Today on Blogcritics
Home » Michael Steele Wins Republican Chairmanship

Michael Steele Wins Republican Chairmanship

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

On the second day of the general session of the meeting of the Republican National Committee, the voting to select the new Chairman began at 10:30 am and made it through 6 ballots before former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele won with 91 out of the 168 votes, beating out Katon Dawson of South Carolina. The RNC Chairmanship is an important position which oversees the management of party resources and strategies, both of which will be very important for the GOP in this rebuilding period.

During the course of the voting Steele was always in the top two, initially in a near tie with incumbent chairman Mike Duncan and then when Duncan dropped out after the 3rd round of balloting, he was neck and neck with Katon Dawson. Duncan dropping was a bit of a surprise as he was in the lead, but he may have seen the momentum of the more conservative candidates shifting to Dawson.

As Dawson took a 2 vote lead, one of my fellow watchers commented that he was "very disappointed to hear that the member of a whites-only, no-jews country club is in the lead for RNC Chairman," referring to a controversy which emerged last week over Dawson's membership in an exclusive South Carolina country club. Another observed that if Dawson wins, "stick a fork in us, we're done."

The key turning point came after the 4th ballot when Ken Blackwell dropped out of last place and rather than endorsing Dawson he went with the more moderate Steele. His votes gave Steele a 79 to 69 lead, leaving Michigan GOP Chairman Saul Anuzis as the potential kingmaker, with 20 votes which could push either remaining candidate to the 85 votes needed to win.

After the fifth ballot Anuzis also dropped out, but rather than picking a winner with an endorsement, he announced he would support whoever won, leaving delegates with a brief break to make deals and discuss options before what would have to be the final ballot between Steele and Dawson. When they returned, most of the Anuzis votes went to Steele, who brought in a 91-77 victory to become the new Chairman of the Republican Party.

Steele inherits a challenging job, running a party in disarray, with factions struggling to see who can seize the mantle of reform and rebuild the party. Steele will be faced with the difficult tasks of bringing these factions together somehow, while reaching out to a very angry and alienated grassroots and finding ways to bring the Republican message to independents and new voters.

Steele's ability to broaden the appeal of the party is enhanced by his personal charm and excellent speaking skills. It also helps that he is both an African-American and a practicing Catholic, factors which help to insulate him from some criticism from liberals. Steele is seen as a moderate, and has pledged to work to unify the party, reaching out to both the grassroots and potential new party members.

Steele's victory is an important milestone for the Republican party, not just because he is black, but because as a self-styled "Lincoln Republican," he may be able to bridge the gap between party moderates and more libertarian and conservative elements. Among those I discussed the results with as they came in, there seemed to be guarded enthusiasm from all quarters and perhaps a bit of wariness from the most religious and most conservative. One observer summed it up well when he commented: "Mike Steele was not my candidate but after his acceptance speech I said to myself, 'I think they chose a good man."

Steele has the opportunity to set the party on a new course towards a brighter future, if he can put aside the politics of complacency and arrogance and return the party to its traditional emphasis on economic prosperity, fiscal responsibility and individual liberty.

C-SPAN carried the whole vote live on the web and on cable.

MSNBC had a laughably un-prophetic write-up of the race which came out right before voting started.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • Baronius

    Well, I hope for the best, but Steele was the head of the Maryland Republican Party. Maryland. There’s a state where the Republicans have come up with a winning strategy.

  • Brunelleschi

    The GOP left Lincoln a long time ago.

    This situation cracks me up!

    GOP slogan for 2014-

    “Hey, vote this way, we are blacker than Obama!”

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Steele was the first african-american to win statewide office in Maryland history. That at least makes him exceptional.

    We’ll see how well he can reach out to the reform elements of the party. He at least seems to have good intentions.

    BTW, good job with the simplistic comment, Bruni. You clearly have no idea of the diversity that exists within the GOP, but yet you have an opinion anyway.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    Thanks Sav-

    How’s the book burning going?

    :)

    I can’t wait for him to tour the south. Think they will let him in?

    What party fought the Civil Rights Act the hardest?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    What party fought the Civil Rights Act the hardest?

    You really are remarkably ignorant. Look it up yourself. All of the major civil rights legislation of the 1950s and 1960s was passed primarily by Republican votes and passed with larger majorities among Republicans than among Democrats.

    Which had candidates who ran on a segregationist platform in response to the Civil Rights Act?

    Dave

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Arguing about which party fought hardest for the Civil Rights Act is a bit like debating over which sex won the last election.

    If you actually look at the voting numbers in the House and Senate, it was a straight geographical split. Northern congresspersons, irrespective of party, overwhelmingly voted in favor of the Act; Southern congressthings overwhelmingly voted against.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Basically true, Dr. D. And wildly irrelevant today when clearly neither party is particularly discriminatory in who they let rise to positions of prominence.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    I live in the deep south and I am white.

    I know what I still hear, who says it, and what party they embrace.

    You can’t bullshit me.

    The GOP is only scrambling to out-Obama the Dems.

    pathetic.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    If your deep south experience is anything like mine then I’m sure you know that the real, hardcore racists don’t subscribe to their political party. They oppose them both and anything that smacks of an establishment.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    You mean the descendants of KKK that say “If that sheriff even gets close to my gate, I’m gonna get my shotgun…?”

    My ex girlfriends mom dated one of those guys…. and he was named after a 19th century GOP president that everyone wants to take credit for now… :)

    (You can’t make this stuff up!)

  • Arch Conservative

    It’s no use arguing with Bruno Dave. He’s just another Democrat that’s madder than hell that it’s public news that a slave wandered off the plantation.

  • Brunelleschi

    FYI-

    I’m not a democrat. I’ve been sick of them since Reagan days.

    :)

    I’m not mired in partisan bickering like most of the righties.

    I am enjoying the Obama story for what it is, a great story.

    But, the messiah still is a democrat.

  • Clavos

    The Messiah has no clothes…

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I’m not mired in partisan bickering

    Ah, the familiar cry of those whose ideology is so extreme and rigid that they can’t bring themselves to participate in politics productively and just sit on the sidelines and bitch.

    Dave

  • Hope and Change?

    Oh yes….all of the liberal racists have crawled out from under their rocks!!!

    Hope and Change – “as long as the liberals dont give minorities a real seat at the table”

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    H&C,

    You’ve got to distinguish between liberals, socialists, and hard-core communists. (Gosh, I never believed I would ever need to resort to the last term in the 21st century.) Believe me, there is quite a difference of opinion between the three.

  • Cindy D
  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    That’s cute! You must have quite a library.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    The figure in the background reminds me of Charles Bukowski.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle


    You’ve got to distinguish between liberals, socialists, and hard-core communists.

    Good luck with that, Roger. I’ve been fighting that war for years.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Dave

    You know what? As much as I hate to do it, because it’s going to offend a great many people here – which is not very constructive – I’m going have to put this baby to rest. Once and for all!

  • Bliffle

    Dave speaks the truth! Well, part of it anyway:

    “If your deep south experience is anything like mine then I’m sure you know that the real, hardcore racists don’t subscribe to their political party. They oppose them both and anything that smacks of an establishment.”

    And their most virulent attacks are invariably on ‘liberals’ and ‘democrats’ and ‘hippies’.

    Nowadays they seem to have a special place for Nancy Pelosi.

    Usually they self-describe themselves as ‘conservatives’, though it’s difficult to wrangle a single conservative essay out of them.

    Usually their chief criticism of a republican, such as Bush, is that he didn’t go far enough.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    There’s a perfect name for them: rednecks.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    You should hear them rant about Bush. Bush is as hated among the extremists as Pelosi is. Bush’s rational immigration policies are particularly offensive to them.

    But I think it’s unfair to stick them on the political right. A lot of their beliefs, like protectionism, nativism and isolationism are really more characteristic of the political left.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    You’re right. They’re a class unto themselves.

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    Honest question…

    If Hillary Clinton had just been elected President, would Michael Steele have won?

    Honest second question…

    I know what the GOP offers to the mega rich (tax cuts), religious fundamentalists (Pro-life) and angry old white people (perpetual wars against swarthy looking foreign folks, whether here through immigration, or abroad in the middle east). What exactly is the GOP offering to to non-Whites who will be the majority population in a generation, and who voted overwhelmingly for Obama?

    –Cobra

  • Clavos

    What exactly is the GOP offering to to non-Whites who will be the majority population in a generation…

    You and the US Census Bureau are speaking erroneously (and, in the case of the Census Bureau, deceptively) when you say that minorities will be the majority. Counting all non-Caucasian people as one majority is both a fallacy and unrealistic; not even all Latinos are one group, though most gringos (including the Gringo government) tend to lump us all into one group incorrectly named “Hispanic” (only Spaniards, Portuguese, Andorrans and the inhabitants of Gibraltar are Hispanics). I, as a Mexican, have nothing in common with a Black Jamaican, a Korean, a Hmong, or even a Cuban or Argentine (except for a shared mother tongue, in the case of the last two).

    The sum total of ALL minorities will numerically be greater than 50% of the population by 2042, but we will not be a majority in any sense other than numerically; certainly not in the sense that the Caucasian population has historically been the majority.

    As to what the GOP will have to offer them, that remains to be seen. Cubans, for example, are already primarily Republican; by 2042, who knows what the party OR the “majority” will be like.

  • Brunelleschi

    #14 dave

    I see that comment was over your head.

    The world does not begin or end with two rival factions from what is really one party. They just argue over the details of the same things.

    Lets see some variety, some options, some honest debate.

    Disband both parties and replace them with 5 or 6, I don’t care. I have zero emotional attachment to either of them, unlike yourself.

    How many times have your readers suggested that you step out of the box? This isn’t church where you have to cling to old dogma like its a liferaft.

    Honestly, if both parties disappeared today, I would not miss them. Can you say the same thing?

  • Brunelleschi

    #26 Cobra-

    Perfect question, and a no-brainer. No, he would not.

    The color blind party just decided to use black bait to prove they are color blind. haha

    What a crock.

    But, I’m happy for the guy, as happy as I am for Obama.

    I hope he tours the south and shakes some rednecks up, and brings a white girlfriend. (I mean that in a good way.)

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    If Hillary Clinton had just been elected President, would Michael Steele have won?

    Actually, I think that if Hillary had taken a stronger lead early Steele might have been McCain’s pick for VP.

    What exactly is the GOP offering to to non-Whites who will be the majority population in a generation, and who voted overwhelmingly for Obama?

    Putting aside your erroneous claims of a non-white majority which Clavos has already addressed, the GOP offers them the same thing it offers to everyone, the opportunity to benefit from the fruits of their labors and be treated fairly by government. While it may not be immediately apparent to them that freedom is better than being a client of the state, eventually many of them do come to that realization.

    There’s a reason why successful african americans like Michael Steele, Herman Kain, Ken Blackwell and others are attracted to the GOP. They’ve realized that it’s the party which protects the interests of people who succeed based on their own merits and without regard to race. Some blacks like being treated as if they’re equal to whites.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    ” Some blacks like being treated as if they’re equal to whites. ”

    And the rest?

