Well, the big vote happened and I was surprised, very pleasantly surprised that Roark won 57 to 15 (you can check the exact figures but that's what I heard). My husband thinks the results indicate that other people also thought some sort of shenanigans were going on in Boise. I disagree. And I certainly don't think that it had anything to do with my blog; I don't write often enough for people to read it every day. Rather, I believe that Roark gave the most eloquent presentation. He appealed to the people who work on the ground, going door-to-door, trying to fill local positions, wanting the IDP to understand their needs rather than being told what they had to do. Our previous Idaho senator from Boundary County, Senator Tim Tucker, has said for years what Roark said tonight: we need to fill the courthouses with Democrats.
I also must commend Jerry Brady, who so thoughtfully explained his endorsement of Minnick. It made it all so clear; too bad it wasn't clear until tonight. As I said before, I do not doubt Brady's integrity, nor do I think he would be anything less than a great IDP Chair, I just didn't like what appeared to be going on in terms of full disclosure from the IDP offices in Boise.
But, be all that as it may. We had an election. It was overwhelming for Roark. I hope that the IDP will now move forward and after the Iowa Caucuses, I am really looking forward to our own Super Duper Tuesday.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Shenanigans in Boise? Flip. We are usually in the position of begging someone to do it. Glad there was a contest between two worthy candidates and look forward to Roark's leadership and advocacy.
But as an attorney in the state I am concerned with the blatant partisanship regarding judgeships. I don't think that was a wise comment that will win us many votes. I have many friends who are judges in this state some of whom are partisan but keep it to themselves as the judicial canons require. The judges stand for election in non-partisan races and for Democrats to infuse politics into the judiciary reflects poorly. I'm not naive enough to say it doesn't play a part on certain issues but as a political platform its a loser providing red meat for the opposition.
My area of expertise is human culture and behavior, specifically why the Germans acted as they did during the Nazi era. Sometimes, when things are really out of hand, we need to counter partisanship with same. I have no problem with any of Roark's statements. As far as I'm concerned, he spoke to the people at the grassroots who do not do this work for a living but because they want to make the world a better place. And in order to do so, they volunteer. So they volunteer because they believe in what they're doing. That is a good
much greater than the sum of its parts.
As for shenanigans in Boise, give me a break. Way too many people smelled something rotten in Boise, otherwise I never would have heard about it. We had two good candidates for chair, and the majority spoke. Done deal.
Well, thank goodness for bloggers or those outside the immediate loop would never know what's going on in the party. Sounds to me like even the membership of the CC was unclear on what was going on. Hopefully KR can move towards improving the communication system of the IDP because it's in pretty sad shape right now. I did receive the earlier email from the interim chair regarding the need for a new chair, but there was no mention of the nominees in that email, nor was there a following message nor anything posted to the IDP website. Why bother to have a website that doesn't have current information? We should make better use of the "internets" ;-)
You may not be able to control what the media presents on the tube, but there's no reason not to make better use of some simple tools at hand to improve participation and visibility.
Hey Sisyphus,
Sorry, I was rather tired and short on that last response. I think the partisanship issue can be complicated. Certainly Democrats do not want to engage in partisanship in any way, shape or form that the Republicans do. On the other hand, we do want to fill non-partisan posts because it demonstrates our involvement in our communities. The phrase that Roark use in "filling our courthouse with Democrats" I have heard on many occasions and I take it as a rhetorical statement that we need to fill local non-partisan positions, for the reason I stated above.
However, I also feel that some partisanship must be forwarded because of the aggressiveness with which Republicans have, indeed, taken over our courts. I think the current Supreme Court is an apt example, as was the Supreme Court that gave Bush the presidency in 2000.
And look at what has happened with government services under the Bush administration from the FCC to the FDA to the EPA to FEMA and so forth. It's all partisan! And that is why I referenced Nazi Germany. The process begins slow and subtle, then becomes more blatant, but most people do not want, and even cannot believe that their wonderful government could stoop to such low levels. We're living in dangerous times.
A friend of mine, an independent of the baby boomer age, said after one of the largest peace marches occuring after 9/11, I have never felt more patriotic in my life. And it wasn't because of 9/11 per se, it was because no matter how large the peace march, nor how global, government was not responding and the media was under-reporting. Thus her willingness to participate.
I do not dislike the IDP nor do I dislike any of the people involved in it. I do dislike secrecy and I'm really suspect of hidden agendas. That being said, I believe our party will moved forward and that this next election will be grand for Idaho.
Well, you are all close to the mark except Roark was mentioned as a replacement when Stallings wavered back in 2006...
Post a Comment