PDA

View Full Version : Kansas Republicans will demand loyalty oath


Mr. Laz
08-01-2007, 09:54 AM
Posted on Tue, Jul. 31, 2007

Kansas Republicans will demand loyalty oath
By MIKE HENDRICKS

Over the weekend, Kansas Republican leaders formed what they’re calling a “loyalty committee,” a move that’s ticking off moderates and conservatives alike.

It is never a sign of strength when your group, country or otherwise starts imposing loyalty oaths, or so I told Kansas Republican Party Chairman Kris Kobach over the phone on Tuesday.

“That’s probably a fair criticism,” he said.

Yet, beginning next January, the state GOP will begin purging its leadership — all the way down to the precinct level — of any party official who actively supports non-Republicans for office.

“One weakness we’ve had is that on game day, a few of our leaders have gone out and supported the other team,” Kobach said. “I’m trying to basically take in two years a team that got skunked in 2006 to a winning team in 2008.”

You can see why the Kansas GOP is heading this way.

Republican moderates and conservatives have been at each other for decades. But it’s getting worse, from Kobach’s point of view. Ronald Reagan’s commandment, “Thou Shall Not Speak Ill of a Fellow Republican,” gets no respect.

Every couple of years, for instance, a group calling itself Republicans for Moore buys ads in support of 3rd District Congressman Dennis Moore, a Democrat. Then Moore goes on to beat the Republican.

In 2004, the loser was Kobach, who couldn’t even win in heavily Republican Johnson County. But this sort of thing isn’t confined to JoCo. Cross-party endorsements have been flying in other parts of the state.

More worrisome for the GOP have been the high-profile defections we saw in 2006. First, the former head of the Kansas Republican Party, Mark Parkinson, left the party to become the running mate of Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. The pair won easily.

Then former Johnson County District Attorney Paul Morrison left the GOP to run for state attorney general, trouncing the Republican incumbent, Phill Kline.

There were others, and there are bound to be more now that moderate Republicans have learned the secret to beating their conservative adversaries: Avoid a losing battle in the primary, where the most-conservative voters hold sway. Switch parties and eke it out in the general, winning the support of Democrats, independents and moderate Republicans.

As the trend accelerates, so will the number of “loyal” Republicans eager to support their party-switching friends — or so goes the logic.

Hence, the new rule (to be enforced by a new committee) aimed at dissuading public displays of affection across party lines.

“We’re not compelling anyone to make a pledge to the GOP,” said Christian Morgan, executive director of the state party. “You’ve just got to not endorse a Democrat.”

Not everyone is happy about this. Some mods are squawking. The chairman of the Kansas Democrats smugly said his party had no plans to form its own loyalty committee.

But frankly, I don’t see anything wrong with the Republicans or any other group purging themselves of turncoats. As long as it doesn’t apply to the average party member, who can switch parties at will, I say let the cleansing begin.

Only here’s the most interesting wrinkle of all. Most upset by the new rule weren’t the Republican moderates. (Hey, they’re used to being pushed around, right?).

More angry were the pro-life conservatives, the very folks who turned the Republican Party into the lovefest it is today.

Among the loudest objections, Kobach said, was that from former Kansans for Life president Tim Golba.

Golba has proudly supported pro-life Democrats for office while continuing to vote on internal GOP matters, and he thinks he ought to be able to continue doing so.

“I helped lead tons of Bible-believing Christians into the Republican Party,” Golba told me. “And what they’re saying is they don’t want us in the party anymore.”

That’s not at all what they’re saying. But party loyalty comes first, Kobach said, adding, “I think it’s a long time coming,”

To reach Mike Hendricks, call 816-234-7708 or send e-mail to mhendricks@kcstar.com.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/columnists/mike_hendricks/story/213657.html

BucEyedPea
08-01-2007, 09:56 AM
Not good.

Bowser
08-01-2007, 10:27 AM
Awesome state.

I'm no expert, but couldn't this be argued as illegal? And if it's NOT illegal, wouldn't that make republicans who actually enjoy to invoke their right to think what they want will actually defect to another party, thus weakening the neo-con repub base in Kansas?

Bowser
08-01-2007, 10:27 AM
C'mon, Adept! Fire away! Fish in a barrel!

Braincase
08-01-2007, 10:29 AM
It's no longer about who is the best person for the job. Idiocy knows no party boundaries, and I am a moderate Republican, but some of the far right is so FOS they leave me no choice but to support a non-Republican, i.e. the real easy choice of Sebelius over Shallenburger a couple of years ago.

Cochise
08-01-2007, 10:59 AM
This happens on both sides, already. I remember reading that Daschle would tell people if they didn't vote with him on XYZ they wouldn't get re-election support from the national party. In some cases the national party will try to run a candidate against a 'rogue' to defeat them in a primary.

If anyone ever thought it was about "who's best for the job", that was a sad mistake. It's about trying to get like-minded ideologies in leadership positions. If you ever thought otherwise I think you were drinking the Gullible Punch.

mlyonsd
08-01-2007, 06:33 PM
Just change out the names and parties and you'd have the dems and Lieberman in 2006.

trndobrd
08-02-2007, 02:16 PM
Interesting headline, but I didn't see anything in there about a loyalty oath.

FWIW, they passed a rule that allows Party officials (i.e. County Chair, State Committee delgate) to lose their position within the party if they decide to become a "Republican for ____" or contribute money to a non-Republican candidate in a contested election. Basically, if you want to publicly support the opposition, you can't have a position in party leadership.

Nightwish
08-02-2007, 06:54 PM
Interesting headline, but I didn't see anything in there about a loyalty oath.

FWIW, they passed a rule that allows Party officials (i.e. County Chair, State Committee delgate) to lose their position within the party if they decide to become a "Republican for ____" or contribute money to a non-Republican candidate in a contested election. Basically, if you want to publicly support the opposition, you can't have a position in party leadership.
I would say that would probably only carry any weight if the "Republican for _____" group were affiliated with or sponsored by the Kansas Republican Party. They don't own the rights to the name "Republican," though, since it is a national movement. If Joe Blow wants to start his own group called "Republicans for Mud Guppies," and support a Green Party candidate who is more likely to protect mud guppy habitats, there isn't jack squat that the Kansas Republican Party could do to the man, unless he sought their approval or sponsorship.

trndobrd
08-02-2007, 07:47 PM
I would say that would probably only carry any weight if the "Republican for _____" group were affiliated with or sponsored by the Kansas Republican Party. They don't own the rights to the name "Republican," though, since it is a national movement. If Joe Blow wants to start his own group called "Republicans for Mud Guppies," and support a Green Party candidate who is more likely to protect mud guppy habitats, there isn't jack squat that the Kansas Republican Party could do to the man, unless he sought their approval or sponsorship.


Let me put this in a more concrete example. If a Republican who holds a leadership position within the party structure itself* (not just someone registered as a Republican) joins "Republicans for Moore" or "Republicans for Sebelius" or were to add their names to a newspaper ad endorsing a non-Republican candidate in a contested race, that person could be stripped of their leadership position within the Republican party.

Basically, it is a way to remove party officers who work against the party. It seems kind of self evident that if someone wants to be a Republican Party County Chair that they wouldn't go around endorsing Democrats, but some have.

*District Delegates, County Delegates, Precint people, State Committee Delegates, etc.

WilliamTheIrish
08-02-2007, 08:37 PM
Sounds like something you'd sign in blood.

In a treehouse.

When you were 7.

beer bacon
08-02-2007, 11:06 PM
Let me put this in a more concrete example. If a Republican who holds a leadership position within the party structure itself* (not just someone registered as a Republican) joins "Republicans for Moore" or "Republicans for Sebelius" or were to add their names to a newspaper ad endorsing a non-Republican candidate in a contested race, that person could be stripped of their leadership position within the Republican party.

Basically, it is a way to remove party officers who work against the party. It seems kind of self evident that if someone wants to be a Republican Party County Chair that they wouldn't go around endorsing Democrats, but some have.

*District Delegates, County Delegates, Precint people, State Committee Delegates, etc.

Mindless loyalty to the party really is the perfect way to operate. That always ends well.

listopencil
08-03-2007, 05:00 PM
I'm going to go make a brightly colored banner, fascism is coming back into style! Yee-hah!

Adept Havelock
08-03-2007, 05:22 PM
Mindless loyalty to the party really is the perfect way to operate. That always ends well.


My thought as well. Gotta dump the moderates that reach across the aisle to actually get things done. Straight out of the wingnut/moonbat playbook.