District 6 Chairman attempts to disenfranchise elected precinct committeemen

Candidates unwelcome; police officers scheduled at meeting

In a not to be believed missive titled, Changing the way we do business, (link no longer functions) District 6 Chairman David Braswell informs the elected Precinct Committeemen of the district that all discussion regarding challengers in the House race is verboten. Here is a snippet of what he has to say:

I have spoken with the campaign leadership of both the Bouie and Seel camps. Their leadership has agreed to my request not to have their candidate’s attend our next meeting. I will not allow any disruptions and they support my position. They do not want their candidates presence to possibly trigger a disruption that some have said to me is going to occur.

As Chairman, I believe it serves no purpose to subject these gentlemen or you to any further debate during our meeting. We all know what their positions are and any further debate will only deepen the wounds that have occurred up to this point. Therefore, I will not allow any discussion or comments from any individual or candidate regarding these two challengers during the meeting. This includes any comments that might be made by incumbent candidates in attendance and permitted to address the membership.

For the chairman to cut off debate at the very forum and among the people where it rightfully should occur is preposterous.

He further states: Due to concerns expressed by the Deer Valley Airport Authority: The Chairman and the LD 6 Executive Committee has contracted with the Phoenix Police Department to schedule up to two off duty Phoenix Police Officers to be present at the meeting. No disruptions of any kind will be permitted during the meeting. The Chairman will have the officers escort anyone he deems a disruption from the meeting immediately. (This paragraph was in the message sent by email, and not included in the link above,)

A single hysterical email from the wife of candidate Tony Bouie precipitated this overreaction in what appears to be a successful attempt to silence his opposition.

Advertisements

52 Responses to District 6 Chairman attempts to disenfranchise elected precinct committeemen

  1. Frankly Speaking says:

    Who made this guy king? Any elected precinct committeeman is not only welcome to attend the district meetings, but there is an obligation for them to be present unless circumstances prevent attendance. That does not mean the chairman has the discretion to keep them away.

  2. MacBeth says:

    Chairman Braswell says, “We all know what their positions are and any further debate will only deepen the wounds that have occurred up to this point.”
    Sorry friend, but Tony Bouie has only attended ONE meeting, which was days after he switched his registration from lifelong Democrat to instant Republican, and then announced his intention to run for the legislature. None of us have any clue about his positions. He has told so many untruths that even what he puts on his mailers is suspect. Two newspapers have written about him in this context. This meeting is the first one prior to the election. It was ridiculous to put meetings on summer hiatus during an important election cycle. It is an outrage to banish the candidates at the last meeting before the primary.

  3. Chrissie says:

    Is there a list of things we can’t talk about? Are women soon to get a dress code mandating burquas? Do just the men get muzzles or are they unisex? I presume the Ayatollah will let us know.

  4. Andy says:

    Republican Precinct Committeemen shall not discuss Republican candidates at the Republican District Committee meeting? Carl Seel, Arizona Republican Party Assistant Sergeant At Arms and duly elected Precinct Committeeman won’t be attending the last District Meeting prior to Primary Election Day?

    Bouie’s campaign calls Carl Seel supporters “part of a white supremacy group,” “racists” and “crazy people” and you think Carl does not want to be available for questions from his peers?

    Sounds more like Braswell has a horse in this race and that is Bouie. Who gets hurt by not attending the meeting? The one who falsely played the race card or the innocent party, Carl Seel? After Seel put up with Bouie’s lying to the District 6 voters, The Ariozna Republic and The Capitol Times, and the over-the-top false racist charges, Seel deserves an engraved invitation and a red carpet into this meeting. Not a shut-out by the Chairman.

  5. Andy says:

    “For the chairman to cut off debate at the very forum and among the people where it rightfully should occur is preposterous.”

    Who will be policing our speech?

  6. Marianne says:

    Do you dare to question these directives? The Czar has spoken:
    “Therefore, I will not allow any discussion or comments from any individual or candidate regarding these two challengers during the meeting. This includes any comments that might be made by incumbent candidates in attendance and permitted to address the membership.”

