Quotes of the day
posted at 9:30 pm on May 17, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
MR. STEELE: Well, I, I–thank goodness for Nancy Pelosi. And I’m so, I was so edified by that press conference the other day where she really expressed in as long as, Tom, she could take, eight different views on this one issue. And I think the reality here is that Nancy Pelosi has stepped in it big time, and she’s not put the Democratic Party in a position where, where the question for me is does the president support Nancy Pelosi’s versions of what happened or his CIA director’s version of what happened? And then the next question is you’ve got, you know, Steny Hoyer himself who’s calling for a closer examination of what Nancy Pelosi knew and when she knew it. And I, you know, and I know Steny very well, and he’s a capable, qualified leader in the House. And he, if, if he sees some concern here, then there must be some rot somewhere in the explanation.
***
MR. GREGORY: Do you, do you think it was torture?
MR. STEELE: Well, my, my opinion on it doesn’t matter. My personal opinion is look, I want the information.
MR. GREGORY: Yeah.
MR. STEELE: We’ll get it however we can get it.
MR. GREGORY: But you do, you have an opinion?
MR. STEELE: I have a personal opinion, yes.
MR. GREGORY: Do you think it was torture?
MR. STEELE: That’s my–I’m not, that’s not appropriate here.
MR. GREGORY: You’re not going to say.
MR. STEELE: Yeah.
***
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
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: « Previous 1 2
Because he’s a Democrat, of course.
FloatingRock on May 17, 2009 at 11:37 PM
What is it with Steele? Was he like this all along or did he buffalo all of us conservatives?
Were we blind or did he pull the wool over our eyes?
Skidd on May 17, 2009 at 11:39 PM
OT
Nice jolt here in Southern Cal.
baldilocks on May 17, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Yeah, I had a few things fall off my shelf.
Mark1971 on May 17, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Not at all. He used to be quite good, before he was made RNC chair. I used to enjoy watching him debate. He was one of the better people during the credit crisis. Now, I just cringe every time he opens his mouth. Weird.
progressoverpeace on May 17, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Yeah, it got us pretty good out here in La Mirada. Where are you, baldilocks?
Joe Pyne on May 17, 2009 at 11:43 PM
platypus,
Nah, it’s an old Alberg classic…all glass…except for the deck, which is typical…
Beautiful lines and sails easily…
But you’re right it’s a buyers market and has been for years…
Glass boats don’t fade away just their owners’ will…and mine is undying…
This one is my childhood dream…
jerrytbg on May 17, 2009 at 11:43 PM
This is just a glimpse of the RNC’s idea of the “new Republican”. Mark my words. In 2010 these guys are planning on running a bunch of so-called “moderate Republicans” that will make Arlen Specter look like Rush Limbaugh.
RMR on May 17, 2009 at 11:43 PM
http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/recenteqs/Quakes/ci10410337.html
5.0
Mark1971 on May 17, 2009 at 11:45 PM
So what does this mean, then? A third party formed by real conservatives and lifetime memberships in the John Birch Society?
Skidd on May 17, 2009 at 11:48 PM
No, not all of us. Some of us here tried warning the rest but were scoffed at. There were a few willing to listen, though.
FloatingRock on May 17, 2009 at 11:52 PM
This was horrendous. Get Liz Cheney or Dick Cheney as new RNC chair pronto.
jencab on May 17, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Atlas Shrugged?
FloatingRock on May 17, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Cardiff by the Sea, Ca………….
…………. Big jolt.
Seven Percent Solution on May 17, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Good to see the stupid parade marching through HA…
So Steele might think water boarding is torture…so what? By not outwardly expressing his personal opinion is he not showing deference to those within the GOP who do not see it as torture? We all know if he said “I personally think it’s torture”, the MSM would use that as a wedge. By not specifying, he doesn’t give them the pull quote.
But for shit-stirrers like AP, no matter what Steele says it will never be a good enough response as say, a guy who hiding behind a blog monicker could deliver.
Steele’s job is to raise money and support candidates. If he fails at one, he should be ousted. To do so otherwise is simply giving the left the biggest mid-term gift possible.
Besides – I thought the majority on HA touted the Hannity line of “Conservative first, GOP last”. By looking at the responses, that seems to be as big a load of shit as when Sean says it.
budfox on May 17, 2009 at 11:56 PM
lol. No, a lava lamp. Didn’t break though.
Mark1971 on May 17, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Actually, everybody is assuming he doesn’t believe it’s torture but doesn’t have the stones to say so. The possibility that Steele thinks it is torture doesn’t appear to have even entered anyone’s mind, as far as I can tell after having read the entire thread.
FloatingRock on May 18, 2009 at 12:01 AM
I’m going to ask you this one time to watch your filthy language. If you continue to post like an angry child, I’ll report your posts to AP, Ed and Michelle.
As to the substance of your post, I think you know that there is a war going on for the soul of the Republican party, right? So, who represents the voice of the party is significant.
Steele is annoying the conservatives in the GOP.
It matters.
Skidd on May 18, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Felt a big jolt in downtown SD.
oceansidecon on May 18, 2009 at 12:08 AM
Agreed Float….
I believe Hannity is touting OUR line… When he does…
Get it right will ya…
jerrytbg on May 18, 2009 at 12:09 AM
I’d vote for Liz Cheney for anything she wants to be – RNC Chair, President, whatever.
Daggett on May 18, 2009 at 12:10 AM
platypus – yes it is true –
At a debate rally at Coppin St College Dems pelted Steele with Oreo cookies
In Maryland liberal get away with anything
iam7545 on May 18, 2009 at 12:11 AM
FIFY
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Great! I won’t need to waste time going to the polls.
oldleprechaun on May 18, 2009 at 12:16 AM
You got to admit, you and AP have something in common.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:16 AM
You can always write-in.
Upstater85 on May 18, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Not far from the epicenter (Ingelwood/Hawthorne).
baldilocks on May 18, 2009 at 12:20 AM
tell me something…
when you use that language and your moniker implying, I’m one of the sly guys…
What kind of thrill do you get when you see it in print?
jerrytbg on May 18, 2009 at 12:25 AM
This dude’s job is to raise money. Period. As long as he is bringing in the cash, I’m fine with him.
Agreed. Most people don’t even know who the heads of the paries are. If he stopped doing interviews it would not alter his effectiveness one bit. His jobs are: 1) Raise money, and 2) Recruit candidates.
PackerBronco on May 18, 2009 at 12:29 AM
No third party! A third party will just split the vote and guarantee democratic victories in perpetuity. Conservatives must accept the fact that many of the elected officials, and the so-called brain thrust of the Republican party are neither Republican nor conservative; but individuals who jumped on the Republican band wagon when the party was in governance. These individuals have now reverted back to form – liberalism – and are now trying to drag the party in that direction.
The answer is quite simple. Boot them out! And replace them with true conservatives.
RMR on May 18, 2009 at 12:30 AM
What happens if everybody writes in the same name for every office on the ballet—and s/he wins?
FloatingRock on May 18, 2009 at 12:35 AM
Whenever I watch a Steele interview, I can’t help thinking he belongs in a 1970’s sitcom calling people, you jive turkey.
Christina_M on May 18, 2009 at 1:01 AM
What – no quote on steele’s citing Christine “It’s My Party, Too” Todd Whitman as a prime example of the gop’s big tent?
benny shakar on May 18, 2009 at 1:01 AM
Here’s a thought……when the RNC has their emergency meeting to change the name of the Democratic Party to the Democratic Socialist Party, why don’t you just change the name of the Republican Party to the Whig Party?
strangelet on May 18, 2009 at 1:05 AM
That second part is the key to the issue. If he is going to recruit moderates, the party is done. Just because the elites and insiders think that moderates and being democrat-lite is the way to win, despite the evidence of the last two election cycles, does not mean that general voters and the GOP base think the same.
What is that they say about insanity? Something about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. The GOP leadership is looking to do the same thing with the same kinds of candidates that it did in 2006 and 2008. But in 2010? Ah, the results will be different. /yeah, right.
AZfederalist on May 18, 2009 at 1:11 AM
Litmus test on canidates.
Tax Neutral and Spending Neutral Votes Only
Publically supports Marriage Amendment
Pro-Life
Anyone else is a RINO
PrezHussein on May 18, 2009 at 1:21 AM
Circa in the not too distant future.
You finally really did it!
You OBAMAMANIACS!……. you blew it all up!
Ahhhh damn you! Damn you all to HELL !!!!
semloh on May 18, 2009 at 1:22 AM
HA, look, strangelet had a thought.
Schadenfreude on May 18, 2009 at 1:59 AM
Gingrich is the the only hope for the GOP.
Punchenko on May 18, 2009 at 2:00 AM
I’ve noticed in all of these “We can’t become democrat-lite and expect to win” posts, there aren’t any specifics. What specific issues can we and can we not change our positions on? What about the massive deficits the last time Republicans were in charge? Is it moderation to say that that was a mistake? What about using the military for humanitarian purposes? Is it moderation to suggest that the military exists for our defense?
The reason it all sounds so dumb to me is that the last batch of Republicans who were in control, who actually did get elected in 2000, 2002 and 2004, were in a lot of ways ridiculously moderate. No Child Left Behind was an extreme left wing departure from the conservative position on education (that the Department of Education should be eliminated). They doubled the size of the federal government, they ran up huge deficits, they adopted the liberal position of humanitarian use of the military, they used supply side mechanisms that are fundamentally a variation of the left wing Keynesian economic theory, so please, what the hell are we moderating from? It seems like we moderated a while ago.
Electorally we need to stop ignoring the median voter theorem. The reality is that when we operate on a polarized basis, there is a bell curve ideological distribution in the general population. The Karl Rove strategy worked because 9/11 and the war in Iraq guaranteed enough of the vote from the center that running up the turnout score on the edge with things like the gay marriage amendment was sufficient to get a win. That strategy is what failed in 2006, and by 2008 there ceased to be any semblance of a cohesive electoral strategy.
We can’t moderate, because we don’t have a core philosophy anymore. The core tenets of our philosophy, federalism, small government, frugal usage of military resources, all got sold out in getting big christian right turnout while trying to divert attention from the ridiculous corruption of the people we elected to Washington.
So I’d be a lot less worried about electing moderate conservatives and much more worried about electing people who know and care about what conservatism is. I’d be happy to have someone who has an honest opinion on the conservative philosophy, even if they came to the conclusion that it should be applied moderately, as that would be superior to what we have, a bunch of spineless limp dicks who only ever hit on conservatism by coincidence in the process of spewing populist garbage.
galenrox on May 18, 2009 at 2:30 AM
Everyone assumes Steele is representing the Republican Party.
When a party has a President in the White House, the President usually has a lot of control on the party (or vice versa) and he can install a figurehead to represent his views (or vice versa)
On non Presidential years, who controls the top of the party? Some of them got Steele installed. Steele is a man floundering. This is the sign of a rootless figurehead. If he was in control he would have an opinion he could share. He doesn’t have an opinion, because his opinion does not count with the party elite, and they have not shared their strategies with them, so he is stuck between a rock and a hard place not knowing what he is supposed to say. When he gives his own personal opinions, he is laughed down and the party honchos let him take all the bullets.
Some Beast-ly type at the top strategerized it would be useful to have a quasi-Obama as figurehead while they worked out their ad campaigns to redefine the party down.
He got a nice office, a title, and no friends to go with it. They will let him flounder until he sinks and then they will blame him. Such is the politics of what I am calling more and more the Beast-ly RINO herd running the ad campaign called the GOP
entagor on May 18, 2009 at 2:59 AM
Steele should have simply responded: “I wasn’t briefed on the subject, unlike Ms. Pelosi, so I won’t offer an unfounded opinion, especially since it’s not germane to this discussion.
hillbillyjim on May 18, 2009 at 3:16 AM
“
hillbillyjim on May 18, 2009 at 3:17 AM
Michael Steele, you represent what is right and also what is wrong about the Republican Party. On one hand you stand behind conservative principles but on the other hand you don’t have the necessary gumption to call Obama a socialist.I would call it schizophrenic. Conservatives would call it selling out to the Messiah. Others would call it wishy-washy. But regardless of what it is called it is counterproductive.
technopeasant on May 18, 2009 at 4:03 AM
The problem is not what Steele really thinks or if he annoys hardcore conservatives.
The problem is that he is not effective if he is using weaselly language. Do you think that evasive maneuvering impressed anyone, Republicans or Independents, no matter where they stand on the matter?
Steele is a good guy but he´s not a debater. I noticed it when he was substituting for Hugh Hewitt on the radio. He always instinctively agreed with whomever he talked to. Trying to find common ground does only get you so far. Obama certainly doesn´t do it. At some point you must be able to steer the conversation in your preferred direction. That is how you earn respect. That is how you get people to think “yes!”. And Steele has yet to show that he can do it.
el gordo on May 18, 2009 at 6:05 AM
just say no.
rob verdi on May 18, 2009 at 6:09 AM
FWIW, Steele’s “Weekly Trunk” emails usually hit the Dems very hard.
As el gordo said above though, Steele is trying too hard to be liked by the MSM. That’s like trying too hard to be liked by Dracula once he’s kicked the lid off his coffin after a three-day nap.
The RNC chairman’s job should be to piss off the Dems and the MSM every day. If he does that, the fundraising will take care of itself.
fiatboomer on May 18, 2009 at 6:24 AM
Hannity for RNC chair….if he couldn’r raise the millions needed, he could just write a check
greataunty on May 18, 2009 at 6:44 AM
For some reason I cant see my earlier post.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but his clown act and clownish behavior prove he isnt fit for the job. Hell I could do it better.
