What’s The Matter With the Republican Outreach Plan? Republicans.

Three commissioners.  One douchebag.  Can you spot him?

“I’m John.” “I’m Randy.” “I”m Racist.”

I get asked sometimes, “Jeff, why do you hate Republicans?”

Frankly,, that question puzzles me.  I have never said I hate Republicans.  Because I don’t.   I don’t like  lot of Republicans, but that dislike grows with the distance between local level and national Republicans.   The further up the political food chain you go the less likable Republicans get.

After last year’s electoral shellacking some of the smarter members of the Grand Old Party came to recognize they had a serious image problem with people of color.   They resolved to do something about that.   They needed to fix the image.  Never mind the awful policies or the awful  personalities articulating the policies.   The rebranding of the Republican Party wasn’t going to be about coming up with a better brand of dog food.   The goal was to convince the dogs that they just weren’t getting the message.

A better question would be, “Why do Republicans hate me and anyone that looks like me.”

The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince Priebus, whose name sounds like a shampoo ingredient, laid out his master plan to win over Blacks, Latinos and Asians who had gone big for President Obama and the Democrats in 2012.

Hi, my name is Reince Priebus and my job sucks!

While Democrats benefited from well invested and expansive political operations in states across the country in 2012, Priebus acknowledged the Republicans faced a deficit in that area and said the GOP would combat shortfall by launching a $10 million initiative dedicated to outreach in minority communities.

“The Obama campaign lived in these communities for years.  Their relationships were deep.  They were authentic,” Priebus said.  “We’re going to be announcing a $10 million initiative just this year which will include hundreds of people, paid, across the country, from coast to coast, in Hispanic, African American, Asian communities, talking about our party, talking about our brand, talking about what we believe in, going to community events, going to swearing-in ceremonies being a part of the community on an ongoing basis paid for by the Republican National Committee, to make the case for our party and our candidates.”

Yeah, you have fun with that, R.P.   Priebus may be sincere in broadening the GOP base, but not everyone is on board with the initiative.   Some to ridiculous extremes.

Jim Gile, a Republican commissioner in Saline County, Kansas, used an offensive racial slur during an argument with a fellow commissioner, but he wants everyone to know that he isn’t a racist because he’s “built Habitat homes for colored people,” and also that he has a black friend:

In a recording made by County Clerk Don Merriman of the study session, Gile, who is white, can be heard to say the county needed to hire an architect to design the improvements rather than “nigger-rigging it.”

His comment brought laughter from others in the room. Salinan Ray Hruska, who attends most commission meetings and study sessions, asked Gile what he said.

“Afro-Americanized,” Gile replied. . . .

Gile said he grew up around the term, but it is something he shouldn’t have used.

“I am not a prejudiced person,” Gile said Friday. “I have built Habitat homes for colored people.”

Gile said he also has a close friend whom he regards as a sister who is black.

Damn man, could you fuck that up any worse?

It would be a mistake to allow one idiot Republican nobody in Kansas to cock up the entire idea of outreach, which is a good idea.  It shows there are people left in the GOP who actually get it that there’s a problem here.   The thing is the Republicans have spent such a long time dividing the country along racial lines and appealing to fear of “the other” that they can’t just turn on a dime and become the party of openness and diversity.   It’s like squeezing your feet into shoes one size too small.  It’s a bad fit.

When you’re a political party who’s been wiped out in consecutive presidential elections and you’re tired of being called old, White and racist, who you gonna call?   The Super Six G.O.P. Outreach Team!

Rep. Don “Wetback” Young
Jim “the Nigger Rigger” Gile
Dr. Ben “Gay Marriage Will Lead to Pedophilia and Bestiality” Carson
Sean “Ben’s Ass and My Lips” Hannity
Sen. Rand “Hey, I Love the Civil Rights Act” Paul
Sarah “Shuck and Jive” Palin

Todd Kincannon and Jennifer Olsen because superheroes need stupid sidekicks.

and Reince Preiebus as Professor X.

It’s hard to clean up the image of a party that lives and thrives on racial baiting and the politics of polarization

These half-assed efforts at “outreach” might be a sign Republicans just aren’t any goddamned good at this sort of thing.

