Mr. Steele

Michael Steele
Republican National Committee Chairman

Mr. Steele: Thank you for your kind letter and research 2009 State Republican Party and as usual in my name, I will take this opportunity to address questions specifically inquired into it further that this simple multiple-choice survey permits.

For your convenience and mine, I have reproduced the questions before giving my answers.

Question:
"A recent national survey revealed that almost 25% of Americans want the government to adopt more socialist laws. Do you agree or not?"

No true American response to this question are in agreement with the proposed action plan. Similarly, no student of history can be seen clearly the horrors past and present socialist government in its many forms has affected the people say yes unless they are blinded by the lust for power themselves and control over others. This result not only confirms what I have repeatedly observed easily and to be true, approximately one quarter of the population United States are hard core left that the desire for a utopia "think they can be created by the Almighty hand of government.

The problem is, however, I have to ask what did the Republican Party to stop the hand slowly progressive unconstitutional state control over the years? you have made a better guardian of American freedom? Is it simply the fact that they have not been part of socialist legislation very bad as the other political parties? If this is the case, and certainly not whether or not I agree, but if the GOP is in agreement and willing to act against members who promote such madness.

Question:
"What Do You create more jobs for the U.S. economy: government programs and expenditures or the American Free Enterprise System?

The question is not should be to create more jobs, but creates more freedom and sustainable employment. Both systems are capable of creating jobs. But this policy is an asset to pay a man to dig a hole and then another, just fill back up so it can be dug the government to do many projects to work? Is this a good policy to build buildings that are unhelpful and only spend the money the government is going to do? Is this a good policy to adopt a legislation that kills jobs for U.S. workers, but two posts are created to oversee the bureaucracy than government policy often? Of course, it is not.

The American Free Enterprise System creates course of employment and allowing people to freely contract with one of the goods and services. Allowed to participate his freedom and is obviously far better system, but sometimes that freedom leads to pain and suffering caused to people who take bad business decisions.

Of course, I prefer it to the inevitable pain granted by government bureaucrats.

Question:
"The Obama administration has proposed spending up to $ 1500000000000 to shore up the banking sector. Do you agree or disagree with this proposal? "

This is not just the Obama administration has proposed that. It was also the Republican Party representatives who have made this reality and helped pass the evacuation of the lenders who made bad financial decisions assets and wrongdoing in its fiduciary responsibility to their customers who have invested with them. TARP is the obvious example.

Of course, these are extra-constitutional actions in scope and should not be carried out. The problem is that none of the major parties has shown the ability to lead on this issue.

Question:
"You oppose the so-called "debit card" legislation, which eliminates secret ballot elections during union organizing campaigns and puts workers at risk of intimidation by employers of work? "

The means of voting is of secondary importance in this question. It is a practice essential for the intimidation of those trying to force others to act against their will. Of course, secrecy is favorable and I think in most cases are preferred. But not always necessary. The Declaration of Independence was not a secret ballot, for example, and all those in favor proudly and openly displayed their vote by the firm.

The issue of unionization is deeper than the issue of card check "which I think should be firmly against. Many industries and businesses have been forced simply accept the unions based on the desire of workers to unionize. This ignores the rights of private owners do not want the company accept such an act, or face that entity. The rights of owners should be equally protected as those who want a union and I am afraid that is not often the case on the basis of strength and bargaining power of unions that arose in many companies when they become too big and powerful and weak are covered at the expense of reasonable business practices.

Question:
"If Republicans join to block new federal bureaucracy and red tape that will crush the growth economic future?

The Republican Party must unite to block all new federal government bureaucracy that is unconstitutional in nature. Adoption of this principle general would be much more admirable. The question is whether the GOP do this?

Question:
"If the Republicans in Congress oppose the new programs approved waste of public expenditure in the recent "stimulus" bill the Pelosi-Reid Democrats drawings "spread the wealth?"

See previous answers about the government unconstitutional. The adoption of this essential principle to serve the Republican Party well and answering all the questions you ask me.

Question:
"Do you agree that we must secure our borders and stop illegal immigration?

Whereas the control of immigration is a legitimate function of government and clearly in the Constitution, as such, a legitimate role and Whereas the laws discriminatory not to do certain types of illegal immigration today, then the answer should be obvious.

The answer is yes. However, the Party Republican has proved somewhat ineffective in meeting this demand with a high profile party members, even pushing the concept of amnesty for criminals in carrying out rule of law and legitimate stern.

Question:
"If we do everything possible to block Democrats trying to stop the radio about the doctrine conservative justice "called?

The issue of government control over the media and the radio goes beyond attempts mandated some of the practices and standards of private enterprise by the doctrine of fairness "or some other horrible thing members in an attempt to regulate the dissemination of ideas and opinions that the government and officials of the same dislike. Respected by the federal government should resist these dishonest acts naturally. But the problem is that the government is too far from the most treacherous of the regulation of these entities that radio stations based on false accusations in relation to their right to regulate "public" radio waves with the pretext that they are "public" and on this assumption.

However there is no difference between the so-called "public" radio waves used by radio stations and two people to communicate on the street corner. The two sets of words travel through the air and even if one can be set so that if others can reach. Of course, neither should be placed under the control of freedom of expression. The regulation of "Public" is a slippery slope that can only lead waves further infringement of the First Amendment by government officials to freedom wicked and their actions should be seriously considered and related Display only constitutional roles clearly defined in the Federal Constitution. Unfortunately for the federal government, which would mean for the total dismantling of the bureaucracy, they have created for this purpose in recent years because there is no constitutional authority to do so.

Question:
"If we resist Barak Obama's proposal to spend billions of federal taxpayer dollars to pay the" volunteers "chosen to play their tasks? "

The federal government should not be outlaying a mere fraction of a penny of taxpayer money except the obligations expressly attributed to the Constitution.

Question:
"If the Republicans are united in opposition to judicial candidates who bring a personal perspective, from the program to the left on social issues to his work as judges? "

The consultative role and consent of the Senate in the appointment process has always been to prevent the President to appoint fully qualified lawyers for the bank, who are personal friends, family or politicians that people do not defend the core principles United States and our Constitution. The integrity of the judiciary has been of great importance in the past, but has since been deactivated.

If a judge for appointed is unwilling to prevent the taking of life without respect for the law (except in the case of the defense against evil) and keep a conviction of a person convicted of a crime punishable the fate constitutionally eligible for the death, while judge should be disqualified and totally opposite. If the judge to be appointed is unable to read clearly and is not enforce provisions of the unequivocal right to the second amendment to the people to keep and bear arms applies to all cases before they rightly should not stand in any position in federal court.

Question:
"Republicans want to vigorously defend the ban on partial birth abortion passed attacks recently against the Democratic majority? "

I fully expect the Republicans to defend vigorously the right to life of all persons, including the unborn child which satisfies all the biological and ethical standards of human life, as proclaimed that we are all entitled to our own Declaration Independence and our Constitution.

Question:
"If the bureaucrats in Washington, DC in charge of making their choice of health care instead of your doctor and you? "

That question does not even need to be asked. The Republican Party must continue to stand against unconstitutional that the control of Washington DC, health care obviously.

Question:
"If Barack Obama is trying to empty the USA Patriot Act and other laws important that promote safety and security of all Americans, Republicans in Congress should be fighting? "

President Obama, of course, is not capable of such acts, since it is the Congress does and, consequently, the laws repealed. But they can try to get his party members in Congress to adopt such measures. But more to the point of this question is that Republicans, I emphasize once again, against any unconstitutional power the government tries to seize it. If there are provisions unconstitutional any law, including the USA PATRIOT Act, which must be fought.

Therefore I will not give letter Blache authority simply to keep something just because they do not and declare to you that good without knowing in detail exactly the features you want to talk.

Question:
"Should we stop the leadership Democrats to cut funding for our intelligence services or to return to Clinton-era restrictions on communications among agencies? "

I am sure that there are economies had on all government programs, including intelligence agencies. thus ruling against the reduction in funding does not would be prudent. If you have the question of whether the Republicans against the Democrats that we should try to castrate the intelligence community and make them ineffective in reducing financing without rhyme or reason just to get money to pay for other plans, which could then the answer is definitely yes.

Question:
"Are you in favor of the use of air strikes against a country that provides refuge or aid to individuals or organizations involved in new attacks on U.S.? "

I think the U.S. is defending a clearly defined role for the federal government and the answer is absolutely. But I would go further to say any country to take such action would in fact commit an act of war against this country and should be treated with more force, more than any pump only a few tens of thousands of feet into the sky.

Question:
"If the Republicans united in support of full funding where Border and Port Security Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid trying to make cuts in their areas?

If you honestly stand wondered whether the Republicans should take seriously their oath to support and defend the Constitution after being elected to public office? Well of course they should.

Question:
"Do you think U.S. troops should have to serve under United Nations command is? "

I think this issue has generated otherwise. The U.S., even be a member of the United Nations, an organization that allows tin horn dictators and thugs grotesque enter our country and act as if they were legitimate state? The answer to this question is no, and also applies to the specific needs also asked questions.

Question:
"Do you think that our military priority should be fighting terrorists? "

Our priority must be the military defense of America and our allies around the world. If this includes the time that fighting terrorists, then yes.

Question:
"If we cut military efforts in Congress, like Barney Frank Liberal proposal to cut Pentagon spending by 25%? "

The U.S. military and defense are just a few functions that the government participates in the federal Constitution that they really are. This does not mean, however, As with intelligence programs that have addressed, there is no waste and abuse can not be eliminated. But just hack and slash in an effort to find money to fund other government programs, constitutional or not, should never be approved.

Question:
"While Barack Obama has pledged to personally meet the likes of Raul Castro, Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Republicans should continue to focus on supporting democratic movements in oppressive states like Cuba, Venezuela and Iran? "

What we need to support "movements democratic as much as we should support the actions of these two seek or try to maintain freedom. "Democratic" movements often have bad things and Germany before the Second World War, France, Venezuela, etc. It is the purpose of the movement, and movement of nature itself will ultimately be taken into account.

Therefore the U.S. must stand shoulder to shoulder against all who love freedom and the help we can. If we do not want the freedom of man in Africa due to its proximity, then we, by our inaction, do not even meet our own founding documents proclaim that all men are created equal and have the right to freedom.

Question:
"Why Republicans lose the White House and congressional seats in elections 2008? "

Because the Republicans, in general, have not strictly adhered to our founding principles and defend our Constitution. Instead, allowed everyone to join their ranks Leadership as Full Throttle and candidates, though not of the quality and caliber should be legitimately claimed. When you look like used cons, give you no reason for people to vote for you on those who are cons.

Question:
"What are the strengths and beliefs of the Republican Party that we can build on? "

The precepts of our founding documents and nothing else. But nothing less. However, in Lately, I have to wonder if things really are the Republican Party believes in.

Question:
"What are the weaknesses the Republican Party? "

Let me answer this question with questions of my own for you. When the last When the resistance of the Republican Party rose against the culture of wellness in America where slaves are in production for the lazy and those who believe they are entitled to one thing or another because of their age or situation in life? When was the last time the Republican Party forces attacked the falsity of the myriad of unconstitutional spending programs shedding Washington and has paid any attention to other than words? I mean really up and called unconstitutional! Not only ignoring this important issue and to highlight the Symptoms programs that are high and difficult to manage the debt for our children, the loss of jobs, destruction of families and so forth? When was the last time that Republicans once had the courage and political parties to grab the third rail of politics and take them with hands and firm position of principle, no matter what those who benefit from these programs may falsely say unconstitutional to try to keep your hands clean in the bag?

Answer these questions and you'll have the answer to your question.

Question:
"What is the best way to stimulate and record new voters in your community? "

I think the possibility of personal appearance of the Republican leadership that can articulate the concepts and importance of freedom individual and the need to launch the bloated government is now overwhelming our children is the best. But again I turn to the idea of thought that few, if any, leaders Republicans able to accomplish this task.

Question:
"What technological innovations must use the RNC to grow our party?

There will be technological innovations that drive the Republican Party. Only a strong message of freedom and show once again that the Republican Party believe in this message. How the message is delivered is secondary and should not be the biggest concern of the party. To put the cart before the horse not to condemn the Republican Party of failure after failure. The Republican Party has to correct his own home and getting your message directly before pushing the game.

Question:
"What can the Republican Party to gain their trust? "

Unfortunately, this is not a simple answer. The Republican Party has a lot to see that confidence can be given easily. The party has betrayed America and our first principles so often that it becomes a huge task in itself to achieve some modest confidence point measures far less competent. A recurring theme is that many party members are too liberal and too difficult to America with his actions after being elected for this position. These people should not be members of the party and if it can be unsustainable sever ties with them for fear of losing power and numbers in the current Congress and Senate, we find that they can not trust anyway. Please refer to the case of dishonorable Arlen Specter of my own state of Pennsylvania who, after finding that his career policy may be one and probably will not win the party primary, jumped ship to the party, which was more in line with the principle.

Specter should never have had the opportunity to run as a Republican for the party, but in a desire for power is easy to maintain in the cycle after cycle, due to their eligibility in a state that usually can not bring themselves to vote for someone other than liberal Democrats. Other members of the Party, Senator John McCain, for example, have enacted laws in flagrante houses of Congress which is directly opposed to the Constitution and try to avoid. I mean in the McCain-Feingold. There is absolutely no excuse for any man or woman who represents the government of Pakistan to think for a second that it was nothing less than an unconstitutional violation of our God given freedoms.

But he and many others are allowed to stay on the grace of the party. And I do not think you even need to highlight the atrocity of the TARP that has been supported by many members of the Republican Party other arm and clearly unconstitutional.

Far from suggesting it should not be disagreements among party members on the issues. But when the issues at stake are so clearly in violation of the Federal Constitution but even with the support of party members a serious look should be taken to see if they are worthy of being called Republicans. Otherwise, be grateful for their service and sent on their way to work, either as Democrats, independents or some other third party may accept their actions.

It was clear that over the years the Republican Party is far from ready to withdraw its principle of selection process of candidates for capacity change candidates to increase the number of parties and power in Washington, but not only state and local level also. The Republican Party must address this to gain confidence Americans who still believe in freedom and the party must be willing to participate actually do not take our Constitution and the principles of limited government the most expensive. The clearest example for me is that the election of senators, 2004 in connection with Mr. Arlen Specter. The Republican Party is against a candidate clearly superior in terms of republican ideals Pat Toomey to openly support the incumbent. And today, that effort paid, how? I think I see my point clear.

To be honest, Mr. Steele, I'm not sure that you are the man who can help achieve the goal is to regain my confidence or trust many other Americans that the party Republicans so desperately needs. You have not earned my trust and everything we're given the opportunity by doing so remain skeptical. I will not stain your character saying that, I'm just saying that although I know some of you, I know enough to trust you enough and that the actions of the party and its members will dictate my future direction on this important issue. I think you can understand this skepticism about the current state of the party and very poor candidates have been placed before us as options shown in the 2008 presidential election cycle only. It was mostly a mix of moderate candidates left-center with a history of constitutional violations, too much big government, insanity and general promotion of the lack of programs of socialism are well known but often ignored.

The Group has a great story. But it has a bleak future if these are the best leaders we can find and save. Earning my trust and confidence of millions, pulling weeds from the lawn and culture of business growth and dense grass that everyone can walk without fear of thorns and other annoyances. Take the weeds and throw them into the compost and let it rot, so they can enrich the culture of good.

Question:
"Will it help the Republican National Committee to implement their ideas and help maintain our programs to create parties for the elections 2009-2010 presented by making a contribution today? "

If I understood from the beginning you are looking for monetary assistance for their efforts please consider this letter to my contribution. My time is valuable and not a living wage for every hour of my time and This letter had the biggest part of ten hours to compile everything into a state where I feel comfortable in presenting your attention, I think you have to accept that my contribution and make what they want to help their efforts.

Laus Deo,

Jeffrey J. (JJ) Jackson, President
Land of the Scene, Inc.

Trailer – CQ by Roman Coppola

Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America 1992 $41.84 This book is in Used condition