Pete Harring Removed as Auburn City GOP Chairman

Wow. Crack open a can of brew and grab some popcorn. This ought to be a good one.

Is Pete the Indispensible Man?

I don't know if he is "Indispensible", but he is hard working and duly elected.

If Pete can be removed, is anybody safe?

And by the way, that line in the notice that "this decision was taken lightly" has to be one of the best Freudian slips of all time:-)

He’s the guy that was spotted at the national convention wearing a clothes pin on his nose, right? (Although it was nicely accessorized with a cute lobster on it, as I recall). Can’t imagine that had anything to do with this.

It doesn't matter what Pete the Carpenter did in Tampa. His feeling that he was the object of party power politics was not entirely without merit, but even if he was completely wrong that's not the point. The point is that he came back to Maine committed to getting Romney elected as well as Republicans all the way down the ticket, willing to put his feelings aside for the good of the party and our shared goal of Republican victories. THAT'S THE GROWNUP THING TO DO! And yes I meant to shout. I don't give a rat's patootie if you have irrefutable proof that Pete the Carpenter picks his nose and his feet stink. Act like a grownup, put your personal feelings aside and take up the battle after the election. Petty little power plays DURING an election are SELFISH. We get control of both Houses plus the Blaine House for the first time in 4 decades and are currently involved in the most important election in my lifetime at every level of government including local, and someone feels the need to punish someone who hurt their feelings, even if it results in the loss of the Republic and the enshrining of Socialism. I'll supply the ammunition for a circular firing squad on November 7th for everyone who cares to attend, but until November 6 has come and gone either grow up or join the Democrats and do them the same favor.

Some of the bylaws, such as Cumberland County, have provisions in them to remove a member or officer for certain types of conduct, such as publicly endorsing a non Republican candidate who has a Republican opponent. I haven't seen Auburn's bylaws, but when Pete was in Tampa, didn't he bad mouth the Republican Party on video? Is he involved with the Gary Johnson campaign at all? The could be cause enough to remove him. Someone needs to get a hold of the Auburn bylaws and see what they say.

Critics say local GOP rift another sign of party disunity in Maine

Posts on a Facebook page set up in support of Pete Harring — an iconic leader of Maine's tea party movement and a prominent figure in the protests that Maine GOP delegates staged during the party's national convention — state he was removed from his chairmanship of the city of Auburn's Republican Party Committee.

Sun Journal

Circular firing squad, aye.

Can't tell you how proud I am. It sure wasn't much of a honeymoon, was it.

This action was taken lightly

Now there's a kick in the butt for ya!

Apollo, I don't care if they have grounds to remove him or not. Barring some kind of criminal act, the time for any removal is November 7th for anyone who wants Republicans to win the election. That's what grownups do; practice delayed gratification.

"This action was taken lightly

Now there's a kick in the butt for ya!"

This is another in a long sequence of grass roots smackdowns that go back decades.Those grass roots activists who support our platform and work hard for our candidates are not welcome unless they are "approved" by the establishment. When they are successful it is indeed taken lightly. They get a lot of yuks out of it like the interaction between Charlie Webster and Stavros Mendros on camera at the convention when Stavros held up the Romney sign.

Roger:

I have every reason to believe you and your brethren are individuals motivated to stop the damage being done to our country, and are principled and committed.

It occurred to me, however, that you use the concept and word 'establishment' to demean anyone who doesn't agree with your tactics.

Which by default makes me 'establishment.'

Well, bunky, I do not belong to any committee, town, county, or state; I am not part of the party 'apparatus' in any way shape or form, nor do I caucus with any of them to find ways to neuter the efforts of those like you who want to turn things around.

So as far as I am concerned, you can take your constant complaining about the 'establishment' and sell it somewhere else. My objections are based on expectations and outcomes and how you might influence them. I could care less about orthodoxy and/or challenges to same.

But I do care about election outcomes, now that things have been narrowed down to the possible and the impossible. And if you continue to lobby for the impossible, is there a question as to why voters aren't fumbling all over themselves to help you out?

By the 'impossible,' I don't mean founding principles. I simply mean election outcome now that we are where we are.

Your call, buddy. Politics, if you haven't heard, is 'the art of the possible.'

That is offensive on many levels, but it doesn't make it any less true.

The ongoing thrusts of the Gary Johnson/Ron Paul zealots is beginning to annoy the living crap out of me. I could go on and on, but I'll leave it at that.

I have hunches about this situation, like all of us do. But I don't know anything about it, really. Until someone with the "skinny" gives us more info, I'll withhold.

Mel thank you for taking the liberty , great post expressing the feelings of many.

Jim Cyr well said.

Melvin Udall imagines:
"It occurred to me, however, that you use the concept and word 'establishment' to demean anyone who doesn't agree with your tactics."

It isn't about our tactics. Our tactics earn majorities and establish platforms that reflect the national platforms. It's about the progressives in both parties who want bigger government, higher taxes and less freedom. Progressives in both parties don't like it when we shine the bright light of truth on them. They get grumpy when we don't bow down and worship their anointed faithful. We do demean progressives with just and righteous indignation.

