According to an e-mailed press release:
Diane Tebelius elected new state GOP ChairPosted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 28, 2006 03:31 PM | Email ThisSeattle, WA – Earlier today Diane Tebelius of Bellevue was elected Chairman of the Washington State Republican Party at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Tukwila. Tebelius, who has served as state party’s National Committeewoman for five years, received a majority of votes from the WSRP’s 117 member state committee.
I wonder how all of the committee-members voted?
Any news from the state Democrat party Chair election? Will the state Democrats repudiate Berendt-ism? If so, a welcome breeze of clean air from both our state's major parties.
Posted by: Richard Pope on January 28, 2006 03:51 PMMs. Diane Tebelius
Present
National Committeewoman, Washington State Republican Party, elected - July 31, 2000
Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Seattle, Washington, 1986-
Senator Slade Gordon's Advisory Committee, 1994 -
Precinct Committeewoman, Meadows Project, 1994 -
Vice-Chair, 48th District Republicans, King County, 1994 -
Washington State Republican Party Executive Board, 1998 -
President, Board of Directors, West Lake Sammamish Association, 1998 -
Member, Bellevue Rotary, 1998 -
Adjunct Faculty, Golden Gate University, Seattle Campus, 1989 -
Washington State Steering Committee, Bush/Cheney Presidential Campaign, 2000
48th District Chair, Slade Gordon for Senate, 2000
Overlake Republican Women's Club
Previous
Math and History Teacher, Rialto School District, California School System, 1971 - 1976
Special Counsel, U.S. Senate Budget Committee, 1981 - 1983
Special Assistant to Assistant Attorney General,
Tax Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1983 - 1986
Election Campaigns for Representative Jennifer Dunn, 1994, 1996, 1998
Election Campaigns for Representative Rick White, 1994, 1996, 1998
King County Council Campaign for Rob McKenna, 1995
Vice-Chair, Dole/Kemp Presidential Campaign, State of Washington, 1996
Washington State Senate Campaign for Dino Rossi, 5th LD, 1996
and may we bless her and hope that the Republican party will be more of a pro-active organization forcing the oposition to act rather reacting to negative responses such a what occurred with 'illegal voters' with the previous incumbents!
She needs to provide the leadship we need to explain our platform to the rest of the state understandable in the terms of our opposition.
(I think that one problem we have is that many people do not understand our position because it is 'Republican' rather than it is 'What the people need for their freedoms we enjoy.)
Tim
Diane very nearly buried herself before she
got started though.Susan Hutchison was scheduled
to speak at the meetings.Of course it was up to
the new state chairperson if she ultimately
would.Fredi graciously agreed to let Susan speak.
Diane's campaign manager initally said it would
no problem.Then McGavick got wind of the fact
was Susan going to speak and convinced diane
to either make Susan publicly endorse him
or not speak at all.
Well Mark Hulst would have none of it.
He let Diane know that if she refused to
let Susan speak on her terms that there would
a number of people who would make her political
life less fun.She also would be on Mark's bad
side.That my friends is something you don't
want from Mark.Diane backed off and let Susan
speak and the rest as they say is political
history.
I've known Diane for a while, she's a great lady.
That said, I don't have anything against Freddi. Out of curiosity, does she stay on as vice chair?
Posted by: Cliff Smith on January 28, 2006 06:31 PMIf they haven't elected a national committeewoman yet, they should pick Hutchison.
Posted by: Arthur on January 28, 2006 06:31 PM Diane decided to wait until the may state
meetings to have an election for that as well
as vice chair.she did so in order to be fair to
those who might want to run.
Arthur,
you don't have to believe what I said
never the less it did happen.
She's got what it takes to fight the BS coming from the Liberal Democrats....She just has to use it! (and if she carries some warm milk and a tent peg with her to deal with the RINO's...all the better!)
Posted by: Deborah on January 28, 2006 07:46 PM fredi will stay on until may when they
have the election for vice chair.
They will wait until may for national committee
woman as well.
Then she charged the GOP a very fat fee, despite the loss?
Dwight will eat her for lunch. He is canny --- and one of the experts on good field work.
You loose, no mattter how much of a lady she might be. No Jennifer Dunn.
Posted by: U Smith on January 28, 2006 10:38 PMOkee Dokee!
We be loose!
(Thank God it wasn't U of W SMITH...snicker...)
Posted by: Deborah on January 28, 2006 11:16 PMNow I know why they call you guys the Reagan Wing. Because that's where Ronald was *from*, not because you stand for his *values*!
Nice job, newbies. You've now succeeded in your "Dr. Evil" plan to take over the entire state party.
