Cr Vets for Spin: Another One Bites The Dust
Written by Mark Harris on May 20th, 2005In another thigh slapping move the Gourley campaign blog states that Jess Beeson was the Davidson teams first choice and not Sarah Floerke, but they had to go with their second string option. Now someone here is lying, either Team Davidson or the CRVets Sources ::cough cough HoplinCo cough cough::.
That being said I am not sure either is really what the CRNC needs to shake things up. Stories are circulating out of Texas that a civil war may be brewing and that Floerke will be at the center of it. Still unconfirmed reports though various reliable sources state that it is likely that Floerke denied the state delegates the right to vote, which would be ironic to say the least. Apparently the state constitution was amended after the election to allow for future direct election, but not before as opponents claim Floerke’s supported ticket would have lost had a vote been allowed. Floerke’s side charges that this is simply sour grapes by losers who are willing to put the best interest of the movement behind the interests of their own power.
Objectively I suspect this is one of those unfortunate circumstances with good people on both sides who are well intentioned but disagree. Floerke’s term seems to have mixed results, but that is the case with most CR state chairs. She was the CR Chair of the year in 2004 as picked by the CRNC (run by HoplinCo), but she appears from my vantage point too establishment based to be the kind of real advocate we need in Washington fighting for true reform of the CRNC and a return of the Krank to its members in the states.
More on Floerke:
But Sarah Floerke, the current Texas College Republicans chairwoman, said McCaig was in a dispute with the organization’s leadership when he stepped down and might be biased. She had not heard about the questions surrounding the group’s fund raising, other than in Hoplin’s memo, she added.
“I’m sure I’m going to find out a lot more at the meeting,” she said. “I think the College Republican National Committee did an excellent job fund raising, and they were able to send out College Republicans across the nation.”
Keep in mind this is prior to the bad stuff hitting the fan for the most part, but I think it is relavent to this national debate. She was likely ill-informed up to this point, so I am not sure the relavence but since I figure the quote is going to come out sooner or later its best to get it out in its whole context.
All in all I say the pick was obviously no surprise to anyone and is a decent pick but not the type of homerun I was hoping for.
21
PM
Davidson tries to sell ticket spots too! I am shocked! Mark, doesn’t this make him a careerist too? He offered Jess Beeson co-chair isn’t that the type of thing you preach about being the downfall of the CRNC? Trying to lure Gourley states away by offering them ticket spots… If your principles are absolute shouldn’t you scold Michael Davidson as well?
21
PM
Anon #1, first of all I have seen no proof of this, second of all I have told the Davidson campaign that I expect to see them playing above the table, third did you even read the post? It wasn’t exactly the most Davidson rah-rah post ever. When was the last time CRVets posted anythign even remotely critical of Gourley? Yeah, never.
21
PM
Considering the way that they hid everything, I’m thinking that she didn’t know anything about it.
22
AM
I actually can’t believe that the CR Vets would post something that they know is an out and out lie. They made up the Jessica Beeson (or I guess I should say Hoplin made it up). Yet another strike againt their lacking credibility. Now they’ve just made themselves irrelevant to the process.
22
PM
Davidson didn’t mention what school Sarah attends in his press release. I assume Texas A&M. Either way, I’m a former memeber of Texas CR’s and it could run itself.
22
PM
She goes to Texas Tech.
22
PM
a CA-TX ticket seems great to me. at least Davidson and Floerke have both run successful state operations - unlike Gourley and Beeson.
Davidson never offered Beeson co-chair. heck, why, when you could get a co-chair who has actually done something?
as for ticket spots being used to swing states, that’s called politics. the difference between Davidson and Gourley is Davidson isn’t promising the same 4 spots to 12 different folks. . . and so far, the Davidson team is made up of competent leaders. . .not holding my breath for Gourley to put anyone on the ticket but a stooge.
22
PM
In response to the above statement that the present Indiana Chairwoman Beeson has not “actually done something” to be qualified as National Co-Chairman. She has served as an intern at the Leadership Institute, the White House and the Heritage Foundation. As a College Republican, she served two consecutive years as the state secretary, developed a women’s outreach in Indiana and worked in the CRNC office as the Director of Outreach. Still, Sarah Floerke is a well-qualified and respectable candidate that will give the Indiana Chair a run for her money.
23
AM
Wow, Beeson was an intern.
She can get Sarah her coffee when she wins. As Director of Outreach… no one knows who she is. That was, until she started campaigning. Got to love self-promotion.
As for the TFCR running itself, the organization nearly tripled under Sarah Floerke. True, it’s a strong base, but she did a good job of mobilizing them, and there was a lot of growth under her administration. The woman is solid. That’s why she was State Chair of the Year, as chosen by Hoplin. Bet they’re regretting that one now…
23
AM
There was very little growth in Texas under Floerke’s administration. She was an improvement over her predecessor, but that isn’t saying much. The vast majority of the “new” chapters that she is claiming were either chapters that already existed but did not pay a chapter tax to the TFCR or existed only on paper and were barely active. The TFCR leadership did next to nothing to mobilize CRs to work on campaigns in Texas. The individual chapters were left to do this on their own. The TFCR was, and continues to be, a shambles of an organization.
23
AM
“Sam” is absolutely wrong — TFCR does not “run itself,” it had been run into the ground by Sarah’s predecessor. The turnaround has been nothing short of amazing.
Anonymous Pansy #10 needs to grow a pair and put his name where his bullshit is.
23
AM
“Joe G. Biles” everyone in Texas hates your school and your town. You can’t run anything from West Texas. It doesn’t take a lot of work to run an email list.
23
PM
As a Chapter Chair during Sarah’s term in TFCR, my chapter grew tremendously. We became the most active political organization on campus as well as in our city. Our membership roster grew by 1,324% by the end of the 2004 elections. We were awarded the “Most Active Student Organzation” award from the university. I can tell you right now: All of this was DESPITE Sarah Floerke. Her administration gave most of the chapters nothing but problems. The turn around in Texas had nothing to do with good state leaders. It had everything to do with good chapter leaders.
“Joe G. Biles” Leave Anonymous Pansy #10 alone. A lot of current members of TFCR feel an obligation to speak out, but are afraid to do so for fear of retaliation (i.e. being fired by Margaret). Anonymous Pansy #10 has the right to speak anonymously.
23
PM
Your most active student organization did a great job getting people out to support the Schubert campaign. What was it, a half-dozen?
23
PM
Sarah is an accredited leader with a good track record as is Jess. I’m quite pleased with both national candidates selections. I still obviously favor Gourley in the national election, but am impressed by the two canddiate’s selections.
23
PM
Wow, Jess Beeson, she was an intern, how many millions of those are there in Washington? She was a state secretary, maybe she’s adept at shorthand, maybe she should be the nominee for National Secretary, and not the second most powerful member of the national committee. She’s never even participated in a national board meeting, but yet feels qualified to chair the credentials committee.
On the other side, Sarah Floerke served as the ‘Best State Chair’ of 2004, serving as an active member of the national board, and has dramatically increased the size and success of chapters across the state. In the race for Co-Chair, go with experience and it’s an obvious choice.
24
AM
“Joe G. Biles” –I dont remember seeing you at the Schubert HQ ever..suprising..seeing as TFCR promised the campaign 500 volunteers…but only sent 3. But to clear this up…you’re response to my statement that my chapter grew and worked despite Sarah Floerke is “No you guys dont do anything.” If Sarah is as great as you claim, shouldn’t it be “No..Sarah did this this and this and THAT is why you guys got ‘Most Active Student Org”?
24
AM
Sarah organized trips to OK to campaign for Dr. (now Sen.) Coburn. Texas was one of few states that put time and effort behind it’s women’s outreach program, and because of that, a trip for the TFCR women was able to be organized to IA through the 72 hour task force. There were also 72 hour task force trips to NM and OH - sending dozens of TFCR volunteers where they were most needed (if you remember, IA turned out to be closer than expected). Every month, there were state-wide campaign trips, and one in Dallas turned out several hundred volunteers from across the state. Were you there? Or are you ignoring it?
Not many state chairmen can say that every GOP Congressional candidate in the state was campaigned for (or that they even knew who they were), but Sarah can. That’s impressive.
Might want to forgive Joe for responding to an attack with an attack… it is human nature.
24
PM
Ridiculous…
I heard over a week ago from a Davidson supporter that he (Michael) was going to offer Beeson the spot… this story IS TRUE. Davidson can lie now all he wants, hell he has been this whole campaign. The truth is he tried to get Beeson but she is supporting Paul and won’t jump ship for some lying State Chair who spent $800 on business cards while breaking CA and Federal law.
DAVIDSON WANTS “MY CRNC” AND CANNOT BE TRUSTED.
24
PM
In other news Joe Biles refues to comment on how crapy his school is.
24
PM
I am in MA and heard Brad Smith comment on the whole Beeson offer from Davidson. Apparently this is how it happened…
Brad Smith called Beeson and effectively offered her a spot as Co-Chair on Davidson’s ticket… a “unity” ticket idea since she was already on Paul’s ticket. If it had ended here then yes it might not be a real offer, but it didn’t.
Davidson called very soon after Smith called and extended the same offer… even implying that if Beeson joined as his running mate she could bring a few other Gourley supporters with her for the “unity” ticket (i.e. Davidson is Desperate Ticket)…
This is confirmed from Massachussets… so anyone who discounts this story is lying… including Michael Davidson. I guess I’d lie too if I was caught doing something so desperate and stabbing Sarah Florke in the back.
25
PM
well, from Washington, I can definitely tell you that Davidson never called Beeson when you say he did. you can look at the log on his phone, and you will see that he never called Beeson. Smith was responding to overtures made by Beeson that she was upset with the incompetency of Paul’s campaign.
25
PM
a-non,
I am glad that since you’re in the same state as Brad Smith, you know everything that’s going on…since you’re in the same state as John Kerry and Ted Kennedy can you reveal their personal conversations? No, that’s because you’re full of shit, so shut up.
25
PM
Look how Paul Gourley will lie. You just can’t trust him. Notice that Beeson is silent on the issue.
25
PM
Davidson continues to lie to CRs… we can’t afford a “MyCRNC” victory.
25
PM
The main reason that Floerke was awarded Best State Chair of 2004 was as a means of stroking her ego. The rationale of the CRNC was that the longer they could hold Texas, the better their chances at holding off retaliation and opposition for Gourley.
Now Floerke is being upheld for her award, benefitting the Davidson campaign despite lack of real merit. So it shows just how ridiculous this race has become. I am convinced that there no longer remains a “Better Candidate” in this race. My only hope is that whoever is elected on June 25 has some outstanding ideas for reuniting College Republicans across America.
25
PM
The best chance for reuniting the CRNC is Michael Davidson. He’s the one with ideas, and by actually putting the CRNC to work, CRs will stand behind it.
26
AM
Davidson’s ideas are built on lies… remember he lied to CRs about how much he raised in CA (using fuzzy unrevealed in-kind math… without giving details) and he lied about how much his programs would cost (expecting CRs to believe covering 10x the area for 7x as long would cost LESS)… he is a dishonest leader and would never be able to unite CRs as long as people opposed to deciet and back stabbing exist.
26
PM
a - learn to spell & get your facts straight. Davidson never signed a letter defrauding people. Gourley has to make these things up just to cover his own ethical problems. Everything you just wrote is a total lie.
also - TFCR is solid, not in Civil War. There’s just one pissed off guy who lost an election. Ask someone in Texas:
http://www.joebiles.com/cavazosrelease.doc
26
PM
Of course Joe Biles and the TFCR would tell the absolute truth and not spin what is really going on in Texas! That press release is nothing more than an angry rant against somebody who disagrees with them.
BTW- if that dude really did submit dupliate names on his credentials report, wasn’t there a credentials committee to find stuff like that before the convention business starts?
27
AM
Sarah Floerke is the most corrupt person the CRNC has ever seen. She will stop at nothing to attain power and will step on anyone who attempts to block her path. Anyone who believes that she was a legitimate leader is living in fantasy land. I love how Floerke always preached about how “Christ like” one day, then turned around and lied and cheated the next. We need to bring people together, not tear them apart. If Floerke plans to do for America what she’s done for Texas, we’re doomed.
27
PM
Friends,
>
> I never wanted to have to write this email.
>
> Earlier this evening, I telephoned NYCRSC Chairman Michael Backus and
> asked for his resignation. He laughed and hanged up the phone. I
> don’t know what about the state of our organization is so funny. Let
> us consider the events of the past two months, since Backus was
> charged with rebuilding the state organization:
>
> Hillary Clinton came to RPI amidst an immense controversy, and Michael
> Backus did nothing.
> A CR was expelled from Wells on politically motivated contempt
> charges, and Michael Backus did nothing.
> Ralph Nader toured the state spewing the same rhetoric as the
> terrorists in Iraq, and Michael Backus did nothing.
> The RPI and UAlbany CRs sought help in their stand against Marxists at
> Russell Sage College, and Michael Backus did nothing.
> The President came to Rochester at a time when he needs our support,
> and Michael Backus used his position for personal gain.
