First read this... as my nomination for Hypocrite of the Day":
http://www.redstate.com/...
I TRIED to respond, but apperantly by account was banned because of something I said... probably rational, and most likely reasoned.
Below the fold.. I give you:
My response
To point out something totally irrelevant.
Wasn't the RNC of the last few years irrelevant as well? And now there is a fight over the direction of that very body. Yes, the DNC will slip as Obama will be the Commander-in-Chief and therefore the lead spokesman for the Democratic Party. Just as Bush, Clinton, G.H.W. Bush and Regan and all other before them were.
It's why most mid-term election are usually unfavorable for the party in the White House... the other party runs against the White House more than they do their opponents. (betcha that's exactly how it works in 2010,)
As for the RNC, the question I have from an outsider is where does their leadership take them? Calls on this site as well as others have been for a return to a more conservative stance (in general) compared to those that wish to moderate the party.
The DNC has done a good job electorally (use it as you will) by employing Howard Dean's 50 state strategy. And while the 2010 census will tip in what some consider a Republican way, with it come mostly voters who would be considered Democratic voters by demographic.
You insight to make a sham of the announcement of the DNC leadership (which most people who've watched the political heads recently was barely a side note in passing) while the RNC is having a small side theater for the election of its head as well.
But then again, at least it's one election that a Republican is sure to win.