That was the best TV I have seen since the Gipper was on the tube (or Fred Thompson’s No Hands show in the debates!).

My distaste for any GOP member who feels the need to instantly apologize over some MSM instigated remark or twisting of words or intent (or taken out of context) is reaching new levels everyday. Instead of falling for it headfirst, Michael Steele should have planted a foot up someone’s rear. I had expected better from him.

We need to start making the liberals own this mess, instead of apologizing…

While not disagreeing with any of the statements about how offended conservatives on this site are by what Steele said, I would like you for just a few minutes, to try to see this from another perspective. Let’s start with
my post from yesterday. I do think that to some (probably small) extent, Steele understandably identifies with Obama. And I don’t doubt Steele has been pummeled in that spot often enough that it is sensitive to any other incidental approaches. And I think Rush’s words hit him squarely in that spot. I don’t think Rush meant to hit him in that spot. And I think that in some sense those of us who love Rush are reacting to Steele’s remarks the same way that Steele was reacting to Rush’s remarks.

The only way past this impasse, if for each of us to identify with the other. In one of Pat Buchanan’s books, he writes about being on his high school football team. This was well before the civil rights era, and the team wound up with a black player. Pat doesn’t talk about how quickly the player was accepted by the team, but at some point he was. And then the team was scheduled to play against some team whose coach said that they could play the game, but only if the black player didn’t take the field. In turn, Pat’s team said there was no way they were taking the field without him being allowed to play, and in the end, his team forfeited the game. Until we have that kind of mutual bonding, we won’t be able to work as a team to set the country back on the right path.

I think after Steele and Rush talked, Steele is identifying more with Rush. I think that will help him avoid this pitfall in the future.

As I said in my post yesterday, I am going to disagree with Steele in the future because he is libertarian and I am paleo. When such disagreements occur I will do my utmost to convince him of the correctness of my position over his. But I do not intend to throw him under the bus the way I would happily throw Specter, Snow, or Collins under the bus. I am not asking any of you to forgive Steele. I am asking you to accept his apology and shake hands. By all means, watch him like a hawk afterward. I certainly intend to.

Yeah, I would have preferred Ken Blackwell too. But we didn’t win that fight. And elections, even for the RNC have consequences. We now have to live with those consequences. Rush (and Hannity, and Levin, and Glenn Beck and all the rest) will continue to be the voices of our philosophical leadership. But Steele is now one of the prominent voices of our political leadership in exile, just like McConnell and Boehner. When they err, we should chasten them, but not throw them out.

You were walking a real fine line there for a bit, smelled like troll, acting like a moby but close enough to RINO that I wasn’t sure.

But anybody who says “Buckley .. Buchanan … whatever …” isn’t even a RINO.

I happen to have read both men and respect a lot of what Pat wrote before he ran for office (and fell off the edge of sanity). Nobody who is even passingly familiar with the two men could make that statement. And begging off as ‘senior moment’ is even worse.

So far as CPAC, Rush hit an outstanding home run with bases loaded!

Regards

Also, how does a party that is supposedly dominated by conservatives allow independents, democrats and “scared to death of Hillary” Republicans allow John McCain to be its nominee?

It’s all very frustrating to me because this party seems to have a full-blown case of the “Bob Michels”.

Also, how does a party that is supposedly dominated by conservatives allow independents, democrats and “scared to death of Hillary” Republicans allow John McCain to be its nominee?

It’s all very frustrating to me because this party seems to have a full-blown case of the “Bob Michels”.

If you are talking the party, it’s obvious that many already have.

If you are referring to RS, some have done that too. After the primary was over last year, conservatives that did not approve of McCain had to tread very carefully here at RS to make sure we didn’t upset the cart.

So what I am asking you to clarify is:

In the about section up there, it says neither Republican nor Conservative, it says right of center. Which is it? My contention is that John McCain was not “right of center” or a conservative, he was however a Republican, and we were more or less told to get onbaord or leave.

In my opinion, Michael Steel should have apologized for letting them get away with saying the RNC convention attendees looked like nazi’s. Steele is and has harmed the (R) party more than he’s helped so far, and if smart would step aside and let Blackwell or Saul have the reigns.

Also, (ht EricBrockway) Rush Limbaugh is not our leader, he’s our spokesman!

Because she gets that you have to go to war with the party you have, not the one you want.

I’ve read many of your posts, so I know you are more eloquent than “fine, leave”.

What has the GOP done to earn the trust of conservatives? I feel that is a fair question.

Go, stay, but make up your mind about what team you’re on.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19517.html