The text of the letter Steele refused to sign on to reads as follows:

As leaders of our respective national parties, we want to speak to all Americans about the importance of conducting our political debates in a manner and tone that respects our political system and demonstrates to the world the strength of our democracy.

We have a system of government that allows the great issues of our day to be resolved peacefully and civilly and that serves as a beacon of hope to those around the world who yearn for political freedom, political stability, and governing without the threat of violence.

We have a system that allows people to express approval of their government or change the party in power peaceably through the ballot box.

Our Constitution affords Americans the right to assemble and petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Clearly, we have different positions on the merits of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, we together call on elected officials of both parties to set an example of the civility we want to see in our citizenry. We also call on all Americans to respect differences of opinion, to refrain from inappropriate forms of intimidation, to reject violence and vandalism, and to scale back rhetoric that might reasonably be misinterpreted by those prone to such behavior.

I will say this for the Republicans...they're flat-out amazing.

Every time I think they can't possibly sink any lower, they astound me with their inventive means of doing exactly that.

This sort of thing ought to be beneath the Democrats. It's not Michael Steele's fault that the minions in his party are hate-mongering jackholes, even if he is kind of a dumbass. I mean, this would kind of be like Steele demanding that Obama sign a statement that he is in fact a citizen of the US and then crying bloody murder when he refused to acknowledge the demand.

If he signs the statement, he's taking ownership of the violent people, because it's implied that he's expecting them to listen to him. This is gotcha politics.

@direpickle
Did you even read the letter? It's really short, you know.

There is no blame, there is no ownership, there is nothing objectionable about it. Calling on people to disavow violence is hardly "gotcha politics". It's more like common courtesy, or basic fucking decency.

@direpickle, yes, the worst thing about violent Republican rhetoric is that Democrats are publicly asking Republicans to stop their violent rhetoric.

@Stormsinger: You know, you seem like a pretty decent person. I agree with most things I've seen you comment on. You don't have to be hostile. Yes, I read the letter. Yes, there is nothing explicitly assigning blame. I still think this is a pretty blatant attempt to score political points. NR's link says that Steele already spoke out against it anyway. What's the point of sending a letter, from the Democrats' point of view, if not to score points? The violence works in their favor.

Honestly, I'd say that he probably expected (and wanted) Steele not to sign. It'd be a minor victory if he did sign: Kaine would get to say, "We got the RNC to speak out against violence, go us!" And they'd get to score points by pointing out hypocrisy whenever a Senator started quoting Limbaugh.

Since he refused to sign it, this is a huge win for the DNC. They can run around saying that the RNC supports violence, despite them (apparently?) having already said to stop it.

I think that it probably would have been prudent to sign it, from Steele's point of view--but whatever. He's the cow on the tracks.

It wasn't hostility, it was a serious question.

Apparently you don't see any way for the Democrats to ask for the Republicans to join with them in solving a problem. The actual form or contents of the request don't matter. If they do, they're accused of playing politics. I assume that if they don't, they're accused of playing politics.

Personally, I see significant value in presenting a united front against something that every decent person knows is wrong. But then I'm not a Republican. Frankly, given the party's behavior over the last few years, I'm sure they don't think like I do...I'm not sure they think at all.

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with your analysis that the violence works in the Democrat's favor, so they don't really want it to stop, or gain anything by trying to calm the waters. Actually, I -am- sure...I'm absolutely not comfortable with it. I don't think it stands up to consideration, unless you think that people -like- getting death threats.