>
> Where is the “communication” and the “action” we were promised at the
> state convention two months ago? Why was Backus’ only email to New
> York CRs in regards to how much power HE would wield at the national
> convention? Every request for assistance by myself or nearby schools
> has been met with excuses and claims that more time is needed.
> Michael Backus has offered no ideas, no hope, no vision, only blame,
> all the while freely admitting he plans to resign before the end of
> the year to pursue other goals.
>
> This, my friends, is something we, as College Republicans, can no
> longer tolerate.
>
> New York cannot afford to enter another election cycle with its best
> and brightest on the bench because our chairman lacks the capacity to
> lead. We need a chairman who will replace Backus’ excuses with
> action, his buzzwords with strategies, and his dereliction of his
> responsibilities with a commitment to the organization that will
> inspire us all.
>
> This organization must not be allowed to continue to degrade because
> of the selfishness and ineptitude of one individual. I call for all
> schools to contact Michael Backus and ask him to tender his
> resignation immediately, and for the Executive Committee to convene at
> the earliest possible date to hold impeachment proceedings, should
> Backus continue this show of disrespect for our organization, our
> party and our state. In the meantime, I ask that Patrick Juliano, the
> most senior member of the executive committee, assume command of the
> organization in holding with the constitution and assess the status of
> all chapters and address their most pressing needs.
>
> Ken Girardin
> RPI College Republicans
> girark@rpi.edu
27
PM
What were the New York CR’s thinking they elected somone more brain dead than Dan!!!
27
PM
Mark McCaig should be the next Chair of CRNC…let’s get him in this race while there’s still hope!
28
PM
I’ve seen Sarah a few times and was never too impressed by her…Yeah she’s got great hair, and that good ol’ politician smile that seems to hiding a lot more than either her, or Mr. Joe Biles would like to admitt…
There is a CR chapter on my campus and it was never helped in any way shape or form by TFCR. Now looking in on all this crap that Joe is posting and TFCR is posting…I’m glad we never interacted with them…
With regards to the whole University of Texas at San Antonio junk…if whoever the chair of the Credentialing committee was is at fault…why didn’t he take the time to actually do his job and review the rosters…isn’t that the purpose of the committee and his title? Seems like a petty scam considering it was brought up so late in the game…
28
PM
There is not necessarily a “civil war” in Texas…there is however a faction of malintentioned individuals who would do anything to have someone like Sarah Florke at the CRNC level.
The people who Joe speaks out against, did all they could to fix and resolve the issue and move on…
If there is any further perpetuation of the problem it is due simply to the immaturity of individuals like Joe Biles, Clint Peterson, Sarah Florke and Margaret Ritzert.
28
PM
Sarah Floerke was present at the Credentialing committee meeting and served as chair.
28
PM
From a political standpoint Sarah Florke’s phone calls denouncing Davidson are simply the wrong move. It’s already pretty obvious that Beeson is more well liked than Sarah…she has now alienated some of her only voters…Not too smart Sarah…
28
PM
I’ve checked out http://www.joebiles.com…and you do not photograph well…if you intend on having so many people looking at your site, you might as well get some decent pictures…
28
PM
When did Sarah make phone calls denouncing Davidson, and how did you find out about it, Jessica?
28
PM
Read about it…you can too… CRVetsforTruth.com or use the link provided at the left hand side of this page… Under the “CRNC Related” links…7th one down.
28
PM
Thanks, I’ll check that out. Are you the person running with Gourley?
28
PM
Not a problem. No I am not the person running with Gourley, just another concerned College Republican.
28
PM
Are you going to convention?
28
PM
Not as a delegate, but I’m planning on attending anyway…either way it’ll be an event…
28
PM
By declaring independence from Davidson, Sarah Floerke has demonstrated how she cares little about the CRNC and only for her own employment. Sarah brings nothing to the table but a lack luster record from Texas. I hope CR’s from around the country choose someone with a proven record for hard work and dedication and that person is Jessica Beeson. She will make a great Co-Chair for the CRNC. She basically has the endorcement of both Davidson and Gourley, what more can anyone ask for?
29
PM
Sarah Floerke hasn’t declared independence from the Davidson campaign in any way. Calling state chairmen herself was in an attempt to introduce herself and her candidacy, which isn’t a terrible idea. Each member of the national board should be elected on their own merit, not by coattails, which is the only way someone as unqualified as Beeson would make it to into the Co-Chair spot. Even she’s said on phone calls to state chairs that Floerke has done more to deserve the position.
Jess Beeson is nowhere near the endorsement of the Davidson campaign - Mazanec and the Vets fabricated that story, just like Floerke’s “independent” campaign. They have serious credibility issues, Jessica.
29
PM
If anyone has serious credability issues in this campaign it is Sarah Florke. What is being heard from Texas is that Sarah, regardless of what a few individuals who post here say, is not very well liked. She is infamous for being elected through undemocratic means and allowing those means to find their way into her friend’s election to TFCR state chairmanship.
I agree that everyone who is running should win “on their own merit”; but seperating yourself from your ticket is a step in the wrong direction. “Winning on your own merit” is something that Ms. Florke is not familiar with seeing as she was handed the position of state chair, rather than elected to the position of state chair.
29
PM
What has Sarah actually done for any of her chapters? So she sent people to New Mexico for the Bush campaign in 04′. Anyone could’ve done that simply by logging on to the website and selecting the state you and your friends would’ve wished to travel too. I’d like to see what she has actually done; from what I hear…isn’t much.
29
PM
She didn’t separate herself from the ticket - the bloggers made that up. To see what someone who actually got one of the phone calls said about them, look here: http://crncrealitycheck.blogspot.com/2005/05/oops-they-did-it-again.html
Are you even from Texas? I’m thinking no, since you say that you might be a delegate. Have you talked to people who aren’t ticked off they lost the election? I doubt that. Under Floerke’s administration, the voting procedure was actually changed, which wouldn’t happen if she was trying to keep power at the top.
And Scott B., tell me what Beeson did that merits her the co-chair spot. Wearing a flip flop and answering phones don’t count.
29
PM
What election did they lose?
The time to change the voting procedures was BEFORE convention, not after. Too little, too late.
29
PM
We attempted to get the rules changed BEFORE convention, but Floerke wanted to ensure that her and her cronies would retain power, so they did not allow the rules to be changed. This was despite Hoplin’s suggestion…
29
PM
I’ve actually ANON I said that I was most likely attending the convention, but NOT as a delegate. Like most Floerke supporters, you are too quick to attack prior to simply reading a statement…
Like in any election, esp. one of this magnitude both sides have some unfavorable tricks up their sleeves, and hey that’s politics right? To repeat the point previously made, because undoubtably you either A) Won’t read it properly B) Won’t get it or C) Will ignore it, as to not draw attention to the huge flaw that is Sarah Floerke… Texas was the only state in the US of CR Federations where the delegates were not allowed to vote…certain complaints were made to the Republican Party of Texas and they advised TFCR to reform their methods…after several years…after Sarah’s friend Ms. Ritzert was given her title, then…efforts were placed in motion to correct the wrongs made several years ago.
We are not only Republicans, but Americans, and to deny anyone, especially a group of united Republican people, the right to vote is fundamentally wrong. That you cannot deny, regardless of what state you are apart of—
That is how Sarah Floerke became state chair, that is how Margaret Riztert, Sarah’s friend, became state chair.
Before you start pointing fingers, I suggest you dig deeper into the past of the person you are supporting. If you enjoy your freedoms and your right to vote seriously reconsider voting Sarah as your National Co-Chair. Because that kind of corruption, will remain within an individual despite any subtle constitutional changes.
29
PM
Is it just me or did random anonymous person forget to mention what Sarah has done for Texas CR’s, national CR’s or humanity in general.
Jessica: I couldn’t have said it better myself.
30
AM
“Jessica” seems silent on the issue that no matter which way you slice the pizza, Margaret Ritzert had the support of a majority of (legitimate) delegates to the State Convention. I say this as someone that wasn’t supporting her at the time.
30
AM
Jessica if you’re really serious about the right to vote, how in the hell can you support a campaign whose surrogates are actively trying to decredential one-third of the CRNC to put Gourley on top?
Lie with dogs, you get fleas.
30
PM
Again, the problem with all Floerke supporters is that they are too quick to jump to conclusions and assume that in which they do not know. I never once said I was supporting Gourley in this campaign…you just assume that Sarah IS the Davidson campaign—which she is not. Again before you start calling people out on things they have yet to say, check your facts…
Joe: As someone who never really supported Margaret, and still does not support Margaret, she did not have the numbers at the time…Nor did she have too esp. when she had an illegitimate way to win. It’s fairly easy to “win an election” when their is no real election. And from what I hear, the only candidate you have ever been in support of is yourself.
30
PM
Sarah Floerke is definitely part of the Davidson campaign. They released this letter together:
http://crncrealitycheck.blogspot.com/2005/05/reality-check-crvets-lie.html
Sorry if you have some sour grapes because you supported a losing candidate, but Floerke will be a great co-chair. Beeson wouldn’t know where to start.
30
PM
As someone that was (regrettably) party to the Cavazos campaign, I can tell you his best internal estimates the night before the convention gave him a four or five point edge on Ritzert at best — a margin more than covered by his eight illegitimate delegates. That is even giving him the benefit of the doubt on the issue of whether he would have carried all the delegates of all the schools that were behind him (I’ve learned since the convention that he wouldn’t have).
30
PM
My understanding is that there was not an election held at all for this guy to win or loose. Isn’t that what they are mad about?
30
PM
What they’re mad about is that there was not a fraudulent election for him to win (losing has yet to enter into his mind evidently). They’re obfuscating on the fact that we would have lost in a *fair* election and that the process has since been reformed.
As I’m fond of reminding my Democrat friends on the issue of picture IDs at voting booths, “Of course everyone is entitled to vote… once.”
30
PM
It seems to me like you went after this guy for speaking out against Sarah. And out of curiousity, what has he said? The only thing I’ve heard about him is from you guys. It seems bizarre that your Federation is so focused on this guy. If there really were mistakes on his chapter’s credentials, why wasn’t anything done about it before hand? Why was it brought up months later? It really seems like you singled him out for disagreeing with you. That is something that I find abhorrent.
From a political stand point I also think it was an idiotic move. You said that this guy is speaking out against Sarah preventing an election, and the Texas Fed’s responce is to do something that can only be seen as an attempt to silence him with intimidation. I don’t know what you guys are thinking in Texas.
30
PM
1) Mr. Cavazos has been circulating a request asking Texas chapter chairs to sign onto a letter attacking Chair Floerke, and has been spreading similar propaganda to various bloggers and on blog talkbacks.
2) As was noted in Credentials Chair Clint Petersen’s (Sarah Floerke *did not* chair the Credentials Committee as someone said earlier) statement, the discrepancy wasn’t noted until after the former UTSA chapter secretary came forward. To this point there has been no requirement that membership lists be in alphabetical order, so the duplicated members weren’t found by a perfunctory inspection the night before the convention (when the Committee met) or noticed in the random audit (which would be expected since the audit would only identify nonmembers, not members listed more than once). To rectify this problem we established at our Constitutional Convention earlier in the month that the Credentials Committee will meet no later than 15 days before future conventions for auditing purposes.
3) I’m not singling him out because of a disagreement; he has singled himself out by seceding from the organization and using the CRNC race as a venue for self-aggrandizement to the detriment of the organization and the Davidson campaign. I do not question his right to do the former (though I think it unwise and selfish), but the latter clearly merits a response. He is trying to make it look like there is some big controversy about Floerke when in fact he has two schools on his side, tops, out of more than 30 federated chapters. Four schools that were on his ticket at the convention have signed a letter condemning him and endorsing Sarah Floerke for CRNC Co-Chair.
Frankly, this guy is a Gourley-esque opportunist who deserves all 800 pounds worth of gorilla on his ass.
30
PM
Like I said…it’s bizarre how fixated the Texas Fed is on this guy.
30
PM
Joe:
The UTSA former CR Secretary Charles Manley in an email with myself claims that he “did not have the active membership roster that went to the State Convention.” (And Joe you do have a copy of that e-mail by the way to go ahead an review it later, which I’m sure you will…) So with regards to your accusations made in your little Press Release the only thing Marc could be at fault for would be adding members from the FaceBook—which according to the Constitution being used at the time, was alright seeing as their was no given definition as to what constituted a “member” which was something that Marc wanted to fix…After the Convention our chapter did not disburse the roster to the entirety of our membership…so if your story is true, Charles wouldn’t have known about the alleged duplicates and could not have been a whistle-blower, unless approcahed by you, Sarah Floerke, Margaret Ritzert, or Monica Rojas…Which would make sense considering you have it out for Marc and would do anything to keep him from hurting Sarah’s miniscule chances of winning…The thing is, however, that Charles was the one who added the FaceBook members to the roster; (which he did without Marc’s consent), and was actually in charge of making the roster himself…so if anyone is to blame it is Mr. Manley as well as Mr. Peterson for not taking the simple initiative to do his job. I sat on Credentialing Committee and I know for a fact that Clint Peterson reviewed our list and verified it as being okay. The only person who he placed any effort into was his known “enemy” Kat Miller…and for those of you who went to the Convention, you already know what happend and nothing more need be spoken with regards to that…So it seems that your crew only finds faults in your present enemies…the rest of the people on committee either choose not to look at the majority of the list because they were “too tired” or simply didn’t care…But then again, you wouldn’t know because you weren’t there…
You however are missing the point, or wisely choose to avoid it because there is no way that either you or Sarah could defend the position that Sarah on multiple occassions DENIED the membership THE RIGHT TO VOTE. Why would she do that if not to allow her friend Margaret to win…Whoopie! The Constitution was revised after Sarah finished her term and annointed Margaret worthy to follow in her glorious footsteps…the problem was that it should’ve been done sooner…the problem was that it should’ve never happend in the first place…the problem is simply that Sarah is no better than Gourley.
If Marc was so insignificant you wouldn’t go out of the way to manipulate some of the (former)members of his chapter to your advantage or pre-empt a letter, which was NEVER SENT, with your slanderous press release…the truth is that he has something worth saying, which is the truth about Sarah Floerke and if everyone knew she, like Margaret, would’ve been assured a loss.
I suggest you go back and read the letter denouncing Sarah Floerke again, I can assure you it was signed by more people than Marc Cavazos…but surprisingly he is the only one you mention…gee I wonder why that is…if you wanna talk about personal vendettas this would be the case to go by…seeing as you Joe Biles are now going after a guy who you fear because he can do the job that you were never capable of…so much so that you had to go running back to Floerke & Co. If anything, you are the loser in all this, not Marc or even Sarah for that matter…
30
PM
And for everyone else this is a direct quote from the guy who Joe Biles glorifies as being a credible source who spoke out against Marc…
“…As far as stacking the election, the above is true. I did in fact tell Russ at one point that I would do this in order to provide good election turnout…” - Charles Manley, Former UTSA CR Secretary. 05/26/05
What can I say Joe, you sure do know how to pick em’…
30
PM
Katy, You should point out too that Russ turned him down when he offered to stack the UTSA election. So did Christian, so did you, and so did I. He didn’t just offer to stack the election for Russ. He offered to stack the election for all of us. We went as far as to pass an election code to stop Charles’ attempts to rig the election.
30
PM
Maybe this Charles guy can help Margaret and Joe stack the election with the newly “revised” constitution in place!
Or maybe he could help Sarah and Davidson!
30
PM
Again, I’d like to point out how no one has mentioned specifically what Sarah has done for TFCR aside from smiling, flipping her hair, and posing for cameras…
30
PM
The irony is that you just Margaret and Joe on the same team, when they’ve always been on opposite sides.
31
PM
Joe and Margaret are equally as corrupt, regardless of whether they said they were not on the “same team” they always have been…
31
PM
Sarah has done lots for the TFCR. First off, she’s way cooler than most of the geeks there. She even got dumped by her boyfriend because of her willingness to spend most of her time on this politics stuff. I wish everyone would stop saying such hurtful and thoughtless things about Sarah Floerke. She’s my friend. When she was still at Tech, she always made sure that all members of Phi Lamba were included in all of our phlanthropy activities. That’s sort of the same thing as college republicans when you stop and think about it. Plus Davidson is way hotter than Gourley.
31
PM
Wow Allison, that was the best defense I’ve heard from Sarah Floerke supporters yet…and sadly the only defense you have is that 1) She is hotter than other girls (Even though she was voted the least hottest state chair according to ) 2) That Gourley is NOT hott. Is your name Allison or Paris Hilton??
What she does for your sorority has nothing to do with her lack of service to the organization statewide or nationally.
The majority if Texas knows about her breakup. I hear it was quite public and actually pretty funny. That was one of the better things she did for the TFCR; ammuse us.
31
PM
I ask for days as to what Sarah has done for the TFCR or Republicans in general and that response by “Allison” is all I get?!
That’s a pretty damn good reason to NOT vote Sarah for best bag lady at Wal-Mart, let alone CRNC.
Sarah Floerke what a joke.
1
PM
73) & 74) That is the funniest thing I’ve seen all week.
Seriously, if that is the best Sarah’s people can come up with the Davidson campaign is in some serious trouble.
1
PM
Katy,
I have a few things to say to you, and this is coming from someone who has been watching from the sidelines. You are one of the most rude and obnoxious people I have ever met in my entire life. I remember Marc and all of his little followers begging for votes because he knew he didn’t have a snowballs chance in hell of winning the election. Also, I know for a fact that the so called credentials fiasco wasn’t because they were not doing their jobs, but because you all were calling peoples parents at 10pm waking them up. Which, I know for a fact that you were bitching people out for not wanting to make anymore calls even though you were waking people’s parents up. It seems that when you don’t get your way you always end up pitching a fit. Wow, it seems to be a recurrent pattern since you have done it once again in this ridiculous response you have written. You seriously need to move on and stop fighting your boyfriends battles. He lost who cares, oh that’s right, only you and your few friends it seems. Though I have to say, it was a nice try on the part of the Cavazos people to try and stack things which you deny knowledge of, yeah right. If Marc is such an amazing chair wouldn’t he know what his officers are up to? So yeah, stop whining.
2
PM
I am appalled at some of the attacks on this site that have been directed toward Ms. Floerke, Ms. Ritzert, and pretty much every other Floerke supporter. It seems that most of the people discrediting Ms. Floerke and her service as TFCR state chair are either from out of state, and therefore are only basing their attacks on hearsay, and/or are Cavozos supporters, who have had it out for Floerke since she ran for TFCR state chair. I believe that it says a lot that one of Ms. Floerke’s main advocates is Mr. Biles. For those of you who don’t know, he ran against Ms. Floerke for State Chair at the 2004 state convention and was an avid Cavozos supporter at the 2005 state convention. For one of Ms. Floerke’s former opponents and critics to support her the way Mr. Biles does, should only show the respect that the vast majority of Texas CR’s have for her. Ms. Floerke took over the position of TFCR State Chair at a time when it had hit rock bottom. She rebuilt the TFCR by re-federating old chapters that had withdrawn their membership due to past leadership, federated numerous new chapters, and helped in the strengthening and development of chapters across the state. This is all coming from someone on the inside; someone who served as both a state director and officer under Ms. Floerke and had first hand knowledge of ALL THINGS regarding TFCR business. At no time did Ms. Floerke ever knowingly or purposely do anything unethical or immoral regarding the TFCR, nor did she abuse her power. Regarding the election held at the 2005 State Convention, everything that was done was done so as outlined by the former state constitution and Robert’s Rules of Order. Ms. Floerke even went as far as to appoint a convention parliamentarian that was an expert in Robert’s Rules and election proceedings and was in no way associated with ANY of the candidates running for ANY state office. I fully support Mr. Davidson and Ms. Floerke. I both support the right of individuals to question and research the background of any candidate, in fact, I encourage it, but I do ask that people stop relying on the ‘he said, she said’ hearsay and stop attacking their fellow republicans with the malice that had been displayed on this board. You have every right to disagree and voice your opinion, but please remember that at the end of the day, we are ALL Republicans and ALL still stand for the same core beliefs.
