Um, not Kevin Steele.

I was thinking of Michael Steele. For RNC Chair, that is. Let's face it: we can't even begin to address our problems over the next 2-4 years without tapping one talented guy to clear out the deadwood over there, sharpen our message, bring us up-to-date on technology, and create the environment for us to re-take the Congress in 2010.

After we've done that, we can start looking at the rather awesome assortment of new talent we've discovered across the country, and figure out which two guys/gals are going to lead the charge in 2012 (and which other whip-smart people will be working behind the scenes, and not-quite-behind-the-scenes).

Let's do it.

And . . . I didn't mean this Michael Steele, either:

But that, my friends . . . aw, that is a woman of steel. Don't get me started.

Hey! How about a (Michael) Steele and (Michael) Steele ticket in 2012? And don't give me that "she isn't qualified" baloney! If you can rock and roll, you can be a VP.

And she'd be learning from the best!

Posted by: Attila Girl at 01:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 192 words, total size 2 kb.

Either one would be a breath of fresh air.

Each of 'em has the candlepower to bring sorely needed new ideas to the RNC.

We can't have co-chairs, can we?

Posted by: Attila Girl at 03:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, if we don't like losing, what can we do to start winning? We could use some soul-searching, a little new blood. Oh, and—we could stop behaving like assholes (my word; not Rubin's). From her latest at PJ Media:

The Republicans have just taken a beating. They lost the White House, at least six Senate seats, and approximately twenty House seats. They have not a single House member from New England. They have no West Coast senators (other than Alaska). So what do they do?

Well, in the days following the election they engaged in the same petty, irrelevant. and ultimately self-destructive behavior which got them into the political ditch to begin with.

Let’s start with the petty. The RNC spent its time sending out “oppo” memos as word of President-elect Obama’s White House staff picks (e.g., Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod) came out. “Too partisan!” screamed the press releases. “He’s hiring political people!” Oh, the horror! Not many people in the country, other than staffers at the RNC with too little to do, begrudge the new president selecting competent political advisers, especially ones which proved discreet and capable during the campaign. And even the Wall Street Journal editors were not buying the hysteria — correctly noting that Emanuel was a free trader and economic moderate.

Next, we were treated to the sight of a group of old Washington insiders meeting at a Virginia estate to discuss the future of the GOP. This hardly seemed the way to refreshen, revive, and enliven the party. And by shutting out young conservative bloggers, they ensured that the most significant impact of the confab was to start another intra-party fight.

But much of the week was taken up by former McCain staffers, snooty columnists, and unnamed sources continuing the vendetta against Sarah Palin. It seemed utterly incomprehensible why they would want to tear down the favorite 2008 Republican candidate and an able spokeswoman for reform, one who actually still holds office.

Nor did Congressional Republicans fully appreciate the need to clean house. Young Turk Eric Cantor (R-VA) did step into the position of minority whip. But John Boehner (R-OH), hardly the model of reform and innovation, remained ensconced as minority leader. Was this the way to communicate to Republicans and the country as a whole that it would no longer be business as usual? If so, it was a strange way to show it.

None of this suggests that those inside the Beltway appreciate the predicament the GOP is in. The election returns were filled with bad news: Republican lagged in party identification (39-32%), got a fraction of the Hispanic vote (31%), and lost multiple red states (e.g., Ohio, North Carolina, and Florida). Young people are flocking to the Democratic Party. Sniping at the new presidentÂ’s White House staff, circling the rickety wagons of Washington insiders, and attacking their former VP nominee are not going to ameliorate any of those problems.

There were a few isolated signs of life. Mitt Romney gave an interview which provided a cogent assessment of the economy and outlined sound fiscal policies, without engaging in a trace of partisanship. And a group of young bloggers put forth a game plan for web organizing and communication. These hints of progress and forward-looking thinking suggest that the best ideas wonÂ’t be coming from Washington, at least not from the Old Guard of leaders who led the party into ruin.

In the weeks and months ahead Republicans will need to craft a tone which does not reek of excessive partisanship. Republican strategist Todd Harris explained: “In terms of the long-term prospects for our party, the tone we take now is in many ways even more important than the tone we took during the election. The country has spoken and pretty overwhelmingly elected Barack Obama president. We can either learn from our own mistakes, in terms of the things we have done in the past that compelled a center-right nation to elect a liberal Democrat as president, or we can do what some seem to want to do, which is to point fingers, double down on failed strategies and leaders, and continue our decline.”

