feed icon

Comparing The Kurita And Williams Situations

By Kleinheider Posted on February 15, 2009 at 12:21 pm

Tom Humphrey explores the differences in the two cases of party disloyalty:

[T]he Democrats held their Kurita hearing in public and voted in the open. The party chairman at the time, Gray Sasser, left the decision to the executive committee.

The Republicans, in accord with their bylaws, left the actual decision on Williams to Smith but had a secret vote of the executive committee on a resolution urging Williams’ ouster — refusing even to make public a copy of the resolution until Smith made her announcement and said it was approved overwhelmingly.

It might be, however, that Kurita would have been better off if tossed out of the party back in 2007. She would have had two years to prepare for election as an Independent (or Republican?).

As it was, she was effectively unelected by the party executive committee when her name was removed from the ballot. She tried to run as a write-in candidate, but that crusade was doomed.

Williams does have time to organize a campaign as an independent and, conceivably, could benefit from a Carter County backlash.

permalink

Tags: , , ,  

Comments

8 Responses to “Comparing The Kurita And Williams Situations”

  1. Avatar writes
    February 15th, 2009 12:42 pm

    Another difference:

    Kurita was in the minority voting with the majority.

    Williams was in the majority voting with the minority.

  2. Sam writes
    February 15th, 2009 12:49 pm

    In other words, by voting with her party, her party’s candidate was not going to win anyway.

    But by voting with his party, his party’s candidate was assured to win.

    Of course that is why the Senate Democrats were so mad - they believed that the other traitor named Williams would have voted for the minority candidate (again) as well.

  3. Eleanor A writes
    February 15th, 2009 12:55 pm

    A big difference: Democrats let Kurita run in the primary - wasting her money and that of many Democratic supporters - and then used a totally ethically corrupt rationale to remove her from office. In yet another example of the same good-old-boyism that’s run rampant in this party, and why it’s not going to be able to elect anybody dogcatcher until the powers that be that run things, take a good long look in the mirror.

  4. Ben writes
    February 15th, 2009 2:02 pm

    Of course, the powers that be in the Democratic Party elected one of their own as chairman. Chip Forrester has been on the executive committee, the body that stole the election from Rosalind, for a quarter century. In fact, he led the charge to steal the election. He’s the head thief.

  5. The Avenger writes
    February 15th, 2009 6:28 pm

    And, TRP Chairman Robin Smith didn’t have to ask the TRP SEC members to vote on anything. The chairman has the sole authority according to party by-laws to make the decision. Smith wanted their input and she got it.

    It wasn’t a secret as Humprhey indicates–everyone knew the voting was going on via email/fax and it went on for four and 1/2 days. The resolution was emailed out to the members. He may be disapointed no one gave him a copy, I guess.

    I guess the TRP wanted to keep their party business to theirselves instead of having Democrats meddling in their business–like electing a Speaker.

  6. TennRod writes
    February 15th, 2009 8:47 pm

    The stealing of that election from Kurita was one of the the most shameful days in the history of the Democratic Party in Tennessee.

  7. GOPer writes
    February 15th, 2009 8:56 pm

    As Republicans we need to stop setting our standard by what the Democrats did? Of course we were move above board than they were. But that doesn’t mean what we did was right. We need Republican leaders that set a higher standard than “we did better than the Democrats did”!

  8. The Avenger writes
    February 16th, 2009 7:51 am

    Setting standards is what the TRP did when it striped Williams of his ability to run again as a Republican. It was the right thing to do–he violated the rules of the Republican party and it sent a strong message to the other weaklings in the GOP House. The Naifeh boys were the inspiration for the TRP bylaw in the first place.

    Guess what–it worked on them–they were smart enough to know that Robin & Co. were not bluffing. Williams–not so smart.

    At least the Republicans “keep their word”. They say what they mean and mean what they say. With the exception of Williams–he was warned and didn’t vote for the GOP Caucus nominee. He is a one time Speaker and two term legislator. Book it!

Leave a Reply




Partly Cloudy

The Collective

The Latest from NashvillePost.com

Archives