Steele: The way back
posted at 12:20 pm on November 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Former Lt. Governor Michael Steele and Newt Gingrich have apparently locked horns in the effort to chair the RNC after two straight successive national-election fiascos. One might wonder why anyone would want to take on that challenge; it would take undying optimism, as well as (dare I say?) hope and audacity. Steele shows plenty of these qualities in his Wall Street Journal essay today, instructing his fellow Republicans on how to work their way back from the wilderness:
Republicans once said that the opportunities this nation has to offer rest not in government but rather in the hands of individuals. Over the past decade or so, however, we Republicans lost our way. The disparity between our rhetoric and our action grew until our credibility snapped. It wasn’t the fault of our ideals. It was the failure of our leadership.
Over time, our principles morphed into baser motives. Continued political dominance grew more important to those who led us than the noble vision most of us originally signed on for. And to maintain power we turned to the controls of government — we became the party of big government. We behaved like Democrats.
Most people have realized that failure, although some still believe that the future of the Republican Party lies in acting even more like Democrats, and not just on policy. We hear people clamoring for the same MoveOn/Code Pink tactics rather than fixing our own house and offering a positive alternative to the liberal government we’ll endure for the next two years, at least. Steele disagrees:
We must articulate a positive vision for America’s future that speaks to Americans’ hopes, concerns and needs. It’s time to stop defining ourselves by what we are not, and tell voters what we believe, how we’ll lead, and where we’ll go; how we Republicans will make America better; how we’ll make their families more prosperous, their children better educated, their parents more secure, and all of us healthier, safer and stronger.
Our challenge lies not in beating Democrats, but in uniting around a message that solidifies our ranks and attracts new people to our cause. We have to listen to what Americans are telling us about their hopes, desires and needs, and then translate that message into proposals for meaningful action squarely grounded on the values we Republicans have always stood for.
Our faith in the power and ingenuity of the individual to build a nation through hard work, personal responsibility and self-discipline is our uniting principle.
We need to do more than just unite around those principles, although that will be the start of our recovery. We need to elect Representatives and Senators who will abide by these principles, and not those who merely mouth them while raiding the Treasury for their own personal purposes. For that matter, we need to abide by those principles in state houses as well. That’s where the future of the party will get built, and we had better ensure that we keep the hypocrites out at the ground level if we expect to compete nationally in the next couple of decades.
Steele evokes Ronald Reagan, as so many do, in hearkening back to the principles that transformed the Republican Party into a force for liberty and reform. We’re fortunate to have both Steele and Gingrich to guide us out of the wilderness in this fashion, but Steele may represent the future of the party better than Gingrich as the head of the GOP in the next few years. I look forward to hearing more from both as to their vision on revamping the technological infrastructure of the RNC in order to support the ideals the party unfortunately betrayed while it held power.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Please, you Gingrich people, get with the program. Michael Steele would make a magnificent GOP Chairman. He’s right on the issues, very libertarian. But more importantly, he’s got the right image, which Gingrich does not.
If this election taught us Rightwingers (conservatives and libertarians), anything, it’s that image does matter!
We need to desperately “hip-ize” the GOP. And Steele is the perfect choice to do this.
ericdondero on November 11, 2008 at 12:25 PM
I was leaning towards Newt because he already brought us back from the wilderness once, but Steele impresses me with this essay. As long as we have a dude at the head that understands we don’t need to “reform” or “reinvent” our basic principles, but rather just fight for them, we’ll be fine.
Pasalubong on November 11, 2008 at 12:25 PM
If it is a vote – Steele.
I think Newt is better off with interviews and not actually having a position of power. Nothing personal, but come on already.
kybowexar on November 11, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Steel is the “good” Howard Dean.
RobCon on November 11, 2008 at 12:27 PM
hmmmmm, Ed, you are on to something there. Steele just might be the right choice. I sure hope so. Get the Rhino’s out. Newt is great though. McCain was a Rhino. But still I wanted him to win. Only choice we had. I am new Rep. Been researching and I ask my hubby tons of questions. He has been Rep. for years. My parents were staunch Rep. Not that I rebelled. I was convinced that the Dems. were like JFK. I admired him that much. Boy did I have a rude awakening.
sheebe on November 11, 2008 at 12:27 PM
I concede your point – and the nice thing about Steele is it is definitely not simply image.
kybowexar on November 11, 2008 at 12:27 PM
Sunshine and roses for everyone!
Rode Werk on November 11, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Can ANYONE talk about self reliance, freedom and independence? Until someone starts asking the American people to get their act together in their own homes and demand that they get what they are paying for (decent education and uncorrupted representatives) I don’t see much chance.
Cindy Munford on November 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM
its a start, but lets be clear, just hoping that the Dem policy proposals get mugged by reality and a backlash will propel us to power is wrong. We believe in reform government, that means taking a stand against crony/capitalism. Fight any attempt to wage war on warming by increasing taxes on the working and middle class. Hit them with facts over and over, be relentless in probing for weaknesses. Support for freedom over seas as not only the moral thing to do, but the rational thing to do for the more free the world, the safer the USA.
rob verdi on November 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Ed please post Paul Ryan’s as well. His piece in the Journals series has been the most impressive I think. It’s a shame he decided not to challange John Beohner (sp) for the leadership role due to his young family.
Dritanian on November 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM
I also was leaning towards Newt, but we HAVE to face reality. We are seen, unfair as it may be, as a party of mostly old, white people. I am NOT saying to pick someone based on skin color or age, but this guy is very charismatic, and he is young and vibrant, and we need that NOW more than ever. Perhaps Newt and Fred and other elder statesmen of Conservatism can offer counsel and guidance, but I am on the Steele bandwagon!
We not only have to win the WAR of IDEAS and PRINCIPLES, but our electorate is such that we need to win the CHARISMA and the PRESENTATION pieces as well, especially against President Present.
ReaganConservative3 on November 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM
i think newt is very able, but he really does have image issues. while he was impeaching clinton, he was running around himself cheating on his wife. that’s fine for the democrats, but the republicans shouldn’t be the party of filanderers.
anna on November 11, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Newt could give the GOP a 2nd revolution. I have always liked Michael Steele. A fresh face would be really good, and Steele may just be that man. If I have any issues with Steele, it might be on social issues. Is he pro-life? When he ran for US Senate in MD it appeared that he was leaning moderate but that might have been just to appeal to liberal MD. The GOP doesn’t need another moderate, although Steele’s got more “fire in the belly” than any other moderate.
thatselbert on November 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Fred!
saint kansas on November 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Actually Michael Steele’s idea is to start acting more like Democrats and try to tack to the left of them. Check out this useful article here before you start slobbering all over Steele. http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-38438.html
I like Steele, but I don’t think that co-opting slimy David Cameron (who BTW threw America under the bus on Sept. 11’s anniversary for a few cheap points in the polls) and a Tory party that seems determined to outbid their Labor counterparts is a good way forward for the Republican Party. We’re never going to be able to outbid the Dems. when it comes to public spending. Instead, we should present solutions on education, health care, college, etc. that provide people with choices and keeps down expenses.
Illinidiva on November 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Michael Steele would be without doubt, at this point in time,the perfect choice. He is dynamic and does not carry the baggage of wars past. This is important if the conservative movement is to flourish as the liberals show their disadain for our laws and our values. Time to move forward with the same conservative message packaged in a new facade. Go Mike Go!
volsense on November 11, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I don’t see those two activities as mutually exclusive.
Lehosh on November 11, 2008 at 12:35 PM
It’s not what others think of us… it’s who will take us where we need to go…
Are we to exclude any white male over the age of 50? That’s an awfully small pool in which to choose from for either party, frankly.
Besides, it would be racist and ageist!
beththebaker on November 11, 2008 at 12:36 PM
The perfect scenerio would be for both of them to co-chair the position. While they are both capable and determined to advance the cause of conservatism, we may indeed need both of them with the onslaught of liberal socialism that is upon us.
Rovin on November 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
From the looks of it regardless of you wins we get to go back to the future with either. I’m happy. I have liked both Steele and Newt. Newt’s personal story is a bit of hard to swallow stew but his ideas are good. Steele’s speech at the convention was very good
unseen on November 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
also, is everyone forgetting newt’s ad in spanish when he was still considering his run for president. how pandering can you get? i agree with whoever said he’d serve well in an advisory role but stay out of the spotlight.
anna on November 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
I had the occasion to meet Steele a couple of weeks ago here in Virginia. He speaks passionately and from the heart and exhibits warmth and charisma that would make Obama jealous.
Yeah, I’d definitely like to see him as RNC chair.
flipflop on November 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
i love watching him on hannity b/c he’s not only articulate but he says all the right things and knows how to drive it home.
anna on November 11, 2008 at 12:39 PM
The candidate is the one that needs to be hip, not the Chairperson of the RNC. Which is what the McCain campaign didn’t understand. They took a guy who has the record for Daily Show appearances, hosted SNL, and has a colorful personal life (kinda like a cool grandfather who tells off-color jokes) and turned him into this doddering old guy who looked like he was about to yell at Obama to get off his lawn.
Illinidiva on November 11, 2008 at 12:40 PM
OMG…please don’t say he’s “clean and articulate”! ;-)
flipflop on November 11, 2008 at 12:42 PM
What about Steele’s David Cameron love? I’m not supporting another RINO
lodge on November 11, 2008 at 12:42 PM
After reviewing this article from Mr. Gingritch, it seems that he was right about the Republican Party election outlook and outcome.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26376
SheetAnchor on November 11, 2008 at 12:43 PM
I think that the biggest lesson to be learned in this past election is that fresh ideas and fresh blood unite political parties. It doesn’t matter which party, it doesn’t matter what the ideas are, just having them said from someone new sparked interest. I know that is terribly simplified, but I hope you get my point.
That is why I think we need something to revive our party. Newt has had his day. Steele all the way.
Karen_VA on November 11, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Newt is a fine statesman; but the party needs new faces in leadership. Steele will be a superb pick.
tdavisjr on November 11, 2008 at 12:44 PM
The first step toward that is to STOP supporting liberal Republican Primary candidates over conservative ones, as the RNC leadership did under Bush.
We don’t need to fight over who is the biggest ideologue. Steele and Gingrich are more than fully qualified at that, and it’s silly to quibble over the margins. Given that the candidates are real Republicans (at which Steele and Gingrich both qualify) we need the candidate with the best organizational skills.
There’s nothing on earth wrong with “listening, adapting and being positive.” But such feel-goody terms are easy to mimic. Any candidate can provide lip service to that. But Newt turns these fuzzy aphorisms into cold, hard policy goals – that way we can put each candidate on a scale every two years, instead of just getting into endless arguments among ourselves about who attends church most often vs. who hates terrorism the most.
logis on November 11, 2008 at 12:46 PM
We are going to make everyone healthier?
thecountofincognito on November 11, 2008 at 12:47 PM
There is no way the GOP is smart enough to pick Steele for chair.
It would signal a departure from the Politics of Monumental Stupidity which has served them so well.
Bruno Strozek on November 11, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Newt has brought the party back before, he can do it again.
moonsbreath on November 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM
Gingrich supported the bailout. Steele scoffed at the politicians who didn’t listen to the voters.
Put me in for Steele over Newt.
angelat0763 on November 11, 2008 at 12:51 PM
btw
I’m gonna kill myself if Mike Duncan or Huckabigot’s choice wins
lodge on November 11, 2008 at 12:52 PM
He’d probably get more support from me if he didn’t jump on the global warming/climate change bandwagon of junk science.
flipflop on November 11, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Anybody but Huckabee (or his puppet).
Unless we want a return to the 60s and 70s, when Democrats controlled the Senate for over 25 years.
Techie on November 11, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Michael Steele’s words are well worth heeding, and his projected image is all very nice, but there are the minor problems of -
- you have to win elections in order to govern, and he doesn’t, and
- if he were to articulate his policy preferences, this crowd would find much to discuss.
Jaibones on November 11, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Add Michael Steele to the Republican Party
keeper list,and yes,Steele should be the
Republican Chair,
remember it’s Party rebuild time!!
canopfor on November 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Michael Steele for RNC Chair!
Enoxo on November 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM
That is a fantastic article and Steele in right on!!!
I can’t think of a better image to lead the re-establishment of Conservative politics.
HoosierCon on November 11, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Steele. No question.
beatcanvas on November 11, 2008 at 12:57 PM
You need to put what he said about Cameron in context of British politics which is a hell lot different then American Politics. He’s not saying that we need to be like dimbocrats in this article and I’ve never heard him say that.
Dritanian on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Tough decision, but in the end, the stache puts Steele over the top.
commodore on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM
“But more importantly, he’s got the right image, which Gingrich does not.”
And what image is that? Please don’t tell me it’s that whole marital issue again that was going on a few years ago. Please, the majority of us conservatives don’t give a rat #ss about that. Steele may be just as good, but Newt’s proven himself before and I for one want someone with experience (sound familiar) at the helm of a comeback, and that he’s got. It’s you folks that are looking for a walking Saint to represent our ideals that are making it impossible to put good people in important places. If the “affair issue” is the worse Newt’s done, then bring him on. At least he’s not cavorting with terrorists or listening to people preaching to hat the GD United States. I’m just saying.
rayvet on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM
whoever gets the job, has to come up with some plan to deal with the MSM. if the MSM were less bias/hacks, bush would be much more popular right now and many of the things he’s done in recent years wouldn’t have happened.
jp on November 11, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Mike Steele is the guy. Met him, liked what he had to say. Always has his s&*t together. If the RNC doesn’t get its agenda together and start hammering it home soon, though, we’re screwed in oh-12.
HomeoftheBrave on November 11, 2008 at 12:59 PM
The GOP has a tremendous image problem at the moment.
Look, I hate racial politics as much as the next guy, but it does SPEAK to a large portion of the electorate when there are ZERO minority Republicans in Congress.
Get qualified candidates into the primaries, stat.
Techie on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 PM
I would like to see Steele as chair and Newt his gun-hand.
Mr Snuggle Bunny on November 11, 2008 at 1:02 PM
Steele is my pick for whoever the face and philosophical director of the RNC will be. That appears to be the GENERAL CHAIRMAN as opposed to chairman.We need qualified conservative diversity on our frontlines at this moment in time.
I still think Newt or Saltsman could effective do the Executive day to day operations from behid the scene. both have a track record of leading successful ‘revolutions’
We all know Newt’s but Saltsman is no johnny come lately.
If the GOP can get over their Huck phobia, they may discover that Saltsman could be the ‘Dean’strategy wise, who will be able to deliver the best bang for the buck from behind the scenes. He also scored a huge endorsement from Bill Frist who is twisting arms and calling in favors to garner support for him.
Rensen on November 11, 2008 at 1:03 PM
I’m agnostic in the current battle: Steele has been very impressive and seems to have a plan, but Newt is quite the idea-guy, too, and has experience leading a fight against Democrats. At the moment, I lean a bit toward Steele, because he doesn’t carry the baggage Newt still has from the 90s.
And spot-on about paying attention to state politics. One of the little-noticed developments of the last 15-20 years has been the development of good GOP leaders at the state level who could make the transition to national office, Palin and Blount among them.
irishspy on November 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM
anna on November 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM
ReaganConservative3 on November 11, 2008 at 1:10 PM
What I deduced from the article is that the Republicans had to follow the British Conservaties lead and try to outbid the Democrats (which is what the Conservatives are now doing). The Republicans could adopt this strategy and wait for the Democrats to collapse, which is what is happening in the UK. Or they could develop a counter-agenda to challenge the Democrats based on actually reforming education, Medicaid, college loans, etc. rather than just whining about the Dems. solutions or saying “me too.”
Illinidiva on November 11, 2008 at 1:14 PM
Newt is an idea man, but it’s dangerous to put him in charge of the party because sometimes he spouts ideas off before having time to think them through. He’s a classic professor.
I guess my question is, what the hell has Steele been doing with that GOPAC organization (which, if memory serves, was Gingrich’s idea) the past few years he’s led it? Has he demonstrated strong leadership in that role? It’s easy to spout platitudes, but we need someone who can deliver results. The only result I have ever seen from Steele is that he managed to get himself elected to one term as Lt. Gov. in Maryland. That’s not to say that he’s not a great guy, but let’s get an analysis of his record and make a smart choice here people!
Outlander on November 11, 2008 at 1:17 PM
It’s nice to have two good candidates to fight over. If only we had this in the primaries instead of 6 crappy ones.
lodge on November 11, 2008 at 1:17 PM
You need someone who isn’t going to pull punches against Obama though.
RNC needs some teeth back.
The beginning of the end for this election was when the crowds at McCain rallies said they were mad, and scared, and McCain didn’t echo their sentiments.
Obamalama Deprogrammer on November 11, 2008 at 1:17 PM
If the GOP had brains, which it has proven not the case, Steele would have been the nominee instead of McCain. He is a true conservitive with track record to prove it, but also he is black. Despite what anyone wnats to admit, a great many black people voted for Obama because he was black. Some of them would have rather voted for a black conservitive if one had been offered, but they were not given that choice. Most white and black conservitives would accept Steele, and some black independants would too.
Why does no one want to talk about Steele’s race? Dancing around it is just as racist as talking about it in the daylight.
MikeA on November 11, 2008 at 1:18 PM
I would say that we should let the dialogue continue so we can properly vet our next RNC Chairman. There is a lot at stake in this. We don’t want another 2008, which should have been prevented after 2006.
DL13 on November 11, 2008 at 1:22 PM
I enjoyed listening to Steele in the Situation Room on FNC during Obama’s DNC speech and I like hearing what he has to say on H&C. I also enjoy listening to Newt. I can’t decide between the two. I guess we need to keep informing ourselves on both of them and maybe someone will rise to the top. I am just happy that we have 2 good choices and are not stuck with advocating for the “lesser of 2 evils” – like we had to do Nov. 4.
HawaiiLwyr on November 11, 2008 at 1:41 PM
In actuality, the question Republicans must ask is this….do we want a chair who is a spokesperson or one who builds the Party?
http://thirdbasepolitics.blogspot.com/2008/11/newt-vs-steele.html
DJ Tablesauce on November 11, 2008 at 1:42 PM
I admire Newt, and he does need a place in the Rep. party, just not so visible..
We need new blood, Michael Steele would be fabulous. The libtards are always screaming there is no diversity in the Rep. party.. That would start the shut-up.
reshas1 on November 11, 2008 at 1:42 PM
I think Steele would get away with alot more in the way of the Hardball that the party needs to play to get the party back on track. Gingrich will be a constant target of the Media because he is known, they love to hate him. Steele is African American, and the media would be wary to come at him too hard, unless they want to come across as “racist” (The new DNC talking point). He is a strong intellect & a powerful voice for the party.
How could Steele be called racist while pointing out Obamas double talking lies? Of course the Media will call him an “Uncle Tom” which we could destroy the Media with.
Steele is a win-win pick.
portlandon on November 11, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Steele would have been vilifiled if he was the Rep. pres. nominee. Democrats HATE, with a passion, Black conservatives. Think Condi Rice, Colin Powell(once), Clarence Thomas, etc. Go to any of the liberal web-sites, and you will see how black consv. are treated…
I do hope that eventually, he would be able to make a run for Pres.
The lame non-thinkers, who just blindly believe everything the MSM and their churches tell them, would NOT have voted for him.
reshas1 on November 11, 2008 at 1:46 PM
I agree, totally. I love Newt… but he would be a lightning rod/sideshow/distraction; keep him behind the scenes… he can be effective through American Solutions, without the restrictions of a formal GOP position.
But I don’t necessarily think Steele would get the Obama-like kid gloves treatment because he’s black: look how they demonized Hillary and Sarah Palin, despite their being women. This is all about ideology and ODS.
VastRightWingConspirator on November 11, 2008 at 1:51 PM
That was a very obama like speech. Say something…come up with a plan and push it like you were holding an election.
tomas on November 11, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Just as long as Newt has a say, he is the true intellectual conservative. He offers depth, and his analysis is dead on.
We need to have a system where one is in charge, but the other as substance. Why do we have to use the same formula, why not a point man, and a man that works to build the platform.
Who was more instrumental in building our country…Franklin, Adams, or Jefferson?
We have two great men, lets put them in a place that both can work together to build a stronger conservative party.
If the two can’t work together, then I say will not be able to pull together the party.
right2bright on November 11, 2008 at 2:01 PM
I agree with the prevailing opinion here. Steele would be a great public face for the party. Newt, well not so much, but he is great with ideas and strategy and has a vital role to play.
firepilot on November 11, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Newt is sooooooo 90s. Michael Steele is a man for the 10s and yes he is black, an asset rather than a stumbling block as proved by the election. He’s real change and going to offer real hope after the Obama years.
thebrokenrattle on November 11, 2008 at 2:15 PM
Fox news breaking: Newt has decided not to run for RNC Chair. Steele will.
Enoxo on November 11, 2008 at 2:16 PM
Oh goody! Conservative-lite here we come… Perhaps, like the British Tories, we’ll be back in 16 to 20 years.
Illinidiva on November 11, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Those people need to switch parties, alright. Right is not a bad word. People don’t need to be afraid of it. That’s where the silent majority of the country is and how the future of the party needs to get built. Moving more right is right. Embrace it. Right, then.
apacalyps on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Lookit, people.
Neither one of these two characters will correct the systemic problems in the Republican Party that were revealed last Tuesday. For the last two years (indeed, even throughout Bush’s terms) an ongoing debate was occurring about the future of this country that raised every conceivable issue and viewpoint anyone could imagine. And we’ve seen the result of that debate; the majority of the people of this country have chosen to enable the Marxists, fascists, socialists, and communists among us as the future face of America. We can wish it were not so, but the bald truth is otherwise.
We have reached a point in the history of this country where the advocates of freedom and liberty may have to suffer a violent trial-by-fire unseen since the Civil War to right the sinking ship-of-state. Put yourself in the place of a liberty-loving German who just witnessed the election of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in Germany in 1932. What would you do if the Reichstag was burning and Kristallnacht had just exploded? There are just two choices left to us now; submit or resist. And neither Gingrich nor Steele can be expected to do anything but meekly submit.
blackelkspeaks on November 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM
The clincher: Nobody will ever call him Yearghh Steele.
whitetop on November 11, 2008 at 2:43 PM
“‘e’s a liberal!!! he didn’t say nothin’ about god or the amero in there!!!!”
eh on November 11, 2008 at 2:43 PM
I like Newt, quite a bit. He has a problem: he is a ‘reformer’ and his idea of ‘well, this is going to happen anyway so we might as well try to go along with it’ does not offer a contrast in ideology. He wants that on GW, or did, at least, and that points out that working ‘inside the beltway’ ends you up believing that what happens inside DC is paramount. Which is just what the D party believes. That has gotten us that lovely class of folks that came in with the Contract with America expanding government, broadening its scope and reach and generally being unable to state why smaller government that can actually do its job is good for America. Newt didn’t bring home the goods, or else we wouldn’t be in this position of figuring out just where the R party ‘lost its way’. Newt got his majority… and it is now *where*, exactly?
I like Mr. Steele who ran a good and innovative campaign in MD that I got to see from the VA side of things. He has a good, basic message and the party will have to find one and *stick to it*. May I suggest that trying ‘reformer’ this last campaign and running a fixture of DC at the top of the ticket really didn’t say ‘reform’? The R party has a number of good people out in the States and if it wants to offer a non-DC oriented position to start cutting back on government, then that basic message needs to be the lead. If you believe that the States really are the best place to figure things out, then getting abortion back to the States and trying to fix things *there* and keep it out of the hands of a SCOTUS that will be more liberal after 4 years is something you will *want* to do. If you do believe that local communities are set up better to handle education, then getting federal rules and regulations *out* of that is necessary. And maybe, just maybe, getting a party that agrees that its elected members will push for a 5 day workweek for *itself* in elected office, might just start to demonstrate some of those ‘conservative values’ that always seem to wind up in only one or two topics? Because the current Congress gets 4 day weekends… plus long vacations, and that is neither conservative nor representative of the American people. It stinks of acquiescent elitism.
That sort of agenda requires hard work and thought to carry through and make sure that a lean, basic and sturdy party platform that *every* candidate will run on is put forward. And mean it. If I want to vote for slackers, I will vote the D party, thanks… I’ve run out of parties to vote for and very few people that I can support politically. It can’t be done in two years… but in four you can have a very good contrast with the way things will have been run for four years and give an idea that you just might have an alternative to more, bigger, fatter and more powerful government.
ajacksonian on November 11, 2008 at 2:48 PM
I voted for a black man, but it was Lynn Swann.
thebrokenrattle on November 11, 2008 at 2:54 PM
LOL. Irony.
Constant Parrhesia on November 11, 2008 at 3:05 PM
“Ronald Reagan made it cool to be a Republican, for God’s sake.” – Michael Steele.
He does seem to evoke the qualities of Ronald Reagan.
Kokonut on November 11, 2008 at 3:07 PM
I agree. However, I want Gingrich in there off the camera working with others on policy formation. We need both of these guys.
Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 3:08 PM
If Obama creates the ‘national security force’ yes it is a resist situation. There would be NO doubts what his intentions are. But, let’s give it our best shot to rebuild and do it right and be patient. Ignoring the communist connection, the next 4 years is the GOP’s “Long March”.
Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Gingrich would be great too. I prefer Steele. Either way the social conservative wing, Prolife and Protradional Marriage is the cornerstone of Republican party’s ability to win back the opportunity to govern.
jack_in_the_box on November 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Term limits for congress, 6 terms for the House and 2 for Senators is a winnning issue. Too bad the Republican party abandoned that part of the “Contract” back when it took power in ‘94. I don’t want to hear what anyone tried either.
jack_in_the_box on November 11, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Also smaller gov’t and less spending is no longer a Republican principle. Oh, sure, it SHOULD be, but after the last 12 years of runaway spending by the Republican controlled House AND Senate. I would only laughed at McCain trying to say he would reign in anything when he never stood up “made people famous” during all his time in the Senate before.
jack_in_the_box on November 11, 2008 at 3:31 PM
After Obama appoints radical leftist to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace some of the ultra-leftist who will now retire, most rational, yes even California voted socially conservative, people would vote for someone who will appoint conservative Justices to safeguard life and marriage.
jack_in_the_box on November 11, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Embryonic stemcell research is close to what the Japanese did in human testing pre and during WWII. Amazing results, but sold its soul.
jack_in_the_box on November 11, 2008 at 3:32 PM
Steele is right about one thing: Republicans need to make believe that they reflect the needs and values of ordinary people looking for a better life.
Terrye on November 11, 2008 at 3:35 PM
Who here has actually met and talked with Steele? Show of hands…
Okay, I have. Believe me, you want that guy in charge of the RNC.
Newt will be of more value cranking out Contract with America-type solutions for clean energy, health care, education, and taxes.
ScottMcC on November 11, 2008 at 3:36 PM
how about “make people realize”
The Democrats believe in public housing for ALL. That way we’d all be equal.
The Democrats continue their tradition of slavery through social programs designed to take away a persons motivation to excel. The Master has been replaced by the social worker delving out the rations to 100 families at near or below poverty level, while driving a luxury car and living in a fine home.
jack_in_the_box on November 11, 2008 at 3:41 PM
I favor Steele. Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Steele has none, and would be a new voice, something we seriously need. Both have vision. Give it to Steele.
paul1149 on November 11, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Unless that how is get the government the hell out of the way, this is just more of the same.
Stephen Macklin on November 11, 2008 at 4:09 PM
The solution is to do both. We need to be rebuilding a party that has a chance of at least controling the leftward drift, but at the same time being prepared to resist, no revolt is the word, if they make moves to get things far enough along to remove the means for resistance. If Obama builds his KGB, it will be too late. The revolution must come before they disarm us and and outnumber us. Armed men are citizens; disarmed men are subjects.
MikeA on November 11, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Sheebe–WELCOME, glad to have you. On the Steele subject, I think he’d be just fine. The only problem I see is the other side with all their uncle Tom stuff. It would be hard for him, but then we are made of sterner stuff than that. I think part of our problem was there were to few of our leaders willing to really fight back. You never hear the Dems. speaking evil of each other, but we do all the time. Personally, I see it as a badge of courage to be disliked by the DEms. This is going to be a fight. A bloody fight, and the power at the moment is all on their side. I am encouraged with the polls that say the people are still right of center in their views but upset that we lost our way. Well our leaders did, I didn’t. Neither did you. I guess we just have to hang in there and hide our guns till there needed.
Amazing Grace on November 11, 2008 at 6:42 PM
This is a good point. We need a Moveon-type organization, or complex of organizations. It should be well-funded and respond within hours to whatever inanity the Dims manage to come up with. It should create simple, powerful commercials that question what the they are doing or illustrate the consequences of what they do or attempt to do. They should do this relentlessly.
Let’s face it. The Code Pinkers are stupid, obnoxious and frankly, so ugly they’re scary. We need a group of people that are attractive and ‘hip’. They shouldn’t just be popping up and screaming. They should be doing actions that mock the Dims. (We all know they have no sense of humor). Make fun of them. Do political theater. Have them take actions that amuse and educate. Get people thinking.
We shouldn’t just copycat. We need to build a better mousetrap.
trigon on November 11, 2008 at 7:25 PM
If the GOP wants to win, I suggest that the entire primary/caucus vote take place on one day. And make it one week after the DNC has their convention.
We’d never lose again.
Saltysam on November 11, 2008 at 9:57 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »