Now it seems the grassroots Tea Party effort is being portrayed as a project of the GOP.  Here is Eric’s response - which, as a volunteer Tea Party organizer here in NV, and an associate and friend of Eric’s, I can verify as true and genuine:

#dontgo Movement

Is the Tea Party tied to the GOP? Posted: 10 Apr 2009 11:43 AM PDT Of course not. In fact, that couldn’t be further from the truth. The reality is, the RNC has been about as effective as a lead balloon in actually engaging the free-market minded grassroots with regards to political action. The RNC, as well as all but two Republican members of Congress, have been eerily silent over the past few weeks. RNC Chairman Steele’s office did reach out to me on Tuesday morning (although rumor has it that he is now denying such a conversation took place), and the person I spoke with asked if we would be interested in having him speak at the Chicago Tea Party. This request was…at the last minute and only after national media eyes became involved. But that was the first time the RNC had really injected itself at the national level into any part of the Tea Party Movement. Why do we use “Silent Majority” as our national brand? Because the vast majority of those involved in the Tea Party effort are people who have sat at home yelling at their TV’s for the past few years.  This is a group of folks who have gone on with their lives in attempt at the American dream, only to be shell-shocked by a sudden and bold surge towards full scale socialism… and we’ve had enough! Most of those involved in the Tea Party Movement do not wish to see something with RNC or DNC involvement. We do not want the failed two party structure injecting itself into this movement for political gain. That’s not to say that there aren’t Republicans or Democrats involved, because we have people identify themselves as both involved all across the country. But there is no evidence whatsoever that the Tea Party Movement is some kind of orchestrated GOP effort disguising itself as non-partisan. In fact, the evidence suggests quite the opposite. Take Chicago, for example. A handful of local young Republicans have been trolling and following me all over the web in an attempt to attack me at every opportunity. They hunt me down on Twitter and Facebook, lashing out at me because I refused to promote their REPUBLICAN sponsored event happening later in the day on April 15th. Indeed, the FUNDED organizations and media outlets of the left are swinging at this movement from all angles, attempting to paint this as a GOP backed effort. But the reality is that thousands of free-market minded Americans don’t see it that way. The DontGo Movement was attacked last year by these same groups who claimed that we were taking oil money (still waiting on those magical checks, BTW) and now they claim we’re under the spell of the Republican Party. What part of “we’re just Americans and we’re mad as hell” do they not understand? -Eric Odom

]]> http://elizabethcrum.blogivists.com/2009/04/13/tax-day-tea-parties-are-not-gop-sponsored-or-funded/feed/ 0 http://elizabethcrum.blogivists.com/2009/02/12/tennessee-republicans-kick-a-rino-out-of-the-party/ http://elizabethcrum.blogivists.com/2009/02/12/tennessee-republicans-kick-a-rino-out-of-the-party/#comments Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:31:13 +0000 E!! http://elizabethcrum.blogivists.com/?p=574 This story out of TN has cheered me up considerably.

Apparently Representative Kent Williams sold out conservative Tennessee voters and his own party when he  stole the House Speaker’s chair at the last minute – with the help of Democrats with whom he has been secretly conspiring.  And apparently the TN GOP decided not to take it lying down.  From a resolution of their Executive Committee:

Whereas the supporters, voters and donors of the Tennessee Republican Party have a right to expect that, having collectively campaigned for and won a majority in the state House for the first time since 1868, both houses of the legislature would be lead by loyal Republican leadership; and

Whereas the evidence shows that Representative Kent Williams had been planning his betrayal for eight weeks and conspiring with Democrats to crown him Speaker in exchange for betraying his fellow Republican caucus members; and

Whereas Representative Kent Williams rewarded his Democratic allies with committee chairmanships, putting at risk the Republican agenda the majority of Tennessee voters voted for; and

Whereas Kent Williams’ actions and words provide indefensible evidence to the 30 written challenges questioning the Bona Fide status as a Republican; and is entitled to its constitutional right of Freedom of Association; and

Whereas the Tennessee Republican Party seeks to disassociate with Representative Kent Williams;

BE IT RESOLVED:

1. That state Representative Kent Williams of Carter County, Tennessee, be forever barred from seeking elective office in Tennessee on a Republican ballot; and

2. That the Tennessee Republican Party immediately request all media outlets in Tennessee to cease referring to Representative Kent Williams as a Republican.

3. That Kent Williams receive no support, endorsements, or financial backing by those affiliates of the Tennessee Republican Party.

Can they DO that?

Yes.  As the resolution notes, the Republican Party enjoys the constitutionally protected right of Freedom of Association.

Hmmm…

Have the state parties in Pennsylvania and Maine – home to RINO (Republican In Name Only) sell-out Sens. Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins – heard about this pithy little resolution out of Tennessee?

Maybe the GOP in every state should start disassociating themselves from Republican legislators who sell out conservative values, the voters, and the party that got them elected.

I can think of one state, in particular, in which at least one prominent Republican seems to be conspiring with Democrats to give “bi-partisan” support for tax hikes in the middle of a huge recession.

I’ll give you one guess which state – and which Senator – it is.

I don’t talk much about my faith here on E!!  but as a Christian conservative with a libertarian streak, I am always interested in these kinds of debates.  Generally speaking I’m a social and cultural conservative, but I am cautious about state-mandated morality (because it can cut both ways) and often find myself defending freedom itself as an important right and virtue.

This is because I believe that (1) God grants us freedom and free will, (2) God grants us free will for a reason, and (3) Jesus Christ was not an Authoritarian. 