  7. Republican in LD-6 says:

    Two hired cops, that’s who will police your speech.

    There can be no viable reason for Carl Seel to be locked out of his own precinct committee meeting. He was elected to serve. How dare the chairman lock him out.

    This is so far off the wall, that Carl should get an injunction forcing the chairman to let him attend a meeting to which he was elected by the people to attend on their behalf.

    Braswell has gone too far. How could he possible expect order to prevail when he is so far out of order? Sounds to me like there is a lot of paranoia going on in his office. It will be interesting to watch the police remove every conservative from the meeting. Wonder if they will remove Rep. Crump?

  8. Chuck says:

    It’s getting late and I’m tired after a long day and tough week. I will only use one word to describe this: SHAMEFUL.

  9. Dist. 6 PC says:

    I’ll add one more word, Chuck: Outrageous!

  10. Dist. 6 PC says:

    Just another thought–Where is state chairman Randy Pullen on this? Shouldn’t he rein in this out of control Gestapo? What are the rules governing removal of a district chairman? If he thinks he can oust people with impunity, we should have the same rights. We put him in office, not the other way around. He only won by a coin toss.

  11. Craig says:

    Braswell “Consequently, I say respectfully to MCRC outsiders that voted to endorse one of our non-incumbent candidates without allowing us to be represented, No Thank-You!”

    MCRC are not outsiders and they show up to EGC meetings. It was our Chairman’s choice to allow District 6 to go unrepresented at the EGC Meeting. If EGC meeting attendance depended on air tight airline schedules then LD-6 better get used to not being represented at EGC meetings.

    GREAT WORK EGC! You had every right and responsibility to voice your opinions in the EGC meeting. Thank you for doing so. Even though LD-6 did not care enough to attend or send a proxy. LD-6 was not represented at EGC by any of our elected officers and they did not make sure a proxy attended. EGC–Thank you for YOUR attention on behalf of the LD-6 membership! Glad we got representation from somebody!

  12. Lori says:

    Police presence at the LD-6 meeting? Doesn’t that give false credence to Bouie’s LIE that Seel supporters are “crazy people?” I think Braswell’s bias is showing here too.

  13. Jason says:

    LD-6 Chairman: “We all know what their positions are….”

    Bad assumption. Actually, I would like to learn a little more about these candidate’s positions and I was looking forward to the opportunity of looking them in the eye while I got an answer. That opportunity is supposed to be available at District Meetings.

    When this Chairman ought to be encouraging the attendance of our candidate’s he is instead arranging their absence. Makes absolutely no sense at all.

    I can understand why Mr. Bouie may not want to attend after being found out a liar. But, Carl Seel? I will be very disappointed if I have lost the opportunity to address him with some questions.

  14. Dist. 6 PC says:

    WellBrassed says: “As Chairman, I believe it serves no purpose to subject these gentlemen or you to any further debate during our meeting.”

    I would like to inform him that “As a PC, I believe it serves the intended purpose of informing me and others to ANY debate during our meeting.” We have had NONE.

    What is this concept he has of closing down the purpose of the meeting? He decided to close them down completely since June, in an election year ! At that time, he had the nerve to ask the question, “How many of you know what ‘goes dark’ means?” He thinks he is chair of a pack of no-nothings and can run over us with impunity. This slickster now schedules two of the state office staff to address us on Monday, rather than give us the opportunity to hear from the candidates in a CONTESTED district race. Why is Wellbrassed trying to shut down freedom? District meetings always have candidate forums. How else do the elected PCs get inormed, so they in turn, can inform their neighbors?

  15. Horst Kraus says:

    Dist. 6 PC,
    Although I do not wish to address this whole BLOG at this time, only your last post. Response #14.
    It is obvious that you, even as you identify yourself as a PC, do not know the first thing about the function of a district in general, nor the Bylaws of LD-6 in particular.

    Article IV Section B. 1 “The Duties of the Chairman shall include but not be limited to;”
    and continues in B. (b) “To hold District Meetings, at least six (6) times in odd numbered years and at least nine (9) times during even numbered years”.

