RNC insurgents in futile bid to depose Mel “Amnesty” Martinez as chairman
posted at 1:18 pm on January 16, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The convention starts tomorrow. The delegates are supposed to rubber-stamp Bush’s pick but some of them have other plans. Plans that involve the most lethal weapon at their disposal — Robert’s Rules of Order.
Unhappy committee members say that, in the past, Republican presidents and RNC leaders have successfully run roughshod over the rules, because the RNC officer presiding over votes at committee meetings have simply overruled points of order and other objections from the floor, with no accredited professional parliamentarians to exercise a check.
This time, the organizers of the rebellion say, their strategy will rely in part on having a parliamentarian present. And violations of Robert’s Rules of Order and of the RNC’s written rules — adopted at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York — could result in legal challenges…
Mr. Pullen pointed out that Mr. Martinez, who served as Mr. Bush’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development before winning a Senate seat, is not an RNC member. RNC rebels say the rules are clear that the person who heads the committee must be a member of the committee.
“Outsourcing our leadership at this critical time is not an option,” Mr. Haugland said.
Bush wants Martinez in as “general chairman” and Robert Duncan, the current RNC treasurer, as the national chairman. Rule 5(a)(1) does provide for co-chairmen — but by gender, not by responsibility. There’s no such office as “general” chair versus “national” chair, unless the delegates vote to create one. Which, let’s face it, they probably will.
There’s not a hope in hell of getting Martinez bounced, but let’s enjoy the Mel-bashing while we can. Your first stop: StopMartinez.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
The RNC comes to order!
Entelechy on January 16, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Bring it own………….
ritethinker on January 16, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Does somebody have those email addresses on the stopMartinez.com website in a block format?
PRCalDude on January 16, 2007 at 1:39 PM
What we really need right now is a man of steel.
Michael Steele, to be exact. His is a fresh voice, deserving for a change to drag the GOP into 21st century sensibilities. How can the electorate trust the Republicans to do the right thing when the people who failed us the first time are still holding positions of leadership?
Mel may be in, but the GOP would be better off if we gave Michael a shot. And no, I am NOT one of his relatives. ;-)
itzWicks on January 16, 2007 at 1:47 PM
I agree itzWicks. Martinez is a serious disappointment. I think Michael Steele is the perfect individual to have as RNC chariman. I really don’t understand my own party sometime.
Catie96706 on January 16, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Ugh, I’m glad some of the RNC still has cajones…
With Mel at the helm we can expect more pandering to the “civil rights” of illegal alien drug smugglers while those doing their jobs will be given prison terms longer than most drug smugglers get for “violating policy.”
I’m witholding my membership fees until after we see who the leader is, and I suggest others do the same, noisily.
The border patrol agents go to jail for 11 and 12 years tomorrow, people. It’s time to act.
NTWR on January 16, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Martinez’ appointment is just one in a long string of dissapointments; which leads me to believe that conservatism and Republicanism are mutually exclusive. For the sake of our Republic, I pray for a viable option.
Kid from Brooklyn on January 16, 2007 at 1:53 PM
I don’t think the current GOP members themselves understand what the party is supposed to be about. This is not any GOP that I recognize.
Gregor on January 16, 2007 at 1:54 PM
Ahhhhhhh, yeah! Apparently the author has never been to California.
There are lines around the block of illegal immigrants being signed up by the Democratic Party, and even though it is a crime to vote if you are not a citizen, since they are Democrats, it does not even constitute a minor infraction.
I have seen this state change from one of prosperity to resembling a third (fourth) world country. Did you hear Arnold’s speech? Health care for everyone? Over crowded jails? Do you want to know the cause?
Where are you Michael Steele? Your country needs you….
PinkyBigglesworth on January 16, 2007 at 1:57 PM
stopmartinez.com is sponsored by englishfirst.org. I have no other comment, except that:
http://www.englishfirst.org/
Is right. English first. Clearly not designed for the end user first. What an ugly site :)
lorien1973 on January 16, 2007 at 1:59 PM
For those that do not believe this is true … take a look at this and be sure to read the letter from Clinton at the end.
Gregor on January 16, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Quibble with the headline – they’re not ‘insurgents,’ they’re ‘freedom fighters.’
Or minutemen.
Slublog on January 16, 2007 at 2:24 PM
Anyone else having trouble getting on to little green footballs?
Back on topic, what was wrong with Michael Steele as RNC chairman. He was my choice.
CrimsonFisted on January 16, 2007 at 2:30 PM
The party will not change until Bush is gone. He is weak, he is too liberal, and is no leader. The past 2 years have been a disaster for the party and it ends on his desk. I was one of his most avid backers until 2004 election. He got a big ass after that and has gone down hill fast. Martinez appointment is another fine example of poor leadership and management.
Wade on January 16, 2007 at 2:33 PM
This is really depressing. “More of the same” is what lost us the election. Its like they want another 40 years in the desert. Well I don’t. Its like this Washington Times article where the leadership is happy to play along to get along with the libs, instead of fighting for what they believe.
Iblis on January 16, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Agree with the comment, but have no idea what this figure of speech means.
Slublog on January 16, 2007 at 2:36 PM
I have a question. In the long run, what difference does it make who is the “general chairman” of the RNC? The RNC didn’t run for US Rep in my district, Dave McSweeney did — and he was an INEFFECTUAL candidate who lost. The RNC wrote off ILL’s 8th District to Melissa Bean who was elected in 2004 simply because she wasn’t Phil Crane (who viewed the district as his by “divine right”).
What the Republicans need are VIABLE CANDIDATES back by lots of money, and the willingness to get dirty, fight dirty, and use knives on the Democrats.
For example, if I were in charge of the RNC, I’d already be preparing ads to take down Durbin in 2008. I’d hit Durbin hard over his calling the US military Nazi camp guards, Gulag guards, and participants in Pol Pot’s genocide. I’d have a newly out enlisted man make a testimonial as to how hurt that one of our leaders smeared the military as perpetrators of crimes against humanity.
I’d make really big deal about Durbin’s part in the Rockerfeller memo that outlined how the Democrats would sabotage the war for partisan political gain — the memo that Zell Miller called treasonous or the first cousin to it.
I’d make commercials showing a Durbin like character wearing a turbin.
I’d portray him as a jackal dining on the bones of our military dead.
I’d portray him as leading the SURRENDER movement, working had to betray the country.
If Martinez were do to that and something similar in every Senate and US Rep race in 2008, even though I am not a card-carrying, dues paying, Republican, I’d be all for it.
But, as the Republicans, in general and as a party, DO NOT HAVE THE STOMACHE to start eviscerating the Donkey with sharp knives, all I can say is “who gives a damn!”
georgej on January 16, 2007 at 2:37 PM
That’s not exactly accurate. The reality is, they are fighting for EXACTLY what they believe.
It’s just not what conservatives want. They really couldn’t give a rat’s ass what we want, and I don’t even believe they really care if they win or lose. They have an agenda, and that agenda is looking to be complete by 2008 at which time they are perfectly happy escaping into their lives of eternal power and luxury.
Gregor on January 16, 2007 at 2:45 PM
because it works. For whom?
PinkyBigglesworth on January 16, 2007 at 2:46 PM
This is what conservatives must have felt like back in the 50s and 60s before Reagan came along.
Clark1 on January 16, 2007 at 3:10 PM
I unfortunately made a plege that ‘the day Martinez becomes chairman of the RNC is the day I become an independent.’
The hope was that they would not do this damned silly thing, but they seem intent on it. So an (I) will shortly appear after my name. This man stands for almost the exact opposite of what I think is conservatism.
Kevin M on January 16, 2007 at 3:19 PM
itzWicks is right. I was initially against Steele as the chairman, since I thought he could win a spot in the Senate if he only moved. Now I’d be willing to sacrifice him to the RNC chair only to stop Martinez from getting the job.
Hand to God, I’m more conservative (and MUCH more libertarian) than most Republicans, but I’ve had enough of this party. Can you believe it took NANCY PELOSI to create a bill to fix earmarks!?!??!?! What in the hell does that say about our own politicians?
Kevin M on January 16, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Bloody hell, you’d think that Bush would’ve learned his lesson regarding crony assignments after the ill-advised (read: idiotic) Harriet Miers nomination… yet we still get the likes of Julie Myers (her most relevant experience being marital relations with her Michael Chertoff) heading ICE and now “we don’t need no stinkin borders” Martinez.
Nice job President Bush, Karl Rove and Trent Lott along with the other free-spending, crony appointing, open border advocate “conservatives” for sacrificing the Republican party on the altar of your political careers and election campaign coffers. You already lost us both the House and Senate, a few more crony appointments and lobbyist directed earmarks and you’ll succeed in losing the Presidency in ‘08 too.
Hollowpoint on January 16, 2007 at 3:48 PM
“We’re going to find out whose side you’re on … the American people or the side of our enemies,” Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, said of Mr. Bush in a press conference this week. “If you let these two men go to jail for defending us, then we’ll know you’re on the side of our enemies.”
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20070112-115026-5429r.htm
Speakup on January 16, 2007 at 3:56 PM
So, the agents are sent to prison for 10 and 11 years … for picking up their shell casings? Not for actually shooting the fleeing illegal alien drug dealer?
Make sense.
So what? He ran away, disobeyed orders to stop, and from what I’ve read … possibly took a swing at the agent. What does it matter if the agents knew the full extent of the person’s criminal activity before they shot a fleeing suspect.
Bush sucks.
Gregor on January 16, 2007 at 4:08 PM
If BP agents shot more dangerous criminal aliens in the ass the problem of border criminalization would drop considerably.
Apparently the administration doesn’t want the problem to cease, but wants only to restrain agents instead.
Speakup on January 16, 2007 at 4:24 PM
I believe George W Bush is what our British friends would call a F__king C__t.
mikeomatic on January 16, 2007 at 5:05 PM
http://home.earthlink.net/~gohomemel/
Booo on January 16, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Sarcasm /on “But, he’s doing a job no American wants to do!”
Sarcasm /off
Hyunchback on January 16, 2007 at 9:02 PM
Bush probably wants to sabotage Republicans —lord knows he isn’t one!!
Mellen on January 16, 2007 at 9:31 PM
Comment pages: