Of The RNC Chairmanship

Mark Levin said on the radio today that the race to replace the feckless crew over at the RNC has begun and its between Newt Gingirch and Michael Steele.  I've made my views no, but as much as I love Newt the philosopher, his return to party leadership would be a sign of wishful thinking; hoping to rewind the clock 12 years.  Gingrich says he knows how to lead a Revolution, but the issues and circumstances are different.  Gingrich has remade himself admirably as a commentator and conservative stalwart on television and in print.  But the shadow of the end of his speakership, and the fact that when given the levers of power Newt over and over got run over by Bill Clinton . . . how Clinton was ever reelected after 1994, and how Clinton completely mugged Gingrich over and over for the credit of Republican reforms is both maddening and a lesson we need to remember.  Newt is a great communicator and idea man, but when he has had power in his hands he has not used it well.

Steele on the other hand has, in the parlance of ESPN, got "Next."  He's just as conservative as Gingrich ever was or is, yet represents a shift in the Republican Party from the old guard of '94 that is still clinging to power.  This is a tremendous opportunity for the GOP, its our chance to start clean and fresh with ourselves and the American people.  New faces are stepping forward, new faces who have little connection to '94 and the way that legacy was betrayed by the very people who brought it about by abandoning the very principles that got us elected.  That is why Sarah Palin so excited the Republican Party, it was like it was 1994 again but without all the baggage that carries now.  Steele would be a fresh face, a Bush-free personality who could articulate our beliefs without people saying "yeah but, look what you did in power."  Folks like Steele and Palin and our bevy of governors and young congressmen represents that change.  

Steele for Chair! 

Comments

[LFS]

Well, this is getting interesting. I like both men.

However, in this case I prefer Newt. We need a back-bencher who can direct the party both tactically and philosophically. Newt's problem is that he's got a horrible "bed-side manner"... if you will, and therefore makes a bad politician.

I'd rather save Steele for political office. Senator Steele, Governor Steele, Vice President Steele. Michael Steele can connect with voters. We need him for something more important than the RNC Chair.

[Anne]

I prefer Michael Steele. I'd rather for the Republican party to be looking forward than looking backward. Being RNC Chairman and doing it well could enhance Steele's future prospects as a candidate.

I hope the candidate list is broader than just having it be an either/or choice on Newt. I prefer Newt in the role I see him in now - as a political philosopher and news commentator.

If we Republicans want to win, then we've got to look to the future. It isn't 12 years ago. It isn't 28 years ago. It's now. And after the thumping we took on Election Day, it's now or never.

I'm not looking for a revolution in the Republican party. I'm looking for a resurrection of the Republican party. That's a little harder to pull off. It's a challenge, sure - but we should be up to it!

[LFS]

Well, possibly the best of both worlds.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/11/steele-likely-seek-rnc-leadership-post/

[NoVA Scout]

either one would bring strengths to the position. I really enjoy Newt's aggressive brain-storming. Steele is solid. It's nice to have two good choices. Most of the time we Rs don't even have one.

Newt is out of the running. What about the Chairmen of SC and Mich.? Are they gaining any traction?