Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Trouble at UCSD: We Have To Help These Kids

Anyone who has immersed themselves in political life knows that the toughest and dirtiest battles are not fought at the top of the food chain, but the bottom. The watchful eyes of the media largely keep our elected officials in check, but when absolutely no-one is watching, you create the potential for one of the most toxic political environments in the country. I’m speaking, of course, about the College Republicans.

The vast majority of CRs are great people, but there are far too many of us (myself included) who come out scarred and jaded after watching four years of shameless backstabbing, political vendettas, and routine corruption. Often, those who claw their way to the top of the garbage pile go on to become our most aggressive and successful strategists - Karl Rove was national chairman in the 1970s, and Lee Atwater managed his campaign for that office. However, for every Karl Rove, there are probably ten young activists who end up fleeing the cesspool. Most of the time, we “grown-ups” shrug off their antics, because “they’re just college kids” – but eventually somebody has to stand up and say that our young leaders deserve better than to be treated like dog feces. The CRs are an integral part of the party’s operations, and they need to be subject to the same ethical standards we apply to anyone else.

Unfortunately, the only way this situation was going to get the attention it deserved was if it spun far so far out of control that it became newsworthy – and sadly, the California College Republicans (CCR) have finally reached that low. I’ve spent the last several days interviewing people familiar with the situation, and frankly I have been shocked and disgusted by actions of that organization’s leadership.

A plethora of strange and twisted events have occurred in the last few months, all of them connected with the CCR State Committee’s desire to influence the election of their successors - but in order to understand the full scale of the issue, I want to begin with the biggest act of corruption I have ever witnessed in College Republicans:

Last Thursday the CCR State Committee voted 6-1 to revoke the charter of the College Republicans at the University of California–San Diego (UCSD). As a result, all of the members of the UCSD chapter (30 active, over 500 on the mailing list) have been effectively kicked out of College Republicans, and a full 10% of the electorate at the state convention (and a key center of opposition to the incumbents) was eliminated in the blink of an eye. The flippant expulsion of these kids should be enough to provoke outrage – but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. A quick look at the months leading up to this travesty reveals a sordid tale of corruption and intrigue that would rival the most imaginative works of political fiction.

The whole thing started near the end of last year, when I had the chance opportunity to befriend a young intern by the name of Sarah Johnson (we stayed in the same intern dormitory her in DC) – while I was just getting out of college, Sarah was a wide-eyed 18-year-old who would soon be a freshman at UCSD. We talked a lot about CRs, as I had just finished my career (I was the chapter chairman at my college), and she had been receiving strange Facebook messages about the UCSD CRs impeaching several officers. At the time, we laughed it off - but when she got back to San Diego, she found out that she was not dealing with a run-of-the-mill CR squabble. As she told me Friday, she had “walked into a war zone”.

As it turned out, those Facebook messages she showed me were the first shots in the mother of all collegiate conflagrations. There had, in fact, been an underhanded attempt to impeach the CR chairwoman at UCSD, Dejah Stanley – and it backfired in a big way. Inez Feltscher, who succeeded Miss Stanley as chairwoman, gave me the run-down on the circus that followed. Apparently, one of the club’s Vice Chairs, Megan Rodriguez, wanted Stanley gone (most of the club didn’t). Hence, she called a meeting to impeach Stanley, where the articles of impeachment were convincingly voted down. However, this technicality did not stop the instigators from Facebooking the entire club to notify them that Stanley had been voted out of office. The rest of the club was none too pleased with this stunt, and promptly called a meeting where Stanley’s leadership was affirmed and Rodriguez was unanimously impeached as Vice-Chair - YouTube video of the vote was even made available to prove the integrity of the process. Rodriguez, however, decided not to recognize her removal and insists to this day that she is still the club’s Vice Chair for External Affairs. She was also a member of the CCR State Committee, and she decided to use her connection to make life hell for the club - that’s when the hard-core sleaziness started.

According to Feltscher, members of the UCSD CRs started receiving threatening phone calls from CCR state officials, telling them that (among other things) their involvement in Rodriguez’s impeachment would prevent them from ever working in politics again. As the problems got worse, the UCSD CRs found themselves on the outs with the state committee, and they ended up endorsing “Red State Rising”, a slate of state committee candidates running against the incumbent-endorsed slate (known as “Revolutionize CCR”). At this point, they found out that they were subject to an even bigger state committee vendetta – this one aimed at crushing “Red State Rising” in the election.

I got the details on this second sub-plot from Adam Ellison, head of “Red State Rising” and their candidate for State Chairman. RSR has also experienced the strong arm-tactics employed by certain members of the State leadership, this time in their capacity as representatives of the “Revolutionize CCR” campaign. At the state’s annual Republican convention, one state co-chair even went so far as to imply that physical violence could occur against a consultant for Red State Rising.

Then again, that wouldn’t be terribly surprising to anyone frequenting the comments section at The Dana Report, one of the only blogs covering the election. State Co-Chair Leigh Wolf is a frequent commenter, as are other people involved in the race, and you’d be amazed at the comment threats being fired off on one post written after that convention. One commenter asks another “Alec, are you the dude that got thrashed by Leigh Wolf after passing around some random s*** at the CCR meeting? Saw the camera… just wondering.” Mr. Wolf then responds “Yes he was. You’re a sniveling weasel Alec. Bring that trash to the CCR convention, I dare you.” Another shocked commenter than asks if Wolf is making a threat, and receives a rather chilling response: “Yes Matt Schenk it is a threat. I’m glad you picked that up... I will publicly embarrass and make famous anyone who puts their own agenda before CCR at the expense of CCR’s reputation. So i repeat to (name deleted), Bring that trash to the CCR convention, i dare you.” I might add here was that the person was merely distributing literature noting that impeached UCSD Vice-Chair Megan Rodriguez, now a top-ranking “Revolutionize CCR” candidate, had no business masquerading as a sitting vice-chair of the USCD College Republicans…which brings us back to the plot that resulted in dozens of innocent CRs being thrown out of the organization.

Somewhere in the middle of this debacle, Club Treasurer (and Rodriquez ally) Chelsea Green resigned from the UCSD club along with a few lackeys. She then removed all of the other officers from the club’s bank account and commandeered it for her own use. While the university did ensure that the account was eventually returned to its proper owners, Green did manage to withdraw $500 before ceding back control. Coincidentally, she was also able to form a rival “College Republicans” club (with herself as chair) the very same day. At this point, I should probably tell you about the bogus restraining order filed against a member of the UCSD CRs (thrown out in court), but that would interrupt the story.

The renegades then set out on a quest to get their old club de-chartered by the state committee - not a bad plan, considering that they could abuse Megan Rodriguez’s connections. So, they compiled a mailing list of “members” by trading signatures for Red Bull during finals week. They have yet to use that mailing list, despite being in existence for several months - nor have they even hold single meeting - but they did amass a “membership list” to submit to the state committee in their bid to steal the UCSD charter. So, the state organization scheduled a “debate” between the two clubs to determine which was the “legitimate” holder of the UCSD charter.

Now, one would think that preference would be given to the larger club with a 23 year history. However, through a rather amazing feat of intellectual gymnastics, the charter was awarded to the upstarts who don’t even bother to have meetings. Here’s how it went: First, the committee validated the invalid impeachment of Chairwoman Dejah Stanley (remember her?). Then, they declared that, because the club refused to recognize that impeachment, all actions taken by the club afterward were illegitimate. This invalidated the subsequent impeachment of Megan Rodriguez, meaning that the club could now be charged with preventing their suddenly-unimpeached vice-chair from performing her duties. Furthermore, the committee deemed that, as the rebels did recognize the impeachment of Dejah Stanley, they were the only legitimate CRs at the school.

Personally, I find this entire process appalling – these people are supposed to be the future of our party, and nobody will even slap them on the wrist for unjustly expelling an entire chapter. Not only that, but the chapter was disbanded largely for reasons that had nothing to do with the UCSD feud. Yes, that was the excuse, but I’m guessing that the primary reason had far more to do with eliminating voters who were going to oppose “Revolutionize CCR” in this month’s elections.

It’s high time that somebody stood up to these punks, and I personally am willing to flog this issue until something is done about it. If “Revolutionize CCR” and their state committee friends want to play hardball, then let’s play hardball. From here on in, I’m on a mission to make them famous. Any slimy move they make will be blogged about, fed to my Twitter followers, sent to my mailing list, and forwarded to my media contacts. The only thing that these people are “revolutionizing” is ham-fisted, Chicago-style machine politics, and our kids deserve better than that.

College Republicans is supposed to be a place where our young activists learn about the principles of our party - but if this travesty is allowed to stand, then the only thing they’ll learn is that Red Bull does indeed give you wings. We need to do everything we can to get these kids back into CRs (and maybe throw out the bums that did this to them) – and there is no time like the present to get moving.

82 comments:

  1. This is pretty crazy! When we were involved with CR's there was inter fighting, but nothing compared to this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Four years ago this week (in fact this past Sunday was the four-year anniversary), fraud extraodinaire Ward Churchill spoke here at EWU. Our departing school pres (Stephen Jordan, now president at Metro State in Denver) was given the Bush treatment on the way out for his decision not to cave in to Churchill's demands, which actually, believe it or not, included an armored tank!

    Needless to say, the CRs don't really exist here after three tries. Then again, the Young Democrats started up and went belly-up about four or five times too since I've been here. Not that this isn't a political (uber-leftist) campus, it's just that especially now all the leftie kiddies really have nothing to cry about in the "Hope/Change" era. Of course the more Chris Gregoire plunges the state into hell (which will affect our funding) this will change, at least in theory.

    Now correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it UCSD who "accidentally" sent welcome letters to about 20,000 rejected applicants last week? Maybe the CR "leadership" is one with them. Too bad, I've been to UCSD, pretty nice campus up there in the hills north of La Jolla. If I had been able to afford to live down there, there's a chance I would gone there (USD and SDSU are pretty nice too but I probably couldn't have afforded either of them).

    ReplyDelete
  3. As a UCSD CR alumni, I cannot tell you how upset and disillusioned this whole sorry affair has made me.

    It has certainly been an eye opener. I now know better than to be surprised when backstabbing happens, even among people who supposedly hold the same political views that I do.

    Dishonorable snakes can be found anywhere, it seems.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One more thing, when you think about it, are you really surprised this is the case? The WA GOP is horrible, so the WCRF follows suit (outside of Wazzu, which, not surprisingly, is mostly independent of the group). In CA, look at the style of conservatism the Republican leader of the state is promoting. So I would assume the CA GOP is even more hopeless (and the CCRs following suit).

    We need a conservative (not R) party in 2012. I'm tiring of giving Michael Steele chances when all he wants to do is BET-ize the GOP here, MTV it there, and if these guys are going to follow suit the hell with them too. Now true, third parties in the U.S. don't even register as afterthoughts (with a few exceptions), but if you got enough heavy hitters like Sarah, Mike Pence, Bobby Jindal, Mark Sanford, and so on and so forth then you'd see them matter.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It serves you nutcases right. Ha ha! What's even more fun is that this overwrought posting of yours never mentioned any issues. It's all personalities with you rightwingnuts. You deserve your fate, crazies!

    ReplyDelete
  6. And who exactly might you be, Trollkulus? You should talk about personalitlies with your incompetent cult-of-personality-in-chief.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh...look...a troll...yawn

    Please note that the post is a condemnation of unethical personality politics

    ReplyDelete
  8. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 7, 2009 at 1:55 PM

    From my understanding of the facts, asking these questions to Feltcher should get you to the bottom of the story at UCSD. I live in SF so i only heard what Feltcher and Rodriguez said on the phone call.

    Would Feltcher support re-instating Deja as UCSD Chair? Why or why not?
    Did deja stanley "Lose" club funds?
    Were there non-UCSD students that showed up from other schools that voted against megan rodriguez?

    And let's cut the crap here, I'm a Marine, i'm shipping out in October, i really couldn't care less about UCSD's infighting. I've got much bigger concerns to deal with. What i do care about is the infighting spilling out into public view, for example, our CCR board meeting at CRP. Its unprofessional and childish and i won't allow it at my meetings.

    I got a good chuckle out of the way you danced around my alleged physical threats. I know it sounds sexy and probably gets hits to say i threatened to hurt someone but, trust me Brickley, Alec Wiseman is not worth getting kicked out of the Marine Corps.

