Mel Martinez: Incompetent Fool
By Erick Posted in Republicans — Comments (57) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The Fool we call Mel Martinez needs to go. In fact, you need to call your state party and demand they get rid of Mel Martinez immediately.
I won't belabor the point.
Martinez has not been seen or heard from as Republican Party Chairman in a very long time. In fact, he's been an absent chairman. But yesterday he opened his mouth and attacked Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney for their opposition to illegal immigration.
I can see next August's ads right now. The Democrat, whoever it is, uses a black and white picture of the nominee, whether you think it will be Rudy or Romney, and then quotes Mel Martinez bashing them.
Do. No. Harm. That is the base, the foundation from which the party chairman should start.
Mel Martinez needs to go. Call your state party and make sure they know it.
Maybe in the meantime Duncan Hunter will loan us some of his fence so we can make sure the border around the RNC is secure enough to stop Martinez from getting in the building.
« Burn the Witch — Comments (18) | Wave Goodbye To Our Pork — Comments (12) »
Mel Martinez: Incompetent Fool 57 Comments (0 topical, 57 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
This is a policy argument that must be had. If we divide on the issue, we divide on the issue.
Martinez should be saying it if it is his policy preference, which it obviously is. And I plan on working to have him removed.
The purpose of political parties is to advance a policy agenda or platform. They have no other purpose. If the Republicans are not on board with this issue, I will go elsewhere.
If, on the other hand, you think political parties are more important than policy, then please support the Republicans by working to adopt strict immigration and border enforcement as part of the platform. The top of the system can jump up and down and yell all they want. That policy is a winner with the American people.
Should NOT be encouraging outside groups (in this case the Chamber of Commerce) to pin down his presidential candidates on an issue on which he disagrees with them. He shouldn't imply that their position shows a lack of leadership.
Parties exist to advance platforms, but the RNC exists largely to help Republicans get elected to office. And for the chairman of the organization to insult (explicitly or implicitly) two of his party's leading candidates is unacceptable.
To me this isn't a policy debate. It just shows political tonedeafness that isn't pretty in a party chairman.
"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert
We have a party apparatus not to make or debate policy; rather, it is a support operation for the elected officials and/or campaigning candidates.
On thing that's often confounding,though, is deciding how that applies to supporting incumbent Republicans who do not support Republican positions. (I'm thinking primarily of the Rhode Island blacksmith and his contest against Steve Laffey.)
Everytime someone writes a check for the RNC instead of an individual candidate, they support terrorism.
There doesn't seem to be much hope for 2008 when the national chairman beats up the party's leading contenders.
Texas State Party Chairman Tina Benkiser led the attempted revolt against Martinez, so I'm sure that she'd be more than willing to get some support from the rest of the RNC in dispatching Martinez from his chairmanship of the RNC.
Tina Benkiser is soooo awesome! We are so lucky to have her in Texas. She is a bona fide conservative and it is hard to keep from bursting with pride to be a Republican after a pep talk from her. SHE should be the RNC chairman!!!
The GOP's principal amnesty/open borders advocates are like substance abuse addicts who have no desire to quit. No matter how often their well intentioned associates try to get them to give it up, they just keep going back from another drink from the bottle, or another hit off the crack pipe. And they don't care how much their addiction harms those around them, or their political party.
I agree Martinez needs to be replaced, and W and others completely ignored on this issue, or totally defeated when they try to resurrect any portion of it other than enforcement. How stupid can it get when the RNC chairman is criticizing the party's most likely nominees for 2008?
Email sent.
Missing the Mehlman & Racicot days....
www.scottbomb.com
Click here to donate to the Fred Thompson campaign.
We can't have the party chairman sniping at two of the three leading candidates.
I actually think that a lot of people would be fine with some kind of earned legalization (in which you have to earn legalization, not just citizenship) once the border is under control and if it included full background checks. The main problem is that a million new illegal immigrants are streaming in every year. If we start allowing illegal immigrants to become legalized now that will only lead to more. But if the border is under control, then we can deal with those that are already here, have jobs, speak english, and have never committed a crime and deport those that don't fit that criteria.
"But if the border is under control, then we can deal with those that are already here, have jobs, speak english, and have never committed a crime and deport those that don't fit that criteria."
Don't forget the several family members each legalized illegal will be able to bring into the US. What will that add? 30, 40, 50 million new 'Americans' within a few years?
