I can see the next RNC now, he and Meghan McCain on the floor cheering for each other.

Welcome to the new & improved Moderate GOP! Guaranteed to lose every time!

Join the RedState Strike Force

Republicans need THEIR version of Howard Dean!

I get that strong so-cons should feel welcome and supported in the Republican Party. That’s not the same thing as saying that the RNC chair must be a litmus-test so-con, is it?

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the teeny-tiny tent!

(Okay, maybe a little strong, but hopefully you can appreciate how … oh so very Kos-like … some, but not all, of the criticism of Steele sounds)

This is not really a surprise to those of us who supported Blackwell (so, here it is: We TOLD you so!).

But this guy is such a disaster it’s not even funny.
He MUST go.

And if he doesn’t go, the RNC (and pretty much all the other national Republican electoral committees) can kiss the grassroots good bye.

The truth is, we don’t need these guys any way - we can directly fund conservative candidates ourselves nowadays without any “help” from the committees.

The national Republicans, and many of the same officeholders (see: The Senate) are a joke. We need to see all of their heads on a proverbial pike.

As party chairman you don’t wade into an issue that potentially divides the party and could alienate a huge chunk of the base. Why does he keep getting himself goaded into these liberally slanted issue questions? You can personally believe what you want, but as spokesman for the party you need to figure out a way to reframe the question or answer diplomatically in a way that respects one portion of the base. An experienced GOP politician should know that any reporter or interviewer has a liberal bias and is looking for ways to discredit you or raise internal conflict within the party. How many times does Lucy have to pull the football away before GOP politicians realize that they are not our friends.

because honestly, where was the policy concern here with Michael Steele?

I thought the debate with the homosexual community was more to do with gay marriage and other issues, not on what homosexuality actually is.

I just don’t know how we’re going to get anywhere debating the why and how of something as sooooo unimportant to governance than if homosexuality is a choice or something that happens to you through emotional development or born that way.

And the best part is we’re allowing the media to make us look like we’re even more in the dark ages by having these type of interviews with Steele.

He should know better, but we should BE better than that.

…is playing Steele like a violin. And he’s singing their tune.

that the media and the democrats will NEVER like him. So stop trying to appease them. For our sake, I hope that someday is today.

Why can’t he talk about the things that (presumably) all conservatives - be they socially moderate or socially conservative - have in common. You know, the financial conservancy thing. When the tingly leg media asks him a question about gays or abortion or any of the other issues that will always divide us no matter what, he needs to smile and say something like “I don’t think that my opinion on this issue matters at all - we are concentrating on our primary principles of fiscal conservancy and smaller government.” I’m not a great (oral) communicator, but Steele supposedly is, so when is he going to start acting like it? The guy has been acting like a deer in the headlights for a long time. I read something the other day on AmericanThinker.com that made a WHOLE lot of sense. I’ll quote part here:

“The truth is that conservatives generally don’t have a single leader. They are united by their devotion to the rights of individual citizens, their adherence to traditional morality and the principles of republican government, and their opposition to socialistic meddling with individual freedom. But within that framework of belief, they tolerate and even encourage a diversity of views about specific issues and approaches.

Therefore, no one person can be called the “voice” of Republicans, because they tolerate a broad range of opinions about many issues. No one person can be called “the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party” because that role belongs to the conservative-moderate majority of the American people.

Even the most charismatic conservative leaders, like Ronald Reagan, considered themselves first among equals and were open to criticism and debate about policies. We must remember that we did not have a single Founding Father but a group of more than a dozen who, with much public discussion and compromise, collectively hammered out our Constitution and laws.”

(From AmericanThinker.com, Paul Shlichta, 3/11/09)

Join the RedState Strike Force

I have not sent them a dime since the immigration debacle. Last year their
letters asking for money made me so angry, I continually wrote them back to
inform them how out of touch they were. And we were not small donors when
we were sending in checks.

I will continue to send my donations to more worthy organizations. The RNC
has not earned it.

And that is his biggest problem.

