I hearken back to early last year when DNC Chair Dr. Dean again invoked the race card when he said that republicans don’t have diversity among them unless they include the wait staff.Â He was speaking to the Congressional Black Caucus.Â Repulsive as that was, it was ignored by the media.Â Here’s another one that will be similarly ignored.Â Do the dems have a ‘Michael Steele Problem?’
From Michelle Malkin’s blog:
Well, isn’t this rich? Howard Dean is scolding the Maryland state Democratic Party for being too..white:
Dean says Maryland democrats need more color (black) on the top of their tickets to be successful in ’08.Â He still doesn’t get that color is not the issue as much as issues are the issue.Â Michael Steele got the endorsements of some prominent black (democrat)Â leaders not because of his color, certainly not because of his party, but because of his message.
I just don’t see how anybody who thought the gang of fourteen was a brilliant move could expect to win a nomination or a national election.Â Â TheÂ weasel surely is not an endangered animal in the republican party.Â Â Will his exploratory committeeÂ draw the same conclusion?Â The republican party needs to get back to what wins elections and ideas; conservatism.Â They have their own cut-and-run politicians which don’t belong at the top of the party hierarchy, and as founder of the gang of fourteen, McCain is one of them.
Ken Mehlman says he’s had enough fun for 6 years and is leaving as RNC chair for the private sector. Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, Maria Cino, a former RNC official and now Deputy Secretary of Transportation, and Mary Matalin, former communications director for VP Cheney are three names supposedly under consideration.
I would be surprised to see Michael Steele take the job as head of the Republican National Committee. Not because I don’t think he would be a good one, but because he probably has ambitions higher than that. Prior to this election, I would have said Michael who? It was his campaign that introduced him to me and most of the rest of the country. I was impressed, and after he said that he identified more with the party of Lincoln than the party of Bush, I liked him even more. I don’t mean to take away from Bush with that comment. Rather, like Bush, I see Michael Steele as someone with a vision for a better future. Paul at Power Line thinks that taking that position could hurt his electability in Maryland. That might be the case in Maryland. But I think that Steele is ready for a larger stage. Libertas at HipHopRepublican seems pumped to see Steele as the RNC chair. I know I’d like to see it happen.
Steele would, if he took the position, be making history in more ways than one. The other is that his vision may be just what the doctor ordered to help the Republican Party get on the right track, get the majority back, and make this country better than where we are today.
Mary Matalin is another excellent choice. And like Steele, a good communicator. According to the resumes however, it looks like Maria Cino would be the one.
Whoever becomes the RNC chairman, they better make embracing conservatism their guiding light. We have learned that a compassionate conservative isn’t conservative. A compassionate conservative is one who embraces entitlement programs regardless of the cost, and not based on need, but rather on age. (the prescription drug program) Economically speaking, the only difference between a compassionate conservative and a liberal is that the liberal wants to spend even more.
When you stop doing the things that got you elected, you won’t get re-elected. That’s what happened yesterday in the 2006 mid-term elections. But it was more than just that.
The media’s assault on the administration and the war-on-terror has had a cumulative effect on public opinion. All of which went unanswered. By allowing the spin to go unanswered, Bush allowed the people of this country to be misled on the Iraq war. It never was he doing the misleading. The fact that too many people don’t understand that Iraq is a front on the global war on terror is proof enough for me. Too many people think the Iraq war is not part of the war-on-terror. Never mind that everyone should be united in wanting to end this war by winning it, instead of just ending it, which appears to be the Dems and the George Soros wing of the Democrat Party’s plan.
In his farewell comments today, Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld summed it up perfectly when he said that this is a war unlike any other we or anyone else has ever engaged in. Everything about fighting it is unconventional. He added that this is the most misunderstood war in history. By last night’s election results, I’d say he is right.
Knowing that this country expects wars to be short and sweet, and with little to no casualties, the President’s failure to continue to make the point that this isn’t a microwavable war is also reflected in the vote yesterday. He made that point in the beginning, but his detractors weren’t listening and have short memories. The left is always asking Bush what mistakes he has made in this war. His biggest mistake is not being engaged in the media war early on. By not repeating over and over and over again, that this is going to be a long war that will extend long after the Iraq war has ended and our troops have come home, the voters have grown impatient and haven’t bought the notion that they really do need to be protected offensively, not defensively, and for a long time to come.
What kind of video would these two make? Under a million dollar bail it’ll be centered around steel bars instead of the Steelers’ football stadium. More on this from Debbie Schlussel.
You can be sure, well at least I am sure, that if the GOP hangs on to its slim majority in Washington that it won’t be because they won and the Dems lost.Â It’ll be because the election wasÂ stolen, again.Â Only question is which democrat will start that ball rolling?
It’s good for the Iraqi people to see the rule of law in action, instead of the rules of torture, rape, and murder under Saddam Hussein. It can’t hurt Bush either in the sense that the Iraqi people would not have witnessed what they did today when Saddam got the noose thrown at him, were it not for the vision of George W. Bush.
The majority of Iraqis were dancing in the streets today in celebration of the verdict.
All except some Sunni Arabs that is. They protested Saddam’s conviction in the streets. The Sunnis, a minority of the overall population in the country, enjoyed privileged status during Saddam’s 30 years ruling Iraq. It takes a sorry lot of people to think that they are somehow better and entitled to privileged status over all others. Sort of like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean and Harry Reid, but worse.
How long will it take before somebody starts calling for a retrial in an international court?
News of Saddam’s verdict has been tempered in the press. Some ‘fear’ that the news would be good for Bush. To which I say, to the victor goes the spoils. We have been hearing for years that Iraq is ‘Bush’s war,’ both he and the Iraqi people deserve some credit. One thing is certain, Democrats can’t take credit for prosecuting this war because they’ve been consumed with fighting to defeat Bush because of the war. I think I’ve said this before, but it bares repeating. If it’s good for America, it’s bad for the Democrats.
… you remember, that’s the program that Harry Reid, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., John D. Rockefeller IV, and Carl LevinÂ have said Saddam didn’t have.Â They acknowledge it now by complainingÂ that the declassification ofÂ some of the captured documents, so the public can see what was happening there,Â may be dangerous.Â These are documents recovered in Baghdad when US forces first went in.Â Â Making them available does tend to verify and validate the fact that, on this subject, Bush was right, and they were wrong.Â And don’t expect to hear them admit that they were wrong and Bush was right either.Â
The play is to forget about what was in the documents, and toÂ make an issue over making them public, ignoringÂ the obvious facts contained therein.
They are good at deflection and use it often.Â Â ThisÂ deflection is reminiscent of the Kennedy judicial obstruction memo that was read from a shared file on a computer network.Â A networkÂ that was shared by republicans and democrats in the Senate.Â Amazingly, Kennedy (with the help of the media by ignoring the content of the memos) was able to make the issue an issue of ‘how did republicans get his memos,’ instead of what was actually IN those memos.Â What was IN those memosÂ was their plan to politicize the Judiciary committee’s work in the handling of Bush’s judicial nominees.
Sooner or later something will happen that highlights the differences of Democrats and Republicans. The Jim Gibbons episode is one of these events. Ask Jennifer Flowers what Clinton officials/advisers said about her, and how the N.O.W. gang ignored her and her complaint (which Clinton settled out of court over).
When a democrat runs afoul, you see other dems having a pep rally on the capitol steps or (when Clinton was impeached) on the White House lawn, all lined up in support of their accused politician. And they also denigrate the accuser. I remember James Carville likening Jennifer Flowers as someone who will jump at a dollar bill if you drag it through the trailer park.
Shoe on the other foot. When a republican runs afoul, like Foley, Livingston, and others, the party expects them to pay the price. They don’t get behind the accused, and they don’t bad-mouth the accuser. You don’t hear anyone saying that Gibbons’ accuser, waitress Chrissy Mazzeo, is a gold digger or trailer park trash. And his republican colleagues, while disappointed with the news, say that if the accusations are true then he should go. But there is no pre-judgement of the matter. No pep-rally.
How these parties react to situations like this really does illuminate the character of both.