Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

If Michael Steele resigns as RNC chairman, then who?

Tornado Damage resembles internal chaos of Republican party

With many Republicans now calling for their own party chairman, Michael Steele, to resign after yet another Biden-like gaffe, the question arises, who's in the Republican bullpen to clean up the devastation?

The good news for Republicans is, with the long July 4th holiday and all the attention to Jake Pavelka and Vienna Girardi's shocking breakup, Steele might just skate by, unless blogs like this pick up the story again this morning. Over the weekend only Rep. Ron Paul spoke out in support of Steele.

But the last thing the party of Abraham Lincoln, with its first black chairman (and the inspiring story of his self-driven rise from inner-city poverty to political prominence), should be doing is going through its own misery and ...

... turmoil self-inflicted by the likes of Republican National Committee Chairman Steele and a pair of JB's -- Reps. Joe "Apology" Barton and John "Ant" Boehner.

With Democrats led by the unpopular Barack "What Oil Spill?" Obama, Nancy "C'mon, Let's Spend Just a Little Bit More" Pelosi and Harry "I Don't Know Anyone Named Rory" Reid, Republicans should be poised for potentially historic midterm gains in Congress on Nov. 2. That's barely two years after their historic waxing at the polls by two senators, of all things -- a lowly freshman and a veteran blabbermouth -- with $750 million at hand.

It's always nice to have your own folder of fresh ideas in politics, but polls indicate many in the country have decided not to believe in that change to believe in. So, the reality is, all Republicans have to do basically is get out of their own way and let angry, frightened voters see their incumbent Democratic targets between now and November.

If, as polls indicate, voters are now reeling from Obama-deficit sticker-shock and about 60% want his prized healthcare repealed, why talk about anything else?

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele

Yet GOP members have made a series of distracting recent gaffes, not the first time for Steele.

His inarticulate comment last week that Afghanistan is a war of Obama's choosing made him seem ignorant of the fact that Republican George W. Bush launched that fight in 2001 after 9/11 -- even if Steele really meant that between the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Obama chose the latter as the important one.

In today's politics, if you have to explain what you meant to say, you've already lost.

And to be honest, Steele's comment that the Afghanistan conflict is unwinnable based on history is dead-on accurate. Just ask the Russians and British long before them. It's also an attitude that polls show many Americans shifting toward, as casualties and costs grow. But it is politically dumb to talk defeat during a war, even if a party chairman is still stupid enough to believe that some tiny video camera isn't recording every word he utters in public.

Steele's life story suggests he won't give up without a fight, a blessing for the other party's African American head. Steele's term ends in January. And speaking of history, party chairman is a thankless job. If your party is out of power, you sound like a grumpy retired guy always complaining about the new neighbors; think Howard Dean and Terry McAuliffe.  

And if your party owns the White House, you become a hand-picked political parrot like Tim "Obama's Certainly Doing a Wonderful Job" Kaine, who's so earnestly auditioning for the 2012 VP slot.

Two facts stand out in the Republican mess:

One, after some quiet guidance and suggestions to Steele behind the scenes by Republican heavyweights proved fruitless months ago, they gave up on Steele's sloppy RNC management. Now, they've established parallel fund-raising operations to finance much of this fall's Democratic-ousting activities.

And two, who's the big-name Steele backup? 

Uh, well, there's um .....

Or maybe .....

-- Andrew Malcolm

For Twitter alerts of each new Ticket item, click here. Follow us  @latimestot Or Like our Facebook page right here. Go here for a Kindle subscription to The Ticket, with a free trial.

Photos: Associated Press

 
Comments () | Archives (3)

The comments to this entry are closed.

"And to be honest, Steele's comment that the Afghanistan conflict is unwinnable based on history is dead-on accurate. Just ask the Russians and British long before them. "

I love this myth building over the Afghanistan fighters as if they were some sort of "Supermen". Did they give the Brits a hard time? You bet, IN THE 1880s. After the collapse of Communism we also saw that Uncle Ivan wasn't as strong nor as organized as we first though and yet (with 20-20 hindsight a big mistake) it took considerable US support for the Afghans to survive.

The only reason this was in unwinnable is because of the P.C. handcuffs we have put on our soldiers. Let them fight without their hands tied behind their back for fear of looking bad in the media (who have their own agenda), let them fight, win and get them home

Nice, Veritas.

I suppose you are making the argument that the US is now a "strong" power, and not handicapped by any of the financial difficulties that plagued the former USSR.

The "PC handcuffs" are in place precisely because we have no declaration of war against Afghanistan, and no plan to win any "war" declared or not. We are currently engaged in nation building, not warfare. We build it, they blow it up, we build again et al infinium.

The illiterate goat shepherds of Afghanistan aren't supermen ~ they live in a land that is so rugged our 21st century vehicles can't make the trek. Our helicopters, soldiers, and air force are hamstrung by altitude, weather, and terrain ~ not the idiots on the ground with decades old rifles and homemade explosives.

Our soldiers will not be allowed to fight "without their hands tied behind their backs." There is no appetite for that kind of war amongst the hard core neo-con nationbuilders, let alone those if us who've been against this international expeditionism for a decade now. If GW couldn't get a war declaration through a Republican dominated Congress in the wake of 9/11, Obama doesn't have a prayer of garnering support for his folly with a divided base in 2010.

Bring the troops home now. There is going to be no declaration of war ~ therefore we will never see sane ROEs in the middle east. The cause is lost: continued misplaced aggression and financial mis-management are doing nothing but risking our nation's future.

(Insert Dana Carvey here)

Could it be....Palin?


Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics


Categories


Archives
 



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: