Posts tagged: loyalty oath
In her newletter this week, Mary Souza of OpenCDA.com is claiming today that the Coeur d'Alene City Council has some sort of “loyalty oath” to keep everyone in line. She sez that “Coeur d'Alene City Council Standards and Norms” is akin to a loyalty oath in offering 24 points, much of which begin with the statement, “I will …” For example, two points reads, I will tell the truth,” and “I will be accountable.” (Shazam, I smell a conspiracy coming) Now, for Mary's take: “In order to put the “Loyalty Oath” in perspective, I asked some city administration and council folks from nearby towns if they have ever seen anything like this document. They were all shocked. They said they had never heard of such a thing, and that city councils are elected by the people and are not beholden to the mayor or any other city official. City Council members are responsible to the citizens.” You can read the rest of Mary's complaint here.
Question: So is this a loyalty oath or simply a code for good conduct while serving at a City Council member?
They say if you’re getting lots of flak, you must be over the target. Obviously the Idaho Republican Party is directly over the target. Witness the whining, moaning and gnashing of teeth of the Democrat party bosses and their willing instruments in the media regarding the Idaho Republican Party’s recently concluded convention. If it wasn’t completely clear to you that the, “legacy” media is the official mouthpiece for progressives and statists AKA Democrats, it should be now. Let me address what the Democrats and their fellow travelers in the media have dubbed a, “loyalty oath.” This is one of the most absurd allegations I think I’ve ever witnessed/Rod Beck, via Adam’s Blog. More here.
DFO: Seems to me that Beck is hypersensitive re: the “loyalty oath” but doesn’t mind using pejorative terms for the “legacy” media and “fellow travelers in the media.”
Question: If it’s not a loyalty oath, what is it? And if it’s so harmless, why have Gov. Butch Otter and Congressman Mike Simpson declared that they won’t submit to it?
Three North Idaho lawmakers who joined Gov. Butch Otter for a press conference today on state revenues also expressed concerns about the GOP platform loyalty oath, as did the governor. Sen. Joyce Broadsword, R-Sagle, said, “I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of Idaho and the Constitution of the United States. My loyalty is to the people that elected me, and I have no desire to sign anything for anyone.” Sen. Shawn Keough, R-Sandpoint, said she wasn’t at the convention and hasn’t had a chance to study the new platform. “It’s still not cl’ear to me just exactly what’s in there,” she said/Betsy Russell, Eye On Boise. More here
Question: Do you want to know how your three district representatives stand on the Idaho Republicans’ loyalty oath?
Idaho Gov. Butch Otter is the latest high-ranking Idaho Republican to say he won’t sign a loyalty oath to the state GOP platform that was approved at the recent state party convention. “I understand the motivation behind that,” Otter said, “but obviously there are things in there that I’d wholeheartedly support and things in there that I can’t.” The question of allegiance to the party platform, he said, “I don’t think can be answered by a single signature”/Betsy Russell, Eye On Boise. More here.
Question: What impact will be the fallout from Gov. Butch Otter’s refusal to sign the state GOP’s loyalty oath?
In his “cheers & boos” column, Adam Graham/Adam’s blog gives U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson and other Republicans like him “boos” for attacking the so-called “loyalty oath” in the press. Said Simpson, “I take one oath, and that’s to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, period.” Now first of all, the actual resolution is not a loyalty oath, it’s a media pejorative as Rod Beck explains over Idaho Grassroots GOP. More to the point, rather than accepting the decision of delegates at the Convention and uniting the Party, Simpson is pressing a divisive issue. … Simpson seems to be clueless to his position.His 58% of the vote in the last primary was down from more than 80% two years ago. In 2012, if Simpson keeps cheezing people off on this on things like this and his wilderness bill, he could lose. More here.
Question: Would you cheer or boo Simpson’s stand against the Idaho GOP plank that demands a loyalty oath of all political candidates to support the Republican platform?
Today, let’s revisit the Idaho Republican Party’s monumentally misguided “loyalty oath” — and political labels. Not the fun pejorative labels, like “wingnut.” But meatier labels, like “moderate” and “pragmatist.” Plenty has been said and written about how party-purity-on-steroids nonsense will purge the moderates from the GOP. And it very likely will. I also think that it is one more incremental step that purges the pragmatists from politics. There is a big difference — although one that is often poorly stated and underappreciated — between a “moderate” and a “pragmatist”/Kevin Richert, Idaho Statesman. More here.
Question: Are you an ideologue? A moderate? Or a pragmatist?
Idaho GOP activist and former state Sen. Rod Beck is peeved about everyone calling the GOP platform plank he successfully sponsored this year a “loyalty oath.” “It’s just a candidate disclosure, that’s all it is, it’s not a loyalty oath,” Beck declared. “It just asks candidates to say if they support the platform, and if they do, fine, if they don’t, state which areas that they don’t.” Beck, who pushed a similar proposal unsuccessfully four years ago, said he copied the language for this year’s successful proposal from Utah’s GOP. Beck said the term “loyalty oath” is “used as a pejorative in a propaganda sense.” However, he said, “The last time, Blake Hall called it a litmus test - I didn’t like that either”/Betsy Russell, Eye On Boise. More here.
Question: Does it sound like a loyalty oath to you?
U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson is another Republican with no use for the Republicans’ “loyalty oath.” The 12-year congressman, running for a seventh term in November, criticized the oath, approved at the state GOP convention two weeks ago. The oath requires all GOP candidates to endorse the party’s platform in full, or publicly state their areas of disagreement. “I take one oath, and that’s to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, period,” Simpson told the Statesman editorial board this morning/Kevin Richert, Idaho Statesman. More here.
Question: Which is a goofier idea — a loyalty oath or protesting a “fiesta” theme at a county fair?
Item: GOP loyalty oath divides members/John Miller, Associated Press
More Info: Some Republican lawmakers won’t pledge loyalty to Idaho’s new state party platform, despite a candidate disclosure measure approved at the 2010 state convention last weekend asking them to do so. State Rep. Maxine Bell, from Jerome, and Sen. Joe Stegner, of Lewiston, said the disclosure could be used to narrow the party’s base, not promote healthy debate.
Question: Which North Idaho legislators do you think will sign the loyalty oath? Which will resist?
The Idaho Republican Party approved its new platform Saturday, but it almost didn’t happen. Several delegates opposed much of the content of the newly-written platform and tried to kill all changes. The move was unsuccessful and the new platform, which calls for the repeal of the 17th Amendment and instills what amounts to a loyalty oath for Republican candidates, was adopted after several hours of discussion. Delegates began work on the platform Friday in an open committee meeting/Dustin Hurst, Idaho Reporter. More here.
Question: Would you want a candidate, including those for nonpartisan offices, to pledge loyalty to an Idaho Republican platform that includes among other things repeal of the 17th Amendment?
Friday, Dan Loughrey, a candidate for the Idaho Legislature, proposed that members of the platform committee support a plan to require Republican candidates for public office at all levels – local, state, and national – sign a pledge stating that they will govern and serve according to the party platform. If the party as a whole decides to adopt the measure, it would also require the party chairman to release a list of who signed – and who didn’t – 40 days before elections/Dustin Hurst, Idaho Reporter. More here.
Question: What do you make of a loyalty oath that would require candidates to govern by the platform of a political party?