Race for NCGOP Vice-chairman a true test of THE Pope’s “party loyalty” message

ncgopState GOP vice-chairman Joyce Krawiec’s appointment to an unexpired state Senate seat from Forsythe County has created a job vacancy within the party hierarchy.  Krawiec’s move to the Senate meant that she had to resign her party post.  Party insiders are expected to meet within a month to pick someone to finish her unexpired vice-chairman term.

So far, it appears there are three candidates for the job — two of whom ran for the post previously against Krawiec.   Former Guilford County GOP chairman Marcus Kindley and former state Rep. Glen Bradley have once again tossed their hats into the ring.  The new name — former state Rep. Carolyn Justice (R-Pender) — is causing quite a bit of concern among party rank-and-file. 

Justice was one of a handful of Republican legislators in 2003  who joined former state Rep. Richard Morgan in forming a governing coalition in the House with now-disgraced, then-speaker Jim Black (D-Mecklenburg).  This group earned prime office space and committee chairmanships, while aiding Black and the Democrats in their efforts to persecute conservative House members.  Justice went so far as to defend her alliance with Morgan and Black by suggesting — in writing — that “the best team won.”

This whole power-sharing episode earned Morgan a denouncement for “party disloyalty” by the NCGOP leadership.  Morgan lost in the 2006 GOP primaries.

Current NCGOP chairman Claude Pope has been preaching the gospel of “party loyalty” to anyone who will listen.  How effective — how credible — will that sermon be with a party vice-chairman in place who stabbed her party caucus in the back for thirty pieces of silver  a nice office and a committee chairmanship? 

Glen Bradley ran afoul of the party establishment while in the House and found himself gerrymandered out of a job.  He is quite popular among Tea Party and other grassroots activists.

Marcus Kindley has been elected as a county party chairman.  He’s previously run unsuccessfully for some state-level party offices.  I met him during the last round of  NCGOP officer elections.  Kindley strikes me as someone who doesn’t mind a good fight with the other side.

62 thoughts on “Race for NCGOP Vice-chairman a true test of THE Pope’s “party loyalty” message

  1. I would sure like to see Glen Bradley in this slot! He is a fine and honest man who understands the issues!

  2. You have hit the nail on the head.

    Carolyn Justice was one of the ”Morgan Five”, the key co-conspiritors who betrayed the Republican caucus to do a seperate deal with Jim Black. If the caucus had stuck together, then power could have been split 50-50 between the parties due to each party having 60 legislators. Thanks to Justice and Morgan, Jim Black and the Democrats got the lions share of power. Among issues up that year was redistricting, and the Morgan/Black redistricting allowed Democrats to get a majority back so they no longer had to deal with Morgan and his little band of traitors.

    The Morgan rebellion was the major act of betrayal within the Republican Party in the last century, and Carolyn Justice was one of the ringleaders. The NCGOP executive committee, by overwhelming vote kicked RIchard Morgan out of the Republican Party over this treachery. Justice and the three other co-conspirators should have received the same treatment. Of course Jim Black went to prison for his corruption in all of this.

    From what I hear, Thom Tilli$ is also wrapped up in pushing Justice. That figures, as Tilli$ got into politics by being recruited by Morgan and Black to run in a primary against a GOP stalwart, John Rhodes, and to support the Morgan group in its alliance with Jim Black.

    Both Justice and Tilli$ have a history of treachery in betraying the party as part of the Morgan conspiracy with Jim Black. Putting people like that in high office makes a mockery of party loyalty or party unity. It is telling that Tilli$ is still more of a Morgan type than a Republican in that he is pushing someone like Justice.

    The best thing that could be done to unite the party is to elect someone with conservative / grassroots / Tea Party credentials, and that is the opposite of Carolyn Justice.

    1. You part of that right, but a lot of it wrong, Raphael.

      Carolyn Justice backed Morgan in his deal with Jim Black, which was, IMO, a grievous sin. But she was not a “ringleader,” she was just his pawn. Still I agree with you that that should disqualify her for Party leadership.

      Also, Morgan was not kicked out out of the Republican Party, he was only kicked off of the State Executive Committee. We’d have kicked him out of the Republican Party if we could have done so, but that wasn’t possible. (We’d have kicked him right out of the State if we could have!) Under NC law, membership in the GOP is determined by how a person registers to vote, and there’s no way to expel someone from the Party.

      Most importantly, Tillis does NOT have a history of treachery, and did NOT betray the Party as part of the Morgan conspiracy, and (so far as is known) he was NOT recruited by Morgan to run against my friend, John Rhodes.

      1. Morgan was not just kicked off the state GOP executive committee. The motion that was passed on Morgan was under the provision of the State Plan of Organization that prohibited Morgan from holding any office in the party at any level. He was not even allowed to be a member of his precinct committee. Granted, the party has no control over whether he can register as a Republican, but Morgan was pretty thoroughly kicked out of the party.

