Michael Steele, chairman of Rep.

• Michael Steele, chairman of Rep. - Asked his entire staff to resign.
  • Cool. Sounds like he's gonna be tough. - Backwards typist
  • Michael Steele....(sm) - Just the big bad
  • That's all find and dandy but what's the difference? - idiots!!! sm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

By Philip Klein on 3.11.09 @ 10:15PM

In 1983, Woody Allen made the mockumentary film Zelig about a man who longs for approval so badly that he changes to fit the people who are surrounding him. The movie may as well have been written about Michael Steele, who continues to tie himself in knots as part of his effort to reach out to moderates.

Steele already has been ridiculed by all sides of the political spectrum for blasting Rush Limbaugh on CNN only to apologize when he received blowback. But now, via Matt Lewis, I see he told GQ that he believes abortion is an individual choice. Here's the portion of the interview:

How much of your pro-life stance, for you, is informed not just by your Catholic faith but by the fact that you were adopted?

Oh, a lot. Absolutely. I see the power of life in that—I mean, and the power of choice! The thing to keep in mind about it… Uh, you know, I think as a country we get off on these misguided conversations that throw around terms that really misrepresent truth.

Explain that.
The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.

Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.

You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.

So basically, in an effort to seem more inclusive, Steele tried to appropriate the language of the left by saying life is a choice, but then he allowed himself to be backed into a corner in which he said that women have the right to choose abortion -- by definition, a pro-choice postion. Perhaps realizing what he had just said, Steele then tried to add nuance to his point:

Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.

Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.

Do pro-choicers have a place in the Republican Party?
Absolutely!

So, after getting boxed in, he suddenly shifts from "individual choice" meaning "women have the right to choose an abortion" to it meaning that states have an "individual choice" about whether or not to permit women to exercise choice. Liz Mair, charitably, thinks that Steele was trying to express the pro-choice, anti-Roe, position but that he just was clumsy about it. Even if that were the case, however, it wouldn't be consistent with other recent statements he made on the subject.  

In December, when he was under fire during the RNC race for being a member of Christine Todd Whitman's moderate Republican Leadership Council, he portrayed himself as emphatically pro-life to CBN's David Brody, barbing, "I was a monk for goodness sakes ok?" Appearing on Fox News Sunday after his election to serve as RNC chair, Steele declared, "I'm a pro-life Roman Catholic conservative, always have been."

In a debate moderated by Tim Russert during the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Maryland, Steele was all over the place on Roe. Check out the following exchange:

MR. RUSSERT: Would, would you encourage — would you hope the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade?

LT. GOV. STEELE: I think that that’s a matter that’s going to rightly belong to the courts to decide ultimately whether or not that, that issue should be addressed. The, the Court has taken a position, which I agree, stare decisis, which means that the law is as it is and, and so this is a matter that’s ultimately going to be adjudicated at the states. We’re seeing that. The states are beginning to decide for themselves on, on this and a host of other issues. And the Supreme Court would ultimately decide that.

MR. RUSSERT: But you hope that the Court keeps Roe v. Wade in place?

LT. GOV. STEELE: I think the Court will evaluate the law as society progresses, as the Court is supposed to do.

MR. RUSSERT: But what’s your position? Do you want them to sustain it or overturn it?

LT. GOV. STEELE: Well, I think, I think, I think Roe vs. Wade, Roe vs. Wade is a, is a matter that

should’ve been left to the states to decide, ultimately. But it, it is where it is today, and the courts will ultimately decide whether or not this, this gets addressed by the states, goes back to the states in some form or they overturn it outright.

MR. RUSSERT: Is is your desire to keep it in place?

LT. GOV. STEELE: My desire is that we follow what stare decisis is at this point, yes.

Huh?

The problem with Steele's defenders is that they like the idea of Steele -- i.e., the idea that Steele is going to reach out to moderates. But the reality of Steele is quite different. He is proving himself to be a shape shifter who is trying to please everybody, but in the end delivering a completely muddled message. Ultimately no pro-choice independent or Democrat is going to be more inclined to become a Republican as a result of that GQ interview, because Steele comes off like a bumbling clown who is trying to have it both ways. The mere fact that we have to have a whole debate over what he means demonstrates that he's doing a terrible job at communicating. And lest we forget, communication was supposed to be his strong suit.

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/03/11/michael-zelig-steele

But not before he solicited at least two teenagers via email/internet.  See articlee (be sure to read on and see what he says to them).

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 30, 2008; A01

Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, went unarmed into his first meeting with the new commander in chief -- no aides, no PowerPoint presentation, no briefing books. Summoned nine days ago to President-elect Barack Obama's Chicago transition office, Mullen showed up with just a pad, a pen and a desire to take the measure of his incoming boss.

There was little talk of exiting Iraq or beefing up the U.S. force in Afghanistan; the one-on-one, 45-minute conversation ranged from the personal to the philosophical. Mullen came away with what he wanted: a view of the next president as a non-ideological pragmatist who was willing to both listen and lead. After the meeting, the chairman "felt very good, very positive," according to Mullen spokesman Capt. John Kirby.

As Obama prepares to announce his national security team tomorrow, he faces a military that has long mistrusted Democrats and is particularly wary of a young, intellectual leader with no experience in uniform, who once called Iraq a "dumb" war. Military leaders have all heard his pledge to withdraw most combat forces from Iraq within 16 months -- sooner than commanders on the ground have recommended -- and his implied criticism of the Afghanistan war effort during the Bush administration.

But so far, Obama appears to be going out of his way to reassure them that he will do nothing rash and will seek their advice, even while making clear that he may not always take it. He has demonstrated an ability to speak the lingo, talk about "mission plans" and "tasking," and to differentiate between strategy and tactics, a distinction Republican nominee John McCain accused him of misunderstanding during the campaign.

Obama has been careful to separate his criticism of Bush policy from his praise of the military's valor and performance, while Michelle Obama's public expressions of concern for military families have gone over well. But most important, according to several senior officers and civilian Pentagon officials who would speak about their incoming leader only on the condition of anonymity, is the expectation of renewed respect for the chain of command and greater realism about U.S. military goals and capabilities, which many found lacking during the Bush years.

"Open and serious debate versus ideological certitude will be a great relief to the military leaders," said retired Maj. Gen. William L. Nash of the Council on Foreign Relations. Senior officers are aware that few in their ranks voiced misgivings over the Iraq war, but they counter that they were not encouraged to do so by the Bush White House or the Pentagon under Donald H. Rumsfeld.

"The joke was that when you leave a meeting, everybody is supposed to drink the Kool-Aid," Nash said. "In the Bush administration, you had to drink the Kool-Aid before you got to go to the meeting."

Obama's expected retention of Robert M. Gates as defense secretary and expected appointment of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state and retired Marine Gen. James L. Jones as national security adviser have been greeted with relief at the Pentagon.

Clinton is respected at the Pentagon and is considered a defense moderate, at times bordering on hawkish. Through her membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee -- sought early in her congressional career to add gravitas to her presidential aspirations -- she has developed close ties with senior military figures.

Some in the military are suspicious of "flagpole" officers such as Jones, whose assignments included Supreme Allied Commander at NATO, Marine commandant and other headquarters service, and who grew up in France and is a graduate of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. But Jones also saw combat in Vietnam and served in Bosnia.

"His reputation is pretty good," one Pentagon official said. "He's savvy about Washington, worked the Hill," and at a lean 6-foot-4, the former Georgetown basketball player "looks great in a suit."

Although Jones occasionally and privately briefed candidate Obama on foreign policy matters -- on Afghanistan, in particular, as did current deputy NATO commander Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry -- he is not considered an intimate of the president-elect.

But as Obama's closest national security adviser, or at least the one who will spend the most time with him, Jones is expected to follow the pattern of two military predecessors in the job, Brent Scowcroft and Colin L. Powell, who injected order and discipline to a National Security Council full of strong personalities with independent power bases.

Although exit polls did not break out active-duty voters, it is virtually certain that McCain won the military vote.

In an October survey by the Military Times, nearly 70 percent of more than 4,000 officers and enlisted respondents said they favored McCain, while about 23 percent preferred Obama. Only African American service members gave Obama a majority.

In exit polls, those who said they had "ever served in the U.S. military" made up 15 percent of voters and broke 54 percent for McCain to 44 percent for Obama. "As a culture, we are more conservative and Republican," a senior officer said.

Obama has said he will meet with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs as well as the service chiefs during his first week in office. At the top of his agenda for that meeting will be what he has called the military's "new mission" of planning the 16-month withdrawal timeline for Iraq. Senior officers have publicly grumbled about the risk involved.

"Moving forward in a measured way, tied to conditions as they continue to evolve, over time, is important," Mullen said at a media briefing four days before his Nov. 21 meeting with Obama. "I'm certainly aware of what has been said" prior to the election, he said.

The last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, clashed with the chiefs during his first sit-down with them when they opposed his campaign pledge to end the ban on gays in the military. The chiefs, some of whom held the commander in chief in thinly veiled contempt as a supposed Vietnam draft dodger, won the battle, and Clinton spent much of his two terms seen as an adversary.

But Mullen came away from the Chicago talk reassured that Obama will engage in a discussion with them, balancing risks and "asking tough questions . . . but not in a combative, finger-pointing way," one official said.

The president-elect's invitation to Mullen, whom Obama previously had met only in passing on Capitol Hill and whose first two-year term as chairman does not expire until the end of September, was seen as an attempt to establish a relationship and avoid early conflict. While some Pentagon officials believe an Iraq withdrawal order could become Obama's equivalent of the Clinton controversy over gays, several senior Defense Department sources said that Gates, Mullen and Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the military's Central Command, are untroubled by the 16-month plan and feel it can be accomplished with a month or two of wiggle room.

These sources noted that Obama himself has said he would not be "careless" about withdrawal and would retain a "residual" force of unspecified size to fight terrorists and protect U.S. diplomats and civilians. The officer most concerned about untimely withdrawal, sources said, is the Iraq commander, Gen. Ray Odierno.

Even as the Iraq war continues, defense officials are far more worried about Afghanistan, where they see policy drift and an unfocused mission. With strategy reviews now being completed at the White House and by the chairman's office, an internal Pentagon debate is well underway over whether goals should be lowered.

Although Gen. David McKiernan, the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has requested four more U.S. combat brigades, some Pentagon strategists believe a smaller presence of Special Forces and trainers for Afghan forces -- and more attention to Pakistan -- is advisable.

Bush's ideological objective of a modern Afghan democracy, several officials said, is unattainable with current U.S. resources, and there is optimism that Obama will have a more realistic view.

A number of senior officers also look with favor on Obama's call for talks with Iran over Iraq and Afghanistan, separating those issues from U.S. demands over Tehran's nuclear program.

One of the biggest long-term military issues on Obama's plate will be the defense budget, currently topping 4.3 percent of gross domestic product once war expenditures are included.

Obama has said he will increase the size of the Army and the Marine Corps, finding savings in the Iraq drawdown and in new scrutiny of spending, including on contractors, weapons programs and missile defense.

"They know the money is coming down," a Pentagon official said of the uniformed services, and many welcome increased discipline.

But it's neither the military's nature nor its role to volunteer the cuts, the official said. "It's for Congress and the administration to say 'Stop it.' "

Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta and research Editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.

I read that he did not take his medication deliberately so that people could see the full effects of his disease.  That's just a tad manipulative, if you ask me.  At any rate, I don't believe, and will never support, stem cell initiatives.  There is much much more to these programs than is being presented to the public. 

