Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Arrogance in Harris County
A couple of articles came out today regarding Eric Thode's "Primary" plan. First up is The Hill. James Woodfill, Chair of the Harris County GOP, thinks Thode's ballot idea is a bad one:
This is the kind of thing Thode was saying two weeks ago! All hail the precinct chairs! Their knowledge is omnipotent! Well, I'm not a precinct chair. With this kind of attitude, this Republican voter may be too stupid to vote for the Republican nominee in November. I'm pleased Thode has recognized the error of his ways. I hope Woodfill learns the same lesson.
Here's the Fort Bend Herald. Thode plays the Goldilocks routine: Those who critize his ballot idea are from the "far right" or "far left". (I don't think I've ever seen Shelley Sekula-Gibbs described as "far right". Maybe she's "far left". I dunno.) Suffice it to say that my support of Thode's "primary" shows that I am well-grounded.
Here's more from the Herald:
I don't hate you, Eric.
There seems to be a common theme regarding the criticism of Thode's ballot. Starting with Chris Elam, many are now questioning safeguards against fraud. Fraud is a serious issue, and I hope Thode is prepared to address it. Up until now, he hasn't.
At the end of the day, though, this ballot will be a footnote in the selection process. I can't imagine that the Brazoria, Galveston or Harris precinct chairs will care one bit about Fort Bend's ballot. Besides, Harris County's chairs are smarter than the voters. But I again want to praise Thode for trying to be inclusive in the process to select a candidate. Thode's idea may not work as he intended, but I believe his intent is genuine.
===
Update
April 26, 2006
OK, so I expressed outrage over Jared Woodfill’s comment that the precinct chairs are more educated than the voters. Chris Elam reminds me that after ranting, I never responded to Woodfill’s claim. Insulting the voters is never a good idea, but I’m learning that one of my weaknesses while writing a blog is that I often sacrifice clarity. I appreciate that Chris gently guided me into something I should have done in the first place.
As regular readers know, I have repeatedly asserted that there is a schism in the Republican Party. On one side are the integrity Republicans who are disenchanted with Tom DeLay’s corruption. During the primary, candidate Tom Campbell articulated the thoughts of most of these Republicans. This group is nearly unanimous in its evaluation of the public record that DeLay at the very least provided the appearance of impropriety with his dealings with Abramoff/Buckham. In fact, for many of this group, the evidence points to basic corruption (see the Wives Club). This group of Republicans values transparency and openness (including an emergency special election to replace DeLay when he resigns) in government. They also want to purge corruption completely out of the Republican Party. Integrity Republicans voted against DeLay in the primary (most voted for Campbell).
On the opposite side of the schism is the establishment Republicans. They feel a sense of entitlement because many of them are members of local Republican Party groups and hold formal positions like the precinct chairs. This is the good-ol-boy Republican Party. They were horrified that Campbell opposed DeLay because noone is supposed to upset the status quo. The establishment Republicans are nearly unanimous that DeLay has been falsely accused of various ethical breaches. This is true when it comes to the Abramoff/Buckham scandal. Establishment Republicans voted for DeLay in the primary.
Now I don’t hide the fact that I have chosen sides and have aligned with the integrity Republicans. I think I am a distinct subset of the majority in that I don’t feel any allegiance to Tom Campbell. But my interests are certainly aligned with Campbell’s supporters.
Obviously integrity Republicans don’t understand how establishment Republicans still support DeLay. Two possibilities enter my mind: (1) Establishment Republicans haven’t evaluated the facts surrounding the Abramoff/Buckham scandal; or (2) Establishment Republicans recognize DeLay’s corruption but condone it. I’m more comfortable with believing that establishment Republicans haven’t acquainted themselves with the facts of DeLay’s corruption rather than believing they condone DeLay’s corruption.
So when Woodfill says that precinct chairs are “more educated” than 99% of the voters, it rings hollow. To the eye of the integrity Republicans, 30-38% of the Republican Party (the integrity Republicans) are very aware of what’s going on. It is the establishment Party that is in denial. Integrity Republicans are very wary of letting the establishment Republicans choose the nominee because the establishment Republicans either can’t see or accept corruption in their midst. On top of that, to be told by the establishment Republicans that they are “better educated” than us? Such hubris!
