"MDGOP to Bloggers: Drop Dead"

Hey, MDGOP…was it something I said?

That’s what my first thought was when I read the party’s policy on credentialing bloggers interested in covering its spring convention this weekend (as reported by The Sun’s Michael Dresser).

The policy reminds me of that famous New York Daily News  headline regarding President Ford’s reaction to New York City’s insolvency in the 1970s: “Ford to City: Drop Dead.”

According to the “MDGOP to Bloggers: Drop Dead” policy, the MDGOP is only allowing “credentialed members of the media” to cover the event, and “will not allow journalists to register as ‘media’ for the purpose of writing a personal online blog.”

Bloggers can still attend the floor festivities, of course…at a cost of $75. That’s about enough gas money to get David Ferguson back to South Carolina, if not back.

If such a policy existed during the previous party chairman’s race in 2010, then it was certainly not enforced. Back then I followed the chairman’s vote via Facebook dispatches sent from the convention from Red Maryland’s Mark Newgent. I followed up with Newgent, who stated he was unaware of any such policy being in force back then.

Clearly this policy, as communicated by MDGOP Executive Director David Ferguson, is a petulant response to the steady string of criticisms the party establishment has received from me and many other members of the blogosphere.

There is much diversity of opinion among bloggers, and we certainly don’t always agree on everything. But, independently we have criticized the recent missteps of the MDGOP and its interim chairman, Diana Waterman, with a high degree of unanimity.

This campaign to reform the way MDGOP does business has an “X-Men United” feel to it. Clearly the defenders of the status quo are feeling the pressure, as evidenced by some of their questionable crisis communications maneuvers. And that must have them collectively shaking in their boots.

It should also be noted that the MDGOP’s restrictive policy against bloggers bucks the trend evident among other conservative leaning organizations.

When I worked at the 2000 Republican Convention, space was reserved for bloggers to cover the convention proceedings for the first time ever. Since then, conservative organizations hosting events such as CPAC have largely integrated bloggers and traditional media into the same space (as fellow blogger Jeff Quinton reports).

Interestingly, in response to an inquiry from another blogger, Ferguson responded that only bloggers with “sponsoring media outlet like the Washington Post, Annapolis Capital, or WBAL” can be credentialed.

Does anyone else get the irony of a state GOP official extolling members of the alleged “liberal media” as examples of legitimate journalism? I’m not sure even Ferguson himself does.

In the end, I don’t think the MDGOP’s pathetic attempt at a crackdown on bloggers will have the intended chilling effect. We’re all going to be at the convention. We’re all going write what we would have written originally without paying David Ferguson $75.

The only difference is that, while our criticisms before were born of political disagreement, David Ferguson and his ham-handed policy has now interjected personal resentment among bloggers into the situation as well. He has also signaled definitively where his personal loyalties lie. If anyone other than Diana Waterman is elected chairman on Saturday, this stunt has likely sealed David Ferguson’s fate as far as keeping his job is concerned.

My late father used to say, “People would rather you urinate on their faces than ignore them.” The fact that the MDGOP has moved away from ignoring bloggers and towards a crude attempt at stifling and exclusion is an unmistakable sign of weakness on the part of the establishment and its defenders.  

Gandhi famously said, “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.”

The MDGOP establishment can no longer afford to ignore its critics. And its clumsy foray into censorship demonstrates that it lacks the energy and ideas to defeat them.

Ellen Sauerbrey: "Showing Up Counts for Something"

One of the iron laws of MDGOP politics is the fact that, other things being equal, the establishment of the past will always support the establishment of the present.

We witnessed this phenomenon last year when a variety of party elders – the mausoleum wing of the MDGOP – lined up in support of Audrey Scott’s unsuccessful bid to become national committeewoman.

At the time, one of Mrs. Scott’s most ardent backers was former GOP gubernatorial nominee, House Minority Leader, and Delegate Ellen Sauerbrey.

Well, Mrs. Sauerbrey has jumped into the fray again, this time by circulating a letter in support of interim MDGOP Chairman Diana Waterman’s bid to serve out the remainder of departed Chairman Alex Mooney’s term.

