What if politicians actually did what they said they were going to do?

In my hometown paper, the News & Record, a report appears today that states the N.C. House will keep on the books, for another two years, a tax that was to expire in 2003. The article appears on their website at http://www.news-record.com/news/government/ga/legbriefs_061005.htm.

The article states that the revenue to fund our state budget will come from the 1/2 cents sales tax from 2001 and will also tax those in upper income brackets at a rate of 8.25 percent, making our most prosperous North Carolinians the target of higher and higher taxes.

We cannot tax our way into prosperity!

On another note this week I read that N.C. Supreme Court Associate Justice Paul Newby announced that he is a candidate for the 2012 Supreme Court race. I am glad to hear it as we need more conservative judges like Paul Newby. However, his reason for announcing so early underscores just how cumbersome and unrealistic election law has become in North Carolina.

As an article in the News & Observer stated, one of their weasel reporters raised questions about Newby attending a pro-family rally. Apparently a pro-queer activist associated with another campaign lead the reporter to the story. (Reporters are generally too lazy to find out anything on their own.)

The explanation of the law according to the N&O read as follows: "The justices' attendance didn't violate any judicial ethics rules. As a judge, they can attend political events and fund raisers. However, as a candidate, judges are more free to engage in political activities and political speech under the ethics rules, said Jim Drennan with the Institute of Government.

For example, a candidate can endorse another candidate, while a judge who has not announced his or her candidacy cannot endorse someone, Drennan said."

Now, if any of that makes sense, you must be a Philadelphia Lawyer.

On the eve of the NCGOP Convention, I look forward to seeing many of my friends and readers there. I will be in and out of the hospitality suites on Friday evening as I will be arriving later in the evening. I also understand that their have been cancellations in speakers and so I am glad that I did not pay for the additional meals.

While it is anyone's guess as to the outcome, I will be casting my vote for Vernon Robinson due to the incredible ineffectiveness of the current chairman and staff.

Another point worth making is that I understand that there are over 900 delegates registered for this convention.This number seems extremely low for a state such as North Carolina and with the bulk of registered die-hard republicans living in Western North Carolina.

I suspect that not much will change but one can hope.

As a follow up to my first commentary, I want to say thank you to all who commented and participated in the discussion. A few took issue with what I had to write and there were some apologists or “spin doctors” who wanted to get in on the act. This development is a great place for Republicans, particularly Conservatives, to begin the formulation of a possible New Republican Majority in North Carolina.

It would seem that times are indeed changing with regards to the NCGOP. My understanding from those involved in Wake County that Vernon Robinson made quite the impression with some of the loyal grassroots activists there. I also understand that Robinson has told others that Bill Peaslee may be fired if a Robinson campaign is successful. This has certainly bolstered Robinson’s chances with many of my contacts across the state. It appears that the “big tent” is more preferable than the “tiny tent”.

Oddly, Robinson’s brand of fiery rhetoric and conviction might prove to be the uniting force in Asheville. Robinson has one great advantage over his competition: he understands who the real enemy is and goes after them.

Of course, when the political lines are so blurred by petty personal differences and agendas, the end result is a state party that fails to accomplish anything. I caught some heat regarding my criticism of Art Pope’s and others involvement and desire to dictate a party “their” way, versus a party that adheres to core principles yet believes in the individual and their ability to act and express their political will rather than being sheep following each other off the proverbial cliff. Robinson may be seeing what some blind sheep refuse to see.

It is no coincidence that a few consultants who worked for Pope and his interests, Tom Fetzer and Mark Stephens, announced on March 30th their joint partnership with Speaker Jim Black’s and Lieutenant Governor Beverly Perdue’s consultant, Brad Crone.  For a party so bent on “purity” there seems to be a mixing of the ingredients that continue to dilute the party.

The release bragged of the “strategic alliance” of the firms that will now offer “Bi-Partisan Consulting Services”. It seems to tell a bigger tale about the past cycle.  After all, Fetzer and Stephens were in charge of the GOP Senate effort this past cycle. Robinson correctly points out: “We even lost seats in the state senate to add insult to injury!” There are bigger issues going on here. How can we expect to win and beat the other side when the strategist for the Democrats is holding hands with the Republicans?

One should not miss the great irony here. Tom Fetzer now agrees with Richard Morgan that there are needs for Bi-partisan coalitions. Also strangely missing from the release is that Fetzer is a member of Pope’s American’s for Prosperity and, according to a July 27th, 2004 News and Observer article, Pope’s group, the Republican Legislative Majority, used Fetzer Stephens in their attacks on eight Republican House members.

Mix in with this a News and Observer report in January of 2003 where rumors were floating that Pope would be Daughtry’s chief advisor if elected Speaker you begin to put many of the pieces together as to why Pope has attacked Morgan with such zeal. Pope, according to the article, seemed to deny such an offer. "I will continue to have a great deal of interest in the state budget, taxes and redistricting," Pope said. "Whether or not I will be involved in a formal capacity or informal capacity, I have not asked for or received any agreement." The open-ended statement left others in the caucus wondering what exactly Pope’s role would be.

It seems that the seeds for dissention have been sown all around the North Carolina Republican Party and many of the same old faces appear time and time again. I was posed the question as to why I criticized Pope and Daughtry but placed no blame on Richard Morgan. My interrogator missed the point.

When big boys with deep pockets launch attack campaigns against anyone who dare to disagree with them, how could we fault the other side for fighting back? I write not to defend Morgan, but to point out that Morgan would not be an issue if a more open party structure existed.

The discussion of Michael Decker also seemed to upset a few, and I agree that Decker’s actions with regard to switching parties were deplorable.  However, would Decker have been so upset had others within the caucus not recruited someone to run against him in the primary? Maybe this looked over fact should be restated and pursued.

Some other facts regarding the disintegration in the NC House Republican Caucus have been ignored and were brought to light by a recent column by Paul O’Connor. O’Connor gives a better accounting of history than has been circulated in GOP circles. O’Connor writes: “let's go back to 1997, the second and last session of the 20th century in which the GOP controlled the state House. Speaker Harold Brubaker and his rules chairman, Morgan, began feuding with Republicans who felt they were being ignored. At the time, the friction was personal, not ideological.”

O’Connor continues: “The feud only got worse after Democrats retook the House for the 1999 and 2001 sessions. So to say that Decker is the root of the feud is plain wrong.”

By all accounts Decker was one of the most conservative Republicans in the state House. His fall from grace may be worth noting, but to lay blame for the continued infighting is disingenuous at best. Decker left the party after the 2002 election because he was being forced to vote for a man he considered highly unethical. Given Decker’s strong religious convictions, this really should have come as no surprise. What is surprising is how our Party leaders rushed to attack him for staying true to his religious convictions instead of asking themselves if Daughtry was the right man to unite the Republican Party. Even with George Holmes, who was offered as an alternative to Daughtry, the perception was that Holmes was nothing more than a Daughtry lackey.

We have all been led down a path of half-truths and innuendos by those in authority. It is time for the grassroots to wake up and smell the greenbacks and begin to question what is really going on with our party. Once we as a party work toward a common agenda and unite behind solid conservative policies and not personalities, we will return to Raleigh in the majority. I think that can happen.

Times they are a-changin’!

My first posting with regards to the infighting in the North Carolina Republican Party made quite a splash over at www.ncumors.com. This is especially exciting since I just began my blog. They were very gracious in placing this blog on their regular updates.

I also should thank www.ncblogs.com for adding me to their list of regular posters.

I write to make others think! So far, so good!

Carolina Pundit 

After volunteering for a number of Republican candidates for office over the years, both locally and state-wide, it is readily apparent to me that the state Republican Party is in such disarray that new leadership is needed, both in elected office and within the party structure itself.

For years, I have noticed the steady disintegration of the effectiveness of the NCGOP and our leadership. All this while consistently electing many good Republicans to office yet watching offices like the Governor’s and others slip through our fingers because of ineffective action. From my viewpoint, is does not have to be this way and good Republicans across our state can join together and make a difference.

Republicans are at a crossroads in North Carolina and we have several choices to make. One choice is to continue down a road of tearing each other apart, lobbing snide remarks and comments at one another, name-calling, and so on. I would argue that is the wrong choice.

A second, and more viable option, is for the grassroots activists and those willing that are already elected, to work toward a positive, results-oriented agenda.

I must caution those that wish to undertake such a noble task to understand a bit of current history and how we got to this point.

There have been several people involved in the state GOP that have allowed personal agendas to interfere with our party keeping pace or surpassing other states in terms of GOP success. If you received Vernon Robinson’s appeal for support for his chairmanship as I did, you will read that he is very right about some things.

Robinson writes: “Only seven of 50 states are now completely controlled by Democrat occupation of both the Governor's mansion and the legislature. And North Carolina is one of them!”

This fact should outrage Republicans all across North Carolina and cause them to take a moment and ask why. The answer lies in the behavior of many in power positions in the NCGOP and in the State House. Personal agendas and personal ambition have brought our party unsuccessful election after another. We have seen some bright spots such as the election of Richard Burr, Elizabeth Dole, Les Merritt, Steve Troxler, and others, but I would submit that this is largely due to these campaigns’ individual effectiveness, not because of the work of the state party.

We have been left behind. How is it that a state as conservative as North Carolina keeps electing liberal Dems like Mike Easley and a liberal state house and senate?

Again, largely because we have a state party and members of our own house caucus that do not want to see success unless they are completely and totally in charge.

In a Charlotte Observer article in October, Rep. Frank Mitchell, an Iredell County Republican described Art Pope as: "a man who is willing to use his checkbook to back up what he believes." Let me be crystal clear, I have no problem with someone, even a billionaire getting behind the candidate or candidates of their choice for their personal beliefs. The problem comes in, particularly with regards to our party, when you find out what Pope believes.

Pope believes in an ideologically driven party. So do most in the grassroots of the Party. However, he also believes that if you disagree with him, you should not be welcome as long as he is writing the checks. And that’s the sum of the real problem with the party.

From my viewpoint, Republicans should be free to vary on opinions. I do not believe that one, or a small group of Republicans know exactly what is best for the rest of us. What happened to the party of the big tent?

We seem to have a field-hand/plantation owner mentality in the NCGOP. They always want you to work and do their bidding, but never ever disagree with the powers that be or they will annihilate you politically.

The same Observer article that I mentioned earlier said: “The Pope family has spent $260,000 this year boosting anti-Morgan General Assembly candidates. They managed to beat several of Morgan's top allies in the Republican primaries, including Rep. David Miner, a Wake County Republican. Morgan himself barely escaped the primary.”

How could the NCGOP ever expect to win when we were not even working together?

We win by sharing our viewpoints and managing to get along, even when we disagree. Reagan’s “11th Commandment” should always apply. This will help our party know who the real enemy to our values truly are and allow us to stay focused on the task. We should not be spending money in primaries against each other when the money could be used in general elections.

A series of email lists have also developed in the ranks of the worker bees who have succumbed to these twisted and ill-motivated power grabs. The rhetoric has continued and now has infected local parties so bad in some areas of the state that it would appear that the entire party mechanism is becoming unglued and dysfunctional.

It can be fixed however. I have seen our party march to the same drum occasionally. In 1994, prior to our Republicans taking over the House, Jack Hawke and the House Republicans worked together to accomplish a majority. They were successful because they worked on the things they agreed on. It can be done again.

I am optimistic that there are leaders in our party today, from the precinct level to the House that want to see this accomplished. Now, how do we work together on this and who will unite us?