Free will is meaningless if people aren’t free to choose wrong as well as right, evil as well as good.  (Please don’t interpret this to mean I support anarchy; I don’t.)  We can and should legislate behavior to keep people from unduly harming one another, but we really can’t legislate matters of morality and conscience and spirit.  A man’s heart and mind cannot be taken by force; he must give it freely.

Jesus never strong-armed or forced anyone into listening to him, following him, or believing in him.  He spoke the truth with grace, closed his remarks with something pithy like “go and sin no more,” and that was basically it.  You were either touched and moved by what he said or not – but he didn’t chase you down the street, and he didn’t appeal to Rome to turn the Beautitudes into the law of the land. 

Anyway, check out Hoven’s piece and let me know what you think about his views.  I’d be interested to hear from so-cons as well as libertarians.

Specific complaints include the fact that the Obama campaign provided Project Vote a copy of its donor list while hiding the fact that they did so, that Obama flew to Hawaii to visit his grandmother on $100,000 worth of campaign funds (instead of paying for it personally), and that Obama has been promised (and has accepted) “pro bono” legal representation by a law firm that has told its attorneys it will compensate and reward them for helping Obama.  All of these things are either in violation of federal election law or formal FEC opinion.

We’ll see what the FEC does, if anything.

After carrying herself in a fair, patient, and professional manner over the past eight months, it seems Sue Lowden must now bear up under the label “inept” by the RNC Committee on Contests.  This tag seems harsh and unfair in light of the extreme difficulty and complexity of Lowden’s position this election cycle.

The real story – which is not one of party ineptitude but instead of the combative and unreasonable demeanor of one Mr. Jeff Greenspan – began early this year.  Greenspan, an official Ron Paul campaign representative with whom Lowden was working after Paul received 14 percent of the vote in our presidential caucuses, agreed that the Nevada GOP would give Paul 14 percent of the state delegation (equating to four delegates).  Lowden invited Ron Paul to speak at our state convention, and Greenspan submitted the names of four Ron Paul supporters to the Nominating Committee for consideration.

But on the morning of the convention, April 26, for reasons I have yet to understand, Greenspan went back on the deal with the Nevada GOP.  Instead of moving to an up-or-down vote on the delegate candidates pre-screened from the dozens that had been submitted for consideration, Greenspan teamed up with a Paul supporter named Mike Weber, led a floor “revolt,” and threw the convention into chaos.  How did they accomplish this?  By insisting on opening up nominations from the floor.  This resulted in some 287 new nominations for 31 delegate slots and 31 alternates.

There was no way the convention and/or state party could hear and vet 287 last-minute nominations in one day.  In fact, in light of the time it takes to hear individual speeches/pitches for candidacy, eat meals, take bathroom breaks, allow for interruptions, and take care of other necessary convention business, it is doubtful whether full, fair and proper vetting of 287 new delegate candidates could have been done in two, three, or even four days.

And so it was that the well coordinated, pre-arranged delegate selection process put in place by the party and agreed to by Jeff Greenspan turned into an unholy mess.  The convention fell apart.  And to outsiders, the process meltdown probably did appear “inept.” 

After the convention fell apart, Greenspan, Weber, and other Paul supporters like Wayne Terhune continued their crusade, doing what they could to impede reconvening and even holding their own unsanctioned “convention” in June.  Due to the boycott by the Paul people, the GOP was unable to obtain enough RSVPs to obtain a quorum for the reconvening of the official state convention.

This week the RNC Committee on Contests reviewed the matter, ruled that the Paul “convention” in June was unauthorized, rejected the “delegates” that were “elected” at that meeting, and recommended a compromise by which the Nevada Republican Party will replace four of the current convention delegates (which the Nevada GOP’s Executive Committee appointed last month) with four Ron Paul delegates. 

Readers will note that four delegates is exactly the number of delegates the Nevada GOP had originally agreed to include before Greenspan reneged on the original deal.

Chairwoman Sue Lowden has agreed to the compromise.

“It was always my intention and hope to bring the Ron Paul people into our party,” she said yesterday.   “In fact, I was the only state Republican party chairman to invite Ron Paul to speak at our state GOP convention.  So I’m more than happy to accept the compromise proposal from the Contest Committee, especially since it’s exactly what we had already agreed to last April.”

The matter is scheduled to move to the national convention’s Credentials Committee next.  If the Paul camp also accepts the compromise proposal, this mess will be at an end.

Either way, Greenspan and his minions owe Sue Lowden an apology for their antics and the tremendous amount of time and energy that has been wasted trying to work with them and around them.  And Ron Paul should dismiss Greenspan from his campaign.

Seems the RNC committee decided that the Nevada GOP violated rules in its delegate election/appointment process.  I remember wondering about all this after the whole Ron Paul Rebellion thing and its aftermath…but I assumed GOP leaders knew what the rules were and that appointing delegates was ok.

Anyway, the committed has recommended a compromise, as I posted earlier this morning.

On the other side is Muth and Citizen Outreach, not-so-gently reminding candidates that there will be a barrage of pre-election phone calls and mail-outs into their districts if they don’t sign the Pledge.

What’s a Republican candidate to do?  Buckle when the leader of the opposition party points her canons his way, or stand up for fiscal conservatism and fight the Good Fight?

Here’s a third alternative for Nevada’s candidates:  if you’re billing yourself as a Republican but support raising taxes on an already over-taxed citizenry, do us all a favor and leave the party.  Buckley will be glad to have you, and we’ll be glad to see you go.

If you’re a voter who opposes new taxes, or are running for election and want to see and/or sign the Pledge, go here.  Candidates can fax it to Citizen Outreach at (775) 522-3925.

(I suppose Lieberman might prefer a broken leg or two to being shut down in the Senate…)