Jan Ting Thrown Out of the GOP.
And yet Joe Lieberman remains in the Democratic caucus. I think this demonstrates one of the differences between the parties:
The man who was the Delaware Republican Party’s standard bearer in the race for U.S. Senate in 2006 has been expelled from his position in the state Republican Party.
His crime? Quietly supporting Democrat Barack Obama for president.
“Evidently someone went online and saw that I had been making contributions to Obama,” Jan Ting said today.
He also was spotted by a News Journal photographer in the crowd when Obama made his campaign visit to Wilmington in February, drawing record crowds to Rodney Square. The picture was later posted at www.delawareonline.com.
…
But that appearance, and about $250 in donations to the Illinois senator, who is now the Democrats’ presumptive presidential nominee, was apparently enough for the state party to brand Ting a traitor, according to the former Republican candidate.
I feel somewhat responsible. For you see, initially, the News Journal did not identify Jan Ting in the photo they ran. And then a little blurb in the Dialogue Delaware column talked about someone looking awfully like Jan Ting potentially being at the historic Obama rally. Since I stood next to the man, saw him wearing an Obama button, and talked to him, I decided to take matters into my own hands, and posted a story on Daily Delaware. I posted two pictures I took myself:
See, there is Jan standing right under the N in Can. But this next paragraph is the kicker:
Ting said he was invited to an April meeting at a Brew Ha-Ha, where the state regional chair and a district chair informed Ting they were aware of his Obama activities and told him, “unless you are willing to recant that and swear allegiance to the party nominee John McCain, we are compelled to request your resignation from the Republican Committee.”
Ting said he had been a member of the committee for 25 years — and when he was asked to leave, he was a committeeman for the 7th election district of the 11th representative district.
First, Republican committee meetings at Brew Ha-Ha’s? I can’t decide if I should be amused at the sad state of the GOP or angry that my favorite local coffee shop allows such nefarious organizations, like the Republican party, to hold meetings on their premises. Second, we have been through eight years of President Bush requiring loyalty oaths be signed before anyone can listen to him speak. And now we have Republicans demanding a fellow Republican swear loyalty to John McCain. He is not McSame, how exactly?
As a Democrat, I welcome Jan Ting into our Party if he so chooses. As he says in the article, we won’t agree on everything, but ours is the true Big Tent Party.
Perhaps Ting didn’t want to be in the same party as Christine O’Donald and Mike Protack!
Good for him. Standing up for your beliefs is commendable.
No, if Ting had his druthers, he wanted to stay in the party. He was forced out of his positions due to his support of Obama.
http://www.wdel.com/story.php?id=478366975820
“The Republican Party endorses a candidate forPresident of Wilmington City Council…and he’s aDemocrat.”
“Saying it’s important for voters to support the personnot the party, former State Representative Herman Holloway, Jr. announced his candidacy.”“The son of long-time State Senator Herman Holloway,Sr. says he’s still a Democrat, but struck an agreement with the Republicans because he saw it as the only way to bring his good ideas to thepeople.”
Maybe the GOP party chair needs to get the boot of the state committee. Ting has the basis for a major lawsuit.
Is this the same party that spent last year chasing Alan “Donates to Biden” Levin to run for governor?
Indeed. As mentioned in the article, Levin also donated to Carper in 2006, while Ting was running against him. Yet Ting, with no hard feelings, held a fundraiser at his home for Levin while Levin was contemplating running for Governor.
The delicious backstabbing irony that is the Delaware GOP.
I guess all the Markell Republicans will also have to be excommunicated.
Desperation, pure desperation.
He has changed his name to “Jan Hu” to more accurately reflect his irrelevance….
Jan HU?????
This is why the Delaware GOP is so fucking impotent in the state of Delaware. They’re accepting of Herman Holloway who I know is not supporting McCain, yet they kick out Ting?
No one can “kick” you out of a party, that was tried a few years ago in the Brandywine Region with Frances West when she supported Dave Brady against Wayne Smith.
Frances has had a leadership role with Republican Women in recent years and seemed to do a good job.
Christine O’Donnell ran in the 2006 primary and then ran a write in candidacy in 2006 yet won the convention nod in 2008.
Rudy Giuliani endorsed Mario Cuomo against George Pataki in 1994 for New York Governor yet he was the favorite of many of the Delaware GOP leadership.
The key question is what do the regional by laws say about the request for Jan to resign? Each region (7) has their own rules.
Really folks does anyone really care what the state GOP does. So now instead of Ting we have the 40 year old virgin. Caught her on the radio down her in Sussex county she sounds like a wind up Barbie doll.
I first read this article today online.
The WNJ did not say Brew Ha Ha…today. WTF?
They said it last night?
Are blogger’s most trivial and boooooooooring idiocyncrasy’s kicking off reactionary censorship? Did Brew Ha Ha object to the use of their name out of thin air or did some DE Liberal reader pick up the red phone?
How about them paying more heed to some of internet-writer’s issues that really make news?
LOL. It was in the story last night, and no I did not call anyone. Perhaps Ms. Lippincott called up the News Journal. Perhaps Mr. Ting was incorrect in his recollection that the meeting happened at Brew Ha Ha.
You folks come up with the most entertaining conspiracy theories.
The same-day web postings don’t go through the normal editing process. Most editors would routinely change the name of a shop (Brew Ha Ha) to a generic description of what kind of shop it is (coffee shop), if only as an aid to readers who have never heard of Brew Ha Ha. It also avoids the appearance of giving a free plug to Brew Ha Ha.
This is standard editing procedure.
Plus, Mike is right. He was asked to resign his position in the party, not the party itself.
I may be wrong, but isn’t there a difference between Republican “Committee” and Republican “Party”?
There is nothing wrong with being a member of the Republican Party and choosing to help, support or vote for a Democrat running for office. It seems to me though, if you are part of the Republican “Committee”, you are doing so to support the Republican candidates.
The State Republican Party hasn’t ceased to amaze me in the last few years, but I do have to give them a pass on this one.
Funny I just this second read the article online and the reference is to a “Pennsylvania coffee shop”. Anyway…
This is why I stay unaffiliated. DE Dems support Castle and DE Repubs support Biden. Making a meal of this makes the DE GOP look clownish.
Generalize much? This DE Dem does not support Castle. No one on this blog does.
I think it’s an apt generalization. Perhaps DG should have added the modifier “too” before each. TOO many DE Dems support Castle and TOO many DE Repubs support Biden. I think those statements are certainly true.
I am glad Jan is standing up this treatment. No party should treat its members this way.
This should be a lesson for the Democrats on what NOT to do to members of either party. If you want a big tent, do not ostracize people who disagree with some positions but generally support you. There are many many people who share views consistent with democratic, republican and libertarian principles by trying to see what will work best for the people at any given time and in any given policy.
That should be the measure of success…. Is it working for or against the needs of the people? Not is a policy working for or against the needs of influential party members.
It seems more totalitarian to me then normal party grinding and I do not like that. I would advise the dems to take a different course.
Generally as Americans we have a duty to support who we think is best for the people.
Bottom line is Jan is a brilliant law teacher and desreves more respect.
Agree Mike.
Has Ting left the party?
I find the same kind of GOP- out-of-kilter mind-set in Dave Burris. “Party above Person” is an unsettling and often infuriatingly war-like position against any other political stripe.
There is a huge qualitative difference between being a member of a party expressing your own preferences for a candidate and being in the leadership supposedly representing others in the party. Why not ask John Daniello for his view of this distinction?
I believe in fiduciary duty for all party positions, especially given the statutory recognition of parties in Delaware and the powers that come with this. I pushed such a duty for years in the GOP, both as it regards not supporting opposing party candidates and not supporting one of your own party’s candidates over another in a contested race to be decided in a primary.
Once you are (s)elected to represent others within the party structure you have agreed to support Republican nominees and organize on their behalf.
This fiduciary duty inheres equally to intra-party responsibilities, i.e. leadership has an obligation not to take sides within the party in contested races, and especially not to use party resources or leadership influence against one/for another candidate.
Just as leadership should, at the very least, “do no harm” by supporting another party’s candidates, I believe they are also bound to abstain from supporting any specific would-be nominee in a contested primary race in the party.
How would the Democratic Party treat one of its Committee Chairs or leadership who was attending McCain rallies and sending him checks? I think that person would have both Daniello’s and DL’s footprints imprinted on their butt, on their way out the door.
Very good points, TN.
By the way, I respect Jan Ting immensely. I would have thought his personal ethics would have already resulted in his quiet resignation from leaderships months ago, when he began supporting Obama.
I am a bit surprised he thinks he should be able to hold a committee post while personally supporting that committee’s opponent(s). He knows corporate law well enough I am sure to know that in fiduciary terms this is like having a board member of Coke working for Pepsi’s marketing team.
To me fiduciary duty is not just about affirmative duties, it’s also about consequences for your decisions in contravention of them.
Boy, Republicans sure do like pledges of allegiance. Some kind of medieval oath-swearing fetish I guess, or maybe it’s just run of the mill conservative fascism at work.
Tyler,
I understand where you are coming from regarding fiduciary duties.
Tell me then, should Joe Lieberman resign from the Democratic caucus and from his Chairmanship of the Homeland Security committee? Such a resignation does not affect the majority control of the chamber, for the organizing resolution passed in 2007 does not have a provision for control to flip to the Republicans should the Democrats lose Lieberman.
Seems to me that Lieberman’s support of McCain and his presence in Democratic caucus meetings are in conflict, much as Ting was in conflict as you describe.
Elected officials are not party fiduciaries in my eyes. I have always stated this when it was used to rebut my arguments.
Much as I disdain Liebermann he is the Senator from Connecticut, not the Senator for the Democratic Party.
Tyler, you make the best case possible, but I think all the talk about fiduciary responsibility doesn’t get at the group-think that underlies the issue.The language of “you must recant and swear allegiance” sounds like it comes straight from a cult, a Stalinist circle. It’s a bit scary and it’s certainly undemocratic. The fact that the DE Dems might do the same thing doesn’t make it less so.
“Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. During groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_think
Someone tell me that they honestly don’t see group-think in this event.
Tyler uses lots of long words, but it boils down to this:
You can’t hold a leadership position in the R team and publicly cheer for a member of the D team (or vice versa)
During groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking.”
which is the opposite of what happened.
one member (Ting) promoted viewpoints at odds with the organizations purpose and came into conflict with the group.
“you must recant and swear allegiance”
Although I somehow believe that was Mr. Ting’s distillation of what was actually said, it is definitely not acceptable, true or not, and I certainly don’t subscribe to any such demands being made of anyone.
Fiduciary duty entails a duty of loyalty, but also duty of candor. Again, Ting shouldn’t have thought he could have his cake and eat it too. His personal ethics should have led him to resign if he couldn’t fulfill the basic duty to support candidates he is supposed to be helping elect by virtue of his position of trust within the party. No one should have had to put the arm on him. I am dismayed he wants to play victim now.
This isn’t about groupthink per se, although I am not going to say that groupthink is not something that is incident to all political parties, as Dana suggested, if only as an operative reality.
Political parties are functional organizations to accomplish electoral goals. The basic premise that leaders in these organizations should be able to work with impunity against these goals pretty much undermines if not defeats their entire purpose.
Being in the leadership of a party is no right, no matter how long or supportive you have been. If you can’t even observe the basic reason for an organization’s existence, over your personal desires or choices, you certainly shouldn’t be part of its leadership.
Although I disagree with the ultimatum as purportedly given to Ting, I frankly think it was more than he deserved, i.e. to be given any chance to remain in his post. He should have just been removed for cause, end of story.
Also, if those entrusted as leaders of political parties can pick-and-choose their allegiance to the party’s constituents, thus undermining the very premise of their position of trust…how can we ever expect such people to produce officials of public trust who don’t feel their personal views or desires can arbitrarily be made paramount to the best interests of the constituency they are entrusted to represent?
I dare say this is the single biggest basic evil we have in Delaware government today, one that produce electeds who think even open government is optional if it is against their personal agendas.
Rod G
“I may be wrong, but isn’t there a difference between Republican “Committee” and Republican “Party”? ”
Thicker knee pads
Mike Protack
“No one can “kick” you out of a party”
Protack ! Smell the roses don’t eat them!
Mike Matthews
“I think it’s an apt generalization.”
Very good! Now take the abbreviation for apartment “apt” and find one! Your parents will be very proud of you
It is true that the constituency is who you represent, but the consitientcy and the party are not in lock step, leadership of the party has interests that are often sharply divergent with the needs and the will of the people.
Jan I think, sees that clearly.
I think he is taking a more moral stance and deserves our respect for his conviction.
It takes a lot of guts to stand up to both the cronyism in his own party and the candidate they selected.
And one must remember that the R’s in Delaware have not consistently been supportive of him, his poilices or his ideas.
As one of the mosty respected teachers of law, he could school us all on the dynamics of this and its underlying cause.
He deserves more respect from the party pooh-bahs. And the party needs to change from listening to three or four rich people on important decisions for the “business friends” and lobbyists to listening to the people and actually helping make good policy.
That goes for both parties. Parties are not necessarily the best thing in the world when they serve their own often powerful interests and not the interest of the people. I think as hard as it was, Jan made the right call and I respect him for doing so. I am glad he is doing so.
Being a leader does not imply that he has a fiduciary relationship with the party.
You can be a party leader and do what you think is right, especially when the party picks someone who has consistently done things like lie and manipulate the people so openly as Sen. McCain and his lapdog Lieberman do. Tyler the party apparatus needs to change, it needs a paradigm shift, they could not even accept the libertarian wing of the party, they could nto accept the democrats, while adopting greedily every position the democrats have!
If any of my fellow D’s asked me to support someone as mischevious and underhanded and immoral as Lieberman, first I would blackout, second I would work against him every step of the way.
It may take a realignment of the heavens to occur but the party system as it now stands needs to be different so that servants of the people in the legislative branch serve the people. And elected servants of the excutive branch are not so easily open to manipulation etc.
Did you hear Michael Jackson and Tanya Harding we going in the horse racing business?
Michael Jackson is going to ride the three year olds and Tanya Harding is going to handicap them!
Ok, George Carlin. You’re fuckin’ killing me! Great comments!
Tyler Nixon
Weren’t you the young pilot involved in the Fratricide Incident up around Halar al Batin in Operation Desert Storm?
Tyler Nixon
Always trust TADS! Never trust the IH and DSS!
The boys from B/3-66 will never forget you!
FLIR was on the wrong grid!
Don’t worry I am doing fine in my wheel chair
Brian
“It is true that the constituency is who you represent, but the consitientcy and the party are not in lock step”
for Christ sake! Spit the dick out and talk right!
First, Republican committee meetings at Brew Ha-Ha’s? I can’t decide if I should be amused at the sad state of the GOP or angry that my favorite local coffee shop allows such nefarious organizations, like the Republican party, to hold meetings on their premises. Second, we have been through eight years of President Bush requiring loyalty oaths be signed before anyone can listen to him speak. And now we have Republicans demanding a fellow Republican swear loyalty to John McCain. He is not McSame, how exactly?
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!