Never thought I would say this: I agree with Michael Steele, RNC chairman!

[Blalron]

I never, in a million years, would have thought I would type these words. But Michael Steele was right.

What the hell is the world coming to, when the RNC chairman is more dovish than the Democrat I voted for two years ago?

WASHINGTON — Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, drew fierce criticism and a call for his resignation on Friday after declaring at a party fund-raiser that the United States was on the wrong side of history with its conflict in Afghanistan, a military fight he called “a war of Obama’s choosing.”

“This is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in,” Mr. Steele said in a speech Thursday night in Connecticut in which he offered a strong critique of President Obama’s military strategy.

[Lord Ashtar]

Huh. And here I thought we were already in Afghanistan when Obama was sworn into office.

[Peremensoe]

And later he said,

Originally Posted by Michael Steele

For the sake of the security of the free world, our country must give our troops the support necessary to win this war. As we have learned throughout history, winning a war in Afghanistan is a difficult task. We must also remember that after the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, it is also a necessary one.

Basically Michael Steele says all kinds of things, and few of them are considered.

[Merijeek]

Steele is absolutely not being a dove, and I really hope you were suffering a concussion when you wrote the OP. Steele is attacking Obama. There is, literally, nothing more to his position than that.

If Obama were to release a statement against Blender Kittens, Steele would immediately declare all kittens Excommunicate Traitoris and demand all kittens be immediately blended.

-Joe

[Squink]

I particularly like the admission that all those brave servicemen and women who died in Afghanistan on Bush's watch were thrown away for no reason besides a 'disinterest' in properly prosecuting a war that got blundered into on the way to Iraq.
Very dovish thinking on the GOP heads part there; much to be admired.

[Onomatopoeia]

I wonder if one day, after Michael Steele has added RNC chairman as yet another failure to his already remarkable list of failures, he will look back and wonder if pimping himself, abandoning any pretense of objectivity or truth, and kneeling at the altar of hyperpartisanism was worth it.

I don't understand the man. He can't be so stupid as to not realize that he's simply the house negro, the token, selected as a counterpoint to Obama solely because of his race...can he? I'm embarrassed for him as it seems he doesn't have the sense to be embarrassed for himself. The more he attacks Obama, the worse he looks. Steele is just the kind of person who is impressed by what people think of him. Does he really believe there's any possibility he will leave a positive legacy? Can he truly be that deluded?

The RNC may not remove Steele now, even after this latest embarrassment, but I believe his days are numbered. Even the RNC leadership, as cynical and insulting to all Americans as they were in selecting Steele, must realize by now that they're getting a negative return on their investment.

[Lamar Mundane]

Originally Posted by Blalron

I never, in a million years, would have thought I would type these words. But Michael Steele was right.

What the hell is the world coming to, when the RNC chairman is more dovish than the Democrat I voted for two years ago?

What part of that was he right about? "A war of Obama's choosing." No, Obama was a state senator when the war started.

“This is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in,” No, most Americans, including most Democrats, were for the war in Afganistan. It was Iraq where things went screwy.

Michael Steele wasn't right about anything. In fact, his entire statement was a complete line of bullshit.

[Boyo Jim]

Originally Posted by Merijeek

Steele is absolutely not being a dove, and I really hope you were suffering a concussion when you wrote the OP. Steele is attacking Obama. There is, literally, nothing more to his position than that.

If Obama were to release a statement against Blender Kittens, Steele would immediately declare all kittens Excommunicate Traitoris and demand all kittens be immediately blended.

-Joe

Exactly this. If Obama decides tomorrow to take all the troops out of Afghanistan, Steele would be saying the complete opposite. He would be ranting that Obama is be betraying all the soldiers who've fought and died there.

[gonzomax]

Afghanistan is the longest war in American history. Obama has been president for 1.5 years. It does not compute.

[kaylasdad99]

Wormhole. Or spacetime. Or some long sentence with "quantum" in it.

In fact "quantum" probably appears twice.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Lamar Mundane

What part of that was he right about? "A war of Obama's choosing." No, Obama was a state senator when the war started.

“This is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in,” No, most Americans, including most Democrats, were for the war in Afganistan. It was Iraq where things went screwy.

Michael Steele wasn't right about anything. In fact, his entire statement was a complete line of bullshit.

Agreed. While I sympathize with the OP on the issue of Afghanistan, Steele is an idiot and doesn't know what he's talking about. Or worse, he's an idiot and knows what he's talking about but says it anyway. Knee-jerk slams at Obama are not useful in the debate about Afghanistan.

[Blalron]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Agreed. While I sympathize with the OP on the issue of Afghanistan, Steele is an idiot and doesn't know what he's talking about. Or worse, he's an idiot and knows what he's talking about but says it anyway. Knee-jerk slams at Obama are not useful in the debate about Afghanistan.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Little Nemo]

Wormhole. Or spacetime. Or some long sentence with "quantum" in it.

In fact "quantum" probably appears twice.

A wizard did it.

No wait, I forgot this is the RNC chairman talking.

A democrat did it.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Blalron

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

That just shows that Steele is dumber than a broken clock.

[elucidator]

The alpha lemming is the first over the edge.

[Squink]

Originally Posted by elucidator

The alpha lemming is the first over the edge.

Republican Steele’s Afghanistan Remarks Praised by Ron Paul

“Michael Steele should not resign,” Paul, a Texas Republican and former Libertarian Party presidential candidate, said yesterday in a statement. “Michael Steele has it right and Republicans should stick by him.”

[Voyager]

There have been many threads about movies which don't really exist, like a certain Star Trek one. I think they do something similar at RNC HQ - presidents, Clinton, Obama, there was no president between these two democrats.

[Squink]

W is not canon?

[gonzomax]

Originally Posted by John Mace

That just shows that Steele is dumber than a broken clock.

It shows he is willing to lie and as this thread shows, some people will believe it. You know Steele isn't dumb. He is just another Repub with no regard for the truth.

[sqweels]

Although I generally don't like it when political parties give each other advice, when is the GOP going to appoint Sarah Palin as RNC Chair? She's like Howard Dean: A national figure with a strong following, but lacking electability or the temperment for high office, better suited to act as party bulldog.

Although my own preference is for her to go away, might be a good fit for Palin. And it might be good for a few laughs.

Once Mr. Steele runs out of material.

[Camus]

Originally Posted by spark240

Basically Michael Steele says all kinds of things, and few of them are considered.

You're not suggesting he can't be taken seriously, are you?

[Ichbin Dubist]

Originally Posted by Squink

W is not canon?

Well, increased spending, more bureaucracy, started 2 wars -- clearly Bush is a RINO who will be officially declared a Democrat in retrospect.

[Count Blucher]

Originally Posted by spark240

Basically Michael Steele says all kinds of things, and few of them are considered.

"Wind-em-up-an-look-at-em-go" seem to be the only type of representative or candidate the GOP puts out.

[jtgain]

Steele's reputation aside, isn't it fair to say that he is somewhat accurate? Bush sort of left Afghanistan alone after the initial strike on Tora Bora. Dems criticized him for focusing on Iraq and "leaving the job unfinished" in Afghanistan.

So, Obama came in and made it a point to revamp and reignite the Afghanistan conflict to try to stop the surging Taliban.

I think the point, agree or disagree, is a legitimate one.

[Squink]

Originally Posted by jtgain

Bush sort of left Afghanistan alone after the initial strike on Tora Bora.
...
I think the point, agree or disagree, is a legitimate one.

Sure, as long as Republicans are willing to take full responsibility for those killed while Bush let Afghanistan stew on its tushy.
My impression though is that they don't want to be known as the party that puts American troops in harms way, and then leaves them there to hang because they got interested in some other adventure. Now it happens to be true that that's what the GOP did, but I don't think they want voters to think of it in that light, so they really should be asking Steele to open a big box of STFU. Of course, they could also just pray the thing blows over, and that voters don't notice. The press'll probably help them out with that scenario.

[SteveG1]

What bothers me. is there are really stupid mother fuckers who will flush recent history down the toilet, and buy all of Steele's bullshit, just because they have a case of the ass against all Democrats. Afghanistan and Iraq both were started, for good or ill, under the previous (Republican) administration. To say otherwise is simply a big ass lie.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by jtgain

Steele's reputation aside, isn't it fair to say that he is somewhat accurate? Bush sort of left Afghanistan alone after the initial strike on Tora Bora. Dems criticized him for focusing on Iraq and "leaving the job unfinished" in Afghanistan.

So, Obama came in and made it a point to revamp and reignite the Afghanistan conflict to try to stop the surging Taliban.

I think the point, agree or disagree, is a legitimate one.

Well, sort of. Its a spin job, in reverse!

This kind of political pandering and sniping really fucking pisses me off. Its political obstructionism at its lowest ebb.

"I don't care if its the right thing to say/do, I have to speak out against it because the other guys approve it!"



FWIW I think Obama is doing the right thing by refocusing on the war that out of the two, clearly has some semblance of justification and was left to rot essentially in terms of military expenditures and resources to properly conduct it in favor of the Iraq war.

[Camus]

Originally Posted by jtgain

Steele's reputation aside, isn't it fair to say that he is somewhat accurate? Bush sort of left Afghanistan alone after the initial strike on Tora Bora. Dems criticized him for focusing on Iraq and "leaving the job unfinished" in Afghanistan.

So, Obama came in and made it a point to revamp and reignite the Afghanistan conflict to try to stop the surging Taliban.

First, Steele undermined his own point by backtracking, so if he had some sort of point initially, someone besides Ron Paul should let him know. Second, Bush didn't leave or sort of leave Afghanistan alone, he just withdrew a substantial portion of the initial force sent in and left the remainder to try and accomplish the mission of driving the Taliban out and securing the Afghan state. The mission has not changed, though the troop levels have gone up and the expectation levels have gone down.

Obama did not "reignite" the war in Afghanistan because it has been steadily occurring since 2001 even when Iraq largely overshadowed it in the news. Casualties have been rising since 2005, with significant spikes that year, in 2008 and 2009. The 2009 spike is largely the result of the Marine offensive in Helmand province. Bush ordered an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan in 2008 and Obama ordered another 30,000 troops to Afghanistan in December 2009, but not all of those troops have deployed yet.

Afghanistan is a war of Obama's choosing only in the sense that Obama chose to continue it knowing the crappy situation and the crappy likelihood of an outcome that truly looks like a success rather than throw up his hands and order a withdrawal. So, Steele does have a point that the war in Afghanistan is ugly and messy and the odds of achieving the mission objectives as currently stated aren't that good, but his overall point that the war itself is essentially Obama's fault is woefully and disingenuously mistaken.

[imthjckaz]

Originally Posted by SteveG1

What bothers me. is there are really stupid mother fuckers who will flush recent history down the toilet, and buy all of Steele's bullshit, just because they have a case of the ass against all Democrats. Afghanistan and Iraq both were started, for good or ill, under the previous (Republican) administration. To say otherwise is simply a big ass lie.

I live in such a place.

The people around here elected Michele Bachmann.

Twice.

[Boyo Jim]

Are you all MAD?? Everything was perfect until Obama was elected. Eight years of peace and prosperity, all ruined by the warmongering waterboarding Democrats.

[Onomatopoeia]

Further to my post, #6, above, Cynthia Tucker expresses in this video clip why it was a short-sighted and cynical decision for the RNC to appoint Steele to the leadership position in the first place, also touching on why they may be stuck with him, at least for now.

Originally Posted by Cynthia Tucker

Well, Michael Steele is a self-aggrandizing gaffe-prone incompetent who would have been fired a long time ago were he not black. Of course, the irony is that he never would have been voted in as chairman of the Republican Party were he not black... [more]

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia

Further to my post, #6, above, Cynthia Tucker expresses in this video clip why it was a short-sighted and cynical decision for the RNC to appoint Steele to the leadership position in the first place, also touching on why they may be stuck with him, at least for now.

Yikes!

[The Great Sun Jester]

Originally Posted by Squink

W is not canon?

Well, no. Clinton and Obama were elected.

[gonzomax]

Originally Posted by imthjckaz

I live in such a place.

The people around here elected Michele Bachmann.

Twice.

You have my sympathies. You should lie about where you live.

[The Second Stone]

Originally Posted by spark240

Basically Michael Steele says all kinds of things, and few of them are considered.

That makes him a Republican.

[descamisado]

Originally Posted by Onomatopoeia

Further to my post, #6, above, Cynthia Tucker expresses in this video clip why it was a short-sighted and cynical decision for the RNC to appoint Steele to the leadership position in the first place, also touching on why they may be stuck with him, at least for now.

So, in the years down the road, can we bring up Michael Steele when Republican continue to whine about misguided affirmative action?

[Onomatopoeia]

Originally Posted by descamisado

So, in the years down the road, can we bring up Michael Steele when Republican continue to whine about misguided affirmative action?

It certainly seems to open the door to the opportunity, However, to be accurate, although affirmative action was the result in Steele's case, as he's as far from being qualified for the position as a Buddhist monk, it definitely wasn't the intent.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by jtgain

Steele's reputation aside, isn't it fair to say that he is somewhat accurate? Bush sort of left Afghanistan alone after the initial strike on Tora Bora. Dems criticized him for focusing on Iraq and "leaving the job unfinished" in Afghanistan.

So, Obama came in and made it a point to revamp and reignite the Afghanistan conflict to try to stop the surging Taliban.

I think the point, agree or disagree, is a legitimate one.

He's somewhat accurate in the sense that Obama "chose" to focus US efforts there, but clearly Obama couldn't just pull out, and leaving the same force in place to be slowly killed off wasn't an option either.

To say Bush "left it alone" is rather generous to Bush. He left 15,000 troops there, just enough to ensure they'd have an election of some sort, in the hope that he could point to it as one of his achievements afterwards.