Others expressed confidence that the precinct chairmen, whom Texas election law has made kingmakers under the current scenario, best reflect the will of the people.
James Woodfill, chairman of the Harris County GOP, said that his precinct chairmen are writing a questionnaire for prospective candidates to answer and that the chairmen will meet next week to interview the candidates.
“The precinct chairs are probably more educated than 99 percent of the voters,” Woodfill said.
This is the kind of thing Thode was saying two weeks ago! All hail the precinct chairs! Their knowledge is omnipotent! Well, I'm not a precinct chair. With this kind of attitude, this Republican voter may be too stupid to vote for the Republican nominee in November. I'm pleased Thode has recognized the error of his ways. I hope Woodfill learns the same lesson.
Here's the Fort Bend Herald. Thode plays the Goldilocks routine: Those who critize his ballot idea are from the "far right" or "far left". (I don't think I've ever seen Shelley Sekula-Gibbs described as "far right". Maybe she's "far left". I dunno.) Suffice it to say that my support of Thode's "primary" shows that I am well-grounded.
Here's more from the Herald:
"I have received over 100 e-mails from people saying it's a great idea. I even got two or three people, who quite frankly hate me, to support the idea," he [Thode] said.
I don't hate you, Eric.
There seems to be a common theme regarding the criticism of Thode's ballot. Starting with Chris Elam, many are now questioning safeguards against fraud. Fraud is a serious issue, and I hope Thode is prepared to address it. Up until now, he hasn't.
At the end of the day, though, this ballot will be a footnote in the selection process. I can't imagine that the Brazoria, Galveston or Harris precinct chairs will care one bit about Fort Bend's ballot. Besides, Harris County's chairs are smarter than the voters. But I again want to praise Thode for trying to be inclusive in the process to select a candidate. Thode's idea may not work as he intended, but I believe his intent is genuine.
===
Update
April 26, 2006
OK, so I expressed outrage over Jared Woodfill’s comment that the precinct chairs are more educated than the voters. Chris Elam reminds me that after ranting, I never responded to Woodfill’s claim. Insulting the voters is never a good idea, but I’m learning that one of my weaknesses while writing a blog is that I often sacrifice clarity. I appreciate that Chris gently guided me into something I should have done in the first place.
As regular readers know, I have repeatedly asserted that there is a schism in the Republican Party. On one side are the integrity Republicans who are disenchanted with Tom DeLay’s corruption. During the primary, candidate Tom Campbell articulated the thoughts of most of these Republicans. This group is nearly unanimous in its evaluation of the public record that DeLay at the very least provided the appearance of impropriety with his dealings with Abramoff/Buckham. In fact, for many of this group, the evidence points to basic corruption (see the Wives Club). This group of Republicans values transparency and openness (including an emergency special election to replace DeLay when he resigns) in government. They also want to purge corruption completely out of the Republican Party. Integrity Republicans voted against DeLay in the primary (most voted for Campbell).
On the opposite side of the schism is the establishment Republicans. They feel a sense of entitlement because many of them are members of local Republican Party groups and hold formal positions like the precinct chairs. This is the good-ol-boy Republican Party. They were horrified that Campbell opposed DeLay because noone is supposed to upset the status quo. The establishment Republicans are nearly unanimous that DeLay has been falsely accused of various ethical breaches. This is true when it comes to the Abramoff/Buckham scandal. Establishment Republicans voted for DeLay in the primary.
Now I don’t hide the fact that I have chosen sides and have aligned with the integrity Republicans. I think I am a distinct subset of the majority in that I don’t feel any allegiance to Tom Campbell. But my interests are certainly aligned with Campbell’s supporters.
Obviously integrity Republicans don’t understand how establishment Republicans still support DeLay. Two possibilities enter my mind: (1) Establishment Republicans haven’t evaluated the facts surrounding the Abramoff/Buckham scandal; or (2) Establishment Republicans recognize DeLay’s corruption but condone it. I’m more comfortable with believing that establishment Republicans haven’t acquainted themselves with the facts of DeLay’s corruption rather than believing they condone DeLay’s corruption.
