Dana Milbank: The GOP's Tiny Tent.

The GOP's tiny tent
By Dana Milbank

WASHINGTON — Leave it to a bunch of Republicans to ignore the elephant in the room.

Monday afternoon's debate among candidates for the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee was widely expected to be a bashing of chairman Michael Steele's often clownish tenure. On that score, Steele himself didn't disappoint: When candidates were asked to name their favorite books, Steele offered War and Peace and then recited a line — “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times” — that approximated the opening of A Tale of Two Cities.

But the four challengers hoping to unseat Steele this month weren't inclined to dwell on his gaffes, his debts, his limos and private jets, or even that RNC event at the bondage club. They directed little criticism at the chairman, and the two moderators, conservative journalist Tucker Carlson and anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist, invited virtually none.

Instead, the debate turned into a series of litmus tests of Republican loyalty — and in the process, the participants documented something much more interesting than Steele's checkered tenure. They demonstrated how ideologically homogeneous the party has become.

There were two white women, two white men and the African-American incumbent on the dais, but not a shade of ideological diversity.

As a debate, it was about as successful as Carlson's time on “Dancing With the Stars.” As a cultural indicator, it was extraordinary.

Norquist and Carlson, serving as cardinals of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, administered a long series of loyalty checks, and the candidates were nearly dissent-free. Abortion? All opposed. Lower taxes? All in favor. Gay marriage? All opposed. Cutting spending? All in favor.

Norquist asked if each would support adding a “party unity pledge” to the Republican Party rules — as if even more unanimity were necessary. Five “yes” replies were called out in rapid succession.

Same thing when the candidates were asked who should vote in Republican primaries; all five said independents and Democrats should be shown the door.

The Republicans had, in this debate, reached the logical extreme of litmus politics: Everybody on the stage agreed on everything. The Republican leadership had been thoroughly scrubbed, cleansed and sanitized by the tea party movement — and the candidates took turns expressing their gratitude.

“Let us not forget,” said Ann Wagner, “the tea party patriot and grass-roots movement is why we had such victories in 2010.”

This erection of the GOP's small tent had the effect of shifting attention from Steele's tenure. Steele's rivals opened with some indirect shots at the chairman, saying the RNC has “lost its credibility” (Wagner), has “one of the largest debts we ever had” (Saul Anuzis), and needs to “rebuild” (Maria Cino) and “restore the trust and the confidence of our major donors” (Priebus).

Steele finally offered his take: “I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy. I don't see the crisis as some may see it.”

His rivals pretty much let him get away with that. Invited to criticize Steele's get-out-the-vote effort, Priebus answered: “I don't care to revisit the past.”

Perhaps the inattention to Steele was because his keeping the job, as Politico put it, is “all but impossible.” So instead of barbs about his infelicitous phrases (“flipping the bird ... slumdog millionaire ... honest Injun”), the audience at the National Press Club listened to 90 minutes of harmony and accord.

Asked what viewpoints should lead somebody to be evicted from the Republican Party, Wagner offered several, including pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage and anti-gun rights. Anuzis said a Republican official should be excommunicated if he or she votes against the platform more than 20 percent of the time. “If you're pro-abortion, pro-stimulus, pro-GM bailout, pro-AIG,” said Priebus, “guess what? You might not be a Republican.”

The lone whisper of a dissent on this point came from the incumbent chairman. “We cannot be a party that sits back with a litmus test and excludes,” he said. Later, Steele cautioned: “We do get a little comfortable with ourselves, and we do become so to the exclusion and detriment of others.”

No wonder he's about to lose his job.

Dana Milbank is a Washington Post columnist. His e-mail address is danamilbank@washpost.com.