The Milliken Resolution

As far as the Grand Traverse County GOP is concerned, Bill Milliken isn't recognized as a Republican

Every couple of years, Former Michigan governor William Grawn Milliken trots out his endorsements for Democrat candidates.

While endorsements are a part of the political process, it is always noted that this has been by a ‘Republican’ who “is crossing party lines” to support Democrats.  Often enough it has been against incumbent Republicans, and is used in the press to promote disunity within the party.

Over the years, this has happened several times, and is consistent enough that it seemed prudent that the Republican party in his county of residence have a say in whether he is even considered to be a Republican at all.

Much in the way our nation has been beset by ‘gender confusion’, it seemed the former state executive has had a political identity crisis for some time. Supporting publicly funded abortion through the veto pen, and supporting Democrats against Republicans in critical contests not once or twice, but habitually for too many years to ignore.

In an effort to clarify for the world which looks at endorsements of radical leftists by such a confused ‘centrist’ republican as being legitimate, the County convention voted and passed the “Milliken Resolution.” The resolution reads as follows:

2016 Milliken Resolution

This convention of Grand Traverse County Republican delegates recognizes that the purpose of the
Republican party is to elect Republicans.

We believe that while no-one should, or shall be condemned for voting their conscience, it should be recognized that the visible nature of an elected or formerly elected Republican official in higher office carries weight in words beyond what is done in the privacy of the voting booth.

We the duly elected delegates of the Grand Traverse County Republican Party find that William G Milliken’s support of abortion by veto of efforts to end public funding in 1978, 1980, 1981, and 1982, to be contrary to the core principles of Republicans, and that by endorsing Democrat John Kerry in the 2004 election over a sitting Republican president, and

by rescinding an endorsement and politically abandoning a presidential candidate (John McCain) at a critical time in 2008, whom he previously sought to elevate as our party’s nominee in the race against Barack Obama, and

by endorsing the Democrat candidate Mark Totten over incumbent Republican Bill Schuette in the 2014 for Attorney general, and in the same 2014 election, endorsing the Democrat Gary Peters over the Republican Terry Lyn land,

in the 2016 election cycle endorsing Gretchen Driskell, a Saline Democrat over an Incumbent Republican Tim Walberg for a 7th district Congressional seat, and

lastly, for endorsing Hillary Clinton, a known liar, probable felon, and Democrat for President over the Republican Nominee Donald Trump, we

find the political actions and biannual endorsements of those in other parties by this figure of former Republican prominence to be detrimental to our party, its platform, and it’s candidates.

Be it resolved that through a vote of duly elected Republican delegates in the August 11th, 2016 County Convention, the Former Governor William G Milliken’s status as a Republican be no longer recognized by the Grand Traverse County Republican Party.

Approved as to form and substance by the delegates assembled for the Grand Traverse County Republican Party County convention August 11, 2016.

The resolution was passed, and though not unanimously,  it was sufficient to be representative of Republican sentiment toward GOP pretenders who use their supposed party membership in the way of a fifth column.

One delegate asked whether Milliken was a dues paying member, which he has not been in some time, and delegate Michael Gillman argued eloquently against the resolution about his long time friend. M Gillman argued as a long time Republican in the party, that we should be expanding the party.  His argument garnered limited opposition which was insufficient to table the resolution.

Officially, Grand Traverse County Republicans have denied any legitimacy to claims by the former governor that he in any way represents the views of Republicans in his continued subversion of Republican candidates.

You Betcha! (40)Nuh Uh.(9)

  28 comments for “The Milliken Resolution

  1. Sue Schwartz
    August 12, 2016 at 7:24 am

    As we just witnessed, an endorsement by Dan Benichek for Tom Casperson was the "kiss of death" to his campaign. Think about it--Milliken's endorsement may well be Hillary's KOD at least in Michigan's 1st Congressional District. It's a shame that it has come to this--but most importantly, the ignorance and outright stupidity of the electorate is exactly what the lying Hillaryites of this country rely.