        The Morgan conspirators included some, like David Miner, that did not come forward until after the treason prospered, but were in it from the beginning. Those who went public – the Morgan Five, are however the most guilty. Again, granted that the key leadership roles were in Brubaker, Morgan, and Shumaker (the last now Tilli$’ consultant).

      2. I wish the late Claudia Rogers was still around to respond to you on Tilli$’ connection with Black and Morgan. Ms. Rogers worked for John Rhodes in that campaign and had detailed knowledge of Tilli$’ recruitment and support by Morgan and Black. Tilli$ was lined up to support the Morgan group in their alignment with Black. However, a funny thing happened on the way to a new coalition at the next election. Due to the redistricting under Morgan and Black, the Democrats did not need Morgan and his little band of traitors any more because they won a majority by themselves.

        I still remember the continuing party treason by the Morgan crowd in that next election when Morgan ”Republicans” showed up at fundraisers for Democrat incumbents in districts targeted by the party and spoke out in favor of their ”coalition allies”.

        Tilli$ did not have to follow through on his pledge as the coalition no longer existed after the Democrats got a majority by themselves, but he was firmly aligned with Morgan to do so. It that series of primaries, the party loyalists went after Morgan people and beat some of them, and the Morgan people went after party loyalists, but only beat Rhodes among them. Of course, Morgan and Shumaker had also arranged to redistrict a number of party loyalists out of the legislature (like Tilli$ did to Braddy and Cook two years ago).

  3. Bradley was not “gerrymandered out of a job”. He gave up his House seat(won by a Republican), to run in the GOP Senate primary(eventually won by the Republican).

    1. Actually, Chris. Glen Bradley WAS gerrymandered out of his district, a Democrat district won by a Republican, and it WAS in response to his “principles over party” approach to governance. Bradley believes that the Constitutions of the State of North Carolina and of the United States are the Supreme Law of the Land and the guard rails within which government should operate. Due to this adherence to principles, Bradley found himself opposing the Republican leadership on some issues and putting forth legislation that the Republican leadership would have rather not dealt with, such as the Farmers’ Freedom Act and the Firearms Freedom Act, Tenth Amendment style legislation. So, when the Republican leadership redrew the lines, Bradley was no longer in the district he was representing. So, he decided to pursue the Senate seat.

    2. He declined to run again in his House seat because Republican leadership drew him into the same district as Jeff Collins. Rather than run in a primary against Collins, who he considered a solid conservative, Bradley opted to challenge ultra-leftist Democrat Doug Berger for Senate District 18.

      His reward for working to avoid a costly primary in his old district and try to expand the GOP majority in the Senate was being challenged by Skip Stam’s legislative aid Chad Barefoot.

      But hey, party unity, right?

    3. Good try Chris; Glen only ran for the Senate after he found out about his gerrymandered district. I guess you can say his hand was forced. Glenn reads this blog maybe he will set the record straight.

  4. In your comment here (about me) you attempt to destroy me and toss away my 25 years of hard work in one sentence. Like the one incident you refer to here (my vote to end the most bizarre stalemate in the history of the North Carolina House of Representatives) defines me and my 25 years of dedication to the conservative movement. I went to Raleigh with excitement and enthusiasm to try and put an end to unfunded mandates that were forcing North Carolina’s counties to constantly raise property tax. I walked into a Republican caucus that was at war with itself, which is much the same position our party finds itself in today. Additionally, I had never been involved in state party politics at the time and I walked into a room full of Republicans I didn’t even know. There we were with a 60/60 tie of Republicans and Democrats in the House and no solution in sight for who would be speaker. I was not interested in their war of personalities, of who would be king. I was interested in getting my first session in the General Assembly started and accomplishing good things for my folks back home. If you would like to explain to me what other solution there was, other than a co-speakership, when the House membership of 120 was in a dead 60/60 tie, I would like to hear it. From where I sat there was no solution other than a co-speakership. It might have been a co speakership between Jim Black and a Republican other than Richard Morgan, (which I had never met before in my life) but there was going to be a co-speakership.
    By the way, the size of my office was the same as other run of the mill legislators and was certainly not big enough to sling a cat in. In my entire 10 years I never had what some refer to as a luxury office.
    Carolyn Justice
    PS – I think Mr. Bradley would tell you that I for one treated him with great respect when I served with him in the General Assembly.

    1. Hmmm. Odd. I’m reading this post at 5:17 PM, 1/28/14, but Ms Justice’s post says it was posted at 9:32 PM, 1/28/14.

      A time-traveling Vice Chair could be very useful to us. Not that I’m saying how I’ll vote in Concord next month. 😉

    2. Your are trying to play us for fools. With a 60/60 tie, of course there was going to have to be a co-speakership, but by dealing with a small band of traitors led by Morgan and including you, they were able to throw you renegades a few crumbs instead of having to divide power evenly, which they would have had to do if dealing with the whole GOP caucus.

      When the GOP House caucus voted for its candidate for speaker / co-speaker, you refused to do what the caucus voted to do. Then to try to head off the Morgan rebellion, that candidate for Speaker withdrew, and they voted on a second nominee. Still you went rogue, and refused to adhere to the decisions of the GOP caucus. How in the world could ;anyone trust you in any party leadership position after that? Heck, you might do the same thing and disagree with the decisions of the Central Committee or Executive Committee, and go try to do your own private deal with the Democrats.

      You talk about your other work in the party? Well, as I recall my history, Benedict Arnold contributed greatly to the revolutionary cause, but that one incident of high treason when he gave the British the plans of the fortifictions at West Point cancelled all that out. It is the same with you. Please get lost and do not let the door hit you on the way out. You should have had the same treatment applied to you as was applied to RIchard Morgan.

    3. I abhor how Republicans want to throw the “baby out with the bath water”. I keep seeing candidates cut down by some type of association to Richard Morgan. That to me has become the same as the infamous saying someone is a reference. Personally I support Carolyn for the vice chair position. Having known her for several years I know she is one tough cookie that doesn’t bow down to anyone. Carolyn is respected by many and works hard for the Republican party.

      1. Dianne,

        Are you sure you know just how damaging the whole Richard Morgan debacle was?

        If Carolyn would step up and say, “I was young and ignorant and made a mistake”, that would be one thing. But, in light of how we know it all worked out, she’s still defending that vote. That calls into question her very motives on everything else in my book. Don’t mistake one person’s self-advancement as “work for the party”.

    4. Didn’t Morgan max out his contributions to you, Carolyn? Why not stand tall regarding what a great relationship you obviously had with him? I mean, before he was kicked out of the GOP… unless he kept contributing to you afterwards, too?

    5. Dear Ms. Justice,

      I would be willing to give anyone a pass on a single indiscretion if it were not on the single most significant setback for Republicans in recent North Carolina history.

      With your help, no matter how well intentioned, Republicans were completely locked out of the discussion for almost 8 years until we won the majority in 2010. The actions of your “coalition” handed the reins over to Jim Black and millions of dollars had to be spent over the subsequent years trying to elect Republicans in gerrymandered districts set up by Morgan/Black to punish their enemies.

      Did you play a part in that side of things? You got tens of thousands of dollars in support from Morgan and the “Morgan Five” in the 2004 campaign.

      If you are characterizing the state of today’s NC Republican Party as similar to 2003, would you act in a similar way to “solve” the problem? Are you more interested in supporting “winners” who can get things done regardless of what those things are?

      Regarding your “unknown” candidate, did you not feel it was your responsibility to seek him out and get answers to your questions? Instead, you just blindly vote for Morgan who no doubt promised you thousands in support? When Michael Decker abruptly switched parties to make it 60/60 when it had been 61/59, did you not sense that the fix was in? Did that not alert you that Black – and any of his cohorts – was dangerous for NC?

      I would expect a real Republican to do what the rest of them did. Hold out for vote after vote on principle.

      We lost a lot of good conservative Republican legislators as a result of your vote. I don’t think we should “toss away” your 25 years of “hard work”, but frankly, I’d have to really scour what you’ve done over those 25 years that could remotely make up for what you did in 2003. Maybe it’s not fair, but that’s just the way life is. Sometimes a single act undoes everything else you did.

  5. I find it absolutely appalling that someone is trying to justify their actions in particpating in illegal activity.

  6. Carolyn, there were several democrats who had agreed to vote for a Republican Speaker but ONLY if the GOP had a block of 60 and their vote would give it to the GOP. Those particular Dems did NOT want Black as Speaker again. Sadly, Morgan, you and several others thought you had a better way. Don’t try to convince anyone that a Co-speakership was the only way, and even if that was the only solution you can’t possibly have been politically naive enough to not be aware of what Traitor Morgan was doing!

  7. The Morgan Five!

    Wasn’t Rep. Stevie LaRoque on Morgan’s team too? As I recall Stevie got to sit up front, might even have been in the second row.

    Come on down!

    1. Yes, LaRocque was! And he got defeated in his next primary for being a Morganista. Unfortunately, he came back to the legislature some years later after too many average voters forgot that, and it was during his second coming, when he got cozy with another old Morganista, Thom Tilli$, that LaRocque got caught for corruption, prosecuted, and jailed.

  8. I am one of many that is begging Karen Kozel from down east, NC to run for Vice Chairperson of the GOP. I have known her for years and if we get lucky enough that she will run for this office, I hope you will do your homework and see that Karen should be Vice Chairman.

    1. Never heard of her. What is her background? Has she ever served on the Central Committee or Executive Committee?

      1. You have heard of her, Raphael. She finished the term for Laroque after his indictment. She is deep in grassroots, family, home schooling (I believe), and Tea Party. She also has Liberty leanings. Not so much in the acknowledgment of the disaster that is the drug war, but in an understanding of Peaceful Noncompliance (nullification), it’s history, and the fact that it is, indeed, the rightful remedy. Despite numerous attempts by Skip Stam to brainwash her, she has thought her way through the issue. She is strong, independent, deep thinker, great listener, and an honest Christian woman.

  9. After all was said and done, you still continued to defend Morgan. Heard it myself on Curtis Wright’s show. “Poor Richard”,you said. People just didn’t understand. The whole state executive understood what happened, and you’re trying to tell us you still don’t get it ? Really?

  10. I think Mrs. Justice is a woman of strong character and the fact that she would come on this blog and defend her past actions says that she is a good honest Christian Woman!!!!!!
    However, I think the party already has one old person (Claude Pope) and it badly needs some youthful energy. Therefore, I will be voting for Glen Bradley for vice-chair on Feb 22nd.

  11. Has everyone on this thread forgotten what happened in the years following the co-speakership? Republicans united, word spread about corruption in the democratic ranks, and news outlets started breaking stories about that corruption. Indictments followed. Being a democrat in this state became a burden for the first time in our lifetimes—even as far back as our great-great-grandfathers’ lifetimes! Governance doesn’t happen in a vacuum. If your goal is to turn control back over to the democrats in 2014, then keep violating President Reagan’s golden rule. Then again, even President Reagan was probably a disappointment to some of you. For the rest of you, consider this: the co-speakership was the beginning of the end for the 140 years of democratic control in NC. Their reign of liberalism is over unless our Grand ‘Ole Party fails to do its job at the polls in November. Which brings us to who will be most effective in ensuring victories in November as the No. 2 on Hillsborough Street—a republican or a libertarian? Someone who supported the Marriage Amendment or someone who opposed it. Choose wisely.

    1. Are you totally clueless? The Morganista rebellion in which a small self-centered band of traitors took a few crumbs from Black for themselves to sell out the GOP caucus is the most shameful episode of treachery in the NCGOP in a century. Without the rebellion, there would have been an even distribution of power, instead of most of it left in Black’s hands. Rep. Speciale has even brought up something that I did not know, and that is that there were some anti-Black Democrats willing to let Republicans have the lions share of power.

      This treachery by Morgan and his co-conspiritors let to the only instance of the Executive Committee throwing someone out of the Republican Party, ever, and that happened by overwhelming vote. In retrospect, the other Morgan 5 members including Brubaker and Justice should have been kicked out at the same time because they were just as guilty of this treason.

      Under the prior district system, Republicans had won the House 61-59, but one sold out to Black for cash making it 60-60. Morgan used his influence with Black to punish Republicans who were loyal to the GOP caucus in redistricting, while Black sought to advance the Democrat Party. The result after the Black / Morgan redistricting was that in the next election and several thereafter, Republicans were back to a minority. Paul Shumaker, who is Tilli$ consultant in the Senate race, was Morgan’s advisor on that redistricting. The Morganite rebellion, based on election results, set the GOP back substantially. It was only some years later that we were able to claw our way back to where we were prior to the Morgan rebelliion.

      As to President Reagan’s ”golden rule” you forget that as long as he followed it in the 1976 primaries, he was losing. Then he got to North Carolina, and started talking about Gerald Ford’s record and that is when he started winning. Similarly we need to expose Justice’s record as being a co-conspirator in the most dastardly backstabbing within the NC Republican Party in the last century. Her reaching across the aisle to liberal Democrats with Morgan and Black set the GOP back significantly. Electing her vice chairman would make any calls for party unity by other party leaders nothing but a pathetic joke.

    2. “a republican or a libertarian”.

      What, pray tell, is a Republican these days? I need a definition, particularly when so many supposed Republicans are telling us not to be too “pure” (i.e. – lets water down our insistence on strict Constitutionalism). As for libertarian, that’s a loaded term of unclear definition as used here.

      Glen’s concern with Amendment 1 stemmed from sincerely held beliefs concerning the proper role of government involvement in family matters, NOT because he thought marriage should be recognized in any other way than the traditional definition. I personally disagreed with his interpretation but then again, the Party did a lousy job of explaining WHY they pursued Amendment 1 in the first place, which was to protect the State from an activist judge deciding FOR us. And he’s not a moderate which is the real curse of our Party these days.

      1. The real choice is between someone who has never conspired with the Democrats against the Republican caucus, and one who has; Between one who has always been loyal to the party and one who was a co-conspiritor in the biggest act of party disloyalty in a century.

        Given that the tiny Morganite group that Justice aligned herself with loudly proclaimed itself as moderates, this is also a race between a conservative and a moderate.

  12. Interesting Raphael. It sounds to me like somebody was going to be co-speaker but your guy didn’t get it and you are still carrying a grudge–how many years later? And Toxhandler why is it that it’s okay with you for someone to vote against a basic tenet of the Republican Party if he’s got “sincerely held beliefs”? If anybody but your guy did that you’d be eating his lunch I bet. This is ridiculous.

    1. There is one vote in every governmental body that is absolutely partisan and that is in organizing the chamber. The party votes on its choice, and party members are expected to follow the choice of the majority of their caucus. Making seperate deals with the other party is one of the worst things that can be done to undermine party unity, so it is extremely rare.

      In this case, the issue was whether 1) the Repubican caucus as a block would reach an agreement with the Democrats as a block, which would have split power evenly, or 2) a small rump group of Democrats joined with the Republicans as a block, in which case Republicans would have the real power in the House, or 3) a small rump group of Republicans joined with the Democrats as a block in which case the real power would be with the Democrats. Obviously #2 was the best case scenario for Republicans, and as Representative Speciale said above that would have happened if the ground had not been cut from under the Republican caucus by the betrayal of the Morgan Five. The worst case for Republicans was #3, which is what happened due to the defection of the Morgan Five. Scenario #2 would have been acceptable, but could only be accomplished by the each caucus sticking together, as a rump group would only be thrown a few crumbs and windowdressing by a united caucus that they were joining with.

      The very worst thing the Morgan Five did was agree to a redistricting plan that put the Republicans back in the minority, and they did it because they were more interested in defeating loyal Republicans who stayed true to the caucus than they were in trying to get a Republican majority.

      The personality conflict that led to the Morgan rebellion went back to 1992, when Leo Daughtry and Harold Brubaker were seeking the position of House GOP leader. Daughtry seemed to have the votes, and Brubaker suggested an agreement that he would led Daughtry be leader if Brubaker would be the agreed Speaker if they won a majority (which most at that time did not expect). A majority was obtained in the election, and Daughtry honored the agreement. Daughtry remained House GOP leader after Republicans lost power in 1996. When Republicans regained a majority in 2002, the House caucus chose Daughtry as its Speaker candidate, and Brubaker’s ego just could not handle it. Brubaker, due to his ego, was the instigator of the Morgan rebellion. Morgan had been Rules Committee chairman under Brubaker and a close friend and ally of Brubaker. The deal was negotiated with Black by Paul Shumaker who was consultant to both Brubaker and Morgan (and is now consultant to Tilli$). To try to prevent a split and bring the renegades back to the caucus, Daughtry withdrew his name, and the caucus chose another GOP legislator who would be a neutral choice between Brubaker / Morgan and Daughtry, but by then Brubaker and Morgan and their co-conspiritors were on an ego and power trip and continued their treasonous deal with Black and the Democrats. The GOP House caucus nominated its choice for Speaker, but Justice and the others of the Morgan Five prefered the corrupt and liberal Democrat controlled ”coalition” instead.

      What Justice did would be like Tilli$ getting elected to a 51-49 GOP controlled US Senate, then doing a deal with to vote with the Democrats to give them control and reelect Harry Reid in return for some crumbs thrown to him. (Actually, there is some concern about that given the position of the man who negotiated the Morgan / Black deal in Tilli$’ campaign).

    2. Actually, everything I did and said in 2011 was in DEFENSE of traditional marriage. Marriage is and can only ever be the irreversible union of one man and one woman for life. The difference is I was not simply thinking about the next election but the next 10, and 20 years.

      Have you seen the demographic shifts in the electorate coming out of public schools today? Support for gay marriage amongst millennials is upwards of 70% and climbing. Now that we have subjected marriage – an authority that belongs to God and God alone – to a popular vote, we will have to suffer that vote again in another 15 years. I am not the only one to say that, Speaker Thom Tillis likewise said that the Marriage Amendment would be repealed within 20 years because he, too, can see the shifting demographics in our society. Only I disagree with Speaker Tillis, that the Amendment will not be repealed it will be added to.

      http://www.salisburypost.com/article/20120328/SP0104/303289980/

      In 15 years, we will have to deal with the curse of having gay marriage and heaven knows what else added into our State Constitution because we were so short-sighted as to put marriage to a popular vote when anybody paying attention could see where the demographics were going.

      If you want to know what the real tenet of Republican policy is, look no further than the most Republican State in our union: Oklahoma, which is currently proposing a ban on state licensure of marriage altogether — the very policy I proposed in 2011.

      http://houston.cbslocal.com/2014/01/27/okla-lawmakers-propose-ban-on-all-marriages-in-response-to-gay-marriage-rulings/

      I proposed the policy of banning the State licensure of marriage because, as I said that day on the House floor, that we were being short-sighted and in the long run we were going to cause more damage to traditional marriage than we were going to prevent. Therefore the best way to defend traditional marriage was to place all authority over marriage back into the hands of God rather than into the hands of a corrupt government filled with corruptible politicians.

      If I am guilty of anything, it is of looking 10 and 20 years into the future and seeing the danger posed by what we were doing, and of working to prevent that future threat to the integrity of traditional marriage, rather than only looking 6 months ahead towards the convenience of the next election.

      In 15 years, the vast majority of those who pushed the Marriage Amendment will be retired from politics altogether, and I am the one who will still be here trying to deal with the mess that was created, I will be the one left fighting AGAINST adding gay marriage to our Constitution while being horribly outnumbered by the people who support that abomination.

      If anything, I am the one who was working to DEFEND traditional marriage more vehemently than every other member in the entire legislature, by offering the only policy that would have vouchsafed traditional marriage FOREVER in North Carolina.

      If you want to complain about people who violated basic tenets of the Republican platform, then look no further than those who threw marriage under the bus in 15 years WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE that it was going to come up for a vote again in the future, and did so anyway for temporary political gain.

      I was the only member of the NC General Assembly in 2011 who was ACTUALLY fighting to protect and defend the integrity of Traditional Marriage over the course of the long term. My unwillingness to throw marriage under the bus just to get re-elected should demonstrate that I would do anything to preserve and protect Republican Principle even when it’s difficult, and the entire world has failed to account for the unintended consequences of the legislation being proposed.

    1. Under the Plan of Organization, Carolyn Justice is guilty of Party Disloyalty by definition. Here is the pertinent part of Article VII, Section E subsection 2 of the NC Republican Party Plan of Organization:

      .
      ”2. Party Disloyalty
      Any registered Republican attempting to influence or influencing the outcome of any election against a Republican candidate or Republican endorsed by the appropriate Republican Executive Committee or Legislative Caucus, other than by supporting an
      opposing Republican Candidate in a Republican primary, may be declared ineligible to hold office under the State Plan of Organization at the State, District, and Precinct level for Party disloyalty by 2/3
      vote of the State Executive Committee. . .”

      By voting against the choice of the NC House legislative caucus, Justice clearly influenced that election against the official GOP nominee, and is very clearly guilty of party disloyalty under the Plan of Organization. Morgan himself has already been convicted by the State Executive Committee for the very same act.

      Electing someone like that to a major position in the party makes a mockery of party loyalty and party unity for the 2014 election. I cannot imagine that the Executive Committee would do something so inane. Indeed, her very audacity of even running given her past treachery may well inspire someone to bring party disloyalty charges against her now with the State Executive Committee. She richly deserves it.

      1. I got it. You think Carolyn Justice should be brought up on charges of party disloyalty because she didn’t vote the way you wanted her to in a party caucus meeting over a decade ago. Your man was Daughtry and hers was Morgan. Your guy couldn’t win and hers did. Man your harsh. Treachery? Seriously? Do you know how nuts that sounds?

        1. You either cannot read or are deliberately distorting the facts.

          The party caucus made its choice. When it did, party loyalty requires all Republicans to vote for that choice in electing the Speaker. For the rare ones who do not, the Plan of Organization specifically defines that conduct as party disloyalty and sets sanctions. Richard Morgan was kicked out of the party for doing exactly what Carolyn Justice did on exactly the same vote.

          A legislator can vote any way they want within the caucus, and that has nothing to do with party loyalty, but when it comes to the vote on the floor, failing to vote with the party caucus choice is defined as party disloyalty by the Plan of Organization.

          Personally, I was not that thrilled with either Brubaker, who had been a poor Speaker, or Daughtry, but I recognize that once the caucus made its choice, it was the obligation of all Republican legislators to follow that choice, not do a private deal with the Democrats. Heck, Daughtry withdrew and the caucus put up a more neutral figure, and the defectors still would not vote with the caucus. They cared more about Brubaker’s ego and Morgan’s drive for a little taste of power than for the well being of the Republican Party.

        2. To make an analogy, the vote within the caucus is like a primary election, where a legislator is free to support any Republican they want, but the vote on the floor is like a general election where supporting the other side, the one against the winner of the caucus vote, is like supporting a Democrat in the general election. The latter is what the Morgan Five did.

    2. I am hearing lots of other concerns about Carolyn Justice, although the RIchard Morgan connection seems to be the biggie

      One is that she lives in the same Congressional District and next door county as the State Chairman.

      Another bigger one is that she served for ten years on the State GOP Executive Committee (by virtue of being a state legislator) and never once showed up to a meeting. That is approximately 30 meetings she missed, and one attended. Does someone with an atrocious participation record like that deserve a promotion to a higher office?

  13. That’s your interpretation. Legislators crossover on both sides all the time instead of voting with their caucuses. Look at Glen Bradley’s vote on the Marriage Amendment. He voted against his caucus on that. You are trying to make a rule about candidates in general elections apply to what happens within the legislative caucus and that dog just don’t hunt. Didn’t something like a third of the caucus vote for Morgan? Are they all guilty of party disloyalty in your mind?

    1. Again, you are either clueless or you are trying to blur issues.

      As I pointed out above, the one time that a legislative vote is absolutely partisan is on organizing the chamber. Each party caucuses and chooses its candidates to lead the chamber. Not supporting your party then is blatant party disloyalty.

      Issues are different. The party caucus does not take an official position, and it is common on issue votes for there to be variations among any party’s members. Issues votes, which you try to blur with the organizational votes are an entirely different thing.

      Five Repubicans defected on the organizational vote, not a third of the caucus. That is why the traitors are known as the Morgan Five.

      Party defections on organizational votes are quite rare. In North Carolina, the only other time in memory when they happened was 1985. Joe Mavretic, one of the last of the old time conservative Democrats assembled a rump group of fellow conservatives and a few ”good government” Democrats who disliked the authoritarian leadership style of Speaker Liston Ramsey, which together with the Republican caucus would represent a majority of the House. The Republican caucus voted to support Mavretic for Speaker, and got him elected. One Repubican legislator, Rep. Monroe ”Buck” Buchanan (R-Mitchell) who was a personal friend of Ramsey, walked off the floor rather than vote the GOP caucus position. Both parties moved to punish their defectors. The Democrats went after Mavretic and his supporters for refusing to suport the caucus nominee, and whittled them down so that there was no repeat the next time of that coalition. Republicans went after Buchanan for refusing to support the caucus position, and the state party was involved in helping a primary opponent beat him in the next election.

      Indeed, the state Republican Plan of Organization party disloyalty provision that Morgan and Justice violated, and on which Morgan was thrown out of the party, was written in response to Buchanan’s failure to vote for the caucus choice in 1985, and in response to an incident where some GOP county commissioners in the Piedmont had endorsed a Democrat legislative candidate down east.

      As to the Morgan supporters, there was also a second group which sympathized with Morgan, but respected their party loyalty obligation and still voted properly for the caucus choice. There were maybe six or eight of them, if memory serves. Then there was a third small group that tried to such up to Morgan after the deal with Black went down. If you added all three groups, you might get a third of the caucus. Many of the first two groups had serious primary challenges from loyalist Republicans, and some of them like David Miner in Wake County, Stephen LaRocque in Lenoir County, (name slips my mind) in Craven County, and then the second time around Morgan himself in Moore County, were taken down in primaries. The only GOP loyalist that Morgan took down with his primary challenges to party loyalists was Representative John Rhodes in Mecklenburg County, where Morgan’s recruit was a guy named Thom Tillis. Morgan did take down some others in his redistricting deals with Black, as Morgan’s main objective was destroying GOP party loyalists not advancing the GOP’s election prospects.

      You also do not see Congressmen and Senators on the national level voting for members of the other party to lead those chambers on organizational votes, but again on issues, parties do divide. Trying to lump issue votes and organizational votes together is like trying to combine oil and water.

  14. Raphael, that’s a long time to carry a grudge against a woman you’ve never been married to. Good luck carrying that water, man.

    1. Nobody is ”carrying a grudge”. Conservatives in the party, as reflected on this board remember the treachery of the Morgan Five and the enormous damage it did to the party. We do not want these traitors to be allowed to take positions in our party, not Morgan, not Miner, not LaRoque, not Brubaker, not Justice, not Tillis, not ANY of them. They made their bed with Jim Black, now they have to lie in it.

      It is a lot like Benedict Arnold. He was not welcome back at any point after what he did, and neither are they.

      It is the state Republican Plan of Organization that clearly defines what the Morgan Five, including Carolyn Justice, did as PARTY DISLOYALTY. It is not merely the opinion of those on this board. We do not want a disloyal Republican as Vice Chairman, and the fact that she and her surrogates try to make excuses for it instead of apologizing just makes it worse.

      1. Interesting that you take ownership of the Daily Haymaker Raphael. I think it is obvious to everyone on this “board” that you are carrying a huge grudge against this woman. Carolyn Justice was not in the Morgan Five. If you’ll reread her statement you’ll see that she was a freshman lawmaker who voted for the co speakership along with an entire third of republicans. Maybe your getting her confused with the other legislator with the same name.

          1. You want me to address her perspective? I think it’s a tragedy that she didn’t get Lombardi. How does someone become a House Representative and not understand football? On the other hand, how does someone become a Republican House Representative and not support the plank that marriage is between one man and one woman?

        1. The truth is that I do not like traitors – not Morgan, not Brubaker, not Shumaker, not Justice, and not Tillis. As pointed out earlier, there were only five of these slimeballs who voted for the Jim Black group and against the group supported by the Republican caucus. That is clearly defined as PARTY DISLOYALTY under the Plan of Organization under the provisions quoted above. What part of that do you claim to not understand? Now granted that Shumaker just organized the treason. He was not a legislator to actually vote, and Tillis was not in the legislature then but allied with them later. The worst offenders were the five who blatantly violated the Plan of Organization by voting for the Jim Black group. Do you refuse to recognize that Justice was in violation of the State Plan of Organization when she joined the other four members of the Morgan Five to vote against the decision of the House Republican caucus? It is nothing personal to Justice. All of the Morgan people were traitors to the party and set the NCGOP back substantially. We do not need to be electing ANY of them to any type of position. Not Justice and not Tillis.

  15. Am I missing something? We have Glen Bradley Running who is a HUGE RINO…. He is NO Republican and 100% Libertarian in Hiding as a Republican. and Carolyn Justice with her Freshman Vote for the Turncoat. Do we have a third Option. Please…….

