Just think, we could have had Steele and he's in favor of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. Now, do you really think that Steele could have set that policy?
So instead, we now have a chairman who got the job because of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. Is anyone going to seriously argue this cipher was choosen because he had the best leadership skills? The previous party chairman managed the successful re-election campaign of Bush/Cheney against really tough odds and saved Bush from the fate his father. What "leadership" has Amnesty Mel shown in the Senate, or even in the cabinet? This loser is so incompentant, he HANDED Tom Harkin the Terry Schivo "talking points" memo the GOP wrote up. If it was any other first term Senator choosen for RNC chair with that kind of record, the nomination would be laughed out the door.
So now the official position of the Republican Party is "affirmation action is bad, except when we pick our officials". Do as I say, not as I do.
Michael Steele had enormous accomplishments in Maryland, and was the best choice for Party Chairman, his record stood on its own whether he had been black, white, hispanic, asian, or from Mars. He had already served as state party chair, he was elected the first Republican Lt. Governor of an ultra Dem state in about 40 years, and he came THISCLOSE to winning a Senate seat, running in the bluest of the blue states, in a huge year for the Dems. Normally, a Republican in Maryland is lucky to poll 35%
Any "conservative" who would support a mediocre yes-man like Martinez over the saavy Michael Steele is practing affirmative action.