Mrs. Sauerbrey’s message follows in its entirety:

GOP Friends, 

The Maryland Republican Central Committee will make an important decision in a few weeks, selecting a new Chairman to fill out the remainder of the term to which Alex Mooney was elected. Needless to say, the coming year is a critical one, leading up to the 2014 election.  Our priority and our common mission must be to elect Republicans dedicated to our values of conservative limited government, personal responsibility and individual freedom.  We cannot afford the luxury of division and infighting. 

Congratulations on the excitement and debate surrounding the campaign for chairman.  However, instead of a spirit of unity, I hear concerns about   “the establishment” vs “the activists”…  “insiders” vs “outsiders”.   Clearly, we need both.  We need  seasoned leadership and experience and we must fully embrace new activists,  new energy, and new ideas  if we are to turn around the declining trajectory of the Maryland Republican Party... 

Diana Waterman has shown me both.    For the past few years, she has worked tirelessly on campaigns and party building activity.    Showing up counts for something and Diana seems to be everywhere.  Being State Party Chairman is hard and often thankless work. I believe  Diana is prepared to put the time and energy into the job. 

I share the concern that our party has failed to fully embrace groups like the Tea Party and Campaign for Liberty,  that are a source of highly motivated, dedicated, and often young volunteers.  Diana has committed to me her intent to establish an Advisory Committee that will welcome  and involve the vital  energy and ideas of these groups. 

She has given considerable thought to a comprehensive program to move the party forward.  I hope you will give her a chance to implement it..I support Diane’s candidacy and will do what I can to help her and the party succeed. Ellen

Let me go through Mrs. Sauerbrey’s letter line by line.

Ellen Says: “Needless to say, the coming year is a critical one, leading up to the 2014 election.  Our priority and our common mission must be to elect Republicans dedicated to our values of conservative limited government, personal responsibility and individual freedom.  We cannot afford the luxury of division and infighting.”

My Take: This is a pervasive thought among members of the MDGOP establishment: Dissent in any form constitutes “division and infighting” and is unacceptable. This same sentiment caused a Talbot County central committee official to purge from that party’s website comments that were critical of interim GOP chair Diana Waterman. How ironic that a party which stresses personal freedom would resort to Soviet-style tactics to insulate its leaders from fair criticism.

Ellen Says: “However, instead of a spirit of unity, I hear concerns about   ‘the establishment’ vs ‘the activists’…  ‘insiders’ vs ‘outsiders’”.   

My Take: For me, this was the most interesting part of Mrs. Sauerbrey’ statement in that, based on the language she uses, she seems to be responding directly to points I made in a prior blog post, and in a subsequent op-ed which recently ran in the Baltimore Sun.  I’m certainly flattered to have drawn a rebuttal from one of the MDGOP’s barons. In any event, these are organic and not contrived concerns resulting from the disconnect which exists between party regulars and grassroots activists.  Unless the MDGOP addresses them directly and honestly, they will remain.

Ellen Says: “We need seasoned leadership and experience and we must fully embrace new activists,  new energy, and new ideas  if we are to turn around the declining trajectory of the Maryland Republican Party...”

My Take: No argument from me there. Indeed, I give Ellen credit for offering a sanguine view of the MDGOP's political fortunes.

This contrasts with the fanciful account presented by Louis Pope, who in his recent letter writes: 

“After all the harsh and nasty emails and comments by some in our Party I feel terrible to have put Diana in such an awkward position, over the last three years she has been a driving force on the success of the Maryland Republican Party. She has given of her time, talented, and her own financial resources to keep our Party strong and vibrant…”

Um, let me review modern history:

2006: Bob Ehrlich loses.

2008: Andy Harris loses as John McCain carries his district by 19 points.

2010: Bob Ehrlich loses by a bigger margin than he did in 2006.

2012: The GOP loses one of its two remaining members of Congress, and is badly beaten on the ballot questions.

Exactly what “success” is Louis Pope referring to?

