Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Steele Will Have the Mettle to Lead the RNC

By Greg L | 30 January 2009 | National Politics | 37 Comments

Guest post by Sanford D. Horn

After five ballots, I am pleased to announce that my friend and former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland Michael Steele won election to become chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Not that Michael would make an issue of this, but he becomes the first black chairman of the RNC and brings enthusiasm and a popularity that will help grow the party as well as help lead the GOP back to victory starting with support of gubernatorial candidates in Virginia and New Jersey this year, followed by retaking the House of Representatives in 2010. The GOP can retake the House when it nominates real Republican candidates who stand for fiscal conservatism and responsibility instead of handouts, bailouts and surrendering to the whims and slothful behavior of a Democratic Party who believe in womb to tomb Socialistic policies tethering a soon to be once free people to the puppet strings of government.

It is my hope as a Jewish Republican to see the tent of the GOP expand to include the fiscally and socially conservative Jews, blacks and Hispanics. These are constituencies that should have a natural affinity toward the Republican Party because of the desire to educate their children, believe in the family values of attending synagogue or church, working hard to provide for their families, support a strong military to defend this great nation, and a belief in personal responsibility, freedom and liberty.

I congratulate Michael Steele on becoming the new chairman of the RNC – to lead the party of Abraham Lincoln, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

37 Comments

  1. BothPartiesColludeAgainstYou said on 30 Jan 2009 at 5:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    He’s against Amnesty, so I’m glad he’s become chairman.

  2. BothPartiesColludeAgainstYou said on 30 Jan 2009 at 5:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    Or maybe he’s not. His position seems rather “nuanced”.

  3. citizenofmanassas said on 30 Jan 2009 at 5:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    The only thing that concerns me about Steele is he is starting to sound a bit like a liberal with his “big tent” bs. The dems have a much smaller tent than the GOP does. However, because of their liberal media friends, the perception is the opposite.

  4. jfk said on 30 Jan 2009 at 6:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    All the news reports keep reporting this as the “first black leader of the RNC”. Has the DNC ever had a black leader? I can’t recall that.

  5. Tillie said on 30 Jan 2009 at 6:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    So who cares about the color? Evidently jfk does.
    Isn’t it quality that counts? Or ……..

  6. Anonymous said on 30 Jan 2009 at 6:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    The DNS did have a black chairman first. The one and only Ron Brown, who was elected to the position in 1988. He later had a position in the Clinton White House and died in a military plane crash at Dubrovnik, Croatia. He was under investigation at the time for taking payments from a foreign government (Vietnam) for lobbying work. It was widely expected that he would have been indicted had he not died in the crash.

  7. BattleCat said on 30 Jan 2009 at 6:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    Congratulations to Michael Steele!

  8. FactSupplier said on 30 Jan 2009 at 7:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    The DNC had a black leader 20 years ago: Ron Brown.

  9. CONVA said on 30 Jan 2009 at 8:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    We can only hope Steele champions true conservative issues or the republican party will remain in the toilet. I am at a loss to find a generic defintion of “out reach” “big tent” and “inclusiveness” as it applies to politics. I am afraid the terms are in the eyes of the beholder and not necessarily in the best interest of the party or the country.

  10. obs425@yahoo.com said on 30 Jan 2009 at 8:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWESOME!!

    the only thing better would be a PALIN/STEELE ticket next time around!!

  11. es_la_ley said on 30 Jan 2009 at 8:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    Tillie said on 30 Jan 2009 at 6:37 pm:

    So who cares about the color? Evidently jfk does.
    Isn’t it quality that counts? Or ……..

    The Democrat Party does, when it suits them.

  12. bmo said on 30 Jan 2009 at 9:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    Agree, Steele is a great addition for the Republican party. I am surprised Saul A. did not do better but I am very happy with the RNC choice.
    Looking for my checkbook for when his first RNC email comes out ;-)
    PM: My thoughts exactly PALIN/STEELE

  13. Anon said on 30 Jan 2009 at 10:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    bmo and obs etc.

    The person you really feel is the most qualified Republican to head the ticket next time is Sarah Palin? Or is it that you think her star power would win. Seems kind of unlikely, but I am curious about your reasoning.