My response:

I know you are dismayed and disheartened at the results of last week's election. You're worried that the country is heading toward a very bad place you don't want it to go. Your 12-year Republican Revolution has ended with so much yet to do, so many promises left unfulfilled. You are in a funk, and I understand. Gee thanks, Mike, but I am not in a funk.  I know in whom I believe and it is not a political party and not you.  As to things left undone...yer pal Bill left many things undone also...terrorists running amuck free to plot and plan 9-11 because he was too busy in the cigar bidness with Monica Lewinsky to react decisively to them, too busy lying to a grand jury, too busy obstructing justice, too busy taking care of Vince Foster (though I believe Hillary had more to do with that than Bill did)....as AG said:  pot, kettle, pot kettle.

Well, cheer up, my friends! Do not despair. I have good news for you. I, and the millions of others who are now in charge with our Democratic Congress, have a pledge we would like to make to you, a list of promises that we offer you because we value you as our fellow Americans. You deserve to know what we plan to do with our newfound power -- and, to be specific, what we will do to you and for you.  Oh, yeah, you cannot imagine how jazzed we are that YOU and the Democrats are in charge now.  Whoopeee.  ROFL.  You value us as fellow Americans?  What a load of hooey.   Oh I know what you plan to do TO us...I believe it is calling hosing.  For us?  Nada.

Thus, here is our Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives:

Dear Conservatives and Republicans,

I, and my fellow signatories, hereby make these promises to you:

1. We will always respect you for your conservative beliefs. We will never, ever, call you unpatriotic simply because you disagree with us. In fact, we encourage you to dissent and disagree with us.  You should look up respect in your Funk and Wagnall's, Mikey.  You have never shown it...how could you?  You have no clue what respect means.  You were called unpatriotic because it is unpatriotic to criticize publicly your country and its leadership in a time of war.  Look up patriotic in your Funk and Wagnall's. 

2. We will let you marry whomever you want, even when some of us consider your behavior to be different or immoral. Who you marry is none of our business. Love and be in love -- it's a wonderful gift. Umm, down there where you say you will respect (again, you need to look that one up!) our beliefs...well this one flies in the face of that.  But...oh....your moral compass went wonky years ago.  Might want to look up morality while you are in the dictionary.  Look, Mike....what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms is up to them, but do not expect us to agree that it is right and it is not wrong, because we are not going to do it.  If they are sure they are right, they should not need our blessing.   I am not telling them that they cannot do it...I am telling them I will not, cannot condone it.  Period, end of sentence.  What next?  Stealing will be okay because you have not and and you want to have?  And then what?

3. We will not spend your grandchildren's money on our personal whims or to enrich our friends. It's your checkbook, too, and we will balance it for you.  Oh, that's rich, coming from you.  The tax and spend group.  You want to spend our grandchildren's money on programs that keep people enslaved to your philosophy so they will keep voting for you.  You actually think we don't know that?

4. When we soon bring our sons and daughters home from Iraq, we will bring your sons and daughters home, too. They deserve to live. We promise never to send your kids off to war based on either a mistake or a lie.  You are so full of it, Mikey.  When are you going to stop beating that dead horse?  

5. When we make America the last Western democracy to have universal health coverage, and all Americans are able to get help when they fall ill, we promise that you, too, will be able to see a doctor, regardless of your ability to pay. And when stem cell research delivers treatments and cures for diseases that affect you and your loved ones, we'll make sure those advances are available to you and your family, too. And when the quality of that care tanks and it takes months and years to get treatment, if America is so deluded as to go down that road...you with all the bucks will be fine.  These poor and downtrodden you want to champion will get the short end of the stick...you know it and I know it, trouble is, THEY don't know it.  You have got the wool pulled snugly down around their toes.  Shame on you.

6. Even though you have opposed environmental regulation, when we clean up our air and water, we, the Democratic majority, will let you, too, breathe the cleaner air and drink the purer water.  Yeah, yeah, yeah.  What do you drive?  How many times a month do you fly?  How much have you PERSONALLY done about any of those things? Gimme a break.

7. Should a mass murderer ever kill 3,000 people on our soil, we will devote every single resource to tracking him down and bringing him to justice. Immediately. We will protect you.  HA!  That is the biggest lie of all.  It was when your boys were in charge that terrorism escalated to unimaginable heights.  Your boy Bill could have put bin Laden in the slammer BEFORE 3000 people were killed.  You protect us???  The fox is in the hen house, Mikey.  You couldn't protect a flea in Fort Knox.

8. We will never stick our nose in your bedroom or your womb. What you do there as consenting adults is your business. We will continue to count your age from the moment you were born, not the moment you were conceived.  Thanks for nothing!  Flying a plane into a building and killing 3000 was terrible, but you are condoning mass murder on a grand scale of the most innocent among us.  Millions. What an absolutely ridiculous thing to say.  Morally bankrupt.  That aptly describes the liberal view espoused here.

9. We will not take away your hunting guns. If you need an automatic weapon or a handgun to kill a bird or a deer, then you really aren't much of a hunter and you should, perhaps, pick up another sport. We will make our streets and schools as free as we can from these weapons and we will protect your children just as we would protect ours. Thank you but no thank you.  I will protect my own children.  I wouldn't trust you to protect a gerbil.

10. When we raise the minimum wage, we will pay you -- and your employees -- that new wage, too. When women are finally paid what men make, we will pay conservative women that wage, too.  Then why do you and your ilk keep going to Canada to do your movies, etc., where you don't have to pay American Union wages and can do it cheaper?  You are so full of crap.  Don't know how you are still able to talk.

11. We will respect your religious beliefs, even when you don't put those beliefs into practice. We do put them into practice.  You hate it when we do, when we call wrong, wrong.  Like abortion...like same sex marriage....like.....you are the most intolerant of the intolerant.   Why people cannot see through your facade is beyond me.  In fact, we will actively seek to promote your most radical religious beliefs (Blessed are the poor, seeking to keep them poor and under your thumb is not helping the poor) Blessed are the peacemakers (we do believe in peace, but we do not believe in letting those who DO NOT come here and kill us), Love your enemies (when you get that one down pat, call me), It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God (yep, if you worship money above God, it is, hellooo Mike) brothers of mine, you did for me.(sorry, but hearing you quote scripture is really hard for me when I know you don't believe a word of it...and these are not RADICAL beliefs.  Chopping off your head if you don't agree is radical, you goof.  Saying convert or we will kill you is radical.  We just call what is wrong wrong.  We agree to disagree). We will let people in other countries know that God doesn't just bless America, he blesses everyone. We will discourage religious intolerance and fanaticism -- starting with the fanaticism here at home, thus setting a good example for the rest of the world. You would not know a good example if it bit you on your rather large rear end.  I believe you are wrong about God blessing everyone.  Yes, he does not want even one to perish, that is why Christians try to get the word out.  We would like everyone to have eternal life.  EVERYONE.  But we don't chop off dissenters' heads.  It is a free choice, Mikey.  You come to Him or you don't.  YOUR choice.  Not MINE.  Which is probably what chaps you so much.  Because you are so fond of telling people what they should do, and to do it YOUR way.  Look up intolerance while you are in your F&W.  Fits the liberal view much more than the conservative view.

12. We will not tolerate politicians who are corrupt and who are bought and paid for by the rich. We will go after any elected leader who puts him or herself ahead of the people. And we promise you we will go after the corrupt politicians on our side FIRST. If we fail to do this, we need you to call us on it. Simply because we are in power does not give us the right to turn our heads the other way when our party goes astray. Please perform this important duty as the loyal opposition. We will not tolerate corrupt politicians.  Oh, boy, that is rich!!  I can hardly type through tears of hysterical laughter.  Bill - felony perjury and obstruction of justice; Bill and Hill...convicted of several things back in home state...and still have yet to explain dead Vince Foster--- Murtha, unindicted co-conspirator--Harry Reid, all kinds of shady deals....pullleezzzzeeee.  Pot kettle pot kettle.

