Tag Archive for Michael Steele

Michael Steele Doesn’t Understand The Point of Primaries

December 10, 2011 Elections One comment

Michael Steele I wrote during the CBS News debate a few weeks ago that this current field of Republican presidential candidates is astonishingly less inspiring and conservative than in 2008 which, in turn, was less inspiring than 2000. At least in 2008 we had the opportunity to get behind a sage conservative traditionalist in Duncan Hunter. We just never game him the attention or support he deserved, in my opinion.

So we have a pattern here — a decreasing trend of truly conservative, inspiring candidates in the mold of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. In fact, we get quite the opposite: Mitt Romney and Newt Ginrich, both of whom will take any side of an issue that will result in their election; Herman Cain, who, despite being a conservative traditionalist, wasn’t ready to be president; Ron Paul is refreshingly right on many issues — the Federal Reserve, national debt, etc. — but troublesomely wrong on several issues including aspects of his foreign policies; Jon Huntsman is even more liberal than a typical RINO (Republican In Name Only); Michele Bachmann, much like Sarah Palin, would make a much better senator than president; and finally Rick Santorum who, I believe, is a good man, he’s just not on the level he was several years ago.

We have to ask ourselves, why are these the candidates from which we have to choose? Why is the roster of principled, conservative leaders declining election cycle after election cycle?

The answer lies, at least partially, in the mistaken belief that a primary, particularly the Republican primary, should be a process that focuses squarely on attacking the Democrat candidate(s) and results in electing someone who as perceived as the most “electable” (read liberal) general election candidate.

Former Republican National Committe Chairman Michael Steele championed this belief when he wrote earlier this week on Politico:

The base is looking for a fighter, but they don’t want the fight to be taken to another member of the family. Their fight, which should be the candidate’s fight is with Obama.

This type of thinking completely misses what the object of a party primary should be: to nominate a candidate that embodies the core philosophy and values of the the party and inspires and energizes its members. The candidate chosen for those reasons will indeed be the most “electable.”

GOP leadership waffling on full Obamacare repeal campaign platform; Chinese have 60 brainwashing instiutions in America; and Sarah Palin thinks Michael Steel is doing a great job

April 8, 2010 Culture, Elections, Government, Podcast, World 3 comments

The Republican leadership can sure talk a big game but when it comes time take a stand and go campaign on it they waffle almost as much as John Kerry. GOP leaders like Sen. John Cornyn are advocating campaigning on repealing only the “non-controversial” provisions of Obamacare. Thankfully, conservatives like Rep. Steve King and Sen. Jim DeMint aren’t going along with such a cowardly campaign strategy. They’re pushing for a full repeal.

The Chinese have set up 60 “culture” centers at colleges and universities across America while they have allowed us only 4 in China. These so-called “culture” centers are designed to, in my opinion, brainwash Americans into a better perception of communist (and I really can’t emphasize that enough) China. This also just another example of the decidedly one-sided relationship we have with China.

Sarah Palin thinks RNC chairman Michael Steele “is doing a good job.” Right. She’s flat-out wrong. Please don’t make excuses for her like everyone did for her support of John McCain. She doesn’t have to say that Steele is doing a good job. Palin has become the Barack Obama of the Republican Party–an idol. She seems to more concerned about cashing in on her celebrity than on advancing conservatism.

Play

Podcast: Download

Mark Levin criticizes Glenn Beck; Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin are blowing any chance J.D. Hayworth had of beating John McCain

February 23, 2010 Elections, Media One comment

Mark Levin is jealous that Glenn Beck has surpassed his buddy Sean Hannity. I’ve never cared for Levin. He’s a Republican first and a conservative second.

Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin are showing their GOP establishment colors by endorsing John McCain. Hayworth is a perfect conservative but he’s a lot closer than McCain.

Michael Steele spending RNC funds on private planes, flowers, and Wolfgang Puck catering. And Bill Bennett wants me to believe that the Republican Party has already had its “come to Jesus?” Yeah, OK.

Play

Podcast: Download

RNC ignoring conservatives, tea partiers

January 19, 2010 Elections No comments

Recently, I wrote a post, Retaking the GOP: Decisions are made by those who show up, arguing that if conservatives and tea partiers want to retake the Republican Party we are going to have to do it from the ground up. We have to infiltrate the lower levels of the GOP–precinct captains, county-,district- and state-level Party officers, etc.

It’s definitely the long and hard way to regaining the Republican Party, but I’m afraid the quicker alternative–a top-down approach–isn’t likely, and this is why:

Leading figures in the burgeoning “tea party” movement complain they are being ignored by the Republican National Committee.

“I have called into the RNC many times, and they still haven’t called me back,” said Dale Robertson, head of TeaParty.org, which he claims has upwards of 7 million members. “I’ve called them, lots of times. I called them this morning. I called them yesterday. It’s like they ignore you as they try to figure out a strategy on how to defeat you.”

Several other tea party activists talked of a similar lack of communication.

The Washington Times asked the RNC to respond to these criticisms and “an RNC spokeswoman said she would call back with examples of contacts between the party and tea party organizers. She never did.”

This is how I know that Michael Steele isn’t a conservative or a “tea partier” as he claims. If he was, he would be directing the RNC to undertake a deep, widespread outreach effort with the tea party organizations.

I suspect that as a result of the heat being placed on the RNC by conservatives and tea partiers, we’re about to get a 2.0 version of the traditional Republican campaign ploy of attempting to persuade conservatives that the Party has learned its lesson and is committed to returning to its conservative roots. We hear this every election cycle. We heard it after that 2006 debacle and look what happened in 2008!

I already see the signs of this in the following quote from Newt Gingrich (read it carefully):

Some Republican leaders, like Mr. Gingrich, say the GOP need not take over the insurgent movement, but must instead simply focus on common goals.

“They can be allies of the Republicans without being identified as Republicans,” the former speaker said. “And that’s important. It allows conservative Democrats and people who are independents, but who are fed up with [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi, [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid and Obama, to find an interim home.”

In other words, we need the conservatives’ votes but they need not be the voice of the Republican Party. To put it another way, Newt is saying that Republicans can use conservatives without having to reposition the Party as a conservative one. It’s that damn “big tent,” we can be all things to all people nonsense. You can’t be all things to all people. At some point, you have to stand for something.

Why any of you still believe that Newt Gingrich is a conservative is astounding to me. Have you noticed that with Republicans like Newt it’s always about what’s good for the Republican Party? It’s never about what’s good for conservatism. These people live and die with the Republican Party, not conservative ideology. They are Republicans first, globalists second.

I’m not suggesting that the Republican Party has to be made of people who agree with each other 100% of the time, but the fact is the GOP was founded on conservative principles. It was and should be a conservative political party. To truly return the Party to its conservative roots, conservatives must kick out pseudo-conservative RINOs like Michael Steele and Newt Gingrich. The only way we can do this is by taking control of the lower levels of the Party and working our way up, kicking the RINOs out one-by-one.

Steele’s job is safe because of his race

January 11, 2010 Culture, Elections No comments

Michael Steele

While there is almost unanimity amongst RNC members that they screwed up in electing Michael Steele as RNC chairman, his job is apparently safe and it’s because of his race, according to POLITICO:

“I don’t think there is any chance he’s going to be dumped before the next election for the obvious reason,” said one of the party’s most influential strategists and a key player on presidential campaigns.

Asked why that would be, the Republican, who is not on the party committee, shot back: “You’re not going to dump the first African-American chairman. That’s the only reason. Otherwise, he’d be gone.”

A longtime member of the party committee added: “The optics of pushing any chairman out don’t look very good, but [Steele’s race] puts a much finer point on it.”

If this is true–that the only reason Steele isn’t being fired is due to his race, then the RNC is no better than the DNC.