“Do you think its torture?”
“I think Pelosi was briefed by CIA regarding the aggressive interrogation techniques.”
Spoken In a perfectly calm voice, no smiles, no goofy head moves and no stupid grins. You know, the way Dick Cheney would do.
And thats how you handle an asshat chattering skull trying to change the subject.
dogsoldier on May 18, 2009 at 7:00 AM
Dear goopers, I would like to personally thank you for your choice of Michael Steele as RNC chairman. He is the best thing that has ever happened to my DEMOCRATIC PARTY.Where did you find this joker? Or did you think you could fool America by picking an african-american, and then telling the country how “inclusive” you are? And now your stuck with him, because you won’t take the political hit of letting him go. You folks are brilliant. My party can’t compete with you brainiacs. And please continue your attack on Pelosi, lets get all the details on the illegal torture on the table. Hey, did you folks like the standing ovation Obama got at Notre Dame? Another failed attempt by your side to gin up another “non-controversey”. What brilliant tactic will you try this week? Too bad for your side that Obama is wildly popular and so much smarter than anyone on your side. We have the votes in Congress, we will do what we want.
athensboy on May 18, 2009 at 7:18 AM
Get rid of this clown Steele. He has no plan and just seems to react (badly) to news.
Jaibones on May 18, 2009 at 7:23 AM
I saw him once sub for Hannity on Hannity & Colmes. He was awful. I can’t remember who the liberal guest was, but he absolutely schooled Steele during their back and forth.
It’s gonna be a long 50 years of Dem rule….
angryed on May 18, 2009 at 7:49 AM
Go for it. One side is going to win, and deserves to. I suggest the winners expel the losers–whatever way necessary.
JiangxiDad on May 18, 2009 at 7:53 AM
who above said there should be a litmus test for candidates that included pro-life
people have called me a right wing reactionarybecause i am so conservative. however, i am pro-choice. so i wouldn’t be worthy enough to wear the Republican mantle?
our party has to come to grips with this.
kelley in virginia on May 18, 2009 at 8:07 AM
the question is not where i would go, the question is whether the pro-life candidates would ever feel that they needed my activism, vote, money.
kelley in virginia on May 18, 2009 at 8:08 AM
The question that the Pro Abortion candidates must answer is…what they are going to do with us Pro Life conservatives… On this principle we are simply not willing to negotiate! Killing babies is not and shall not be acceptable to us now or anytime in the future. Sorry if you guys don’t get that but we do and always shall!
sabbott on May 18, 2009 at 8:23 AM
What gives with this irony to veil contempt of our immediate situation?
Extremists whose views come to be proven far more accurate than not? No, my parents eschewed the JBS just as they did the KKK. I certainly have no affiliation with it, and was interested to read it’s generalized Wikipedia entry this morning, unwilling to log into the official site.
For the record, as a child watching MLK on television, I supported his message and was absolutely shocked and scared by the brutality of the day during peaceful marches broken up with firehoses by law enforcement officers. Entering puberty, I was frightened and a bit angry by the mobs and rioting of the Black Panthers dividing America for Black Supremacy, burning their own neighborhoods and inner cities, ransacking the lives of everyone and ruining honest mom & pop businesses.
That the JBS will always be associated with white supremacy is their Achilles’ heel. Hardly fair on a few counts:
1. Perhaps most likely that was a generational expression applicable then, but no longer racist except historically, wherein the KKK Democrat Party must own up now.
2. The result of reverse discrimination is now reality.
3. The federal intrusive legislative movement to make the Bill of Rights “better” has progressed into Hate Crime mode which indiscriminately prosecutes each and every thought of citizens.
BTW, William F. Buckley was JBS, and was miffed with Welch’s observation that Ike was weak on the USSR, which he WAS during WWII. He DID hold back US forces from entering Berlin on the outskirts of town so that the USSR could go in first, and stay too long. Ike wasn’t perfect. Being a diplomat first takes its toll on military effectiveness, and to keep the alliance, Ike along with FDR permitted our troops to suffer the brunt whenever push came to shove in decisions. Easy to have thick skin when it’s not on your own bones.
Whatever else WIKI mentioned about the JBS, time seems to have proven their points well enough.
I am not Libertarian, though as an Independent, I have certainly voted for some local Libertarian candidates as small bedroom communities bloat into high taxes to pad the politicians’ pockets with extravagance, hiring professional municipal employees while the infrastructure continues its expensive and incompetent direction. Among the Libertarian party’s problems, their membership knows well enough what they think and what ought to be, but their candidates are not politically adept. Hard to get that experience without experience.