I promise all of the above to you because this is your country, too. You are every bit as American as we are. We are all in this together. We sink or swim as one. Thank you for your years of service to this country and for giving us the opportunity to see if we can make things a bit better for our 300 million fellow Americans -- and for the rest of the world. 

 Wow, I bet you had to grit your teeth while you wrote that one.  But I see through ya, Mikey.  You are going to try the get more bees with honey because your true colors during the last Presidential election didn't work, did they big guy?  You are so transparent.  Just wish those who hang on your every word realized it.  You wouldn't know the truth if it slapped you upside your rather large head.

Ya know, Mikey, conservatives don't hate liberals.  We don't hate you.  We are afraid for them and you and afraid for ourselves with you in control..but we don't hate you. I pray for them.  I pray for you.  I hope one day the light will really come on and you will know the truth.  I pray it happens before you take us all down with you.  I pray it happens before the radical Muslims start blowing up children in our malls, when cars are no longer safe and we do not feel safe even in our homes.  I sincerely pray that it happens before that.  Yes, we should all sink or swim as one, but if we hold onto the guidebook, the Bible, as one, our chances are much greater to swim.   

God bless!

Observer

Signed,

Michael Moore

When you have time and want to listen it's an excellent interview.  His interview is with Berg - a lifetime democrat/lifetime liberal

http://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/2-news/43-phil-j-berg-on-michael-savage-audio

Once on that page there is a link to click to hear the show (the direct link was too long to post here)

P.S. - I just heard this on the show and it does bring up a question.  Why isn't Obama bringing his wife and kids to visit his ailing grandmother.  The one who raised him.  Wouldn't he want his ailing grandmother to see his wife and kids?  It does not make sense that these could be her last days why didn't he bring his wife and daughters. 

So, now Savage wants Hillary to help him get out of the British ban.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5326181/Shock-Jock-Michael-Savage-seeks-Hillary-Clintons-help-over-UK-ban.html

Now here's the funny part:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CILylcOIQhg

I would bet that she hasn't returned his calls yet....ROFL.

Way to go Michael Savage - way to go!

“You may say, oh, who listens to that guy Savage? What does an endorsement from him mean?

“It means more than you may imagine.

Savage said his endorsement means more than the backing of a dozen newspapers he mentioned, including the Los Angeles Times, Newsday, Chicago Tribune and New York Post, because his “daily circulation is larger than any one of these newspapers.

“I have millions of listeners,” he continued, “most of whom, by the way, are independents. In case you don’t know it, they’re not all conservatives. Most of my audience are independents and they have been waiting for some kind of a signal…

“I have put my own ego aside and I have to say what’s best for America.

“I’ll take my chances with the old war horse and even with Sarah Palin, who I’m not really a big fan of, by the way, over this naked Marxist revolutionary, because I don’t want to see what the next Pol Pot’s liable to do to the world.”

Link below

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/savage_endorses_mccain/2008/10/28/144993.html

He sure has a special talent for making stuupid people look even stuupider.   Take, for example, the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra_fAYl4Th4&NR=1

Wow, you are easily amused. 

He's been trying to "subvert" everyting in American since the ྌs. He's a really big jerk (no pun intended on size) and I wouldn't give him the time of day if he asked.

He's a creep. He's the one who should move to a different country since he finds so much wrong with this one.

JMO

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/michael-savage-banned-from-great-britain

GOOD FOR THEM!!!!  LOL.  We need to do the same thing.  I can think of 2 right off the top of my head.  How about Hannity and O'Really?

How did YOU know?