Tag: michael steele

Will Michael Steele not seek re-election?

There is a good deal of evidence suggesting it – Michael Steele is not canvassing for support, has no team in place to help him get re-elected RNC chair, and will have a conference call on Monday that many think will have his announcement that he won’t seek re-election – but at best it’s a suggestion, not a fact. Given the fiscal difficulties that the RNC is facing right now, it might be prudent for Steele to step aside and let somebody else take the reins. We’re going to need a strong focus on the twin categories of raising money and putting boots on the ground; so distractions at this point are not particularly welcome. And it would almost certainly be best if we had a clean break between the RNC of the past and the one of the future. Continue reading Will Michael Steele not seek re-election?

(Video) Steele: why isn’t Obama trying to get Corzine to drop?

Which is a question that has teeth in it, doesn’t it? Big, sharp, possibly racially-motivated teeth – given that the major difference between Governors Corzine and Paterson is more or less their respective skin colors.


)Sort of via the Hill, via Hot Air.)

Hey, the Democrats ask this sort of question all the time: since skin color’s so important to them generally, it seems only fair to check if it was important to them this time, too.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Steele to Democrats: You have the votes, and you won, remember?

So stop wasting everybody’s time with pretending that you want Republicans for anything but cover and pass your cursed health care rationing bill.

Actually, that’s pretty much what he said:

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele on Thursday dared Democrats to try a one-party push to overhaul the nation’s health care system.

Steele told reporters that he thinks if Democratic senators think they have the votes, they should try a tactic that would allow them to get around a bill-killing filibuster without the 60 votes usually needed. Steele said he didn’t think Democrats would do it because of potential voter backlash.

“Get it to the floor. Up or down, baby,” Steele said at a news conference at the state GOP headquarters. “Put it on the table. And if you don’t think you’ve got enough votes to get to 60, you’ve got the nuclear option. You’ve got 51.”

(Via Hot Air Headlines)

Democrats who are surprised by this shouldn’t be: this is the natural and inevitable result of the Democratic House leadership deciding to freeze out House Republicans in writing bills this session. That particular bit of hubris then means that we feel that we’re under no obligation to give the Democrats political cover for a blessed thing now – and if the Democrats are feeling upset over that, well, good. They should direct that upset towards the people who actually caused it – which is to say, Pelosi, Hoyer, Murtha, Waxman, Frank, Obey, and every other House leader who let their sense of entitlement and need for petty revenge override their good sense. Continue reading Steele to Democrats: You have the votes, and you won, remember?

A mild defense of Michael Steele’s non-involvement in the Tea Party movement.

Glenn Reynolds published a note from a reader indicating that the RNC is not referencing the Tea Party movement in its latest fundraising materials. This may have something to do with the fact that the Tea Party movement itself has no interest in bringing in the RNC:

With regards to stage time, we respectfully must inform Chairman Steel that RNC officials are welcome to participate in the rally itself, but we prefer to limit stage time to those who are not elected officials, both in Government as well as political parties. This is an opportunity for Americans to speak, and elected officials to listen, not the other way around.

Speaking as someone who is simultaneously a supporter of both the Tea Party movement and the GOP: the door swings both ways on this. If it is made clear that someone is not being invited to participate, it seems a bit unfair to object when they take you at your word. While I perfectly understand the desire of the Tea Party people to keep the GOP from taking over, unless the movement plans to actually start a third national party it’s going to have to come to at least an alliance with one of the two existing ones. And starting a third party right now will – at best – merely ensure that the Democrats will retain power for at least the next three election cycles. That works out to at least nine years of more-of-the-same.

We may not have nine more years. I’m of the opinion that three years would be two too many.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.