Fail.

jennifer-olsen

Advertisements

The Choice: Go Forward or Turn Back the Clock

Four more years. Because the job’s not done

Here’s a question without an easy answer.  If Mitt Romney beats Barack Obama in November, who will be the next President of the United States?

Logically, it should be Romney, but as beholden as he will be to Karl Rove, Sheldon Adelson, the Koch Brothers and all the other rich men and special interests with one hand on his shoulder and the other up his ass, who will really be president if Romney wins?

There are trade-offs you have to accept with Obama.  Steady and mature decision-making instead of boldly ambitious plans.  The Republicans are not going to give the president a dime to do anything remotely grandiose.   If Obama achieves anything of significance in a second term, it will be in spite of the GOP, not because of them.

How do you govern when the legislative branch refuses to work with the executive?  There is a natural friction between the two that the Founding Fathers not only anticipated, they designed the Constitution to promote, but open hostilities wasn’t what they had in mind.   It is what it is, and even if Obama wins in a squeaker or a landslide, he can expect nothing more from a Republican-controlled Congress (if the GOP holds the House and takes the Senate) than the coldest of cold shoulders for the next four years.   If a second term emboldens Obama to pursue loftier goals than his first, it will also motivate Congress to give him absolutely zip.

Cornel West might say otherwise, but with Obama it’s a little harder to know who it is exactly who has the tightest grip on his balls.  With Romney you have to count all the hands stuffed in his pants.

Mitt’s other biggest problem is he doesn’t seem to like people very much or at least people not like him.  Wealthy.  White.  Conservative.  Mormon.   In a story at Salon a psychologist put Mittens on the couch and concluded:

He is anxious about revealing who he is and about interacting with people he doesn’t know. He appears to have much less experience than Obama in interacting with people from all walks of life. Basically, he is uncomfortable except within his own family and in the presence of those who share his wealthy background and Mormon faith.

Romney wouldn’t be the first rich guy who was painfully awkward and awfully comfortable rubbing elbows with the people he purports to want to lead.   It is not required that the president relate to  the citizens, but the prospect of a Chief Executive that has no empathy for the middle and working classes is a worrisome prospect.

In 1965, Romney was attending a private high school he was outraged by the appearance of one John Lauber, a quiet fellow student who had bleached d his hair blonde with one long lock falling over his eyes.  Lauber was not simply a nonconformist, but gay as well.  An incensed Romney told classmates, “He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!”

Not perfect, but perfect for the job.

Romney led his gang of bullies in assaulting and pinning Lauber down as Romney cut off his hair.  When asked about the incident Romney shrugged it off saying,  “I participated in a lot of hijinks and pranks in high school and some of them might have gone too far, and I apologize.”

Romney claims Lauber being gay had nothing to do with hassling him.  “I certainly don’t believe that I thought the fellow was homosexual,” Romney told a Fox News radio host. “That was the furthest thing from our minds back in the 1960s.”

As “hijinks and pranks” go, giving crap to the kid who didn’t fit in is a harsh rite of passage in high school.  But it says something about Romney that he didn’t recall Lauber and how he had abused a fellow student who was only minding his business. To Romney, Lauber was a weirdo who didn’t fit in.   How someone forgets their part in humiliating another kid in such a demeaning way says to me if Mitt doesn’t have a dark side, he’s cursed by a sadistic, mean streak.

Forbes contributor Josh Brasso wondered where is Mitt’s empathy?  “…There is a difference between learning to treat others respectfully and having empathy for them. It seems like teenage Mitt Romney fell down on both of those counts, and I’m confident that adult Mitt Romney has figured the respect thing out. But does Romney have empathy for people who are different from him?

No.   Not really.  When Romney appeared at the NAACP convention in July, much was made of the raucous booing he received for saying he would repeal Obamacare.   What was overlooked was his later claim he had met with Black leaders who supported him, but were afraid to do so publicly.

The NAACP’s Hillary Shelton told Ed Schultz,  “Quite frankly, the campaign actually gave me a list of African-American VIPs that they brought into the NAACP meeting.  So we were aware that they had people brought in specifically for the campaign. So I’m sure those were the ones they sat down with, because quite frankly none of the rank-and-file NAACPers met with him.”

“They’re bringing people in that they know will support his agenda from other places, that aren’t active with the NAACP. These are people who are brought in to actually provide the cheering for him, so there will be some support along those lines,” Shelton said.

Romney was praised for being willing to go before a hostile audience and not pander to the NAACP, but he tried to stack the deck by busing in his own Black cheerleaders.  This illustrates not only how uncomfortable Romney is around people he doesn’t relate to, but how he will to shape and manipulate events to make himself comfortable.

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. If Mittens gets five percent of the Black vote it would be a minor miracle.  Anyone duplicitous enough to bus in ringers to applaud for him like trained monkeys (and I do mean that insult in the most racial sense of the word) has already disrespected the intelligence of African-Americans.

I’m quite aware of President Obama’s shortcomings.  I don’t need a 30-second attack ad to tell me his flaws.  There are things about Obama that make me mad and/or drive me crazy.   I wish he fought harder for what he believes is best for America.  Often it seems he won’t if it might interfere with his natural inclination to reach out to the other side.

Some very intelligent people say Romney, once elected, will be free to govern from more moderate positions than the Tea Party-dominated GOP presently holds.   But what if he doesn’t?   What if he is simply a rubber stamp in the Oval Office?   That’s a chance not worth taking.

The likelihood Romney being captured by the right-wing of his party increased  this week in Texas when Ted Cruz, a Tea Party endorsed challenger defeated the favorite of the party, David Dewhurst for the U.S. Senate  vacated by Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s retirement.  Cruz’s win  wasn’t bad news for Obama because Democrats had no chance of picking up Hutchinson’s seat, but it was awful news for Romney because the GOP just got dragged a little further away from the political center.

“If we can elect a really conservative House and Senate that will force Romney to go along with our bold conservative agenda,” a spokesperson for Freedom Works said. “He’s going to have to really, really go to the right. He’ll be working with guys in the House and Senate. He won’t be able to get away with too many middle of the road policies, especially on things like the deficit.”

Would Mitt be in charge of a Romney presidency?

That dear reader, is the final reason a Romney presidency would be a disaster.  He would be an impotent figurehead.  A sock puppet for the wealthy elites that poured millions into the presidential campaign on his behalf and unable to lead from the center with the G.O.Tea Party dragging him far on the fringes to the Right.

Obama earns the contempt of Republicans but Romney would be expected to kneel and grovel before the yahoos of the party.  Is there any reason to expect Mitt would tell the Tea Party  “Screw off.  I’m the president?”

We need four more years for President Obama because four years of a figurehead on the  job  would be a catastrophe and stakes are too high to leave the future of the nation to Mitt Romney…and John Boehner…and Eric Cantor…and Paul Ryan…and Mitch McConnell…and Jim De Mint…and Sheldon Adelson…and David Koch….and Karl Rove…

America can’t afford a president who takes orders from a shadow Cabinet and that’s what we will have with Romney in the White House and someone else in charge.

Burning Down the House (and the Senate Too)

“Wanna go steady and hunt commies together?”

One of my favorite war flicks is Patton and as portrayed by George C. Scott in an Oscar-winning performance, the old “blood n’ guts” general was tough, ruthless, focused like a laser beam on crushing his enemies and showing up his rivals.   The fact that he was egotistical, vain, and maybe a borderline sociopath doesn’t deflect from George S. Patton’s brilliance as a military leader.

I can’t imagine Patton being effective in anything less than wartime conditions.  What works on the battlefield would be disastrous anywhere else and particularly the “no retreat, no surrender” hardline stance.  This is why the Republican Party’s “take no prisoners and make no compromises” view of how politics should be played seems to be no Republican son-of-a-bitch can win by treating the Democratic son-of-a-bitch as an enemy to be obliterated.   Even though politics is said to be war without bloodshed, without the possibility of compromise it becomes every bit as brutal as war.

Two intellectuals, Thomas Mann and Norman J. Orenstein penned a very popular column for The Washington Post (which you might want to read before proceeding) and their central premise is our government is broken and if Republicans didn’t break it, they are vested in keeping it broken.

