Seriously, what party does RNC chairman Michael Steele think he is running:
Do you think homosexuality is a choice?
Oh, no. I don’t think I’ve ever really subscribed to that view, that you can turn it on and off like a water tap. Um, you know, I think that there’s a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can’t simply say, oh, like, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being gay.” It’s like saying, “Tomorrow morning I’m gonna stop being black.”
Does he not understand, the eight remaining members of the Log Cabin Republicans and the remaining closeted members of the Lavender Bund notwithstanding, this kind of thinking is simply not allowed in the Republican party? Additionally, he upset the pro-life crowd by correctly observing that right now, by law, women have the choice to carry their pregnancy to term or abort it.
Josh Hueco
Is it too early to start a Michael Steele death pool?
Ninerdave
@Josh Hueco:
I’ll take March 21st
Comrade Stuck
So true Mike. But it is like saying Tomorrow, I’m not going to be Chairman of the RNC.
Singularity
Wow. Steele is the best RNC chair the Democrats have had in ages. It’s kind of funny to think that he is going to fall for taking positions that are the most likely to help the Republicans get off the path to being a permanent minority. Here’s hoping they publicly crucify the guy and he goes rogue in response.
Rick Taylor
It is amazing to watch. He seems like a nice guy with a propensity to say what he thinks whoever he’s talking to wants to hear and with little idea of what the post he’s been appointed to involves. Republicans have a habit of these days of choosing people for positions based entirely on political calculations and with little regard for whether they’re actually competent and well qualified for the post they’ve been appointed to (for example Sarah Palin), and it keeps biting them hard.
Atanarjuat
Michael Steele is simply voicing an emerging message from a growing number of Republicans. Nothing wrong with that.
It’s the 21st century, liberals. Change isn’t just limited to Obama’s cynical political campaign slogan.
Do try to keep up.
-A
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
Steele will be given the heave-ho Easter weekend. That’s the next opportunity for the Republicans to bury the news. Even the Sunday shows will be light fare with so many Villagers distracted by Michelle’s bare arms overwhelming the Easter egg hunt.
bootlegger
@Singularity: The problem with your sarcasm is that should the Reps actually follow his lead and move toward their liberterian "choice" roots, they would be a bigger threat to the Dems. Its anti-Steeles who are eating their young.
Trinity
@Josh Hueco: I’ll take April 1st. It would be appropriate. Then the RNC could say the whole Steele tenure was just a joke…because it obviously is.
Josh Hueco
@Ninerdave:
That’s a Saturday. Sure you don’t want Friday the 20th? I’ll take Friday the 13th.
BTW, OT, but I posted this on the previous thread. Baylor just upset Kansas in the Big12 Tourney. Wheeeeeeeeee!
El Tiburon
Whatchyou talking about Willis?
Can we get Michael Steele and Michelle Bachmann to co-host some kind of talk show on TV? Teh Stoopid would be really really cool.
a different phil
This is opening the door for Ken Blackwell as the new RNC head. Blackwell makes Steel look like Rachael Maddow by comparison. Kenny would be a great choice as far as the Democrats are concerned.
CJ
@Atanarjuat: For once you might be right. But only insofar as anyone who voices these ideas is still considered to be a Republican.
This may truly be Steele’s way of trying to reform the Republican party and if so, kudos. However part of me thinks that he is saying these things so that he’ll get a better reception from those that are not Republicans once he is let go.
Napoleon
I will take 3/20.
Comrade Stuck
Aunt Milly Whitehead, from the Kansas Church of the Pentecostal Jeevus Beavers is looking for her rope.
Observer
My thought is he already knows he’s on his way out so he may as well say what he really thinks while he has the pulpit. And that it pisses off the dittoheads.
Sherrell
Anyone actually think this is a smart move by Michael Steele. His statements will probably go over well with pro-lifers and homosexual conservatives. Maybe he is trying to redefine the differences between the repubs and the dems by killing this as a defining difference. The real question should be did he clue in the rest of the party to this strategy?
Froley
The man has hours left as RNC head. I say he steps down tomorrow evening because of "health concerns" or "spending time with the family." And it will be disappointing. I don’t think the guy is the brightest bulb, but at least he knows that mainstream republican arguments are on the losing side on those two issues.
Bubblegum Tate
@a different phil:
And after that, Alan Keyes!
pharniel
3/15
beware the ides of march…
it’s either that or someone on that day attempts to go after limbaugh.
Punchy
From a Black guy to a Blackwell. I’ll give them points for consistency.
Indylib
@Sherrell:
Are you talking about pro-lifers within the republican party? All 3 of them?
Add that to the teeeny, teeny, tiny number of homosexual conservatives and you’ll have a quartet.
jibeaux
My favorite variation on this is when people admit that it’s not a choice, okay, it’s a genetic predisposition, but if you have that particular combination of genes you have to be celibate and no one else does. I can’t really think of anything comparable to that. It would be along the lines of thinking red hair was somehow demonic, grudgingly accepting the fact that people are born with red hair genes rather than choosing to be demonic, and agreeing not to stone them as long as they kept their heads shaved.
The Other Steve
I’m banning the word Willis.
Did you hear they’re renaming the Sears Tower the Willis Tower?
NEVER in my life time!
Rick Taylor
And just when I think Republicans cannot possibly surprise me with how stupid their ideas are, they go and outdo themselves. Via Washington Monthly, a "No-Cost Stimulus Plan" from Congressman John Shadegg and Senator David Vitter:
From Black Adder:
jibeaux
Methinks some of you are saying "pro-life" when the conventional appellation is "pro-choice" , given that there are scads of pro-life Republicans, and if anyone tries to engage me in a pedantic discussion of the actual merits or accuracy of either of those labels, piss off in advance, that not being my point.
Joshua Norton
“We TRIED having a black guy in charge! It just doesn’t work.”
