Brent Scowcroft Neutral In Presidential Race

Former Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft, the onetime Bush 41 adviser, considers himself officially "neutral" in the presidential contest between Barack Obama and John McCain, and is willing to offer advice to either candidate, according to two independent sources familiar with Scowcroft's thinking.

That description of the former national security adviser's political loyalty conflicts with a Washington Post survey of campaign surrogates, which listed Scowcroft as part of McCain's retinue as recently as late 2007.

One longtime associate who requested anonymity said that Scowcroft's role advising McCain had been inflated in past reports.

"Scowcroft has an ongoing relationship with McCain that [started] before McCain was a candidate for president," the source told the Huffington Post. "Now that he is a candidate, he and Gen. Scowcroft talk from time to time. So there's no change in that pattern. He is not a formal adviser. Nor has he been. ... The daily phone calls regarding 'What's the issue of the day? What's the message on Iraq?' ... He never was engaged in that."

Still, the source confirmed that Scowcroft was not likely to endorse McCain in the future, and that Obama was just as welcome to solicit the former national security adviser's views. "Would he take Obama's call and talk to him about substance? Sure. But no, I would not expect him to come out and formally endorse Obama, or much less sign up with his campaign. But if Obama wants to talk [with Scowcroft] about the Middle East, Russia, China or whatever, he can."

The fact that such a foreign policy heavyweight in the GOP could sit out a presidential election, however, reflects the lingering tension between the "realist" camp of advisers, including Gen. Colin Powell, who advised President George H.W. Bush, and the neoconservative clique that gained influence during the tenure of Bush 43.

Rumors of a dramatic flip by some prominent realist Republican heavyweights have refused to die, however, as Barack Obama has occasionally hinted at his willingness to form a bipartisan cabinet if elected. Scowcroft has a position on Iran distinctly closer to that of Obama. On Wednesday, Time's Mark Halperin teased a "developing" report that "an organized effort is underway to get some big-name Republicans," including Scowcroft, to support Obama. A spokesperson for the Illinois Democrat refused any comment on Time's item.

Comments

[avraamjack]

03:51 PM on 07/24/2008

.
Wow.
.

[bdl0715]

12:06 PM on 07/24/2008

Doesn't this blow out of the water the MSM media contention that McCain is the foreign policy expert? Why are none of the other experts supporting him?

[JennyJay]

10:35 AM on 07/24/2008

Scrowcroft­, clearly sees the writing on the wall, and he ain 't supporting no dang loser. I am sure
if McCain were doing better in this race, Scrowcroft would be 1000% in McCain's camp. At this point,
there must be an awfully lot of Republican "weasels" trying to avoid this sinking ship.

[nirek]

10:24 AM on 07/24/2008

Sorry, I do not think either bush has been good for our country, especially 43 worst ever.

[ccmd]

09:28 AM on 07/24/2008

Welcome Obamacan. Welcome. =)

[masha2008]

02:58 AM on 07/24/2008

the realist republican­s must be worried of being dragged down by the rovian brand of republican politics. they should step up for pretty soon they will be lumped with them under a new definition of "republica­n", a group of people who revel and thrive in ignorance and fosters the baser instincts in humankind and would do anything to keep themselves in power; those who claim christiani­ty but who only have disdain for the poor.

[whatsthatsound]

07:50 AM on 07/24/2008

Yeah, I think you're right. I think those who you refer to as "realist republican­s" are aware of, and wary of, the guilt by associatio­n you refer to. Still, they did keep their mouths shut for eight long and disturbing years.....

[JohnFObama]

01:27 AM on 07/24/2008

Bush 41 and 43 are not that different. It's not as if the dad is good and the son is evil. I think they are both decent people at their core but their Presidency­s have been radically different. And what is the main difference­? 41 surrounded himself with realist foreign policy advisors, 43 surrounded himself with neocons. A Democrat Obama whitehouse combined with some realists from 41's whitehouse such as Scowcroft, Powell etc would be an ideal bi-partisa­n executive branch coalition.

[NotMcCain]

02:18 AM on 07/24/2008

41 and 43 are VERY different. Bush 1 was intelligen­t and had a good reason for the war against Iraq (which he waged utterly differentl­y) after Iraq invaded Kuwait. He was far more moderate than GWB, including appointing one of my favorite SC justices, David Souter.

Bush 1 won't go down in history as America's worst president ever. For a one-term president, he'll probably wind up ranked as "fairly good".

GWB, on the other hand, clearly has the lock on the "Worst Ever" title. Usually, if a president has poor foreign policy, he manages to do well domestical­ly or vice-versa­.

In Bush's case, he's done remarkably badly with every domestic area and his foreign policy is an unmitigate­d disaster, all the while (unlike Bush 1) invoking the Lord as his guide and inspiratio­n.

I just don't know how Bush 1 can stand to see what his offspring has done to this country.

[Ipanema]

08:30 AM on 07/24/2008

I don't think Bush, the first, was that hot either! Remember the Willie Horton shenanigan­s, proving that the old geezer would go to any extent to win an election with lies and distortion­s. They all belong to the Repug country club, anyway.

[1099]

10:02 AM on 07/24/2008

Bush 41 invaded Iraq for oil the same way Bush 43 did except he used the invasion of Kuwait as an excuse instead of weapons of mass destructio­n.

[bdl0715]

11:21 AM on 07/24/2008

Bush 41 was an excellent President when compared to 43.

Isn't it interestin­g that 2 military/f­oreign policy experts of the Bush 41 administra­tion, Scowcroft and Powell, both are not endorsing McCain? That should tell us all something.

[unionave]

12:54 AM on 07/24/2008

We allow the media to divert our attention from our deepest concerns . Rising prices on all our necessitie­s of life and job loss . During the primaries Obama was required to explain how and what he was going to do to fix our problems . McCain has only talked about military service and surges with plenty of mud slinging at Obama and the media never requires McCain to explain what or how he plans to fix our problems . The media mostly runs to look at Obama to ask him if the mud stuck or how does it feel . If the electorate can not see through this media charade we are going to be in more trouble than we were . Is our electorate that stupid ?

[Epijim]

07:06 AM on 07/24/2008

Is our electorate that stupid ?

In a nutshell: yes

[kellygrrrl]

12:51 AM on 07/24/2008

a ReThuglica­n with a moral compass and common sense?

I thought that species was extinct

[dukeitout]

11:55 PM on 07/23/2008

Brent Scowcroft is one of the most talented people out there and his advice and support should be solicited by Obama. I'm sure he would give him excellent advice. There is just no way I could see him supporting McCain because of McCain's extremely poor judgment on the Iraq war even though Scowcroft is a republican­. Scowcroft strongly opposed us invading Iraq in 2002. A decade earlier he was part of a team that intelligen­tly and flawlessly implemente­d Bush the elder's demolition of Saddam's aggression in the early 1990's. They had 9 objectives which they accomplish­ed and got the hell out. Junior, his necon friends and John McCain really screwed things up by invading Iraq in 2002.

[JLee]

12:49 AM on 07/24/2008

Scowcroft is a different, older-scho­ol breed of Republican­. He's of the breed the current incarnatio­n of the party is alienating in droves with its unholy alliance of far-right theology, madly reckless imperialis­tic policies, and an orgy of corporate looting. Non-fascis­t, non-author­itarian conservati­ves (see: Ron Paul) understand­ably recoil at what the party has become. This election year needs to be about reclaiming the Republican Party so it can be viable political opposition once again, and so that the Democratic Party can become more coherent in its policies.

[KYJurisDoctor]

11:34 PM on 07/23/2008

That says a lot about John McCain's chances, doesn't it?

[Ajegunle]

12:06 AM on 07/24/2008

LOL.

[wanj]

10:53 PM on 07/23/2008

To Brent ScareCrow-­--

No one person gives a rat's behind who you decide to advice or vote for. Get over yourself!

[jupitor]

11:38 PM on 07/23/2008

Your not in the loop of what this means to Mccain are you wanj? Scowcraft is a real repub heavy hitter. If he's not behind mccain 100%, and out batting for him, there's real trouble for the Repubs!

[wanj]

11:50 PM on 07/23/2008

Ok, maybe I missed the point.... At least I'm not ashamed to say I might have missed that ;-)

I just get pissed when I see someone who is actually having second thoughts about someone in his camp, debating about the other guy. Why can't he just come out and endorse O then if he's not sure about that idiot his party elected? The doubt to me makes me think he wants O to beg him for his endorsemen­t. That's what bothered me...

[ObserverinVancouver]

11:39 PM on 07/23/2008

You missed the point of this article, didn't you?

[wanj]

11:54 PM on 07/23/2008

He just NEEDs to come to camp O then... what's there to debate? He should just look at the gaffe machine that's McBush!

I also do concede that I might not be totally clued in on this man's power as well...

[ShamusNYC]

10:48 PM on 07/23/2008

Do you get the sense that when McB calls these guys they kind of treat it like getting a call from a really annoying, droning friend? Then pretend they're getting another call or static on the line or anything to get off the line?

[theone718]

10:40 PM on 07/23/2008

All I want to see is that Colin Powell endorsemen­t. Once that happens it will put the McCain camp on it's bum.

[akryan]

11:49 PM on 07/23/2008

the right would spin it by saying that powell only endorsed because he's black.

[JLee]

10:30 PM on 07/23/2008

The sane realist (i.e. non-neocon­, non-raving­) school of foreign policy experts would definitely be good additions to a Democratic administra­tion. It's time to get over ideologica­l policy-mak­ing, whether left-wing or right-wing­, especially in an area as vital to national interest as foreign policy. That's where the current administra­tion had it all wrong. All their policies were based on wishful thinking and baseless generaliza­tions, not a sober assessment of reality.

[Bitsko]

10:33 PM on 07/23/2008

I agree with you, but always remember the meaning of the phrase "the best and the brightest.­"