Michael Steele fires back at critics: fire me, or “shut up”

January 8, 2010 Elections No comments

RNC chairman Michael Steele has responded to the story in yesterday’s Washington Times regarding the exodus of deep-pocket donors from the RNC.

Several donors have been highly critical of Steele’s decision to use his position as chairman of the RNC to write a book and earn significant sums on the speaking circuit.

His response?

“I have $8 million [cash on hand in the RNC's coffers] and no debt and, oh, by the way, I won two governorships and a host of special elections throughout [last] year and – gee, guess what, we’re building the brand, we’re engaging our grass-roots activists.”

He won two governorships? It’s all about him. Humility isn’t part of Mr. Steele’s persona, apparently.

But it he didn’t stop by claiming personal victory for the GOPs recent wins. He issued a dare to his critics:

“If you don’t want me on the job, fire me. But until then, shut up.”

Well, sir, if I had gotten my way you never would have been elected chairman.

As I wrote yesterday, Steele’s days as RNC chairman are, thankfully, numbered. He’s not a “tea partier” as he claims. He’s a moderate–a RINO with an enormous ego.

Good riddance.

Michael Steele’s leadership (or lack thereof) is driving donors away from the RNC

January 7, 2010 Elections No comments

Most of you know that I did not support Michael Steele’s bid for chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and that I’ve been a staunch critic of his since taking office. I didn’t support his candidacy for two main reasons:

  1. He isn’t conservative enough;
  2. He lacks the leadership skills necessary for that position.

I’m not the only questioning his leadership (or lack thereof), and some, including big-time RNC donors–are even questioning the calibration of Steele’s ethical compass to the point where they’re withholding or redirecting their usual RNC financial contributions.

“I don’t plan to give to the Republican National Committee this cycle, and no other major donor I know is planning to either,” Christine Toretti, a Pennsylvania RNC member and a longtime major donor to the RNC and other GOP campaign committees and causes, told The Washington Times.

Mrs. Toretti said that she and other major donors have never received a telephone call from Mr. Steele soliciting money for the RNC, the GOP’s chief campaign fundraising committee.

Lawrence Bathgate, who served a record three times as RNC finance chairman during and after the Reagan era, told The Times, “No, I haven’t given to the RNC this cycle.”

“I will help the Republican Governors Association and the National Republican Congressional Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee this year. I’ve made commitments,” Mr. Bathgate said.

I know some of these donors are still contributing to moderate Republican committees like the National Republican Senatorial Committee, but the simple fact that they are choosing to elsewhere with their dollars should serve as a lesson to the RNC: Don’t elect non-conservatives or someone who is devoid of leadership skills to the RNC chairman post.

The old adage from the business world that consumers vote for products and services with their dollars holds equally true in the world of political fundraising. Republican donors are voting heavily in opposition to Michael Steele and the RNC.

Steele’s days as RNC chairman are numbered.

Lockerbie Bomber Praised, Savage Hated?

August 26, 2009 Elections No comments
Ellis Washington

Ellis Washington

The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it’s indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it’s indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it’s indifference.

–Elie Wiesel

Anybody that can enlighten the people, motivate the people is a danger to the New World Order.

–Michael Savage, August 24, 2009

The enduring words of Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor of Hitler’s death camps at Auschwitz and Buchenwald, are a poignant reminder that bombs, bullets, tanks, torture and gas chambers are not the most the demonstrative examples of hatred of man against humanity. It is, after those ghastly, terroristic acts are perpetrated against the innocent, that those who are in a position to say something, to do something to stop such senseless genocide, are all too quiet … too indifferent of the plight of another.

The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.

Scotland has recently received tepid condemnation by President Obama and many world leaders for releasing Lockerbie bomber Abdulbaset al-Megrahi, a Muslim fanatic responsible for the deaths of 270 innocent people in the bombing of Pan AM flight 103 which ignited as the plane flew over Lockerbie, Scotland, just before Christmas 1988.

The international controversy was due to Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi giving the Lockerbie bomber a hero’s welcome much to the chagrin of America, Britain and Scotland. In a U.K. Guardian article, it was reported that “the Scottish government … responded defiantly, insisting the U.S. had made clear in discussions that, while it opposed Megrahi’s release, it regarded freeing him on compassionate grounds because of his terminal cancer as “far preferable” to a prisoner transfer deal that would have seen him in custody.”

The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.

Last week my friend and intellectual mentor, Michael Savage, at hearing news of the egregious insult Scotland and Britain did against the families of the Lockerbie bombing victims, as well as against all Americans by releasing this murderous terrorist, rightfully drew the parallel on his radio show between the secrecy and duplicitous treachery of the governments of Scotland and Britain for what appears to be a quid pro quo for oil contracts with Libya, and how Michael Savage was unjustly banned in Britain and essentially put on an enemies list because of his conservative ideology and his Jewish heritage. Perhaps we will later learn through legal discovery that ranking members of the Obama administration thought blacklisting Savage would be a Machiavellian pretext for their real objective – the official banning of conservative talk radio in America via the so-called “Fairness Doctrine.”

The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.

If the Obama administration is anything, these Chicago thugs are Machiavellian to the core. Putting Michael Savage’s name on an enemies list was not by accident. He was specifically singled out because he is the most effective, singular voice against the fascist tactics of “The Chicago Way” in American media. Savage is an existential threat to Obama’s power which this arrogant, political opportunist cannot abide.
Read more

RNC Chairman Michael Steele Should Not Have Spoken at the NAACP Convention

July 21, 2009 Culture, Elections No comments

By Josh Price

Why? Well the answer is really quite simple if you’re aware of why the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was created.

It wasn’t created primarily for the advancement of civil rights. No, it was founded as an anti-conservative, anti-Booker T. Washington organization with the help of three socialists.

I have tried to do my part on the Conservative Beacon to promote the life and conservative philosophy of Booker Washington, in fact, I conducted an interview with Professor Robert Norrell who authored, in my opinion, the fairest and most comprehensive biography of Booker Washington.

Now I’m not going to get into the details of Booker Washington’s life or conservatism here (read the post of my interview with Professor Norrell and his book for that), but what is important in this post is that the Chairman of the RNC spoke to an organization that was decidedly anti-Booker Washington and, therefore, anti-conservatism.

I would like to quote a few sections on the founding of the NAACP from Professor Norrell’s book Up from History: The Life of Booker T. Washington:

The riot prompted three white socialists to start organizing a new civil-rights organization. William English Walling, a settlement-house worker and journalist, had investigated the riot and been appalled by its brutality. Mary White Ovington, another settlement-house worker and sometime journalist, shared Walling’s conviction, as did Henry Moskowitz, a physician and urban reformer. They approached Oswald Garrison Villard of the New York’s Evening Post to support their move to create an interracial organization to defend black rights.

For several years Villard had been talking about a legal-defense group for blacks, and he took the prompt from the social workers to launch his effort. In May 1909 he assembled settlement workers, professors, lawyers, journalists, and clergymen for what would eventually be called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Du Bois, Trotter, Max Barber, and Ida Wells-Barnett were among the black critics of Washington at the inaugural meeting of the NAACP.

The NAACP’s founding meeting demonstrated the organization’s anti-Washington purpose. When a white participant suggested that Booker serve on its steering committee, blacks exploded in opposition.

There’s the true story of the founding of the NAACP. Has anything changed in 100 years? Well let’s look at who spoke at this year’s NAACP convention:

  • Al Sharpton
  • Julian Bond
  • NY Gov. David Patterson
  • Congressman Charlie Rangel
  • Andrew Young
  • Colin Powell
  • Vernon Jordan
  • Cornel West
  • Barack Obama

Nice to see nothing has changed. The NAACP is still an anti-conservative, anti-Booker Washington, socialist organization that is supported by radicals like Cornel West  (the W.E.B. Du Bois wannabe) and his ilk.

What should you take away from this post other than learning about the true founding of the NAACP? Answer: no so-called conservative should ever associate with the NAACP. Oh, and Michael Steele never should have been elected RNC Chair.

RNC Chairman Michael Steele Attacks Rush Limbaugh, Attends “State of Black America”

March 2, 2009 Elections 8 comments

I just want to begin by stating that I was ready to give Michael Steele a chance to lead the RNC even though he wasn’t my first choice. But two events over the weekend confirmed my suspicions about Steele.

First, I was flipping channels on Saturday and I stumbled upon Tavis Smiley’s tenth annual “State of Black America” event being televised by CSPAN. Okay. Fine. Whatever. But as I watched for a few minutes (what turned out to be the closing minutes), Tavis Smiley was thanking the guests on his last panel of the day. Who were some of the guests? The racist (in my opinion) Cornel West, the so-called Reverend Al Sharpton, and last but certainly the one who piqued my interest, none other than the newly elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele.  

Admittedly, I didn’t hear him speak. So I have no idea what he said, but I don’t need to in order criticize his appearance at such an event. He, as RNC Chairman and so-called conservative, had business being at the “State of Black America.” Why? Because Tavis Smiley–the event’s founder/host–is no different than Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cornel West, Joseph Lowery, Andy Young, etc. In other words, Tavis Smiley is a race baiter. He continues to preach about so-called minority victimhood. Many of you will argue that Michael Steele, as a prominent black American, should have appeared at the event. You’ll argue that he could’ve used it as an opportunity to reach an otherwise unreachable audience. You’re wrong. If Michael Steele went there and preached a message of self-reliance and education, of looking forward and not to the past, that message would have fallen on deaf ears. That’s not the message that crowd wants to hear.

So you see I don’t even need to know what Michael Steele said in order to to tell you that it was a horrible move on his part, unless of course he agrees with the victimhood message that is so often put forth at that event. If he does agree then he has no business being RNC Chairman unless that’s what the RNC has become.

The second, and even more troubling incident Steele was involved in this weeked, was an interview Steele gave in which he referred to Rush Limbaugh as an “entertainer” (that’s fine, he is) and that his show is “incendiary” and “ugly.” Let me break this down for you: the RNC Chairman, Michael Steele, is essentially calling conservatives “incendiary” and “ugly” (not physically of course).

Still want to tell me the Republican Party “gets it” and is on the path to conservative redemption? Yeah. Okay. Let me know how that works out for you. 

The fact of the matter is that the Republican Party is closer to extinction–as we currently know it–than resurrection. I know that’s going to offend Party loyalists but it’s time to face the facts. The GOP is no longer, and quite honestly hasn’t been for a while, the Party of conservatism. It is the Party of elites, RINOs and veiled liberals. And if you think Michael Steele is the man to lead the GOP back to political relevance spearheaded by conservatism, well, simply put: you’re badly mistaken.

UPDATE: Michael Steele is digging himself one hell of a hole, folks. Michelle Malkin just posted about about another portion of Steele’s appearance on D.L. Hughley’s CNN show D.L. Hughley Breaks the News where apparently agrees that the 2008 Republican National Convention looked like Nazi Germany. Here’s the link to the clip from Raw Story (scroll down to see the video on their site).

UPDATE 2: This just in: Michael Steele’s unapologetic apology is out on Politico:

Asked if he planned to apologize, Steele said: “I wasn’t trying to offend anybody. So, yeah, if he’s offended, I’d say: Look, I’m not in the business of hurting people’s feelings here. … My job is to try to bring us all together.”

Notice how he really didn’t apologize or admit he was wrong. He basically only apologizing for possibly offending Rush Limbaugh. He’s also implicitly reaffirming his opinion that Rush’s show is “incendiary” and “ugly.” I rest my case about Michael Steele.