Burnt Orange Report

News, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas

Support the TDP!

March 24, 2005

Susan Hays Resigns Effective April 1st

By Byron LaMasters

The embattled Dallas County Democratic Chair, Susan Hays has announced her resignation effective April 1st. A draft of her letter to precinct chairs can be read as a PDF file, here.

The Dallas Morning News reports on Susan Hays's resignation:

Susan Hays announced Thursday that she would resign as chairwoman of the Dallas County Democratic Party on April 1, saying she was the victim of a witch hunt.

In a letter mailed Thursday, Ms. Hays asked precinct chairmen to meet April 2 at the Hall of State in Fair Park to select the next leader.

She appointed precinct chairman Robert Franklin as temporary chairman for the April 2 meeting.

"I am saddened to say that infighting has broken out, giving the public appearance that we prefer to fight among ourselves rather than stand united behind our Democratic beliefs and work together to get Democrats elected," Ms. Hays wrote. "My loyalty is not to the position of the chair, but to the larger progressive movement."


"It is time for us all to move forward," Ms. Hays said in her resignation. "Rest assured that the party will move forward, not because I am resigning or because of the artificial lines people have drawn – but because rather than be divided by personalities we are united by our strong, shared Democratic beliefs."

Mr. Molberg and about 10 other Democrats were meeting Thursday night to talk about a succession procedure. The Dallas lawyer said the precinct chairs could select a temporary chairman April 2 for 30 days. That would allow time for candidates for the chair to campaign and develop their platforms.

First, I think that it was bad form that the Chair went to the press on this matter before infoming her executive committee of her decision. Saying that she was the victim of a "witch hunt" without allowing a forum for the very legitimate grievances against her is, in my opinion, quite inappropriate. Second, I don't believe that the chair has the authority to appoint a chair for a meeting after she has resigned as chair. The Texas Election Code states the necessary procedure on this matter:

§ 171.025. PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANCY IN OFFICE OF COUNTY CHAIR. (a) If a vacancy occurs in the office of county chair, the secretary of the county executive committee shall call a meeting for the purpose of filling the vacancy. If a committee member files with the secretary a written request for a meeting to fill a vacancy, the secretary shall call the meeting to convene not later than the 20th day after the date the secretary receives the request.

As someone who attended the February 28th meeting, it is my understanding that the meeting was recessed until April 2nd, and that the April 2nd meeting will be a continuation of the previous meeting. According to the minutes submitted by the Party Secretary, after the chair Susan Hays abdicated the gavel at the 2/28 meeting, Dorothy Dean moved to elect a temporary chair to conduct further business. At that time, the motion was set aside, and should be the first order of business at the April 2nd meeting.

I certainly applaud Susan Hays's decision to resign as chair. She is a dedicated Democrat and has many talents, especially as a lawyer and as a lobbyist. While I don't think that her calling was as party chair, I think that she has much to offer our party.

Posted by Byron LaMasters at March 24, 2005 11:45 PM | TrackBack


The 2004-2005 Rules of the Texas Democratic Party state in Art. III, E.5.(a):

"5. Vacancies.
(a) When a vacancy occurs in the office of County
Chair, the outgoing County Chair or the Secretary of the County Executive Committee may
call a meeting to fill the vacancy at any time after it occurs. Upon the written request of any
Committee member, however, the Secretary shall
call one for a date not more than 20 days after
receiving the request, giving each member notice
of the time, place, and purpose. Should a
Committee Secretary fail to act after being requested in writing to do so, the State Chair shall call the meeting in like manner. The officer calling the meeting shall designate a Temporary Chair to preside until the new Permanent Chair is elected. (Texas Election Code §171.025)"

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 25, 2005 01:21 AM

State Law supercedes Party Rules when there is a conflict

Article IV, Chapter A, Subsection 2 of the Texas Democratic Party Rules:

“Notwithstanding anything in these Rules to the contrary, the laws of the State of Texas take precedence over these Rules in the event of a conflict, so long as application of those laws does not infringe on the Party’s rights of self-government under the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Texas.”

171.025. PROCEDURE FOR FILLING VACANCY IN OFFICE OF COUNTY CHAIR. (Copied directly from the Texas Election Code)
(a) If a vacancy occurs in the office of county chair, the secretary of the county executive committee shall call a meeting for the purpose of filling the vacancy. If a committee member files with the secretary a written request for a meeting to fill a vacancy, the secretary shall call the meeting to convene not later than the 20th day after the date the secretary receives the request.

Posted by: txrounder at March 25, 2005 10:56 AM

So, since the vacancy has not yet occurred, the County Chair has the authority to call the meeting that will select her replacement, but would not have the authority to call the meeting after the vacancy occurs due to the conflict with state law. And, according to Party rules, the replacement election meeting cannot actually be held until after the vacancy takes place (hence her resignation effective immediately before the meeting). And, as state law appears to be silent on the question of who chairs a meeting called by an outgoing Chair, there is no "conflict" with Party rules, which appear to have at least anticipated the situation of a Chair voluntarily resigning in an organized fashion, rather than being hauled off in a meat wagon.

Apparently the Secretary would not be able to call a meeting until after the vacancy occurs, and then wouldn't there be a minimum notice period required, further delaying the meeting?

Posted by: precinct1233 at March 25, 2005 11:11 AM

As her final blow to Democratic precinct chairs Susan Hays appoints Judge Ted Akin (a Republican) to co-chair the credentialling committee with Judge Ron Chapman.

Is this part of Susan's plant to push Republicans to run for Democratic seats?

Good grief! When will she switch parties?

Posted by: Another Longtime Democrat at March 25, 2005 01:43 PM

can Judge Akins appointment be challanged. I'm concerned that a republican can be appointed to a position that determines whether quorum had been met.
This appointment is consistent with Hays' rule as our county chair. She whines about infighting, when she has created that infighting. To those of you who don't agree, when is the last time that you went to an executive committee meeting that wasn't chaos?

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 25, 2005 03:36 PM

Credentialing Precinct Chairs at the February 28th meeting was a flash point of controversy. It continues to be. Mr. Akins has apparently voted in every Republican Primary since 1996. Mr. Chapman, though a former elected official, is not a resident of Dallas County.

Under the circumstances, I don't think it is at all unreasonable to ask that the credentialing authorities be both Democratic Primary voters and residents of Dallas County.

Mr. Wilkins, the Party Secretary, is the custodian of records and is therefore the appropriate Party Officer to determine the roll and conduct the credentials.

Posted by: Gary Fitzsimmons at March 25, 2005 03:55 PM


Dallas County Democrats Hate Winning Elections
Revert To Petty Party In-Fighting
GOP Applauds Resignation

Posted by: Henry Wade at March 25, 2005 04:04 PM



Posted by: Tom Stevens at March 25, 2005 04:22 PM

Concerning Judge Wade's post, am I the only one that thinks it foolish for a judge to use his county computer and county email address to post on blogs which have nothing to do with his role as a judge? Was his computer purchased with campaign funds, which would subject him to ethics complaints? If he posts on this site, he must post on others and ALL HIS EMAILS ON COUNTY COMPUTERS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS SUBJECT TO AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST. Anyone want to make an Open Records Request for all Judge Wade's emails and posts on blogs?

Posted by: WhoMe? at March 25, 2005 04:39 PM

Judge Akin a Republican? Really! Are you sure about that? The assertion that he has "voted in every Republican primary since 1996" could be easily confirmed or ruled out. He always ran as a Democrat when he was on the ballot (and won many times) and he seems like a committed Democrat to me. If he was really a Republican, why didn't he switch parties back when it was becoming increasingly difficult to get elected as a Democrat? He never did, and he served on the bench for a long time and is an honorable man.

Posted by: Longtime Democrat at March 25, 2005 05:23 PM

Susan Hays was not so bold as Molly Beth Malcolm who chaired the meeting at which Charles Soechting was elected to fill out her unexpired term before she had resigned, a definite no no.

I was a delegate to the 2004 State Convention and attended a goodly portion of the meeting of the Rules Committee. I do not remember hearing about a proposed rule change to Article III.E.5.(a)inserting between the words "Chair," and "the secretary in the first sentence the following:"the outgoing chair or". I am quite sure that this change--or any others to my knowledge--was not voted on by the delegates assembled. Bob Slagle's delaying tactics prevented a meaningful discussion and a vote up or down on the Resolutions. A check of the minutes of the 2004 convention should be made to see what was recorded concerning this matter. At any rate, Article III.E.5.(a)of our 2004-2005 is clearly inconsistent with the Election Code. This may seem to be a small matter until one considers the influence Susan Hays will have over the April 2 meeting if she is allowed to appoint the temporary chair of that meeting. This will be especially true if a significant number of precinct chairs are a little hazy on parliamentary procedure as appears to be the case.

My thanks to Byron LeMaster for bringing this matter to our attention in his excellent Burnt Orange Report

Posted by: John McConnell at March 25, 2005 05:28 PM

Longtime Democrat, aka Sally Garcia, yes Judge Akin is a tried and true Republican primary voter. The number of the elections department is (214) 819-6300 if you would like to confirm this fact.

Posted by: Another Longtime Democrat at March 25, 2005 08:40 PM

Once again, I am not Sally Garcia.

If Judge Akin is a "tried and true Republican primary voter", when exactly and how many times exactly did he do so? Fitzsimmons alleged that he voted in the every GOP primary since 1996, with no proof whatsoever. Document the allegations up front instead of trying to smear an honorable guy.

The man is a Democrat. Besides, separate and apart from Judge Akin, if we exclude from active participation in our party anyone who ever voted in a Republican primary, we will never be the majority party again. Don't we want to welcome the people that the (usually) more intolerant Republicans scare away?

Come on people, the person you apparently love to hate will no longer be Chair in a little over a week. It's time to get a more productive pasttime.

We need to move on and elect a new County Chair without continuing to immolate ourselves for all the world to see.

Here's hoping that the attendees at the April 2nd meeting will have enough maturity to act like adults this time.

Posted by: Longtime Democrat at March 25, 2005 09:15 PM

I will never defend Susan Hays tenure as Chair, because it is indefensible. She was a terrible Chair. However her bad job was out of incompetence, not malice. I do belive that Susan is a good Dem and shouldn't be dragged through the mud. She got in over her head.

The true million dollar question now is can her detractors find a suitable replacement.

Ultimately, this whole saga will be decide on how well her replacement does. If the next Dallas Dem Chair does no better (I'm talking about fundraising and organizing not raw numbers because Dallas gets better by the day) the coup was for not.

It is time to put up or shut up. I for one hope a true and committed chair springs forth and Dems stand united again.

It is inevitable that Dallas will go all D in the not too distant future. The real challenge lays in turning Dallas into the anti-Tarrant County. A pure Democratic vote churning base that can help a statewide ticket.

Posted by: Count Blah at March 25, 2005 09:51 PM

Here is Judge Akin's voting history from Demzilla.

county_name DALLAS
precinct 1132
street_address 5323 DENTWOOD
odd_even_flag O
household_id 3857126
indiv_id A12648187
name AKIN, TED
age 72
ethnic_code W
gender M
household_phone 214-368-4246
postal_code 75220
vhist04r R
vhist02r R
vhist02g G
vhist00r R
vhist00g G
vhist98r R
vhist98g G
walk_order 5323
street_name DENTWOOD

Posted by: Another Longtime Democrat at March 25, 2005 10:24 PM

I had no idea that Dallas County had a judge by that name. The post was supposed to be humorous and referred to the longtime and legendary Dallas County Democratic District Attorney Henry Wade. I hope I didn't get some judge in trouble.

Posted by: Henry Wade at March 25, 2005 10:37 PM

I believe a jury would rule in favor of ANOTHER LONGTIME DEMOCRAT - Judge Akin is a REPUBLICAN. He may have been a Democrat but he is not now.

Obviously you missed the number to the elections department. If not I am certain someone in the Dallas County Democratic Party can help you.

Oh, that's right the last executive director (also a Republican who didn't even vote for his own beloved candidate) has vacated his position. Does that make it five or six executive directors who have left while employed by Susan Hays? God bless them for their service.

God bless us for putting up with her.

Posted by: Yet Another Longtime Democrat at March 25, 2005 10:58 PM

I never suggested Mr. Akin was not an honorable person. I do not know Mr. Akin. I have no idea what his level of honor might be - or whether he's kind to children and puppies for that matter..

Posted by: Gary Fitzsimmons at March 25, 2005 11:27 PM

Judge Wade, how is it that you did not know there was a Dallas Judge named Henry Wade, yet you used his email from the Dallas County Court House?????? Did you not realize that this site traces the email address? As a criminal law judge, you are terrible at covering you tracks. And from what I understand, you are also in big trouble for using the County computer for politics. Isn't that what Laura Miller got in trouble for?

Posted by: Short Time Democrat at March 25, 2005 11:28 PM

Henry Wade talks about Dems infighting and that the Reps are applauding Hays' resignation. Mr. Wade really needs to be paying more attention to his own party problems. I find us in a much stronger position today then at any time in the last two years.
I'm really looking forward to Kay Bailey, Perry and Strayhorn using all of that 20 million dollars they have built up in their war chests to tear into each other, that with out a doubt, will be fun to watch.

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 11:02 AM

Since this is a rainy Saturday and I didn't have much to do, I tried to bring up hwade@dallas.co.state.tx What I got was a syntax error stating that the page I was looking for might have been removed or had it's name changed. Isn't that interesting

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 11:19 AM

The one thing that strikes me in all of these postings is that no one is focusing on moving forward and trying to bring the party together to build upon the momentum we gained last year. My understanding is that Susan's appointments of a temporary chair and credentialing committees were done with an eye to bring NON PARTISIAN persons into the process who were not in her "camp" or the oppositions. Those opposing her have gotten what they want with her resignation. The process to choose a new Chair is under way. Yes there are some MINOR items which could be detated because the rules and election law are ambiguous regarding a situation such as this, but come on guys, lets get past that. Let's have a constructive meeting to move past animosity and get our party back on track. If you have constuctive advice or a candidate for the new chair to promote ... go to it. But let's move forward rather than being stuck in the mud and muck!!! Let's help Bob Franklin, a truly honest, non-partisian (in this matter) arbitrator who is acting in good faith here, as I am sure are both Judges, move this process forward!

Posted by: Lenna Webb at March 26, 2005 11:38 AM

I guess the best way to find a "non-partisan" to handle you credentialing process is to ask a republican like Judge Akin. As for Judge Chapman, he has in no way been "non-partisan" about the Susan Hays stuff at all. He been a strong supporter of hers.

Posted by: Another Longtime Democrat at March 26, 2005 11:47 AM

Non-partisan persons to run the credentialing committee of a partisan political party? Sorry, no can do. Besides there's nothing non-partisan about either of them.

Judge Chapman is a longtime Democrat and while Judge Akin may have been a longtime Democrat his voting history says he is a longtime Republican now. There's nothing non-partisan about them.

If what you meant was that neither of them are Susan supporters on that account you are wrong too. They are both Susan supporters. It seems that Susan is more interested in building a relationship with Republicans than with the grassroots of her own party.