No. Really.
MattF
This item from the NYT Caucus blog has some quotes from various opinionators. All negative. If there are moderate Republicans supporting Steele, they’re doing so very quietly.
Ash Can
I agree with Observer. Steele has never struck me as being as batshit crazy as the GOP base is nowadays. I think these really are his views, and by expressing them publicly he’s just saying "fuck it." As long as we’re placing our wagers, I’ll say I think he could be gone as early as this weekend. I also wonder if he might be angling for third-party leadership further down the road.
binzinerator
@Comrade Stuck:
I think that’s why he said it. He knows he already got the goodbye look from Rushbo, and the bus is revving up and waiting for him to be placed under it so why not tell the truth?
Hell it must feel pretty damn good to tell those fucking ignorant crackers the damn straight truth for once after all that shuck and jive he had to do to debase himself into the role of a GOP lawn ornament of racial diversity.
Joshua Norton
Sure. Just convince everyone that those little Styrofoam packing peanuts are really money.
amorphous
@Joshua Norton: Maybe this is some nefarious plot to make us lose confidence in our black President… more likely, Michael Steele might personally have moderate views on many issues.
jibeaux
@Rick Taylor:
Come on, two million new hookers is too much even for the likes of those two.
JasonF
That whole interview is full of win. Steele starts off by bringing the funny:
********************
I was kinda expecting hip-hop to be playing in here today.
Aw, sh—. It’s on my, uh, computer there. I haven’t pulled it up yet, but I’ll get a little bit goin’ in a second or two.
Who do you listen to?
I actually listen to a cross section, because I like to hear what the medium is saying, what the voice is.
But do you have a favorite?
P. Diddy I enjoy quite a bit.
Do you want to rethink that?
[laughs] I guess I’m sorta old-school that way. Remember, I came of age with the DJ and all this other stuff, so I’m also loving Grandmaster Flash, and that’s not hip-hop, but… Um, you know, I like Chuck D. And I always thought Snoop Dogg was—he just reminded me of the fellas back home. So I’ve always thoroughly enjoyed him.
Who else?
I like Sinatra. I like old-school. You know, Bing Crosby, Sinatra, Dean Martin. Love Dean Martin. He was one of these guys who just didn’t give an F. He just didn’t. Life was a party, and you either want to party or you don’t. But yeah, I like those. I’m a big Pack Rat. I love the Pack Rats from the 1950s—Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr., Frank Sinatra, those guys.
You mean the Rat Pack.
The Rat Pack, yeah.
********************
"The Pack Rats!?" You’ve got to be kidding me.
Then there’s this exchange:
********************
If he were to say, “Come over to the Oval Office, since I’m trying to be so bipartisan”—
I’d do it in a heartbeat.
And what would you say to him?
Let’s work together.
But what could you accomplish? He came in saying, “I want to work with both sides, I want to cross the aisle”—and it’s ugly already.
Because they haven’t been very bipartisan.
Do you think bipartisanship can work?
No. [pause] Look, I’m sorry, I know this is, you know, la-la land and Rodney King time and we all wanna get along, but that is not the nature of American politics. That is not the nature of politics, period.
I don’t know if refreshing’s the word, but to hear someone say bipartisanship doesn’t work—
It doesn’t work! I mean, I understand the ideal of it. But at the end of the day, this is a game of winners and losers. This is zero-sum. Your winning is my losing. My winning is your losing.
Okay, so if bipartisanship doesn’t work, what on earth would you and Barack Obama accomplish by sitting down together?
You find a common ground.
********************
I’m not sure Mr. Steele understands what "bipartisanship" means.
Here’s the exchange John alluded to in his post. It was more than acknowledging that Roe v. Wade is the current law of the land. It was a full-throated endorsement of the right to choose, followed immediately by an attempt to back pedal, which led Steele to the nonsensical position that there is a right to choose as long as the individual states say so (for those keeping score at home, a right that is subject to abrogation by the state is called "not a right")
********************
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.
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.
********************
Also, I think he might be gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that)
********************
So you become a Republican. But you also decide, after graduating Johns Hopkins, to go into the priesthood? What a decision.
It’s a huge decision. And of course my friends were like, “You’re going to be a what?” You know, because I had a small reputation at Hopkins, you know—
As what?
I loved to party—still do—and have a good time.
Did you date a lot in college?
No, I didn’t. I had a lot of girl friends, and I loved—I love hanging out with women, sometimes more than men. You know, sit back and let your hair down type thing? So I knew what I was walking away from …
[…]
Did you watch the Oscars?
I did! I love the Oscars. Despite what Mr. Shales said in his review in The Washington Post, I liked it. I thought it was: [claps]. And the host! Who knew?
Did you watch the red-carpet stuff, too?
I did. I’m looking for who’s got what dress on, you know? I’m looking at the dresses. I’m lookin’ at what they’re doing with the hair. I’m lookin at the fellas. Now, you know, guys are wearing black and white, and I get that, but there’s some style points I could share with some of these brothers out there who just ain’t gettin’ it together.
What do you think of Barack’s sartorial skills?
I… You know what? [drumming fingers on his desk] The white tie at the Inauguration was not working. That was wrong. I’m sorry, white tie only goes with tails. Sor-ry! Wear the tails, bro. Get the waistcoat and the tails. And the studs—you can play around with the studs if you want, but c’mon, bro, don’t do the white tie. Did Not Work. And it did not complement what she wore.
Yeah, how do you think she’s doing?
Oh, I lo— [stops himself] I think she’s doing great so far. But the inaugural dress, I wasn’t feelin’ that.
No?
Nooo. Didn’t like the cut. It was not flattering to her. All the little puff things on it—what was that all about? She should have been there in a, you know—she could have done a Valentino, but she’s a little more hip than that. I just thought it was a little bit [pause]…not her is the only way I can put it.