    If the Chair were to cancel Monday’s meeting all together he’d be within the articles of the Bylaws, because we already had six meetings this year and even without July, August and December, there will still be enought to meet the requirement.

    Nowhere in the Bylaws is there any provision to hold or arrange for a debate by and between 2 or more candidates for the same seat[s] in our district.

    Horst Kraus
    This time only as secretary of LD-6

  16. District 6 PC 2 says:

    Horst,

    You would would be wrong again. District 6 held no meeting in January, due to the State and County meeting. So he still could cancel Monday’s meeting, but the District would have to meet in December, which it never does.

    But as Secretary you should know that.

  17. John Q says:

    Horst,

    I wish that the District Chairman would cancel his Kangaroo Court. Then the precinct committeemen could have the room to have a Republican meeting and act in a democratic fashion. You must have been coaching the chairman on the lessons you learned as a youth. PS: Are your shirts sun bleached tan now? PPS: We also know that you tried to use your position as Secretary to influence this race, so don’t use your Goebbels rhetoric. It doesn’t work in America.

  18. Barry R. says:

    http://www.shangrilaranch.com/

    Speaking of Horst Kraus. Here are exploited 10 year old kids at the Kraus house. Do you think these children actually WANT to be at a nudist colony? Here’s your Horst Kraus.

    Off topic but, this is Horst Kraus’ very public web site.

  19. Horst Kraus says:

    District 6 PC 2,
    The January meeting counts as a district meeting because it is a mandatory meeting to which every PC is called to attend in person or by proxy.
    But then we can engage in splitting hairs all day long. As it stands, he is enabled to cancel the August meeting if he so decides.

  20. Barry R. says:

    Back on topic. What is going on here is obvious. The “Chairman’s” restrictions on freedom of assembly and restrictions on free speech at the District 6 Republican Committee meeting benefit Bouie and hurt the guy who has done nothing wrong in the campaign, Carl Seel. Barring what PC’s are allowed to say and filling up the meeting with singing groups and pep talks instead of allowing us to address higher priority issues is RIDICULOUS!

    If the “Chairman” is willing to manipulate the District and thereby the voters in this ridiculous fashion then no Horst, it would not surprise me one little bit that you and Braswell are looking for ways to totally silence the membership by cancelling the meeting altogether.

    These strong-arm tactics by the District Officers AGAINST the membership are disgusting.

  21. Republican in LD-6 says:

    Add David Braswell’s Name to List of Bouie Supporters

    LD-6 Chairman David Braswell, who was elected to that position by one vote in a runoff against a last minute nominee, has gone too far in his lackluster leadership of that legislative district.

    He has barred an elected Precinct Committeeman from the Monday public meeting of the LD-6 committmen for no other reason than Braswell supports the non-committeeman candidate, Tony (the Liar) Bouie over conservative Carl Seel. And, to intimidate the supporters of Carl Seel, he has hired, at committee expense, police officers to remove those who try to speak in Seel’s support.

    Mind you, this is a guy who could not even be re-elected in 2006 to the Glendale Union School District Governing Board while he was the sitting President of that board. In fact, he finished dead last in a four person race for the seat. Later, he was appointed by Sandra Dowling, yes, that Sandra Dowling, to serve on the Washington school district board.

    In an e-mail to precinct committeemen, he blasted Rob Haney, Chairman in LD-11, for publicly endorsing the only conservative in this two-man race. Given Haney’s political clout and Braswell’s lack of leadership, it’s going to be an unfair fight.

    All committeemen, Carl Seel included, are allowed (dare I say MUST) attend committee meetings. That’s what they were elected to do.

    So, this guy should crawl back to his appointed school board seat and resign as chairman of a committee of equally elected officials.

  22. Stanford says:

    There’s that other pesky problem called Freedom of Speech. I believe it’s included in the First Amendment.

  23. Citizen says:

    This is amazing to me. You have an internal fight over whether meetings will be open to the people who are members of the group? Somebody there should get a clue. I have heard that Mr. Brasswell wants to run for superintendent of education. Won’t it be nice to have our public school system run like this? No wonder he couldn’t get reelected to the school board if he did stuff like this. My friend resigned from the board because of Brasswell’s behavior. It looks like he hasn’t changed.

  24. David says:

    It would appear to me that the lines are drawn in this campaign and people know who they are supporting. I would doubt many PCs in LD6 are undecided.

    But passions are high and the debate is getting very uncivil. I don’t think this is about restricting freedom of speech, but rather maintaining a sense of civility among fellow Republicans. One of these two is going to be elected. I hope whoever wins will be supported by Republican PCs. That is what they are supposed to do as elected PCs.

    I was told recently that Chairman Eddie Farnsworth this year in the House Judiciary Committee held a vote on the Marriage Amendment without taking any testimony. Many people were there to testify either for or against the bill. Every House member knew how they were going to vote. The testimony from the two sides would have been emotional and passions on both sides would have created a very hostile environment.

    LD meetings are not supposed to be hostile. I think Braswell is correct to avoid an avoidable hostile environment at a Republican PC meeting. And it appears both Candidates agreed with him. But then again, I am the guy that always falls back on Reagan’s 11th Commandment.

    I have been around enough to know that a Republican Candidate you know and love can later disappoint you, and by contrast, I have been surprised by some candidates that I did not think would be good, but I admit, they surprised me. Because of that, I guess I just make my best call when I vote, and I don’t get as emotional as some.

  25. Republican in LD-6 says:

    You sound just like David Braswell, “David”. That middle of the road, don’t insult anyone, type of talk would be just fine if the decisions were not adversely affecting only the conservative candiate, Carl Seel. They would be good sounding, if we weren’t keeping an elected official from doing his job and thereby disenfranchising his Republican community.

    This is a terrible mistake. Cancelling, or postponing the meeting, is a solution that could work. But, holding the meeting and arresting every conservative in the room who objects to this un-American approach to ruling a public body is not a solution. It’s a problem and no one who cares can sit back and let it happen without protesting the action.

  26. Republican in LD-6 says:

    And, “David”, you’re right about Farnsworth’s committee. But, no COMMITTEE MEMBER was prevented from attending or speaking.

    That’s a big difference.

  27. Barry R. says:

    David, the assumption ought to be that a civil and respectful meeting will take place. Why assume otherwise? Bouie’s absence from the meeting favors Bouie because he has been found out to have lied repeatedly and because his camp played a phony race card against Carl Seel.

    Carl Seel’s absence from the meeting also favors Bouie because Carl is denied the opportunity to first, attend his District Meeting in routine fashion and second to address the false charges made against him and his supporters. Carl is an LD-6 PC and therefore has a right and a duty to represent his neighbors at the District Meeting.

    Quit dreaming up negative scenarios for our District Meeting. Why not assume the positive that ideas can be freely and responsibly exchanged at a routine District Meeting. Nobody is fooled here. The District Chair is going to great lengths to shield Tony Bouie from fair questions by the Membership.

  28. Barry R. says:

    In the LD-6 Republican Committee Newsletter the Chairman goes to great lengths to impugn another District Chairman. Rob Haney is the unnamed District Chair. Rob Haney prepared the Resolution endorsing Rep. Sam Crump and Carl Seel over the 5 day Republican who found it necessary to lie directly to the voters (in a church, no less).

    The very distinguished Mr.Haney received UNANIMOUS approval of his resolution. A unanimous vote at a County Republican Party meeting is practically unheard of. Yet, Mr. Braswell refers to Mr. Haney as irresponsible. For one thing, Mr. Haney’s opponent in his election for District Chair was none other than former Arizona Governor, Fife Symington! For another, Mr. Haney cared enough to write a Resolution and showed up to the meeting to present it. Mr. Haney is considered by many to be the conscience of the Arizona Republican Party. For Braswell do disparage Mr. Haney is LAUGHABLE. Want to see how irresponsible Mr. Haney is? Compare the web site for Legislative District 11, trugop.org with Braswell’s self serving LD-6 web site, azld6gop.org

    Mr. Braswell lining up singing groups and pep talks at the Republican District 6 Meeting just prior to primary election day and depriving the PC’s the opportunity to hear from the candidates is no less than an intentional ploy to shield Tony Bouie and deprive Carl Seel the chance to rebut the scurrilous attacks made against him by the lying Bouie camp.

    If Braswell was willing to be fair and impartial then the 8/25 District 6 Meeting would be scheduled as routine. Both candidates invited and given the opportunity to address the membership and take questions. What is wrong with a regular and routine meeting right before Primary Election day? According to Mr. Braswell’s actions, it does not serve his pick, Tony Bouie well.

    The most impartial scenario possible is a routine meeting. Braswell is working against that as hard as possible. And dressing it up with “impartial talk” while he is working as hard as possible on his partisan effort.

  29. Keeper says:

    David,

    Reagan broke his own 11th commandment when he ran against Gerald Ford in ’76, a sitting President. Any Republican who is wrong needs to be called out on it, e.g. JT Ready.

    According to my sources, the Seel campaign made no agreement with Mr. Braswell.

    They should sell tickets to the meeting. I bet they’d raise a fortune.

  30. newcomer says:

    Public Record Tony Bouie Campaign Finance Report

    http://www.azsos.gov/cfs/PublicReports/2008/6925BBC5-04EF-444D-ADA9-8873BB72B7C8.pdf

    http://www.azsos.gov>>elections>>campaign finance>>committee name bouie

    Some interesting names are Bouie contributors including Amilyn Gordon. Sounds impartial to me!

  31. newcomer says:

    Public Record Tony Bouie Campaign Finance Report

    http://www.azsos.gov/cfs/PublicReports/2008/6925BBC5-04EF-444D-ADA9-8873BB72B7C8.pdf

    azsos.gov–elections–committee information–campaign finance–committee name bouie

    Some interesting names are Bouie contributors including Amilyn Gordon. Sounds impartial to me!

  32. Nike says:

    I don’t live in this district and sure wouldn’t want to, but I have been a precinct committeeman for quite a while and in two different districts in Arizona. I can honestly say this set of circumstances and the desire by this chairman to restrict access to the meeting is dangerous precedent. It shouldn’t matter one iota if the PC is also a candidate. Most legislative candidates do serve in that position.

    Open meetings are part of democracy and NO elected precinct committeeman should be barred from attending his/her own district meeting. This chairman is clearly out of control and acting in a manner adverse to the good of the GOP. He needs to rethink this absurd and overreaching position and hold a candidate forum, as any reasonable person has the right to expect this close to the election.

  33. newcomer says:

    So, if you hear LD-6 meeting is cancelled or the candidates are not welcome to attend then you will know AZ GOP is just protecting their investment.

  34. Richard says:

    The only IMPARTIAL way for LD-6 Chairman to act is to hold a routine District 6 meeting on 8/25 without restrictions on who may attend or what they may have to say.
    It’s a red herring to have police present but, if that’s what the Chairman calls for, go ahead.

    Anything else…I agree with newcomer…AZ GOP is only protecting their verifiable investment in Tony Bouie by AZ GOP FINANCE DIRECTOR, Amilyn Gordon!

  35. Leroy in CG says:

    Sometimes it is nice to live in rural Arizona where you only have to worry about being shot by your enemies. A bit of sanity appears to be missing in the water of Anthem.

    Since the Republican Party is established and operates under Title 16 of the Arizona Revissed Statutes, it seems that no one can bar an elected Precinct Committeeman from a district meeting. Many times the public is barred from giving testimony, both in the legislature and in other meetings open to the public, but this is the first time I have ever heard that a Chairman thought he had the power to refuse discussion and Q&A from the committee members – especially when they are part of the body that elected the Chairman.

    This would be funny if it did not infringe on many state and federal free speech rights. Braswell needs to rethink his ludicrous and probably illegal position. I think that he is directly in line for a personal lawsuit on his actions.

    As to the “keeper of the records”, to try to claim some type of neutrality is even more preposterous than the Chairman’s ridiculous and transparent position.

    Someone else suggested the the County or State Chairman should direct clearer thoughts, but since State Party paid staff have contributed to Mr. Bouie in a contested primary, all claims of neutrality are shattered.

  36. Mark Zemel says:

    Wow! Let’s say LD-6 Officers relent and agree to encourage the LD-6 Republican candidates to attend the LD-6 Republican Committee meeting. Can it be much of a “meeting” with some singing group entertaining us? Or 3 speakers from State Headquarters? I don’t know. It sounds to me like we are supposed to sit on our hands and not discuss the most important issues of the day. The candidates.

    Don’t get me wrong. I am as glad as everybody else to hear from State HQ’s. No question however, we have one of the hottest contested primaries in Arizona. Our PC’s deserve a lot of time hearing from all of our candidates and a lot of time to ask them questions. We also deserve a lot of time to address the meeting. Is it productive to assign away all our time to a singing group and to State HQ’s updates? As far as recruiting volunteers to phone bank…couldn’t we take care of most of that by means of a flyer? Even if Chairman Braswell agrees to encourage all Republican candidates to attend, what have we gained if all of the meeting time is filled with less than the “important issues of the day?” I have copied this note in a direct email to Chairman Braswell. However, since I see there is so much concern for this subject on Seeing Red AZ I decided to post it here too.

    A little less pre-planned entertainment and recruiting talk and a little more exchange of questions, answers and ideas at our 8/25 meeting?

  37. Republican in LD-6 says:

    Mark, you are so right.

  38. newcomer says:

    Are the Chairman’s threats against LD6 Precinct Committeeman still in affect?

    LD6 sent a “meeting reminder” Sunday evening. None of the previous threats from the Chairman against Precinct Committeemen are removed in the meeting reminder. Is he still going to boot Precinct Committeemen out of the District Meeting for asking questions about LD6 Republican candidates? Apparently so, we do not have anything to the contrary.

    Are our non-incumbent LD6 Republican candidates for the Arizona House of Representatives still barred from the LD6 Republican Committee meeting? Apparently so, again, nothing to the contrary has been sent. There is a rumor that these candidates are no longer barred but, that is all. No announcement from LD6 that changes the newsletter containing the Chairman’s threats and statement that he barred candidates from the meeting.

    The meeting time is still filled wall to wall with a singing group, Sean McCaffrey, Amylin Gordon and Pascal. I understand Gordon taking away meeting time from learning more about the candidates. Her money is on Bouie and the less we talk about candidates the better that is for Bouie. Got to protect your investment. The chairman, will allow comments from selected members of the public and PC’s that are limited to 1 minute at the discretion of the chairman. Be careful what you say though. Last we heard, the wrong question will get you booted out of the meeting!

    If there is a change that Tony Bouie (brand new Republican) and Carl Seel (long time Precinct Committeeman) are allowed to come to the LD6 meeting, then shouldn’t that be announced as widely as it was announced they would not be? Of course, and if this change is true, expect LD6 to send out this change as LATE AS POSSIBLE if at all.

  39. Richard says:

    Obviously these district officers are abusing their position of trust. Trying to lock out candidates from the District Meeting a few days before the primary is inexcusable. Right newcomer, where is any kind of corretion to the previous threats of getting booted out of your own meeting for asking questions about candidates? Are the candidates still barred from attending their district meeting? This is such a tragic defeat of the 1st Amendment by the Legislative District 6 Republican Committee Officers. Is this why they were elected? To threaten the Precinct Committeemen and silence questions of the candidates?

  40. Lori says:

    State Party paid staff have contributed money to Bouie! They are going to protect their investment by plugging up your meeting time. The Chairman obviously is working for Bouie’s best interest. What is happening in district 6 is a TRAVESTY!

  41. Tired of It says:

    How can Amylin Gordon come and take up our time when she has a horse in this race? Her donation to one of the candidates takes her out of the mere staffer position.

    We need to have a debate forum with the three contested House candidates rather than this foolishness. If I want to listen to singers, I can put on a CD!! This inane programming is unsuitable at the last meeting before the election. What is the District Chairman thinking? Probably how best to place a stranglehold on discussion.

    Last election cycle, there was an appropriate forum with Clark Thomas, Doug Clark and Sam Crump. We should have nothing less this time around.

  42. Republican in LD-6 says:

    The decisions of David Braswell need to be addressed by a Point of Order. This should be called, one by one, by each member of the committee until Braswell gets off the throne he thinks he owns and understands that his job is to make sure our meetings meet our needs. Silence of PCs is not a solution to meeting substance.

    He is going to need a lot of policemen if he intends to arrest every conservative member of this committee for exercising their civic and elected rights. The last time I saw anything near this type of activity was at a Democrat convention in Chicago.

    Has Braswell lost his mind to the liberal group in LD-6? Has he swung so far over that he is no longer even reasonable? Why is his mentor, Sen. Linda Gray, not giving him good advice on this? There is no way she would back Bouie. These people do not want a conservative Carl Seel in office.

  43. Lori says:

    Where is the State Chairman on this? Why no leadership here? Passive approval for the candidate his finance director has in the race. So, he is okay with clamping down on freedom of assembly and free speech. ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE AZ GOP EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MONDAY NIGHT? OR WILL THE WRONG QUESTIONS GET YOU BOOTED FROM THE MEETING??

  44. nightcrawler says:

    Wow and double wow. I do agree with much of Braswell’s memo regarding the EGC. It is a conflict to endorse any Republican in a primary, especially when the district in question was not represented. Not sure I agree with the “hush order”. The only reason the PCs and the district infrastructure exists is to elect Republicans, to that end PCs need more information rather than less.

    It would have made more sense for a proper debate to occur between the three candidates. Opening statement, debate, closing statement. All questions from the floor would be in writing and scrubbed for appropriateness. No applause or hoopla permitted. The two rent-a-cops could hang out in the back to keep the crazies at bay.

    At least that way, the message of what the candidates stand for would get out.

  45. Richard says:

    25 hours from meeting time. Still no correction from ld6. AZ GOP Finance Director’s horse-Bouie is benefiting from this silence handsomely!

  46. Janelle says:

    The only crazies are Bouie and his wife, Jeffy and Horst. No one else has sent out irrational, out of control stuff. It has been a nice ploy though for Baker who is scared to death to have the PCs question his candidate.

    By the way, Bouie’s wife must be a real charmer in the classroom if she goes off like this when, according to her husband, she is not even involved in the campaign. Watch your children in Anthem has a whole new meaning.

  47. Clark says:

    Nightcrawler:
    You say it is “a conflict to endorse any Republican in a primary…..”
    How about Congressman John Shadegg’s District 6 endorsement of a five day Republican candidate for a state House seat? How about Shadegg recruiting Congressman MiKe Pence of Indiana to join him in this foolishness? I see that as irresponsible and totally out of bounds. “Overkill” comes to mind.

    Electing Republicans is certainly what it’s all about. That’s why it is so difficult to understand why our congressman would endorse a Democrat who only reregistered as a Republican FIVE days before filing his intent to run.

    You say, “The two rent-a-cops could hang out in the back to keep the crazies at bay.”
    The only crazies are the Bouie’s who flagrantly insulted all of the elected precinct committeemen by calling them White Supremacists in a widely circulated email. They have no knowledge of how a district meeting is conducted or what goes on. They certainly don’t know any of the PC’s since he only attended one meeting –when he announced his intention to run. As a lifelong Democrat, he is unable to be a GOP precinct committeeman.

  48. nightcrawler says:

    Janelle and Clark,

    My point about the crazies was not aimed at any one group, clearly there are crazies on both sides and potentially more political rubber-neckers that may show up.

