show how bad the Reagan campaign had been run. National Review predicted a great re-election victory for Jimmy Carter because of all the inept mistakes Reagan had made. Reagan won in a landslide of such proportions that Jimmy Carter conceded 10 minutes after the polls closed on the east coast.

Political Scientists have spent the years since 1980 studying the 1980 Reagan campaign. It is considered the best example of how to do it right.

National Reveiw has always been clueless.

[HairOfTheDog]

Powell has been a relative dove, and one tending to pursue his own agenda.

You seem to not understand the role of Secretary of State. His JOB is maintaining diplomacy and keeping communication open with the other side until the minute the president decides diplomacy will not work anymore. Powell is the "good cop"... the one that can still get a seat at any table. We need a "good cop" and a "bad cop" in international relations... and Dubya has both in Powell and Rumsfeld.

Powell is performing the job that has been given to him, with the full blessing of the president. How many times does Bush have to say that?