They are doing all they can to boot Mel. Randy Poulin, the head of the AZ GOP was the author of the resolution at the national meeting calling on the Administration to immediately secure the border.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Our only hope is to do as Erick says and call, call, call! If the Bush/Martinez utopian RNC doesn't get shut down and retooled, it will drive us over the cliff in '08.
I'm starting with the candidates themselves. They are the most visible and most inclined to be vocal as they have as much to lose as we do.
(RINO alert! Debra Price in R-OH is not running next time. One down, many many more to go.)
Let's get all the RINO's out of 50-50 districts and replace a good number of them with Democrats. All our problems will be solved! Can't wait to see how small the caucus would get with an attitude like that...190? 180?
"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert
So, somehow you believe that our message is so weak that we would automatically lose the seat to a liberal?
Our message is stronger than that and we only have to work harder to get that message out.
Senator Martinez does not help in that matter.
First, did you sleep through 2006? How many points did Santorum lose by? How was his message? Not every state/district is tailor made for a Tom Coburn or Mike Pence. OH-15 isn't a solid GOP district.
Second, Deborah Pryce had a lifetime ACU rating of 78. She's not the second coming of Connie Morella or anything like that.
Basically, my point is we shouldn't be celebrating the fact that a toss up open seat just fell out of nowhere. Additionally people here are way too quick to throw around the RINO tag.
"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert
So, in your opinion, Rick Santorum ran a perfect campaign, didn't make any gaffes, didn't have any other factors, other than message to account for his loss.
What about senator Spector (sp). Had a chance to run an actual conservative and as a party we said, Oh, no, we wouldn't want to do that. What do we have, a Senator that thinks that we ought to go back and review the transcripts of the hearings for the two Supreme Court nominees.
I have no information on Deborah Pryce, so I can't offer a comment on her.
As far as the RINO tag goes, if it walks like a duck, etc. etc.
Our work is not that of a day, it is generational. I will not live to see the end of it, nor will you. Not that I am in ill health, nor are you, I hope, but that this movement is generational. And we have to start the process, now.
History demonstrates clearly that when the GOP runs on clear conservative issues and does not shy away form them they win, and tend to win big.
No they don't win everywhere, but in enough places.
History also shows that when weak willed Republicans and Rinos muddy the waters and go squish, then the GOP loses, and if you throw in an incompetent administration and lots of sleaze then they lose BIG.
But Personally, even if you were right, It would be worth being the minority party for a while longer if it meant purging the stupid, defeatist, criminal, and downright lefty members. We would emerge a much stronger party.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
Deborah Pryce? Because if there's no room for her in the party, we're going to be the minority party for a whole lot longer.
This all started because someone called her a RINO and expressed some satisfaction that she is retiring.
I promise her replacement will either be a similarly moderate GOPer or Mary Jo Kilroy. This district was basically a tie between Kerry and Bush in 2004, and the GOP brand is, um, less than exceedingly popular in Ohio right now.
This is not a good thing.
"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert
I will vote to throw out Mel "Liar" Martinez. I do not know of a single Republican in my circle of friends that will vote for him the next cycle over immigrtion. He is a man with no principles and as such should never have been made RNC Chairman. I have told the RNC that the day they get rid of Mel is the day I will consider sending them money. Not one red cent for the RNC until then.
In defense of Deborah Pryce, she was a pretty good representative, and probably the best we could hope for from her district. If Mary Jo Kilroy gets elected, many of us are going to be pining for the days we had Rep. Pryce in the halls of congress. I don't know that she belonged in House GOP leadership, but I am going to miss her presence in the House GOP and going to miss her holding down her district for the GOP as she has done, faithfully, for her 16-year House career.
Some argue that we can keep a few illegals around as long as we secure the border. But if you see these illegals as a symbol of the left's desire to eliminate consequences and individual responsibilty--assuming that you see THAT as a nail in the 5th column that runs counter to the spirit of America--then hopefully you'll understand that every last illegal needs to be deported.
Many of these illegals dropped out of school and failed to gain any real skills. It's one thing to 'understand' their plight. It's quite another to shift the responsiblity from them to me.
If we take away any reason for illegals to be here, they will leave.
Martinez is reminding them that the simplistic and confrontational statements they make now, about immigration policy, might come back to haunt them later when they have to actually find a solution to the problem--not just make the immigration hawks happy. It's easy to be hardcore when aren't in the drivers seat.
His job is to SUPPORT the candidates.
Would he ever criticize the President? Then he's showing bad faith by attacking our candidates to succeed President Bush.
He's supposed to be the Republican chairman, not the George W. Bush chairman.
Give me a break. Maybe we should just all leave, and he can have a little rump party with George Bush, Arlen Specter, AGAG, and Harriet Miers.
First of all, if he wants to caution them about potentially damaging positions, he needs to do that privately, not in front of the Chamber of commerce.
Second, there are already solutions:
1.Enforce existing law
2.Build the fence
3.Strengthen penalties for hiring illegal aliens
4. Make it actually a crime, not an infraction, to illegally enter the country
That enough, or should I continue?
#3 and #4 require a change in federal law, and to change the law you need Democrats onboard, and to get Democrats (and also Republicans who care about identifying the illegals already living here) you need something else. You need a reason for illegals (living here) to come forward and give us their photo, fingerprints, and vital statistics. They're not going to do that for just a deportation ticket home. They can get that deal anyday.
"You need a reason for illegals (living here) to come forward and give us their photo, fingerprints, and vital statistics."
The fallacy of that argument is they only have to not be able to get a job, and that law is already on the books.
No document authentication required. Looks good, it is good--employer off the hook. You can't change that without changing the law. All these people who say, "just enforce the current law," don't know what they're talking about when it comes to employers. You can take their employees away, but they'll get more.
Have you read the newspapers recently?
Government contractors to be required to use the electronic database of Social Security numbers. Enforcement of the existing requirement to respond to inaccurate or non-existing Social Security numbers letters.
I will submit to you that you have not done enough research on this particular subject.
we to think that we just can't do anything at all about illegals so lets all try to get them on our side.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
Martinez is reminding them that the simplistic and confrontational statements they make now, about immigration policy, might come back to haunt them later
Then he should do so quietly. He knows their phone numbers. The Party Chairman should not really be participating in this debate at all, but if he is, not by attacking two of the leading contenders for the nomination.
If Martinez wants to be a leading voice on this issue he should not have accepted the chairmanship.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
! His job is to keep the Republican tent sufficiently...
...large to win too."
It must not be working. Fewer Americans identify themselves as Republicans than any time in the past dozen or so years, a trend brought to us by Bush and Company. Nothing has harmed the Republicans like Bush and Company's pigheaded obsession with amnesty for illegals, year-after-year even after congress and the public had rejected it time and again. And they'll probably try again before the must ride off into the sunset.
Peggy Noonan made the point that the Bushes use Republican power as if the earned it. But what they really do is waste the power and influence built up by their predecessors. GHWB, in one term, managed to squander the coalition support built up by Reagan, and then lose to an unknown governor from Arkansas. W has squandered solid Republican majorities in Congress, the first in 40 years until 1994, with his out-of-control spending, poor management of the war in Iraq, ridiculous nomination of Meirs, Dubai ports, and worst of all, going against and repeatedly insulting the Republican base during his open borders advocacy.
Had it not been for all the support and patriotism that accrued to W after 9/11, the current low point would have been reached well before now, if he'd even manged to win a second term.
The candidates for 2008 don't need advice from the likes of Mel Martinez. Bush, Martinez and others have taken the party to its lowest point since the Watergate years.
Republicans in congress lost because too many of them weren't any more careful (or ethical) spending the taxpayers money than the Democrats they replaced. And the President was just too slow to change his war strategy (by changing military personnel.) And for a long time, President Bush wasn't very good at explaining his strategy. Now that he's improving, Bush's popularity is coming back up, as it should. Most people don't like making concessions to illegals, but it's not at the top of their issue list. It's just not.
it absolutely is the number one issue in border states like mine.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
and asked the young man did they intend to lose 2008 because with they way Martinez is running it they will not be seeing the money the way they used to. How does the head of the RNC get picked? My state office did not have an answer for that however she said someone would call me back, I told her politely no thank you I will find out on the internet, so please let me know. I need knowledge to be able to work the telephones most efficiently.
One came from within, and actually runs the NRC. The other was picked by the President, and acts as its public face.
Erick's outrage is wildly disproportionate to Martinez's alleged offense (a mild rebuke on its own, but especially mild when compared with Lindsay Graham's bigot remark).
