Considering the individual who posted that, I doubt Aquila would have any different opinion, regardless the person or party. He's not overly partisan like some folk.
Maybe but I won't buy that isn't what he'd be saying unless I hear it from him.
In terms of the next presidential election, it will likely be an interesting one. I have read numerous articles recently of how the Tea Party is going to split the conservative vote if they field a candidate, much like Perot is thought to have in the '92 election. It will also be interesting to see if the majority that voted for Obama this time approve of him enough to vote him in again.
LOL, do wrong and all they gotta do is pay it back. I wonder what you'd be saying if Obama had done this. Impeachment possibly?
Interesting article that articulates my point...
April 6, 2010 Michael Steele deserves to keep his job
Michael S. Steele has always had enemies in the Republican National Committee. Elected to the party’s top post in the wake of President Obama’s election, Mr. Steele, Maryland’s former lieutenant governor, brought a younger, hipper attitude — and, not coincidentally, some highly visible diversity — to a party whose prospects looked dim indeed. But his a tendency to say what’s on his mind, even if it doesn’t hue to the carefully scripted party orthodoxy, has always brought detractors, and he’s faced quiet calls for his resignation over one gaffe or another from almost the day he took office.
The politics of jettisoning Mr. Steele have always been terrible. How could a party that struggles with an all-white image in an increasingly multicultural society fire the first minority to serve as its chairman for speaking his mind?
But those looking for an excuse to get rid of Mr. Steele may have found it in the recent revelations that RNC staffers entertained young donors at a high-end bondage-themed strip club in Los Angeles and were reimbursed by the party for their $1,900 tab, coupled with reports of spending by the committee on private jets and posh hotels. Party insiders are grumbling that Mr. Steele’s actions to fire key staff members and institute new spending controls aren’t enough to reverse the damage they say the chairman has done to the party’s image and that a total change at the committee is necessary.
Hogwash. Spending big money to woo top-dollar donors isn’t the most savory element of party politics, but it’s not as if Mr. Steele invented the concept.
And it’s hard to argue with his success. The committee does have less cash on hand than it did when Mr. Steele took over, but he has raised record amounts of money and easily kept pace with the Democratic Party, despite the fact that the Democrats have President Obama in their corner. Some party insiders are complaining that major donors are defecting and giving money to other Republican-affiliated organizations. So what? Evidently Mr. Steele has done nothing to discourage support for Republican candidates. Perhaps the party’s money apparatus isn’t as centrally controlled as it once was, but isn’t that the formula Democrats rode to success in 2006 and 2008?
Mr. Steele can also count three big wins since he took office: the formerly Democratic gubernatorial posts in Virginia and New Jersey and Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in Massachusetts. By all estimations, the GOP is set to make major gains in the midterm elections this year. Why would the party pick now to convene a circular firing squad? It sounds positively like something the Democrats would do.
What’s really behind the objections to Mr. Steele is a dislike by some members of the party establishment of a leader who isn’t tightly controlled and rigidly on message. Some of the statements that have gotten Mr. Steele in trouble were his prediction (shared by every independent political analyst) that the Republican Party would make gains in the fall elections but wasn’t likely to recapture control of Congress; his characterization of talk radio host Rush Limbaugh’s style as "incendiary" and "ugly"; and his remark in a GQ interview that abortion is an "individual choice." They all fit the classic Washington definition of a gaffe: accidentally telling the truth.
By all means, party donors are right to make sure the RNC, under Mr. Steele’s leadership, is spending their money as wisely as possible, and it’s entirely appropriate to scrutinize the chairman’s plans to institute tighter financial controls. But it’s worth noting that Mr. Steele was not at the strip club and didn’t know about it before it happened. He’s taken swift and severe action against those who were involved.
That may not be enough for the chairman’s inside-the-beltway critics, but they need to look at the bigger picture. The party is set to pick up dozens of seats across the country, and nothing Mr. Steele has done, from his impolitic statements to his spending, has changed that fact. But a messy fight over the party’s leadership just might. Mr. Steele’s term ends in January; he deserves a chance to serve it out and prove his effectiveness at the one place it counts: the ballot box.
Steele wasn't at the club and didn't know about it before hand. Steele has fired staffers involved and instituted stricter controls.
Let's assume YOU were the chairman of the RNC. You wake up one morning and your wife tosses you the morning paper. Featured is an article about your staff taking some donors to a seedy club. As you make phone calls you discover (as does the media) that the trip was reimbursed out of RNC funds. So you find out who was involved and you fire them. You also institute tougher spending rules and controls. But many in your party are now calling for your head on a silver platter. Do you resign like YOU did something wrong??? No. You address the problem, let your ignorant detractors bark, and move forward as a leader.
... It will also be interesting to see if the majority that voted for Obama this time approve of him enough to vote him in again.
I don't think BHO was voted in because of popular vote as much as through fraud. For example, he won Illinois because he was the Chicago group's choice and they control the official vote count for the state. He won Ohio because of ACORN fraud. We had more votes in Ohio than we had voters. And I'm sure stuff like that happened in other places.
I'm not sure about Newt. Especially after reading comments he made on NBC's Today Show.
His support of not only Steele, but also Boehner and McConnell are disappointing. Steele needs to resign. His misuse and abuse of GOP funds for personal use are inexcusable. Boehner and McConnell are adequate, but should not be Speaker and Majority Leader.
If he's on the ticket in 11/12, I'd vote for him, but I'd have to hear more from him to vote in the Primary.
Dont confuse Newt's refusal to add fuel to a fire while in the "enemy camp" as his position on Steele.
I suspect that in republican only circles, his view is a bit different than what he will say to some liberal talking head in the MSM
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
The Apostle Paul told us to pray for our leaders (1 Timothy 2:1-6) and to be obedient to the laws of our land (Romans 13:1-7 and Titus 3:1-2). The Apostle Peter urged obedience to civil rulers (1 Peter 2:13-17). Jesus told us to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's... (Matthew 22:21).
Even with our government's descent into Socialism we have it better than those folks back there to whom those things were spoken. And, we can work to change our government while those folks back there were pretty much powerless to do so.
Linear Mode