    Starting to smell racist to me.

    Sometimes whitey just don’t know when to shut up!

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    At least the GOP didn’t pick the other African-American, Ken Blackwell, that awful guy from Ohio, a rabid social conservative/Jesus freak.

    As was pointed out on Rachel Maddow last night [following a truly awful ‘comedy’ bit about the chairman contest as a literal horse race], the GOP has been skillful at appointing high-profile people of color in recent years, and the point is not to garner minority-member votes. It’s to appeal to moderate whites who don’t like to think of themselves as belonging to or supporting a lily-white, exclusionary party.

    The Maddow show, by the way has become the best program on television for intelligent political discussion [that aberrant horse race bit notwithstanding]. Our Republican friends could learn a lot by watching. Not that she’ll change your minds, it’s just lively, non-shrill, non-nasty smart conversation. It’s even better when she gets a Republican to appear on the show. And her interview of Blagojevich was insanely excellent.

  • Brunelleschi

    ” the GOP has been skillful at appointing high-profile people of color in recent years”

    How racist. I thought the GOP was color blind.

    This topic cracks me up.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Honestly, if both parties disappeared today, I would not miss them. Can you say the same thing?

    Bruni, I’m on record as having advocated the development of new parties, and I worked for many years to make the Libertarian Party a viable party.

    IMO we need at least 4 parties. We need a religious-left party, something like the Social Democrats. We need a green/socialist party. We need a moderate labor oriented party. And we can round it out with a conservative/libertarian party.

    I think we’d end up with a breakdown somewhat similar to what they have in the Netherlands, where Christian Democracts hold 41 out of 150 seats, Labor holds 33 seats, Socialists hold 25 seats and liberal/libertarian/conservatives hold 30 seats (though they recently split into two parties).

    If you look at our elected representatives and look at their actual voting records you can easily break them down into distinct sub-groups and you end up with a breakdown similar to this.

    There’s nothing in our constitution or the structure of government which makes having multiple parties impossible. The adjustments would be minor and could be handled through congressional rule changes for the most part.

    Dave

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Why a religious-left party, particularly?

    And the European Christian Democrat parties are usually right of centre.

  • Brunelleschi

    We have far too much religion in government already. Let the Christians say a prayer before a session then sit down and shut up until someone asks for a bible holder for something.

    I would go with Libertarians for sure. I’d like to see a party that holds the line on centralized anything, mainly because it would be fun to hear them call bullshit on ever war that the rest come up with. Right now everyone is too timid.

    A green/social party sounds good, but I would drop the “-ist.”

    I agree at least 4. Cover the spectrum, and watch the fun.

    I think I could support a Saturday Night Live party and make fun of the rest of them. :)

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Why a religious-left party, particularly?

    And the European Christian Democrat parties are usually right of centre.

    The whole right/left thing doesn’t work very well when dealing with religiously skewed politics. I was thinking in terms of a party that would appeal to Mike Huckabee and African Americans. Basically big government christians. I guess that might be moderate rather than left.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    Maybe so, but faith is basically politics based on 2,000 year old political thoughts, give or take some centuries one way or the other.

    I got into some serial debates on a local board here in the deep south where it was me vs a board full of nuts that just insisted that the US is a Christian nation, and that’s the way it is. They pretty much said if you don’t believe in Jesus, you don’t deserve to speak in their nation because it is impossible to think of morality without Jesus, and people without morality don’t belong.

    And of course they all said evolution was a myth!

    I looked around and found that they fit the definition of Dominionists.

    After I beat them down, my good threads started to disappear, haha.

    I landed here after that. :)

  • Clavos

    Lucky us…

  • Jordan Richardson

    I got into some serial debates on a local board here in the deep south where it was me vs a board full of nuts that just insisted that the US is a Christian nation, and that’s the way it is.

    Sounds like a helluva Saturday night.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Bruni, we’ve heard that tedious argument from the christian extremists a few times here as well. But regardless of how we may disdain their beliefs, there are probably enough of them to put together a pretty viable political party. They are more numerous and more politically active here than they are in any other western country. In a multiparty system they’d almost certainly be the largest party or at worst the second largest behind some sort of labor/centrist party. Not a pleasant prospect, but a realistic one.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    I wouldn’t mind.

    Let the other parties work out public policy, and they can entertain themselves..

    But they don’t get votes in congress. They can “miracle” their agenda into practice.

    :)

    This just in!-

    “GOP declares Spanish the official language of business…” developing…..

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    Dave writes:

    >”Putting aside your erroneous claims of a non-white majority which Clavos has already addressed, the GOP offers them the same thing it offers to everyone, the opportunity to benefit from the fruits of their labors and be treated fairly by government.”

    The claim isn’t “erroneous”. The hard-core right doesn’t consider Latinos to be “white”, and even those with fairer skin are subject to scrutiny. The Tom Tancredo/Laura Ingraham wing of the GOP has been the greatest get out the vote campaign for Democrats in the Hispanic community.

    And, Dave…please tell me where you get this “fair treatment” “opportunity for everyone” stuff from in the GOP platform? I’ll leave your “some Blacks like to be treated as if they’re equal to Whites” line alone because I HOPE you were trying to make some novel point about the way you’d WISH Republicans would behave, and now how many of them do in reality.

    –Cobra

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Aha,

    A distinction as regards Dave’s aspiration and reality. I always knew Dave had a heart, just it’s so hard to show it.

