Book? What book? GOP asks Steele
Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele is once again at odds with his party. This time it’s for calling for active opposition of the Obama agenda. What’s wrong with that, you ask. Well, he did it in a book. A book GOP leaders knew nothing about until it hit the shelves.
According to Amazon.com, Steele’s book, “Right Now: A 12-Step Program for Defeating the Obama Agenda,” “throws down the gauntlet,” and makes an argument for “abandoning ‘conservatism-lite,’ returning to core conservative principles, and launching an uncompromising campaign for limited government.”
The book is said to be highly critical of the party and has angered Republican congressional leaders who feel such a blueprint for the party should have included their input. Some GOP leaders only learned of the book when Steele began promoting it in television appearances this week.
To make matters worse, the book tour has been speckled with controversial remarks from Steele.
On Monday, Steele appeared on Fox News Channel and said he did not believe Republicans could win back a majority in the House in 2010.
Later in the week, he told ABC News that those angry with his remarks need to “get a life.”
He added, “If you don’t want me in the job, fire me. But until then, shut up. Get with the program or get out of the way.”
It’s not quite dishing, but Palin chats to Oprah about Levi, Couric
Apparently all is forgiven.
Sarah Palin tells Oprah Winfrey she wants to welcome Levi Johnston back into the fold.
Her daughter’s ex-fiance and father of her grandchild has been all over TV shows and in print media making unflattering comments about Palin, but the former Alaska governor says he’s part of the family.
Palin, who ran for vice president on the Republican ticket with Senator John McCain last year, also had nice things to say about Oprah, who had supported the other party’s candidate — Barack Obama.
The interview with Oprah Winfrey will air Monday to kick off a book tour for Palin’s memoir, “Going Rogue: An American LIfe.”
Last year, Palin was skewered for fumbling a question about what she read, and she tells Oprah she knew that interview with CBS anchor Katie Couric had gone badly.
“The campaign said ‘Right on, good. You’re showing your independence. This is what America needs to see’ and, of course, I’m thinking ‘if you thought that was a good interview, I don’t know what a bad interview was.’ So I knew it wasn’t a good interview,” Palin says in a clip of the taped Oprah interview released Thursday.
I am having a difficult time figuring out whether J. VanA is pro-Obama or pro-Palin. The early remarks suggest the latter, but after attempting to visualize (as the invitations go) the future under Obama, I can’t help but see 1) a thoughtful, carefully considered and effective military presence in Afghanistan, one that allows more American soldiers to avoid the massive trauma of armed conflict while providing the necessary support to that country’s own autonomy and safety, 2) a society in which, though the value of the dollar admittedly declines, the basic needs of all Americans are met to a much fuller degree than they have been for decades, 3) a newly self-consistent, fair and humane legal system in which justice is served without the use of impulsive, desperate techniques that have more in common with terrorist tactics themselves than with a humane and enlightened society, 4) a society in which people do not feel like the act of purchasing a fire-arm is their only guarantee of personal safety, security, and control, 5) industries that operate efficiently, honestly, and with the intent of generating the highest quality products, not simply of undermining the competition, of maintaining a strangle-hold on the market, or of serving the bottom line, and 6) a society in which all voices are heard, considered judiciously and weighed before final decisions are made, not a society in which all differing opinions and contributions are stamped out by a stubborn reliance on single principals, very few of which would ever apply singly to a given decision.
I’m in agreement that Sarah Palin is a woman of principle, and I also agree that the ability to answer televised questions extemperaneously does not make or break a person’s decision making or leadership ability; the skill is obviously one that requires serious practice and drill, neither of which Palin had time to recieve during the campaign.
But I have never understood the argument that supports “principle” as the sole factor upon which to base decisions that will affect many people of diverse backgrounds. Not everyone, after all, believes in the same principles as everyone else. The best decisions seem clearly to be those that weigh several different principles and include elements or shadings of each in a well thought out way. The trade-mark of a good decision maker is the ability to see and understand as many of these existing principles as possible, and to arrive at a decision that combines the most valid and compatible elements of each. The process takes time, requires a very open mind and a strong sense of empathy, and often results in a decision that advances no one particular view point or principle completely, but that somehow manages to advance the greater good by a little rather than the smaller good by a lot. This seems to me the very meaning of “The Democratic Process,” and it is not only a skill that a given person can have, but a skill built into the operation and structure of our government.
It is also a skill that, as best I can see, Sarah Palin does not have, and one that she in fact seems to diminish as much as possible despite being a self-described fan of a country built on the democratic process. In a country in which there has never been complete national support for any one cause or value or system of beliefs, shouldn’t we continue to have a president who acknowledges that debate and due process are essential, that having many beliefs, opinions and voices actually makes us stronger instead of weaker, and that no single governmental decision should ever be a simple appeal to something as safe from scrutiny and debate as a one person’s private principle?
Get ready, America: Here comes Sarah Palin
Get ready, America. Like her or not, Sarah Palin is coming to a city near you.
Last year’s Republican vice presidential nominee is starting a book tour next week to promote her memoir, “Going Rogue: An American Life.”
Is it a thinly-veiled bid to test the waters for a possible 2012 Republican presidential bid, or simply an effort to make money and cement her celebrity status?
Only time will tell.
For now, the opening stops of her tour in Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama and Florida, could be valuable if she later decides to run.
So far she is steering clear of major cities, going to smaller places like Fort Bragg, North Carolina, home of one of the biggest military bases in the country.
“I’ve decided to stop in cities that are not usually included in a typical book tour,” Palin said this week on her Facebook page.
ahe puplic lright, lets get to the crux of the matter. the longer you keep this b—– in the public eye, the more she sees herself as a somebody. when in fact she is a nobody made into a somebody by the republican party, and the press just keep feeding us, her! if they never put her nme in an article gain, showed her on tv again, a talk show, a book signing, whose book would make me throw-up just looking at it. read it??????????????????y i’m crqazy, your an idiot, have a nice day
Still publishers are slower than most of our speedy lives. Competiton? Competition is fine, it is even better when it does not have Marxists of the Democrat Party trying to stop it.