Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:00 AM ET, 01/ 4/2011

RNC Chairman's Debate winners

By Jennifer Rubin

Yesterday's debate was not the most scintillating political happening, in large part because all four challengers for chairman of the Republican National Committee said virtually the same thing. That, however, doesn't mean there weren't winners.

First, Grover Norquist and Tucker Carlson asked pertinent questions and got out of the way. Sign them up to co-moderate every GOP debate. Really, why submit to liberal media hosts who are hostile toward any Obama opponent?

Next, Ann Wagner may not win the race but she sure was the most telegenic and amusing. What's her favorite book? "Well, there is my kitchen table... oh, BOOK... I thought he said bar." A lady who drinks at her kitchen table and owns 16 guns is hard for conservatives to dislike.

Another winner: the Republican House leadership. None of the challengers is going to upstage or make life difficult for Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor and the rest. They seem to understand that the job is to fundraise and not make trouble. (In other words, do the opposite of Michael Steele.)

The joint winners: all the challengers. Some liberals seemed puzzled as to why they did not savage Steele. It's quite simple: There was no need to. Steele is kaput, and his indelicate references to his own problems (e.g. wading into policy, his failed 72-hour GOTV program) did more to hammer the nails into his coffin than anything any one of the contenders could have said. By avoiding the temptation to kick Steele while down, the challengers played into the committee's desire to avoid a intra-party bloodbath. One committeewoman who attended the debate told me that her primary consideration was finding "someone to bring us together." All of the challengers demonstrated their ability to do so.

And finally, the new media showed its strength. Seventy-five members of the media attended, the vast majority of whom were bloggers. The event was tweeted and podcasted, and each of the candidates claimed to use the Internet for their news. Political insiders and news junkies (the people who care about an RNC election) have come to rely on new media as their primary source of political news. Any campaign or politician who doesn't appreciate all that entails is going to be left in the dust.

By Jennifer Rubin  | January 4, 2011; 9:00 AM ET
Categories:  RNC  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Conservative tweaking of the left
Next: The size of government matters


Yeah, because all that matters is how many guns someone has. Keep lowering the bar for leadership.

Maybe they should have asked who knows how to USE the guns- or do they need someone else to carry them and cock them like Sarah Palin did in the silly hunting episode of her reality show.

How many guns do you have Jennifer? Oh, never mind, you are a neocon- you are too good to own and learn how to use a gun- it's someone else's job to defend you, right?

Posted by: Stacyx | January 4, 2011 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, because it DOES matter how many guns someone owns.

If one doesn't avail themselves of their Second Amendment rights why would those who do expect that person to vigorously defend those rights and support candidates for office who would as well?

I resigned my membership in the RNC because of their continued support of leadership and candidates who pay lip-service to conservative principles or worse support openly left people so if a non-gun owning liberal like Maria Cino is the chairperson I'll continue to remain outside the organization and donate directly to individual Republican candidates who respect and represent my values.

Posted by: p62c61 | January 4, 2011 11:27 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company