In defense of Michael Steele, sort of

Well, it’s obvious that race is not the reason why Steele is in such trouble with the pooh-bahs of his party. They’re angry at him for being such an indefatigable self-promoter, for seeming to care more about his own career as an author, lecturer and television talking head than about the party’s fortunes, for spending the party’s money lavishly at a time when many Americans are suffering economic hardship, and for handling the party’s money so carelessly that $1,946.25 was spent at Voyeur West Hollywood, a topless club with a sadomasochistic theme. I will make no tasteless crack about Steele having promised to whip the party into shape.

That’s more than enough to get any party chairman in trouble, regardless of race or creed. But if you look narrowly at what he said, he’s surely right.

We’ve come a long way in this country, but it’s still true that the first woman or Latino or African American to hold any high-profile job inevitably comes under extra scrutiny. That’s just the reality. Does that enhanced scrutiny translate into a “slimmer margin for error,” as Stephanopoulos volunteered? Often it does.