Ellen Says: “Diana Waterman has shown me both.    For the past few years, she has worked tirelessly on campaigns and party building activity.    Showing up counts for something and Diana seems to be everywhere.  Being State Party Chairman is hard and often thankless work. I believe  Diana is prepared to put the time and energy into the job.”

My Take: Woody Allen famously said that, “Half of life is just showing up.” I’m not sure that is the primary characteristic people want in a party chairman. Vision matters as well. Based on Mrs. Waterman’s performance at the Montgomery County chairman’s debate I attended, she appears to be a caretaker for the party’s status quo. In other words, she’s an Aaron, not a Moses.

Ellen Says: “I share the concern that our party has failed to fully embrace groups like the Tea Party and Campaign for Liberty,  that are a source of highly motivated, dedicated, and often young volunteers.”

My Take: The rules changes adopted at the GOP convention in Tampa last summer are a major reason the groups Ellen mentions feel alienated towards the party regulars. Diana Waterman served on the Convention Rules Committee alongside Louis Pope.  Yet she has never publicly disclosed exactly what her role was with respect to the rules changes.

Ellen Says: “I support Diane’s (sic) candidacy and will do what I can to help her and the party succeed.”

My Take: If you’re taking the time to endorse someone, one would hope you’d at least get the person’s name right in the endorsement.

Anyway, reading Mrs. Sauerbrey’s missive makes me wonder when other past GOP luminaries will weigh in on the chairman's race as well.  

Rest assured that, should Bob Ehrlich, Michael Steele, Roscoe Bartlett, Charles “Mac” Mathias, or the Teds (McKeldin and Agnew) opine, I’ll letcha know. 

Back to the Blogging Barnyard

So, I took a brief sabbatical from blogging, but events in the MDGOP chairman’s race have necessitated that I climb back in the arena. So here goes.

First, here is my latest op-ed piece in the Frederick News Post detailing another potential liability interim MDGOP Chairman Diana Waterman faces – namely, her questionable decision to name a black cow on her Queen Anne’s County farm “Oprah.” Now, this isn’t news in that the story broke more than two years ago on a Queen Anne’s County blog, and was then picked up by the Baltimore Sun shortly thereafter. But since Mrs. Waterman threw her hat into the chairman’s race, it has received new attention and new relevance.

Why do I think this story matters? Well, the media is dominated by people who are generally looking for opportunities to characterize Republicans as, at best, venal idiots or, at worst, racists. Minimally, Mrs. Waterman’s bovine misadventure, which reeks of poor judgment and insensitivity, provides the media with yet another example of GOP buffoonery. Perhaps more seriously, this episode compromises Mrs. Waterman’s ability to broaden the party’s outreach to minorities. In other words, will the African American voters who make up 30 percent of the state’s population take anything a woman who equates an African American icon with a black farm animal says seriously?

Second, I attended the MDGOP Chairman Candidate Forum organized by Dwight Patel and the Montgomery County GOP last Thursday. All in all, the forum itself was a drama-free affair typified by differences in style as much as substance. Mrs. Waterman was very much the status quo candidate; she tried to bring every answer back to initiatives in which the party was presently engaged. Collins Bailey, whom I’d never met or heard speak before, projected as the glib substitute teacher at times. He was the only candidate to stand and try to engage members of the audience through body language. During his presentation, he described himself as being a “salesman” by profession, which explains why I felt like he was speaking to a roomful of sales trainees at times. Red Maryland’s Greg Kline, an attorney, came across as thoughtful, well-prepared, and erudite.

The most memorable moment of the forum came, as you might imagine, when the issue of Nicolee Ambrose’s removal from the RNC Rules Committee was raised. Seeming nervous yet rehearsed, Mrs. Waterman (who admitted not having been politically active prior to 2005) launched in a defense of her decision to replace Ambrose with National Committeeman Louis Pope. Rather than discuss why she felt Pope was a better fit, her defense centered more on process than substance. At one point, she likened herself to a president who exercised her right to withdraw a Supreme Court nomination prior to Senate confirmation. Kline sharply rebutted her points in what was perhaps the most contentious moment of the rather polite affair.