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(3)
  2. JD
    August 12, 2016 at 7:43 am

    "..The resolution was passed, and though not unanimously..."
    "...Michael Gillman argued eloquently against the resolution about his long time friend. Gillman argued as a long time Republican in the party, that we should be expanding the party. His argument garnered limited opposition which was insufficient to table the resolution.."

    Perhaps Mr. Gillman's impassioned speech/vote should have been verbatim recorded on such a significant (non-strategic) matter along with every other in the room so that 'understanding' our local Republican Part motivations would be made that much less difficult for the rest of us unable to attend. Coming out publicly against Bill Milliken may not approach being against Prop 1 or bailouts, yet it might help.

    We have received little to no word (back) from those who have been back-slappingly invited inside these country club MiGOP walls for over 7 years now (thanks for yours). Arguing for simple roll call votes during these closed-door meetings in terms of non-strategic matters might alleviate much of the distrust built up since the MiGOP effectively assimilated/made harmless any member seeking Party "change" without even really trying.

    Votes matter...when you record them (a critical concept which Tea Partiers nationwide were told to "forget" from the very beginning).

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(3)
  3. Matthew Schoech
    August 12, 2016 at 8:22 am

    It was pretty near a miraculous political moment on the evening of Thursday, August 11, here in Michigan, in the 1st congressional district, in the Grand Traverse County Convention of the Republican Party, heretofore, the home of William G. Milliken. For far too long the "Big Tent Theory" of supposed inclusion and political accommodation, aka, shallow manufactured excuses, that has held sway over the republican mindset. Amazingly, the democrats don’t do this kind of self-emasculation. They have left that for the republicans. RINO's in the Republican Party were put on notice: William Milliken and apologists - You have no clothes on. The coup de gras read as the "Milliken Resolution" was composed and read by Jason Gillman.
    It exposed William G. Milliken for using his prior Republican Governorship as a platform for advancing his order of far left policies and a long trail of political left wing endorsements. Prior Milliken cloying promotion of "bipartisanship", would make an alligator choke. Milliken's latest perfidy of Republican Party interests included the endorsement of the lying Hillary Clinton for President. It was wonderful just to finally hear at least some rock solid examples of the betrayal and misplaced trust the average republican has ignominiously given to Milliken. Maybe the rest of the GOP will wake up.
    The Resolution passed. Amazingly it passed even over the rebuttal by Jason's dad, Mike Gillman, a former protégé' of Milliken. Other slavish followers of Bill Milliken agreed with Mike Gillman as if making nice and forgetting all or some of the betrayals Bill Milliken has used to make Republican Policy no different - even worse - than Democrat Policy. Former Democrat Governor James Blanchard once said of Bill Milliken, "He's one of us". (Now that’s what I call bipartisanship) We can only belatedly add – you want him you’ve got him. Good work Jason Gillman.

    You Betcha! (8)Nuh Uh.(2)
  4. JD
    August 12, 2016 at 9:19 am

    "..Other slavish followers of Bill Milliken agreed with Mike Gillman.." who exactly were they...what was the vote tally...and who voted how?

    These votes have become much more relevant given widespread unwillingness to loudly/publicly support the presidential candidate or for that matter (earlier this year) expose what was happening to kids in Flint LONG before the Governor did.

    (Again) Votes matter.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(1)
  5. Nick
    August 12, 2016 at 10:12 am

    This is absurd. What is the Establishment passes the same resolutions against conservatives who out of principle oppose a RINO nominee?

    You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(5)
    • Jason
      August 12, 2016 at 12:56 pm

      It is a series of endorsements by a singular personality of presumed political prominence. I don't really care much for Snyder for example because I view him as a RINO, but I did not endorse his Democrat opponent. ALSO, I have not made it a running practice to do such a thing.