  • Clavos

    The claim isn’t “erroneous”.

    Yes, it is. And it’s also erroneous to lump all Latinos (NOT”Hispanics”) together into one homogeneous group. We aren’t.

    The Tom Tancredo/Laura Ingraham wing of the GOP has been the greatest get out the vote campaign for Democrats in the Hispanic community.

    Again, wrong. The Democrats have actively proselytized to Latinos for years, pandering to the poor ones with promises of entitlements from the government. That’s what has motivated the poor Latino voters. The middle class Latinos, like the Miami Cubans and middle class Tex-Mex, vote Republican for the most part.

    The average poor Latino, struggling to make a living and keep his/her family fed and sheltered hasn’t even heard of Tancredo (unless they live in Colorado) or Ingraham.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Cobra, show me some republicans in any kind of position of power who have practiced any kind of discrimination against african americans. Truth is the party bends over backwards to welcome and accomodate blacks. It’s actually kind of embarassing.

    As for the nativist nuts, the real hardcore of that group don’t consider themselves Republicans. As far as they are concerned both big parties are different sides of the same coin.

    As for prejudice against latinos in the GOP, I’m just not buying it. We certainly don’t see it here in the Texas GOP. Around here the most anti-hispanic sentiment generally comes from other hispanics. US-born vs. immigrant.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    Around here the most anti-hispanic sentiment generally comes from other hispanics. US-born vs. immigrant.

    Quoted for Truth (except that they’re LATINOS). :>)

    It’s prevalent throughout the 50, wherever there are both types of Latinos.

  • zingzing

    why is it, dave, that you suddenly are again a part of the gop? i thought you were against it… fair-weather republicanism?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I’m for the GOP, Zing. I’m just for making it the best GOP it can be by returning to traditional republican values of individual liberty and fiscal responsibility.

    Dave

  • zingzing

    fair enough, but if that’s not what it is, then why stick to it as if it was?

  • Brunelleschi

    Clavos-

    Miami Cubans are still whining about losing their whore houses and casinos to the revolution. Who cares? I doubt any of them have a political thought other than resentment.

  • Brunelleschi

    #49 Nostalgic Dave-

    Don’t look back. The rise of the corporation made individual liberty and fiscal responsibility just a dream.

    The days are long gone where you can work hard, save, be responsible, buy your own slaves, and experience heaven on Earth.

    :)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    I’ve told you, zing: discrepancy between reality and aspirations. Same reason why Dershowitz, for example, doesn’t abandon the Left in spite of the Left’s stance against Israel.

    You can’t blame Dave for that.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Not without the aid of GOP, Bruno, Reagan in particular. He gave it a carte blanche.

  • Clavos

    Miami Cubans are still whining about losing their whore houses and casinos to the revolution.

    Actually, those belonged to the American Mafiosi, chief among them Santo Trafficante, Meyer Lansky,and Lucky Luciano.

    The Miami Cubans owned and operated the sugar mills, banks, Bacardi Rum, all of the tobacco companies; in fact pretty much everything that was viable (and valuable) on the island.

    I doubt any of them have a political thought other than resentment.

    You’re showing your ignorance again, Bru. Three Florida congressmen are Cuban; as is one of our Senators, Miami’s mayor, Dade County’s mayor, the mayors of several other cities, the Florida Legislature Speaker, etc. etc.

    You can take your foot out of your mouth now.

  • Brunelleschi

    I throw my shoe at you in defiance.

    Maybe if they would have paid people worth a shit, they would still be there. :)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Cuba was an American resort under Batista, a playground. Bruno, you must have seen “Havana” with Redford and Olin, and Raul Julia. Great movie. Of course, to some just a propaganda.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    fair enough, but if that’s not what it is, then why stick to it as if it was?

    Because there are no better alternatives and no place where I have as much chance of seeing at least some of the things I believe in enacted into policy.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Dave,

    Read my #53. You have a perfect right!

  • Brunelleschi

    Dave-

    I’m curious, not arguing-

    How did America before the Europeans landed fit your model of individual liberty and fiscal responsibility?

    What would the politics of Indian Dave be?

  • Clavos

    Maybe if they would have paid people worth a shit

    Maybe. But it’s not really necessary; Fidel doesn’t pay them, and look how long he’s lasted.

    It’s amazing how efficient judicious use of firing squads, torture and imprisonment can be for controlling a population.

  • Brunelleschi

    Personal Responsibility-Those people should have worked and saved, kept quiet and escaped to Miami.

  • http://www.fontcraft.com Dave Nalle

    Bruni, I don’t subscribe to the myth of the noble savage. Native americans fought wars among themselves all the times, conquered, built empires, carried out genocide.

    For other issues of indian affairs talk to my wife who is one.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    What do you think about Europeans who fought wars among themselves all the time, conquered, built empires, and carried out genocide?

  • Clavos

    Personal Responsibility-Those people should have worked and saved, kept quiet and escaped to Miami.

    I agree, and so do more than a million who have done so.

    And they’re still coming.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I think it made them very good at it, Bruni.

    IMO it’s all about population density. Europeans had greater population fighting over less land, so they advanced more rapidly.

    Naitve American societies had less population pressure so they developed less quickly technologically, militarily and organizationally, so they were at a disadvantage.

    No value judgments here.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    Were the natives better off when all this technology migrated to the New World?

    Was Columbus a Republican that respected all races equally? Was he a hero that deserves a holiday?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Columbus never set foot on the territory of the United States and the Republican party was formed in 1854. His holiday was a concession to Italian-Americans to win their votes.