We don't want to hear any more from you whiny babies -- you and your new State Party Chair better damn well fix our losing streak, or your ass is in the fire. We are watching you.
Posted by: I thought it was bad when the *Democrats* ran the state. on January 29, 2006 01:12 AMIn any case, I think National Committeewoman would be a good fit for Susan. She would raise her profile on the national level, and since she's known so well in our state (from her KIRO days) she'll be able to have perhaps as much influence (if not more) than our State Chair!
Spackman's allegations do raise an interesting question: will Susan endorse McGavick? And how much independence will Diane have to form a new strategy for the State Party?
Since we're supposed to be a bottom-up organization, I hope she'll keep touring around the state, listening to what the grassroots have to say. The next few weeks will be particularly enlightening. I predict a stream of press releases, some minor posturing, and from there a few big fundraising opportunities before the summer, when the campaigns will start heating up.
Hold on to your hats, it's going to be one hell of a ride!
Posted by: Patrick E. Bell on January 29, 2006 12:43 PMGood luck, Diane. Not even Dino would be able to sell me on Jorge's romantic overtures to Vincente Fox.
Posted by: Cartman on January 29, 2006 01:20 PMAs for Phil's claim about the last minute stunt: He's telling the truth. I was there too. And no, this didn't happen out in the open--they wouldn't be that stupid. Diane approached Susan to say she would not be able to speak (even though she was invited to do so) unless she would promise to give an endorsement of McGavick. There is plenty of evidence to show that what Phil is saying is true. During the speeches of the candidates and nominators, a non-state committee person and would-be supporter of Susan walked out onto the floor discreatly to give the message to two state committee members that this was going on. The McGavick staff (McGavick, himself was not there) and WSRP staff were scurrying to communicate with each other to get him removed from the floor, while trying not to cause too much of a scene and distract the speakers. Unfortunately they did cause a bit of a scene. Mark Hulst was one of those members who got the message and left the floor to talk to Diane. One of the very first things that Diane did (immediately after her conversation with Mark) was give a gracious introduction of Susan. She should be commended for doing the right thing, even if it did take a little...shall we say...persuading? I hope this is a sign of good things to come.
Susan made an excellent speech and I think, captured the attention of those who may not have already known the potential she has. Some of her speech made the establishment a little uncomfortable though. She talked about her encounters with the Republican leadership in D.C., and how the only thing they seem to be concerned with was how much money you can raise (which is not a problem for her), not her positions on issues. She pointed out very astutely that if that's the only thing Republican leadership is concerned with, then we have real problems. I saw more scurrying during this part of her speech. But all in all, I could tell that she was well received by the principled Republicans in that room. There are many more of those than one might expect. I think the future looks bright for Susan and Republicans.
Posted by: Republcan In Exile on January 29, 2006 01:56 PMAs for the interesting situation where Fredi and Diane continue to serve together, does anyone expect significant problems? One positive thing about this new dynamic, is we that we now have strong East/West leadership. Fredi could capitalize on the support she's received, and make Diane's first couple of months difficult. Or, she could fall in-line, and work to make the Party stronger under Diane. Is this really a new era for the WSRP?
Posted by: Patrick E. Bell on January 29, 2006 02:13 PM
Susan didn't endorse McGavick yesterday and
she won't in the future.She has her reasons
and I'm not about to go into here.That's
up to Susan.
Granted, she didn't actually run in this case but Phil and company spent so much time talking her up, and she spent so much time leaving her name out there, that if she doesn't endorse McGavick then she looks like a sore loser...regardless of whatever her reasons are. There are long lists of people on both sides of the aisle in this state who have had to give grudging endorsements after way more heated battles than this.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 29, 2006 04:18 PM Don't expect Susan to do anything because
of how she may look to people.Since I have
known Susan she has never worried about what
anyone thinks of her.She was portrayed by
McGavick's campaign as a flake(it wasn't true)
it never bothered her.So things like that
won't bother her now.
The attitude of "I know all the inside gossip", is not an attract trait, especially in politics.
Posted by: thatcher on January 29, 2006 07:05 PMI have come to grips that she decided not
to run.As far as I am concerned its up to
Susan to decide what she is going to do next.
Thatcher,
I must say your right I should not have said
anything.Even though what I said was not
gossip.I always have Susan's best interests
at heart.With that She isn't running so
thats the end of it.
The point isn't caring about what people think about her. The point is that people in positions like Susan's are expected to support the party's standard banner.
If she doesn't she's hurting herself if she wants to run for the party's nomination for anything in the future. That's just the reality of the expectations of the grassroots and party infrastructures for both parties. If you don't, a significant number of the party faithful are less likely to trust you in the future...and Susan should care about that.
Posted by: Eric Earling on January 29, 2006 08:11 PMIt has been a long time coming, but with the support of the Party united behind him, McGavick just might walk past Maria in the polls. He is practicing tight message control right now, and his use of political technology is remarkable. Webcasts of his speaches, an interactive web-portal, and a campaign blog to boot!
I would have liked to see more competition, and even would have supported a strong woman candidate, but McGavick's the MAN to beat this November, and that's that.
Posted by: Patrick E. Bell on January 29, 2006 09:15 PMHow many lost elections will it take before you get the message that the current GOP infrastructure stinks? I'll answer that for ya, pardner. As many as it takes until we see some positive changes.
Field a horse that doesn't look like just another jackass, and maybe you'll see some success at the polls.
Posted by: ERNurse on January 29, 2006 09:39 PMI am old enough to remember Simpson/Mazzoli in the mid 80's. I told friends then that it was a green light for more illegal immigration, and I was proved right.
Diane, cut yourself off from GW Bush. He's not a conservative and is out of touch with the base. He is not the future of the Republican party and is little more than a preppy to the manor borne.
Posted by: Cartman on January 29, 2006 10:47 PMYour notion that people in a position like Susan (what position is that by the way?) are expected to support the party's standard banner (and what standard is that?) is exactly what many of us in the grassroots are getting quite sick of--assuming you're meaning that she should have endorsed McGavick (who has not faced any contest to determine that he is who the grassroots of the party would actually choose). We expect a candidate to do what is right, not what the party bosses expect them to do. We find it refreshing when the rare candidate or potential candidate doesn't bow to the wishes of the party bosses, but instead has the courage of their own convictions. If Susan thought McGavick was someone she could endorse, then why in the world would she consider running against him? Keep in mind, I don't speak for her, so she may end up endorsing him after all. I'm just letting you know why some of us might be pleased with her decision not to in her speech on Saturday.
Anyway, the WSRP leadership has succeeded in presenting us with only one "viable" choice, yet again. We shall see, yet again, how smart of a move that was.
Pro-choice Democrat vs. Pro-choice Republican.
Posted by: Republcan In Exile on January 30, 2006 09:42 AMBarring the fact that no reasonable person can look at the evidence and say that it's always the best thing politically to run a pro-life republican (and this is coming from someone who's 100% pro life), you are wrong.
McGavick has said that he's pro-life, but that he wouldn't support a nationwide abortion ban because he 'doesn't think it would work', and frankly, he's right.
Given the seriousness of the issue, I see it as a Civil Right issue, I wouldn't take that position.
That said, he's right that it wouldn't exactly work, in the sense there would be a black market, and I would be willing to throw it back to the states. Which from what I can tell, is what McGavick thinks.
Beyond that, there are other issues. McGavick is basically Slade Jr. If you wouldn't rather have Slade then Cantvotewell, you are the definition of a RINO in my opinion.
Posted by: Cliff Smith on January 30, 2006 09:58 AMThe WSRP is under the illusion that the elected officials need us more than we need them. They are wrong. Dead wrong. The WSRP needs Dino 100 times more than he needs them. I doubt Dino will spend much time at any of our fundraisers or any other events after the rejection he took from the party elites. I seen at meetings where idiots like Yvonne Goldsmith say "Dino has no business being involved in our party." OUR party. The party is nothing unless you get people elected, and the few people we did get elected were shown the door this weekend. Good move.
I think it is funny that people who have NEVER won an election in their life (read most Party Chairs and State Committee Men and Women) think they know what is better for the party than the four people who actually know WA politics enough to win elections. Basically, this weekend, the party (a group of people who can't win legislative office, so they run for party positions) elected Diane (who has also never run a sucessful campaign) in outright rejection of Rob, Dino, Doc, and Dave (all of who have more knowledge of WA politics in thier little finger than anyone at the meeting). I don't know what was more appaling: their ignorace or their arrogance.
Posted by: Professor Republican on January 30, 2006 12:15 PMThis was more of a repudiation of... as someone else here put it, "Vance-ism"-using Dino endorsements as a tool. I'm not saying the alternative was any better, but it was a clear message.
Posted by: Republcan In Exile on January 30, 2006 01:09 PMYes, there are certainly other issues. Very important ones too. The way I look at it, if you can't trust a politician to protect the God-given right to life, what rights can you trust him to protect?
Posted by: Republcan In Exile on January 30, 2006 01:27 PM
Professor Republican, has Freddi Simpson won any elective offices? So how is she vastly more qualified?
Given the close vote, how is that a plate of "screw you" to anyone? Though they gave their endorsements to Freddi, those elected officials are still on good terms with Diane as far as I know.
At the end of the day, we need a good [grassroots] organizer and fundraiser as WSRP Chair to get more Republicans elected statewide. I'm confident that Diane will do well at both.
Posted by: Michael on January 30, 2006 04:07 PMSusan, Mike and the rest of you feuding children, the target is Maria Cantwell. The focus cannot be factions, or egos, or proximity to some perceived power. We have plenty of “politicians” (or pols… isn’t that a four letter word!) in D.C. right now with that mindset. The issue is about moving the Party forward and getting our issues and ideas out to the voters. Proving that we are the Party of better ideas and that we have better solutions to the problems we face, both nationally and in Washington State.
Diane Tabelius will be State Chair till we organize again in January of 2007. Fredi will continue to do her job with vigor and selflessness. We WILL elect Mike McGavick in November and Dino Rossi (again) in 2008. Let’s not let this petty internecine bickering pull defeat from the jaws of victory.
Peter Himmel
It would be helpful if Rossi would stop spending his political capital on trying to control the state party. It just makes for division. Needless division.
Perhaps you misunderstood. I'm not glum. On the contrary, I have faith in the grassroots of this party, so long as they are guided by truth. I see an uprising ahead, not sure how soon, but I know it's coming. I'm just helping to point the way.
I do not however, have faith in these hot shot politicians. Yes I can think of more than a few. I hope some of them change.
And to say that we need to stop infighting, and rally around Diane? I can only assume you did not recieve the "hit email" attacking Fredi and her husband (who she was not married to at the time) over a tax bill that was one month late. Diane played dirty, and won by doing it. And the irony is that SHE of ALL PEOPLE, now chairs the 11th Commandment Committee. Talk about the fox watching the chicken coop.
Posted by: Priofessor Republican on January 30, 2006 10:07 PMGet over it, your gal lost, that happens in elections. To say Dino should run the party is asinine, Dino is a great guy and a wonderful candidate but he lost the last race for governor (stolen or not). This party should be ran from the bottom up, yes that means the grassroots should dictate the direction of the party no potential candidates, Mike McGavick was smart he stayed out of the chairs race because he know he has supporter with both candidates for chair and he wasn’t about to alienate anyone. The hit piece you say Diane put out is ridicules she had no idea it was going out and to my knowledge has never seen it. You say it included information concerning Freddi’s husband that she shouldn’t be tied to, I agree that the tax lean from 1990 may not be tied to her, but the one from 2004 sure is, she is the one traveling the state saying that she was a business woman, yet when an investigation was done and someone found out that the business she has ties to was forced by court order to pay taxes she claims that it is her husbands business, you can’t take credit for being a business owner and than shun the liability when it doesn’t meet your political needs. I only say this to clear up the situation. We all need to rally together and focus on getting McGavick elected.
Right now we all have a choice we can rally around together and win elections or we can continue this finger pointing and continue losing election. Which will it be? I for one am willing to set aside our differences and start winning!
And I didn't say Dino should run the party. I said the grassroots should try avoid harming the party, but they did. It's laughable that you NOW state we should rally together so we can win elections. The time for that was three days ago. You're ready to start winning? Well, that might be easier if we didn't stick it to our best candidates. Words are useless. Actions count. No one cares what drivel we spit out now. The only thing that counts in the Seattle media is that we hurt one of our own.
Posted by: Professor Republican on January 31, 2006 10:13 AMMaybe I do know very little about politics as you say. But I am willing to bet that you would be calling for everyone to unite behind Freddi had she won, which those that are interested in winning would do.
Dino should have stayed out of the chairs race completly. Dino did this to himself, anytime you take sides you risk the chance to being defeated, he knows is, he has been involved in politics. If he didn't want to risk a public embarrassment he shouldn't have gone public with his choice. Don't blame the grassroots...lay blame where it belongs, at the feet of Dino not the grassgoots of the party.
Posted by: Not A Rino on January 31, 2006 10:25 AMDiane went to bat for Dino throughout his campaign and afterwards. Anyone who doubts that she'll do so again if he runs again doesn't know her at all.
I still don't see why Professor Republican attaches such weight to this outcome. Is Pelz or Queen Chris going to be able to make a campaign issue out of it in 2008? Do you really think most of the voters are even aware of this, let alone will remember it in two years? Are you kidding me?!?
Posted by: Michael on January 31, 2006 07:45 PM