    The rules that govern district officers and hence the MCRC and the AZGOP are different than those for the elected officials. Shadegg can endorse whoever he wants. He knows the political risk. If you notice the AZGOP doesn’t endorse anyone (other than McCain during the state convention). I have long said that the MCRC doesn’t represent all its constituents, it is an old boys club that for the past several years has been rather unwelcoming to moderate Republicans. This is no secret to anyone. There are two major MCRC bylaws that need to be changed in my opinion…

    1) Voting must be weighted by population, not simply each district no matter how small, gets one vote at the EGC. This distortion has put a lot of power in the hands of people who don’t deserve it and frankly created the old boy network.

    2) No member of the EGC individually or collectively should endorse one Republican over another in a contested primary. The is the way it is at the AZGOP and the individual districts, it should be that way at the MCRC.

  49. Sideliner says:

    Nightcrawler,
    Interesting premise you put forth on representation of districts at the EGC. It’s clear you are one of those “progressive” Republicans you call moderates. I have routinely attended EGC meetings and it is anything but a “good old boy’s club.” If you are unhappy with what you consider the adherence to the GOP platform by members of the EGC, why don’t you try working your district as hard as some of the members do, and try to effect some changes? Of course, going door-to-door in 115 degrees is not on the top of everyone’s agenda, and probably not on yours. It’s much easier to grouse. I know a bit about this practice, since I have been known to do it myself. That’s why I call myself “Sideliner.”

    Grousing is a whole lot easier than working.

    And since you are so worried abut endorsements, you might remind yourself that the endorsements you so disdain were not commonplace. Smear tactics against solid Republican office holders and candidates require response.

    I still maintain that congressmen and their out-of-state congressional cronies, have no business getting involved on this level. John Shadegg’s actions in endorsing a lifelong Democrat over am active and hardworking Republican, were reprehensible. Bringing in an Indiana congressman who doesn’t have any personal knowledge of these candidates to join him in this foray, is clearly beyond the limits of reasonableness. He is being challenged by a well-financed Democrat this time around. He ought to pay attention to his own race. He has ticked off a lot of longtime supporters with this indefensible maneuver.

  50. nightcrawler says:

    Sideliner,

    I won’t run from the progressive label, it is a fair representation. I am close to both those that call themselves conservatives and those you would call RINOs. My ideology lies somewhere in between. Just for the record, while I do grouse from time to time, I have paid my LD dues, worked less than some, but more than most.

    I don’t have an answer for the out of state endorsement other than to say Shadegg must really want to see Bouie win, or as the case maybe, Seel lose. My guess is that Shadegg believes the Bouie has a better shot in the general than Seel.

    PS I am glad you will get an honest look at your candidates tonight, that was the right outcome.

  51. Sideliner says:

    Careful Nightcrawler, “Progressive” is the new label liberal democrats use to describe themselves, now that “Liberal;” has taken on negative connotations.

    It is impossible to be a RINO and a Conservative. They stand for vastly different positions on the issues. Pick one, NC. Fence straddling exposes private parts that taking a position covers.

    The short answer to Shadegg’s outlandish actions can be given in one word, “McCain.” To expand on that I’d add the other M word, “Money.” One of the other commenters said that the other day, and I had to chuckle at that correct assessment. Illegal immigration is the spine bracing all of this lunacy, from endorsing democrats to hammering popular Sheriff Arpaio. The word from on high is you don’t go against John McCain and his Shamenesty scheme if you are a congressman and hope for a continued money stream into your congressional coffers.

    And why would Shadegg think a democrat who has trouble with truth-telling would have a better shot at the legislative seat than a hardworking republican? Again, the short answer is Bouie was recruited because he was moldable. He didn’t even know what employer sanctions was when asked. He said he’d talk to his consultant and get back with the person who inquired about his stance on that issue. THIS is the guy Shadegg thinks has a better chance? Bouie was hosted at a fundraiser by all of the open borders business moguls who think having a stooge doing their bidding at the legislature is a good thing.

    And, yes, it is a good thing that District Chairman Braswell rethought his extreme and untenable position about ejecting the elected precinct committeemen who is a legislative candidate from the meeting. Braswell is clearly over his head in this role. He needs to be replaced.

  52. Tony GOPrano says:

    See you at tonight’s meeting Janelle/Jaime!!!