    Columbus was a reprehensible scumbag and a con-man, but he was a product of his times. He died in debtors prison, what more do you think you can do to punish him now? The holiday isn’t about him or his personal failings, it’s about the discovery of the new world.

    Technology is neither good nor evil. What matters is how it was used. Are you a luddite?

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    Was it moral for the explorers to take the land in the New World, as it was property of the natives?

    What about Manifest Destiny?

    Land was taken in the west, after the Constitution was a couple of generations old. Was that moral?

    Not arguing, just curious.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Why do you ask all these questions? Do you have no opinions of your own?

    Morality is irrelevant when it comes to large scale changes in demographics.

    And the explorers did not take the land, it was taken by settlers, usually after making deals with the natives or conquering them.

    If the natives wanted to hold onto their land they needed to be more numerous, more organized and more technologically advanced.

    Was it right for the Iroquois to conquer and subdue Algonquin tribes and then convert the tribes they didn’t conquer directly to agriculture through a process of cultural imperialism which sometimes even included adopting the Iroquois language?

    Was it right for the mesoamericans to exterminate the more primitive paleoamericans?

    What was the morality of Cherokees owning slaves?

    Do you think it was just for the Comanche to commit genocide against the Huaco solely because they erroneously believed them to be cannibals?

    Dave

  • Hope and Change?

    Attention BC Editors..it seems we need to add a Philosophy Blog to keep the likes of Brunelleschi from interupting the normal fist fights in here….

    Heres a question Plato…..

    “If Obama was weak and ineffective would the media report the truth?”

    Well I guess we already know the answer to that one…at least us rational thinkers.

  • Brunelleschi

    What happens to your property theory of morality then?

    Seems contradictory.

    What do you think of this quote from the most famous early Republican-

    “Whether slavery shall go into Nebraska, or other new territories,is not a matter of exclusive concern to the people who may go there. The whole nation is interested that the best use shall be made of these territories. We want them for the homes of free white people. ”

    1) Wasn’t taking those territories (someone else’s property) immoral?

    2) What if a republican made such a speech today? Would you agree with it?

    Not arguing, just curious.

  • Brunelleschi

    Socrates silly, get your old school philosophers straight!

    You ain’t got no book learnin in the trailer park?

  • Cindy DiGeso

    poor people are stupid?

  • Clavos

    poor people are stupid?

    In Bru’s elitist view, yes.

  • zingzing

    come on, clavos… you’re just as much an elitist as anyone here.

  • Hope and Change?

    Yes there are alot of DUMB people ..for example

    “In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” Barack Obama – On Kansas tornado that killed 12 people,

    “Just this past week, we passed out of the out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee — which is my committee — a bill to call for divestment from Iran as way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon.”
    Barack Obama Referring to committee he is not on, July 23, 2008.

    “On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.”
    Barack Obama Does Obama see dead people?

    “I’ve now been in 57 states — I think one left to.” Barack Obama at US presidential campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon.

    Gee…the leader of the free world..hmmmm

    Hope and change – it aint what it used to be!

  • zingzing

    h&c, quoting obama: “I think one left to.”

    what? did you just fuck up? or did he really say “i think one left to?”

    food for thought, h&c, food for thought.

  • Hope and Change?

    No dat waz him—must be an Illinois Ebonics dialect…

    Really….could the people who voted for King Flounder realyyyyyyyyy be that stupid?

  • Clavos

    come on, clavos… you’re just as much an elitist as anyone here.

    More, zing.

    But I’m more democratic (small d); I look down on everyone, not just the poor.

  • zingzing

    h&c: “No dat waz him—must be an Illinois Ebonics dialect…”

    ah-ha. i see. you are what you is, you… you. meh, you know what you are. at least you could assume the right grammar, silly pig. or do you know the difference?

    clavos: “I look down on everyone, not just the poor.”

    ahh. ok. that’s cool.

  • Hope and Change?

    Mental Giants of The Democratic Party…

    “500 million Americans lose their jobs every month” Nancy Pelosi

    Um….er…isnt she…the um….er you know…the lead author of the ….um…er…stimulus plan?

  • zingzing

    dude, you don’t know the difference between “to” and “too.”

    you really going to take people to task for mental slips?

  • zingzing

    ahh. it’s “i think one left to go.” so, you forget words. it’s ok. you’re a fucking.

  • Clavos

    …so, you forget words. it’s ok. you’re a fucking.

    That’s funny,

  • zingzing

    i

  • Hope and Change?

    Yes….it is obvious that the left is in shambles now that Barry has been outed as just another “incompetent Democrat”! The more the public sees the Dem leadership the less confidence they have in a recovery…..look at the stock market…look at Barry’s approval
    ratings..all sinking on an hourly basis!

    Very sad to see the bravado and feeling of accomplishment of the left wing loons in here plummet so quickly! They now are forced to hide behind spell checker…rather than defend or debate the issues…

    The Promise of Hope and Change…”A Ponzi Scheme for Idiots”

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    1) Wasn’t taking those territories (someone else’s property) immoral?

    Wasn’t cro-magnon’s extermination of the neanderthals immoral?

    2) What if a republican made such a speech today? Would you agree with it?

    How do you feel about the Yoruba’s war against the Ibo and the Fon for the purposes of enslaving them and selling them to Europeans?

    Do you think we should get rid of president’s day because Washington owned slaves and Lincoln wanted to keep slaves out of the free, white territories of the west?

    Do you know of any questions which are relevant?

    Dave

  • Baronius

    Back to Steele for a moment – Thomas Sowell’s latest column argues that Steele is a rarity among Republicans not for his color, but for the fact that he can talk.

  • Brunelleschi

    Dave-

    I’m asking about taking of property, the highest possible moral and human right. How can you say this question is irrelevant?

    Was it immoral to take the territories under the policy of Manifest Destiny?

    To answer your question, all wars pertaining to slavery were wrong regardless of the race of the people dong them. That’s a no-brainer.

    I don’t care on the president’s day thing. Every nation needs myths to rally around. Pick your heroes, play up what you want, and forget what you want. woot woot woot!

    Science does it too. Science likes to remember what someone contributed that had value, and forgets what was stupid.

    Historians don’t have that luxury. Someone should still keep track of reality.

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    This is another funny conversation.

    Despite vote caging, voter suppression, and recently electing white supremacists/separatists into power, I’ve been challenged to show where ANY Republicans in power have discriminated against African-Americans.

    Just the recent David Duke stuff alone should raise hairs in here.

    Next, I’m watching genocide and slavery get defended. You’d think somebody was channeling Rush Limbaugh, or something.

    Yes, Blogcritics has been very entertaining lately.

    –Cobra

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Cobra, you really do live in an alternate reality, don’t you.

    Did YOU read the David Duke stories? Seems like you missed them. The latest is that Duke has called the Chairman of the GOP a “black racist,” and called the RNC delegates who elected him “traitorous.” Before that the Louisiana GOP went out of its way to find and fund a candidate to run against Duke and get him out of the state legislature. Before that Duke was a Democrat for most of his career.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    Why did Duke switch parties?

    Can he just be banned from the GOP and would you support that?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Duke switched parties because Democrats in Louisiana are almost always opposed by Republicans, while many Republicans run unopposed once they get through the primary process. So when he won his term in the state legislature it was by winning a Republican primary agaisnt 3 other guys, beating the one who got the 2nd most votes in a run-off and then not facing a democrat at all.

    And there’s no mechanism for banning someone from the GOP. The party does not vet its membership. I do support the actions which the Louisiana state party has taken to make sure that Duke never runs unopposed. Remember, the party speaks for its members, but the individual members don’t necessarily speak for the party.

    Dave

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    Actually, this recent Duke story is even more telling:

    David Duke helps son of ex-Klan leader in fight for Palm Beach County Republican seat

    Don’t give me that ol’ “Louisianans had no choice but to vote for Duke”, nonsense. Everybody has a choice. When Duke ran for Governor in 1991, he got over 600,000 votes, and 60% of the White vote. You think the nomination of Steele is sitting well with the Duke constituency?

    And what about the hardcore White Southern base of the GOP?

    White Whine over Steele

    You know what? I’m glad the REAL base of the GOP is finally slithering out into the sunlight. After all those years of the Southern Strategy, what did you THINK Republicans would attract and put up as candidates? There really isn’t room for debate, because if you want me to pull Reagan and Daddy Bush’s cards on race, I can go down that road, too.

    And please don’t make me go all “Lee Atwater” up in here.

    –Cobra

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Glenn, what part of white supremacists not being the mainstream of the GOP do you not get? Does Louis Farrakhan or the Black Panthers represent the mainsteam of the Democratic party?

    Dave

  • zingzing

    “Glenn, what part of white supremacists not being the mainstream of the GOP do you not get? Does Louis Farrakhan or the Black Panthers represent the mainsteam of the Democratic party?”

    according to a lot of the gop, yes.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    And two wrongs make a right, yes?

    Sorry for attributing that silliness to Glenn when it was Corbra who said it.

    Dave

  • zingzing

    two wrongs don’t make a right, but one wrong makes another wrong.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Dave ought to know a great deal about caricature and slander. He has spent many hours slandering the Democratic party on here. Always then denies it of course.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I deny nothing that I’ve said about the Democratic Party. Hell, I’m proud to have opposed it here. And it’s not slander if it’s true.

    Dave

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    Fact: Ronald Reagan campaigned AGAINST the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
    Fact: George Herbert Walker Bush campaigned AGAINST the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

    Bob Herbert in the NYT explained this negrophobic behavior of modern Republicans quite well here:

    The Ugly Side of the GOP

    I sincerely believe that the Lee Atwater quote in this piece is taken to heart, if even only subconsciously by every clench-fisted right winged political operative in the business.

    In the big picture, Michael Steele doesn’t mean a whole helluva lot, in my opinion. It’s dressing up the front porch window while the banjo’s still still playing in the background. It’s akin to Fox News putting Juan Williams on the monitor after O’Reilly or Hannity embarrass themselves on whatever racial topic they discussed the night before.
    Hey, even Ronald Reagan had Ben Vereen perform at his inaugural ball.
    Of course..ahem..he performed in blackface.

    I can’t make this stuff up, people. LOL

    –Cobra

  • Doug Hunter

    Cobra,

    You’re just supposed to say that stuff to keep the blacks on the plantation, not actually believe it. Your ideology of failure requires that you keep people afraid: blacks afraid of whites, poor afraid of rich, workers afraid of management. It’s divide and conquer at it’s worst.

    What you’re regurgitating in your post is racist propaganda to keep the 90+% black vote you already enjoy. Reality is that most white people on the right could care less about the color of someone’s skin. The people who seem to care most are liberal whites and black people expecting a handout.

  • Brunelleschi

    ” Reality is that most white people on the right could care less about the color of someone’s skin. ..”

    That’s only true if they act white, talk white, think white, tell the same racist jokes, and make whitey feel good about being blind to racism.

    If the GOP really were the party of opportunity for people of all races (all of them) they would flock to it. The opposite is true.

    What I see coming from GOP defenders on here- they explain this by criticizing these groups in a number of ways, in carefully crafted terms. What it all adds up to is they explain it away by calling them lazy beggars. But, they love them more than the people who really care. riiiiight!

    I guess we all get our opinions on this in different ways-personal experience, wishful thinking, political bias before reality, or arguing by exception (If one black person makes it to college on their own, and 999 don’t, the GOP minds thinks ‘see, told ya-there is no problem, those 999 are lazy-but I’m not racist-not ME’).

    Things have changed so fast in America, it makes no sense to look back to the 60s for backup. The Dems really haven’t been much better until recent times.

    Racism lives and thrives alongside of conservatism, which has crossed party lines. Dems in previous generations have been just as conservative and racist as the GOP is now.

    Since I am not a Dem, I don’t have to explain away previous generations of Dem conservatism. We all know the history of overt racism in the south and get nowhere pointing partyfingers. Both sides were the same-conservative in todays terms.

    The same goes for stupid wars, until Vietnam, which was a wakeup call that changed the thinking of that generation and since.

    Let’s start with the 1980s, when Reagan was the messiah as much as Obama is today. I moved to California for college, and this is what I experienced-

    -Middle aged and elderly white conservatives pulled me aside one by one with well intentioned advice-“Be careful. Whites are repressed,” they would say, “The minorities have taken over. White people like us can’t even get in college or get student loans. The liberals gave it all away to the n*****rs and Mexicans. Plus the stupid governor let the camel jockey turbanheads in as well-this is not even America anymore…” (This was a reference to a lot of middle class Arabs that were here to study because their parents that could afford it sent them to study to avoid the Iran/Iraq war.)

    That didn’t happen. I got in, and got loans. Being white wasn’t a liability like they said.

    Campuses were polarized over Reagan, and his wars in Central America, nuclear proliferation, and apartheid. Reagan was the messiah for College Republicans and frats. The left/libs hated this and organized in political groups by topic.

    -The campus required one semester of women’s studies or ethnic studies. Who screamed that this was unfair? The Reagan crowd. (Why do we have to take this shit? I don’t want to hear it! fuckem.)

    -Affirmative Action was a hot issue. Personally, I didn’t care. The people that told me that being white was a liability were already proven wrong. Who screamed about this? The Reagan crowd. “Affirmative Action is reverse racism!” they would say. Oh really? I remember writing about this and said I will believe that when blacks live comfortably behind locked gates in expensive homes and drive Beemers with the windows rolled up and doors locked past the whites in the ghetto.. That never happened.

    -Apartheid was all over the news. How could a racist nation even be considered part of the free world? Who believes this bullshit? Easy answer-The Reagan crowd! The left/libs wrote, held meetings, asked the universities to divest any interests there, and the Reagan crowd just made fun of this and acted like jerks. They just didn’t get it, or want to.

    I volunteered to do a voter registration table for the 1984 election. I watched the frats/Reagan folks sign up and mark GOP, and the left/libs Dem. One sorority girl comes up and says “Let me see that form.” OK, I hand her one. She scans it and sees spanish on the form as well as English. She made a pissed off face, and angrily signed up and said “See? This bullshit HAS to go! This is why I am signing up, this spanish stuff is bullshit!” and she marked the form GOP and stomped away mad.

    I could type all night with more. My experience was just as I described, and this was in enlightened California.

    I’m sitting here reading this shit and thinking about what kind of people saw Reagan as the Messiah and what they said and did, and how they are the defenders of racial equality and always have been.

    Someone needs to stop drinking the Koolaid.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Bruno,

    You’re not gonna convince them. Save your breath.

  • Brunelleschi

    I know!

    That’s the sad part. Tomorrow that post will be buried with protests from people saying I didn’t see and hear those things.

  • Cindy D

    Hiya Roger :-)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Bruno,

    Well, you know I stopped commenting. But I will respond now and then to you, Cindy, Zing, Baritone and Glenn (and the Brits of course). As far as I’m concerned, you’re the only sane ones here; and I do miss you.

    Roger

  • Cindy D

    I left you a video somewhere did you see it?

  • zingzing

    fuck off, roger, i’m not sane.

    wait, are you saying dave nalle isn’t some awful construct of my mind, brought on by horrible, destructive cancer?

    maybe i am sane…

    fuck on, then, roger, fuck on.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    No, Cindy. I was too peed off then to look at it. But I know where it is and will look it it up tomorrow. Good night now.

  • Cindy D

    lol!

  • Cindy D

    nite nite…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    OK Zing,

    I know you’re trying awful hard to blend in, but you’re not fooling me. You’ve got heart, and good enough for me.
    Good night, bro.

  • zingzing

    meow.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Wow, Bruni, your college experience sure was nothing like mine and I was in the middle of the Amish country of Pennsylvania, and it wasn’t that many years earlier. We went on protest marches, talked a lot of anarchy and embraced the counter-culture. My frat was all about thumbing our noses at the establishment and getting as wasted as possible. Maybe we were just backwards and the 60s lasted longer in Pennsylvania than they did in California. Hell, we had a chapter of SDS and didn’t even have any College Republicans. I never even heard of the CRs until I was in grad school about a decade later.

    As you describe it, “enlightened” California wasn’t all that enlightened. But you know, it’s all anecdotal. The biggest bigots I’ve met have been card carrying union members who voted democrat religiously. In fact, the only people I’ve ever heard use “the N word” have been democrats. Same for calling Mexicans “wetbacks.” The xenophobia and racism of the working and middle class of the northeast and mid-atlantic regions where I’ve lived is one of the things which drove me away from the Democratic party. The open hostility to blacks and the organized efforts of white union members to bar them from jobs just never seemed right.

    But you know, there are bigots everywhere and of varying degrees. And there are certainly some in both of our major political parties. I find it incomprehensible that you can’t see the racism which is inherent in the politics of the American left, but then I’ve never before encountered the level of irrational bigotry towards Republicans which has surfaced recently in some of these discussions.

    Dave

  • Brunelleschi

    ……Which is why I said conservatism crosses party lines.

    “The open hostility to blacks and the organized efforts of white union members to bar them from jobs just never seemed right.”

    Again, the right opposes (or blames) people they perceive as below them on the food chain. Unions can have some pretty nutty reactionaries. In the 1980s they would have been Reagan’s union base-a goofy thing for sure.

    No one ever said all this was logical. That’s just how it is.

  • Clavos

    Again, the right opposes (or blames) people they perceive as below them on the food chain.

    Not all of us.

    I generally oppose and blame the government for everything that’s wrong.

    Come to think of it, you’re right, Bru, because I certainly perceive the government as below me.

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    Bruni,

    That was also MY college experience in the mid 80’s going to school in Long Island, NY. I was an editor at the left of center-alt school newspaper. I drew my share of left-leaning political cartoons (still do!). I marched for divestment in South Africa, and of course the campus Republicans mocked us, and wanted to know what the big deal was.

    I had a little different perspective as an African-American, however. The things that they whispered to you, most wouldn’t dare say to my face.

    They just smiled, and waited until I left the room. Or muttered something under their breath hoping I was out of earshot. There are some advantages in not being the smallest guy you’ll ever meet, I suppose. The other thing that kept shocking many of them was that I was on the same campus as they were, without Affirmative Action and without athletic scholarships. I didn’t fit their stereotypes.

    The thing that I found the most interesting was the conflict that I saw within many of my White classmates. You could tell how much their parents influenced their political ideology. When challenged in a debate, or faced with facts and issues they’ve never dealt with before, it was as though their religious faith was being questioned.
    When I pointed out that their “heroes” had abominable records on race or civil rights, it was though I was calling my classmates evil, when in truth, I was just criticizing another politician.

    As far as government is concerned, if I have a problem with an elected official, I not only have the power to vote against him/her, I can organize, form lobbying groups, and actively support opposition. The private sector didn’t get me civil rights. It was a grass roots political movement, that was unquestionably opposed by right winged conservatives from Chief Justice William Reinquist to the National Review’s William F. Buckley.

    That’s why I find statements about conservatives, Republicans and African-Americans on this blog to be so darned funny. Michael Steele hasn’t been picked to get “black votes.” He’s been picked to get back white moderates who went for Obama, or at least give the illusion that the GOP hiearchy doesn’t look like the 9th tee at Augusta pre-Tiger.

    –Cobra

    –Cobra

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    It’s interesting, Cobra. I was going to Brooklyn College, NY, during the sixties. The students with a conservative bent were very few and far between. You could count them on the fingers of one hand.

    Was Long Island that different?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    There’s a big difference between the 60s when Roger went to college, the 70s when I went to college and the 80s when Cobra went to college.

    By the 80s the political climate had changed substantially on campuses. Reagan had brought the conservative Democrats over to the republican party and you saw a general lowering of the level of itellectual acuity among conservatives and an increase in the number of bigots tainting the GOP. Plus you saw a growth of a conservative youth movement which tended towards the most radical, least appealing and ultimately fairly non-traditional conservative ideas.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    You’re right there.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    It always makes me uncomfortable when I see otherwise sensible Republicans idolizing Reagan, because despite his very admirable personal qualities and generally positive policies, he is the single person most responsible for the creation of the cancer within the GOP known as the religious right.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    But what are you going to do with these people? And isn’t it the case that without the support of the evangelicals, Bush the second wouldn’t secure the presidency, to say nothing of the governorship of Texas?

  • zingzing

    dave: “In fact, the only people I’ve ever heard use “the N word” have been democrats.”

    bullshit.

    “Same for calling Mexicans “wetbacks.””

    arch conservative, on these boards, many times. just one man, on these boards, many times.

  • Clavos

    “Same for calling Mexicans “wetbacks.”

    Clavos on these boards, pero soy bracero.

  • Cindy D

    buenos nachos.

  • lLumpy

    why is zing so full of hate? he should come here to virginia if he wants to meet some diehard democrat racists.

  • zingzing

    full of hate? i’m just point out that dave has heard those words many times from many a republican mouth. even right here.

    i wouldn’t go so far as to say that some dems aren’t racist, but i would say that some republicans are. and i’d be 100% right. and you know it.

    and i’ve been to virginia, many times. grew up a few miles from the border.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    Interesting thing, zing. When Virginians move to California, they tend to loose their “red-neckness.” And once they live there for a while, nothing would make them go back.
    Go and figure!

  • zingzing

    actually, i like virginia. there are some rednecks, for sure, but i grew up around rednecks, so it’s alright. southern virginia is beautiful and northern virginia is, although awful suburbia, not a haven for dumbass racists.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ Roger Nowosielski

    The one I know quite well tries awfully hard to sound like one, but I know better. It’s just an echo from the past. California can do that for you!

    Perhaps we should send the most incorrigible of the thinkers on this site on a field trip. I might do wonders for them, don’t you think?