So when Woodfill says that precinct chairs are “more educated” than 99% of the voters, it rings hollow. To the eye of the integrity Republicans, 30-38% of the Republican Party (the integrity Republicans) are very aware of what’s going on. It is the establishment Party that is in denial. Integrity Republicans are very wary of letting the establishment Republicans choose the nominee because the establishment Republicans either can’t see or accept corruption in their midst. On top of that, to be told by the establishment Republicans that they are “better educated” than us? Such hubris!
# posted by ACR @ Tuesday, April 25, 2006 
Comments:
<< Home
FYI, the Harris County GOP chair is Jared Woodfill, not James. The Hill got it wrong.
-- Charles Kuffner
-- Charles Kuffner
# posted by 
: April 25, 2006
: April 25, 2006
Greg,
I don't know how you can call yourself a integrity republican and say anyone who voted for DeLay is not a integrity republican...once again you make a baseless claim. I voted for DeLay because #1 a person is innocent until proven guilty. #2 Delay has done so much for this area roads, infrastructure...#3 he votes the way my beliefs are...pro-life, SSA reform, Fair Tax, STRONG immigrations reform. #4 With the time he has spent in D.C he holds a lot of power and can get things done for D 22. #5 He has always supported NASA...full funding. #6 He has been the only federally elected official to constantly work on and support with money when project was almost dead with Clear Creek flooding problem. (I have property very close to this creek so it is close to my heart...should be close to yours if you are in Pearland)
So Greg how does this make me a establishment Repub and not a integrity repub. I obey American Law innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I study the issues and vote according to my issues. Fjet and Baig are clueless and Campbell is not for full SSA reform and private accounts, he is not for full immigration reform, he is not for fair tax so how could I vote for him. Campbell will not as a freshman have the power to continue some of the road and infrastructure projects we have going...Campbell does not even know what the Clear Creek project is (I asked him at a forum when he gave me a push card)
So Greg with that said how am I a republican without integrity???? You cannot throw bombs and blanket statements out like that. Greg maybe you should join the party in a grassroots way volunteer offer your ideas at meetings, events, forums...instead of simply type about how you are better and have more integrity than us that are actually spending our free time volunteering and trying to make the community better. I have integrity and I am not going to say you don't just because we don't vote the same.
I don't know how you can call yourself a integrity republican and say anyone who voted for DeLay is not a integrity republican...once again you make a baseless claim. I voted for DeLay because #1 a person is innocent until proven guilty. #2 Delay has done so much for this area roads, infrastructure...#3 he votes the way my beliefs are...pro-life, SSA reform, Fair Tax, STRONG immigrations reform. #4 With the time he has spent in D.C he holds a lot of power and can get things done for D 22. #5 He has always supported NASA...full funding. #6 He has been the only federally elected official to constantly work on and support with money when project was almost dead with Clear Creek flooding problem. (I have property very close to this creek so it is close to my heart...should be close to yours if you are in Pearland)
So Greg how does this make me a establishment Repub and not a integrity repub. I obey American Law innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I study the issues and vote according to my issues. Fjet and Baig are clueless and Campbell is not for full SSA reform and private accounts, he is not for full immigration reform, he is not for fair tax so how could I vote for him. Campbell will not as a freshman have the power to continue some of the road and infrastructure projects we have going...Campbell does not even know what the Clear Creek project is (I asked him at a forum when he gave me a push card)
So Greg with that said how am I a republican without integrity???? You cannot throw bombs and blanket statements out like that. Greg maybe you should join the party in a grassroots way volunteer offer your ideas at meetings, events, forums...instead of simply type about how you are better and have more integrity than us that are actually spending our free time volunteering and trying to make the community better. I have integrity and I am not going to say you don't just because we don't vote the same.
My terms "integrity Republican" and "establishment Repubican" were meant to distinguish the deciding factor of Campbell voters and DeLay voters respectively.
Campbell ran on a theme of integrity. People who voted for Campbell were judgmental of DeLay on integrity issues ranging from ethical lapses to "The Hammer" operational style to DeLay's involvement in the Abramoff/Buckham scandal. Campbell voters were not much interested in issues of incumbancy or the Republican Party organizational mechinisms.
