Party disloyalty ??? (*SIGH*)

The soap opera in Haywood County just keeps on giving: 

In a story that sounds like it should have come out of Moscow in 1938 or Havana in 1961 rather than Waynesville in 2017, several Haywood County citizens have allegedly been charged with political “party disloyalty.”

According to an email sent July 1 by Haywood Republican Alliance member Eddie Cabe and a blog publication by local conservative activist Monroe Miller, the Haywood County Republican Party allegedly held an unannounced closed session during a special called meeting May 23, during which a resolution accusing five current and former HCGOP members of “party disloyalty” was passed by a vote of 12 to 2.

HCGOP and N.C. Republican Party officials would neither confirm nor deny that any such resolution exists, who might be named in it, whether it was passed, what consequences it might carry for those named in it, if or when those so named would be able to speak in their own defense, and if or when those so named will be formally notified of any actions taken against them. […]

I am buying into this story, somewhat.  A local GOP official in my part of the state tells me they were seriously threatened with removal from their office and “party disloyalty” charges recently.  The offense?  Sharing a post from The Daily Haymaker on their personal Facebook page. 

Wait.  There’s more:

[…] The HRA is a conservative splinter group of the state-recognized county party, with which it shares common roots and a contemptuous history. Miller, who was in attendance at the meeting, was also one of the accused and also one of the two “no” votes.

He reported that the others named with him in the party disloyalty resolution — which was read aloud, with no printed copies yet available to anyone — were HRA members Davis, Richard West and Paul Yeager.

Yeager got under the NCGOPe’s skin on two significant occasions: (1) his organization and maintenance of a pro-Hasan Harnett Facebook page during the coup against Harnett, and (2) his leading role in Jim Womack’s campaign for NCGOP chairman.

MORE: 

[…] Cabe’s email was to request a verification of the charge against him and was addressed to NCGOP Chairman Robin Hayes, Vice Chair Michelle Nix, Haywood County Republican Party Chairman Ken Henson and more than 50 other activists, party officials and news outlets.

He claimed in his email that the county party has a dormant website and no working phone number, and that HCGOP Chair Ken Henson and Vice Chair Debbie King “refuse to answer questions.”

If passed as Miller reports it was, the resolution would bar individuals named in it from holding office in the HCGOP for five years, according to Davis.

Such a move would in essence preempt a possible return to the HCGOP by HRA members, who were ousted from power in the more mainstream HCGOP during a counterinsurgency staged at party elections this past spring.

“They are terrified we will take it back,” Davis said.

*And what would a story about the NCGOPe be without two cents from Brad’s brother and Robin’s grandson?*  

Emails to Henson and King went unanswered, but Ted Carr, vice chairman for the HCGOP’s Cecil precinct and former party chair, told The Smoky Mountain News that it would be “inappropriate” for any HCGOP executive member to comment specifically on an event held in a closed session, and referred comments to Dallas Woodhouse, the NCGOP’s executive director.

Woodhouse said via email July 1 that without commenting on “specifics of any situation that may or may not occur,” state and county organizational plans outline a procedure that “at some point would require/allow all sides to present their case for judgment.”

He went on to cite a section of the party’s state plan that says that any member of a committee organized under the plan may be removed after formal charges signed by the lesser of either 50 committee members or one-third of the committee have been furnished to the accused two weeks prior to any vote and after the “opportunity to present a defense” occurs.

Once proper service has been rendered, a two-thirds vote by members of the committee is sufficient to remove a member only on charges of gross inefficiency, party disloyalty or failure to comply with various organizational plans.[…]

How can you be disloyal to an institution that has had all of its meaning drained from it?  It’s no longer opposed to big government.  (See the rapid growth in the state budget during this period of “conservative revolution” in Raleigh.  You also had to love the Republican defense of the tax policy in the budget — it hits the “rich” hardest.)  The Republicans in Raleigh sided with environmentalists over commercial fishermen and working class utility consumers. 

They’ve been disloyal to us.  THEY have lied to us every step of the way.  How do you dare demand loyalty from people you’ve thrown under the bus — and lied to — repeatedly? 

11 comments for “Party disloyalty ??? (*SIGH*)

  1. July 5, 2017 at 10:08 pm

    This is nonsense. I can’t speak for everyone but I can say without a doubt I did not campaign against a Republican. I might not have praised a couple of them but I did not campaign against them.

    I started a PAC with several dozen other people to do the work that the GOP should have been doing but didn’t. It scares them that we have been succesful. We have a year round headquarters, full time revenue stream, volunteers, education and training programs, social media team, website, etc. since we opened march 1st we have raised over $5000.00 the HCGOP in that same time frame has raised $0.00. We have been registering Republicans and advertising for conservative candidates and advocating for conservative causes.

    We are working to better our community for our friends and family and are not worried in the least about the HCGOP. This is an attempt to keep us out of the party and preserve their own titles.

    Jeremy Davis
    Haywood Republican Alliance
    Chairman
    http://www.hayrep.com
    http://www.facebook.com/haywoodrepublicans
    davisj5717@charter.net

  2. patrick
    July 6, 2017 at 12:07 am

    Can you request the NCGOP add your name to this list – They can feel free to add mine to the list #ConservativeBeforeRepublican

    No more telemarketing calls for donations or form letters in the mail box would be a great blessing also

    The world is self destructing a little more every day #JesusPleaseComeSoon

  3. Raynor James
    July 6, 2017 at 8:29 am

    Republicans who misbehave by being sneaky, ignoring the Party’s Platform, and circumventing the Party’s Plan of Organization while putting on a “show” of following it are displaying disloyalty to the Party.

    Those who work within the Party to try to make it BE what it says it IS are very loyal. They’re also patriots. Good for them!

  4. July 6, 2017 at 9:38 am

    HCGOP found the presence of some members of the Executive Committee to be inconvenient. To solve the problem, there was a coordinated effort to remove those people by electioneered them out of there Precinct Chair positions, and therefore off the Executive Committee.

    They were successful in removing most of the people they found inconvenient. However, to their apparent surprise, those folks didn’t just quietly “take their toys and go home”. They banded together to form a state-registered PAC called Haywood Republican Alliance.

    Ever since then HCGOP, with the obvious assistance of NCGOP in Raliegh, has done all they can to harass HRA and interfere with their activities.

    The actions of HCGOP and NCGOP prove that promoting values, causes, and candidates is not their primary goal – it is power and self-aggrandizement.

  5. Nancy in Craven
    July 6, 2017 at 9:54 am

    So why do the conservatives keep holding on? The meaning of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Does anyone seriously expect anything to change?

    I suggest we leave the party in droves and try to educate the people. After all, what do we have to lose?

  6. Raphael
    July 6, 2017 at 11:41 am

    This provision of the PoO was never intended to be the nuclear weapon of petty local party disputes, and it is being badly abused if this is what is going on.

    The situation that led to its adoption involved a competitive open seat legislative race in the east where the GOP nominee was a former Reagan administration official and the Democrat a local county commissioner. The Democrat persuaded several Republican county commissioners from other parts of the state to make ads and endorse him. Their local parties refused to take any action against them on it. This Plan provision was the result, where such major transgressions could be dealt with by the State Executive Committee.

    The only time this provision has ever had to be used was when Richard Morgan betrayed the State House GOP caucus and did a deal that effectively kept the Democrats in real power in the House in spite of an even split. The state executive committee took action against Morgan for that

    With the wholesale butchering of the PoO at the last state convention, I do not know if this provisions has been distorted, but it should take something major that actually helped Democrats over Republicans to trigger this provision if the wording has stayed the same, and the ultimate decision would be by the state GOP executive committee..

    • Toxhandler
      July 6, 2017 at 8:19 pm

      Two thoughts on your words. With respect to Executive Committee action, the EC has been by-passed on a number of things which might well be construed as illegal without EC concurrence. Those legal notices for one thing, have never been approved by the Executive Committee and according to even the latest POO, it is the EC, not the Central Committee, not the Executive Director, nor the Chairman, who governs the Party and is the client to whom Mr. Stark is to report to. If the HRA ever ends up in court as a result of those notices, the first question I’d ask the plaintiff is if their counsel can prove the authorization of the EC (the client) to have ever issued those notices in the first place.

      And speaking of that most recent POO, an acquaintance of mine pointed out to me that proposed changes presented to the convention of delegates for approval must adhere to Roberts’ Rules of Order when convention rules and the previous POO do not supercede (and in this case they did not). This clearly did not happen (Robert’s strictures were faithfully followed by the POO Committee in all previous conventions), in fact, it was discovered that extensive language has been removed from the previous POO without notice, thus perpetrating a gross deception upon the delegates. Thus, according to my acquaintance, the 2017 POO is flatly illegal.

  7. Jim Womack
    July 6, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    Interesting article. Mr. Woodhouse’s citation of disciplinary action permitted by state and local plans of organization makes sense — even if unfair — for removing someone from a recognized “committee”- an Executive Committee, Central Committee, or other such committee. However, his remarks do not address the two more fundamental questions: (A) How can an organization determine party disloyalty for alleged offenses not covered in these plans of organization; and (B) What disciplinary action is even permissible against a party member, who is not a member of a committee?

    Frankly, a competent conservative lawyer would instruct the NCGOPe not to pursue administrative or legal recourse against these registered Republican members of Haywood County. Much more would be accomplished through listening to their complaints and taking prudent corrective action. (That is always the better way to deal with inside party politics, which this is).

    The actions of the HRA and several similar patriot groups around the state can no more be suppressed than were the actions of Tea Party groups in 2009-10. NCGOPe attempts to discipline or demoralize these conservative activists diminishes the local Republican party’s effectiveness in electing Republicans to office. It also contributes to the continuing decline in numbers of baseline conservative activists around the state, which seriously harms the election bids for judges, justices, and council of state candidates.

    By October of this year, Republicans will be the third largest voting block in the state (behind democrats and unaffiliated voters). One would think the NCGOPe might wise up at some point and seek to rally these conservative activists rather than causing an implosion of the party’s base, leading into the 2018 election cycle.

  8. john steed
    July 6, 2017 at 11:36 pm

    In the past, the state GOP has tried to pour water on local party disputes to try to get people working together. Those now in charge seem to prefer pouring on gasoline to make them flame even higher. That is really stupid politics/

  9. eddie cabe
    July 7, 2017 at 7:47 am

    What Jim Womack said !

  10. GUWonder
    July 7, 2017 at 11:22 pm

    When elected Republicans vote against the GOP platform and for the position of the Democrats, that is an act of party disloyalty. The biggest act of such party disloyalty lately was the majority of our Representatives and all of our Senators voting the Obama position on green energy (H589) and against the specific provisions of the NCGOP Platform, It is these grossly disloyal Republicans who should be denied the ability to hold party office.

    There is currently no mechanism to do that, but it should be added to the PoO. Let the state executive committee take away the voting rights on all party bodies to all legislators who vote against the party platform. Hold their feet to the fire for principle.

Comments are closed.