I'm reminded of the two couples on vacation who shared a table. They got into a discussion about politics. One couple was Republican and the others were democrats. The Republican couple knew about their platform. The Democrat couple had never actually read their platform , so the Republican couple filled them in on what Democrats are supposed to believe in and support. The Democrat couple actually opposed several parts of their own platform. On the way home, the Democrat wife said to her husband, "Oh my God Henry; We're Republicans!" This could never happen if they had been progressives.

Q.E.D.

The Auburn committee followed the rules didn't they? How can you possibly complain about voting someone out when you guys did it at the State Convention?

Elections for party offices are scheduled, like at a convention or caucus. Voting them in or out at other times, without notice to the membership, is tyrannical.

When you guys tried to kick out Jan Staples from the national committee, rules committee, state committee, etc. was that "tyrannical"?

I don't know if they followed the rules. I don't live in Auburn. I don't care if they followed the rules. I want Obama convincingly defeated. I want Republicans to win the House seats and the Senate. I want Republicans to maintain control of both houses of the state legislature. Anything that detracts from that goal is selfish, self centered and juvenile. While people are celebrating their petty victories, the Dems are celebrating too. Grownups don't act like this. I don't care if they're 100% correct; I care that their inability to wait until AFTER the election could very well cost us big time and I care that they're apparently too selfish to care.

Republicans own worst enemies. Dems need not apply.

Looks like he was essentially fired in absentia without any chance to defend himself, face his accusers, hear the charges, or recourse after the fact.
It's one thing to remove a member for good cause, but I don't think that ideological differences rise to that level of justification.

Maybe they can get away with this under their by laws, and maybe Pete was up to something I don't know about... but irregardless it certainly stinks and hands the opposition plenty of "evidence" of how the Republican Party is self destructing / disintegrating just prior to a major election.
It might have been technically "legal", but it does not strike me as being particularly smart.

So; who will be the next grass roots Republican committee leader or member to be purged? Maybe we can start a "Party purge pool" and bet on who the next victim will be, and when.

The RNC crowed sometime back in '10 that the Tea Party "Must be destroyed at all costs"....

Oh; maybe they will stuff us back under the political porch... but it'll cost 'em all right. It just might cost them the election... which will probably cost us our Republic... which will as a result cost the World human civilization, for all intents and purposes.

I think it was Carl Rove who made that arrogant, arse-headed boast about destroying the Tea Party (and by extension all Conservative Republicans, especially the Christian ones) - when he sees America reduced to rubble and ashes and our surviving children in chains and servitude, I hope he's damn proud of himself.

There is sadly a lot more to this story that is going to break soon and be ugly for all Republicans.

Oh, do tell, Stavros.

Maybe it is time to stop telling everybody that the "Tea Party", which as we are told , isn't a real party w/ organization , leaders etc. etc. , becomes one !
Instead of an vague semi invisible entity that is talked about as the next (fill in blanks) !
Maybe the (fill in the blanks) wouldn't elicit such responses if it did.

Stavros, in one of the threads someone posted that they saw you holding a Romney sign at the national convention. You might now be considered establishment and not part of the liberty movement anymore.

Apollo wrote: "When you guys tried to kick out Jan Staples from the national committee, rules committee, state committee, etc. was that "tyrannical"?"

That was a regularly scheduled election held in broad daylight. Are you saying if we throw Obama out on November 6th is is tyrannical? NO, but if we throw him out at 2AM on November 5th in a secret meeting of the House of Representatives, YES.

I beleive what Apollo was referring to was the resolution that was sent out and about asking to have Jan Staples removed early from her position as National Committee Woman.

Sure, calling a special meeting with notice to all members about the proposed agenda. Auburn did nothing like this. Sheer buffoonery.

I don't know about the rules but I know I eventually left Pete Harring's alleged "Tea Party Group" as anyone who did not join in in running smear campaigns against Romney was called 'A Republican Party hack" and worse . The forum was dominated by Ron Paul or Gary Johnson supporters but mainly posted smears about Romney and were instrumental in advancing the mantra that Romney is an Obama clone and Pete did nothing to stop it. IMHO they effectively are serving the cause of Obama's re-election and I would not be surprised if some were covert plants from the Obama campaign who understands the self-advantage of keeping the Republican primaries going until election day.

Why would the GOP want someone who acts in the interest of the Obama election campaign to be Chairman. I don't care what the rules are. There is too much at stake in this election. We cannot afford to have people in key positions who are not working to defeat Obama- and judging from what was taking place on Maine Refounders, Pete does not qualify. Like Ron Paul, who should have officially ended his campaign for the sake of defeating Obama, Pete should have quit as GOP chairman when he decided to follow Paul. Why is he surprised?

People may act outraged on "principals" but to me this is no different than the enemies of the United States using our own system against us. How "principled" is it to hose a Face Book Page that primarily smears Romney and at the same time be the chair of the city GOP committee?