Townhall.com's Amanda Carpenter tries to fit a thought in her head and comes to a conclusion as to why there's already research out on Michael Steele.
Steele clearly got the Dems scared.
Here's the thing: There was a chance the RNC would elect a new chairman who is competent and had a vision to lead the party into the future. In other words, a figure like Howard Dean who took the Democratic party out of the wilderness and took us back onto the path where we now have the House, Senate, and most importantly, the White House. Instead they chose Michael Steele. Michael Steele is best known for never being elected to an office on his own, losing by double digits in a race that should have been much closer, and in that race smiling at an endorsement by a convicted rapist and pretending to be a member of the Democratic party (going so far as to distribute leaflets with that misinformation and distributing lawn signs with same).
Steele just ran 3 years ago, so there's a lot of opposition research out there. Why wouldn't we put it back out there? I for one can't wait to go back to Steele's lies about oreos being thrown at him.
The GOP could have halted their slide, instead they picked a guy who is good on tv but has no vision likely to bring them back from being a mostly white male regional party (I'm sure they think Steele being black will attract black voters - this would be laughable in the past, but in the era of President Obama it is a howler).