Posted on 11/12/2008 4:26:15 AM PST by prairiebreeze
I knew that he was strongly opposed to embryonic stem cell research, and from there assumed he was for overturning Roe vs. Wade. I don't know how to explain that disconnect. To favor allowing Roe, yet opposing ESR seems strange. Perhaps he meant he prefers a constitutional amendment to judicial reversal?
Yes, it strikes me that the ostracism of a racial group that votes in a 95% block is hard for even the most conservative blacks to withstand. He does go out of his way to force basketball metaphors, ‘brother’, and other tropes into his speech.
Bottom line probably is that neither Newt nor Steele is what we need. I heard Sununu is taking a look, but didn’t he bend pretty moderate to try to keep his NH seat?
The minute some name is proposed somewhere for some slot, in swoops the pro-choice set to pick the person apart even if the position has ZILCH to do with abortion policy.
Do you folks realize that the RNC chair does NOT set policy for the party? The job itself requires a combination of personality/charisma (a la Haley Barbour) for effective PR and media purposes.
It requires the ability to be a rainmaker, that is, being able to effectively attract donations through public and private efforts.
It requires some organizational and business skills, and a carefully chosen staff takes care of most of the detailed work.
Above all, the RNC chair has to be a leader, inspiring the general Republican masses to trust the RNC again, to support it with contributions again, to work WITH it instead of being ashamed of it.
To start mixing the abortion issue into this stew is not only nonsensical but counter-productive to getting the RNC back on track.
In my opinion, Steele would be a good man for the job. For heaven's sakes....this is a critical appointment at a critical time. Let's not get involved for months into another ENDLESS debate on the fine points of his views on Roe v. Wade. It will lead nowhere.
Leni
Steele's position is strange; I don't understand where he's coming from.
He opposes ESCR, he calls the pro-life position "mainstream" and says that he endorses it, he's apparently on record opposing abortion in all cases, including rape and incest.
OTOH, he says Roe v. Wade has to stand according to the principle of stare decisis. Okay, why didn't Plessy v. Ferguson (endorsing segregation) have to stand on stare decisis?
I can't tell if he (a) is "personally opposed to abortion but pro-choice" as far as doing anything about it; or (b) he thinks it's a bad idea to overturn RvW in the courts (why?) and wants a Constitutional amendment instead.
RvW is either a bad decision or it's not. If it's a bad decision, why should stare decisis apply?
If he is opposed to abortion, but in favor of keeping Roe v. Wade then he is as "pro-life" as Nancy Pelosi.
No friend of gun owners.
Steel is not another Colin Powell. He’s been a news commentator on FOX, and has subbed for Hannity a couple of times.
He is definitely a well spoken conservative. That’s all I can tell from watching him on TV. I wonder how much fire he has in his belly. Does anyone here know?
Micheal Steele is a solid conservative; a true Reagan conservative. He has a very sound understanding of strategy and tactics, and he understands there is a difference between the two.
He would be a very good choice for the leader of the RNC.
High ethics, conservative values, recruiting younger foot soldiers at the state and county committee levels.
He is PRO CHOICE.
Really? I never heard him espouse affirmative action. Please tell more.
bump that Leni
If, as campion has said, Steele is arguing that RvW meets the stare decisis standard, but that it is absolutely morally repugnant and a violation of the right to life, then he is arguing a contradiction.
There are exceptions to stare decisis and a morally repugnant contradiction to the right to life would meet those exceptions.
No pro-life conservative can believe that the right to life recognized in the 5th amendment and the preamble of the Constitution can be abrogated by a court ruling on the basis of emanations from penumbras. The DIRECT statement overcomes anything believed to be unspoken.
Bottom line, I don't know what he is or where he really stands.
THIS is the kind of stuff the GOP doesn't need and what I am afraid of. Is he another J.C. Watts? Wants affirmative action and quotas? He needs to make it CLEAR where he stands.
I only speak for myself but I am getting ready to bolt the GOP. I am tired of these McCain types. I want a color blind conservative that really believes it - not one who depending on the audience delivers the appropriate message.
MS is solid conservative.. pro life, pro tax cuts and definitely pro cutting government spending.
He is articulate and well able to handle the mainstream media bias. I have watched him for some time on Fox News and like what I see.
I like what YOU said. If this is true, then I could “fall in love again” with the GOP. Right now we are in a “separation” status. I’m really fed up with the RHINO’S taking over the party.
Actually, he says he is “produly” pro-life, though he waffled on whether Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Regarding Roe V. Wade, in the 2006 Maryland Senate debate He also said:
“My desire is that we follow what stare decisis is at this point.” (Did he think the debate was a Supreme Court confirmation hearing?)
On the other hand he has come out strongly against embryonic stem cell reseach and said he consider the embroyos to be human lives.
That is a strange combination.
I get the feeling he is really pro-life but he was trying to win a Senate seat in an a very Liberal state, but I don’t like the pandering.
He is clearly, strongly pro-Affirmative action. What particularly bothers me is that he basically says that AA has worked in colleges, but is needed more in the corporate world.
I am not for AA in either setting, but if anything, workplace AA is far more offensive and damaging than educational AA.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Michael_Steele_Civil_Rights.htm
When I hear “oreo cookie” then it helps me to believe he is a conservative. Keyes, and Thomas all had that hurled at them and I LOVE THEM!!!
Sorry if the fact that he's black bothers you.
What bothers me about a BLACK GOPer is what is wrong with Colin Powell and J.C. Watts. I don't want another BLACK in there for COLOR. In other words, I don't want another RHINO who is a RACIST. Too many times the GOP has gone for COLOR and not SUBSTANCE. If you haven't noticed how the GOP uses the RACE card, you're naive. I don't want a BLACK in there who is NOT a conservative. If THAT bothers, YOU, then YOU have the PROBLEM.
“I like Newt for the bare knuckles fight.”
Newt is a big supporter of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. It’s a big topic on his website.
Fred Thompson called it right during his short-run for the nomination. He stated that his cabinat picks will be pro-life people. He stated you can't have a pro-life stance and not pick pro-life people. Pro-life is the backbone conservatives. Everything else is moot if you are not alive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.