Comrade Stuck
GOP Senator wankfest this afternoon on Senate Floor.
Orin Hatch declares we’re all gonna die if Gitmo terrists are moved to the mainland.
Shorter Hatch–they might tell in open federal court what we (Bush Republicans) did to them. And, my underwear is to tight.
Senator Inhoffe — Global warming is officially over and the eco terrorist hoax exposed. God will cool things down now.
Tonal Crow
Is Mr. Steele Howard Dean’s parting gift to progressives?
Indylib
In other news some of the cats need to be herded into a pen where they are allowed no contact with batshit insane wingnuts because the insanity is rubbing off more and more.
Evan Beyh says "“The American people and businesses are tightening their belts,” Bayh added. “I think we need to show that the government can economize as well.”
Sounds familiar, no?
Indylib
@jibeaux:
Good catch – right you are.
dlw32
Nice Black Adder reference, Mr. Taylor. (… a plan so cunning you could pin a tail on it and call it a weasel)
I might give Steele the benefit of the doubt and say this is the new direction of the GOP if he hadn’t felt the need to apologize to Rush. That made it clear that even if Steele wanted it to go in a different direction, the GOP is headed down the same path they’ve trod since Regan made his deal with the devil (aka the Moral Majority).
binzinerator
@Atanarjuat:
Change for republicans is limited to what they can jingle in their pocket while waiting in a public restroom for a toe-tap from one of the stalls.
jibeaux
Fascinating. The little-discussed option of having a government bureaucrat make all pregnancy decisions.
4tehlulz
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY
Zifnab
@Joshua Norton: I agree. The biggest problem with Michael Steele is that he’s black. In fact, that’s the only problem I can see.
Problems I can hear… well, that’s a different story and one we won’t concern ourselves with when determining who is top dog in the GOP.
Dennis-SGMM
More of the problem with the GOP:
MATTHEWS: Are you proud of the economic record of George W. Bush?
FLEISCHER: You know, I think he came in with a recession, he left with a recession…
MATTHEWS: No, really. Are you proud of it? Is it something to brag about?
FLEISCHER: Chris, it‘s not a simple one-word answer. I‘m not proud of the way…
MATTHEWS: Yes, well, the way we judge success is what you left behind. The way we judge success in life is if you have a campfire as a Boy Scout and you say—you‘re told, Leave it better than when you found it. Did you leave the economy better than you found it?
FLEISCHER: Look, I think when people look back on the Bush years…
MATTHEWS: Isn‘t that a fair standard?
FLEISCHER: … the one thing people are going to remember the most is that he kept us safe. We have not been attacked against since September 11. The second is, as I said, Barack Obama should be thankful that he‘s inherited a world without Saddam Hussein in it. The third part…
MATTHEWS: Yes, but we were attacked on your watch. If you start getting into who was attacked when, we suffered the worst domestic calamity in history on your watch. If you get into this whose watch was good, you guys blew it.
FLEISCHER: Chris, I…
MATTHEWS: I don‘t know if you can do it that way.
FLEISCHER: Chris, how dare you?
Brick Oven Bill
Intrade has Geithner out by 30JUN at 8; and out by 31DEC at 24. This should provide them PC cover for setting a line on Steele.
I would set the line at Steele out by 30JUN at 17; and our by 31DEC at 37. Steele demonstrates both the pandering nature of the GOP leadership (see also Meghan McCain, who will be on O’Reilly); and a PC streak at Intrade.
chrome agnomen
steele DOES realize that he in fact did stop being black some time ago, does he not?
amorphous
Meanwhile, Governor Goodhair is rejecting $550M in stimulus for unemployment in Texas. Meanwhile, he lives in a $10k/month rental – footed by the taxpayer – while the Governor’s mansion is being renovated.
I love Austin, but it’s time to get out of this god-forsaken state run by retards, especially before Chuck Norris and Glenn Beck convince the morons that secession is a good idea.
malraux
@Singularity:
Honestly, though, take away the reactionary minority base stoking positions (forced pregnancy, gay hate, etc) are you really going to be left with anything?
Josh Hueco
@amorphous:
Texas breaks my heart. Such a large state with so many assets and great people and such an interesting history and it underachieves in so many ways.
geg6
@Dennis-SGMM:
That might have been Tweety’s finest 20 minutes ever. In fact, it was. A truly amazing interview. Truly. Funniest fucking thing I’ve watched in years.
As for Michael Steele, does no one remember that this was the guy who ran for, I think, governor or senate and wouldn’t mention what party affiliation he was? And, in fact, deliberately created signage that was meant to imply he was a Dem?
Why he ever took this job, I’ll never know. He never was one of them. And he was ashamed to be associated with them. I don’t get it.
Ninerdave
@Josh Hueco:
Yup. I chose it specifically because it was a Saturday. Less people paying attention. Although that’s a head of the Sunday news programs, so maybe I’ll pick the 22nd at night.
BP in MN
This isn’t Steele knowing he’s on the way out and saying fuck it, I’ll go down in flames. Remember, this interview was actually done three weeks ago.
If Steele knew he was going to burn out this fast, then I give him major props for what has to be the greatest piece of political performance art of my lifetime. But I think it’s far more likely that he’s just comically inept; his whole political history points to that view.
joe from Lowell
I just had a psychic flash. I saw the future.
It was tomorrow, and Michael Steele was walking this comment back during a media appearance.
Also, Michael who’s reading this now, your father IS disappointed in you, but he’d never say anything.
Dennis-SGMM
Link to the transcript of Matthews and Fleischer.
jibeaux
As a mom of extraordinarily gifted and precocious kids, I’m not entirely convinced this is 100% accurate depiction of his adoption, not that it matters much…
This, on the other hand, is true, ergo also likely grounds for dismissal:
jibeaux
Dang it, the 7-8 months is supposed to be blockquoted.
Mark S.
I think this is still a respectable position in GOP circles, but I don’t know. It’s certainly what Scalia and his merry band of idiots on the Court profess to believe.
And I would also guess that most conservatives would admit that homosexuality is not a choice. It doesn’t mean they want to give them any rights. Most of them don’t really have that big of a problem with discrimination (see National Review’s writings during the Civil Rights Era).
I very much doubt that Steele is going to last very long, but I don’t think this is what will push him overboard.
Leelee for Obama
@Joshua Norton:
For the Win! I’ve thought all along they picked him because Democrats and Independents obviously voted for Obama just because he’s black, and if they had their own Barack, they’d be Golden!
What is truly remarkable, as Atan whatever said, is he could actually refurbish the Repubs with this kind of thinking, if he wouldn’t get crushed for thinking outside their box.
I await further developments with popcorn
Betsy
@jibeaux:
Steele also said
Steele was born in 1958. Depending on where his mother lived and how much money she had, bringing the pregnancy to term wasn’t much of a "choice."
John PM
@Leelee for Obama: #58
After all the good times since November 4, 2008, I am all popcorned out. I need me some Junior Mints, which are not unlike Michael Steele – Black on the outside, but oh so white on the inside.
anonevent
@Atanarjuat: An emergence of one Republican, Michael Steele, although, as I point out to my wife, one does not make a pattern.
jibeaux
@Mark S.:
Oh, sure. That’s true. Overturn Roe and you get 50 different abortion policies, that’s why the true pro-lifers as well as the R party platform advocate for a constitutional amendment.
Steele’s problem is that he just, just finished saying the following:
So, then, when he busts out with:
If the definition of "choice" is constant throughout that interview, it would seem to say that the government makes the determination in any given pregnancy whether to continue or terminate it. Whether this would be a coin flip, some sort of lottery system, or possibly a merit-based eugenics-style evaluation, he doesn’t say.
Of course that’s not what he meant. But I challenge any of you to explain what that DOES mean…
Michael
This was the Ron Paul/Dominionist stealth version of fake Libertarianism that’s been trotted out so often.
Here’s the template:
1. Pretend that central government notions of setting forth inviolable personal freedoms are an affront to individual liberty, all while ignoring the glaring contradiction.
2. Sell the populace that true liberty is in being part of the mob in the society you want to live and raise your family in, and that individual freedoms must come only by persuading your neighbors who are in a majority.
3. Dilute the ability of the federal government to act as a check check local repression of ethnic, religious or political minorities, as well as women.
4. Concentrate your agenda on swinging the legislatures first of less populous states. A little money can go a long way (for instance, South Dakota’s legislature and abortion bans don’t reflect public sentiment as stated by plebiscite).
5. As you throw weight around in legislatures of states you control, you can then start attacking larger states.
6. The goal is to isolate hopelessly liberal cities in populous states; ideally, you can go at the hated vices there as you flex your legislative muscle.
When you consider this sort of plan (implied in John Whitehead’s "Second American Revolution), it makes sense that they are so adamant about repealing the 17th Amendment (direct election of senators) and supporting the NRST – its all about running things via easily manipulable state legislatures.
Joshua Norton
I’m sorry, I cannot comment right now. I’m too busy drawing parallels between our mailman and Obama because they are both black.
The Populist
So let me get this straight? No cost? So we drill baby drill the fuck out of the US of A and it’s all free of charge? You mean when the economic damages occur from areas that are devastated by drilling that doesn’t cost anything? Wow!
So when the oil leaks into the oceans and kills fish and birds, that doesn’t cost anything, WOW!
When I look out my window and I see drilling going on and then I check Zillow to see my home values have plunged even further, that won’t cost anything! WOW WOW WOW! Sign me up for that plan!!!
When I walk outside and smell the crappy stench given off by the refinery in the distance, that’s a blessing?!?!?
So wait, they said we haven’t had an energy policy, right? Why don’t they work on getting more green energy tech out there instead of this insane stance on drilling. If you did that, we’d be that much more independent of OPEC and, to me, that seems like a savings right there!
These maroons have zero clue. Drilling only benefits the oil companies and wouldn’t add that many jobs. How many people do you need to work a field? Not many from what I can see. Now to manufacture, deploy/install solar panels, wind turbines, etc…that is totally something that can employ a whole CROP of people.
Why is it the majority of people who post at BJ are smarter than these buffoons on the right?
blogenfreude
Steele will be purged. A ritual purification will take place over the next six months. By the next election cycle, the work of the party faithful will be complete – the GOP will be composed solely of sociopaths, home schoolers, and the clinically insane.
Shygetz
Steele has an impossible job. He ran on a platform of bringing a party of congenital reactionaries into the 21st century. It’s like booking tours of Israel for Klansmen–even if you can get it to work by some miracle, it’s not going to turn out well.
anonevent
@The Populist: Why pay two workers when you can pay one oil executive? His piss will eventually trickle down to those on bottom.
The Populist
I used to support this ONLY to prove you can’t ban abortion completely because Mississippi could outlaw it but the woman could easily drive into a state, say, Missouri where it most likely would remain legal to have her abortion.
What will they do about that? I don’t like this idea anymore BUT a side of me dares some states to do it and see how they feel when young girls are found dead in a backroom abortion clinic OR the state goes broke trying to pay for all those unwanted children.
Republicans talk a good game with regards to Abortion but they sure don’t care much once the kid is out of the womb. Cuts in schools, pre-school, etc. make me wonder what would happen to all the additional kids that TAXPAYERS would have to support.
As that beacon of reason Bristol Palin said, "Abstinence is a good thing to talk about but it’s just not realistic" (paraphrasing). When your party’s star mom’s kid says something that smart it makes you wonder what the fuck is wrong with the other maroons.