Establishment Repubicans were very much interested in incumbancy and Republican Party organizational mechanisms (they view Campbell as an outsider who shouldn't have run). To establishment Republicans, DeLay was entitled to the Congressional seat, and Campbell's candidacy amounted to a sort of treason. Like you, establishment Republicans were not willing and/or able to evaluate DeLay's character.
I think my characterization of the two competing groups of Republicans is quite accurate. When you use the term "innocent until proven guilty", you shirk the responsibility of evaluating DeLay's character and integrity. Your use of that phrase demonstrates that you didn't give the integrity issue much weight when you decided how to vote. After all, this was an election, not a criminal case. "Innocent until proven guilty" does not apply. Integrity Republicans feel voters had a duty to evaluate DeLay's character. Establishment Republicans put forth arguments why voters are not capable of evaluating character.
Campbell ran on a theme of integrity. People who voted for Campbell were judgmental of DeLay on integrity issues ranging from ethical lapses to "The Hammer" operational style to DeLay's involvement in the Abramoff/Buckham scandal. Campbell voters were not much interested in issues of incumbancy or the Republican Party organizational mechinisms.
Establishment Repubicans were very much interested in incumbancy and Republican Party organizational mechanisms (they view Campbell as an outsider who shouldn't have run). To establishment Republicans, DeLay was entitled to the Congressional seat, and Campbell's candidacy amounted to a sort of treason. Like you, establishment Republicans were not willing and/or able to evaluate DeLay's character.
I think my characterization of the two competing groups of Republicans is quite accurate. When you use the term "innocent until proven guilty", you shirk the responsibility of evaluating DeLay's character and integrity. Your use of that phrase demonstrates that you didn't give the integrity issue much weight when you decided how to vote. After all, this was an election, not a criminal case. "Innocent until proven guilty" does not apply. Integrity Republicans feel voters had a duty to evaluate DeLay's character. Establishment Republicans put forth arguments why voters are not capable of evaluating character.
instead of simply type about how you are better and have more integrity than us that are actually spending our free time volunteering and trying to make the community better.
Translation:
Instead of valuing issues of integrity, you should defer to the wishes of the establishment Republican Party.
Translation:
Instead of valuing issues of integrity, you should defer to the wishes of the establishment Republican Party.
Thank you, Greg for telling me why I voted for Tom DeLay. I didn't know I was a person with "a sense of entitlement". Nice move on the word choice, like “entitled” and “treason”. There were 20,000 GOP voters who felt DeLay has served them well and so he should be the Republican nominee. Tom Campbell has every right to run for Congress. And I have every right not to like him for trying to deny DeLay the nomination. It’s part of the process.
DeLay is going to resign anyways, so why are you still attacking his supporters? Is it possible that the people who voted for DeLay know more about his character than you do?
Never mind, you must be the all-knowing “Greg in Tx22” with superior integrity and the absolute best-est character judging skills…
DeLay is going to resign anyways, so why are you still attacking his supporters? Is it possible that the people who voted for DeLay know more about his character than you do?
Never mind, you must be the all-knowing “Greg in Tx22” with superior integrity and the absolute best-est character judging skills…
Land,
I don't think I attacked DeLay's supporters. I offered an explanation as to why establishment Republicans oppose an emergency special election. This is a power struggle. The establishment Republicans want to have the precinct chairs appoint the nominee and keep the Republican voters out of the process. The integrity Republicans want a piece of the action and support an emergency special election. That's really how I see things.
I don't think I attacked DeLay's supporters. I offered an explanation as to why establishment Republicans oppose an emergency special election. This is a power struggle. The establishment Republicans want to have the precinct chairs appoint the nominee and keep the Republican voters out of the process. The integrity Republicans want a piece of the action and support an emergency special election. That's really how I see things.
Greg said
Translation:
Instead of valuing issues of integrity, you should defer to the wishes of the establishment Republican Party.
First of Greg you are terrible at translations...I don't care what issues you vote for my point was do something be active on a grassroots scale...volunteer for Tom Campbell or Nick Lampson whomever you choose just volunteer instead of moaning all the time and telling me why I vote when I clearly stated issues why I can't vote for Campbell...What kind of integrity would I have if I voted for a man who does not have the same issues as me...Go back look at my post I tell you good important reasons why I CAN'T vote for Campbell. Greg Rock the boat more power to you just do it with a paddle in your hand.