When your are speaking to anybody in the press you are speaking for the party, not yourself or your personal beliefs. You job is to fund raise and be the voice of the party, more specifically the platform.

Quit engaging like these are personal interviews…they’re not, they are interviews of the Chairman of the Party.

We didn’t hire you to sell yourself…We hired you to sell Republican ideals and principles.

Get to work.

[sigh] I had such high hopes for this guy.

The only thing I have left to wonder is why we even bother putting our faith in any party. I’m really really really tired of settling.

What he SHOULD have said is there is no independent, true scientific/genetic finding on the issue. If necessary, acknowledge that there has been some advocacy faux science with extensive lobbying efforts to try to prove that it is not a choice, but that should not be considered truly scientific. I would also comment that the canard that “why would anyone CHOOSE to be a homosexual when homosexuals are so “mistreated”" is not scientific evidence to prove anything.

Personally, I would ask Mr. Steele and others regardless of party affiliation if they truly believe homosexuality is not a choice, are they saying that as one can not choose to be black or white, the same applies to engaging in conduct that differentiates one as a homosexual? The truth is one can decide today to go engage in homosexual conduct that would define one as a homosexual. Until the day that someone at the age of x can say “i have decided to no longer fight my urges, I am now a white female (whereas I was from all appearances prior a black male)”, then the answer to that question is quite obvious.

Steele shouldn’t be flogged for his view on homosexuality. (In fact reason suggests that he’s right - why would people sign up for a lifestyle that can get them killed?) The beef I have with Steele is that this is off-message. The message that needs to be shared is one that will resonate with blue states and red states. This is the message that Erick outlined so well.

The Republican Party is the party of individual freedom, and the party that works to assure equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

I know this gets out moderate-Republicans in a tizzy, but since you brought up that no one would choose a “lifestye”; it is obvious that peope choose a lifestyle, sometimes deemed illegal by most or all states, that lead them to personal destruction all of the time. And, if no one would “choose” anything that would cause them harm, including perhaps “death’, then why should we look down upon, much less incarcerate someone for actions that clearly can not be a choice since no one would freely “choose” a lifestyle that could lead to personal destruction or even death.

Man, this is getting ridiculous.

Steele … please, for the love of God or at least the GOP, just stay away from the media for a while … PLEASE!!

I agree he’s taking some chances by being too personal…. time will tell if this strategy makes any sense. Aside from some non-sensical questions and goofy responses, here are some of my takeways from the “interview”…

He believes in individual initiative, not government interference.

He has an incredibly inspiring personal story about his mother not taking govt assistance. I love this story and he is very correct to refer to it again and again. This lends massive authenticity to his political beliefs because it’s so personal, touching and true. People vote emotion, and this one is a winner to get folks excited about what self-reliant conservatism has to offer. PRIDE!

Reagan is one of his top heroes and political role models.

He is deeply skeptical of B.O.

He recognizes there were only 36 African Americans at the RNC convention out of 4000 attendees. Is that really true? That’s less than 1%. If so it’s very shameful and truly humiliating. If the party can’t achieve more diverse attendance than that we are complete failures. If we cannot demonstrate that conservative principles appeal to a more diverse constituency there is serious trouble ahead.

I initially supported him as chairman. The man is a phenomenal campaigner and organizer when he was the head of the Maryland GOP was the only time within the last fifty years that the Maryland GOP had any life. Moreover, he did have a reputation and track record of being a coservative who could reach out to moderates: which IS a good thing.

But now he is sounding more and more like a moderate himself. Which, to me, is bad.

It is one thing to be a conservative and be able to present your conservative message in a non-threatening way that gets people to agree and support you. Just taking the social issues as an example — and indeed, I can just as easily use fiscal and foreign policy issues as example, too — I myself have several friends who are pro-abortion and/or pro-gay rights but I can get them to support conservative candidates because of the ground we have in common. They no I am strongly pro-life and pro-family but again, we can agree and support one another on our common goals and principles.

But it is something completely different to water down your own conservative values in order to appear more attractive to others. That, I fear, is what Michael Steele is now doing. That is, if he truly shares conservative values in the first place.