The event wasn’t without fireworks, however, as fellow blogger Brian Griffiths engaged in a heated exchange with MDGOP official John Wafer. Wafer, who reportedly called Joe Steffen and me “character assassins” in a Facebook posting, is the self-appointed defender of the faith of the MDGOP establishment.

(With all this talk about pit bull legislation going on in Annapolis, based on his Facebook comments and behavior the other night, I see Wafer as a “Pit Yorkie” – in other words, someone who yaps a lot in defense of others, but ultimately make no substantive contribution to the debate).

Anyway, Diana Waterman and her disproportional minion left the venue before her opponents did. They stayed and mingled with a crowd which, as far as I can tell, was more inclined to be friendly to Bailey or Kline. I’m not a member of the Central Committee, but if I was I’d vote for Greg Kline based on last Thursday’s performance.

Lastly, during my post-event conversation, I happened upon the following interesting bit of information regarding Diana Waterman, Louis Pope, and the RNC Rules Committees.

Yes, that’s right, there are TWO Rules Committees. According to my well-informed source:

“The RNC Standing Committee on Rules is composed of one RNC member from each state, elected by the 3 RNC members from that state by majority vote. They are chosen after the national convention, and serve until the start of the next national convention. This is the committee that Nicolee was briefly on. Louis served on this committee for the 2004-2008 and 2008-2012 terms. 

“Prior to each national convention, the convention delegates from each state elect one man and one woman to serve on each of four committees: platform, credentials, permanent organization, and rules. In 2012, the Maryland convention delegates elected Louis Pope and Diana Waterman to serve on this committee.” 

So, in addition to his regular service on the RNC Rules Committee, Louis Pope also served on the one that convened at the convention – and supported the new party rules anathema to so many activists. And, Diana Waterman personally worked to pass them as well.

For me, this changes the tenor of the entire Pope/Ambrose Rules Committee controversy. Originally I assumed that Mrs. Waterman removed Ambrose from the Rules Committee for reasons of personal animosity (Ambrose defeated Waterman bestie Audrey Scott during last year’s national committeewoman’s race) and loyalty to fellow establishmentarian Pope. But in light of this new information, it is clear that Waterman’s choice was for philosophical as well as personal reasons.

The choice for MDGOP comes down to this: If you like the new RNC rules then support the people who passed them (Waterman and Pope). If you don’t, support those aligned with Ambrose, who is working to repeal them (Kline or Bailey).

Anyway, the RNC meets in Hollywood, California later this week. I’ll keep you posted on what happens next.

"Healing the Rift"

Based on the reaction it got, I took my “MDGOP: The Ins Versus the Outs” blog entry and expanded it into an op-ed which ran in The Sun this morning. Enjoy.

 

And, in related news, there are reports that interim GOP Chairman Diana Waterman has chosen a campaign manager for her effort to retain the chairmanship when the state Republican Central Committee meets in April. No surprise that she’d pick the individual at the center of her most memorable political decision to date.

Rumor has it that she’s planning to pick Louis Pope as her campaign treasurer. Apparently, his “experience” presiding over the fleecing of the coffers of the 2012 Republican National Convention continues to be a big selling point with her.

But I digress.

Pants on Fire?

Interim MDGOP Chair Diana Waterman issued a statement addressing the two recent controversies which have raised questions about her leadership abilities. (Michael Swartz reprints the message in its entirety on Monoblogue and provides  his own analysis as well).

Here I’m going to focus on Waterman’s explanation of controversy #1: MDGOP Executive Director David Ferguson decision to cancel the Pathfinders candidate training session in favor of a quixotic trip to South Carolina for the purpose of spreading the news about Governor Martin O’Malley’s failings.

Unfortunately, Waterman’s late-breaking account does not align with previously established facts.

Diana Waterman says…

“On Friday, our Executive Director, David Ferguson, participated in a joint Press Conference with the South Carolina GOP concerning Gov. O’Malley’s appearance at a South Carolina Democrat Issues Conference. This was a joint effort between the Republican Governor’s Association, the RNC, the SCGOP, and the MDGOP. It has received widespread press coverage, and showed Maryland Democrats that the MDGOP is on the offensive now.”

My Take…

On Friday, while Ferguson was engaging in his walkabout tour of South Carolina, the Maryland House of Delegates voted to hike the state’s gas tax by an estimated 87 percent. Neither Ferguson nor interim chairman Waterman issued any sort of statement. So, if the MDGOP is on the offensive, it’s certainly not in Maryland.

Diana Waterman says…

“While in South Carolina, David met with staff members of the State’s leading political leaders to invite them to Maryland for future MDGOP events and for Lincoln Day Dinners.”

My Take…

With which staffers did Ferguson meet? Which Lincoln Day dinners will benefit from this cavalcade of South Carolinians expected to come rolling into our state?

Diana Waterman says…

“For the past year or so, we have been providing opposition research, media briefing kits, and support to Republican State Parties across the United States wherever MOM has travelled (sic).”

My Take…

What sets South Carolina apart to the extent that this same approach would not have worked there?  During the height of a legislative session in which the Democrats who rule Annapolis are ramming through a gas tax, $1 billion in new spending, Second Amendment limitations, a repeal of the death penalty, subsidies for windmills, and other policies anathema to state Republicans, why would David Ferguson believe his time was best spent outside of Maryland?

Fellow blogger and native South Carolinian Jeff Quinton makes the excellent point that the Palmetto State already has a robust Republican Party, and therefore didn’t really need Ferguson’s help.

Clearly the purpose of Ferguson’s folly was to raise his profile in the hopes of securing a better gig in a state with a more functional state party organization, or at one of the national party entities in DC. And Diana Waterman, his friend and ally, is giving him cover.

Diana Waterman says…

“Note – we are not planning to follow O’Malley across the United States in person, however, we will make sure that everywhere he goes, his record of failed leadership will precede him so that GOP Leaders can point it out while he is there!”

My Take…

On March 19^th, John Wagner of the Washington Post reported:

“As he moves around the country in coming months, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) could have an uninvited traveling companion. 

“David Ferguson, executive director of the Maryland Republican Party, vowed Tuesday that he or someone else affiliated with the state GOP will show up each time O’Malley attends an out-of-state event, starting this weekend in South Carolina. 

“O’Malley, frequently mentioned as a potential 2016 presidential contender, is planning to make an appearance Saturday at an 'issues conference' in Charleston at the invitation of South Carolina state Sen. Vincent Sheheen (D), a 2014 gubernatorial hopeful. 

“Ferguson said he will counter with a press conference with GOP leaders in Columbia on Friday and be at the event site Saturday in Charleston. ‘Anytime O’Malley goes and makes a stop on his presidential parade, we’re going to follow him and let people know who the real Martin O’Malley is,’ said Ferguson. 

“Ferguson said the effort — dubbed the ‘No Left Turn Tour’ — is an outgrowth of previous work to arm Republicans in other states with background material on O’Malley, the former chairman of the Democratic Governors Association, when he visits.”

As Ferguson himself told Wagner, this was conceived as a national “tour” consisting of either himself or someone from the MDGOP “show(ing) up each time O’Malley attends an out-of-state event.” Waterman and Ferguson began backpedaling as to the specifics of the tour only after it drew an adverse reaction from activists.

Diana Waterman says…

Also, there was some concern that we rescheduled the Pathfinders Training scheduled for March 23rd so that David could go to South Carolina. This is incorrect. The training was rescheduled because Del. Ready could not be there.

My Take…

This is perhaps the biggest whopper of all.  Central Committee member Hillary Pennington reports a very different experience (this was originally posted on her Purple Elephant Politics Facebook page):

 “For what it's worth: I (Hillary) called to register 7 people for the March 23 Training in Wicomico County. When I heard it was rescheduled, I reached out to Del Ready thinking maybe they thought there just wasn't enough people. Del Ready told me flat out that he had told David weeks prior to Mar 23 that he would not be able to do the training because he had to be on the floor of the House. David then told him that he would still do it and find someone else to help out. Justin was the one who told me about David's opportunity to go to SC and the decision to reschedule. This was before everything blew up. I trust Del Ready's word and know he has no reason to lie.”

Clearly Diana Waterman is feeling the heat as a result of her recent missteps. Are her pants on fire as well?

Pope-A-Dope Politics

Fellow blogger Michael Swartz weighed in on recent GOP missteps on Monoblogue. You can read what he wrote here.

Swartz’s piece was especially interesting to me because of the following excerpt:

“In my original version of this post, I noted I had not yet spoken with Diana Waterman; however, I did speak to her briefly and candidly earlier tonight at the Wicomico County Lincoln Day Dinner. 

“In essence, Waterman told me the reasons she selected Louis Pope to be on the Rules Committee were simple: his experience in the national party on that committee and the length of tenure. It was a matter of ‘continuity,’ Diana said. From what I gathered, she wanted Nicolee to focus on other aspects in the state party.”

Now, someone is going to have to explain to me the virtue of “continuity” in a minority party whose electoral fortunes are as dismal as those of the MDGOP. Nonetheless, in light of what Waterman told Swartz, I thought it might be useful to review Louis Pope’s “experience” representing Maryland on the RNC, specifically as pertains to his biggest assignment to date.

On June 29, 2010, then-RNC Chairman Michael Steele announced that he had appointed Pope Treasurer of the Committee on Arrangements (COA), the entity charged with planning the GOP’s 2012 convention in Tampa, Florida. In the statement announcing the appointment, Steele praised Pope as, “a conscientious steward of donor money while serving as Chairman of the RNC Budget Committee,” adding that, “his exceptional qualifications will help make the Republican National Convention in Tampa a huge success.”

In hindsight, that was perhaps the high point of Pope’s brief, unhappy service as convention treasurer.

By fall 2010, multiple news sources started to report that the staff planning the convention were spending money at an alarming rate. According to the Washington Post, by September 2010, spending topped $636,800 according to FEC filings - 18 times the amount spent in a comparable period four years earlier.

The activities and hiring decisions of Belinda Cook, a former aide to Democratic Maryland State Senator Leo Green and longtime Steele crony who was serving in the newly-created position of “Convention Liaison,” drew special scrutiny. Despite having no event planning experience, Cook was earning $15,000 a month in salary on top of a $25,000 signing bonus. She had also hired relatives and friends for most of the convention staff positions, and the oceanfront mansion she rented for herself accounted for more than half the money the RNC spent on convention-related rent expenses during the third quarter of 2010.

Now, I worked on the 2000 convention in Philadelphia, so I have a unique perspective on these matters. By the time I arrived in Philadelphia in March 2000, the convention already had a manager (Chip DiPaula), a deputy convention manager (Maxene Fernstrom), and two co-chairs (RNC members Jan Larimer and Alec Poitevint) in place.

So, I was especially intrigued when I came across the following tidbit in the Post story:

“The Committee on Arrangements has neither a chairman nor broad membership. The only member is Louis M. Pope, the Republican National committeeman from Maryland, whom Steele appointed last summer as treasurer.”

So, in other words, at the time Cook and her clan were cleaning out the convention’s coffers, Louis Pope was the Committee on Arrangements.

In light of the broad criticism of the profligacy occurring in Tampa, Pope was compelled to issue a memo justifying all this spending.  According to a December 1, 2010 report in the Daily Caller:

“To show that the current spending levels are normal and, indeed, ‘less at the same stage’ as in 2008, Pope compares spending on the 2008 convention over a 10-month period to spending on the 2012 convention over a five month period. 

“Specifically, a chart lists spending from January 2007 to October 2007, 10 months, as compared to August 2010 to January 2011, five months, including two months that have not yet passed. 

“In the 10-month period in 2007, the Committee on Arrangements spent $1.8 million, while in the five-month period in 2010, the Committee on Arrangements spent $784,386. In making the case that the RNC is spending ‘less at the same stage’ in their letter, Cook, Pope and Holly Hughes, the chair of the Site Selection Committee, note that one 'area of greater expense is in legal bills, and that is because so many hotel and venue contracts have been negotiated and signed much earlier.' 

“Specifically, so far Steele’s convention managers have spent more than double on legal bills in the five-month period than over the 10-month period in 2007. The amount in 2012 is $210,000. One Republican source called TheDC unprompted early Wednesday in wonderment at that figure.

“There’s no way in hell there’s that much paperwork,” the source said. 

“The letter from Cook, Pope and Hughes says ‘The COA currently has just six people on staff, including interns.’ In FEC filings, two staff are listed receiving ‘intern stipends.’ One, Cory Sprunger, is receiving modest pay in line with typical stipend amounts for interns in political jobs. The other, Cook’s niece Pamela Kesner, was paid at a rate in September equating to a salary of $50,852. 

“The letter from Cook, Pope and Hughes notes that Republican donors should fear not, because ultimately, it will be taxpayers who foot the bill for the waterfront mansion and $50k-a-year intern niece. 

“Noting that expenses have been paid from a $1 million credit line, the letter says the Committee on Arrangements will ‘pay back that $1MM line of credit in full, next summer when the COA receives the roughly $16 million in federal funds provided to fund both the Republican and Democrat 2012 Conventions.’”

It seems to me that the “ultimately we’re only wasting taxpayers’ dollars, not RNC donor dollars” argument isn’t likely to resonate with too many Republicans.

Well, we all know what happened next.

Reince Priebus defeated Michael Steele for the RNC chairmanship on January 16, 2011. His first order of business was to clean house in Tampa. Cook and her relatives were fired that very night, and Pope was promptly replaced as COA Treasurer with RNC member Tony Parker.

Priebus announced the full membership of the COA on March 29, 2011. Pope wasn’t even allowed to remain as Maryland’s designed COA member, having been replaced by then-National Committeewoman Joyce Tehres. Interestingly, if you go to Pope’s biography on the RNC website, no mention is made of his embarrassing tenure as treasurer of the 2012 convention.

So, was this the “experience” Diana Waterman was thinking of when she decided to replace Ambrose with Pope on the RNC’s Rules Committee? If so, then she clearly lacks the substance to serve as an effective MDGOP chairman.

When it comes to the game of politics, Diana Waterman and Louis Pope are checkers players in a chess world.

MDGOP: The Ins Versus the Outs

Maryland Republican Party Executive Director David Ferguson’s decision to blow off a long-scheduled training session for candidates to shadow Governor O’Malley in South Carolina, and interim Chair Diana Waterman’s decision to remove National Committeewoman Nicolee Ambrose from the RNC Rules Committee, both serve to reinforce conclusions I drew about the MDGOP when I blogged about the National Committeewoman’s race a year.

The MDGOP consists of two primary factions: The “Ins” and the “Outs.”

The Ins consists of party regulars, especially creatures of the central committee apparatus.

The Outs are activists who first got involved through other activities, such as blogging, working on a campaign, running for office, or involvement in national political organizations.

The Ins want to preserve the primacy of the status quo.

The Outs want to change what they regard as a culture of failure.

The Ins believe in oligarchy, invariably choosing to recycle or resurrect the same individuals for various party roles and assignments. 

The Outs are receptive to attracting new faces and new energy to the party, and regard non-central committee-centric achievements as an advantage.

The Ins prioritize self promotion and helping their allies, cronies, or – in some cases – family members. 

The Outs want to focus on activities that help candidates win elections.

They’ll never admit it, but the Ins have quietly come to believe that the GOP's fortunes in Maryland will never change.

The Outs have made no such concession.

The Ins want to hold party office because they think they’re entitled to it.

The Outs want to hold party office because they want to do something with it.

The Ins are personified by people like Diana Waterman, Louis Pope, and David Ferguson – people of long service and scant accomplishments.

The Outs are represented by people like Nicolee Ambrose, Dan Bongino, and Greg Kline – people unafraid to deal with the consequences of pushing a resistant and reactionary establishment to embrace change.

If the Republican Party has a future in Maryland, it rests with the Outs, not the Ins.