A black Republican is like a Yugo: Not seen very often and all it takes is one look to see how limited their power is. Some might argue that Condoleezza Rice is an exception and cite the names of other blacks that have served in the Bush Administration. Stokely Carmichael referred to such presence as “powerless visibility.” For as long as I can remember, blacks have considered the Republican Party as racist and elitist. But this viewpoint is not as prevalent as it once was as more blacks—particularly those who consider themselves Christians—are jumping on the GOP bandwagon. Many would like to back a black candidate like Rice, Colin Powell or Alan Keyes.

While their Democrat counterparts—Jackson, Sharpton and Moseley-Braun—may be better known, black Republicans are making headway in the Party’s hierarchy. Moreover, the Republican Party in general, is making inroads in the black community, which could spell trouble for the Dems in 2008 and 2012.

I. COLIN POWELL: WILL HE BE THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT?

Colin Powell was Born April 5, 1937 in the Bronx, New York City. Powell was a military man for 35 years along with being National Security Advisor under President Ronald Reagan. He was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1989-93) and became Secretary of State in 2001 under George W. Bush.

Powell broke military barriers, which is especially impressive when early in his Army career he received negative performance reviews from General John Hudachek. The General questioned Powell’s abilities as a leader and said that he was unworthy of promotion. Those close to Powell say it was a matter of ego as opposed to an honest assessment of Colin’s military knowledge.

Powell later served in Vietnam as an advisor where he was decorated for bravery. His biography in Wikipedia states, “During the Vietnam War, Powell, as deputy assistant chief of staff at the Americal (the 23rd Infantry Division) with the rank of Major, (Powell) was charged with investigating a detailed letter by Tom Glen (a soldier from the 11th Light Infantry Brigade), which backed up rumored allegations of the My Lai massacre. Powell's response was largely seen as a cover-up; he wrote: ‘In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent’."

So he “bent” the truth. But Robert Parry and Norman Solomon further push the notion that Powell is untrustworthy by writing, “An enduring image of the Persian Gulf War is the picture of the two generals...a politically savvy chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Powell) and the gruff field commander (Schwarzkopf). Powell represented the interests of a political leadership that hungered for a clear military victory to erase the painful memories of America's defeat in Vietnam. Schwarzkopf and other commanders on the front lines argued for careful planning and, if possible, a settlement that would force Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait without costing the lives of American soldiers. These conflicting priorities even led Powell to shirk from presenting to President Bush a last-minute plan that Schwarzkopf thought might have averted the ground war...But faced with Bush's obvious desire for the ground war, Powell substituted a different proposal that made the fighting inevitable.”

This from the man who once made the comment, “There's no longer just the United States versus the Soviet Union, but the whole West and international community against the whole whatever-you-want-to-call-it. And so in my job especially—and I'm considered the multi-lateralist—multi-lateralism means finding areas of compromise.” But before the initiation of “Desert Storm” he had an opportunity to compromise in Iraq, and chose military action over diplomacy. Some might argue that it was not so much his call as it was his attempt to appease President George H.W. Bush.

Powell attempts to defend his actions in his book, “My American Journey”: "President Bush was in a bind. After the expenditure of $60 billion and transporting half a million troops 8,000 miles, Bush wanted to deliver a knock-out punch to the Iraqi invaders in Kuwait. He did not want to win by a TKO that would allow Saddam to withdraw with his army unpunished and intact."

Schwarzkopf counters, “There were guys (in the Bush administration) who had seen John Wayne in ‘The Green Berets’, they'd seen ‘Rambo’, they'd seen ‘Patton’ and it was very easy for them to pound their desks and say, 'By God, we've got to go in there and kick ass! Got to punish that son of a bitch!' Of course, none of them was going to get shot at. None of them would have to answer to the mothers and fathers of dead soldiers and Marines."

Powell’s basic tenets of war are: Troops should be sent into conflict only where there is a clear national interest and an exit strategy. They should also be sent in overwhelming numbers or not at all - and only when success is assured. And he states, "When we go to war, we should have a purpose that our people understand and support. We should mobilize the country's resources to fulfil that mission and we should go on to win.” This worked during Desert Storm. The ground “war” lasted just over four days.

Despite his reputation as an astute military man, Powell’s service to Bush is seen as that of a “buffer,” The phrase “powerless visibility” applies and is described in The Black Commentator by Earl Ofari Hutchinson: “From all outward appearances, they (Rice and Powell) didn’t just explain and promote Bush policies; they were also key players in making those policy decisions. But when former Bush counter-terrorism expert Richard Clarke in testimony before the 9/11 Commission virtually dumped blame for the Bush administration’s September 11 intelligence failings on Rice, that was the first public hint that her vaunted decision-making role in the Bush administration may be much less than it seems. Now there’s the equally damning charge by the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward that Bush ignored Powell’s cautionary advice not to attack Iraq, and when he did attack didn’t tell him beforehand.”

II. POWELL’S CRITICS

Colin Powell was challenged by Harry Belafonte who said, “There's an old saying in the days of slavery. There are those slaves who lived on the plantation, and there were those slaves who lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master. Colin Powell was permitted to come into the house of the master.” The criticism was harsh and in an appearance on the Larry King Show Belafonte attempted to backpedal — to a point.

“This was never meant to be a personal attack on Colin Powell's character. I do believe that the policies that have been expressed by the (George W. Bush) administration he serves are less than honorable…Where is Colin Powell's conscience? In a time when the world is getting ready to go up in flames in a war that's hugely ill-advised, you know. Today we are going to go after Iraq. You know, where do we go next, after Iran? And then, when our present friends fall out of favor with us, do we go after Pakistan?”

George Curry editor of Emerge magazine asks, “If African-Americans don't critique African-American leaders, who should?" But the attacks were from the left and many contend were unfounded.

Powell, like Alan Keyes and Condoleezza Rice stresses the importance of building strong families, particularly in the inner cities. Powell states, "In this richest nation on earth we still have not solved the problems of poverty, hunger or health care or adequate housing, all of which tear away at the roots of strong families.”

Yet, it is as if Republicans are afraid to address or compete for the votes of those in the inner cities. Black Republicans have an uphill fight to be sure. Powell has a different sort of problem. While not exactly posing as a “Republicrat”, he does have crossover appeal which many thought would make him a viable third-party candidate in 1996. Rumors swirled that Ross Perot of United We Stand (a political misnomer) actively recruited Powell, but was rebuffed.

By 2000 Powell’s clout in the Bush administration was beginning to wane. In 2002, a profile on Powell broadcast by the British Broadcasting Network (BBC) stated as much. “As the administration expressed alarm over Baghdad's arsenal in 2002, the Secretary of State (Powell) urged caution and at times seemed at odds with his cabinet colleagues. Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld argued for early military intervention, but Mr Powell called for United Nations weapons inspections as a ‘first step’, to assess Iraq's weapons industry.”

Powell explains that the basis of the friction between the U.S. and countries in the Middle East goes beyond Islam Vs. Christianity, or the issue of weapons of mass destruction. “They've allowed themselves to be stuck.” Powell says. “They haven't been educating their people. They have regimes that have essentially been status quo regimes. They think, ‘Hey, we're doing okay, let's be friends with the Americans and the Europeans, but let's not emulate them.’ And so there's been too much political stagnation throughout the Arab world, and they don't have the kind of intellectual curiosity or entrepreneurial drive or spirit that we have, and they don't have the political system with which to do all that. Why can't they do it inside their countries? Because the political systems constrain them…if you are going to be economically successful you can't really constrain your people too much. Your people are the ones who are going to make it happen for you.”

Once Powell was nearing the end of his first term as Secretary of State, there were rumors that he no longer held the President’s ear. Bush seemed rather nonchalant about the ordeal. It appeared that Powell had lost credibility with allies and those supporters he had in the Democratic Party. Fred Kaplan writes, "The decline of Powell's fortunes is a tragic tale of politics: so much ambition derailed, so much accomplishment nullified. From the start of this presidency, and to a degree that no one would have predicted when he stepped into Foggy Bottom with so much pride and energy, Powell has found himself almost consistently muzzled, outflanked, and humiliated by the true powers—Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.”

It is this sort of back-biting and guttersniping that may have turned Powell off to the idea of seeking the Republican nomination; this despite his strong polling numbers and high approval ratings. A Powell candidacy would have been expected to draw strong independent support. However Powell, always the diplomat, refused to blame his downfall on others. He retired without fanfare saying, "Now that the election is over the time has come for me to step down as secretary of state and return to private life...I think we've accomplished a great deal."

“The Republican Party must always be the party of inclusion,” he says. “The Hispanic immigrant that became a citizen yesterday must be as precious to us as a Mayflower descendent. The descendent of a slave or struggling miner in Appalachia must be as welcome and must find as much appeal in our party as in any other party or in any other American life. It is our diversity that has made us strong. Yet our diversity throughout our American history has also been a source of discrimination which we as guardians of the American dream must rip out branch and root.”

Some would argue that Powell’s words were lost on Republican comrades.

Coming Up: Keyes, Condi and other Candidates

Timothy N. Stelly, Sr. is a 46-year old novelist and e-zine columnist residing in Pittsburg, CA.

• The Biggest Shopping Day of The Year vs. AdBusters


• Smoke and Mirrors


• Dear America


• Watch What You Say!


• The Balance of Lives


• A Mississippi Murder After Emmett Till


• Israel Must Be Wiped Off the Map - Origins of Treasongate


• Liberals Just Cant Help Showing Their Bigoted Stripes


• Democracy, Political Dialogue, & Biblical Aspects of the Mid-East Crisis


• Aid for Africa?