I know this is going to upset some of our more economically conservative Republicans, but hey! we are a big tent. And I am sure there is at least a % of Republicans who don’t mind a very high top income tax rate, so let’s not risk alienating them!

Of course, Mr. Steele never said such a thing, but when I hear/read that a top GOP operative comes out reciting the MSM homosexual agenda line and us little “more socially conservative” Republicans are supposed to shrug our shoulders and “soldier” on, it is the same as asking our “more economically conservative” members to raise taxes substantially or our “more national security conservative” Republicans to go along with giving up on the war on terror.

I believe a winning formula for the GOP is three-fold (and the rest can be “big tent”) in NO particular order:

1. Support for lower taxes, smaller federal goverment and less federal government spending.
2. Support for a strong military that fights to WIN, that is used professionally and given all of the tools necessary to WIN.
3. Support for traditional values, including but not limited to, opposition to every item on the homosexual agenda, including marriage, civil unions, and adoptions.

When we have a chariman who veers off the path of one of those 3, we have a problem, and one is no less important than the other.

I think we all need to calm down. I know we’re in a crisis situation and there’s a lot at stake but when emotions run high, as evidently they are here on this thread, we say a lot of things and do a lot of things that we might later regret.

IOW, we’re starting to sound like liberals. Sorry to put it so bluntly but if we step back and look at what we’re saying and how we’re reacting, we ought to be ashamed of ourselves.

No, Steele isn’t doing exactly what we’d like to see going on right now but it’s early days, yet, and he hasn’t learned that not all news and other press are as nice to Republicans as Fox. Heck, for all we know at this point, the article could have been edited to give just the impression it gave. IOW, to sow more seeds of discord they edited the article to have us all at each others’ throats.

What do his actions tell us? He can’t very well refuse to do interviews with liberal press… he’d never get any except with Fox once in a while. So, let’s focus on upcoming elections and how he works the RNC for that.

The only explanations besides *quisling* that I can think for repeated gaffes of such magnitude of would have to do with gross incompetence, diminished intelligence, substance abuse issues, or onset mental illness… but I keep coming back to quisling because of the timing and the circumstances.

I am totally and absolutely pro life and for a good moral life, and moral choices…however, to go after Michael Steele because he doesn’t believe that homosexuality is a ‘choice’ is over the edge…are there some who ‘choose’ to live a homosexual life style…sure, look at the clowns in San Francisco who invade Churches and perform sex acts on the street…and who push violently for gay rights…but there are millions of others who felt drawn to members of their own sex perhaps since childhood and then, little by little, began to be involved. Many try counseling and prayer and many practice sexual abstinence…there is absolutely no proof that homosexuality is a choice…many kids, when they begin to realize their homosexual tendencies, try to commit suicide…let us not judge…I don’t want homosexuality taught in schools as an alternative life style…and believe it or not, neither do the majority of silent homosexuals who are trying to live decent lives. Let us not judge homosexuals by their violent, out of control radical brethren…Christ said that we are to love one another AS HE HAS LOVED US…we all have faults and failings…we all sin…we all need mercy and forgiveness…we all need to help each other…I’m not a fan of Michael Steele but I agree with him on this issue…there is absolutely no proof that homosexuality is a choice…

We need to understand what Newt is trying to tell us. We cannot win without speaking to the middle and even some on the left. Obama was masterful at this. Obama never took a position without showing concern for the other sides position even knowing he would be an extremist leftist anyway.

Feb 2009
“We cannot and will not sustain deficits like these without end,” President Obama said to open the summit. “We are paying the price for these deficits right now.”

From that statement it almost seems Obama is fiscally responsible . OBAMA speaks to the center but rules from the left. Something we need to learn.

I share the Chairman’s view on this subject. But I’m not so tone deaf that I don’t know that this is one place I know what’s in the best interest of the party isn’t to tout this.

I’m not going to leave the Republican party because I disagree with them on gay rights. But if the Republican party becomes a gay rights supporter, the social conservatives will leave the party in droves.

It’s sad that Steele can’t see that.