      You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(1)
  6. Sharon Vreeland
    August 12, 2016 at 12:35 pm

    Well, at least local Republicans are being forthright that their purpose as a party merely to elect Republican candidates. I wish they thought their purpose was to represent their fellow citizens in government reasonably and effectively for the public good, but since it's not I'm glad they are at least being open about their true intentions.

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(1)
    • Jason
      August 12, 2016 at 12:53 pm

      The party's purpose is to elect Republicans to enact good governance under Republican principles. You can take the shorthand anyway you like.

      You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(1)
  7. JD
    August 13, 2016 at 1:44 am


    If those "local Republicans" were "being open about their own true intentions"...why are BOTH sides of the debate that night (now) so unwilling to simply release the roll call vote (if one was even taken; see my insistence/related distrust above) to FINALLY/PUBLICLY paint the political landscape (locally) for the sake of those wishing to perhaps join, become a precinct delegate or even donate to that particular political Party?

    If this same resolution were brought forward to every single MiGOP enclave in the state irrepairably harming us right now (and it should) "local Republicans...being forthright...being open about their true intentions (or) represent(ing) their fellow citizens in government reasonably and effectively for the public good..." would be much EASIER to ascertain (by name) in at least any first round of vetting by principle.
    The Tea Party movement in Michigan died (mainly) due to strategically irrelevant 'inside baseball' votes such as these not reaching the unwashed masses on a regular basis. Little word was ever leaked from the "battlefield" inside these local parties. Even smaller efforts were made to assure that any actual 'front' even existed across the state (locally). A simple 'trust' issue ensued for budding precinct delegates. How does one even simply join a political party under (cough) 'siege'...when it is not common knowledge (publicly) where your fellow warrior's allegiances lie? (literally).

    If we only had known who we were actually fighting (locally) within a Party we were supposed to "change" by "changing" THEIR minds (the strategy by default)...we might have actually won (by default).

    'Without' that information (ie. the above vote tally being ignored here) nobody with any common sense was joining a Party where sorely needed/overdue (simple) vetting resolutions such as these were 'unwelcome' at best or not 'allowed' (period).

    You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(0)
  8. Sue Schwartz
    August 13, 2016 at 6:20 am

    JD--vote tally 45/33, the abstention vote was not tallied. And, this was announced and published numerous times yesterday. We could have called a roll-call vote, but this was nixed for a show of hands, and only those with vote bands on their wrists were allowed to be counted on this issue. The vote was tallied by our newly appointed temporary counters and they did this without any technical assistance.

    I've been listening to your angst regarding your misguided beliefs of all these secret meetings taking place. The only secret meeting that takes place (which really should be illegal on it's face) is the legislative caucuses. You would rather moan than evidently take the time to become a precinct delegate. You even had until the Friday before the primary to file your intent to write-in for precinct delegate and one vote gets you elected. The procedure cannot be made any easier and then you too could have participated. But it sounds to me like you require a personal invite to join--and then want everyone but you to do the "vetting". It appears that personal responsibility concepts are lost on you. So, let me advise you: your only helping hand is at the end of your arm.

    You Betcha! (6)Nuh Uh.(0)
  9. JD
    August 13, 2016 at 10:14 am

    "..I've been listening to your angst regarding your misguided beliefs of all these secret meetings taking place..."

    Accusing somebody of what they did not say is an effective tactic. Quote me (pretty simple).
    "Behind closed doors" (my claim) refers to the fact that MiGOP meetings across this state aren't even publicly recorded (strategic content obviously redacted) for the benefit of those who you or 'the other side' are claiming to both represent and recruit (potential Republican conservatives seeking to learn more).

    My original point (again) states that votes such as these become extremely important when they are 'bragged about' (complete with a full 'understanding' of their fellow Republican's position) yet not recorded or disseminated properly. Doing so would allow future (inexcusable) positions taken by those same 33 individuals and countless others statewide (when forced in to votes on similar resolutions) to be easily analyzed by those showing up to a MiGOP meeting for the first time.

    The average 'peon' Michigan conservative out here in the political trenches is still fighting for public meeting attendees to be properly informed before they even arrive at their monthly local venues (by state law) via anything other than 'subscriptions' or easily dodged/delayed FOIA wild goose hunts.

    When those waving the Gadsden or their pocket constitutions in our faces for the past 7 years can't even name (publicly) who is STILL out there protecting/supporting the Bill Millikens of of this world using the excellent example recently set in the Grand Traverse area?

    The admission price to that same MiGOP country club atmosphere (seemingly) presents itself as just a little more than we can possibly afford or stomach.

    You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(0)
  10. KG One
    August 13, 2016 at 10:15 am

    Not trying to bash on your Dad, Jason, but coming from someone here in S.E. Michigan (and looking at his sparse history in the resolution), I'm curious about what he would have to say about the following:

    - What does he think of Gov. Milliken's support of the Detroit Income Tax hike on residents and non-residents alike during one of its earliest brushes with bankruptcy?

    - What does he think about his relative silence on that Bradley v. Milliken-thing?

    - What does he think about the lackluster support by Milliken of Richard Headlee during his race against Jim Blanchard?

    - One of my personal pet peevs, EXACTLY what kind of Republican makes a "tax base sharing" proposal during a '76 SOTS speech?

    And that's only for starters.

    Don't misunderstand anything here, I'm glad that someone has finally said something (it got picked up in The Fish Paper this am). It's one thing for someone to be a long-time friend, but like you mentioned above, if you not promoting the philosophy of the group that you belong to, then why are you even there?

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Jason
      August 13, 2016 at 12:41 pm

      Dad has thick skin. No worries.

      I have seen a lot of complaints over this in the local rag, and the freep. Most would not have any clue how to answer your questions above. Its amazing that when someone calls out "the emperor has no clothes" how quickly someone will say "That's the style of the times! Cut him some slack!!"

      You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)
  11. JD
    August 13, 2016 at 10:31 am

    ...and to answer your further assertion, Sue (as you offer it constantly):

    Nobody in this state is going to sign up to be a precinct delegate until they are able to determine (in even the slightest reality) exactly who their friends and enemies are in this exhaustive often fruitless pursuit (locally).

    To teach our children anything less in light of what just happened to many starry eyed conservatives with their hearts in the right place yet no understanding whatsoever of who they were actually dealing with in terms of their 'conservatism' conceptualism vs the buzz saw of old school political vipers they ultimately ran in to is 'beyond' irresponsible.

    At the very least (please) allow their extremely hard lesson lesson learned to be one that our children might never repeat or (heaven forbid) experience themselves ever again.

    You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)
  12. Sue Schwartz
    August 13, 2016 at 1:22 pm

    JD--to quote you--"Nobody in this state is going to sign up to be a precinct delegate until they are able to determine (in even the slightest reality) exactly who their friends and enemies are in this exhaustive often fruitless pursuit (locally)" My goodness--Really? See, it's this type of thinking that has you confused.

    There are those of use who feel we need to get done what needs to get done. For me, I'm disgusted with how electoral college votes are mandated and this should not be state legislatively regulated. How it is now is winner take all electoral college votes, i.e., the entire state popular vote dictates the vote of each of the electoral delegate votes, regardless of the popular vote within each congressional district. This process deliberately disenfranchises all the voters of the individual congressional districts and I believe this unconstitutional. Only two states allow votes to be cast based upon the vote of the individual congressional districts my aim is to make Michigan #3. The system is broke and I'm going to plant the seed for change.

    We could sit back and whine which is unproductive. Or we can put our face in the system and effect change. Lastly, if you get involved and your children observe you getting involved, then they get involved, etc. Don't get involved and your children will be destined to a future of no America. If this doesn't get you motivated--

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • JD
      August 13, 2016 at 5:24 pm

      Here's an example for you, Sue:
      Christians don't join churches strictly because 'God' is offered there.
      They join to either be around like-minded souls in that belief or to necessarily change their church if that belief (above) is nothing more than a 45/33 ratio.
      I may go to church to hear the sermon and even disagree with it...yet I'm not signing up to be a deacon (precinct delegate) until I know every soul in that church and my chances of helping them in their(our) journey with truth (God).

