Saturday, January 31, 2009
|
|
What Steele Means for the GOP
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
5:55 PM
|
Regardless of what you think about Michael Steele, it is clear that his election sends a message that the GOP is, at least, serious about change.
In my estimation, after eight years of George W. Bush, that is an important first step.
Early news coverage has been very positive. Of course, his long-term effectiveness as a leader will be the true test. But there is no doubt the GOP has symbolicly turned the page. This will be very interesting to watch...
|
|
"I'm a "social/fiscal conservative",...I guess you could call me a "Paleo-con",....which has nothing to do with RINOism."
Tazzmax makes my point. |
|
I'm a "social/fiscal conservative",...I guess you could call me a "Paleo-con",....which has nothing to do with RINOism.
Rejection of tax funded abortion,...yep.
Foreign policy against radical Islam,...yep.
Isolationism/nativism,....we are not the worlds' "dumping grounds" for undesirables, we are not the worlds' welfare agency or police dept., we do not owe the world with unFAIR trade policies that destroys jobs here in America,....
Lower taxes and less govt.....Yes.
Complete rejection of all illegal immigration,....YES!
Most legal immigration,....yes,....we are being flooded with "turd world ingrates" that are sucking up tax revenue,...all for the sake of PC social engineering and the country is overpopulated.
That is colonizing,....not immigration. |
|
"Steele has the opportunity to bring the RNC back to real conservative roots"
The trouble is that there isn't any agreement on what those roots ARE. Social conservationism? Fiscal conservationism? Absolute rejection of abortion? An aggressive foreign policy targeting Muslims? Isolationism? Complete rejection of all illegal immigration and most legal immigration? Lower taxes and smaller government?
Those are all fracture points within conservationism, across which you loudly call the other side RINOs. I guess you're all RINOs on this bus. |
|
"The red herring here is calling them entertainers instead of what they are: editorialists."
That's just a subset of entertainers. Comedians like Lewis Black and Jon Stewart are entertainers who do so by expressing their opinions about politics. The people you named, especially Coulter, Malkin, and Limbaugh, play for laughs; they're doing EXACTLY the same thing that Black and Stewart are doing.
"Some do their commentary in entertaining ways, but that does not make them entertainers."
If they cease to entertain their audience, they will lose their jobs. If they cease to editorialize, but continue to entertain by singing and dancing, they will still be employed. |
|
Steele has the opportunity to bring the RNC back to real conservative roots and get rid of the RINOs who've been killing the party for 20+ years.
If he doesn't bring the party back to conservatism, they can expect to be in the minority forever!
They need to learn that they can't "out liberal" the RATs! |
|
before you bleed to death, Scarlett.
A "brand", a "joke", a "media creation"?
"That's what Steele called President Obama during the election when the issue of race came up and what he called "white liberal guilt"."
There was nothing there to work with so the MSM did they best they could with what little was available to them. Obama the cipher.
|
|
that leftist/commie trolls AKA as "Fwankie, Muncky man, Harlot'o Scara, window dresser and the rest of their herd" continue with their tripe about how the RNC should be run! LMAO.
It really makes us "gun clingin Bible thumpers" happy that they are soooo concerned!
What would we do without them? |
|
|
The red herring here is calling them entertainers instead of what they are: editorialists. Some do their commentary in entertaining ways, but that does not make them entertainers. You will note that I refered to lefties and not you personally regarding ad hominems. But you used ad hominems in several of your posts today on blogs here at TH. Nice try, Bob. You are like Frank. You need to have a picture drawn for you before you 'get it'. |
|
"Calling Limbaugh et al 'entertainers' is another red herring tactic employed by the left."
Are you saying they aren't entertainers? In what sense? Do you have any argument that refutes my discussion of how they are entertainers? What else would you call them? If they cease to entertain, they lose their jobs, just as a truck driver loses his if he ceases to drive a truck.
"Interesting that lefties posting here prefer ad hominems"
An ad hominem argument on my part would consist of attacking YOU. I did no such thing. (I don't think you know what "red herring" means either, but we'll leave that.) |
|
|
OK. I see you are acting as an agent provocateur-as usual. Calling Limbaugh et al 'entertainers' is another red herring tactic employed by the left. Talk about thinking in unison. Thanks for the clarification though. Interesting that lefties posting here prefer ad hominems to 'thinking' why claiming they have moral high ground. LOL |
|
I wouldn't call a conservative movement, but a neocon movement. There is little, if anything, they are conserving. As for people like Limbaugh and the supremely ignorant Hannity, clowns indeed they are.
Alcohol and pot doesn't kill near as many brain cells as listening to them. |
|
"What was your point about entertainers?"
All of those people (Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.) will be successful and continue to be employed based on their ability to make their audience enjoy watching them. They are entertainers. They don't have to be logical, fair, intelligent, caring, or sympathetic, just entertaining. In fact, they're often more entertaining when they are the exact opposite of one or more of those things.
Politicians, on the other hand, should have all of those characteristics when they are in office. The right wing has entertainers as the dominant force in its politics; for that reason, the right wing is inherently unable to govern.
Shorter: the conservative movement is a clown car. |
|
Sorry. We are miscommunicating. I wasn't criticizing Steele. I was merely pointing out to the 'Reps' who complain (in quite bigoted terms) so much on blog sites about the socialcons and blame them for the Rep loses of late and name Limbaugh et al in particular for aiding and abetting and being one of the group they loath so much. Yet, they posted comments about how Steele is a 'moderate', which he isn't when you look at his positions on issues.
What was your point about entertainers?
|
|
"I used those particular people because they are so often referred to as emblematic of what is wrong"
So you intended your equating of Steele's views with theirs as a CRITICISM of Steele? Sorry, I didn't read it that way. |
|
|
I'm not sure what point you are making in your observation. I used those particular people because they are so often referred to as emblematic of what is wrong with the Rep party/conservatism by 'Rep' commenters here and on other sites, and why the Reps have been losing elections. |
|
"A comparison of Steele's positions with Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, Hannity and others charaterized as socialcons"
It's interesting that the standard of comparison for politicians is a bunch of people who are primarily entertainers. |
|
...the reality or the truth of events, it is always reassuring to find the usual, rabid left-wingers as always spewing anti-conservative hate speech. It is not only predictable, but in its very predictability reinforces our knowledge of these people. These emeperor's sycophantic minions are intolerant, rude, hate-filled, distasteful, illogical and willfully misguided.
The biggest irony is that they do not see themselves, for they are constantly projecting their essential qualities onto us! They are being so counterproductive here, yet they keep showing up. Why? Makes one logically assume they are tools of the GOP - a Rovian manifestation. Or else they are just plain psycho. |
|
Certainly Steele communication skills will be put to the test.
Black voters are never going to embrace social conservatives anyways as they were the most racist past of the GOP-that is before the evangelicals realized there were mormons sneaking around.
Steele certainly is an olive branch but who would have thought that blacks would be running the politics in this county's major parties-a first for both.
So even in spite of our devils we have managed to find our better angels. |
|
Stay strong Mr. Steele, as your name suggest. You have the right ideas and don't let anyone, especially any member of the media knock you down.
Sag |
|
Reading some of the comments by Reps here is puzzling. A comparison of Steele's positions with Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, Hannity and others charaterized as socialcons shows he matches up with their positions on everything except overturning Roe v Wade. On Roe his position is nuanced. Steele is Pro Life, but does not openly call for overturning Roe. So apparently being pro-abortion is the dividing line for the commenters here and the other 'moderates'- just like Limbaugh says it is. If Steele were POTUS he would, by deduction, apoint strict constructionist SCOTUS judges, who would then overturn it in all likelyhood. Then the laws on abortion would return to states' jurisdictions, where it belongs.
Further, Michelle Malkin openly and enthusiastically endorsed Steele in his run for the US Senate. Steele is also pals with Sean Hannity, who also openly supported Steele for the Senate and Chairman of the RNC. They are two of the most 'notorious' socialcons extant. Insofar as socialcons with bully pulpits goes, it looks like 'moderates' will continue to be frustrated by the 'presence' of the socialcons since Steele agrees with them, and they with him, 99% of the time. |
|
Har de har har. that was funny.
but seriously Dawson would have been a fiasco of EPIC proportions. |
|
"final ballot represented a pretty stark choice-a distaster was averted by a hair."
Remember, they were pushed; the room was booked for a wedding at 5:30 and the local Chuck E. Cheese wasn't available. |
|
you should know that the social conservatives wanted Blackwell mainly because of his race-not his social conservative zealotry was a given but many felt that by getting a black chairman there would be a kind of racial immunity in terms of criticizing Obama;i.e. they don't want a change in rhetoric but rather they feel that coming from an African american they might be able to reach new voters and other moderates. Will this plan work? We will see. Yes the GOP IS playing dicey game of racial politics but as you saw yesterday during the race the final ballot represented a pretty stark choice-a distaster was averted by a hair.
Certainly Steele is going to say much of the right stuff as he has had mucho practice as Fox commentator-he has full command of the issues-but at heart he is a moderate from Maryand and that will put certain alliances under the big tent to some evntual tests as he tries to grow the party.
I think you should be happy that if even for the wrong reasons the GOP is finnally moving in the right direction. Steele's election is just as historic as Obama's. Who would have thought that African americans would become the heads of America's largest poltical parties in the same year?
Movin' on up indeed. |
|
And the GOP won in 2006 and 2008 because..ta dah
the eeeville social conservatives were where?
yep, you all proved you had a RINO winning combination. How many seats did the GOP win with these huge victory's..a tad less than 200 hundred and how many Senators needed to be filibuster proof..o yeah, you all did a really good RINO job with those elections.
The only reason McC go 47% was because he had
a strong pro life veep nominee running with him.
Before she was named, you guys were really a fired up bunch, the energy was mind boggling.
Incidentally, I'm a conservative across the board, that supports Republicans when they stick to the platform and don't roll over like submissive dogs and piddle all over themselves whenever Harry or Nancy squeek. |
|
TH regulars and it is a huge relief to not be associated with Lola, WindowCleaner, Ivan, Frank, Munck, and, well, you know the rest of the names on the troll list.
"People like Homer, Tazmax, foxmustang, Wonna and other far right partisan shills are not going to like the way Steele conducts the GOP business
and that will be a good thing for us all long term."
No thanks for the pre-judging though. I fail to understand how someone who walks the path of a liberal can have such a clear vision of how genuine conservatives will feel about Steele.
And you also want us to believe that people like Lola, WindowCleaner, Ivan, Frank, Munck, and the rest of the names on the liberal troll list are not partisan shills? |
|
|
|
Never truer words: "The social conservatives had been sabotaging our agenda, because at heart, they are big government conservatives who want a government big enough to force their socio-religious values on America and if property rights or any other inalienable right gets in the way, then rights be damned."
Would you consider running for Prez?
|
|
I really don't know anything about Steele, as I had not been following the issue much. I hope that he is someone who is serious about the so-called libertarian core of conservativism: Pro-capitalism, free markets, property rights, anti-bailouts, anti-socialized medicine, anti-big government anything. The social conservatives had been sabotaging our agenda, because at heart, they are big government conservatives who want a government big enough to force their socio-religious values on America and if property rights or any other inalienable right gets in the way, then rights be damned.
Protecting our capitalist system is the single most important and salient issue of our time, and I hope Steele exercises strong leadership on this. |
|
Change would have been a conservative GOP leader. Many look at this move as an attempt to steal some of the spotlight off of the President Hussein Obama. What this country needs is a RNC with a plan and vision for uniting our party. We are as split as the dems 8 years ago. Now, they have the momentum. we need a contract with amaerica like focus. During that election the country saw that the republicans were focused and had goals. Conservative values. Conservative goals. Conservative ideas.
Conservatives didn't have a voice during this last election. Someone give us a voice. |
|
The surest sign that the 2008 election results did not go unnoticed. Repug politics of the past have been repudiated by the American public, my only concern for Steele is that he is the "poster boy" and a convenient band-aid to put on the wound.
Jindal and Steele will get alot of face time as the Repugs go on a PR blitz..... but you are still an outdated party of old people stuck in 1860.
On the flip side...... Obama vs. Steele in 2012?!?!?! |
|
yes it is a glorious day in the GOP for the big tent has finnally embraced moderation in its leadership. No matter how you slice it steele is a mod and not Blackwell,the annoited choice of the social conservative faction led by Dobson, Perkins, et al. Moderation, not far right zealotry will be the order of the day.
But social conservatives have been given a second chance; get behind Steele and prove your worth to the GOP. Steele went and met with the social conservative body members and assured them they would have a place at the table but that he would be calling the shots. Good for you Mike! The direction of a new politcal tone will be set by Steele; he will not sink to the level of the Limbaughs or ann coulters-both of who he has repudiated-Steele will be his own man knowing that the way for the GOP to comeback is to grow the party.
People like Homer, Tazmax, foxmustang, Wonna and other far right partisan shills are not going to like the way Steele conducts the GOP business
and that will be a good thing for us all long term. |
|
|
|