The first challenger for Michael Steele’s position as Chairman of the RNC has surfaced, Saul Anuzis of Michigan, a previous candidate for the role who was defeated in 2008.
In his statement of intent Anuzis says, inter alia, “Chairman Steele’s record speaks… for itself.” Yes it does and is proven as he goes on to congratulate Republican candidates on the “Historic victory we achieved on election day.” He does not give the credit to Steele for that historic victory but as Hindenburg said when asked who was responsible for a great victory achieved over the Russians, Ludendorff or himself “I don’t know who was responsible for the victory, but I do know who would have been charged with the loss.”
Anuzis finds fault with Steele-apparently the victory in 61+ congressional seats was not good enough, the GOP should have won the senate too which loss describes to a lack of funding and being beaten by the Dem’s GOTV capacity.
Apparently the GOP lost in “Countless Congressional and legislative districts” for this reason.”Countless”? The Republican tide smashed through Dem seats which had been held for years and which were deemed untakeable.This sort of hyperbole is unacceptable as it is a ridiculous statement unfitting to one seeking such an important office.
The other aspect that Anuzis hints at is the high profile of Steele. “We will only win if the Chairman of the RNC steps out of the limelight” and he goes on to ascribe his role as a “nuts and bolts” Chairman.In reality this old guard, old fashioned image is totally out of touch with a hugely important development in the fortunes of the GOP, the influx of Black (32 of whom stood for the GOP) and Hispanic voters and candidates.
“These are not just people pulled out of the hole,” said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a black conservative group. That is “the nice thing about being on this side of history,” he said. He added that the candidates might be helped by the presence of Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican National Committee who is black and ran for the Senate himself in 2006.
But even with that invigorating infusion of an aspect that has been missing from the GOP “since reconstruction” and the victory of high profile Black congressional candidates Allen West in Florida and Tim Scott in South Carolina there is a danger. The attachment is tender, and perhaps tenuous, as reflected in the comment by high profile Black Republican Aprill Shines that although the GOP has embraced many more Blacks and membership is up “Though the Republican party has seen growth of black membership rise from 5 to 15% it does not seem to be indicative of accepting black leadership to correlate with black votes”.
How would the removal of the first high profile Black to hold executive office in the GOP help to remove the perception that, although Blacks are welcome to fetch water they are not welcome to organize the water gang, even if one of their number has led the party to an almost unprecedented victory?
How would the replacement by a bland “nuts and bolts” Chairman counter the, guaranteed to be used over and over,'”racist” hit job by radical leftist Dem’s and their enablers in the liberal media. “The real opposition to Obama is based on racism not matter how the Republicans try and cover it up-just look how quickly they dumped Steele once he had served their purpose as a token counter weight to President Obama”. Nothing could be surer than that is exactly what they would do and say.
According to commentators the campaign against Steele is being led by the GOP old guard, especially Karl Rove. Rove is perceived as ultra-establishment and no friend of Palin’s. If the Beltway Boys plan is to remove Steele, a noted Palin and Tea Party friendly Chairman, as a way to stop Palin getting the nomination, it will be a costly and Pyrrhic victory. Not only could it lead to the Tea Party creating a third party for 2012 which would of course ensure the crushing defeat of the GOP, but it could seriously erode the nascent entry of Blacks back into the party of Lincoln.
For Anuzis, and any further challengers to Steele, they must state how they would deal with this potentially catastrophic loss of both Blacks and Tea Partiers. They would also have to prove that they are not in anyone’s pocket. Anuzis says ” I will not be taking sides in the presidential primary” he and other contenders should prove it by categorically disassociating themselves with the anti-Steele, stop Palin cabal which is being described as led by Rove.