      The fact that I'm (somehow) arguing the need for roll call votes on similar resolutions literally everywhere and on this matter in particular should be the focus here.

      That these (very) old money 'Republicans' choose to stroll down memory lane in this manner with obviously your support and at least 45 others keeping their individual votes from public circulation is disappointing in the least and certainly not helpful in terms of recruiting future delegates who (obviously) expect much more.

      You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(4)
  13. Sue Schwartz
    August 13, 2016 at 9:42 pm

    Pay attention JD, because you are not involved in the process, you are naive in your thinking--this was a resolution--we we're not making law. Jason put together a well-thought-out piece, expressing much of our collective thoughts in that a former gov. of years past, has been using his "former" standing as a republican to endorse candidates who fail to meet the principals of a party he once belong. We merely wanted to make it clear that Bill Milliken can endorse anyone he wants but not as a republican from our turf. Obviously, the vote was public because it was all over the media yesterday and today. Delegates on both sides of me were in the 33--so I asked why they were voting no. One said, he's an old man and we should leave him alone. The other said that he's done a lot of good for the state and when I asked for specifics, he couldn't say.

    As far as recruiting future delegates--I personally recruited more than 30 delegates--and encouraged others to recruit all around the state. Of those recruited, several were elected delegates to the state convention. The state convention allows a delegate to get up close and personal with the candidates. But my recruiting was more sinister--I wanted delegates elected to the state convention who will vote to nominate Tom McMillan to the State School Board. I've been working on recruiting for months and feel this is one of the most important issues facing Michigan voters. I do not want to leave anything to chance--you have to make it happen. Nuff said.

    You Betcha! (4)Nuh Uh.(0)
  14. JD
    August 13, 2016 at 11:16 pm

    (Sue): "..Obviously, the vote was publiific because it was all over the media yesterday and today. .."
    Your making my point, Sue.
    People notice you dodging the same question (why wasn't a roll call vote demanded or votes simply recorded in anticipation of the waiver) again and again.
    They then ask themselves the following:
    Why would I want to be a part of a local MiGOP Party when history is being made (Jason's resolution)...if the agents of 'change' actually MAKING it (us)...aren't even willing to EXPOSE those forcing ME to be there making it WITH the first place?

    We get it.

    You want US to stick our necks out voting against the most powerful people in this state or fighting for what is God given good and right (as WE NECESSARILY fight in plain sight)...yet you want THEM (and you) to continue on perverting our personal freedoms/basic transparency rights using closed door NON-roll call votes *NEVER* designed to (finally) expose what is truly wrong in elite Republican politics for both our children's sake and theirs.

    Where do I sign up?

    At least Jason and his Dad were willing to stand up like men and explain to the world how they voted and exactly why. Every other person in that room should be acting similarly proud today along with every other Party member across the state given this golden opportunity to stand for 'something' in 2016 (whether 'Bill' touched their lives positively or not).

    There is just too much at stake here and the older that you are?.. the more that you know it (which is pretty ironic for your own grandchildren not knowing any better).

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(4)
  15. JD
    August 14, 2016 at 7:45 am

    (From the Traverse area Record Eagle):
    "..Still, (GOP County Chairman) Roth and others are concerned the resolution could send the message that moderates aren’t welcome in the Republican Party, he said. He wants moderates or those who may be socially liberal but fiscally conservative to join the GOP ranks..."