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM
I didn’t watch the whole thing, so only play the Devil’s Advocate re: this thread’s quote.
The “enhanced interrogation techniques vs. torture” explication has ALREADY been argued and PROVEN by those directly involved. Steele SHOULD study up on that so as to be their advocate. He’s taking into account ALL the voters and the roll call temperature, holding back his own opinion, which SHOULD be fine. Is HE the legal authority, or was HE “in” on the knowledge when all this went down? Obviously, not. Should this be the only criteria upon which the RNC reorganizes? Should this be any criteria upon which the RNC regains strength? Should Steele’s opinion match everyone’s? Impossible.
Steele’s mannerism uphold’s the right to private opinion.
THAT has been under attack simultaneously with the original argument.
Steele said he’s for getting the information. He’s the RNC Chairman, not the POTUS, not the Senator or Congressman now. Taking the “journalists” bigoted bait (as the MSM have their own agenda, not the nation’s best interest at heart, certainly not the RNC or Steele best interest at heart) would have fed the fire, rather than stifle it. Steele deprived the journalist interviewing free oxygen.
Steele’s position is the RNC position: and the members are infighting just as Steele won’t feed fresh meat during an interview.
Would I rather see Liz Cheney, RNC Chairwoman?
Yes. But she’d be assailed just as fiercely by disgruntled Republicans as Steele is; everyone’s grinding their axe right now. There’s good and bad to come from the grinding.
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 8:53 AM
Steele, you are a clown, a tool, a fool, a fop, and you are torturing us. Get gone.
Western_Civ on May 18, 2009 at 9:03 AM
That gibberish comes courtesy of a Johns Hopkins education.
Akzed on May 18, 2009 at 9:08 AM
On the pro-life Constitutional stand, deprive abortion any taxed funding, and leave the issue to LOCAL authorities. The Feds have no right to dictate on this issue, no matter how popular or unpopular.
I agree with Fred Thompson’s approach.
Tax funded health clinics should NOT perform abortions on the tax dollar. Preventive health care by choice offers an array of alternatives that prevent the “unwanted” fertilization from occurring. An “unwanted” pregnancy demanding abortion should be paid for by the client; and measures taken during the procedure to prevent further “accidents” from the irresponsible female.
Every abortion excuse has become another rampant argument to murder innocent unborn babies. If a person chooses an abortion, I am sorry for their choice: I DON’T WANT TO BE INVOLVED!!!!!!! I donate to adoption and orphanage programs, but never to an abortion clinic. WE should NEVER be required to fund abortion.
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 9:11 AM
Michael Steele communicates with whomever he is conversing.
People listening who don’t hear what they want give their own knee-jerk responses.
Any one who demands a purist from the RNC Chairman is perpetually disappointed.
Steele’s personal opinions are NOT going to affect the legal outcome of any DNC witch hunt.
Steele would do the RNC a huge favor by willingly undergoing waterboarding so as to be able to defend its virtue as an enhanced interrogation technique, and to gain the respect of the many raw and enraged Republicans. Sacrifice, Steele. Just how far are you willing to go to coordinate the rebirth of the Republican Party and fight the Chicago Way? Sorry to suggest it, but a few moments of absolute agony might be well worth getting past all this and being ON TOP!
maverick muse on May 18, 2009 at 9:22 AM
Additionally Mav…when you consider the changing attitudes on abortion… it’s swung what, 10-15 points in recent years…it’s time for real change…the spending spree the rino’s went on under Bush…GRRRRRR
Replace them all…the country is lost if we don’t…
In fact it may already be too late…
jerrytbg on May 18, 2009 at 9:50 AM
maverick
The DNC head ,Howard Dean, was a purist. They won.
evensteven on May 18, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Regardless of what Steele is attempting to do with the Republican Party, can we all agree that he is a horrible spokesman. We needed a no nonsense guy who could not only articulate Republican positions, but better organize the party. We needed a Romney not a Steele.
Stickeehands on May 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Thoughtful post on the JBS. I do disagree with the label of “libertarian” for JBS, though. I believe it leans more conservative Christian.
Nontheless, no organization is perfectly correct on all stands it takes, nor is any organization without it’s foibles and screw-ups (individually and collectively). Still I see it as a very good organization and well needed.
Gonna fill out an application? :)
Skidd on May 18, 2009 at 8:11 PM
Michael Steele, don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out, you scumbag.
nelsonknows on May 19, 2009 at 12:41 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2