The Populist
Yep, just more ways the right try to appeal to the middle class and working poor only to find out it’s more trickle down bullshit that helps nobody but the moneyed class.
Zifnab
@The Populist: What amazes me is that he has this dogged insistence that if you just put a drill bit in the ground, oil will come gushing out.
Low on jobs? Just drill for oil! Where? Uh… where the oil is! Nevermind that oil companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars finding the stuff and that one in ten wells come up dry. The solution to our unemployment problem is to turn every American into an oil rig worker.
They’ll wave their hands and proclaim off-shore oil drilling will solve all our problems without giving half a thought to even the broadest logistics. Just wave your hands, make it happen.
Dumbasses like this gave us sub prime mortgages, Tennessee Valley coal slurry spills, and the Iraq War.
geg6
@Shygetz:
Okay, there went than nice clean monitor I had.
priscianus jr
I agree with Observer (16) and Ashcan (29). Also, he’s trying to atone for the fact that he caved to Limbaugh. His motto might well be:
"Fu¢k this $hit."
Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but I suspect that he realizes the Republican coalition has no future, the wingnut model will not attract anybody new, so he’s just going to say what he thinks and is sure to attract some kind of a following of people who agree with him. He obviously hasn’t got his career staked on being chairman of the RNC.
IThe story of Steele bears an uncanny resemblance to the movie Putney Swope.
"The changes I’m going to make will be minimal. I’m not gonna rock the boat. Rockin’ the boat’s a drag. What you do is sink the boat! And there’s no sense sinkin’ nothin’ unless you can salvage with productive alternatives. And brothers, you can’t change nothin’ with rhetoric and slogans. Because if a man’s really got the truth in his pocket, he doesn’t talk about it. He hangs it out on a shingle where people can see it. So from now on, the name of this agency is TRUTH and SOUL."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putney_Swope
AhabTDefenestrator
"Yeah boys, put out an APB on a ship named "the Pequod," and bring in this guy named Ishmael for questioning. Looks like somebody harpooned themselves a whale."
[/Wiggum]
Zifnab
@The Populist:
They’ve been working on that answer for years, and it’s generally tipped their hands to the whole "pro-life is code for misogyny" complaint.
Basically, you make women prisoners of the state while their pregnant. They can’t legally leave to have an abortion elsewhere without some form of written consent or court allowance. See the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. It’s the template that you can expand over all women given the right legislative locomotion.
MikeJ
Why would it matter if sexuality is a choice or not? For that matter, if you could choose to not be black, would that make it ok to discriminate against black people?
Fuck all that. Innate, choice, who gives a shit except for some moronic god-botherers. Their choice, religion, is already protected by the constitution. why not give someone else a chance? Or why not simply call homosexuality a religion? ("This is my body. Eat me.")
The Populist
Zifnab, agreed but remember these are the idiots who wanted to turn every American into a Wal Mart worker/Ebay seller when the economy was deceiving everybody. They sure fell in love with that idea while all the good manufacturing/skill jobs left for cheaper lands.
Yep, the GOP pushed the idea of creating this "service" economy and it fell flat because A) they hate minimum wage and did NOTHING about it until the Dems took control and B) they feel a job is a job when it isn’t the case.
See righties, you allowed Wal Mart to grow so big it has KILLED every small businessman in it’s gigantic path. When a Wal Mart is allowed to move into a small town it is FACT that the small retail businesses die quick deaths. On top of that, try being a manufacturer or product vendor and deal with Wal Mart? They nickel and dime you on cost to a point where you are fucked if you DON’T get the order. Try walking away knowing that if your other accounts are dying off and WM is the only retailer that can make up the losses you grudgingly give in and sell to them.
Then the purging starts. A company like Mattel moves mfg to China so they can sell more toys at the margins WM likes since WM is the #1 toy seller in America. Yep, Mattel may have wanted to keep operations here, but they can’t do it because WM dictates how much they will pay for that toy.
Same goes for almost all businesses. I remember when Sam Walton used to brag about ONLY selling MADE IN AMERICA in his stores.
Fuck them.
Aimai
Steele will be paid to go away. If there is any cunning plan it is that. He took the crappy job for the graft and loot but recent revalattions abuut his history of corrupt self dealing and incompetence probably made him a poor figurehead and placeholder.right now the backroom boys are trying to find donors who will pay him off to go quietly. I’m betting that an extorted golden parachute was his plan all along.–aimai
[delurk]...[/delurk]
@JasonF:
I generally agree with you, but "States’ Rights" can lead in the opposite direction, too. Speaking from Washington, the first state to legalize abortion (in 1970. Greatest bumper-sticker ever: "Don’t Labor under a Misconception–Vote for Proposition 20!) I depend on my state to take the lead in advancing rights against the Federal Government, which has to pander to a bunch of red states full of troglodytic Neanderthals.
Maybe it’s time to go all "States’ Rights" with a vengeance: Let those of us in civilized states build the kind of life we want for ourselves, let Alabama and Mississippi stew in their own primitive juice, and let people vote with their feet.
The Populist
MikeJ,
My one argument with the retarded righties on homosexuality is simple:
Picture yourself waking up one day. You have a wife/girlfriend and you see a guy in speedos. You stare at him and then decide that you hate women and want the guy (or as Denis Leary once cracked – How is it a "choice"? I don’t think a 30 year old guy wakes up one morning, sees a dude and thinks "Yep, I want that!").
I point out that gay folks are BORN this way. Science backs this up. They get all flustered and disagree like they know how people make up their minds. Makes me wonder if they are closeted and, if so, what are they so fracking afraid of.
God bless Gay folks. Every one of them that I know/have known are caring, giving people who are full of life. Each person in the community isn’t easily stereotyped and the diversity is wonderful.
