We must not take Michael Steele out of context. That is what killed Mitt Romney. If we want Romney to have a chance in 2012, we have to change the way we debate issues as a party. We can’t turn the word “nuanced” into a bad word, and we must never take people out of context. If we removed Steele for what he said, we would be serving the emotional shouters of the party… we are not the party of emotion… we are not the overly-idealistic, naive, party of people who get riled up by something that someone says out of context. We are the party of ideas. It doesn’t matter what it sounds like Steele said, it only matters what he really said. Jay Cost thinks that it is tie for Michael Steele to go, over what he said about Romney. Jay Cost is wrong. Michael Steele was saying what a lot of people believe. We need to win the argument, with reason, not by kicking those people out of power that don’t see things “the true way”. We need Michael Steele out there saying what people believe, and having the conversation. It was fine for Romney to disagree with Steele, but Romney did not “slap” him. Romney disagreed with Steele. You can disagree with someone without “slapping” them. Lets all just calm down, Ace… no one has to walk the plank. The caller was saying Romney could have won against Obama. Who cares? Maybe Romney would have won, maybe he wouldn’t. Who cares? Michael Steele was pointing out that Romney did not win. I think Michael Steele tried brainstorming some of the reasons Romney did not win. Romney is a shrewd businessman. Business people who do not learn from their mistakes do not have the kind of careers that Romney had. I’m sure Romney sat down and made a list of all the things that he did right, and all the things that did wrong. “Chairman Steele regrets the way his comments have been interpreted,” RNC spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said. “Chairman Steele believes Mitt Romney is a respected and influential voice in the Republican Party and looks to his leadership and ideas to help move our party and our nation in the right direction.” Yes democrats could do what John Stewart does every night, and take something that Steele said out of context. But there probably things that Romney said that they could more easily take out of context. You could take what Steele said out of context, and say that Mormons do not have the right to be republicans. But that is not what he said. Steele said, “It was the base that rejected Mitt because it had issues with Mormonism.” He never said that he had issues with Mormonism, or that it was right that the base did. He listed it as one of other reasons, and he is right that it was a factor. It doesn’t matter if what Steele said “sounds wrong” because he is right. It was a factor. Steele didn’t say it was good that the party reject people like Romney, Reagan, and George HW Bush, who were once pro-choice. If Michael Steele would have been smarter, he could have pointed out that Reagan was once pro-choice. But Steele was on the program for an hour or two…
He also could have been more nuanced (a word that Hotair is trying to turn into a bad word… not a good move for the republican party) in his explanation of Mitt Romney’s pro-life position. Romney said he was always pro-life, but believed in the rule of law and promised he would not change the law in Massachusetts. When the democrat called him a liar, and said that he was pro-life, would always be pro-life, Romney had to convince them that he would not change the law. He would not make the laws more pro-life, or pro-choice. Romney kept that promise, but people took what he said out of context. It didn’t matter than any person with 1/2 a brain knew that Romney was always pro-life, that he just promised not to change the laws, all that mattered was they have videos that could have been taken out of context. Well it is the same with Michael Steele. But we have to reform as a party. We can’t keep Steel out of the party leadership because he can be taken out of context, and hope to get Romney into leadership, another person who was totally taken out of context. PS If Romney is unable to address these issues in the next 3-1/2 years, or with the book he is working on, than nothing that Michael Steele says matters. Romney’s dad lost his presidency because something that he said was taken out of context. It would be sad of Steele lost his spot, while talking about Romney, because of something Steele said out of context.
2 comments:
Steeles comments are wrong in some regards in particular on the Mormon Quesion
Steel should have crawfished out that question
See my post
Chairman of Republican Party Explains Why Romney Lost (The Mormon Issue Again and other Myths)
http://opinionatedcatholic.blogspot.com/2009/05/chairman-of-republican-party-explains.html
Again we have a huge amount of exipt poll data of real GOP voters that is for some reason rarely looked at as to the Romney loss
http://committedtoromney.com/2009/05/11/opinion-of-mike-laub-michael-steele-should-stay-gosh-darn-it/
We must not take Michael Steele out of context. That is what killed Mitt Romney. If we want Romney to have a chance in 2012, we have to change the way we debate issues as a party. We can’t turn the word “nuanced” into a bad word, and we must never take people out of context. If we removed Steele for what he said, we would be serving the emotional shouters of the party… we are not the party of emotion… we are not the overly-idealistic, naive, party of people who get riled up by something that someone says out of context. We are the party of ideas. It doesn’t matter what it sounds like Steele said, it only matters what he really said.
Jay Cost thinks that it is tie for Michael Steele to go, over what he said about Romney. Jay Cost is wrong.
Michael Steele was saying what a lot of people believe. We need to win the argument, with reason, not by kicking those people out of power that don’t see things “the true way”. We need Michael Steele out there saying what people believe, and having the conversation. It was fine for Romney to disagree with Steele, but Romney did not “slap” him. Romney disagreed with Steele. You can disagree with someone without “slapping” them. Lets all just calm down, Ace… no one has to walk the plank.
The caller was saying Romney could have won against Obama. Who cares? Maybe Romney would have won, maybe he wouldn’t. Who cares? Michael Steele was pointing out that Romney did not win. I think Michael Steele tried brainstorming some of the reasons Romney did not win. Romney is a shrewd businessman. Business people who do not learn from their mistakes do not have the kind of careers that Romney had. I’m sure Romney sat down and made a list of all the things that he did right, and all the things that did wrong.
“Chairman Steele regrets the way his comments have been interpreted,” RNC spokeswoman Gail Gitcho said. “Chairman Steele believes Mitt Romney is a respected and influential voice in the Republican Party and looks to his leadership and ideas to help move our party and our nation in the right direction.”
Yes democrats could do what John Stewart does every night, and take something that Steele said out of context. But there probably things that Romney said that they could more easily take out of context.
You could take what Steele said out of context, and say that Mormons do not have the right to be republicans. But that is not what he said. Steele said, “It was the base that rejected Mitt because it had issues with Mormonism.” He never said that he had issues with Mormonism, or that it was right that the base did. He listed it as one of other reasons, and he is right that it was a factor. It doesn’t matter if what Steele said “sounds wrong” because he is right. It was a factor.
Steele didn’t say it was good that the party reject people like Romney, Reagan, and George HW Bush, who were once pro-choice. If Michael Steele would have been smarter, he could have pointed out that Reagan was once pro-choice. But Steele was on the program for an hour or two…
He also could have been more nuanced (a word that Hotair is trying to turn into a bad word… not a good move for the republican party) in his explanation of Mitt Romney’s pro-life position. Romney said he was always pro-life, but believed in the rule of law and promised he would not change the law in Massachusetts. When the democrat called him a liar, and said that he was pro-life, would always be pro-life, Romney had to convince them that he would not change the law. He would not make the laws more pro-life, or pro-choice. Romney kept that promise, but people took what he said out of context. It didn’t matter than any person with 1/2 a brain knew that Romney was always pro-life, that he just promised not to change the laws, all that mattered was they have videos that could have been taken out of context. Well it is the same with Michael Steele. But we have to reform as a party. We can’t keep Steel out of the party leadership because he can be taken out of context, and hope to get Romney into leadership, another person who was totally taken out of context.
PS If Romney is unable to address these issues in the next 3-1/2 years, or with the book he is working on, than nothing that Michael Steele says matters.
Romney’s dad lost his presidency because something that he said was taken out of context. It would be sad of Steele lost his spot, while talking about Romney, because of something Steele said out of context.
Post a Comment