  14. WxGeek said on 31 Jan 2009 at 8:30 am:
    Flag comment

    Palin? Really? That’s the best the Republicans can offer? That’s an insult! Dumb as a door nob isn’t anyone’s standard for president. Run Jeff Frederick. He’s got more going for him AND he’s better prepared.

  15. Pat.Herve said on 31 Jan 2009 at 8:40 am:
    Flag comment

    I would be surprised to see Palin back on a national ticket. She was only put on the ticket to distract from McCains struggling campaign.

  16. Greg L said on 31 Jan 2009 at 10:05 am:
    Flag comment

    Since every pick by the GOP of late seems to relate to identity politics in one fashion or another, perhaps the next pick could be someone who never played that game. If you want someone who has never brought himself down to the level of talking about how someone’s skin color, gender or national origin is meaningful when discussing whether they’d be a good leader or have good policies, you got a pretty short list.

    Bobby Jindal and J.D. Watts come to mind. Especially Watts.

    The Republican party will certainly die if it tries to perpetuate the notion that identity is even worthy of discussion. The quickest way to find who is contributing to this is to see all those people thinking that Michael Steele’s racial background is going to make one whit of difference in the future success of the party. Let’s hope he brought something else to the table rather than just the color of his skin.

    I’m pretty hopeful he has, but these days it’s pretty hard to tell.

    [Ed note: thanks Sanford Horn for catching me get confused with the names of some politicians from out west I normally don’t hear from too often.]

  17. monticup said on 31 Jan 2009 at 10:50 am:
    Flag comment

    Michael Steele is a good man and I’m glad he’s chairman of RNC. I would have preferred Ken Blackwell because Blackwell is more conservative.

  18. citizenofmanassas said on 31 Jan 2009 at 2:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    Wx and Pat,

    Do you know Sarah is stupid, or are you relying on the liberal media to tell you that? She is no more stupid than obama who thinks we have 57 States, who thinks Arabic is spoken in Afghanistan. No more dumber than Joe Biden who asked a crippled man to stand, and thinks FDR went on TV in 1929 to give a speech.

  19. Sanford Horn said on 31 Jan 2009 at 2:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    Message to WxGeek: You’re not that bright either: door nob[sic]? No, no, it’s knob, and Jeff Fraudrick is splitting the VA GOP in more ways than the so-called MSM media could hope to do.

    As for Sarah Palin, in 2009, no, she is not prepared to head up the national ticket, and neither is Michael Steele and I know the man personally. He will be a tremendous leader for the RNC as stated in my above column. He would have been a super US Senator from the People’s Republic of MD if they had the brains to elect him. By the time 2012 rolls around, let’s see the progress the GOP has made under Steele’s leadership, THEN assess his potential as a member of the national ticket. Let’s also hold off judgment on Palin until she has another term as AK governor under her belt.

    Message to Greg: I think you have JC Watts confused with JD Hayworth - both of whom were excellent GOP members of Congress. Watts, from OK, IS in fact black (I know him as well), while Hayworth, from AZ, is white. (Just a little housekeeping here.)

    As a party and as conservatives, we needn’t worry about what the Democrats will do, because whatever it is, the MSM will defend it and praise it to the ends of the earth. What we need to focus upon is returning to our roots as Goldwater and Reagan conservatives and not have RINOs co-opt the party that gave us watered down candidates simply because the New York Slimes liked them. They loved McCain and he was a disaster as a presidential candidate.

    Let’s not start promoting potential candidates because of gender or skin color - that’s not what the GOP is about. Leave it to the Democrats to hyphenate everybody. And if we do start looking for able-bodied conservatives, start with Senator (Dr.) Tom Coburn (OK) and Congressman Jeff Flake (AZ). Sadly if the name Newt Gingrich wasn’t so polarizing he would be the ideal choice.

    OK, we have out work cut out for ourselves. Let’s roll up our sleeves and get busy.

    By the way, my offer to challenge Jim Moran in 2010 still stands if someone can help raise $3 million.

  20. Hmmm... said on 31 Jan 2009 at 3:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Republicans Nominate Flake for President”

    Yeah, that’s a great headline!

  21. citizenofmanassas said on 31 Jan 2009 at 4:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sanford,

    You made some good points. Steele though, seems to want to play identity politics like the Dems do.

  22. citizenofmanassas said on 31 Jan 2009 at 4:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    Hmmm,

    What flake are you talking about?

  23. Anon said on 31 Jan 2009 at 5:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    citizenofmanassas, one can make one’s own judgments on Palin based on listening to her interviews or her performance in the debate. You are certainly free to argue she is the best the GOP could field in 2012. Obama laughable error about 57 states can hardly be thought of as more than a slip of the tongue. The Arabic reference is more serious, although he corrected himself instantly. McCain made his Sunni/Shia mistake several times, he seemed incapable of learning from the first mistake. Palin never corrects herself on anything and yes, does seem like a flake. To take a famous example:

    “Asked what newspapers and magazines she reads, Palin - a journalism major in college - could not name one publication.

    “I’ve read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media,” she said at first. Couric responded, “What, specifically?”

    “Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.”

    “Can you name a few?”

    “I have a vast variety of source where we get our news,” Palin said.”

    I doubt there is a single person on this blog who could not answer the question that totally flummoxed Palin, even after she was given repeated chances to come up with something. Grade A Alaskan Prime Ditz.

  24. WxGeek said on 1 Feb 2009 at 10:47 am:
    Flag comment

    Sanford,

    I meant “nob”. Calling her a “knob” would be giving her too much credit. Keep drinking the Kool Aid, sport!

  25. Karla H said on 1 Feb 2009 at 2:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    Steele is a rock solid contender. Presentable, great background. Given the opportunity, he may get my vote. But I can’t help but think he got this position because of his color. “Hey! Look! Now the Motorola cellphone has the same features as the iPhone!” My concern is that we are entering a new era of politics in which “marketing is replacing engineering”. I’m looking for innovation. The old tax-and-spend is not going to work as personal incomes drop. I’m watching Bobby Jindahl to see how he does. He has some king size problems and limited resources. I want to see how innovative he can be. Palin, is presentable, but does not appear to have the skills I’m looking for. Colin Powell just plain back stabbed me. I’m looking over my shoulder from now on. If the Repubs want more votes they should be courting the Jewish population. Here is a well educated group with strong family values, a firm belief in individualism, and a history of knowing how important national defense is. The fact that they vote Democrat is a travesty.

  26. citizenofmanassas said on 1 Feb 2009 at 9:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anon,

    Obama also did not know the mascot of Penn State. I would argue that is pretty stupid, considering he seems to have an opinion on holding a College football playoff.

    Obama also tried to “enter” a window” at the WH. He also told a stupid joke that was simply wrong during his first press conference after winning the election.

    Obama also said Iran was not a threat, then it was a threat, then it was not a threat.

    As I said she is no more stupid then obama and joe b.

  27. Anon said on 1 Feb 2009 at 9:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    citizen of manassas, your examples before Iran couldn’t be more irrelevant, particularly the mascot one. Are you serious? Too many beers at half time? Clearly you must think tens of millions of Americans are stupid since I would imagine tens of millions don’t know that totally irrelevant fact either.

    If physical clumsiness is grounds for stupidity, I can think of a famous Republican pres who has the window beat by a long shot. On the joke regarding Nancy Reagan, it was in bad taste for sure. I am not sure how it reflects on the new president’s knowledge of policy however. You make the oddest equivalencies.

    I don’t agree with how you have described Obama’s position on Iran. What he has said is that he is open to talking to the country and lots of people in the foreign policy establishment agree. After all, the US held negotiations with North Korea. Finally and most important for a Republican, your “no more stupid than” is hardly a reason to support Palin for President. I’ll ask it again. Is Palin the best candidate you can imagine from the GOP? If so, the party is in worse shape than everyone says.

  28. citizenofmanassas said on 1 Feb 2009 at 11:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    The joke was bad because he was too stupid to realize Nancy Reagan did not hold séances in the WH, but still thought it was OK to take a shot at her.

    Obama has repeatedly talked about college football over the last four months. Penn State is one of the most followed tradition rich schools in the Country. He should know the mascot, or ask someone what it is before talking about it.

    The media loves to push the stereotype Republicans are stupid. They don’t do the same for their fellow Dems. President Bush attempted to use a locked door, it was played out in the media. Yet, Obama tries to walk through a window, and it does not rate for the media.

    Obama during a signing of an executive order ceremony was asked a question about what the executive order would do, and he did not know, and said he would have to ask his staff. Now, we all know if that was Bush, he would have been skewered by the media for not knowing what he was signing.

    He also flubbed the swearing in as well. Of course Roberts had a screw up too, but the media put all the blame on Roberts to protect their fellow lib.

    President Bush of course was not a very good speaking and he took plenty of heat for it. Yet, listen to Obama when he is not reading from the TelePrompter, he sounds just a bit better than Bush. Yet, we hear nothing but how smart the guy is etc.

    It is relevant to say she is not more stupid than obama and Joe b. Because if the media was honest in their coverage, they would either not pick on the GOP or they would be honest and admit that obama is not really that smart.

    I posted in another thread what Iran said in response to Obama wanting to talk with them. They see it as a weakness.

    Take for example the experience factor. Obama had very little, Clinton had very little(leave out her 8 years as First Lady)and she had 8 years experience as a Senator. Yet, the media never focused on that.

    Yet, when it came to Sarah Palin, she had no experience.

    Do I think Sarah will be the best pick in 2012? That is hard to say, considering we are three years away from the campaign.

  29. Anon said on 1 Feb 2009 at 11:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    citizen of manassas, Well it hasn’t been hard to say for others on this thread, who say Palin/Steele right now for 2012. Actually Bush wasn’t the clumsy Republican president I was thinking of. Again, most of your examples are so trivial. And in terms of the swearing in, it was very clearly the Chief Justice who made the error, he gave the phrase incorrectly and the ritual is for the president elect to repeat the Justice’s words and so the whole thing got muddled. I am not familiar with the executive order story. Could you provide a reputable news source? I don’t agree with you on how Obama speaks, and I also would note that his law students and academic colleagues don’t agree either. On Iran, I don’t think we should allow the country to dictate our policy decisions. They taunt the US either way, if talking is suggested or if it isn’t. Both have been portrayed as signs of weakness. Again, the US negotiated with North Korea, easily as rogue a regime. Many foreign policy experts would say talking to one’s enemies is a sign of strength and practicality.

    You haven’t actually offered any evidence at all that Obama, graduate of Columbia and Harvard, professor, politician, and writer, is not intelligent. Lots of his political enemies have characterized him as such, including some of the leading conservative commentators he engaged recently at George Will’s. They still don’t want him to be president. The point is to disagree with him on his policies, not to stretch to find bizarre flaws like the Penn State mascot. Again, how unbelievably irrelevant is that?

    On executive experience, I would agree you are right. He did have an extensive record as a legislator in Illinois, but very little time on the national level. However, time will tell. He won a very clear victory, by a safe margin in the popular vote, and in electoral college terms it was a landslide. You are going to have to live with it and maybe stop obsessing on mascots.

  30. BothPartiesColludeAgainstYou said on 2 Feb 2009 at 7:27 am:
    Flag comment

    “As I said she is no more stupid then obama and joe b.”

    Obama had no foreign policy experience 4 years ago and made himself quickly into someone who the American people felt comfortable with. Sarah has 4 years till 2012. If you’re right, she’ll be as cool and collected as Barack is by 2012. Personally, I doubt it.

  31. citizenofmanassas said on 2 Feb 2009 at 8:13 am:
    Flag comment

    Anon,

    If you watch the swearing in ceremony, Obama starts to say the second sentence before Roberts starts it. That is where the screw up starts.

    I love the “reputable” news source. As if I just pulled that out of my backside.

    Trivial? Every screw up the GOP does, the media covers it as if it is on the National security level. Sorry, it is your lib friends in the media who do that.

    Obama says more umms then anyone I know. If you take off your liberal bias, you will see it too.

    President Bush, if you recall, was too dumb to win against the very smart John Kerry. Yet, as it turns out Bush had a higher GPA then the very smart John Kerry. The same was the case in 2000 against Al Gore. Just because someone has a college degree, does not make them smart.

    Obama was lauded for campaigning on not allowing lobbyists to “run Washington”. He made a very visible pledge and yet what does not get covered is the exception rule that allows lobbyists to serve if obama deems their experience and skills necessary. In other words, I’ll rant and yell about how evil lobbyists are, but I’ll use them.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyW9e5QdWxk&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThEAO0lt4Dw&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU&feature=related

    Yup, he is one sharp dude.

    Is CNN reputable enough for you?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF5z2j-5DxQ

    Of course lost in all of that is another exception. Obama reserves the right to order more tactics then just what is in the Army field manual. Yet, he wants to make everyone think torture will never be used again.

  32. Chuckie said on 2 Feb 2009 at 11:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Smile and grin at the change all around!

  33. Stay on message... said on 2 Feb 2009 at 11:51 am:
    Flag comment

    Directed to most of the blogs above:

    Look, none of these people is really stupid. We may agree or disagree with them, but they’re not stupid. The only stupid thing going on is this discussion. Given the problems we are facing, discussing “who’s the stupidest” trumps fiddling while Rome burns. Let’s get back to discussing real issues.

    Fifteen people in fifteen separate blogs all asserting that the media is liberal accomplishes nothing. It’s for the most part correct. We know it. Now get over it.

    Be effective or be a crybaby. Don’t get distracted by the silly stuff. Concentrate on the issues.

  34. citizenofmanassas said on 2 Feb 2009 at 4:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    Stay on message.

    Well, if you listen to the liberal media the GOP is stupid and the Dems are just the smartest people ever. Just a bit of the turning of the tables.

    That is part of the issue. If the media is not going to accurately portray the two parties, there has to be another way to do it. Blogs are a good way to do just that.

    For example the popular opinion in the press regarding the house vote was the Repubs were partisan. Yet, they were joined by 11 Dems, yes that is a very few, but the no votes were more bi-partisan then the yes votes. That matters in the larger picture.

  35. citizenofmanassas said on 3 Feb 2009 at 5:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Here is more liberal BS about how smart Obama is.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCV9ZoV–BY

  36. Anon said on 3 Feb 2009 at 10:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    citizen of manassas, You think saying “um” means a lack of intelligence? I guess you have never been around many professors or scientists because plenty of the smartest people on the planet do not speak glibly like a midnight infomercial host. Apparently that is what signifies intelligence in the citizen of manassas world.

    You make no sense. You haven’t offered any examples that relate to intelligence. Wow Bush and Kerry, one point difference. That sure makes a strong point, as if. They were both lousy C students at Yale. Your examples get weirder and weirder and more of a stretch. Stay on Message is 100% correct.

  37. citizenofmanassas said on 3 Feb 2009 at 10:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anon,

    Yes, I do think saying “um” over and over is a sure sign of not being smart. The same goes for saying “you know” over and over. Obama should have a much larger vocabulary than “um”. He should be able to string together more than a few words without saying “um”.

    He says he is going to have the most ethical Administration of all time. Does that mean ignoring the tax cheats and hoping those issues will not come up during the confirmation process?

    Exactly who is in charge of vetting for Obama? Did Obama pick that person? If not, who did, if it was Obama, that again shows he is not very good at picking people, which means he is not very smart. Smart people do not put stupid people in charge of making decisions that will ultimately be placed at the feet of the “smart” person.

Comments are closed.


Views: 1425