Real Reform added the endorsement today of Wisconsin Federation of College Republicans Chairman Mary Ellen Burke, bringing the total number of state chairman signed onto the platform to thirteen. Here is the statement Burke released in her endorsement:
"I support Real Reform because we need a federation based on ideas and not bureaucracy."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
110 comments:
How typical
I absolutely love the anonymous drive-by hit jobs. I guess since Chatter is no more, the bomb throwing has landed here!
Correction: 14 state chairmen are supporting Real Reform.
"i. Budget & Finance Committee
A budget & finance committee consisting of the caucus chairs, the CRNC national chairman and chaired by the CRNC treasurer should be appointed for the purpose of financial oversight."
I'm sorry but how does creating a "Budget & Finance Committee" constitute as not creating a "bureaucracy"??
It is just a good measure for accountability; more regulation is a good thing in this area of managing our money.
Yeah, but it's still bureaucracy. That's basically they're whole ticket.
I'm sorry, but aren't Republicans for "limited government" and "less bureaucracy"?
"v. Operation Big Trunk & CRNC Jobs
The CRNC should increase the effectiveness of Operation Big Trunk and CRNC Jobs."
LOL!!!
The CRNC should be against cancer too.
The CRNC would never accomplish anything if our money had to go through a process approval via bureaucracy. Those people better be prepared to be readily available at every whim.
Both of those elements are basically worthless right now though, so improving them is definitely a good thing if they are going to be around.
I haven't heard the CRNC speak against cancer. Therefore, they must be "pro-cancer".
I don't think the goal is to tie up every single expenditure, but it is to keep everyone on the same page and have better accountability.
Obviously, pro-cancer.
How is "Operation Big Trunk" worthless when there are College Republican chapters utilizing it?
Whether you like it or not, a bureaucracy would inevitably tie up our CRNC expenditures.
Have you seen the websites? Most of the chapters that are signed up for it and have domains have never bothered to go in and edit their pages. I would be willing to bet that under 25% of the chapters who have domains under Big Trunk actually have made use of the website.
CRNCjobs is basically a rip off of conservativejobs.com its useless and a waste of time when li already has it.
Both programs are a step in the right direction.
If done right, it is not a bureaucracy. Having a finance committee is a good thing people! Letting more than two or three people keep tabs on the books would do wonders.
I think that CRNC Jobs could be made more effective simply by taking a page from Conservative Jobs, and either partnering with them or making the site worthwhile like LI's version is.
If you have a leadership you can trust, you don't need a bureaucracy for finance.
Do you not trust Siludeman?
well i guess you're right. we'll see...
Big Trunk and CRNC Jobs are good ideas, but they needed a little more work before they were launched. The product they put out was pretty bad, let's be honest here.
A committee is just a good idea. Most all of the county and state GOP organizations utilize finance committees.
siludeman? is it official now?
And I repeat: Do you not trust Siludeman?
Does that make the current admin. Schurley?
"The product they put out was pretty bad, let's be honest here."
Most definately. I don't see why they just don't post a link to conservativejobs.com though. li and cr work together anyway. what harm could be done?
Yes, I do trust them, but even with trust existing there, it is still a good measure to take.
If you are going to fight FOR a financial bureaucracy, can you please provide charts and graphs proving that having a finance committee in these organizations is more successful than not?
Exactly. Make it a co-op project, or just do away with it and link up on the website.
To be honest, you've got me there, but I am sure the guys who are actually running this show are working on things like that. The platform is going to have to fleshed out as this campaign goes on anyhow, so I am sure someone is doing it. On the flip side, do you have anything concrete to prove that it is not a good thing?
right, and what are the cred. for getting on these committees?
Getting on the CRNC Cmte. or a real state/county party cmte.?
crnc cmte. I mean, srsly, we couldnt just let any state get on.
If Republicans can live without excessive amounts of bureaucracy and we, as Republicans, are a successful party, then is that not proof enough?
AND
The obvious fact that the more levels of government you have the more difficult it is to accomplish anything.
Are we not the party of Reagan?
i like big booty hoesssss.
"i. Budget & Finance Committee
A budget & finance committee consisting of the caucus chairs, the CRNC national chairman and chaired by the CRNC treasurer should be appointed for the purpose of financial oversight."
^is that u gourley?
^ are we not educated enough to come up with a real rebuttal; you know, something other than "is that u gourley?"
i guess that idea is ok. im still a bit weary.
This is not excessive bureaucracy. It is four extra people doing oversight that the Natl. Board already does yearly, except that they will be doing it quarterly. 4 people is not a bureaucracy; like I said, State and County GOP organizations already employ the use of Finance Committees.
Where did you get "quarterly" from? Seeing as how it isn't in the platform.
Did someone ask if I was Gourley? Because if Gourley is quoting the Real Reform platform, he really is in dire straits!
lawd ham mercy. Why are ppl signing onto platforms when theye haven't even seen all there is yet?
sheesh.
no i was asking if the person who loves big booty hoes is gourley.
"Where did you get "quarterly" from? Seeing as how it isn't in the platform. "
I smell a real reform agent
"iii. Line-Item Budgets
Annual line-item budgets will be submitted to the national board for approval. The budget & finance committee shall review the budget quarterly and recommend changes as necessary."
It isn't in the same bullet point, but it is indeed in the platform two points below. So, no, I didn't just pull "quarterly" out of thin air. Even if it was not mentioned, it is common sense to assume that a quarterly review would be the logical setup, seeing as how our country's fiscal apparatus operates on a quarterly basis.
Quarterly is in the platform, kids.
I'm sorry, I'm not a business major. I have a soul.
Touche, sir. Not a business major either, but I figured people would get the example of companies presenting quarterly earnings reports.
What qualifies State Chairmen to be financial gurus?
What qualifies State Chairmen to be National Chairmen?
Please, let's refrain from answering questions...with questions.
Not every State Chairman is capable of running a multi-million dollar organization. Hence, why there is only ONE National Chairman.
Nothing qualifies any single College Republican for any position of leadership in terms of finance and budgets, but we work on the assumption that as State Chairmen, they have compiled their own state fed. budgets, thus giving them some measure of experience.
The biggest shocker here is that this is shaping up to be one of the most boring crnc races EVER!
"but we work on the assumption that as State Chairmen, they have compiled their own state fed. budgets, thus giving them some measure of experience."
So, assuming that your previous statement is true, shouldn't we be choosing people for the Budget & Finance Committee that have created financial successes within their own state federations?
I agree that fireworks have not exactly been prevalent to date, but this is one of the earliest starts for a CRNC campaign. Wait until after Christmas, as we get closer to CPAC. Things will heat up considerably. Remember, too, that we have no announced candidates, and people have to be more careful about public attacks when they are not in the race yet.
My o my.
Yes, I think that would be a good idea, but for the purposes of the platform, I also think that they probably decided plugging in Caucus Chairmen there would do for the time being. I don't see this platform going unchanged or unimproved upon.
Well we do hav Siludeman who haven't announced officially...
Has anyone here noticed that the majority of the Siludeman Platform is word for word from Davidson's Platform in 2005, give or take a few new ideas?
How can someone, with decency, claim that platform as their own?
There is also the assumption, albeit a bad one, that the Caucus Chairmen should be among the better State Chairmen. Not saying that these are two good assumptions to make, but I am simply pointing out that they are there.
BTW, facebook groups are stupid
People should really perfect their platform before they embarrass themselves by presenting one that is mediocre & amateur.
"How can someone, with decency, claim that platform as their own?"
Then there is the assumption that there is decency involved in this.
I'm sorry, but do you have a Siludeman ticket spot or something?
There are definitely a lot of similarities, but no one is talking about that. I also think there are people that are still fighting that same fight of 2005 and would not care if the platform actually changed. Aside from this, they should probably acknowledge the genesis of the majority of this platform, but simply because it is the same does not make the ideas bad ones.
Somebody on here obviously does have a Siludeman ticket spot or a job in DC in the works...hmmmmmmm
"Then there is the assumption that there is decency involved in this."
Exactly, assumption and we all know where assumptions lead us.
It is head and shoulders above "Unity".
Where is Unity?
Just sitting back here and watching the fun, but I can tell you that by IP addresses, it doesn't look like there are any people who would be on a ticket on the site right now.
Has anyone asked Davidson how he feels about people stealing his ideas?
Nowhere because it is nothing but a catchphrase.
Does he even care is the million dollar question.
Don't be foolish enough to assume that conversation did not happen. He is meeting with Charlie this weekend, and everyone knows about it because it got up on Truth Caucus, but that does not mean that other people did not meet with him earlier.
If he didn't care, then he wouldn't have called Siludeman during the National Board Meeting weekend to tell them how upset and disappointed he was in the both of them.
ok, getting boring now...
You have to love naivete.
It is funny that the bigger player of the two previous candidates is not the one who won that battle.
big booty hoes. nuff said.
"It is funny that the bigger player of the two previous candidates is not the one who won that battle."
Funny indeed.
indeed, big booty hoes.
Probably because the person that won cheated.
But then again, in the words of Mark Grace "If you're not cheating, you're not trying."
"Probably because the person that won cheated"
Proof?
You have to wonder how badly they are kicking themselves in DC for not recruiting more pro-Establishment State Chair candidates last spring. Although, there is still a whole other cycle of state elections this year we seem to be forgetting.
The fax, the threats, it was blatant.
" Although, there is still a whole other cycle of state elections this year we seem to be forgetting. "
Right. This means endorsements mean next to nothing.
Do we really need to give proof again? Missouri, New Jersey, Virginia, New Mexico, and the list goes on. We had an election; it got dirty. Cannot we just move on here?
"The fax, the threats"
The proof?
Everyone seems to forget that these early endorsements are worthless. Just to name two who are not going to be around come springtime: Justin Smith (already out) and Dan Carlson (not running for another term). More of the endorsers are sure to follow.
I am sorry that I do not have a transcript of the phone calls from McHenry or a copy of the fax in hand. I don't carry them on my person 24/7.
If we thought the last election cycle was bad with out-of-staters interfering with state elections, this spring will be worse.
But, there is a factor to consider: Most State Chairman from this cycle get to practically hand-pick their successors.
" I don't carry them on my person 24/7."
And who is your person?
Most, but not all. Not all by a longshot. There is more discontentment in some states than you think.
and when do you carry it on him?
If I told you that, I wouldn't be able to hide behind my anonymity, now would I?
Some of the ones who do get to handpick will be fairly safe if their state is on the ticket. But, the average College Republican simply does not know what the national scene entails. Some of the more inexperienced newbies will surely change their minds 500 times between their election and the CRNC election.
I believe that big booty hoes are germaine to the topic at hand: persons.
*OMG* I got a headache
Indeed they are.
Sledgehammer to the forehead usually takes care of those for me.
State chairs are supposed to work for the people in their states, not for some tool who promises them a ticket place. Damn it.
Merry Christmas from the CRNC!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GD3MFkk73Z4
so what states do the endorsements actually matter in? Who has the control over who the next chairman is?
ie what state chairman currently can appoint someone and they can win without any serious challenge?
None of them.
Actually a few, but I won't name names.
Post a Comment