Greg I and many DeLay supporters I know are all for a special but none of us are the Governor. I am sorry I have no more power than you on that issue Greg. I would LOVE a special Primary but that is not possible either so once again quite telling me and other DeLay supporters how WE feel. Get a grip man.
Translation:
Instead of valuing issues of integrity, you should defer to the wishes of the establishment Republican Party.
First of Greg you are terrible at translations...I don't care what issues you vote for my point was do something be active on a grassroots scale...volunteer for Tom Campbell or Nick Lampson whomever you choose just volunteer instead of moaning all the time and telling me why I vote when I clearly stated issues why I can't vote for Campbell...What kind of integrity would I have if I voted for a man who does not have the same issues as me...Go back look at my post I tell you good important reasons why I CAN'T vote for Campbell. Greg Rock the boat more power to you just do it with a paddle in your hand.
Greg I and many DeLay supporters I know are all for a special but none of us are the Governor. I am sorry I have no more power than you on that issue Greg. I would LOVE a special Primary but that is not possible either so once again quite telling me and other DeLay supporters how WE feel. Get a grip man.
It is my understanding that only precinct chairs can choose a nominee. There cannot be a special election to pick a party nominee. And maybe you aren't intending to directly attack DeLay voters, but your casting of labels isn't helping your cause.
My suggestion to you is to get active in your party. Don't fault the people who have put time and effort into building the party and whine about it from the sidelines. If you don't like what's being done, get involved and try to change it.
My suggestion to you is to get active in your party. Don't fault the people who have put time and effort into building the party and whine about it from the sidelines. If you don't like what's being done, get involved and try to change it.
Land,
The law provides that one precinct chair from each county will select the Republican nominee. Four people total. The precinct chairs have taken on the extra-legal (but not illegal) process of involving all precinct chairs to determine who the "Four" are. All I'm asking is for the Party to support an emergency special election in a district so Republican that Eric Thode's Republican dog could win if he were on the ballot. Let tens of thousands of Republicans have an impact on the "Four" instead of just the precinct chairs. Yes, it is extra-legal, but no more than allowing every precinct chair to be involved in the process.
The law provides that one precinct chair from each county will select the Republican nominee. Four people total. The precinct chairs have taken on the extra-legal (but not illegal) process of involving all precinct chairs to determine who the "Four" are. All I'm asking is for the Party to support an emergency special election in a district so Republican that Eric Thode's Republican dog could win if he were on the ballot. Let tens of thousands of Republicans have an impact on the "Four" instead of just the precinct chairs. Yes, it is extra-legal, but no more than allowing every precinct chair to be involved in the process.
Greg -- speaking as one of those precinct chairs, I can honestly say you do not know what you are talking about.
1) Even if there were an emergency special election, it would be to fill the balance of the term -- NOT select a GOP nominee. That process, via long-standig state law, is in the hands of the precinct chairs.
2) Like it or not, the law does not spell out how the four precinct chairs are to be selected, as i understand matters. Theortically, the County chairs could make the selection -- thereby cementing the image of an "insider deal" choosing the nominee. It would also be possible to randomly draw a name from a hat in each county -- a bizarre and undemocratic approach to candidate selection. So instead, each county is going with the only option ot there that allows for some sort of vote -- a vote by the precinct chairs to select each county's delegate. The elected represetatives are going to elect one of their number to elect the new candidate. Imperfect? Yes -- but more perfect than any other option.
Also, there is a problem with your choice of labels. I don't know any person who voted for DeLay who thinks he is guilty of wrong-doing. Maybe the better descritpions would be "Innocent-until-proven-guilty Republicans" and "Guilty-until-proven-innocent" Republicans.
1) Even if there were an emergency special election, it would be to fill the balance of the term -- NOT select a GOP nominee. That process, via long-standig state law, is in the hands of the precinct chairs.