This hatred needs to stop. These dumbfucks are doing some major damage. I do see hope with younger folks, but hard to tell.
Martin
Even Republicans are starting to notice how stupid Republicans are. That’s a pretty impressive accomplishment if you ask me.
The Populist
Good point…so much for the GOP being defenders of "liberty", eh?
Man it’s just so infuriating. Who are these asswipes to dictate to others? They say lefties are the ones wanting to take freedoms away, yet I see this shit and shake my head in disgust.
Tsulagi
No shit. This guy is turning out to be comedy gold.
Yeah, saying the gay and abortion ain’t no big thang will go over really well with the 6k old Earth truthers, the 0 tax rate=infinite revenues econ geniuses, and the ball-buyers shooting starbursts swooning over dreamy rough men at the ready. The Base.
Let’s take a look at how that interview went over with some in that base. You can always count on RedState. Not only debate on homosexuality as a lifestyle choice, but also whether the gays are recruiting straight people. Some say no, some say yes. Janis shares….
Preying gays!
Bubblegum Tate
As a longtime DJ and even longer-time hip-hopper, I say this to Michael Steele: If you think Flash isn’t hip-hop, then you can shut right the fuck up.
The Populist
States rights? Seems when California felt compassion for dying people they passed a Medical Marijuana law. Ashcroft immediately put the fear of jail into the people who grew and gave out the needed pot for those with prescriptions.
What about Teri Schiavo? These fucks want to legislate everything.
What about Oregon’s right to die law? Ashcroft and Gonzalez had issues with that one as well.
States rights are only for those who vote along the hard right line. If the citizens of these states pass laws that offend the mighty righties, watch out. If the states want the things that offend the minority of a-holes on the right, too bad. What part of democracy do you not understand?
Either you are fully in support of states rights or you aren’t. Make up your minds, right wing freaks.
The Populist
teh stupid amazes me.
ChrisA
The problem with the GOP? Gee, where to start.
It’s the party of ideas and open debate, dontcha know.
You can start with this lame request (via DailyKos) on putting a clip on YouTube for RNC job applicants.
You can listen to the talking-point doofus on the video provided or for
more fun just type ‘RNC Application’ in the search field on YouTube.
Endless hours of free fun. I’m thinking of using the clips for a GOP talking points drinking game.
Xanthippas
And that’s what keeps me reading the comments here.
NonyNony
The only thing I’m wondering now is if the GOP will replace Steele with the guy who belonged to an "all whites" country club in the 21st century (Kit Bond), with the guy who has presided over the last two RNC losses (Mike Duncan), or with the other black guy who wanted the job and who is probably crazier than all the other guys who wanted it put together (Ken Blackwell).
The part of me that understands that we need two healthy political parties in this country for our system of government to be healthy has decided that there isn’t an RNC chair who could get the job that could make the party a sane political party again. So I’m really hoping that the GOP figures that the least worst optics for replacing Steele would be to have another black guy take over when he leaves. Meaning that "Krazy" Ken Blackwell gets the job when Steele gets his walking papers.
Krazy Kenny would never do things like compare being gay to being black or do anything to upset the anti-abortion nutters at all ever. If you want to pander to the Religious Conservatives, Krazy Kenny is your man. And I can’t recall right now, but I think that Limbaugh was pushing for Krazy Kenny back at the last RNC election (he might have been pushing for Kit Dawson and it was RedState pushing for Krazy Kenny – I can’t remember now).
But if Krazy Ken Blackwell gets that job, I can rest assured that he’ll bring the same quality of service and excellence to the job of RNC chair that he brought to his service as Secretary of State here in Ohio. He might actually manage to cripple the party so badly that the coalition cracks up entirely and a new opposition party might be able to be formed in its stead. At the very least, his fealty to the nuttiest of religious nutters in the party will accelerate the departure of the few moderates left.
Ash Can
@BP in MN: Whoa, I (obviously) didn’t know that. Thanks for setting me straight. In that case, I’m the one saying "fuck it." I have no idea what his game is at this point.
Hypatia
@The Populist:
Link, please.
I am aware of some questionable studies on the matter.
Nothing definitive has been published IMO.
Plus everything has been about gay MEN.
John PM
@NonyNony: #89
I am going to stop you right there. It is not at all self-evident that we need two political parties (or indeed any political parties) for our system of government to be healthy. What we need are 537 individuals who respect the Constitution and who first and foremost put the welfare of every American ahead of their desire to be reelected or the demands of corporate interests. We have 220 years of experience in running a demoncracy to draw on, but it seems like no one in the Republican Party is interested in that. As of today not one Republican is worthy of being one of our 537 elected federal representatives. You need read no further than the Preamble to the Constitution to reach that conclusion.
Paul Crowley
Here’s hoping they publicly crucify the guy and he goes rogue in response.
Wouldn’t we prefer it if there wasn’t anyone for the less demented elements in the Republican party to rally around?
michael
To be correct, that should be restated as follows:
Walker
@The Populist:
Forget the environmental effects, I don’t understand how this is supposed to work. Oil is sold on a world market. What are we supposed to do to make it worthwhile to buy USA oil over Saudi oil. Are they suggesting protectionism?
Oh, I forgot. This is the party of Hoover. Of course they are.
JasonF
@The Populist:
You need look no further than the Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, which all but a handful of Republicans in Congress voted in favor of despite decades of vociferously arguing that decisions on the legality of abortion should be left up to the states.
binzinerator
@BP in MN:
Like Ash Can, I didn’t know that either. And I don’t have any idea what his game is now either.
Maybe three weeks ago, before being forced to grovel before The Pilonidal Fatass, he was still deluding himself he was going to lead the gooper party in a new direction, and that was it. Maybe. Shit I don’t know, but if that was it he was effin’ as clueless as to who makes up his party’s base as he was to who actually controls them.
tom c
First of all anyone who made the prediction that losing the election would trigger a Republican civil war should win a cookie or something.
The Republican base is demanding that its leadership hold so many different views with such ideological purity that there is really a very narrow cross section of the country that need bother applying. You can’t be even squishily prolife. You can’t ever want to raise taxes, not ever, under any contingency. You must hold certain positions on the environment, no matter what scientific consensus may say. You all can see where this going. There are not that many smart, creative people who think that rigidly. Its one thing to have one or two unpopular beliefs. Hell, I practically recommend it. The Republicans are demanding purity though and they aren’t ever going to find good leadership until they realize that they need to have someone who is able to tell them things they don’t want to hear.
The Populist
You are kidding right? There are many, many studies on this issue. It’s been shown that there is something that is formed in the brain that makes a human being homosexual.
I’d look for it, but I sense it wouldn’t matter because you prove my theory on all this. It appears your mind is made up and nothing I can show you will convince you.
Are you a Conservative? Do you really, honestly believe that a man or woman wake up one morning and decide to be gay?
You see, I am 40. I grew up in a time and place where being gay was abhorred. In my high school we had kind of knew who was gay. When I went to my 20 year reunion both guys were there with boyfriends.
Now let me ask you this…those guys back then in the 80s didn’t magically decide to be gay. There are studies that show young boys who hid their homosexual tendencies and tried to be the man their parents wanted them to be. Problem is they lived lives that wound up hurting their wives and in some respect, the family as well. Now if we’d agree that you are gay from the day you leave the womb (or sooner) then maybe these people wouldn’t NEED to hide anything.
Sorry, but I’ve worked around many gay men. Almost all have the same story and not one straight person was "converted" even though a few gay men try from time to time. How is it that somebody like me, for example, didn’t become gay because of it? Using the conservative logic I should have turned gay the minute I went for drinks with this one guy.
Going back to the high school guy I knew, why is it that a guy who played sports, dated cute girls and whatnot decided to be gay one day? Really…he didn’t get exposed to it as the area we grew up in was VERY conservative. There wasn’t LOGO network, gay magazines on the shelves of stores nor was there Queer Eye or WIll and Grace. Many of us kids never even realized what gay was since our parents never brought it up. All we knew was what society told us: Gay meant wrong. I disagreed even then because I realized that there must be reasons to why somebody is gay. Anyway, this man had no real exposure, so why did he "turn" gay? The studies I’ve read and talking to many gay people, women and men alike, tells me that the stories are similar…either they were in the closet and tried to live what they were told was a normal life (a lie basically) or they knew it but couldn’t share it with anybody until they moved to gay friendly places.
I am happily married with no kids. I CHOOSE to not have kids so they don’t have to grow up in a world where hate is substituted for religion and irrational beliefs for science.
See, I can choose to not have kids because I am not selfish enough to have them to make the in-laws happy. My wife doesn’t either because we worry about our economic future. So basically, one can choose things like children, jobs, etc. One can’t choose their sexuality.
michael
For giggles, they’re starting to parade Roy Moore around again.
http://askshow.com/
I think I’ll go around and talk him up for RNC chair.
michael
Limbaugh/Moore 2012 – "Extremism is an OK Vice"
Of course, in that event, Rush will need to triple his Secret Service protection against plots by his VP…..
The Populist
Found the link I read the other day:
* News
* World news
* Gay rights
US researchers find evidence that homosexuality linked to genetics
Such findings would further the debate over whether homosexuality is innate or a choice
* McClatchy newspapers
* guardian.co.uk, Monday 1 December 2008
* Article history
Compared to straight men, gay men are more likely to be left-handed, to be the younger siblings of older brothers, and to have hair that whorls in a counterclockwise direction.
US researchers are finding common biological traits among gay men, feeding a growing consensus that sexual orientation is an inborn combination of genetic and environmental factors that largely decide a person’s sexual attractions before they are born.
Such findings – including a highly anticipated study this winter – would further inform the debate over whether homosexuality is innate or a choice, an undercurrent of California’s recent Proposition 8 campaign in which television commercials warned that "schools would begin teaching second-graders that boys could marry boys", suggesting homosexuality would then spread.
Some scientists say the political and moral debate over same-sex marriage frequently strayed from established scientific evidence, including comments by Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin that homosexuality is "a choice" and "a decision".
Until 2007, CNN polls had found that a majority of Americans believed gay people could change their sexual orientation if they chose to; it was only last year that a majority for the first time said homosexuality was an inborn trait.
Christian groups such as Exodus International argue "that homosexuals who desire to change can do so". One prominent psychiatrist, Dr Robert Spitzer of Columbia University, found controversial evidence that therapy can cause some gay people to change to a heterosexual orientation, although the study concluded that a "complete change" was uncommon.
While sexual behaviour may be chosen, the preponderance of researchers say attraction is dictated by biology, with no demonstrated contribution from social factors such as parenting or other factors after birth.
A host of studies since the mid-1990s have found common biological traits between gay men, including left-handedness and the direction of hair whorls. The likelihood that if one identical twin is gay, the other will be also be gay is much higher than the "concordance" of homosexuality between fraternal twins, indicating that genes play a role in sexual orientation, but are not the entire cause.
"In the past decade, I think the pendulum has swung more toward biological theory and biological causes," said Richard Lippa, a psychology professor at California State University-Fullerton, who has studied hair patterns and other biological traits in gay men.
Sven Bocklandt, a geneticist at the David Geffen school of medicine at UCLA, is bewildered by the argument that people choose their sexual attraction. He said that virtually every animal species that has been studied – from sheep to fruit flies – has a small minority of individuals who demonstrate homosexual activity.
"I really believe the reason most humans are straight is the same reason that most crocodiles are straight, and the same reason most whales are straight," Bocklandt said. "Nature would not leave something so important for reproduction, for the survival of the species, to coincidence."
Less understood is the degree to which sexual orientation is determined by genes or environmental factors, such as hormones or immunological factors that may act on a foetus. What scientists call "the fraternal birth order effect", the fact that each successive boy born to the same mother has a greater chance of being gay, may be due to an increasing immunological response by a mother’s body to each male foetus in her womb.
Long discredited are theories that parenting – one mid-20th century theory held that boys raised by a domineering mother with a distant father were more likely to be gay – has anything to do with sexual orientation.
Evidence of that, said Michael Bailey, a professor of psychology at Northwestern University in Illinois, comes from studies of genetically male infants born with malformed or ambiguous genitals. In many such cases, surgeons would construct a vagina, and instruct parents to raise the child as a girl, with no knowledge of his medical history.
As adults, those prenatally male/postnatally female people were virtually all attracted to women, Bailey said.
"If you can’t make a male attracted to other males by cutting off his penis, castrating him and rearing him as a girl, then how likely is any social explanation of male homosexuality?" he said.
Researchers are eagerly awaiting a DNA study of male siblings with at least one gay brother by Bailey and other scientists at Northwestern University due in early 2009, because it may shed light on the role genetics plays in sexual attraction.
By researching 800 sets of brothers, by far the largest study of its type, the Northwestern study is searching for the specific genes that influence some brothers to be gay and others to be heterosexual.
Women may have more fluidity of sexual expression than men, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have a specific sexual orientation, said Lisa Diamond, a professor of psychology and gender studies at the University of Utah who studies female sexual orientation.
One explanation is that women’s sexual behaviour is driven more by relationships.
For some women, "your sexual orientation does not provide the last word on the sorts of behaviours and identities you might experience in your lifetime," Diamond said.
"Some lesbian women are predominantly attracted to women, but some of them have found themselves becoming incredibly close to their best male friends, sometimes having sex with them. It does not make them straight. It’s not, since you had a one-night stand with your male friend, that you can choose to become straight."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/01/homosexuality-genetics-usa
jake 4 that 1
I have to say, I’m surprised he hasn’t walked this back yet. Or has he?
@Punchy: Um …
Never mind.
Dennis-SGMM
@Bubblegum Tate:
"Life is a jungle, sometimes it makes me wonder how I keep from going under."
Zifnab
@The Populist:
They’ve determined the cause of the Gh3y is actually in a set of chromosomes called Satan’s Jeans – pictured here.
The only way to combat the Gh3y jeans is for an ordained priest or other sanctified religious official to beat them off.
/ducks
Tsulagi
Someone steered you wrong. Those are the BDU pants of the storied RSSF.
Other news, I see Steele has walked back his GQ musings. No one could ever have predicted, and all that.
Don’t know about hip hop, but that sucker can sure dance to others’ tunes. He’s starting to make Multiple Choice Mitt look all stalwarty.
vacuumslayer
He be da man!
vacuumslayer
@jibeaux:
Yeah, but those gingers have it coming.
Comrade Stuck
@vacuumslayer:
Thumbs up on your art!
jcricket
If there’s one thing the parties can unite on, it’s that.
We’re probably cheering the death of the GOP a little prematurely, but here’s all it will take:
1) Insistence on purity to all the wingnutty causes (creationism, global warming denial, hatred of gays/immigrants/non-Christians)
2) More "formerly known as moderate Republicans" running as Blue Dogs (or not running at all) – giving independents/moderates a "Democrat" they can "safely" vote for.
3) Leads to a complete decimation of the Republican party outside of the most wingnutty areas (let’s say 30% of the House/Senate seats stay wingnutty).
At that point it’ll be hard for Republicans to recover. Their bench will be destroyed, the wingnuts will be in charge, pulling the party even further to the right like the gravitational field of a black hole.
vacuumslayer
@Comrade Stuck:
Athankee! :D
jim
All this wishy-washiness does not a leader make. Steele may as well change his name to Stretch Armstrong at this point – he’s going to beat McCain’s record for 180’s pretty soon if he keeps it up.
*
Ironically, if they put expediency & common-sense ahead of ideological purity & went along with Steele’s POV, the Republicans would have a slim (but not impossible) chance to regain the Oval Office in 2012 or 2016. The non-logic of deciding that the electorate rejected your already-extremist right-wing platform only because it wasn’t right-wing ENOUGH is a one-way ticket to the fringes.
*
This is the problem with jumping on board the Purity Bandwagon: no steering-wheel & ever-increasing momentum.
Hyperion
@The Populist: You wrote a lengthy reply but did not provide a link, which I requested.
Um, I’m a scientist. When some asserts (as you did) that "Science backs this up", meaning that there is scientific evidence "that gay folks are BORN this way", I want to see that evidence. This is an undergraduate report that has a good overview and a list of pertinent references. At the end links are provided to other (scientific) websites. It and other articles I read appear to support the position I stated above, that is,
Perhaps you can find scientific articles that reach different conclusions. If so, please draw them to my attention. This is a hard problem and needs further study.
DougJ
I hate this, hate this, hate this.
He says what we all believe is true. And that seals his fate.
Nothing good can come of firing people for telling the truth.
Buck
I love it when Aunt Milly Whitehead shows up.
Gay Veteran
Hyperion: "…Perhaps you can find scientific articles that reach different conclusions. If so, please draw them to my attention. This is a hard problem and needs further study."
I got your hard problem hanging.
Who the fuck would just wake up one day, join the Teh Gays, and risk losing your family, your friends, your job, even your life to violent homophobes?!?!?
The Populist
Are you blind? I included a link and article from a respected SCIENCE journal above.
Nice try. You can’t win the argument so you make me out to look like a buffoon. READ WHAT I POSTED DUDE.