News Does Michael Steele Truly Represent Any Faction of the Republican Party?

[LowlyPion]

This is what I had in mind...quite a few 912ers are on board. The Washington Times is the only news link. The other 2 are to demonstrate what I meant by taking on a life of it's own...shows momentum.

Beck will undoubtedly flog that to within a fractional inch of its life if he thinks he has a market for his infantile theatrics.

But the premise of the site is seemingly so oriented toward Christian Fundamentalists (Principle 2 alone is already exclusionary in its call for the primacy of God) as to seem to have lost its way from the very Constitution that Beck pretends to embrace.

A life of its own? It can't even eat or breathe on its own. If Beck pulled the plug, I think it would be a merciful euthanasia. Those people are lost. Abandoned by the consequence that the last administration they helped put in office demonstrated that in the World their Principle 1 that America is good simply got lost.

I think Steele's problem is that he is not one of them. They wouldn't even let him speak at their Teabag parties on the 15th. And outside of the socially conservative the Republican Party is looking a trifle thinned.

 

[Gokul43201]

How does "significantly" mean?

"Significantly" means the difference is larger than any errors in my counting and any fluctuations from someone dying and being replaced by their widow or a special election happening here or there unexpectedly and/or under unusual circumstances.

For the age of the party, I drew up a frequency table with 8-yr spans to estimate the average age (rather than actually count every single senator). My error bar on the estimate is a year or two, and the difference between the mean values was smaller than that, hence no "significant" difference.

 

[WhoWee]

Beck (not talking about Hannity and Rush didn't participate) repeatedly stated he didn't want the Tea Party gatherings to be Republican or Democrat...Steele wasn't invited accordingly.

As a result, independent groups are forming in small towns to run local (independent) candidates.

As for the state government leaders challenging under the 10th Amendment..they were prompted by "no child left behind"...a Bush initiative.

 

[lisab]

Steele now says Obama wasn't vetted, because he's black.

...what the......?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/22/steele-obama-wasnt-vetted-because-hes-black/

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This accusation of "liberal guilt" kills me. If that was really a determining factor, Jesse Jackson would have been President long ago.

Thrilled to see a black man as President? Absolutely!

Willing to vote for a person just because they are black? Absolutely not!

Every time a Republican claims that Obama was elected for reasons other than his superior intellect, superb political skills, values, wisdom, pragmatism, his global perspective, his quick wit, and his charisma, they just put another nail in the Republican Party coffin and prove that they have no idea what is going on.

 

[LowlyPion]

Steele now says Obama wasn't vetted, because he's black.

...what the......?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/22/steele-obama-wasnt-vetted-because-hes-black/

Apparently the Republicans are the ones that should have vetted Steele.

His verbal dysentery is every bit the equal of Biden's I think.

I think it must be a scary day to be a Republican, any day that Steele or Cheney gets their hands on a microphone. These days that seems to be any day whose name ends with a "y".

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I can't help but add that the first time I saw Obama, on Meet the Press, I was wishing he was white. I was afraid that his skin color made it impossible for him to win. For this reason, while I supported Obama with great enthusiasm, I had predicted that Hillary would win the Dem. ticket.

Many liberals and moderates, including blacks, found themselves in the position of liking Obama but being afraid to support him for fear of it costing the Dems the general election. It was only when he won lily-white Iowa - the whitest State in the Union - that many of us began to take him seriously as a viable candidate. In other words, the truth of the matter is that his skin color almost cost him the liberal vote; including the black vote!

I love Iowa!

 

[swat4life]

This accusation of "liberal guilt" kills me. If that was really a determining factor, Jesse Jackson would have been President long ago...

I like your way of articulating things. This whole balderdash about "liberal guilt" is no different than calling men who are activists for women's rights "effeminate" or in extreme cases "gay".

The underlying logic is that those who voted for Obama did so principally because of his race and not because of other factors.

In other words, something "emotional" and nonsensical drove individuals' decision making as opposed to clear, well-thought out thinking.

The irony is also the educational and financial differences between Obama voters vis-a-vis his recent competitors.Is Obama perfect? Absolutely not.

Is he the most experienced? Absolutely not.

Was he the best individual for the job? In my opinion, yes. The Republican party as it stands now consists "largely" of regional pockets of people who are out of touch with the mainstream of society. Once more, sensible members of the party like Tim Pawlenty from Minnesota for instance get silenced by the extremists. I gave money to a Republican candidate during the primary but as I saw how things progressed towards the general, I was sadly disappointed with the direction the party took.Michael Steele speaks like someone who didn't pass his 7th grade Langauge Arts course and he shouldn't get a "pass" for sounding "cool" just because he is African American - he sounds like a true idiot.What about people like Kay Bailey Hutchinson? I was so incensed when Ms. I-attended-55-community-colleges aka Sara Palin was selected as McCain's running mate. WTF?!

Of all the intelligent, articulate women in the Republican party, is that what they present to the world? Yes, she went over well with her base, but not with middle-of-the-road voters.The Republicans are still feeding off of the same old tired fear, hate, reactionary focused strategies of the past and they don't seem to recognize that it's just not going to work this time around.

Paul Krugman did a fascinating video presentation in Oregon where he discusses economic and social policy in relation to democratic and republican party formation. He touches on my last point above about the strategies of the Republican party since Reagan.

The video is both informative and entertaining. He's a wee bit too left-of-centre for me but he does have some interesting insights rather regularly.

Video link on google:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-782159081457451178&ei=2HcXStFLguaqAuPJocAG&q=paul+krugman&hl=en