    So since this vote tally was purposely covered up by the 'true conservatives' in this local party to help their fellow members rewrite history through their (continued) anonymous support of Milliken's highly questionable role in it...what's next?
    Yet even 'more' anonymous votes regarding the oft-repeated "goal" above to NEVER define the term "socially liberal" for the sake of potential new members or for that matter budding precinct delegates?
    Or are these delegates attending some 'secret class' where they all will (someday) declare the 'secret definition' concerning 'social justice values' at the same time...then immediately take over the Party's (previously undefined) heart and soul?

    I've said it before:
    This resolution was MEANT to only go so far. If anything, it helped illustrate the establishment's long held goal of painting conservatives as uncaring monsters of social preservation or change (you pick). It ended up PRESERVING a false narrative of history disgustingly fed to our children every single day. The present war for our grandchildren's future will never be won by granting 'breaks' along the way to every good 'ol boys club member who started it. These old farts want their stones to read that they were "a good Republican when it mattered" vs what we all know to be just the opposite not only from history but from when 'it' actually mattered (now).

    Michigan Tea Parties have been all about preserving this status quo by creating the illusion that they are but one 'resolution' or 'precinct delegate' away from finally pulling the curtain back on the inner workings of how our local/state political machines have destroyed our children's future.

    This ugly picture will eventually be revealed to them through textbook examples involving half-hearted battles for their history books such as this one. If there are 33 Republicans (still) willing still raise their hand in this regard (and most likely more if they were ever forced to go on the record for it) then for heavens sake let the battle for their future begin there.

    If we aren't willing to be honest enough with these kids that we are ALL indeed accountable here and that REAL history actually matters?
    They will not only be doomed to repeat ours..but have no chance of building what THEY need to which we could (obviously) not.

    You Betcha! (1)Nuh Uh.(3)
  16. JD
    August 15, 2016 at 6:33 am

    ...and for all Michigan 'conservatives' refusing to bring similar resolutions forward to their local Republican Party or similarly fearful to push for the transparency argued for here...I give you a fellow Michigander at the Libertarian convention just this year:

    Those running THAT political party were forced in to a decision rather than allowing the behavior of those IN IT to define who the rest of them were or are.

    When we teach our children that the admission (or explosion) price involving our most powerful of political machines is nothing BUT a vague definition of "fiscal conservatism" rather than their PUBLICLY VOTED ON AND **EASILY** DEFINED **VALUES** (see chairman Roth's wide undefined net cast for the "socially liberal") THEIR 'SIX' WILL BE **AT RISK** FROM THOSE EITHER BUILDING SOMETHING ELSE OR (QUIETLY) COVERING UP FOR WHAT THEY HAVE ALREADY RUINED.

    The emperors have no clothes.

    If votes aren't recorded to argue this or the emperors themselves are 'puppeting' those insisting on the vote...all is lost (this goes for any party in any generation fighting for the mere scraps they have been left by the previous).

    Bring this resolution and many more which (finally) force the establishment's hand to your local MiGOP and see what happens.
    Their refusal to record the vote or to allow YOU to bring it to the masses clamoring outside those country club walls?..will be more 'telling' than the issue or vote itself.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  17. JD
    August 15, 2016 at 6:35 am

    ....that should have been 'expulsion' vs 'explosion' in the above commentary (sorry).

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  18. JD
    August 16, 2016 at 8:05 am

    What parallels can be drawn between the closed door shenanigans involving Courser/Gamrat's expulsion from the MiGOP...and the closed door/no roll call vote 'resolution' to kick Milliken out of the exact same Party?

    Should the average citizen (still) clamoring outside of both our Capital and local MiGOP meeting walls be somehow 'less' enraged in terms of transparency (one over the other)? Why wouldn't voters today blame EVERYBODY in a MiGOP meeting room (on any given night) for refusing to bring forward resolutions pushing their candidates out in to the public sphere during the single most contentious election cycle in American history? Or would such a (nonexistent) 'resolution' designed to increase local Republican participation/membership rolls result in yet another 'no roll call' vote?

    Pulling the credentials of fellow Republicans at 'conservative' (only) VIP/pay to play conventions is no different than TeaParty 'conservatives' closing the doors behind them to pull credentials at their local MiGOP country clubs.

