Freepers want Steele to resign. You'll NEVER GUESS who they suggest as his replacement.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

To: SeekAndFind

The ONLY reason Steele got the job in the first place is because the RNC felt they had to have a black spokesperson in order to criticize Obama without appearing to be ‘racist’. The RNC are a bunch of PC-afraid, linguine-spined wussies.

6 posted on Thursday, April 08, 2010 9:56:36 AM by bk1000 (A clear conscience is a sure sign of a poor memory)

***

To: SeekAndFind

Steele is in over his head. He should resign and Sarah Palin should be named RNC chair.

10 posted on Thursday, April 08, 2010 10:26:43 AM by Behind Liberal Lines

[mattvermont]

1. Only in my wildest of dreams

SP as RNC chair would be like Candy Mountain for us all.

[Warpy]

2. Now THAT I can support!

I just don't want her anywhere near any sort of candidacy or appointed public office, ever. However, putting her in a position to drive the final nails into the GOP coffin suits me just fine.

[malaise]

34. That would be

Oh Happy Day! :rofl:

[Subdivisions]

3. Yea, Steele should quit so The Quitter can be the chair. n/t

[Kievan Rus]

4. Teh stoopid! It burns!

[NeoGreen]

5. This would be better then if she ran for office...

... it would give her the keys to drive the GOP off the cliff.

Oh, please, please, please push this meme...

Palin for GOP Chair

[marmar]

6. The RNC is PC?

Just shows you how removed reality these freaks are.

[tammywammy]

7. Yes, yes, yes!

I'd be totally on board with Palin taking over as RNC chairman.

[denbot]

8. You know this would not be good for us..

She would empty the rubes pockets, and possibly 10-15% of the loot might end up at the RNC.

[deminks]

9. Oh, please, Gawd, make this happen.

[coti]

10. I'm shocked.

Sarah Palin: the be-all and end-all of the Teabagger thought process.

[madokie]

11. Oh please let it be true

sister sarah and the rnc sorta rolls off the tongue nicely

[Initech]

12. I'd rather have Palin as RNC chair than president.

:nuke:

[MattBaggins]

13. How stupid are these people?

They are pissed that Steele is spending money hand over fist and they suggest putting the Wasilla Hillbillies who have gone on repeated party funded shopping sprees in charge. They never cease to amaze.

[tanyev]

14. Yeah! 'Cause Sarah would never spend RNC money on herself and her family!

:spray:

[chill_wind]

15. Oh yeah! :-)

That would be just too much to hope for, but OMG we can dream.

Yes, oh yes!

[Swede]

16. That would be a stroke of genius.

You betcha.

[onehandle]

17. Not a chance. She doesn't work for the little money any more.

Just one of many reasons she will never run for political office again.

[Love Bug]

35. Yep. She's seeking Glen Beck $34M territory

heading up the RNC is small potatoes for her.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Sarah the quitter as the head of the RNC

at least Steele, to his credit, will not quit

[Liberal In Texas]

19. Now she could REALLY squander donations.

Make Steele look like a piker.

[Canuckistanian]

20. No way.

Sarah has her sights set MUCH higher than RNC chair.

Besides, the GOP DESPERATELY NEEDS a COMPETENT LEADER at the helm, especially now.

For the very few smart people in the GOP, Sarah Palin must be radioactive POISON.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

23. But what if they found a competent leader and he wrote stuff on her hand to read?

For better or worse, Sarah Palin is the new Reagan to Republicans who are only interested in a figurehead that they can put on a pedestal. They've assigned quality after quality after quality to the woman that she simply does not posses. She's essentially the character Tina Fey portrays on SNL and nothing more, and yet, her "faithful" keep hailing her qualities as a "leader."

She's poison, alright...but sometime check into the many tragic stories of sushi bar patrons who "just had to taste" the blowfish ("fugu") liver. They knew it was poison, but they had to stick their tongue on it. And it killed them.

Same thing could happen with the RNC, ya know? They could put a blowfish liver in charge.

:rofl:

[Iggo]

21. She's got my vote.

:patriot:

[femrap]

22. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

:think: :think: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:

This could be fun....:party:

She'll scare the Independents and that's who decides Elections....well, when the voting machines aren't deciding them...or the Supreme Court.

At least it could be entertaining! And maybe good for a few laughs.

[muntrv]

24. Puhleeeezzzzzzze nominate the quitter as RNC chair.

[customerserviceguy]

25. She'd never take it

She wants the big prize, the Rethug nomination. If she would ever do such a thing, it's because she's figured that Mittens Romney has a much better chance than she does of getting that tarnished brass ring.

And since the fundies who love Caribou Barbie would NEVER vote for a Mormon, that just ain't gonna happen.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

26. Their current "Dream Ticket" is Palin / Bachmann...

...no one on the 2008 playing field is even being discussed, unless it's to dismiss them. It won't be Huckabee, it won't be Romney. Damn sure won;t be McCain, and they seem to have stopped swooning over Senator Centerfold...they never mention him.

[customerserviceguy]

29. We're less than a year and a half away

from the time when any serious Repuke contenders would have to throw their hats in the ring to even have a shot at winning anything in Iowa or New Hampshire in early 2012. I just don't see anyone other than Mittens, Hucksterbee, or Caribou Barbie being in the running, even as a "get my name out there for the first time" candidate.

[jmowreader]

36. That's pretty much OUR dream ticket, too

Sarah Palin could win the White House under two circumstances:

(1) she's the standardbearer on a ticket with someone who has a LOT of experience in both the corporate and the government environments. Mitt Romney is about the only person I can think of who fits in that category.

or

(2) she runs for vice-president behind someone sane who can groom her for the top spot. Sarah needs a lot of grooming, and not the kind you do with a hairbrush.

With Bachmann as her VP running mate the Republicans stand no chance of winning. They're both clinically insane and borderline psychopathic. The Republicans need to take the soft middle--the 40 percent of the electorate who "votes for the candidate, not the party" and they can't get it when they've got two people on the ticket who literally scare the shit out of anyone who doesn't want to live in a country with a fundamentalist theocracy as its government.

This, however, is why the Republicans probably WILL run them. The GOP has a history of throwing elections. They've done it three times in my lifetime: in 1976, when they needed to get rid of the taint of Nixon; in 2002 when they needed to recover from the eight-year Reagan/Bush spending spree, and in 2008 when they needed to recover from the eight-year Bush/Cheney spending spree. The country will not be fixed in 2012. It may not be fixed in 2016, or in 2020. They won't want it back until the economy has recovered well enough for them to go on another tear. (Imagine your wife maxing out four credit cards, taking out a second mortgage to pay them off, then maxing them out again even after she's been asked not to. That's what the Republicans do.) They run a bad campaign, or run bad candidates. After they lose, they spend the next four years obstructing everything the Democrats try to do. (As Tom DeLay once said, "bipartisanship" means "buy into my partisanship.")

So...they'll run candidates they know will lose, wait three years to see if the country's in good enough shape to take back, and go from there. If it's still fucked in 2016, they'll run Tom Tancredo and John Boehner if that's what it takes to get their asses stomped.

[CoffeeCat]

39. Wow, that is an amazing theory...

I am so intrigued by your theory that the Republicans have "thrown" elections, during
years when it didn't benefit them to win.

I am not questioning your hypothesis. However, for it to be true, the Republicans
would have to be totally running everything and in control. I do believe that the
neocons control the voting machines. I believe it's the neocon/PNAC crowd who is
really in the driver's seat--and the parties are a distraction and a facade that gives
the appearance of a democracy/two-party system.

In the past decade, it appears that many Dems have crossed into neocon lines. So,
the power may not be entirely in Republican hands.

In the last election, I believe the neocons thought they had it locked down. McCain
on the right and Hillary on the left--two candidates who are both supportive of
neocon ideals. Then, Obama came from behind. I don't think they planned on Obama
winning Iowa. Hillary was expected to win Iowa, and Obama surprised everyone
by winning every Iowa county. I think this threw them off kilter.

However, I think your theory is intriguing and entirely plausible. I'm just wondering if
all of that power is currently concentrated in Republican circles. Many Dems have gone
"corporatist" and have sold out.

I do agree though, that the powerbrokers have election years that they can afford to lose.
Why be in power during the worst economic crisis since The Great Depression?

One thing is clear--things are not as they seem--and our elections are easily thrown
and rigged.

[jmowreader]

40. Look at the election of 1992

You can see how I came up with this by looking at 1992. According to the conventional wisdom, GHWB was SUPPOSED to win that election. He won Panama. He won Desert Storm, and he was running against a guy who smoked weed, had questionable land dealings, raised taxes three thousand times as governor of Arkansas and was going to put a gay guy in every foxhole. Then came the actual campaign...Bush flat out seemed like he didn't want to be there and he CHECKED HIS WATCH during the last debate. Most political consultants will tell you, when you go into a debate don't even wear your watch. It'll eliminate the temptation to check it, and people won't judge you by it.

[lonestarnot]

27. McMoose the wardrober. Now that's a plan!

[KonaKane]

28. I would LOVE to see Fail-in chair the RNC!

Are you kidding me? Hollywood wouldn't be able to 3D a more stupendous flameout and meltdown of a political party!

[LiberalFighter]

30. The RNC is screwed either way.

[rhett o rick]

31. Well I'd say Bobby Jindle was in the running until he had his official photo retouched to

lighten his skin color. He may have lightened his way out of that job. lol

[chollybocker]

32. No no no

Please save Palin for the GOP '12 ticket.

I really want to *witness* the epic debates. Not to mention the early election night returns.

[zbdent]

33. bring ... it ... on ...

:rofl:

[ellie]

37. That would be so

incredibly awesome! Let's hope it comes to pass.

[n2doc]

38. Having grifter Sarah as head of the RNC would lead to their bankruptcy in 6 months

So I wholeheartedly support the idea.