For a lobbyist on pro-choice, anti-parental consent laws (which is Susan's background) that's probably good but for a partisan Democratic party chair she obviously is a complete failure.

Posted by: Yet Another Longtime Democrat at March 26, 2005 01:20 PM

You are still not address the issue of moving forward and stopping the party. Credentialing should be easy to resolve. There are records to which one can refer. If there are disputes, reasonable people can look at the facts, resolve disputes and get on with the process of getting a new county chair. I don't know these Judge's histories, but are then not honorable men who have had to look at two sides of an issue and come to a just conclusion? What matter if they were Hays supporters in the past? She will no longer be Chair as of April 1st! So once again, why can we not stop fighting and get on with the business of healing this breach and moving the party forward?!!

Posted by: Lenna Webb at March 26, 2005 02:19 PM

Bob Franklin is the man Susan Hays chose to serve as temporary chariman of the April 2nd meeting. Supposedly he is "non-partisan".

Lenna Webb - are you Bob Franklin? are you Bob Franklin's wife? Or has Bob just allowed you to post using his e-mail address?

Let me know Bob, I mean Lenna.

Posted by: Tom Stevens at March 26, 2005 03:17 PM

I agree that we should and will move forward. I still have a problem with ANYONE that Hays' has appointed for ANYTHING, Democrat or Republican. We need remember that on the evening of Feb 28th, Hays first appointed John Wiley Price to be Chair Pro Tem when that was struck down, she appoints Gene Freeland which was also struck down, both not being members of the Executive Committee.She has made some decisions and taken some actions in the past year,That have placed her in the position that she is in.
While I know this would never happen, I would not be opposed to a meeting five minutes after her resignation goes into effect to select the Credentials Committee.
I know that you have a bias toward Bob Franklin and well you should. To me this is not about whether Franklin would be partisan or nonpartisan, this is about an appointment by Hays who has demonstrated I high level of incompetence in the past. tom madrzykowski

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 03:24 PM

I think we need a strong, elected Democratic official to serve as temporary chair so the healing can begin.

Posted by: anon at March 26, 2005 03:49 PM

I can't believe we are fighting over points of order and who calls the meeting. This is absurd!

Now Susan can't even leave in peace! What have we come to? This group, which is all about its own anger, seems bent on scorching the entire county clean of Democrats. When will this maddness end? They aren't even happy she is leaving. What will make them happy? They seem to want to throw the party into court (sure to be a big win for the other side) rather than just give up one little inch.

David Wilkins,
You can settle this issue now and potentially redeem yourself in my eyes, by calling for the same meeting that Susan has. No party business has been conducted since at least December and delaying this meeting only adds to that problem. Most of the people that are going to run decided months ago if they wanted it or not, so why not get the show on the road?

Sadly, I keep my name hidden here for fear of a smear campaign.

Posted by: The C'abolishionist at March 26, 2005 04:26 PM

All you Concerned Democrats of Dallas County i.e., the Susan Haters, Coup Democrats, The Petitioners, that includes you too Byron are definately a bunch of bitter, vindictive freaks--you are all freaking amazing. You get exactly what you want, Susan's resignation, and you STILL aren't happy.

How does making MORE controversy solve anything.

All you are doing is serving up the Republicans a mountain of ammunition to sue the Party with and then you'll have screwed all of us Democrats who are actually trying to do something constructive.

You're going to reap what you've sown and we won't forget who was responsible.

Posted by: Pete at March 26, 2005 04:31 PM

I strongly encourage the return of former County Chairman Sandy Kress. He is a visionary on education issues and is a wonderful organizer and fundraiser. Sandy has a proven ability to bring factions together. Please give him your serious consideration.

Posted by: Bob at March 26, 2005 04:34 PM

C'Abolishionist & Pete: do us all a favor and lay off the double mocha cappucinos - you're gonna bust an artery!

Posted by: Purple Pete at March 26, 2005 04:40 PM

Bob, I'm afraid that no credible, qualified person would get involved at this point. The Coup Democrats, lead by Ken Molberg and Theresa Daniel, are making clear their intentions--no tolerance for anyone who they haven't hand-picked so they can have total control

In addition, their activities and strategies most likely violate election law and campaign finance law and I'm sure the Republicans are licking their chops waiting to haul them into court--a track record all too familiar for the individuals leading the coup. Credible individuals like Sandy know the conspirators have placed the Party in legal peril in the past and that the Party has paid a substantial price for their incompetence.

So, sadly, nothing has changed and the party returns to the malaise days from when Mr. Molberg was chairman. When the party couldn't collect donors, candidates, volunteers or election day victories and the Republicans laughed at the incompetence and stupidity.

Thanks Coup Democrats, you've made us so proud.

Posted by: Pete at March 26, 2005 04:57 PM

C'Abolishionist& Pete, I am not a bitter vindictive freak, I am any angry Democrat that has a lot to offer my party, I have been led by a County Chair that had her own agenda, that chose to cast deaf ears on myself and other strong democrats (May 04 and Feb 05) If you want her to be able to leave in peace, then suggest to her that she resign The first thing Monday morning and let wilkins take the helm until Saturday Apr.2. Is it not true that both the National Pert Chair and the State Party chair had asked her to resign more than one month ago. As far as being vindictive and bitter. Read the column about her resignation, instead acknowledging her own shortcomings, it was everyone elses fault. Not hiding behind any alias. tom madrzykowski

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 05:03 PM

Tom, first of all, as I have stated in numerous posts, I've never denied that some of the concerns about Susan weren't valid. What I have a problem with is the witch hunt to force her resignation--it is unnecessarily destructive and on several fronts ILLEGAL.

Since my concern is foremost for the Party, I oppose the witch hunt. You and the other like minded Democrats who have expressed a nasty, personal vitriol for Susan are doing yourselves and every Democrat a terrible disservice.

It is NOT TRUE that the State Party Chair and the National Party Chair ask for her resignation. It is naive to think they would dirty their hands with a local political squabble and I challenge to PROVE your assertion.

How can you be serious about letting David Wilkins take over the party? He is a twenty something unemployed political hack. Is this the person you want running the local party and trying to ask for donations from wealthy and powerful donors, recruiting qualified judicial candidates, and maneuvering all the legal pitfalls of campaign finance law? You're kidding, right? What makes David Wilkins QUALIFIED to be the party chair other than the fact he is a puppet of Ken Molberg and Theresa Daniel?

Posted by: Pete at March 26, 2005 05:20 PM

Pete, Isn't the Secretary the next in the line of succession prior to a executive committee meeting naming an interim chair??
I am not influenced in the Hays fiasco by anything or anyone other than my observations and my frustrations. Read my other post about the Rep party. They need to focus on their own problems right now and they know it. tom

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 05:49 PM

Forget Wilkins, I'd like to nominate Tom Madrzykowsi as the next Party Chair. He seems to have all the answers and a deep understanding of the many requirements for running the Party. I'm sure he will keep the 100s-of-thousands of Dallas Democrats perfectly happy.

Don't worry Tom, when the Coup Democrats start tearing into you, Pete and I will guard your back.

Posted by: Tired at March 26, 2005 05:51 PM

No thanks, I'm high maintenance and the job doesn't pay enough, besides I would have to deal with people like yourself who are quick to impart opinions and unwilling to identify themselves. tom madrzykowski

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 06:01 PM

Tom. No, the party secretary isn't next in line. The Coup Democrats are picking and choosing between election code and Party rules that suit their own interpretations--all of which create legal perils in an inevitable lawsuit. Feel free to think the Republicans won't take notice and take action, but you would be most naive. They are constantly watching for gifts like this and the Coup Democrats are giving them a golden opportunity to deal the Party a major setback after some significant victories in the last election. But of course the real damage they have done is drive away donors, candidates and volunteers with their "eat our own" at any cost mentality.

Because I have consistently criticized their tactics I've been attacked as a Susan supporter. I'm a Party supporter and the Coup Democrats tactics have done exponentially more damage to the party than Susan's shortcomings.

Back to your claims about the request for Susan to resign, do you have proof? As for David Wilkins, outline what qualifications he possesses to make him suitable for the position of Chair.

Posted by: Pete at March 26, 2005 06:11 PM

Why am I not surprised. You certain are qualified for a job as a comedian.

Posted by: Tired at March 26, 2005 06:13 PM

Pete, Again, I am not a Coup Democrat. I am a strong Democrat influenced by MY OWN thoughts and perceptions. I am smart enough to recognize incompetance and arrogance when I hear and see and feel it. Those and only those are the things that influenced me about Susan Hays. tom

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 26, 2005 06:24 PM

Yes, Lenna Webb (me) is Bob Franklin's wife. No, he is not letting me use his email address to post. I have my own account, my own name, and my own oppinions. When I told him I posted to this site he was not happy as he is trying to resolve all these petty difference before a very public meeting where the press is sure to be in attendance. I told him I had a right to express my own oppinions, and so I have.

To set the record straight, Bob has only met Susuan a few times very casually and has NEVER talked at any length with her until the temporary chair was proposed to him through a mutual aquaintance, specifically because he HAD NO CONNECTION WITH HER. For your information, he is a lawyer by training; currently an adjunct profession at Brookhaven Community College teaching American Government where he is also the faculty advisor for the Political Science Club; and he is working on his PhD at UNT in Political Science.

I say he is an honest broker, here because he truly has no adgenda beyond getting the party through this mess, because I am in a unique position to hear his private torment over this whole thing. You can believe what you want, but neither or us are shills for ANY SIDE and are trying only to represent sanity.

And Tom, ask your significant other about Bob & I. You may not remember us, buy she certainly will. You can get all the references you want from the Irving community through Judy Smith!

Posted by: Lenna Webb at March 26, 2005 08:52 PM

Lenna, your honesty is brave and admirable and I wish you and your husband the best of luck. The attacks you have endured on this blog are just a sampling of what is in store for both of you.

Since your husband wasn't handpicked or pre-approved for this role by the Coup Democrats, they will go to any length and use any means to attack and discredit both of you. They ignore all reason and will use any tactic to get their way. They interpret the law to their liking with little regard for how it would hold up in court.

For example, the outgoing chair selects two JUDGES to conduct the credential process so that it will withstand scrutiny in the courtroom. But instead of respecting this decision to protect the Party legally, the Coup Democrats are trying to discredit the decision because their agenda isn't yet fulfilled. To make sure the goals of their agenda are realized, they must control the credential process.

Your husband should not underestimate the Coup Democrats determination and ruthlessness. The next meeting has the potential to be even more contentious than the last one but on hand this time will be the media to record the fiasco and law enforcement as an insurance policy.

But since the current Chair won't be in attendance, and thus not available to be made the scapegoat as chief troublemaker, the true troublemakers will be exposed for all to see.

So once again, thanks Coup Democrats for not only ripping the local party apart, but also for burning it to the ground. I hope your proud of yourselves.

Posted by: Pete at March 26, 2005 09:55 PM

Perhaps we should select an outsider with a proven track record to lead our County Party. Steve Wolens, for example, might be just the sort of person who could put this all behind us and get us heading in a new, fresh direction.

Posted by: LM at March 26, 2005 10:53 PM

Whoever is puting forward the suggestions for Chair i.e. Krauss and Wolens then using Bob Strauss and Steve Wolens email address in your post--if you're a rethuglican, get lost and if your a Democrat, grow up.

Posted by: Pete at March 26, 2005 11:10 PM

After having endorsed a President Bush Republican judicial nominee on Dallas County Democratic Party letterhead, Chair Hays has finally resigned.

It is unfortunate that Chair Hays publicly attacked the Democratic Party in the Dallas Morning News. Chair Hays characterized our party faithful as a mob. It's ironic that she attacks Democratic activists for embarrassing the party, when SHE went to the Dallas Morning News to attack the party. The Concerned Democrats of Dallas County didn't go to the media. From a distance, I could almost feel sympathy for Chair Hays, for looking so desperate and disloyal--had she not been causing harm to our party for her own miscalculated self interest.

But it's done. And as the senior member of the State Democratic Executive Committee, Attorney Ken Molberg, has rightly pointed out, the County Executive Committee meeting is in recess, and a motion is on the floor to elect a temporary chair. Ken was very generous to Susan when interviewed by the DMN, and I'm sure had she asked, he would have been glad to explain the law to her concerning the inappropriate attempt to arrange the next executive committee meeting, and this heated exchange could have been avoided.

It's time to move on, and it's also time to end the personal attacks against my good friend, David Wilkins. For years David has worked on Democratic campaigns, knocking on doors, phone banking, registering voters. He re-established the Dallas YD. David is a Texas YD statewide officer, and the Dallas County Democratic Party Secretary. David worked on a U.S. Senate race in Oklahoma last Fall, and yes, David does have gainful employment. I would ask that those of you who call into question his integrity to please publicly state your names.

The process does matter. The law should be followed. And the rules should not be ignored. A motion is on the floor.

Posted by: Melissa McIntosh at March 27, 2005 01:57 AM

My, my, but some of you are tossing out some pretty nasty comments, "bitter vidictive freaks", "puppets", etc. about people you probably don't even know. Do you think that is rational? Does that illustrate critical thinking skills? In fairness, it's hard to tell if you actually know the people involved, since you insist on hiding behind made up names. If you are so certain that the folks you call the "coup democrats" or all those other nasty names, are doing what you say, why do you hide your real identity?
precinct 2324

Posted by: g michele at March 27, 2005 08:43 AM

I'd also like to respond to Pete and the others who feel the need to attack Ken Molberg. You need to get your facts straight before you try to discredit one of the best county chairs Dallas County has ever had. Under Ken's leadership we had the best fundraising history in the history of the party. Also, Ken has remained positive in all his statements to the press. He has not said anything negative about Susan. As a precinct chair, I felt supported under Ken's leadership. That is something I have never felt under Susan's reign.
With regard to Sandy Kress, have you forgottenn that he supported Bush over both Gore and Kerry? Why are you guys wanting to turn control of our party over to known Republican supporters?

Posted by: gmichele at March 27, 2005 08:55 AM

Whoops, Sandy Hress is a great Humanitarian, But he is still A republican. Pete is a mole and will always be a mole and a republican. This is my last response to you bub.
Tom Madrzykowski Precinct Chair 4601

Posted by: tom madrzykowski at March 27, 2005 12:41 PM

Susan Hays has been let go from the last two law firms she's worked for. Perhaps it's because, as she has demonstrated this week, she has trouble reading and following the law, and has to have her mistakes cleared up by those with more experience. In any case, "Pete", I think after your comments it's fair game to point out that Susan is a thirty something unemployed political hack. Is this the person you want running the local party?

Posted by: Another Longtime Democrat at March 27, 2005 12:43 PM

"Pete" is obviously Susan Hays; always has been.

Posted by: Purple Pete at March 27, 2005 03:02 PM

I just heard that Darlene Ewing, the past chair of the Lakehighlands/White Rock Democrats is seeking the chairmanship. I think she is great. I have not heard of anyone else to step forward yet.

Posted by: Shorttime Democrat at March 27, 2005 05:22 PM

One more thing.....I just looked at the Dallas County Website and there is a candidate page for County Chair, but no one has posted anything on it.

Posted by: Shorttime Democrat at March 27, 2005 05:25 PM

Tom Madzrhyhkowski and Pete are both correct. We need Dean -- David Dean -- for Dallas Party Democratic Party Chairman. David served as general counsel to our former Democratic Governor, Dolph Briscoe, and has been active in political, civic and community affairs.

He and Governor Dean are probably kin. In any event, Dallasite David Dean would be fantastic!

Posted by: janie at March 27, 2005 05:33 PM

I thought Susan Hays had left two different law firm jobs because she was spending so much time with her political responsibilities that it was difficult for her to fit into a law firm's work time requirements, so she started practicing on her own because she needed time flexibility.

If Ken Molberg is such a legal authority, why is he giving what seems like bad legal advice to Concerned Democrats about what the Election Code says? The language of the law seems pretty obvious, but it doesn't fit with their purposes, so he conveniently ignores what it actually says in its entirety. Does being a lawyer mean the English language means something different than what normal people read? Byron identified the law on the subject as Texas Election Code 171.025, and it's available online.

Is Mr. Molberg going to volunteer his legal services to the party when his advice lands the party in court, as some people seem to predict will happen?

I'm not an attorney, but are people actually reading the part of the Election Code that is the state law about the process for filling the vacancy of a county chair? It's not that complicated to understand, and I don't think Ken Molberg's assertion about what it means should be automatically accepted because he's an attorney, when his assertion contradicts what a common sense reading of the law says.

That makes me wonder, is Ken Molberg speaking as an attorney or as someone with an agenda?

Are there any attorneys looking at this besides Ken Molberg?

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 27, 2005 05:52 PM

Yes, Yellow Dog (if you are), other lawyers have looked at it and have reached the same conclusion. Mr. Molberg is right. State law is unambiguous and easy to understand. You need to re-read the provision.

The law says that the only person who can call an Executive Committee meeting to fill a County Chair vacancy is the Party Secretary – which is Mr. Wilkins. And the Secretary is the only person who can name a Temporary Chair for that meeting – again Mr. Wilkins. And if the Secretary fails to do this, then the State Party Chairman does it.

Why is Ms. Hays ignoring the law and trying to rely on an invalid rule to call the April 2nd meeting and name a Temporary Chair? Do you think that maybe she hasn’t read the law? Or maybe she has her own agenda. Maybe like trying to control the whole process and dictate to the Executive Committee even after she’s resigned. And what’s with all those puerile threats about lawsuits? Do you think that scares anybody? Shiver me timbers!

Posted by: Gary Fitzsimmons at March 27, 2005 07:03 PM

I think this should be thoroughly litigated -- even it takes years and years and years. We MUST have these procedures clarified so that an assistant precinct chairperson's deputy parliamentarian can have a clear, precise understanding of the county credential processes, sucession rules and those decisions' application to the Geneva Conventions and the World Court. Please, let's not devolve into anarchy! Elections come and go, but county party bylaws are what keep us a free nation!

Posted by: tina at March 27, 2005 07:56 PM

Mr. Fitzsimmons:

I don't appreciate the patronizing tone. I can read plain English, and I don't appreciate your insinuation that I am somehow not as much of a Democrat as you are just because I have concerns we could be mucking things up if further if we follow and do what the Concerned Democrats want to do.

I thought the "Concerned Democrats" wanted to have the Executive Committee name the temporary chair, not David Wilkins. Have they changed their tune after having read the law?

Do you dispute that the law says that call of a
meeting is "for the purpose of filling the vacancy."? How then can the agenda from the previous meeting be the one for the meeting called for the purpose of filling the vacancy?"

The state law does not say "only" the Secretary or the State Chair shall call the meeting. I talked to a lawyer Democrat about it a little while ago, and their opinion is that despite the use of the word "shall" in the law, the TDP rule Ms. Hays used to call the meeting doesn't conflict with the state law any more than regulations that add more detail to statutes do when they are written to allow for practical application of the statutes. The attorney also mentioned that court rules are a similiar example.

Despite who is right about who has the authority to call the meeting, it seems the Concerned Democrats don't want to completely follow the
law that they allege doesn't allow Ms. Hays to have called the meeting and appoint a temporary chair. The full text of Texas Election Code 171.025 is:

(a) If a vacancy occurs in the office of county chair, the secretary of the county executive committee shall call a meeting for the purpose of filling the vacancy. If a committee member files with the secretary a written request for a meeting to fill a vacancy, the secretary shall call the meeting to convene not later than the 20th day after the date the secretary receives the request.
(b) If the committee does not have a secretary or if after receiving a written request under Subsection (a) the secretary
fails to call the meeting, the state chair, on written request of a member of the county executive committee filed with the state
chair, shall call the meeting to convene not later than the 20th day after the date the chair receives the request.
(c) The authority calling the meeting shall notify each committee member in advance of the meeting of its time, place, and purpose.
(d) The authority calling the meeting shall designate a committee member as temporary chair, who shall call the meeting to order and preside until the vacancy is filled."

How can a vocal minority of the Executive Committee, or Mr. Molberg, have the power to ignore the party rule and declare that state law means something it clearly doesn't say, just because it fits their agenda to do so?

Despite your dismissal of the concerns people have about the party getting sued, isn't that a concern that should be addressed with seriousness? We don't need that to happen, and from what I understand, the Republican Party could be the ones to sue us. Do we really want to open ourselves up to that?

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 27, 2005 08:27 PM

Why are you so afraid of the agenda from the last meeting yellowdog?

Posted by: redcat at March 27, 2005 10:21 PM

I'm not afraid of it, but the petitioner's agenda is irrelevant and unnecessary now that Hays has resigned, and we need to stop the infighting and move on.

I don't see how an agenda that contains a petty, vindictive item on "Correcting the Congressional Record", that was originally put forward to publicly embarras Susan Hays so she would quit, helps us move the ball down the field towards victory in 2006, especially now that she has quit.

The party needs to focus on the business of finding a suitable replacement, and follow the the TDP rules and the law in the process.

We have a lot of work to do, and we don't need to be creating more unnecessary problems and embarassments that detract from what should be our mission of electing more Democrats.

We need to elect a new Chair this Saturday and start to heal the party. God help us to not look like complete idiots in front of the press on Saturday. We want voters to see us and decide to join us, not be turned off by churlishness and scared away from supporting our candidates because our public image frightens them.

Enough is enough. We have candidates and ordinary people depending on us to get our act together.

We are Democrats. We should be fighting Republicans, not each other.

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 27, 2005 11:50 PM

It is the committee's agenda. They voted to adopt it. Why is it irrelevant and unnecessary now that Hays has resigned? I think it is relevant and necessary. I think a correction of the record is in order. Why not? I think that is all many wanted in the first place. Not Susan's head. She admitted to her wrong doing didn't she? Why would she be against correcting the record? Why would any Democrat?

Posted by: redcat at March 28, 2005 12:26 AM

The petitoner's agenda from a month ago is not relevant to electing a new County Chair, and the the meeting is called for the purpose of filling the vacancy, which is what STATE LAW says the meeting is for. Period.

It would be absolutely stupid to pass a resolution to "Correct the Congressional Record" at this point. What would the resolution say? "The former County Chair meant what she said in the letter, but shouldn't have used party letterhead?" What good would that be? We'd look like fools to the public!

You have to remember that we are not a church excommunicating a member, and that what we do is public and widely watched by others, including the voters who we are ultimately appealing to.

