The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Steele Yourself for Disaster

Text Size

If you are a member of the Republican National Committee or a supporter thereof or donor thereto, you should, this very minute, be having conniption fits about the leadership or lack thereof of Chairman Michael Steele. Reid Wilson at Hotline on Call today explains why: "The RNC has spent more money than it has taken in during every month since July." Ugh.

Looked at objectively, this is a pitiful performance. Where is all the money going? Why don't RNC members hold Steele's feet to the fire? Does Steele hold his office to serve the Republican Party, or is he using the Republican Party to serve himself?

View all comments (14) | Leave a comment

yarrrr| 1.22.10 @ 10:18AM

Settle Down... Steele is doing fine... who cares if he is spending more than he's taking in... what matters if we have enough for the upcoming election...

Alan Brooks| 1.22.10 @ 12:52PM

"or is he using the Republican Party to serve himself?"

Think of Steele's book royalties as reparations for slavery.
("shut up, Brooks")

Bob Miller| 1.22.10 @ 10:22AM

What Republican activity is being helped by Steele?

Interested Conservative| 1.22.10 @ 10:40AM

A few follow up questions are in order.

First, the article is not solely critical, and notes that the trends are basically flat, not draining, particularly noting the expenses in NJ and VA.

Second, I wonder if a larger trend is at play here, perhaps not matched on the left - namely, disintermediation. I last gave to the RNC years ago, and haven't given to either of the house or senate funds either. However, I more than matched those amounts by shifting donations to direct candidates (i.e. the Brown moneybomb) and local orgs (tea parties).

I'm no Paulite, so I don't count there, but I wonder what the data are for right/left donations?

Finally, I noted Sen. Cornyn's comments about supporting, but not being visible in the Brown effort. Sure, it's self-serving, but there may be an element of truth there, and Mr. Steele may be moving the national structure similarly.

Maybe the opposite of Organizing for America is Act Locally to Disorganize the Left.

Oldefarte| 1.22.10 @ 11:03AM

For the thousandith time, since Steele has been RNC chairman, Vaginia, NJ, and now [heavily Democratic, labor unionized and Kennedyized] Massachusetts have had Republicans elected to statewide offices. Wait, I know, that has happened all because of Mitch McConnell, Newt Guinrich, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, right?????? Go ahead and continue attacking Steele for various and sundry picyune things, and see if he doesn't stick his middle finger into the air and say to hell with it [which will easily provide the Democrats with their needed branding weapon/label of RACISM, DISCRIMINATION, DISENFRANCHISEMENT, GENTRIFICATION,etc [and possibly, justifiably so] !!!!!

JP| 1.22.10 @ 12:13PM

I'm not sure that one can attribute the recent GOP victories to the RNC. Steele has been totally absent as far a fundraising goes, and more can be said for the individual operations of the candidates than any strategic moves by the RNC to recruit and promote new candidates. The RNC's only visible forray into these races was NY-23 and that was an unmitigated disaster for them. And Scott Brown used Mitt Romney's old campaign team and solicited money via the internet.

We shouldn't be too hard on Steele. His predecessor was just as bad. The last time the RNC was effective was 2002

kevino| 1.22.10 @ 11:06AM

I'm not surprised, most of my Conservative friends who used to donate to the RNC will not give them any more money. They are sick of RINOs, they are sick Republicans that spend too much money, and they are sick of the RNC's political incompetence. Basically, if the RNC doesn't change, it's dead, and the Tea Party movement will become the second party.

Dai Alanye| 1.22.10 @ 11:11AM

Brown's election, and those of the governors', can be credited primarily to Obama, Emmanuel, Biden and Axelrod. The independents who went Republican weren't much affected by Steele one way or another.

I must say I originally thought picking Steele was a wise choice but he hasn't shown much native political ability since.

Dai Alanye| 1.22.10 @ 11:13AM

Omigosh! I forgot to credit Frank, Reid and Pelosi, along with many another Congressional Dem.

democratsarefascists| 1.22.10 @ 11:19AM

No doubt all the money's going to McCain's Senate campaign. Got to keep those pro-amnesty RINOs in power, you know.

mary| 1.22.10 @ 11:21AM

The GOP did little to help Scott Brown. That's a good thing. He owes them nothing.

Betty | 1.22.10 @ 11:23AM

Like so many in the past year, I only recently became involved in politics, and have followed closely the Hoffmann, Rubio, VA and NJ and now Massachusetts elections. I have given to individual candidates, but have never once given to the RNC, not so much because of Steele (though I remain unimpressed with him so far, and with Gingrich, though that's another essay), but here's the crux of it: I don't give to the RNC because I'm not quite sure what it is THEY ACTUALLY DO. If its selling conservatism, I'd give them a solid D-minus.