Nathan Moore's Thoughts
Van-ity
This Saturday ought to be interesting. I go to very few State Executive Committee meetings, but I believe I’ll go to this one. From South End Grounds
The Committee will meet again this weekend so I did a little checking around to see what was going on with this situation. One committee member told me that a resolution is being developed to remove Hilleary from his position as National Committeeman. The member also told me that the votes are there to pass it if Hilleary doesn’t back down from his position.
Surely, Hilleary doesn’t want an embarrassing defeat that would show weakness with grassroots Republican primary voters at this stage of the game. But that might be what’s in store for him if he insists on holding an official party position while running in a contested primary. It’s a situation not allowed in other states and fraught with conflicts of interest.
No word yet on whether Jane Fonda supports the resolution or not.
August 17th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
Are you saying that John Ryder should have resigned as National Committeeman when he was simultaneously running in a contested primary? John was a great Committeeman and performed all of his duties well while he was also running in a contested primary. There is no reason Van can’t do the same.
And let’s not forget Beth Harwell she served as Party Chairman while running.
This is nothing more than a politically motivated stunt –something for the bloggers to get each all worked up over.
Van has worked extremely hard for the Party and for the conservative cause over the years. He is a good Committeeman and this Party and the people he has helped elect over the years should be thankful for his service.
You’re an Ed supporter so your attacks make sense. If I am correct John Ryder sits on Ed’s kitchen cabinet…wonder if he would concede that he should have resigned his position. My guess is no. What about Beth? My guess again ..no.
August 17th, 2005 at 9:45 pm
Thanks for the comment.
Actually, I’m a Bob Corker supporter, so I have no opinion on John Ryder one way or another. I would contend, however, that anyone running, as Van is, and who holds a party office, like Van does, ought to resign that office.
No one is immune from this suggestion. Talk of a movement by members of the SEC this Saturday is what put this on the table, not any particular Van-centric animous on my part. The political implications are plain however, and Van ought to simply resign the position and continue running for Senate (or Governor, or Congress, whatever it is he actually intends to do). He gains nothing by pitching this battle.
As to grass roots, if I recall correctly, Van more or less borrowed what Ed had created in running against Lamar (except for the East Tennessee part - it seems Bredesen borrowed that). Let’s give credit where credit is due.
Regards,
NSM
August 17th, 2005 at 10:19 pm
Van has the strongest grassroots network in this state sans the Bush Cheney network in 04. The proof is in the pudding. As I recall Van won 93 of 95 counties in the primary and Ed won 23 — not to mention Lamar has no grassroots organization to speak of and he still beat Ed handily.
What Bredesen borrowed was about $4 million dollars from his personal bank account and he spent it on back to back attacks ads in east Tennessee in the remaining days of the campaign.
Let’s not forget what a great party man Bob Corker is hosting a reception in his home for the Democrat gubernatorial nominee. Nice –talk about party building. Guess that is why he won’t run against his good buddy Phil. Besides how would the pro-choice, pro-income tax folks choose between the two? Would they vote for lil’ Don Sundquist or Phil Bredesen –would be a tough one?
This SEC nonsense is politically motivated by Ed and Corker supporters. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens.
Regardless of who you support it is a fact that neither John Ryder nor Beth Harwell resigned their party positions when they were running for office. Why should Van be different?
August 17th, 2005 at 10:28 pm
It’s a silly battle to fight. If Van has any political sense (which is in doubt after the Jane Fonda challenge), he’ll simply resign the position. It doesn’t do him any good anyhow. In the midst of a senatorial primary, this is not a place to stake principle.
As to my posts re Corker and why I’m supporting him over the other two, a search of the site will show the ample supply.
Regards,
NSM
August 17th, 2005 at 10:31 pm
oh the canned rhetoric…what about his record? i don’t think there is going to be much of a fight over this on saturday but I have been wrong before. we shall see.
and it is ok to be for corker if i was a pro-choice tax raising squish i would vote for him too. every wing of the party needs some representation.
have a nice evening and i look forward to seeing what happens on saturday
August 18th, 2005 at 9:29 am
I’m not a Republican (in fact, Nathan himself correctly identified me as being “all over the place” in a recent comment), but I was one of the first people to notice, and to begin questioning, Van Hilleary’s dual role as Natl Committeeman and potential candidate, even before he declared.
Therefore, Georgia Olivia’s contention that this is somehow “politically motivated by Ed and Corker supporters” is hogwash, at least where I’m concerned.
I happen to support Corker, too, but my position on Hilleary’s obstinance and arrogance with regard to this duality was clear even before I had decided whom to back in this GOP primary. I would have similar objections to Democratic primary candidates who hold state party positions.
By the way, I don’t think Beth Harwell has done anything more than form an exploratory committee, so the fact that she is a former party chair has little to no relevance to this discussion, in my view.
August 18th, 2005 at 12:16 pm
Canned rhetoric? I’m hurt - everything on this site is 100% pure original thought. And only my wife can refer to my current physical form as “squish”, even by association with Bob Corker or otherwise.
Regards
NSM
August 18th, 2005 at 1:16 pm
Georgia, Nathan, Joe and I may not agree on GOP electoral politics, but any objective observer can see that what Van Hilleary is doing is clearly a conflict of interest. If not, there wouldn’t be a resolution being developed by nonpartisan SEC members to have him removed. You can make it out like this is some kind of Van against the world fight, but the reality is that he’s in the wrong and should have resigned as committeeman before he announced he was running for Senate.