This kind of thinking is exactly what got the GOP/RNC RINOs like McCain.
Steele supported a gun ban, you either support the 2nd Amendment as a WHOLE or you DON’T.
Steele supports Affirmative Action.
Steele supports Roe V Wade.
Steele supports gay marriage
Elect another RINO to run the RNC and see how far it gets you.
Conservatives are sick of compromising with frauds who claim to be conservative and fail miserably.
If you think that having a RINO as the voice of the entire party isn’t a HUGE mistake and a slap in the face to conservatives, go ahead and elect Michael Steele and watch the GOP/RNC continue to lose election after election.

You’re Rino platform would exclude a man who was endorsed by the NRA the same year he said that there should be “a line” as to what weapons are considered civilian. That doesn’t seem like an endorsement of the AWB, but the opinion of a person who grew up with the strictest gun laws in the country and maybe doesn’t know the difference between a civilian M-16 and a full auto weapon.

But even if he did so what? As long as he supports the 2nd Amendment and will fight for the Republicans what is the point. This would be an issue if he was running for Senate but as chair of the RNC? Come on.

Steele is the only leader we have with a positive vision that doesn’t include blaming everyone else, crying and turning the GOP into a party of 1% of the country.

3) Not letting the Dems take the “high road” on this issue.

Very smart. The more I learn about Michael Steele, the more I like the guy.

UltimateBob on November 18, 2008 at 5:36 PM

The “high road”. Strange choice of words.

How annoying! I’m supporting him too. Where’s MY shoutout? B*st*ge.

Just kidding. Steele for anything he runs for! Steele, Jindal, Pence, and Palin are our future, I hope.

I want to see more of Steele talking about how he will articulate conservative principles.

tarpon on November 18, 2008 at 5:38 PM

Good luck, he apparently can’t do that because he doesn’t believe in them.

Aren’t there any actual intelligent conservatives left?

The Republican’s biggest problem is the “social conservatives” that somehow have the idea that they’re going to enforce God’s law with man’s legislation.

Abortion, prostitution, and Billy banging Bobby may very well be sins, but making them the foundation of your political ideology only shows that your real commitment isn’t to freedom but to forcing your religion on others. That’s the message people get whether it’s the one you wanted to send or not.

If you really want to regain control of Washington from the socialists then you’ll let God enforce his laws and get back to cutting taxes and spending.

But don’t listen to me, BECAUSE GAY MARRIAGE IS THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!

Browncoatone on November 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM

I sadly don’t have the balls to say what you just said. Thank you, sir/ma’am.

More freedom, not less – that is the challenge. Even if its for people I personally find repugnant.

What happened to “GIVE ME LIBERTY… OR GIVE ME DEATH?”

Abortion, prostitution, and Billy banging Bobby may very well be sins, but making them the foundation of your political ideology only shows that your real commitment isn’t to freedom but to forcing your religion on others. That’s the message people get whether it’s the one you wanted to send or not.

If you really want to regain control of Washington from the socialists then you’ll let God enforce his laws and get back to cutting taxes and spending.

But don’t listen to me, BECAUSE GAY MARRIAGE IS THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!

Exit question: Is his description of himself as a Lincoln Republican invested in individual rights a signal that he’s prepared to back gay marriage?

Didn’t Lincoln live in a log cabin? Bet he wouldn’t be a “Log Cabin” Repub. Probably wouldn’t even be a Repub today.

I believe he would follow the Constitution,

Achilles on November 18, 2008 at 5:52 PM

Though not the first and second amendments to the constitution, apparently.

He’s a gun grabber, supports affirmative action programs and Roe/Wade, supported campaign finance reform, and I suspect, based on the rest of it, that he’s in the open-borders category.

Conservative? I don’t think so.

Gay marriage is a states rights issue. Leave it the local legislation. The Federal government should stay out of it, as it only stirs up trouble. It is the third rail of the Presidential electorate right now. Candidates can have a personal preference to how they feel on it, but should not be legislating from the podium.

portlandon on November 18, 2008 at 6:29 PM

If only it were that easy. I’d support a state’s right to allow gay marriage, but the gay lobby’s support of gay marriage isn’t a federalist thing. It’s all about the Full Faith and Credit clause. Two homosexuals marry in Massachusetts, then move to Tennessee, and expect their marriage to be allowed there too. They’ll argue Full Faith and Credit all day long, and one sympathetic judge could overturn a state’s ban on gay marriage.

Exit question: Is his description of himself as a Lincoln Republican invested in individual rights a signal that he’s prepared to back gay marriage?

I heard him in an interview during his Senate campaign where he said that gay marriage was a State issue and he did not support gay marriage.

I could have misunderstood his answer in that he could have meant he did not support gay marriage approval at the Federal level.

jp on November 18, 2008 at 5:35 PM

Your scenario would suck if DOMA was overturned. A good, republican, SCOTUS would uphold the DOMA.

Just in case, if Abortion or Gay Marriage ever came up for a vote in my state of Illinois, I vote against both (pro life and keep marriage the way it always has been); but, I believe if we impose these from the federal level, the liberals\socialist can justify their ideas with the same argument.

Let’s have the conifidence of our beliefs and respect for what the founders wanted (free states secured by a federal government), and fight this battle 50 times.

I want to see more of Steele talking about how he will articulate conservative principles.

tarpon on November 18, 2008 at 5:38 PM

Me too.

the Dems won’t even back Gay marriage

jp on November 18, 2008 at 5:22 PM

Here in CA, it wasn’t a question of whether Democrats will back it but whether blacks and Hispanic would. The two groups are going only so far with the Democrat agenda and same-sex marriage is usually where the line is drawn.

Exit question: Is his description of himself as a Lincoln Republican invested in individual rights a signal that he’s prepared to back gay marriage?

I believe he would follow the Constitution, but he would probably be open-minded to gay marriage. I personally don’t care if gays can marry or not. I just don’t want the gov’t to force churches to marry gay couples because the Bible says something about gay marriage being wrong, I believe, and it would harm Judeo-Christian/Islamic, etc. own freedom of religion. Other than that, though, I think that gay people have the right to be gay; many gay people are very nice and would never hurt anybody (except the prop 8 protesters, that is).

As far a prop 8 goes: In a democratic society, the votes of the majority matter.

Steele is not the man this time around.