Here's what Martinez actually said (via the Washington Times):
"It's about leading on the tough issues," Mr. Martinez told the St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce ... "It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez' ... But at the end of the day, what is your answer? How would you solve this?
More here.
and Martinez should know by now that GOP members think enforcement must be first (cf. the repeated defeat of Bush's amnesty bills).
Do you, or does anyone here, have the complete transcript of his remarks.
I am willing to stipulate that the quoted material, while marginal, may have been taken out of context, but without the complete remarks, we cannot know.
"It's about leading on the tough issues,"
Mel's remark there is very similar to some of John McCain's remarks explaining the collapse of his campaign organization and the loss of about 2/3 of his support.
I guess "leading" can only be defined as agreeing with Mel and doing what he'd do on the immigration issue. After so many lies and ruses and insults this year, few will fall for that.
"It's about leading on the tough issues,"
Leading would not be doing again what was promised and reneged on in 1986, as Mel would define it. Leading would be enforcing the laws passed in 1986, and fulfilling the legal requirements of the law passed in regards to enforcement, since the amnesty was give, but the enforcement ignored for twenty-one years.
Leading ain't doing the same thing again, Mel, and telling the same lies to the voters as in 1986, with basically the same old ruse brought back for an encore.
Mel has a very weird and self-serving definition of "leading".
And I think over reacting to Mel's statement is not much better than, and could easily be worse than, what Mel actually said.
We need to chill and put away the knives.
I am in a killing mood, have been for about two years. When the people you trust to run your party are clowns and you see your opponents, who don't have any issues, run rings around you then I think its high time for some purging.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
"Now that he's improving, Bush's popularity is coming back up, as it should. Most people don't like making concessions to illegals, but it's not at the top of their issue list. It's just not."
Bush's popularity this year has perfectly tracked the prominence of the immigration issue, hitting a low point around "see you at the bill signing" time. Now it's etched back up a few points because people are thinking less about immigration and some potentially better news from Iraq.
The immigration issue hurt the party more post-2006 election than pre, but it's been the biggest negative this year, and will remain so if W and Company are foolish enough to continue trying to revive amnesty, and calling it something other than what it is.
If you think his pigheadedness and insults to the conservative base during the immigration debate hasn't hurt the party significantly, then you're nuts. It's up to the presidential candidates to put things back together in 2008. Bush is a definite liability.
"But at the end of the day, what is your answer? How would you solve this?"
The answer has been/is being provided loud and clear, by 79% of the American people: enforce the damned law as it is and forget amnesty.
The answer is, and has been there. Mel, Bush and others just don't like the answer.
"Most people don't like making concessions to illegals, but it's not at the top of their issue list. It's just not."
It's enough of an issue that it shut-down the Capitol phone system, and senators, representatives and staff on the hill said over and over that they'd never experienced an issue that stirred so much passion and response from the public.
According to the latest Rasmussen poll, 79% of the people want the laws enforced, and another 10% are 'undecided'. Can you name another issue that receives such broad agreement across the political spectrum? It's really a matter of what percentage of voters will make it a vote deciding issue in 2008. I think that's an unknown for now.
If you don't closely examine who the candidate is before the primary. He is like a Rudy, 'say anything to get elected' type of guy. For evidence of Rudy's two step, see this.
Won't make the same mistake twice, unfortunately there is nothing I can do about voting for Mel now.
rick55
I'd fence in ALL of DC and most of Anne Arundal County.Then,I'd start building a fence in Buffalo, New York. Better get a clue people! Forget invading Pakistan. Pacify Tehran and Baghdad!
Win the FRIGGIN WAR!!
If RNC donations continue to be down, it might not take too many calls from state chairmen to get rid of this fellow. In a nice way, mind you.
Some might say what they what about Romney's changes of mind, but Rudy is no less prone to these flip-flops:
On a speech last Tuesday in SC, Rudy said, "We can end illegal immigration."
On a 1996 speech in Harvard University he said, "We'll Never, Ever Be Able To Totally Control Immigration."
Which one is it, Rudy?
How you feel about the immigration issue. Personally I'm probably closer to Martinez than Hunter et al. on it. But you can't say that. You can't say anything derogatory against your own party when you're party chairman. Especially not about arguably the two front runners for the freaking nomination!
Can you imagine Dean saying something like this? Or Mehlman? Nope. Never.
"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert