Until recently, I was agnostic with regard to Michael Steele.
I didn’t know much about his political views.
I liked the idea of a black man heading the Republican National Committee.
And he seemed to be engaging and likable in media appearances.
I started to have real doubts about him when he went after Rush Limbaugh in what seemed to be a hissy fit of jealousy.
It all began to unwind in a recent CNN appearance on “D.L. Hughley Breaks the News.” (Yes, that’s actually the name of a show on CNN.)
The host chided Steele to the effect that Rush Limbaugh was “the de facto leader of the GOP.”
That was too much for Steele. His response: “Rush Limbaugh, his whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it’s incendiary. Yes, it’s ugly.”
Steele would live to regret those words, but, I suggest, despite his later apology, I strongly believe those comments reflect his true feelings.
Why do I believe that?
Because of his interview that appears this month in GQ Magazine.
Asked if he thought women had a right to abortion, he said, “Yeah. Absolutely.”
What did he think about a constitutional amendment proclaiming marriage as an institution between one man and one woman – as the Republican platform recommends?
“Just as a general principle, I don’t like mucking around with the Constitution,” he said.
He added that homosexuality is not, in his opinion, a choice people make.
Steele stood by earlier comments that the GOP convention was a “sea of white people” because “we have offered [minorities] nothing.”
It seems Steele is confused about a few things.
Does he really believe women have a God-given, inalienable “right” to kill their unborn children?
That’s what a “right” is, as defined by our constitutional framers. It’s something that is not conferred by government and cannot be taken away by government. I wonder how anyone – Democrat, Republican, independent, liberal or conservative – could justify such a notion. From where does such a “right” descend?
The notion descends from only one source – a Supreme Court case in 1973 called Roe v. Wade. It was in that case that a majority of justices found hidden in the Constitution a “right to privacy” that wasn’t there. And inside that “right to privacy” that wasn’t there, they found this “right to abortion.”
It was that Supreme Court that was “mucking around with the Constitution” – not efforts to amend the document through the process prescribed by the Constitution itself. Amending the Constitution through the legitimate process is hardly “mucking around with it.” But grossly distorting the Constitution, as Roe v. Wade did, is clearly “mucking around” with it.
While Steele agrees Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, he believes state governments should be the enforcers of this so-called “right to abortion.”
Steele has also acceded to the homosexual agenda propaganda that this particular sexual proclivity is a genetic thing – an irresistible and natural compulsion, I take it, that should be celebrated and, presumably, entitle those born with it to special protections under the law.
As for the GOP not offering racial minorities anything, I have to assume he means “goodies,” perks, giveaways, special treatment, affirmative action.
Wow!
It sounds like the Republican National Committee has selected a Democrat to lead it into what portends to be the most important midterm election in the nation’s history.
I felt bad for Michael Steele when he ran for a U.S. Senate seat in Maryland and was pelted with Oreo cookies by Democrats suggesting he was “black on the outside and white on the inside.” But here he is embracing the same hateful political values as those who were attacking him.
He is race conscious without a doubt.
In the GQ interview, he proclaimed: “I mean, who’da thunk in 1963 two black men would sit on top of the political world of this country? How friggin’ awesome is that?”
In my opinion, not very awesome at all.
I’m afraid I’ve come to the conclusion that Michael Steele’s leadership of the Republican National Committee does not provide the antidote to what ails this country right now – not even close.
