Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
Michael Steele: there he goes again. This time, the unforced error is a string of comments on Afghanistan -- a "war of Obama's choosing," if Steele was to be believed, before 'walking back,' as they say, that and other choice remarks. The reaction is as you'd expect: as a few exasperated conservatives demand his resignation, the rest of the world rushes to meta-analytical judgment. Hewing a middle course is David Frum, who has posted a litany of pro-Afghanistan soundbytes uttered by Steele and forwarded his way by a scrambling RNC communications team.
The whole mess, predictable and ridiculous as it is, raises a basic question: why does Michael Steele still have his job? The meta-critics are right that his lumpen rhetoric probably has no ultimate significance, cosmic or political; like the Fool on the Hill, there Steele will sit as the world spins on. Possibly that is no big deal when a party is cruising down the highway of power, top down, wind whipping... but now is not that time. Now is neither a time when complacency nor resignation will do for Republicans. Yet here is a man who, through sheer force of sensationalist mediocrity, forces the heart and the mind into a defensive crouch of one or the other attitude. Steele is a timesuck. He cannot even say the wrong things well. Imagine what an effective RNC Chair could have been doing this year. Imagine what an effective Chair could do in the next. It's far past due, but it's still not too late to drop Steele.
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
For Steele, it's one stupid misstep after another, but after Steele puts his foot in his mouth, some even stupider misstep--an Obama misstep--always seems to distract our attention, just when pressure to show Steele the door would come to a head. What saves Steele is the incompetence of his opponents. But Steele needs to go, in case the other side gets their act together. At that point, we might need someone who can concentrate, and remember what their job is.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
This is even more of a problem given Obama's tendency to use off-the-reservation comments by Republicans as strawmen. If we do indeed succeed, Obama a year or two hence will surely quote Steele, painting Republicans as the party that "resisted, said it couldn't be done..." Republicans need to make their own clever use of Friday evenings--to dump Steele.
Jun '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
"Promote" Steele to the office of minority recruitment. Bring in Newt.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
This one is tough. The Republicans need a guy like Steele who isn't obviously "old party". At the time of the RNC election, the rhetoric and vitriol from the Old Guard was more damaging and over-the-top than anything Steele had ever done or said. Katon Dawson and South Carolina as the face of the party, which we almost got, would have been immeasurably worse, and since the election, we've gotten a constant stream of behind-the-scenes undercutting leaks trying still to bring Steele down.
The problem is that Steele has made some mistakes (not as many as some think; on his worst day he is far better than Howard Dean was for the Dems) and is still fighting the rear guard sniper action, plus he does at times speak unwisely- as he certainly did about Afghanistan- on issues where we should be more unified.
I think we need to stop the RNC civil war, go through November, and then re-assess. The best candidate was Ken Blackwell; the fact that the Michigan and SC GOP chairs were serious candidates, now still unwilling to pull together, proves that what the GOP does best is fratricide.
Jun '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
I can't help but watch and listen to Steele and think the present is the time before he writes a tell-all book on Republicans. I just can't see him leaving the role of chairman and being a supporter of the party that elevated him to his current position. Of course, keeping him on only to delay the book and inevitable fawning interviews is not a good reason.
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
Over at the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol has published an open letter to Steele, urging him to resign. With respect to Duane Oyen, who, as always, makes a good argument, I'm with Bill Kristol. Steele must go.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
...and, as an Ohioan, I recommend he not be replaced with Ken Blackwell. Blackwell looks great from afar, but up close, not so much: very polarizing, strident and extreme (not to mention exceedingly unpopular with independents). The guy would produce many, many cringe-inducing, over-the-top one-liners--particularly pertaining to the "culture war"-- from which mainstream Republicans would need to backtrack. We need an experienced, steady adult.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
Good morning and happy Independence Day everyone. This morning momentum grows for Steele to step down, with McCain and others piling on. Duane, it now seems the civil war we all fear is likely to happen whether Steele stays OR goes, so the question has become, what's the quickest way to end it? Jettison Steele, I think. Hope he has the decency to go quietly, with class.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
I've struggled with this for a while- none of the alternatives is particularly attractive. As I said before, the Dems wouldn't be having this kind of war at a time like this instead of concentrating on the enemy (us). I still think that the Dems would use this kind of situation as an opportunity to illustrate "Big Tent" rather than demand that everyone line up on every policy. Bill Kristol (with whom I almost universally agree on issues) is very much identified with the GWOT hawk side, so his view here is predictable.
If you make a move, you need a consensus candidate of unquestionable quality and ideal demeanor. If they could persuade someone like Jeb Bush (or Haley Barbour, but he is kind of busy) to take the job, and do it surgically and quickly, fine.
Scott, I hear you, but Blackwell's national image was from the Ohio count in 2004, and he came off sober and unflappable, not as a zealot the way you apparently saw him locally. I defer to your superior experience. Tim Pawlenty would be terrific, but he is also not inclined to get into squabbles at this point.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
Duane, ya, Blackwell was good in the 2004 "controversy" (which was a completely manufactured crisis BTW; it wasn't really even close), but his 2006 gubernatorial run was the stinker: got < 40% as I recall, focused on the whole gay marriage thing, total culture warrior. 2006 was positively brutal in Ohio, though, so maybe he was desperate and misrepresented himself. Still, like you say, best to get a safe consensus guy, since at this point all we need is to not fumble, which appears to be our one great skill.
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
Scott Reusser: Duane, ya, Blackwell was good in the 2004 "controversy" (which was a completely manufactured crisis BTW; it wasn't really even close), but his 2006 gubernatorial run was the stinker: got < 40% as I recall, focused on the whole gay marriage thing, total culture warrior. 2006 was positively brutal in Ohio, though, so maybe he was desperate and misrepresented himself. Still, like you say, best to get a safe consensus guy, since at this point all we need is to not fumble, which appears to be our one great skill. · Jul 4 at 11:16am
What else could you run on in 2006 after Taft's spending and tax issues, not to mention other scandals? It was a losing hand.
I don't have much against being a relatively low key culture warrior as long as one doesn't delude one's-self into thinking that you win election on those issues without other substantive positions.
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
A civil war would require that Steele actually have a serious base of support. Does he? I don't think so. The main argument in favor of keeping Steele is that a civil war would erupt after he left -- and had to be replaced. Peace at any price?
May '10
Re: Why Don't We Throw Steele Away?
After Obama's fund-raiser speech in San Francisco, where he broadly insulted all of Middle America and paid no serious price for it, I am still reluctant to crucify Steele for comments made at a fund-raiser that are less iunsulting and argulably true. I may disagree with him regarding Afghanistan (I do- call me "Mr. Neo-Con"- but George Will and others disagree with me while remaining perfectly good conservatives), but I am sick to death of the constant stream of insider leaks from the RNC by his jealous and overambitious detractors. Republicans should be able to have differences over specific policies without being drummed out of the party.
Unless there is a bloodless way to bring in a perfect consensus leader, let's stop bloviating about this and train our guns on the real enemy. It is no wonder we find ways to blow elections when we react like this.