Why succession is necessary in the CRNC

After this past election in the CRNC it should be very clear to many in the group that they cannot co-exist within the CRNC. This has been obvious in Minnesota since Hoplin left as the MN CR chair. It is painfully obvious nationally.

I have been posting around the blogosphere why this is necessary and not just sour grapes. I have been called many names for providing this enlightenment, but sometimes the truth is hard for some to swallow.

So, as a general response to all of those I will edit a comment I made on another blog. Maybe a few more will understand why the CRNC needs to divide.

The bottom line is that the CRNC has a division within it already. There are those who think that the GOP (and the CRNC) should be about right vs wrong. Who they supported in this election is not relevant, though I guess most supported Davidson. In Minnesota they opposed Hoplin and Eibensteiner. These people think that Gourley and Hoplin should not be rewarded for the unethical way they ran the CRNC (and the immoral way Hoplin had run the MN CR). These people also believe in accountability.

The other "Republicans" believe in careers within the party, the 11th Amendment shields them from answering tough questions about their immoral ways, and that the ends justify the means. They are the first to resort to questionable tactics (or at least not say anything about the ones that help them). This group believes in right vs wrong ONLY when it helps them or their political buddies. "You scratch my back..." is the most accurate motto they can hold. Even right vs left is not a constant for them (see some of their positions on the Twins/Vikings stadium issues).

These 2 philosophies are impossible to maintain within an organization. The large majority of the Gourley supporters were of the 2nd type. Same thing with Hoplin supporters in MN. Same thing with those who supported Tyler Richter or Kristen Meyer in the MN CR. They cannot co-exist in a group. Congressman Patrick McHenry is also of this brand of "Republican".

It is for that reason that those who believe Gourley should not have been given a promotion, not have been rewarded for unethical behavior not yet redeemed, should leave the CRNC and start new chapters of Campus Republicans on their campuses. It is hard work, but then so is being a conservative on a college campus.

We are not necessarily on the same side. MN CR blindly supported Norm Coleman...I could not stomach voting for him because he is not a conservative. The CR for the most part have not been able to make the distinction between supporting a cause and supporting the party. The first is good, the second leads to immoral thugs/liars/hypocrites like Gourley, Hoplin and the CR vETS for "truth". They support blindly the party, right or wrong. They do not support any cause beyond their own career.

That is why there needs to be a split. Not to give up, but to understand that the CRNC's new leadership, like all the ones before Gourley, are not for a cause, but for their own careers. And most of their supporters are hypocrites if they ever say they believe in personal responsibility, accountability or that Clinton should have been impeached. Those supporters circle the wagons around those who will help them move up politically. This is NOT what Republicans should stand for, but they do.

So long as both philosophies exist within the CRNC there will be tension and undermining of each other. The main cause for the principled Republicans will be defeated (electing true Republicans, true conservatives) because the careerist Republicans will step on the principled ones.

It is not bad to be a careerist like Hoplin, Gourley, Shay or McHenry, but it is crucial for the rest of the CRNC and the GOP to understand how this mentality is more detrimental to the party than RINOs or liberal Republicans.

If the two groups are in different organizations then they can come together when needed (for Bush's 2004 campaign) and stay apart when they do not agree (re-electing Coleman in MN or McHenry in NC). Only when they are separate groups will the divisive and damaging cross fighting cease.

Yes, the CRNC will be weaker in numbers, but they will have a unified front for their own cause: their own political careers. The other groups will be weaker in numbers also, but they will have a unified front for their own cause: advancing conservativism. Once in a while those two causes will coincide. But when they don't there will not be the acrimony that the CRNC's election has caused.