GOP Chairman: “I Am Absolutely for Transparency”

AT this point I think an endorsement from Michael Steele has about as much of an impact on the Republican agenda as an endorsement from me would. Who doesn’t think this guy is a clown now?

I’d wager Steele doesn’t know what the word “transparency” means.

The “chairman of the Republican National Committee” has no legislative authority, does not set the party platform, and is an unelected bureaucrat within a party infrastructure. His opinion has just slightly more weight than mine does. I’m for transparency, too.
.
“Steele’s inefficacy fueled the rise of the new conservative political groups”
.
Are you saying that these group’s would not exist were it not for Steele being….well, Steele? That’s a pretty bold claim. I’d be willing to bet that these groups would still exist, and still being spending the obscene amounts of money they’re spending, with or without Steel in the picture.

Steele isn’t a clown, he’s a puppet and unfortunately a “token” who probably deserves more respect than he ever got from the party to begin with. He was selected to change the image of the party, but the party base didn’t want its image changed.

If he’s ineffective, it is largely because his party doesn’t care what he says.

As Rachel Maddow pointed out later, since Gregory was ignorant of the fact, the Reps blocked the Dems proposed bill to increase transparency.

That transparency must include an investigation into the punk Obama’s campaign fundraising during 2008. It is much more likely that the punk’s campaign received foreign money than the GOP has during this cycle. After all, they did turn off the CVS function when they accepted contributions via credit cards.

The liberals are only criticizing Steele because he is a black man.

*yawn*
.
Nice bit of bomb-throwing there, Groo, but please make an attempt to stay on topic.
.
I take it you don’t have a problem with the lack of transparency associated with those contributions, as long as it benefits right-wing candidates and causes?

Given what I’ve seen out of him, if the R’s elected not to be changed by him, they’ve made the right choice. He’s reaped about as much respect as his job performance has earned him.

The liberals are only criticizing Steel because he is a blank man.
.
Fixed it for you.

SteelE, OK?

Gee, kevie, why don’t we get Mr. Obama’s definition of the word “transparency”?……He campaigned endlessly, promising Americans how “transparent” his administration would be. What we got was something quite different. (I know, I know…you have already pointed out that NO ONE should believe campaign promises!)

Nah, if no one wants to work with a man this is what happens. But at the same time, they didn’t pick someone who had standing in their party either. The Republicans did themselves in on this one by choosing someone they wouldn’t follow & someone who also didn’t command respect. So, its sort of a mutual failure on a part of Steele and the Republicans.
·
You don’t make yourself party leader. And if you get made party leader it doesn’t mean anyone wants to listen to you either.

“…the current conservative line, often expressed by the Chamber, that disclosure “squelches speech” because it risks donors being harassed, intimidated and even “threatened with violence.”

No kidding. And which form of speech is immune to those consequences?

Why don’t you tell the rest of the story, april? Blocking this legislation was also endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union (one of your favorite groups) and the United States Chamber of Commerce. As a matter of fact, the president of the chamber, Mr. Thomas Donohue, went as far to say “The disclosure act is an unconstitutional attempt to silence free speech and a desperate attempt by democrats to gain political advantage in the 2010 elections.” opensecrets.org/2010/news. Quite a profound statement, I would say. In conclusion, as the late, great Paul Harvey used to say, “you now have the rest of the story”!

GOP Chairman: “I Am Absolutely for Transparency”

I think the rest of the GOP wants Steele to be so transparent that he just disappears. They can’t come right out and say it because then they would lose the black vote.

It is much more likely that the punk’s campaign received foreign money than the GOP has during this cycle

Do you have some factual evidence to support your specious claim or is this just more of your usual “monkey flinging feces” approach? I’m betting it’s the latter.

earljr, I certainly have think the National Chamber of Commerce would not be my source on reforming campaign funding. What did the Reps and the Chamber propose as an alternative?

groaner never posts anything of value. He is like the kid in the playground who just stands at yells nonsense and everyone ignores him.

2.1 – earljr1,

Now that you got your shot in, that has nothing to do with the lack of transparency of Repub donations, do you want to comment on the issue?

7 – groen,”

“The liberals are only criticizing Steele because he is a black man.”
The Republicans only selected Steele because he is a black man. Better.

What Republican black vote? Oh, yeah… Steele.