Oh, and for Sam or whoever it was saying that Floerke’s school (Texas Tech) ‘sucks’, get a life. Not only is it juvenile to attack someone’s school like you are back in High School, but your claim is false and unwarranted. Texas Tech is a fine state institution with numerous academic programs that ranks them among the upper echelon of Universities across the nation, as well as wonderful sports teams, and the best people that you will find anywhere. Get a life and stay with the issues at hand.
2
PM
Sarah, that isn’t Sarah Floerke yet just as annoying and uninformed…or is this( Sarah AKA, I just got appointed by the Nominations Committee Thompson…)
If you wanna go ahead and blame me for doing my job on committee yeah okay guilty. Big deal…I’ll give Clint one thing, he actually did make some phone calls off a list…calling St. Mary’s and UTA…Credentialing committee cannot be held responsible for the numbers that the members of independent chapters write down…If that is all you have to complain about—that I did my job; that is why you and yours will loose in the end. Sorry that I pointed out things about your beloved Sarah Floerke that you don’t want heard by the masses…she’s your former chair you deal with it…I’m not going to sit in the shadows like some useless conformist, like you, and not speak out against injustice…I’m not fighting my boyfriends battles, I’m fighting for people like you and Sarah Floerke to stay out of office, and for the end of corruption within CRNC.
If you and your little friends would like to believe that Marc didn’t have a “snowballs chance in hell” that’s fine—you can rationalize what Sarah did whichever way possible to make yourself feel better. Speak to anyone at UTSA who isn’t interested soley in themselves, (everyone except two individuals who praise TFCR); and they will tell you that both of those individuals were and continue to be a pain and serve little to no contribution to our organization. Good job name callling though—very mature…but frankly I could give a crap what you think of me…unlike your other servants I don’t need to seek your approval for political gain.
CAG: There are chapters who I have spoken with personally, who claim that Sarah went to their school once, spoke, got them federated, and they never heard from her again. During Margarets election tour she claimed that the every school who was federated was thanks soley to her—and insulted the Area Directors who worked hard to get those chapters on board. So you have you on one side saying “it was all thanks to Sarah” and Margaret on another saying: ” It was all thanks to me!” —Kinda sketchy, at best. The problem with the 2005 State Convention is that the OLD constitution was used—after RPT caught wind of how delegates were not allowed to vote they suggested that we fix it by the next Convention…which didn’t happen. The fact that the past administration had one year to fix the problem and chose to do nothing except deny the delegates a vote is the problem. And by the way, you mentioned you served with Sarah…were you elected by a delegate vote or appointed???
Everyone has strong convictions within this next CRNC election, and I can honestly say that I do not believe that Sarah is the right choice for Co-Chair. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and the problem I am having with TFCR is that whenever anyone tries to speak out against TFCR, TFCR attempts to silence that voice. As if it has no right to be heard…If Sarah intends to continue running for office in the future, she and her supporters should get used to dissent. Not EVERYONE is going to like her or worship her, that’s just how it goes…We’ll see how good of a candidate she is if she can defend her actions, rather than having other people do it for her…If she defended herself the way she defended Hoplin she’d be in WAY better shape.
2
PM
Wrong again, this isn’t Sarah Thompson. Yes, people do have a right to their opinions, but when it comes to spreading vicious false rumors you have to stop. Also, as for you not doing your “job” on credentials committee you are absolutely right. I am just proud that Mr. Peterson had enough ethics about him to stand up and say that UTSA was wrong. UTSA almost pulled it off though. The credentials committee consisted of you, Mark Annas, Tom Cavazos, and Clint Peterson all avid Cavazos supporters so you should have been safe from being discovered. All I have to say is thank you Mr. Peterson. (and yes I know there were one or two others on credentials, but my point is that they were outnumbered.)
Also, I don’t remember seeing you on many campaign trips. I have been extremely involved in the TFCR since the Oklahoma trip (which by the way Sarah Floerke planned and Margaret also played a large role in). So, misinformed, you wish. Just because you can’t figure out who this is (which I don’t think is too difficult seeing as there aren’t that many Sarah’s) doesn’t mean that I haven’t been around to see what has gone on in the TFCR. Another thing, if you wanted to change the constitution so much why didn’t UTSA call for a Constitutional Convention at the end of the 2004 elections? Seriously, if you don’t want to take the initiative to do something don’t blame others for your own problems.
Also, don’t attack CAG for stating their feelings on the issues seeing as they have been around though it all. As for you saying that Margaret and Sarah both claim to be the sole cause for new chapters, which is false. They have said many times in front of many people that it was a joint effort on the part of all of the officers and directors. But, once again how can we expect you not to make things up about people when it is convenient for you.
2
PM
To reiterate what Sarah ‘not Floerke or Thompson’ said and to clarify what I was trying to say, I by no way meant that the chapter development or campaign trips were solely the work of Ms. Floerke. Just like ‘the other’ Sarah stated, they were the combined of work of Ms. Floerke, Ms. Ritzert, and the rest of the State Officers and Directors. One of the best signs of a great leader is that they delegate power and do not try to accomplish everything under their own strength. Ms. Floerke did this very effectively; hence the reason that so many people were involved in the many successes of the TFCR under her administration. This delegation of power should not be skewed or contorted to make it sound as if there is, or ever was, any discrepancies on who was responsible for the TFCR’s successes. Despite what has been said by Ms. Floerke’s critics, she always wanted the praise to go to the TFCR as a whole and never looked for personal praise. Also, as many believe, I wish that the constitution would have been amended earlier than it was, but the fact is, that the blame for this not happening does not lie solely on one person or one group, but on everyone in the TFCR. An amendment to the constitution could have been written and/or proposed by ANYONE. The blame for this mistake lies on us all.
And as for Katy questioning whether or not I was elected or appointed, I WAS elected by a delegate vote, not appointed by Sarah or the credentialing committee.
2
PM
My name is Raz Shafer. I am the President, and founding member, of the Tarleton State University College Republicans. We proudly began our association with TFCR last fall in September, and continue to pledge our support to that organization to this very day.
As you can see from my opening statement of my identity, I am not afraid of people knowing who I am. I believe that since personalities are central to the arguments expressed on this blog, posters should let their identity be known. I openly charge the anonymous posters among you as cowards.
My comments will be constrained to points which I know to be facts. They consist of first hand information only. Not second hand hearsay. I have been witness to all the following information and confirm its veracity.
Preceding the TFCR state convention, both candidates (Margaret Ritzert & Marc Cavasos) campaigned actively. I received calls and emails (both personal and bulk) from both candidates and examined each person’s platform carefully. As the President of my college chapter I wanted to present an informed opinion to my members. Prior to the SCREC (State College Republican Executive Committee) meeting immediately preceding the State Convention I had never personally met either candidate (I did however receive extensive help from both Sarah Floerke and Margaret Ritzert throughout my chapter’s federation process.)
After arrival at the State Convention I was actively lobbied by both campaigns to lend my support. In spite of my support for Margaret Ritzert’s platform (preceding the convention) I listened carefully to the ideas laid out by Marc’s campaign and examined the individuals who each candidate had selected to run on their ticket. After carefully looking over each tickets vision for the TFCR I came to the decision that in the event of a floor vote I would support Margaret Ritzert for TFCR Chair.
I had never met Joe Biles before attending the convention. From information about the previous year’s convention, and the walk out that centered around his candidacy, I had an unfavorable opinion of him. His support for Marc Cavasos was clear and dogmatic. My intimate knowledge of the Ritzert campaign allows me to assure Marc and others who call Joe’s allegiance into question that prior to un-civilized antics by Cavasos supporters on the convention floor that Joe never expressed any sentiment of support to the Ritzert campaign. After it became clear that Cavasos supporters were beginning an effort to undermine the convention process Joe stood up and made his allegiance to the TFCR made known. He stated that internal division would be caused by an acrimonious debate over the Nominations Committee report and urged Marc and his supporters to refrain from any action that could further divide the TFCR. Joe submitted a constitutional amendment (seconded by Jason Fite, Margaret’s candidate for Alumni Relations) to change the format of TFCR officer elections. Because this amendment was not made until after the nominations committee (the body previously responsible for the election of TFCR officers) convened and presented their report it was impossible for this change to have any effect over the 2005 elections. Many people don’t understand why, after the ’04 convention walk out, the TFCR did not call a constitution convention and change the constitution to allow for a delegate vote on TFCR officers (as well as fix many other problems with the TFCR constitution). Actually, Joe Biles and his supporters, through the action of their walkout, insured that the problem they wished to protest would not be changed for another year. The TFCR constitution mandates that in order for a constitution convention to be called or constitutional amendments to be considered that 2/3rds of all federated chapters must be represented. Since there was not this quorum of chapters present after the ’04 walk out, or at any SCREC meeting in the ’04-’05 school year it was impossible to call a constitution convention or make any amendments. The ’05 Convention was the first time since the previous state convention that we had the opportunity to make a constitutional amendment to change the elections process.
At the 2005 state convention we appointed a time and place for the constitution convention. I was appointed to chair one committee, of the two, responsible for amending the constitution at that convention and am pleased to report that it was handled efficiently and that we arrived at many incredible changes to the constitution which will, no doubt, make the TFCR a stronger group. Our new constitution is available on the TFCR website.
Despite repeated promises by Marc Cavosos, and his campaign, that regardless of the results of the election that they would stay involved and be active in the TFCR, Marc and his chapter at UTSA seceded from the TFCR shortly following the TFCR state convention and refused to take part in reforming the constitution which was to blame for their anger. In addition to this irony is the fact that Margaret and Marc, in order to promote post election unity, had promised each other that which ever one won the state chairmanship, the other would be appointed executive director. Following Margaret’s election she was notified by a member of Marc’s campaign that he refused to accept her appointment. If Marc’s real ambitions within the TFCR centered around hope that the organization would grow and that meaningful reform would take place then he would have never promoted the division that he sparked through his actions at the convention, not trying to stop his supporters from disrupting the convention, seceding his chapter from the TFCR and requesting that other chapters do the same, and not attending the TFCR Constitution convention late last month. All of this evidence points to the idea that Marc never cared about the TFCR but instead was seeking to promote himself as a politician. Regardless of whether he was trying to prop himself up or build the TFCR he failed miserably in both.
The TFCR officer election was handled with 100% parliamentary efficiency and this was verified by having an independent parliamentarian. Our constitution was followed without exception and business was completed according to the agenda and rules approved at the start of the convention. Sarah Floerke, Margaret Ritzert and all other state officers behaved congenially and abstained from controversial votes.
To answer allegations that the TFCR can run itself or and that Sarah Floerke did not have a significant impact on the growth of our organization, that she did not have a great deal to do with TFCR members campaigning in other states, that she did not work hard with individual chapters both in the federation process and afterwards, that she is just a pretty face with no substance to back it up and that she is not capable of executing her future office of CRNC Co-Chair I can speak from my personal interaction with Sarah, speaking with numerous other individuals about her and reviewing work that she has done in the past. All the allegations that have been brought against her are utterly false. Not only are these charges baseless but they show the supreme ignorance of the parties levying them. Being party to such unfounded attacks on the character of any individual is shameful, even more-so on someone such as Sarah who has worked so hard to promote College Republicans across the nation.
As to Michael Davidson and his candidacy for Chair of the CRNC, I am 100% behind him and Sarah Floerke, his running-mate. It is essential that we elect someone with real vision for our organization and Davidson has it. When you examine the platforms of Davidson and Gourley it becomes clear who has the better vision and experience to handle the job of CRNC Chairman. Just look at their track-records. Davidson has taken a withering state organization and turned it into the foremost federation of College Republicans in the nation! UC Berkely is now one of the largest college chapters! I know of no other federation that has been able to build and maintain a successful newsletter such as California has done with Moxie. All of these things were accomplished with incredible leadership on the part of Michael Davidson. Gourley’s accomplishments cannot touch what Michael has done. I encourage each delegate to look carefully at each candidate’s websites and press-releases, regardless of your state’s endorsement, and see which person you believe has the better track-record of achievement and who will be best suited for being a face for our organization and leading us forward in the next two years. My support is for Michael Davidson. I have spoken with him many times and our email correspondence is lengthy. He is an honest, capable man who believes strongly in our cause and will promote our organization to new heights as our next CRNC Chairman.
2
PM
Katy,
Nobody has been silenced; you’ve been very vocal since before and after the state convention. Ever since Marc lost, and especially since Sarah was announced as Davidson’s running mate, yall have been slinging accusation after accusation. The truth is that you do not have that much support among your fellow, or should I say ex-fellow, TFCR chapters. Of a state federation of 32 or 33 federated chapters, I have only heard of two leaving since the state convention. There may be one or two more that are thinking about it but the fact remains that the majority of the TFCR is more or less finally on the same page. You basically wanted to change one part of the Constitution so that Marc could get elected; that’s not how we do things. If you’re going to fix something you need to do it thoroughly and correctly. We shouldn’t change one part of the constitution so that a person can get elected, while neglecting the other evident problems. We had a constitutional convention for the purpose of revising all the problems, not just one, and instead of helping in this effort you seceded; you left when you didn’t get your way. Then, in the most immature act of college students I have ever seen, certain people from your campaign (including yourself) sent horrible e-mails to Margaret. One of the anonymous e-mails stated, “How does it feel to know, for a fact, that both of you (Margaret & Sarah) were considered inferior candidates by a majority of your peers? It’s going to be a rough year.” I’d like to point out that that was in no way a fact and that the winking icon at the bottom of the e-mail was especially twisted. You said it yourself that there was no delegate vote, so how can you be sure you had a majority? Many people from your own camp told me that they wouldn’t have voted for Marc; you just automatically assumed that every person from every supporting chapter would have voted for you. We know now that that is not the case. Another e-mail written by you stated, “The little respect I had for you (Margaret) I lost on Saturday. I am ashamed to call you my Chairman of TFCR, in fact I choose not to call you my chairman… If this is the road you choose to take to win a state college election, I fear what you will do in the future when you choose to run for a higher office.” I have another question (excluding the one on whether you ever learned how to use articles). Weren’t you blaming Sarah for the “tainted” election? Isn’t that why you have been undermining Sarah and her place on the Davidson campaign? If that’s the case, why did you and certain followers send hate mail like this to Margaret??? She didn’t run the election in any way, shape, or form. You are basically lashing out at the people you didn’t support. Your readiness to change only certain parts of the former constitution in light of its many numerous problems coupled with your apparently phony credentials report (which is said to have used http://www.thefacebook.com and duplicate names) is evident of the fact that the only power hungry people were yall. All yall ever do is tout how your only goal is to support core Republican values. Where do falsification of documents, hate mail, and random accusations fit into the core Republican values that we are all supposed to hold? How do all of those fit into the Republican core values of limited government and personal integrity? The simple fact is that they don’t. I think that a good indication of character is how one responds to loss. If we judge using that criterion, I would say that you have been judged and found wanting.
P.S. There really was no grand conspiracy involving Joe and Margaret to usurp power. I can guarantee that one through personal knowledge.
3
PM
I’m beginning to think that I’m the only person who has actually taken a step back and looked at this entire situation. Does anyone realize that we are just a bunch of kids, young adults at best? Eighty-two people, and now myself, have voiced their opinions in this matter. Over half of it is hearsay, mud-slinging, and petty arguments by a lot of ill informed people. I could care less about the issue at how, I’m writing to tell everyone to grow up. We are all Republicans, first and foremost. I’m shocked and appalled that we, College Republicans, Future Leaders of the Free World, Future Ambassadors, Future Presidents would go so low as degrading someone based on what college they attend, how their hair looks, or how someone’s significant other broke things off with them. I think everyone needs to shut-up, get over yourselves, and start acting like the adults that y’all pretend to be. The NCRC is quickly approaching, and I think before anyone takes off to D.C. you should pack your diapers because you’re acting like a bunch of babies. We are NOT Democrats and we WILL NOT stoop to this level.
3
PM
1) The majority of the argumentation used is at best circular. There was no delegate vote so I suppose niether party could 100% say “I would have one had their been a vote” …but with the knowledge we know of, with the people and the backing on individuals we’ve spoken to, we know we would have had enough support to beat Margaret. The reason why I speak out, and have spoken out against Margaret is because when directly asked if she would support a constitutional amendment to allow for delegate voting she said “no” moreover when the motion was made DURING the 2005 Convention to have a Constitutional Convention she was one of the few who decided to “abstain”… That is why I have such contempt for Margaret because she on several occassions decided to defy democracy.
2. Sarah, I did not say I didn’t do my job on committee I said I was one of the few who did. After reading the slanderous assumptions made on the last TFCR press release condeming Marc, the so called inconsistencies were 150% false. The amount of mistakes that the TFCR claimed to find on our roster were non-existent, as we have reviewed our records…and Charles Manley, former Secretary, submitted an apology with regards to that press release; he finally saw the error of his ways in trying to blame his mistakes on us…You might want to check with Margaret and Joe about that little Press release as well…
3) Marc and his campaign made an agreement that we would see to it that we would help put into motion something that would produce reform within the TFCR, prior to our leaving…which we did see happen at the state convention. Our chapters reasons for leaving were that we got no help from the TFCR. They did nothing for us. We decided that some of the people invovled were not people who we would want to be affiliated with. Marc and Margaret did decide on post-election unity, as I sat at the table at the coffee shoppe in Austin with both of them when they reached that agreement…the only problem with that statement is that there was no election. Margaret herself that day said that she wanted to “phase out the nominations committee” prior to the election…I guess when she realized that that decision would not lead her to a victory she decided to take an alternate route…Typical, for being a Floerke supporter. So that is why, not that we really need to explain ourselves, left the TFCR. They offered us no support, only skepticism. They benefitted us in no way possible. Aside from a name recognition, which was minimal at best, they did nothing for us…and it has been so for several years now, so we left.
4. While I was in TFCR I attend the majority of the SCRECs and went on two campaign trips including the 72 hour task Force. The other times I was busy with my own chapter and helping to run it efficiently and effectively which I’m sure is something you have no knowledge about Sarah.
As far as I know, Joe Biles was fired from his position within the TFCR for saying things similar to you Sarah…you might wanna look into that…
3
PM
Man Katy, you really are a wack job. It was never possible to have a reasonable conversation with you when you were in the TFCR because you’d always resort to screaming at everyone. You out to be locked up in a padded cell.
3
PM
kristen, is insulting katy going to accomplish anything? just because a person has a (valid) point to make doesn’t mean they’re crazy. if i were you, i’d step back and review the character of who you are supporting.
3
PM
by the way, i think you were looking for the word, ‘ought.’
3
PM
I just wanted to say thank you to Kelli for her post. She is absolutely right about the majority of conversation on this page coming from college students acting like they are back in Jr. High.
And Katy, I think that your statement of “They benefited us in no way possible” pretty much summed up the reasoning for everything done by Cavazos and Co. If there is no benefit to you, your mentality tends to be ’screw it and screw you, we’re out because you can’t/won’t help us advance our political agenda’.