tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post6227632046323324568..comments2008-06-18T01:24:44.133-05:00timthschttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05896035882619304204noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-82838758191774270992008-06-18T01:24:00.000-05:002008-06-18T01:24:00.000-05:00Judge Rene Diaz is the epitome of the Philadelphia lawyer with absolutely no scruples or conscience whatsoever. He was Benkiser's hatchet boy and he wielded his hatchet well as her boy for Chair of the Credentials Committee. <BR/><BR/>PortiaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-75300466739346128102008-06-16T22:01:00.000-05:002008-06-16T22:01:00.000-05:00Mr. Church-<BR/><BR/>Thank you for your hard work as well. I know you were very frustrated with the Chair as we all were. I don't think I would have made it through one day on the committee myself. We appreciate your attempts at fairness.<BR/><BR/>It baffles me that Renee Diaz is a Republican Judge, but I guess that's a good insight as to the state of the Party in Texas. If he is representative of our "leaders" it's no wonder we have the legislation we do coming out of Austin and Washington.<BR/><BR/>Rest assured, we will see you in 2010 and look forward to standing with you on the side of right!Danyahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10484649264766446667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-20759332728883304622008-06-16T20:48:00.000-05:002008-06-16T20:48:00.000-05:00To All:<BR/><BR/>I wish to thank Mr. Lambert for working as hard as he did.<BR/><BR/>As someone who really had no idea who he was, my initial thought when I walked in to sit down and saw him at the seat of the Temporary Credentials member whom he replaced, I figured she had been tossed for being such a strong supporter of the rules and doing the right and just thing.<BR/><BR/>Mr. Lambert introduced himself to me and I asked what had happened to the previous delegate wherein he very graciously told me who he was and why he replaced that person. Once this was done, I was very happy to have him there and to have met him. Since then, upon returning home, I have spent a bit of time researching Mr. Lambert as I really did not know who he is. <BR/><BR/>For those reading this, understand that there were many who fought for the right and just thing. Even those whom did not seem to at first, when realizing the scope of what had happened, fought for the right and just thing and at the end, there were twelve of us- including Tim Lambert.<BR/><BR/>I wish that the outcome had been different and that the RPT would not have made such a foolhardy mistake in the way that they treated the challengers, contestants, and those appealing, but they have and will regret it in my opinion.<BR/><BR/>Respectfully,<BR/><BR/>Denny Church<BR/>SD27<BR/>Permanent Member Credentials Committee RPT Convention 2008Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-52405807122761758382008-06-16T06:29:00.000-05:002008-06-16T06:29:00.000-05:00I believe this convention showed how irrelevant our state party has become. We have lost seats in the Leg. during the reign of Benkiser the Brutal; she usually keeps about half of the SREC disenfranchised and in the state of Texas right now, Harris County rules (Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, etc). Let's take what we learned back to our own districts and work to have victories in November. Let's reach out to the new people and work with them to redefine the Republican Party in Texas and be ready for 2010 in Dallas. Let's learn the rules, follow the rules and be ready defend the truth at all times. The Brutal is term limited, we'll be electing a new chairman in 2010...there's something to live for!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-45237947428536620242008-06-15T15:26:00.000-05:002008-06-15T15:26:00.000-05:00I too was astonished by the activities involving the Nueces rump convention. This being my 4th state convention to attend I was disappointed in the lack of consideration given to objections to the credentials committee. It seemed that the temporary committee would not take up the issue because it was the responsibility of the permanent committee and the permanent committee would not take up the issue because the temp committee didn't take it up. And not even allowing the issue to come before the full convention was flat out wrong. Altogether it was a rather pathetic convention. The party seems incapable of admitting to the real problems and so I fear the November elections are going to be real ugly.Patricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-70616222002748272692008-06-15T13:23:00.000-05:002008-06-15T13:23:00.000-05:00I second that!<BR/><BR/>On the floor of the convention, I could not believe how many sat on their butts for nay votes because they just wanted to get "business" over with and go have fun, listening to them rumble about "just getting it over with". I came to work and do the work my county sent me to do, and represent the republicans of my county. I declare the convention majority LAZY!sarahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-21025275237577519142008-06-15T10:57:00.000-05:002008-06-15T10:57:00.000-05:00I sat in on the Permanent Credentials Committee meetting and I am astonished that the sham of a committee meeting occurred at the Republican Convention. The committee members were given no option by the chair except to accept the temporary roll without discussion! <BR/><BR/>Before the General Session was adjourned, we were told if we had additional platform planks we would like heard, we could present them to the Pemanent Platform Committee for consideration. This tells us 2 things: 1) points could be raised and considered from the gallery and 2) the Committee could consider new business. Neither was allowed in the Perm. Cred. Committee. <BR/><BR/>If a delegate from the gallery wanted to be heard, we had to write a note, give it to the Sargeant at Arms and ask it be given to a committee member. To clarify, that's what we came up with - not what was offered to us. The Chair specifically said it was out of order for a Perm. Committee to recognize a member of the gallery. If that is correct, how is it the Perm. Platform Committee could hear and consider new planks?<BR/><BR/>Even objection and discussion from the committee members was ruled out of order. Several of them wanted to discuss Bertuzzi and Nueces but were gavelled down and told they were out of order because the only business of the Committee was to recommend the permanent roll of the Convention. It is the Chair's contention that the only purpose for the Permanent Credentials Committee is to rubber-stamp the Temporary Roll without discussion. In fairness, he did say he would hear discussion, but could not imagine a question that would be in order!<BR/><BR/>Further, the 12 Committee Members who were interested in submitting a Minority Report were told that a Minority Report would be rejected if it contained any mention of Bertuzzi or Nueces (or any other challenge) since that was not the business of the Permanent Committee! It is noteworthy that he also had a Parlamentarian that twisted rules like pretzels to uphold whatever Diaz wanted to rule - and RULE is the correct word here.<BR/><BR/>The 18 members of this committee who went along to get along epitomize to me the problem with this Party. Obviously, there was a majority of delegates at this convention who were more interested in the party than the Party.<BR/><BR/>I would like to submit a motion that all such delegates be given VIP passes to the next convention so they may continue to feel important, attend the festivities and shop the trade show while being stripped of their voting rights so those of us more interested in Party business than dinner parties may attend to the business at hand. Do I hear a second?Danyahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10484649264766446667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-34330970089922806932008-06-13T16:59:00.000-05:002008-06-13T16:59:00.000-05:00brandynn,<BR/> Thanks for the distinction.Stephennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-3017192293954858782008-06-13T16:35:00.000-05:002008-06-13T16:35:00.000-05:00Also, if I'm correct - and let me know if I'm not - Diaz denied the rump convention, and refused to even listen to why they held a rump convention, on the basis that they did not notify individual delegates. The two things are not related. <BR/><BR/>Challenging delegates is one thing, where notification of those delegates is required. (Which goes to show that those precinct records ARE public - otherwise, how would you be able to challenge a delegate if you didn't know who they were?)<BR/><BR/>Holding a rump convention is a separate thing. Notifying each individual delegate is not required in that case. You are required to announce you are holding a rump convention, at the time you are leaving, which the Nueces County audio proves was done.<BR/><BR/>When two conventions are held, the credentials committee is supposed to hear BOTH sides and THEN determine which is the genuine convention and which delegation will be seated. The dear judge refused to even allow those sides to be heard. He threw the whole thing out based on a technicality which didn't even apply to rump conventions.<BR/><BR/>He only did the bidding of Benkiser the Brutal, who is taking her marching orders from who knows how far up the ranks of the GOP. He did not follow any sort of rules or provide any sort of truth or fairness to the situation.Brandynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12989999217034723759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-78178710744967180812008-06-13T12:25:00.000-05:002008-06-13T12:25:00.000-05:00To Stephen<BR/>Even though they are public records Bertuzzi refused access to precict convention records until way after the deadline for filing individual challenges. The records he did release pusuant to court order were altered and not in the form submitted by precict chairmen which he was obligated by the election code to preserve.<BR/><BR/>Is this a violation of criminal law? Since Bertuzzi is an attorney --an officer of the court sworn to uphold the law and obey state statutes such as the election code--can he be charged with violating bar association ethics code?<BR/><BR/>JackJackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04131203351992757438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-30088518841299116902008-06-13T12:19:00.000-05:002008-06-13T12:19:00.000-05:00Please keep pushing this issue. You are on the side of history. Thank you for what you do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-39275264658637700982008-06-13T08:36:00.000-05:002008-06-13T08:36:00.000-05:00Having read your post, and in full favor of the philosophical and practical rules based approach which you offer, and also not at all accepting the down and dirty tactics of the current leadership, I would like for you to distinguish the "rules-adherence" position for which you advocate with you complaint about the rule which Judge Diaz used to deny the challenges because they were not individual challenges. Shouldn't they have been, if it is a valid rule? And if the rule is valid and wasn't followed, does it even matter that we are in an overall position of "right". Shouldn't it make us do exactly what we want them to do: follow the rules and if we violate one then say to ourselves, "Well, there is a 'heads up' for next convention which won't bite us again because we will pay attention." Sure there is momentum, but technicalities are exactly that: technical aspects of the rules that exist for a reason. They violated technicalities in their eyes and want us to swallow the disparity. Can we expect less from ourselves? <BR/><BR/>Please clarify the distinction.Stephennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5454215976081715358.post-45547556334879345862008-06-13T07:56:00.000-05:002008-06-13T07:56:00.000-05:00Just wow. Thanks for taking the time to document this. I still can't believe that there are 35 people on the floor of our convention who did not vote in the primary, were not selected as at large delegates and were not selected as delegates at their precinct convention. And the leadership upholds this.<BR/><BR/>"grass roots" indeed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com