Rep. Allen West, a Florida Republican, was recently captured on video asserting that there are “78 to 81” Democrats in Congress who are members of the Communist Party. Of course, it’s not unusual for some renegade lawmaker from either side of the aisle to say something outrageous. What made West’s comment — right out of the McCarthyite playbook of the 1950s — so striking was the almost complete lack of condemnation from Republican congressional leaders or other major party figures, including the remaining presidential candidates.

It’s not that the GOP leadership agrees with West; it is that such extreme remarks and views are now taken for granted.

We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.

“Both sides do it” or “There is plenty of blame to go around” are the traditional refuges for an American news media intent on proving its lack of bias, while political scientists prefer generality and neutrality when discussing partisan polarization.

Many self-styled bipartisan groups, in their search for common ground, propose solutions that move both sides to the center, a strategy that is simply untenable when one side is so far out of reach.

An endangered species meets the president

It is clear that the center of gravity in the Republican Party has shifted sharply to the right. Its once-legendary moderate and center-right legislators in the House and the Senate — think Bob Michel, Mickey Edwards, John Danforth, Chuck Hagel — are virtually extinct.

The essay (which has been “liked” and shared over 100,000 times on Facebook, tweeted more than 2,400 times and received up to 5000 replies before the WaPo website stopped counting) is taken from the authors book It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism. The popularity of the piece probably will sell a few more copies than a book with a clunky title normally would.

The idea that Washington has become a place where not much get done isn’t a new one. Post columnist Dana Milbank points out the House of Representatives has been in session only 41 out of 127 days in 2012 and will be on vacation for 17 of the remaining 34 weeks. On the rare occasions the House members are in town it’s only for three days.

Nice work if you want to call that work (to be fair, Milbank notes that over in the Democratic-run Senate…of the 87 votes, the majority were on just three bills: 25 on the highway bill, 16 on the postal bill and 13 on an insider-trading bill. Sixteen others were on confirmations.

What’s the problem with a Congress where nothing much gets done because one party considers “compromise” a dirty word (I see you over there Don)? If the GOP is successful in taking back the Senate and holding on to the House this fall you can bet you’ll see a lot more legislation than the 106 passed so far by the 112th Congress.

Even if President Obama wins reelection, if he finds he’s going to have to send congratulations to Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell he’s going to go through a lot of veto pens and Rolaids.

Even if you think a dysfunctional Congress that can’t pass anything but the most inoffensive and menial bills where its members regard the other side not simply as wrong on issues, but un-American isn’t a bad thing, there is no reason for anyone but the most blindly partisan to even run for office.

Why bother if you are a Democrat, you can’t reach across the aisle to your Republican colleague when he or she believes they were sent to Congress to spit in that hand. Allen West, whom Mann and Ornstein name-check has called his own Congressional representative, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, “vile” and “not a lady.” What the hell could they ever work together on to mutually benefit the people of Florida?

Let’s take the Republicans at their word the government really is the enemy. Is it really surprising they seemingly have no interest in assisting in the smooth functioning of an institution they don’t believe in? If a house divided against itself must fall how long before a bitterly rancorous House falls apart and brings the Senate tumbling down with it?

Lying liars telling lies.

Can Obama Get Off the Mat?

Obama said knock you out....but when?

A funny thing happened on the way to President Obama’s big jobs address given to a joint session of Congress.  Like so many things in this Chief Executive’s life even the relatively routine matter of getting the speech scheduled at a time of the president’s choosing became a major controversy.

The Tuesday Obama wanted to give his speech fell on the same night the Republican presidential challengers were scheduled to gather for a debate.   This sparked cries that the president was trying to big foot the Republicans so Speaker John Boehner asked the president to move his speech to Thursday instead.   The White House conceded to Boehner’s request and immediately the howls when up how Obama had caved to the Republicans–again.

But it also brought to light a different issue.  How little the GOP seems to respect this particular president.

When she was House speaker, Representative Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California verbally tormented President George W. Bush. (Ms. Pelosi’s description of Mr. Bush as “an incompetent leader” comes to mind.) Dick Armey, a Republican former lawmaker from Texas and now a Tea Party leader, referred derisively to Bill Clinton as “your president” when speaking to Democrats. President Ronald Reagan sparred often with Democrats on the Hill.

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, said this year that his first goal was to see Mr. Obama defeated.

“The closest we have come to this was Tom DeLay’s hatred for Clinton when he demanded impeachment of him,” said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative research group. “But that was one guy or a handful. Now it is much more widespread, and the toxicity is, and culture is different now.”

Mr. Ornstein pointed to the fight over the payroll tax cut sought by the Obama administration — one that many Congressional Republicans supported in 2009 but oppose now — as an example of Republicans’ opposing Mr. Obama even when they had agreed with him on a policy.

Mr. Obama has had his own contributing role. Often when he has met with Republicans he has taken a scolding tone that irks them. Even some of his fellow Democrats viewed his attempt to schedule an address on job creation before a joint session of Congress next Wednesday — the same night as a major Republican presidential debate — as clumsy if not downright rude. It then became embarrassing when Mr. Obama capitulated and changed the date to Thursday at 7 p.m., as Mr. Boehner wanted.

But the dynamic, which Democrats largely blame Republicans for, has irked many of them, especially on the Hill. “I think it is unprecedented of a leader in the Senate of either party to say the most important goal he has is to make the current president a one-term,” said Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California. “That is about respect, that is about priorities and it is just wrong.”

Julian E. Zelizer, a political scientist at Princeton, said that when it comes to Mr. Obama, Republicans “just keep gaining confidence to force his hand.”

“While there might be a few people whose words have become nastier than usual, I think this is really the new normal in Washington with a president who is always on the ropes,” Professor Zelizer said. “I am not convinced that is about lack of respect so much as the feeling that this is a weak president. If the president seemed more powerful they would have returned the call.”

The White House press secretary, Jay Carney, said Thursday that the administration spent “zero” time worrying about whether Republicans in Congress are showing the president the respect that the office deserves. “You guys care much more about this than we do,” he scolded reporters who asked about the relationship between Mr. Obama and Congressional Republicans.

Ready to rumble?

I count myself among the ranks of the “you guys” that Carney dismisses.  If the president continues to act like a doormat he shouldn’t be surprised if Republicans wipe their feet on him.

Washington is a place of power and with power comes respect.  I’m not exactly sure how Obama can command the respect that is due him as benefits his office, but a show of strength might help.

Back in the day of the first George Bush, disrespecting presidents was called “the wimp factor” and since then every man that’s held the office has come in for more than the usual kind of criticism that’s expected.

Any president is going to face natural adversaries.  No matter how popular a president or his policies are, someone is going to dislike both intensely.

I’m not going to pull the race card (this time at least), because this is Obama’s fault to an extent.  Obama is slow to anger and even slower to show it for reasons I can speculate upon but hesitate to say.   Even if Obama knows in his heart of hearts some of the shit slung at him is based upon his race, he’d never say it out loud.  He’d be denounced as a whiner and it’s a fight he would never win.

Presidents can be seen as weak, even as ineffectual, but if they look like they’re going to cry because they get punched in the jaw, they’re done.  Nobody respects a crybaby.

I won’t be listening to his speech next week just to hear what he has to say about creating jobs.  That’s the most important part, but how he says it will matter just as more.

If he challenges the Republicans to step up and do something more than obstruct and oppose anything he proposes because he’s proposing it I’ll be pleased.  Some have suggested Obama has been playing defense and executing a clever version of Muhammad Ali’s “rope-a-dope” strategy against George Foreman.

The thing is, Ali eventually came off the ropes to knock out Foreman.  If Obama’s strategy is to keep taking roundhouse rights and upper-cuts until the Republicans punch themselves out and get arm weary, it doesn’t seem to be having the desired effect.

If he’s pleading yet again with the Republicans to hold hands and sing “We Are the World” and show his willingness to reach across the aisle in the spirit of bipartisan bullshit, I’ll retch and be disappointed as I choke down the bile rising in my throat.

Right now, I expect disappointment.  Obama needs a Ali-style knockout of a speech.  He’s past the point of covering up, clenching and jabbing as he waits to be saved by the bell.   The Republicans are coming to take his title.

I know Obama can fight.  I’m just not sure if he will.

Is Obama ready to fight for his presidency and his principles?

The Neutering of Michael Steele (to be continued…)

H.N.I.C.

“I’m very introspective about things. I’m a cause-and-effect kind of guy. So if I do something, there’s a reason for it… It may look like a mistake, a gaffe. There is a rationale, there is a logic behind it. I want to see what the landscape looks like. I want to see who yells the loudest. I want to know who says they’re with me but really isn’t.”

~ Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele

Michael Steele loves the sound of his own voice.  Since taking over as chairman of the Republican National Committee, Steele has issued proclamations, postured for the cameras and proudly proclaimed himself as the leader of the Republican Party.

For what that’s worth.

Apparently, not too much.  A recent Gallup poll revealed most Republicans believe the “leader” of the party is Rush Limbaugh.

The question was put to national respondents, “Who do you think is the main person who speaks for the Republican Party today?”

Limbaugh grabbed 13% of the vote, followed by Dick Cheney (10%),  John McCain and Newt Gingrich tied (6%).

Steele came in at a whopping two percent along with fellow bottom feeders House Republican leader John “the Boner” Boehner and Williard “Mitt’ Romney.

That means the self-described leader of the Grand Old Party comes in far behind a corpulent, Oxycontin addicted talk show host,  an ex vice-president who misled the country into war against Iraq, a failed presidential candidate and a guy named after an aquatic salamander.

“Pass those chicken wings over here!”

Steele when given the news probably jumped up, broke into the Electric Slide screaming, “Sarah Palin didn’t even place.  Woo-hoo! Suck on that Sarah!”

If one of Steele’s stated goals is to make the Republican Party the supposed “big tent” that is open and inclusive of all races and creeds, now would be a good time for the erstwhile “leader” of the party to speak up and denounce the recent acts of bad taste and racism directed at President Obama and the First Lady, Michelle Obama.

Instead there’s only been stony silence.   Steele has said nothing about the recent rash of Republicans Behaving Racist against the Obamas.   Steele has spent his time whacking ABC for not accepting RNC ads during a planned news program broadcast on the president’s health care plans.

Douglas MacKinnon, the press secretary for former Senator Bob Dole wrote a column for the NY Daily News asking why the Republican “leaders” won’t stand up and confront the bigots in the party.

Two blatant and mind-numbing acts of racism by Republicans were just reported in the news — and unfortunately and unwisely, GOP “leadership” has chosen to remain silent. Why?

The first involved a former election commission chairman from South Carolina who, upon hearing a gorilla had escaped from the local zoo, posted on his Facebook site, “I’m sure it’s just one of Michelle’s ancestors — probably harmless.” The second involved the executive assistant to a Republican state senator in Tennessee who circulated a photo of all 44 presidents, with the picture of President Obama being an all black rectangle with two white eyes.

You would think, that as the complexion of America continues to change and as the GOP has discovered a desperate need to reach out to minorities, that at least some of those who purport to speak for the party might look upon these disreputable acts as a way to sincerely reach out to the black and minority communities. Sadly, that does not seem to be the case.

Even with the appointment of Michael Steele as the first black chairman of the Republican National Committee, the party is far from connecting with black and minority communities. Beyond that, some GOP leaders seem to be looking for every chance to undermine Steele’s efforts to create a more relevant and diverse party.

The recent racist flare ups could have been a turning point.

Regardless of whether they intend to run for the White House or not in 2012, the likes of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Romney and any other “leader” of the GOP, should step in front of a microphone immediately and offer a sincere and deserved apology to Michelle and Barack Obama on behalf of the GOP — and let them and minorities across America know that not only do vile people who make such jokes not speak for the party, but they are not welcome in the party.

Palin asked for an apology from David Letterman for a joke that she said was an attack on women everywhere. He delivered it. Given these recent brazen offenses toward blacks, the GOP could learn from Letterman’s contrition.

Speak up, GOP leaders — and recognize this as a chance to do and say the right thing. If not, your silence will be analyzed and ultimately interpreted. link

Meet the same Boss.  Same as the old Boss.

Meet the same Boss. Same as the old Boss.

If David Letterman can apologize multiple times for bad jokes about The Palins, Michael Steele, who normally never turns down a chance to run off at the  mouth, should apologize to the President and First Lady for Republican racism.

Maybe he would.   If the real bosses of the RNC (Rush, Newt, Cheney) would let him.

As Elton John said, it’s a sad, sad situation and it’s getting more and more absurd.