How does a silly agenda item like that make us look good to the voters and help us elect our candidates? Isn't that what we are (hopefully) working together as Democrats to accomplish? Or are we simply trying to maintain a social club with membership limited to people who agree with who yells the loudest in a meeting?

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 28, 2005 01:10 AM

Even if Judge Ted Akin voted in the Republican Primary in the years that were listed, I understand he will be voting with us in the Democratic Primary in 2006 and beyond. He did not switch parties while serving as an elected Judge, like a number of others did. Over the years he was elected to County, District and Appeals Court positions, as a Democrat. He has also been a member of the Dallas Democratic Forum. Don't be surprised if he appears at our meeting on April 2.

Posted by: Tom Blackwell at March 28, 2005 05:38 AM

Purple Pete, Yellow Dog, Susan Hays, Sally Garcia, and Tony McMullin (whoever you are) I believe that I speak for other longtime Democrats in saying the Congressional Record will be corrected.

Sorry, we don't care about Susan being embarrassed. Her actions were outrageous and we as Dallas Democrats were embarrassed. I can't imagine any political party chair believing that it would be okay to use our name to give an opposing party candidate an endorsement.

Posted by: Yet Another Longtime Democrat at March 28, 2005 09:15 AM

YALD, you folks obviously don't care what the voters think either.

We need to keep our eye on the ball, which is appealing to voters and getting people elected!

Do you deny that is what our goal should be?

The petititioners are embarrassing the PARTY by continuing this charade.

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 28, 2005 12:05 PM

I agree that all of us must move on and work towards 2006. That I believe was the Reform Group's real goals.

As far as credientialing, I have no problem with Judge Chapman. Although he has been clearly biased towards the outgoing chair, I have know him for years and think he will do what is right over the Outgoing Chair's objections. I do have big problems with someone with a record of voting in the last 5 republican primaries having anything to do with the Dallas County Executive Committee. While I respect Tom Blackwell's opinion, I think Judge Akin needs to vote in one or two Democratic primaries before he can be considered a Democrat.

Running the meeting will be precinct chair Bob Franklin. I do not know Mr. Franklin and in my 23 years of activity in the DCDP, I do not believe I have met him. While I am sure that his intentions are good and I have no ill will towards him, I would like someone with a little more experience running our meeting. If we are to move on, we must destroy this partisan fight between ourselves. We are all Democrats, so who is really neutral?

A resolution correcting the Congressional Record is not only still necessary but a requirement for our county party to begin healing. The congressional record says that an endorsement of Michael Schneider has been made by the Dallas County Democratic Party, not by Susan Hays or DCDP Chair Susan Hays. While probably not a malicious error, nonetheless, it is an error that should be corrected. We are already looking like fools to Democrats across the state, for letting this go on. Making this correction is forthright and correct.

These incessant attacks by Tony McMullin (Yellow Dog, Purple Pete, or whatever he goes by lately) need to be condemned and stopped. If there is anything that is tearing our party apart, it is his pitiful attacks of people who have nothing but the good of the party at heart.

My question to Tony is why is he so insistant on electing a Party Chair at Saturday's meeting. What does have against the Democratic Process where candidates have time to campaign and work for the Precinct Chair's support and vote? Does Tony already have a candidate in mind? Who is this candidate?

Let us all move on, and forward to Victory in 2006.

Posted by: Michael Moon at March 28, 2005 12:09 PM

The Congressional Record will NOT be corrected, regardless of what you Dallas crackpots want!

Posted by: hottub at March 28, 2005 12:09 PM

Ain't gonna be no changing the Congressional Record, so you Dallas cry-babies can just drop the whole thing.

Posted by: isthereadoctorintheroom at March 28, 2005 12:20 PM

Yellow Dog:
I’m having a little bit of trouble understanding exactly what you want here. The meeting on the second is simply a continuation of the last meeting because we were unable to get through the agenda, which was meant to achieve aims outside of persuading Susan to resign. The only permanent vacancies we should be filling at this point are those of the numerous precinct chairs who were unable to be sworn in at the February 28 affair. I believe that we need more time to make a decision, and the most we should do at the April 2nd meeting in regard to this issue is elect an interim chair until David has had an opportunity to call a separate meeting specifically to fill the vacancy. But let’s entertain the idea that we might elect a permanent Chair at the April 2 meeting, who do you have in mind?

Posted by: Emily Beer at March 28, 2005 12:26 PM

John Wiley Price, Ken Molberg, John Pouland, Sally Cain, Daryl Jordon, Ron Chapman, Jerry Jones, Laura Miller, Ron Kirk, Byron LaMasters, Lupe Valdez, me, Terri Hodge, Martin Frost, Sandy Kress, Mark Cuban, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Dale Tillery, Fred Barron, or Ross Perot, Jr. would all be acceptable.

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 28, 2005 01:09 PM

We need to elect a new County Chair and get this whole sordid episode behind us. We don't need to drag it out for another 20 - 40 days beyond Saturday like the Concerned Democrats are proposing.

Besides, under state law, all it takes is one member of the Executive Committee to send a written request to David Wilkins, and David Wilkins MUST call a meeting to convene within 20 days for the purpose of filling the vacancy. If David Wilkins receives such a written request today, then the meeting to fill the vacancy could be held no later than Sunday, April 17th.

If David Wilkins is derelict in his duty and in full public view chooses to ignore state law and ignore the request, then the State Chair could be sent a request to call the meeting, and the State Chair would have to call the meeting to convene within 20 days of the request to him.

So, there seems to be a definite time limit on how long we have to elect a County Chair.

Let's not dilly dally around.

As far as who is the best person to replace Ms. Hays, I'm not sure. Have the people who ran her out on a rail lined someone up yet?

Posted by: Yellow Dog at March 28, 2005 01:12 PM

I've been watching this thing with interest, and I'm reminded of the joke of the dog that finally caught the bumper and didn't know what to do with it.

You folks up there in Dallas really have it going on!

Posted by: Jimmy Joe at March 28, 2005 01:18 PM

Although many of the comments above remind me of the apoplectic screeching of a disaffected member of the Progressive Populist Caucus just over 2 years ago, nonetheless, I take the positive view that all of the above indicate that Dallas Democrats are alive and energetic in 2005!
So, once we tackle the agenda adopted at the 28 Feb meeting--once we choose a temporary chair to run the meeting; once we install any candidates remaining to fill precinct vacancies; once we pass a motion to correct the Congressional Record--we can entertain motions for a Temporary DCDP Chair until an election is held at a later date to fill the vacancy.
In the meantime, refusing to dive into a bubbling pool of vitriol, I am going forward with my duties as Precinct Coordinator for TX House District 104; as a Progressive Populist; as a Stonewall Democrat; and as a Dallas County Democrat. And I would suggest that others do something similar: focus energies on opposition research about county ReThuglican office-holders; protest down in Austin as we enter the truly dangerous weeks when the legislative crazies get serious about keeping Texas at the bottom in everything that matters--fighting with Alabama and Mississippi for last place; volunteer in a City Council campaign or one for Commissioner's Court; find more precinct chairs!!!; and help train the onoes we have!!!
This episode, too, shall pass...and Dallas County Democrats will continue to emerge stronger and more unified!

Posted by: John Tackaberry of Lone Star Matters at March 28, 2005 01:36 PM

The two postings regarding the Congressional Record seem to be from our "esteemed" Republican leaders in the House and Senate, if their email address can be believed. Does this not give everyone pause about how far reaching this mess become? As for correcting the Congressional Record, authorities tell me that it cannot be done. The best we could expect is to have a Democratic congressman read into the record something to the effect that Susan's letter did not represent the Dallas County Party and that she used the letterhead inappropriately. This is all you can get! Is it worth all this in-fighting when we are already the laughing stocks of the country. Get a grip! Let's get a new chair elected as soon as possible in the most organized, resonable way possible. Remember not only the party faithful, but the press and our opposition are all watching how we handle all of this!

Posted by: Lenna Webb at March 28, 2005 01:51 PM

Actually, you can put any email address in the email address window, see my email address for this post. I doubt if either of those folks actually wrote those emails or even care.

But actually, the wording of the Congressional Record can be corrected and it should be, that is the only true and fair thing.

And actually we are not the laughing stock of the country. we are the laughing stock of Texas Democrats for letting this joke go on as long as we have. The SDEC tried to pass a state-wide condemnation of Susan at the last SDEC meeting, but our Dallas SDEC members (including Theresa an Ken) asked for it not to be presented as "we would take care of that situation ourselves". As has been done.

The Dallas GOP had a big fight in the party over some internal power struggle. The DMN ran one story on it and three years later, no one even remembers it, or even cares.

And we are supposed to care what the DMN thinks.

The same newspaper that endorsed Beth Maultsby over Dennise Garcia, endorsed Cliff Stricklen over Don Adams, and Bill Rhea over Lorraine Raggio.

Me thinks Dallas Democrats are made of much sterner stuff.

Michael Moon

Posted by: Michael T. Moon at March 28, 2005 03:17 PM

Lenna is exactly correct about the Congressional Record. However, if Dallas County Party activists want to play "connect-the-dots" then consider:

Susan Hays wrote a favorable letter for Judge Michael Schneider, whose wife is ...

Mary Schneider, the former state director for Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and whose name used to be ...

Mary Toomey, when she was married to ...

Mike Toomey, the lobbyist who was chief of staff to Governor Rick Perry, who first appointed Mike Schneider to the Texas Supreme Court and also helped mastermind redistricting for Congressional seats in Washington ...

for which Tom DeLay was grateful, although the majority leader had no say in the Senate confirmation process of ...

Mike Schneider, now a confirmed federal judge who was guided through Senate confirmation by Senator John Cornyn and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who ...

was videotaped by Perry operatives with Hilary Clinton, who ...

said nice things about Senator Hutchison and even gave her an air kiss ...

which is much less serious than the kind of kisses received by her husband, former President Bill Clinton, who ...

has been hanging out with tsunami victims along with former President George H.W. Bush, who ...

is the father of current President George W. Bush, who ...

appointed Mike Schneider to the federal bench and who ...

before he became Governor lived in Dallas, which is ...

the exact same city in which Susan Hays lives!

Coincidence? Not a chance.

In fact, I hear that the whole Bush family, Rick Perry, Kay and Ray Hutchison, Mike and Mary Schneider, Mike Toomey and Hilary R. and William J. Clinton are all getting together this weekend for a group grope at Susan Hays' house in Dallas. Whoever wins the nekkid jello-wrestling match gets to be Dallas County Democratic Party Chairperson. Runner-up gets to spend a wild weekend with Chelsea and the Bush Twins.

If I had an invite, I would try to finish second on purpose!

Posted by: Ed at March 28, 2005 03:32 PM

Lenna is exactly correct about the Congressional Record. However, if Dallas County Party activists want to play "connect-the-dots" then consider:

Susan Hays wrote a favorable letter for Judge Michael Schneider, whose wife is ...

Mary Schneider, the former state director for Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and whose name used to be ...

Mary Toomey, when she was married to ...

Mike Toomey, the lobbyist who was chief of staff to Governor Rick Perry, who first appointed Mike Schneider to the Texas Supreme Court and also helped mastermind redistricting for Congressional seats in Washington ...

for which Tom DeLay was grateful, although the majority leader had no say in the Senate confirmation process of ...

Mike Schneider, now a confirmed federal judge who was guided through Senate confirmation by Senator John Cornyn and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who ...

was videotaped by Perry operatives with Hilary Clinton, who ...

said nice things about Senator Hutchison and even gave her an air kiss ...

which is much less serious than the kind of kisses received by her husband, former President Bill Clinton, who ...

has been hanging out with tsunami victims along with former President George H.W. Bush, who ...

is the father of current President George W. Bush, who ...

appointed Mike Schneider to the federal bench and who ...

before he became Governor lived in Dallas, which is ...

the exact same city in which Susan Hays lives!

Coincidence? Not a chance.

In fact, I hear that the whole Bush family, Rick Perry, Kay and Ray Hutchison, Mike and Mary Schneider, Mike Toomey and Hilary R. and William J. Clinton are all getting together this weekend for a group grope at Susan Hays' house in Dallas. Whoever wins the nekkid jello-wrestling match gets to be Dallas County Democratic Party Chairperson. Runner-up gets to spend a wild weekend with Chelsea and the Bush Twins.

If I had an invite, I would try to finish second on purpose!

Posted by: ed at March 28, 2005 03:36 PM

Request to Dallas Democrats – let’s avoid hollow victories

For Dallas Democrats today’s holiday should be a reminder that the time has come to reflect on the importance of putting our differences aside and working together for our common good. To the leadership of the Concerned Democrats of Dallas I would remind you that you have achieved your goals of replacing our party leadership and instituting a new party organizational structure. Now is the time to show greater leadership and to reach out beyond your base and work together with the other executive members to ensure a successful 4/2 meeting and party transition.

We all know that the eye of the media will be watching us and will happily report our failings. On April 2nd we desperately need to have a successful meeting. Executive members regardless of what their position was on Ms. Hay’s leadership must come together to achieve the greater goals of our party. There is hope for future party harmony, last Monday’s (3/21) the Dallas County Advisory Committee meeting was a positive step forward. I am glad to report that this meeting witnessed a high spirit of cooperation regarding the development of a comprehensive sub-committee structure to draft the party’s strategic 2 year plan.

A successful meeting starts with one agenda, podium, process to review credentials etc. If we are unable to agree before the meeting on these basic meeting logistics, we will fail. Bob Franklin, who was neutral on the Party Chair matter has been appointed to be the interim chair by Ms. Hays, is working diligently on doing the necessary pre-work to ensure a successful meeting. He has asked that the leaders of the Concerned Democrats to work with him to prepare for the meeting, to decide on mutual agenda and the guidelines to review credentials, election proposals etc. To the Concerned Democrats, please work with Bob Franklin and others on preparing for the 4/2 meeting and lets move forward.

Anthony Pace
Precinct Chair 1811

Posted by: Anthony Pace at March 28, 2005 03:37 PM


On most of your points, I am in agreement. There is just one agenda, the petitioner's agenda. That meeting has not been completed yet. One of the first orders of business is to appoint precinct chairs, conduct new business, hear elected officials speak and adjourn.

I understand there was a meeting last week where the same folks that told people to walk out and break quorum and now calling folks and telling them not to attend in order to break quorum once again.

I would hope that you would publicly condemn the actions of these few insurgents who for whatever reason are planning another quorum bust.

Posted by: Michael Moon at March 28, 2005 04:04 PM

As I said in an email to our club today, North Dallas Democrats (House District) 102, I am strongly encouraging all precinct chairs to attend the 4/2 meeting. We need to deal with the issues at hand once and for all and do it in a civilized manner. If anyone asked me about boycotting the 4/2 meeting, I would tell them straight on that this will not resolve our issues and will not allow us to move forward.

Also believe its best to elect a permanent party chair at this meeting, have candidates present their case why they should be elected and then have the election. This would avoid the nasty logistics and tensions of trying to put another meeting together in a very short period of time. Instead our new Party Chair can begin to plan and the much needed healing our party can then begin.


Posted by: Anthony Pace at March 28, 2005 04:36 PM

Anthony and Michael are both wrong! We need to fight this out until one faction or another has control of the three computers, one fax line and five SBC connections that the DCDP owns!

Posted by: anon at March 28, 2005 06:40 PM

For what its worth, we are going to have a meeting, and I see no harm in having a temporary chair for 30-45 days while people want to "campaign" for the position. On the other hand, if a clear consensus emerges at the meeting, then we can move forward and elect him/her.

Obviously we need to make a threshold decision at the meeting on whether to elect a temporary chair or a permanent one. I say we wait until the meeting, see who is interested and the case can be made at the meeting on whether to elect a temporary or permanent chair.

As far as the other business, the FIRST thing should be to swear in new precinct chairs - this is critical and should have been done at the last meeting. The rest of the business should take 15 minutes tops and then we can make a decision on how to proceed with a new chair.

We have a lot of work do be done in the next several months - let's get past this and roll our sleeves up.

Carl Ginsberg
Precinct 3200

Posted by: Carl Ginsberg at March 28, 2005 09:52 PM

Please observe - 4 of the last 5 posts were signed, civil and contained sincere discussion of rational points of view. Agreement or disagreement of a point does not require sarcasm, pettiness, hatred, bitterness. Agreement or disagreement does not require vicious attacks on other good Democrats (or their motives) from anyone.

Also observe that the only really silly posting among the last 5 was done by 'anon'.

I'm asking every Democrat who really wants to engage in the constructive work ahead of us to self-control the urge to hide your anger behind an alias. If you don't have the courage to attach your identity to your words, perhaps the words should not be used.

My theory is that only 2 or 3 actual Democrats have viciously and anonymously attacked other Democrats and they should be ashamed of themselves. I believe most of the bile appearing in these blogs must have come from republicans or their sympathizers.

I do not believe that putting your name to it will eliminate all anger - I understand passion. It may lead you to try to use some of the good manners your mothers taught you and to not shame yourselves behind anonymity. Every little bit of civility helps and you will be healthier for using it.

Remember, Richard Nixon said one true thing as he was leaving office - I paraphrase. Don't hate your enemies. It will destroy you.

Let me include John Tackaberry's blog as a recent example of decency. I agree with John's optimism about our future.

Posted by: Jean Ball at March 29, 2005 11:07 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

May 2005
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

About Us
Advertising Policies


Tip Jar!

Recent Entries
BOR Edu.
University of Texas
University Democrats

BOR News
The Daily Texan
The Statesman
The Chronicle

BOR Politics
DNC Blog: Kicking Ass
DSCC Blog: From the Roots
DCCC Blog: The Stakeholder
Texas Dems
Travis County Dems

U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett
State Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos
State Rep. Dawnna Dukes
State Rep. Elliott Naishtat
State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez
State Rep. Mark Strama
Linked to BOR!
Alexa Rating
Truth Laid Bear Ecosystem
Technoranti Link Cosmos
Blogstreet Blogback
American Research Group
Annenberg Election Survey
Polling Report
Rasmussen Reports
Survey USA
Texas Stuff
A Little Pollyana
Austin Bloggers
DFW Bogs
DMN Blog
In the Pink Texas
Inside the Texas Capitol
The Lasso
Pol State TX Archives
Quorum Report Daily Buzz
George Strong Political Analysis
Texas Law Blog
Texas Monthly
Texas Observer
TX Dem Blogs
100 Monkeys Typing
Alt 7
Appalachia Alumni Association
Barefoot and Naked
BAN News
Betamax Guillotine
Blue Texas
Border Ass News
The Daily DeLay
The Daily Texican
Dos Centavos
Drive Democracy Easter Lemming
Get Donkey
Greg's Opinion
Half the Sins of Mankind
Jim Hightower
Hugo Zoom
Latinos for Texas
Off the Kuff
Ones and Zeros
Panhandle Truth Squad
Aaron Peńa's Blog
People's Republic of Seabrook
Pink Dome
The Red State
Rhetoric & Rhythm
Rio Grande Valley Politics
Save Texas Reps
Skeptical Notion
Something's Got to Break
Stout Dem Blog
The Scarlet Left
Tex Prodigy
View From the Left
Yellow Doggeral Democrat
TX GOP Blogs
Beldar Blog
Blogs of War
Boots and Sabers
Dallas Arena
Jessica's Well
Lone Star Times
Publius TX
Safety for Dummies
The Sake of Arguement
Slightly Rough
Daily Reads
ABC's The Note
BOP News
Daily Kos
Media Matters
NBC's First Read
Political State Report
Political Animal
Political Wire
Talking Points Memo
CBS Washington Wrap
Matthew Yglesias
College Blogs
CDA Blog
Get More Ass (Brown)
Dem Apples (Harvard)
KU Dems
U-Delaware Dems
UNO Dems
Stanford Dems
GLBT Blogs
American Blog
Boi From Troy
Margaret Cho
Downtown Lad
Gay Patriot
Raw Story
Stonewall Dems
Andrew Sullivan
More Reads
Living Indefinitely
Blogroll Burnt Orange!
BOR Webrings
< ? Texas Blogs # >
<< ? austinbloggers # >>
« ? MT blog # »
« ? MT # »
« ? Verbosity # »
Election Returns
CNN 1998 Returns
CNN 2000 Returns
CNN 2002 Returns
CNN 2004 Returns

state elections 1992-2005

bexar county elections
collin county elections
dallas county elections
denton county elections
el paso county elections
fort bend county elections
galveston county elections
harris county elections
jefferson county elections
tarrant county elections
travis county elections

Texas Media
abilene reporter news

alpine avalanche

amarillo globe news

austin american statesman
austin chronicle
daily texan online
keye news (cbs)
kut (npr)
kvue news (abc)
kxan news (nbc)
news 8 austin

beaumont enterprise

brownsville herald

college station
the battalion (texas a&m)

corpus christi
corpus christi caller times
kris news (fox)
kztv news (cbs)

crawford lone star iconoclast

dallas-fort worth
dallas morning news
dallas observer
dallas voice
fort worth star-telegram
kdfw news (fox)
kera (npr)
ktvt news (cbs)
nbc5 news
wfaa news (abc)

del rio
del rio news herald

el paso
el paso times
kdbc news (cbs)
kfox news (fox)
ktsm (nbc)
kvia news (abc)

galveston county daily news

valley morning star

houston chronicle
houston press
khou news (cbs)
kprc news (nbc)
ktrk news (abc)

laredo morning times

lockhart post-register

lubbock avalanche journal

lufkin daily news

marshall news messenger

the monitor

midland - odessa
midland reporter telegram
odessa american

san antonio
san antonio express-news

seguin gazette-enterprise

texarkana gazette

tyler morning telegraph

victoria advocate

kxxv news (abc)
kwtx news (cbs)
waco tribune-herald

krgv news (nbc)

texas cable news
texas triangle

World News
ABC News
All Africa News
Arab News
Atlanta Constitution-Journal
News.com Australia
BBC News
Boston Globe
CBS News
Chicago Tribune
Christian Science Monitor
Denver Post
FOX News
Google News
The Guardian
Inside China Today
International Herald Tribune
Japan Times
LA Times
Mexico Daily
Miami Herald
New Orleans Times-Picayune
New York Times
El Pais (Spanish)
San Francisco Chronicle
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Times of India
Toronto Star
Wall Street Journal
Washington Post

Powered by
Movable Type 3.15