    1. I agree that it would be beneficial to have another choice in the race.

      One thing that is important in the credentials for this office that both of these candidates lack is experience in the party structure. The primary background of both is as elected officials. What we need is someone who knows what it is to be a county chairman, a district chairman, or to have served on the state Central Committee. Bradley had a brief time on the State Executive Committee and did attend at least some meetings. Justice had ten years on the State Executive Committee, as all legislators are automatically voting members, but did not show up for meetings. Her credential in her letter to executive committee members does not mention a single office in the party organization that she has ever held. I think there are better candidates out there, and I know some senior Republicans have been actively seeking one who will run. Marcus Kindley was a fool to drop out, as this is the one he might have won. As a former county chairman of a major county, he had the important credential that the other two lack.

      1. But Raphael, Carolyn Justice was not in the Morgan Five, man. This version of history that’s being thrown around on this page has huge errors in it. As you can see from the documented votes that took place, Carolyn Justice didn’t vote for Morgan until a third of the caucus voted for him. Are you saying that all 20 or so legislators are guilty of party disloyalty? Are you getting Carolyn Justice the freshman legislator confused with Carolyn Justus the veteran legislator? Who in their right mind gives a flip? Just because the guy you wanted to be co speaker didn’t win over a decade ago does not mean that everyone who voted for the other guy is a–what were your words?–treacherous back-stabbing traitor. Get a life!

        1. You are stuck on a broken record. The post of mine you respond to talks entirely about Justice’s lack of credentials in party organization posts, but you ignore than and get back to talking about her allegiance to RIchard Morgan and Jim Black.

          Your attempt to challenge facts also conveniently overlooks the fact that Justice herself admits to voting for Black and Morgan in that vote and against the position of the House GOP caucus. Only five of them did that.

          Yes, there were others who opportunistically came over to the Morgan camp seeking committee gavels and other favors. In the subsequent primaries, when loyal Republicans worked to clean house of Morgan supporters, those types were also targeted and many taken down, as I mentioned before. Their taint is less than that of the Morgan Five, since they at least technically voted in accord with the caucus position on the floor vote to organize the House, but their later allegiance to Morgan was enough for party loyalists to oust them in primaries where loyalist candidates could be recruited.

      2. Plus the Vice Chair is non paid and is expected to travel the state on their own dime. No expense money that I can see on the NC GOP fillings for both the state and federal accounts. So who ever we elect from the state Exec committee needs to be able to self fund. That limits the field . I heard an interesting name out of the west. We will have to wait and see.

    2. Actually, I am not hiding anything. I am a 100% strict Constitutionalist and I have the exact same platform as Robert A. Taft and Barry Goldwater. Look up what they stood for and see for yourself. The origins of my platform go all the way back to John Fremont, our Party’s first-ever candidate for President. It is a strange and Orwellian world where I am the most Republican candidate to come along in half a century and you let the actual RINO’s paint me as though I were something I am not, merely because I have the ability to bring both the under-30 demographics and minorities on-board with true conservative, Republican principles.

      1. Glenn, you do bring another perspective, that of the Tea Party, to the table, which would help unify the party, and I have never known of you to back party traitors like Richard Morgan whose rebellion against the House GOP caucus caused enormous damage to the party. I also believe that you actually came to State Executive meetings, unlike your opponent. My main qualm about your candidacy is your lack of experience in holding party positions to have the understanding of how the party operates. You are certainly ahead of your current opponent in that regard, but not to the level I would prefer.

        1. I appreciate your kind words, and I did in fact attend all of the Executive Committee meetings while I was on it. You are correct that my entire goal has been to unify the Party around our common cause, because if we move into the 2014 General Election season as divided and hateful as we are now, then we stand to face real damage in the Congressional races, particularly that of the US Senate Race.

          I do not need to remind anybody here that whether or not the Republican Party can take back the US Senate and begin to undo some of the horrible damage that the usurper-in-chief has done, may well come down to our US Senate race alone. We simply cannot afford to carry this overwhelming division into November, particularly given the fact that our US Senate race alone could spell the difference between survival and destruction as a nation.

          I think what people tend to forget is that the principles we stand for, while considered ‘different’ today, were in fact the mainstream Republican principles when we stood opposed to Woodrow Wilson’s New Deal and Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society.

          The irony is that today, our principles attract the youth and minority voters when properly articulated, but there is a large segment of the Republican Party today who would reject the last 130 years of Republicanism to claim that we do not belong.

          I agree that I have not had the multiple decades of experience at working within the Republican Party that some have. I have only been voting Republican for 22 years, and I have only been active within the Party for 7 years. However, sometimes to achieve the greatest level of success, in this case uniting the Party ahead of the 2014 General Election, it requires a new perspective upon the same objective truth that we all hold.

          I fully believe that I am the best choice for our electoral success in November or I would not have submitted my name for consideration in the first place. Right now, our greatest handicap in a General Election is our failure to bring younger voters and minorities into the Republican Party based on legitimate conservative principles.

          I hope to help organize the Counties and the Districts throughout North Carolina to reach out and win the youth and the minorities, so that we can utterly demolish Kay Hagan in November, no matter who gets the nomination; and to dominate every class of election from Congress to Soil and Water for Republicans.

Comments are closed.