2) Like it or not, the law does not spell out how the four precinct chairs are to be selected, as i understand matters. Theortically, the County chairs could make the selection -- thereby cementing the image of an "insider deal" choosing the nominee. It would also be possible to randomly draw a name from a hat in each county -- a bizarre and undemocratic approach to candidate selection. So instead, each county is going with the only option ot there that allows for some sort of vote -- a vote by the precinct chairs to select each county's delegate. The elected represetatives are going to elect one of their number to elect the new candidate. Imperfect? Yes -- but more perfect than any other option.
Also, there is a problem with your choice of labels. I don't know any person who voted for DeLay who thinks he is guilty of wrong-doing. Maybe the better descritpions would be "Innocent-until-proven-guilty Republicans" and "Guilty-until-proven-innocent" Republicans.
Rhymes
Welcome to the site and thanks for the facts the problem is that Greg does not look and or understand facts...just his opinions which are based of of half truths...I am not calling him a lier just a rookie at politics and he does not totally understand what he talks about...he still can't figure out what a ETJ is...Rhymes thanks for speaking up I hope you will stay around.
Welcome to the site and thanks for the facts the problem is that Greg does not look and or understand facts...just his opinions which are based of of half truths...I am not calling him a lier just a rookie at politics and he does not totally understand what he talks about...he still can't figure out what a ETJ is...Rhymes thanks for speaking up I hope you will stay around.
Rhymes,
If you had read the comment immediately preceeding yours, you would see that I advocate having the precinct chairs nominate whoever wins the emergency special election.
This is a power struggle. A lot of Republican voters want the precinct chairs to be responsive to the voters. As your comment indicates, a lot of precinct chairs don't want the decisions they make to be determined by the voters. That is a very dangerous position for the precinct chairs to take.
If you had read the comment immediately preceeding yours, you would see that I advocate having the precinct chairs nominate whoever wins the emergency special election.
This is a power struggle. A lot of Republican voters want the precinct chairs to be responsive to the voters. As your comment indicates, a lot of precinct chairs don't want the decisions they make to be determined by the voters. That is a very dangerous position for the precinct chairs to take.
Gee, Greg, I said no such thing.
Your interpretation of my words -- and reality -- sound like they could be written by the Lampson campaign, or some DC Democrat staffer.
The reality is that a special election drains money from the coffers of evey GOP candidate, limiting the ability of the eventual nominee to get his/her message out. It is also a bloodbath, leaving Lampson with plenty of good sound-bites and to use to trash the eventual nominee. In my opinion, it leaves the party fragmented and with little time to unify. Like it or not, the system, as currently operating, is the best available route this time around to select a new candidate.
Your interpretation of my words -- and reality -- sound like they could be written by the Lampson campaign, or some DC Democrat staffer.
The reality is that a special election drains money from the coffers of evey GOP candidate, limiting the ability of the eventual nominee to get his/her message out. It is also a bloodbath, leaving Lampson with plenty of good sound-bites and to use to trash the eventual nominee. In my opinion, it leaves the party fragmented and with little time to unify. Like it or not, the system, as currently operating, is the best available route this time around to select a new candidate.
Land,
I intended to respond to your objections of my choice of the words "entitlement" and "treason".
First of all, the Washington Post attributes Tom DeLay himself as calling his primary opponents "gadflies and traitors". The source of my statement that establishment Republicans thought Campbell was guilty of a sort of treason was DeLay himself. Also, the tone of the very same article indicates that DeLay thought he was entitled to the seat. Why else does DeLay resort to such juvenile insults?
I respect you, Land, even though we disagree. I didn't want to ignore your objections, and I apologize that so much time has passed before I did. I am sure the tone of my description of establishment Republicans appears harsh, but I am only reflecting the opinions of DeLay himself.
Post a Comment
I intended to respond to your objections of my choice of the words "entitlement" and "treason".
First of all, the Washington Post attributes Tom DeLay himself as calling his primary opponents "gadflies and traitors". The source of my statement that establishment Republicans thought Campbell was guilty of a sort of treason was DeLay himself. Also, the tone of the very same article indicates that DeLay thought he was entitled to the seat. Why else does DeLay resort to such juvenile insults?
I respect you, Land, even though we disagree. I didn't want to ignore your objections, and I apologize that so much time has passed before I did. I am sure the tone of my description of establishment Republicans appears harsh, but I am only reflecting the opinions of DeLay himself.
<< Home