Unfortunately, from pundits there was too little of the gentlemanly tone which Bill Kristol displayed: “We pledge our support for those of his policies we can support, our willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt in cases of uncertainty, and our constructive criticism and loyal opposition where we are compelled.” Republicans will need to develop an agenda in Congress which distinguishes them both from their own past (e.g., pork barrel spending) and the new administration, should it go down the tax-and-spend road preferred by Congressional Democrats. Will they support a bailout of the auto industry or sound the clarion call about creeping government ownership? Will they oppose a stimulus package filled with pork? In these and many other questions they will need to determine whether to oppose the Obama administration at all costs or try to carve bipartisan compromises.

As for the aspiring 2012 contenders, they would do well to follow the lead of both Palin and Romney. For Republicans who still have jobs, they should perform them well and demonstrate that some Republicans can competently govern and legislate, make bipartisan deals, and remain politically popular. For Republicans who are no longer in office, they would do well to explain, educate, and bolster rather than sneer and back-bite.

My emphasis.

Amen, sister. (Though we do need to talk about this "which for that" verbal tic of yours.)

This reminds me of a Glenn Reynolds observation about the Emanuel appointment:

Emanuel will serve as Obama's hatchet-man and Dr. No, but the main targets will be Congressional Democrats and Democratic interest groups. Obama realizes that he's promised a lot more than he can deliver, and Emanuel's job will be to stave off all the claimants who—as they realize that too—will try to get to him before it's too late. Obama can stay the good cop, while Emanuel will be the bad. Republicans flatter themselves if they think they'll be the focus of Emanuel's attentions; they'll be an afterthought.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 05:22 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1028 words, total size 7 kb.

Olbermann has left the Twin Cities; the GOP delegates are all now draped in black. A sad day for overwrought shallow media, indeed.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 09:44 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.

John Hawkins' application to cover the Republican National Convention this year was declined. Yes: I'm aware that Hawkins has found himself unable to support John McCain, and has been critical of other members of the GOP as well. He certainly, like many, has been very skeptical of any approach to immigration that includes any variant upon the "amnesty" theme.

But isn't there just a little bit of irony in the Republican Leadership touting both McCain and Palin as "mavericks," and "reformers"—near-saints—making it a virtue to be willing to buck one's own party (it usually is), only to turn around and exclude someone like John Hawkins? Let's recall who Hawkins is:

• He runs one of the largest websites on the rightosphere;

• He has been particularly generous in granting exposure to bloggers who are less well-known than he is;

• He runs periodic polls/articles that elucidate the "pulse" of New Media on the issues of the day;

• He has a huge corral of co-bloggers and guest bloggers that maximizes the coverage he can give those issues.

Look; I'm a Moderate Republican, capital "M." I'm probably more open to the RINO charge than any other blogger I know. John Hawkins has given me enormous publicity and traffic over the years by periodically making me "blogger of the day," and by giving me a slot as a guest blogger on Saturdays (being enormously flexible, by the way, when work demands, family commitments, and a brief health problem left me unable to generate weekend posts of the correct caliber for his site multiple Saturdays in a row—I had to beg off for around a month; John was quite patient).

John goes to a huge amount of effort to include dissident voices on his sites, including my very own voice.

And yet the RNC, with "maverick John McCain" at the top of the ticket, and "reformer Sarah Palin" backing him up, apparently wants a more homogenized coverage of the Republican convention than John Hawkins allows at The Conservative Grapevine, Right Wing News, or within the Conservative Blogad Network [which, by the way, he has allowed me to be part of, despite all our ideological differences].

Shame on the RNC for this ill-considered action. I thought I belonged to the party that allows—even encourages—criticism and debate.

Coverage of the Convention will continue at Right Wing News, courtesy of John's "stringers," but when the media team declined Hawkins' application to attend personally, they tarnished the reputation of the RNC more than they ever could have affected Right Wing News, or John himself.

Yeah, yeah. It's only "censorship" when it's done by the government—not by a party that would like to have a majority stake in government. What a relief that is.

Not a great day for New Media. Not a great day for the GOP.

Posted by: Attila Girl at 08:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 462 words, total size 3 kb.