    If precinct delegates (the seeming 'gold standard' for Michigan conservative participants) are concerned with the average Joe/Jane's participation in the current election cycle?

    Let's all simply met up in a public space with plenty of advance notice before November with y(our) local candidates explaining their legislative votes thus far or perhaps THEIR public position regarding Milliken's injustice in Grand Traverse county.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Jason
      August 16, 2016 at 8:19 am

      1st paragraph: NONE Zero. NADA. It was a simple resolution that said hey guess what? We noticed that Bill Milliken is not a Republican.

      As for the rest. Lets fantasize forever about things that won't happen.

      You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
  19. JD
    August 16, 2016 at 3:41 pm

    If we have no 'pulse' whatsoever for the inner workings of our local GOP establishments (or types) to be eagerly taken by those sitting right next to them at our closed door country clubs?

    Then continuing to call this a "grassroots movement" is about as laughable as trolling for (new) "Republican" members to be simply defined as "fiscally conservative" in order that the definition of "socially liberal" be passed on as well.

    If nobody in a room is willing to tell the rest of the world how anybody else voted and afterwards claim that nobody ever will?

    Absolutely nothing has changed...and our kids know it.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Jason
      August 16, 2016 at 4:01 pm

      The doors are closed to nobody. What is it that you do not understand. Show up and watch. If things aren't done in just such a way that YOU personally want to see, its "closed doors?" And an indication of a failure of grassroots?


      Again.. be involved and actually learn how it works, or please stop, for the love of..

      You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
  20. JD
    August 17, 2016 at 4:02 am

    "...If things aren't done in just such a way that YOU personally want to see, its "closed doors?".."

    This chapter of the MiGOP chose to make history and open up this can of worms in regards to who a Republican actually is in Michigan and who is not (period). We full well realize (as do you) that a similar RECORDED vote all across this state would finally start to answer this question or at least jumpstart debates to solve this once and for all.
    The Republican Party all across this country is in 'meltdown mode' due to one simple fact:
    Donald Trump stepped in to a vacuum of identity.
    The same identity crisis which caused this vote to be taken cowardly rather than proudly. and in public
    Those 'outside' the MiGOP and all across this state supporting you in this regard (for years) have been plagued with the exact same refusal to properly record exactly what is happening inside their local parties. VOTES and *how* our 'representatives' VOTE, be it at our local GOP establishment gatherings OR in Lansing, has been the single most neglected issue this side of transparency. Neither of the latter issues has risen to the level of grassroots action for one reason:
    We cannot convince 'conservatives' across the entire state to not only bring forward issues (*publicly*) involving even who we are or who (*exactly*) disagrees with us.
    This is the see-no-evil/speak-no-evil identity crisis which Trump exploited. It is what keeps patriots at arms length from any party 'conservatives' claim to be changing.

    "..Again.. be involved and actually learn how it works, or please stop, for the love of.."

    We know full well "how it works" Jason...have BEEN involved outside "it"..and frankly don't feel that "it" is interested in needed changes involving 'resolutions' that "it" won't even honor with a recorded vote. Our legislators ACT similarly, VOTE similarly and 'feel' no differently every single day.

    If a political party is enticing me to join them by insisting that any vote taken will not be made public or for my grandchildren's approval?

    " it works.." or being backslapped at the local country club 'after' said vote doe not appeal (to me).

    Good luck with that in terms of the aforementioned grandchildren as well.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  21. JD
    August 17, 2016 at 4:25 am's a lot like saying (to a potential member):
    "We're having an identity crisis right now (see our vote total)...yet we won't tell you WHO we exactly are until you join us...where you'll be sworn to secrecy whenever we vote 'again' on who we are.."

    "Who we are" is EVERYTHING and when there are fractures of that Millikenesque type magnitude?

    Potential members deserve to know EXACTLY who they're up against and why (ditto for every other district across the state).

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *