Olympia Snowe apparently doesn't like being bullied

What a surprise. Apparently Michael Steele's recent comments didn't sit well with some of their intended targets. Via TPM:
Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME), a pro-stimulus Republican who will be up for re-election in 2012, told Roll Call that she approached Steele about his comments and asked him bluntly: "You didn't really mean that, did you?" She said that Steele has agreed to set up a meeting with the three pro-stimulus GOPers to discuss this.

Snowe pointed out that the loss of GOP moderates, and the view that they don't belong in the party, has contributed to the party's overall decrease. "When we were in the majority, there were more of us. Now that we're in the minority, there are less of us," Snowe explained, also adding: "If that's what they want to be, well that's their choice."

Here's the deal, Michael Steele. Snowe, Collins and Specter are all more powerful than you are. You need them more than they need you. I can only imagine how that "meeting" between the four of you will go, but I can only imagine the take-home message will be some variation on "shut your cake hole."


  1. I think the power hierarchy is backwards from what you describe. Were I Mr. Steele, Mmes. Snowe, Collins, and Mr. Specter would be informed that, while the GOP values the Big Tent approach and has no litmus tests, it might become necessary to find candidates in the next election who respect fiscal sensibilities of the electorate. The GOP is rebuilding, replacing the country club Rs whose prolifigate spending in part lead to the Current Difficulties. It shouldn't be difficult in places like Maine to find viable candidates who hold moderate views, but who are unwilling to support theft from future generations. Of course, Senators should exercise their judgment, but the Party can also exercise judgment as well regarding the fitness of candidates to carry forward the party's message.

    Then I'd ask them if they really wanted to run as lackeys of the corrupt, pro-torture, bumbling Democratic Party, especially in a year when the culture of corruption (think Rangel, Dodd, Burris, Jefferson, Murtha, and Geithner just on the national stage) swung hard to the Dems. At least Repubs who were accused of taking bribes had the decency to resign. Anyway, I'd ask them if they really wanted to be associated with this sewer of Democratic corruption, which would be featured in the 2010 election campaign.

    And I'd point out to Ms. Snowe that the word she was looking for was "fewer", not "less", since that is one of my pet peeves.

  2. I take it you didn't read my prior post on this subject, John. Sure, the party can look for whatever primary challengers they would like for Sens. Snowe and Collins. And when the two of them have finished picking their teeth after making a nice, light snack of their opponents, they can send Michael Steele a thank you note for the yummy morsel. Collins just won her most recent race, and I'll bet you a nice, shiny nickel that Steele lasts a lot less time in his job than she does in hers. If either of them lose their seats, it will be to Democratic challengers, not some vengeance candidate that Steele sends their way.

    I'm not sure if you've heard of Ted Stevens, but I don't remember him resigning so very decently. As for the rest of your latter comments, particularly the "pro-torture" bit, but I have no idea why you would make yourself ridiculous by saying them. I haven't been in a coma in a cave on Mars for the past eight years, so I'm at a loss how you can possibly expect me to read them without laughing, shaking my head, and wondering at your delusion.

    You are, of course, correct about "less" and "fewer." Hurrah! Common ground!

  3. Ms. Snowe may find the going a little less of a cakewalk that you predict if she continues to approve stealing money from children. In any case, were I chair of the RNC, I wouldn't let Republicans of convenience off the hook for voting for great slabs of pork and corruption. If Ms. Snowe doesn't like the heat, let her change parties. Repubs need to reclaim principle over expediency if the US isn't to be turned into a fiscal disaster like California.

    Pro-torture? Surely you have realized that Mr. Obama is pursuing almost precisely the same policies of rendition as his predecessor. Mr. Obama's DoD has given GITMO a clean bill of health. If that isn't a pro-torture position, what is?

  4. 1) Obama is closing Gitmo.

    2) There is a difference between rendition and extraordinary rendition. I would refer you to Obsidian Wings (or rather, at this point, their archives) for a detailed discussion of the subject.

    3) Obama has ordered that all interrogations comply with the Army field manual.

    That you elide all of these developments in your response makes me question how closely you pay attention to details.

    And yeah, we'll see about how tough a time Olympia Snowe has getting re-elected. I think your predictions are... unlikely to come to pass.