Steyn Nails it

Readability

Steyn Nails it

Mark Steyn puts his fin­ger on Steele’s prob­lem:

in all the Rush-​bashing, I was more dis­turbed by Michael Steele’s wretched per­for­mance. His ini­tial reac­tion — that Rush’s show is “incen­di­ary” and “ugly” — revealed:

a) that he never lis­tens to it;

b) that he takes his cues from the main­stream media, for whom Rush is invari­ably “angry”. They don’t lis­ten either. Rush is a lot of things, but “angry” isn’t one of them

Does this mean that we have selected an “affir­ma­tive action” can­di­date? Steyn’s conclusion:

In two brief sound­bites, Mr Steele has man­aged to sug­gest to his own party base that he has a lazy dis­po­si­tion that reflex­ively shares the lib­eral biases, and to allow the wider world to por­tray him as a craven squish. This is not encour­ag­ing. At the very min­i­mum, he does not appear ready for primetime.

This is a large mis­take but not yet a fatal one, it remains to be seen if Steele can learn from the mis­take or not.

Mark Steyn puts his finger on Steele’s problem:

in all the Rush-bashing, I was more disturbed by Michael Steele’s wretched performance. His initial reaction – that Rush’s show is “incendiary” and “ugly” – revealed:

a) that he never listens to it;

b) that he takes his cues from the mainstream media, for whom Rush is invariably “angry”. They don’t listen either. Rush is a lot of things, but “angry” isn’t one of them

Does this mean that we have selected an “affirmative action” candidate? Steyn’s conclusion:

In two brief soundbites, Mr Steele has managed to suggest to his own party base that he has a lazy disposition that reflexively shares the liberal biases, and to allow the wider world to portray him as a craven squish. This is not encouraging. At the very minimum, he does not appear ready for primetime.

This is a large mistake but not yet a fatal one, it remains to be seen if Steele can learn from the mistake or not.