Republican unease growing over Steele’s rule at RNC

Embattled RNC chairman Michael Steele (Reuters)

Signs of growing GOP uneasiness over Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele’s high-flying lifestyle and mismanagement emerged over the weekend as two Congressional leaders voiced their displeasure.

“This kind of thing has got to stop or they won’t get any contributions,” noted Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl.

Kyl joined California Rep. Kevin McCarthy in voicing concern over the growing list of problems with the RNC under Steele’s leadership.

Steele has come under fire for his lavish lifestyle with money contributed to the committee, including extensive use of private jets, luxury hotel suites and bloated expense accounts. The RNC was also rocked recently by revelations that donor money had been used to pay for a $2,000 evening at a “fetish club” in Hollywood.

“The RNC does have some challenges that they need to correct,” McCarthy said on “Fox News Sunday,” adding “Not only does the American people request it but Republicans request it as well.”

Kyl, appearing on the same program, added: “The people that contribute to the committees, both Democrat and Republican, want to know that their money is well spent for the cause, and it needs to be that way.”

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

8 Responses to "Republican unease growing over Steele’s rule at RNC"

  1. Almandine  April 5, 2010 at 8:00 pm

    What’s more important is that Michael Steele represents a continuation of the most recent Republican status quo, leading any thinking independent to question whether voting Republican in November will only return us to the ways before the rise of the Obamaniacs.

    Having said that, given the pickle we now find ourselves in, what other choice is there?

    Please tell me.

    • Bill Cravener  April 7, 2010 at 10:28 am

      Sometimes insanity is the only alternative. . .

    • griff  April 7, 2010 at 11:59 am

      Considering that this government will do as it pleases…none.

    • Guardhouse lawyer  April 10, 2010 at 7:55 pm

      Why do you find it necessary to use pejoratives like Obamaniacs when mentioning those with whom you do not agree? Do you consider it cutesie?

      It is not.

      • Carl Nemo  April 10, 2010 at 11:47 pm

        Yo G-Lawyer…

        One thing for sure, there’s nothing “cutesie” about you and your ongoing, petty censorship schtick.

        It this site wore shoes you’d represent a very small, sharp rock digging into our collective heels.

        On occasion you write something of merit, but for the most part your routine has become an annoyance and I’m sure not to myself and a few others, but many readers. Grow up!

        Carl Nemo **==

      • griff  April 11, 2010 at 2:45 am

        I prefer Obamanoids, but to each his own. I seem to remember the widespread use of much more, shall we say – colorful, perjoratives in describing the Bush administration. In fact it became quite a cottage industry. No one seemed to mind that.

        Double standard, any one? We’ve got plenty to go around.

  2. AustinRanter (AKA Gregg)  April 10, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Nobody cares. In fact, I don’t care. It doesn’t matter who is where in the government, the end result is always the same. Need I elaborate?

  3. AustinRanter (AKA Gregg)  April 10, 2010 at 10:33 am

    Sorry, all of the above in my last post plus – RNC’s DNC’s, TBNC’s, other Jerks’ National Committees…and any and all Political Parties are included along with my previous post.

Comments are closed.