    I wonder why Adam would fabricate an attack against me, someone who he describes as "the best CR in the state" and "a perfect example of what a CR should be."

    PS, I'd be more than happy to talk to you on the phone or via e-mail. Unless this is a blind hit piece I imagine you'll be more than willing to hear the other side.
    Leighwolf@mac.com

    ReplyDelete
  9. Get to the point. I didn't read this because I have no interest in sitting through ten paras in order to find out what the issue is.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As a person newly introduced to this conflict: Leigh Wolf's comment reads as though he "doth protesteth too much." For all his professions of apathy, "I'm-a-Marine-I'm-on-my-way-out-so-I-don't-care" etc., he certainly cared enough to aid in revoking the charter of a long-established member of the state organization for reasons that baffle the casual reader. If there are better reasons than those listed here by Brickley, please, let him enlighten us. Because if this sequence of events played out more or less the way they are characterized here, it sounds like CCR is lucky he's being deployed. Our young conservative leadership could do without his (and other responsible CCR board members') brand of corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow, you usually only see stuff like that in Third Party Politics

    ReplyDelete
  12. leigh I find it interesting that you are commenting on here and no one else from your "club" is. Does that make you the official spokesperson?

    "Were there non-UCSD students that showed up from other schools that voted against megan rodriguez?"

    This did not happen, because if I remember clearly megan and ronsen handed out the voting slips and had multi colored papers for people on their lists. NO ONE from another school voted!! Maybe if you actually did your homework you would have known that.

    as for your threats You will notice that adam did link the article and comments from dana report. You very clearly stated threats on there. Next time you might want to control your anger. Its unbecoming of an officer!!!

    as for this: "Did deja stanley "Lose" club funds?" do you even have evidence of this or is it all hearsay from your precious emerald on your board??

    Seriously when you go to court you have to prove yourself with evidence. hearsay isn't accepted, geesh are you people on the ccr board that naive and unintelligent???

    "And let's cut the crap here, I'm a Marine, i'm shipping out in October, i really couldn't care less about UCSD's infighting."

    Obviously you do otherwise you wouldn't be making so many comments about it on here or on dana report.

    Leigh once again you've proven yourself as someone who isn't educated on the issues at hand. Its time that California takes a stance and looks for change and thank god it isn't you for a second term!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 7, 2009 at 3:15 PM

    "Faith Adams" You're lucky i'm getting deployed? You're god damn right you are. I'm putting my ass on the line so assholes like you can sit behind your computer and run your mouth. I'm glad red state rising supporters are so willing to kick me in the ass on my way out to a combat zone.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM

    WOOPS, Looks like someone forgot to put their name on their post, Allow me to correct:

    Inez Feltcher Said....

    leigh I find it interesting that you are commenting on here and no one else from your "club" is. Does that make you the official spokesperson?

    "Were there non-UCSD students that showed up from other schools that voted against megan rodriguez?"

    This did not happen, because if I remember clearly megan and ronsen handed out the voting slips and had multi colored papers for people on their lists. NO ONE from another school voted!! Maybe if you actually did your homework you would have known that.

    as for your threats You will notice that adam did link the article and comments from dana report. You very clearly stated threats on there. Next time you might want to control your anger. Its unbecoming of an officer!!!

    as for this: "Did deja stanley "Lose" club funds?" do you even have evidence of this or is it all hearsay from your precious emerald on your board??

    Seriously when you go to court you have to prove yourself with evidence. hearsay isn't accepted, geesh are you people on the ccr board that naive and unintelligent???

    "And let's cut the crap here, I'm a Marine, i'm shipping out in October, i really couldn't care less about UCSD's infighting."

    Obviously you do otherwise you wouldn't be making so many comments about it on here or on dana report.

    Leigh once again you've proven yourself as someone who isn't educated on the issues at hand. Its time that California takes a stance and looks for change and thank god it isn't you for a second term!

    ReplyDelete
  15. excuse me that wasnt Inez! why dont you try again

    ReplyDelete
  16. This sorry affair, and the participants who deem themselves above reproach for doing underhanded things, is pathetic.

    Seems the thirst for power starts at a young age.

    Learn and practice principles, people.

    Otherwise, you're no better than Democrats, and we don't need corrupt individuals like you.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, that wasn't me. I have better capitalization, and I certainly don't post anything anonymously. One thing I do appreciate about Leigh is that he always has the guts to sign his name, as do I.

    ReplyDelete
  18. LOL, Leigh is a girls name. Which brings up another point. This is what happens when you let women run things.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I do have to say Ms. Adams that it is wrong to insult Leigh on his military standing in any way. I am a large supporter of our armed forces and even with this whole mess going on I would like to thank Leigh for the contribution he is making for our country. So please, if you are going to comment do not stoop to debasing any member of our armed forces.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Apparently being in the marines isn't everything.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "I’ve spent the last several days interviewing people familiar with the situation"

    Who did you interview? Did you interview anyone who wasn't an Inez/Dejah supporter? I'm making this anonymous, but that shouldn't discredit the question, it is an unbiased question to find out who all your sources on this fairly elaborate story were.

    ReplyDelete
  22. So... I will be a Senior transfer student to Fresno State (CSU - Fresno) next year.

    All this he-said/she-said shit makes me not want to join CRs (which is HUGE because I'm PR Director of CRs here at my home campus in Eau Claire, WI) when I transfer.

    Look at what you're portraying to out-of-state people, like me. You guys better figure this shit out or you're going to lose members, and lose them quickly.

    Re-establish UCSD's charter, be ADULTS, and MOVE ON from this stupid middle school drama that you all should have graduated from.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Great job, Adam. See what you started?:)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Liegh you cant claim your not bias and that you don't care when you have endorsed the other slate "Revolutionize" the slate Megan is running on because you look like an idiot!

    ReplyDelete
  25. This is my statement in regards to the article on the Dana Report which focuses on this issue:
    http://danareport.com/2009/04/07/internal-cr-politics-gets-heated-ahead-of-ca-state-convention/

    - Alec Weisman
    Social Coordinator, College Republicans at UCSD

    The Dana Report is merely the propaganda machine for Revolutionize CCR, and here it is just spinning it's wheels. Not only should most of what comes from the Dana Report be disregarded because they endorsed Revolutionize CCR (1) and have yet to provide any unbiased coverage, their "Contributors" (2) have repeatedly smeared and threatened myself and others from my club repeatedly. Not only this, every one of the contributors to the Dana Report is either running on the Revolutionize CCR slate or has endorsed them.

    Anton, St. Mary’s College, Candidate for Chairman of California College Republicans - Revolutionize CCR Bio
    Clinton, Palomar, Appointee for Communications Director for California College Republicans - Revolutionize CCR Bio
    Falicia, University of Southern California, Candidate for Co-Chair of California College Republicans - Revolutionize CCR Bio
    Megan, UC San Diego, Candidate for Administrative Vice-Chair of California College Republicans - Revolutionize CCR Bio
    Leigh, San Fransisco State, Co-Chairman California College Republicans
    Steve, University of Southern California, Chairman USC GOP

    Now to the Dana Report article. Dejah was never impeached. The allegations that are made in their rebuttal that people who were not "non-UCSD students and non-CRs, many of whom cast “provisional” ballots against impeachment" are blatantly untrue. True members who were not UCSD students were in attendance, but it was to serve as witnesses, and only three ballots were cast as "provisional," and not one of them changed the difference of the vote. DEJAH STANLEY was not impeached.

    However later that evening, Ronsen Yako, the secretary at the time, sent out an unofficial email to the club where he claims Dejah was impeached. It was for this action, as well as for refusing to hand over meeting minutes and attendance sheets when requested, that he was impeached. As per our previous constitution, a person must be notified that they will be impeached seven days prior to a vote actually occurring, however their presence is not required for the vote to occur. Not only did Mrs. Rodriguez and Mr. Yako refuse to show, they did not send anyone to attempt to defend their actions, and although they were called at the meeting so that we could attempt to understand their position, neither picked up their phone (they had been ignoring calls from club members since their failed coup to impeach Dejah).

    The Dana Report alleges that the club headed by our Chair, Inez Feltscher has crumbled, and yet it is a club that has been meeting for nearly twenty five years, and met weekly this entire year, while you completely disregard the fact that the "Triton College Republicans" have not held any meetings to date, and only recruited their membership list by passing our red bulls during finals week.

    Also technically the CCR Excutive Committee has been very sketchy with their own rules, especially the sections regarding Regional Vice Chairs, which state:

    Things Not to Do (3)
    • Never interfere in a club when you are unwanted
    • Do not take sides in civil wars
    • Do not dictate to campus leaders how they should run their organization
    • Do not sponsor leadership coups

    It also happens that the Dana Report claim that "It happens that some of the members of the CCR Executive Committee are running on the Revolutionize CCR slate, including Rodriguez, while Feltscher and her group have endorsed their opponents, Red State Rising. What this has to do with the outcome of the vote is beyond me, unless you’re prone to conspiracy theories." is bogus, because EVERYONE on that phone call is either on Revolutionize CCR or has endorsed them (4), except surprisingly, the one guy who voted in favor of the legitimate club, headed by Chair Feltscher, College Republicans at UCSD.

    A list of those who were present on the call were (5):
    Chairwoman Cheyenne Steel
    Co-Chair Leigh Wolf
    Administrative Vice Chair Michael Antonopoulos
    Treasurer Matthew Donnellan
    Secretary Kaitlyn Shimmin
    Executive Director Matthew Dobler
    Capitol Regional Vice-Chair Pete Markevich
    Bay Area Regional Vice-Chair Trent Downes
    Central Coast Regional Vice-Chair Ryan McNicholas
    Los Angeles Regional Vice-Chair Falecia Mandel
    Southern Area Regional Vice-Chair Megan Rodriguez

    Talk about the conflict of interests, and it's really intriguing that, as you say, the only person who voted in favor of the legitimate club was Mr. McNicholas, the Central Coast Regional Vice-Chair, who has endorsed neither slate.

    Finally, in regard to Mrs. Steel's statement, where was she when we requested her aid in solving this dispute 5 months ago?



    1. http://danareport.com/2009/01/12/the-revolution-is-coming-for-california-college-republicans/
    2. http://danareport.com/about-us/
    3. http://www.collegegop.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=99&Itemid=0
    4. http://revolutionizeccr.com/?page_id=7
    5. http://www.collegegop.org/content/view/57/47/

    ReplyDelete
  26. I am the wife of a UCSD CR alumni and I cannot tell you how disappointed I am at the CCR for not doing a full investigation on the matters of the UCSD CRs. I personally feel that Megan Rodriguez and Chelsea Green should be prosecuted and convicted for stealing money from the club and using it for their own agenda. We do not need Obama’s and Biden’s among our good Republican youth.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I COMPLETELY AGREE! How can Rodriguez and Green just walk away with $500 of fundraised money? Did they need a bailout? Prosecution should be obvious... but I guess people are blind?

    ReplyDelete
  28. For the argument and evidence of UCSD's legitimacy: http://gop.ucsd.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44:constitutionality-and-legitimacy&catid=18:constitutional-legitimacy-by-inez-feltscher&Itemid=20

    ReplyDelete
  29. Leigh,

    You posted about how this article is biased and needs to talk to the other side. That sounds legitimate to me. Perhaps the Dana Report should allow my argument (from the comment above) to be posted instead of censoring it. At least no one has deleted your comments from this website.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I'd like to clear up any misconceptions here; I was the instigator of this article. Inez is not pushing her own agenda in fact she is the farthest from it. I asked my friend Adam to write a story because as a newer member of the club I am worried about what this is coming to. So if you want to know who started all this, it was me Sarah Johnson, so stop being awful to Inez and blame the person responsible for talking to Adam Brickley in the first place, me.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Sarah, I think you're making a vital mistake in your comment. In fact you are neither the instigator of the article nor the person who started all this. IN FACT, it is the focus of this article, Miss Rodriguez, Miss Green, & Mr. Yako, and the rest of Revolutionize CCR who is responsible for the existence of this article. For when they made their choice to lie to members in the process of their failed impeachment of Dejah, and then continue their shady actions in the weeks that followed, they merely served to increase the odds that the truth WOULD COME OUT, and it would have come out, whether via Mr. Brickley, or by some other person with a sense of honor and decency.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Leigh & Sarah--being a Marine is of course a great service, but it does not make you above moral reproach. I mean, please, let's be realistic?

    The irony of this situation as I see it is that it's just the back-stabbing, corrupt big party politics playing out in the microcosm of college. It's a shame that an ambitious few can ruin the experience for everyone. A house divided is torn asunder. Hopefully justice will be served here.

    ReplyDelete
  33. There are too many kids out there that want to make their claim to fame during college to help them in their future political careers. This need to stand out blinds them from seeing the big picture, it keeps them from seeing what we all should be fighting against. It seems that the bad seeds stand out more than those that work hard for their party and their beliefs. This makes success more complicated amongst the republican youth. Until the College Republicans can come together for their beliefs and not their egos there will be no success.

    This past election has provided with at least some information, the youth on the Republican side just isn't on it. Our party lost because the youth under Obama outnumbered us and mobilized. I just hope that people like those at UCSD can open their eyes and see what they are doing to themselves and their party before it is too late.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I like Alec's use of the word "shady" in an otherwise serious post, haha.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I was ask to comment on the lovely blog by an involve party. So after reading the article and all the lovely infighting posts I find that something as simple as a disagreement on the leadership at my beloved UCSD CR's has blown up into some ugly and grotesque monster. For starters if an individual was not happy leadership of club in her second year she should have done everything in her power to prove she was the better person for the job for the next round of elections. And proceeded to job the best job she could in the following year. This is politics people and lets not let the 'adults' be our examable. One can not impeach someone if they did not do anything wrong. If you suspect something then investigate, or better yet C.Y.A and get a third unbaised party to investigate for you. And if something is amiss then do something about it. The finanical records of the UCSD CR are about as transparent as it gets. As for the national committee taking sides and pulling UCSD's charter, the lot of you should be ashamed or yourselves. This was clearly an in-house problem that needed to be fixed in-house. Even if it was a political move to ensure the next leadership corp took its place, you could have done that with out resorting to shady back room politics. One does not cut a potental 500 member work force from your political machine. Its cutting off your nose despite your face. I am sure I could have addressed more but I believe, for now, I hgave said my peace.

    TMF ~ if you know me, you know I am right.

    P.S. A. Mark Mendoza worked so hard to keep the club running while he was the chair. It is a shame some of you that called yourselves his friend would work so hard to kill something he worker harder to keep alive.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 8, 2009 at 4:46 PM

    Inez Feltcher threatens to sue CCR Co-Chair for embarrassing UCSD club member:

    I wasn't going to release this e-mail but after seeing recent blog posts regarding the UCSD situation I was left with no choice. At the College Republicans meeting during the California Republican Party convention we welcomed some of the biggest names from around the state. These speakers included gubernatorial candidates Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner as well as the Chair and Vice-Chair of the state party. Also present were countless elected officials from around the state. Inez Feltcher and the rest of the students accusing the CCR excomm of corruption, decided to hand out a "press release" that detailed the extensive in-fighting at UCSD. There was no contact info on this "press release," it was basically a hit piece. CCR does everything in it's power to maintain and professional image. I was not happy because the entire state leadership was watching a CR club air their dirty laundry to the entire delegation. These actions served no purpose other than to make CCR look childish and petty. I called over one of the students handing out the "press release" and told him to leave. I then told him if he pulled something like this again i would publicly embarrass him and make him famous to all of CCR. This was deemed an illegal "threat" by Inez Feltcher. She sent me this e-mail (see below) warning me that i could be facing a lawsuit if I continued to threaten them with public humiliation. Inez Feltcher and her ilk are loose canons and shameless opportunists. They are playing CCR politics with their clubs in-fighting to benefit one slate. The idea that a CR would threaten to sue the CCR ExComm for threatening to embarrass them for acting like children is both laughable and foolish.


    Link to e-mail:
    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3600/3424545857_4a33c09f80.jpg?v=0

    ReplyDelete
  37. Leigh,

    I am completely fine with you releasing my email, and I encourage people to go and read it. All that I want to say in response is in that email. I asked for your help in resolving this in a reasonable manner. Had I NOT had respect for your position in CCR I would have actually brought suit instead of warning you that further action on your part would result in one. I would like to point out that it has only been recently that you have clarified that by "break [us] in half," etc. you meant you would politically humiliate us. By all means, continue to do so. I however, along with those who were the targets of such language, interpreted your comments as a physical threat and took appropriate action.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Oh, and the fact that there was no contact information was an accident, merely due to the fact that I am not accustomed to formatting press releases. It did, however, have the names of all the officers of our club stapled to the back and it was not at all unclear where the document originated. Like I said in my email, it was not meant for the public, but only for the members of the Excomm board.

    ReplyDelete
  39. obviously since CCR exec board refused to look at any evidence these links below will give you all the documentation that you will need to decided your own personal feelings.

    http://gop.ucsd.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44:constitutionality-and-legitimacy&catid=18:constitutional-legitimacy-by-inez-feltscher&Itemid=20

    ReplyDelete
  40. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 8, 2009 at 5:14 PM

    Took appropriate action? I've been physically threatened by leftists on my campus on multiple occasion. The appropriate action for dealing with a legitimate physical threat that you deem serious is to file a police report. You did not file a police report which means you knew EXACTLY what i meant when i said. This "physical threat" is fabricated by you and your people as part of your continued, and failing, effort to discredit the CCR excomm.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Principles are meaningless if you are unable willing to do whatever it takes to win an election. It is in this regard that I have to say that the crafty maneuvering of Revolutionize CCR and the intimidation by Leigh Wolf, a young man who is proudly representing the USMC (see Hatch Act) deserve respect. Politics is a dirty job that someone has to do. It is a job which many normal people don’t have the stomach to observe up close. I have to admit, it gives me a good feeling to know that there are young people with conservative principles who are so willing and so able to participate in this process. This crew allows decent people like myself and the rest of the silent majority, don’t have to get our hands dirty.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 8, 2009 at 5:28 PM

    You might want to read the hatch act before you start being a douche. Military personnel are exempt from it and regulated under the UCMJ. As a reservists i can pretty much do whatever i want when I'm not on orders. I'm smarter than you, stop wasting your time.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Here I have posted two definitions from a law dictionary explaining what a threat is. I have also copied the direct conversation of Leigh Wolf and Matthew Schenk from the Dana Report. As it clearly states in Leigh's own words that he did clearly make a threat.

    Legally this is admissible in court and if Leigh would like to know the legality of this please don't hesitate to contact me, since I do have a personal lawyer that could translate it for him, and I can as well with my legal background history.



    Threat of harm generally involves a perception of injury. Harm is physical or mental damage, an act or instance of injury, or a material and tangible detriment or loss to a person. The precise definition varies according ot the context in which it is used.


    Threat
    Definition - Noun
    : an expression of an intention to injure another
    : See also menace <
    see also stalking



    Leigh Wolf { 02.27.09 at 2:44 pm }

    “Alec, are you the dude that got thrashed by Leigh Wolf after passing around some random shit at the CCR meeting?”

    Yes he was. You’re a sniveling weasel Alec. Bring that trash to the CCR convention, I dare you.

    Matt Schenk { 03.01.09 at 2:36 pm }

    Is that a threat Leigh. personal threats will not be tolerated. and anyone who makes statements without attaching their names should not be taken seriously, i mean man up guys.

    Leigh Wolf { 03.01.09 at 8:20 pm }

    Yes Matt Schenk it is a threat. I’m glad you picked that up. I will not tolerate individual club members embarrassing CCR by airing their clubs dirty laundry to a state wide audience. I will publicly embarrass and make famous anyone who puts their own agenda before CCR at the expense of CCR’s reputation. So i repeat to Alec Wiseman, Bring that trash to the CCR convention, i dare you.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Took appropriate action? I've been physically threatened by leftists on my campus on multiple occasion. The appropriate action for dealing with a legitimate physical threat that you deem serious is to file a police report. You did not file a police report which means you knew EXACTLY what i meant when i said.

    In most real-life situations, including the one currently under discussion, there is more than one appropriate course of action. I haven't seen any evidence that the course taken by Inez and the other College Republicans at UCSD was inappropriate. In particular, the email you posted is very diplomatic in tone, and I can only construe it as evidence in favor of the UCSD CRs.

    You might want to spell "Feltscher" correctly one of these days, too. Your failure to do so so far doesn't speak well for you.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Leigh,

    I didn't file a police report because I had no desire, and still have no desire, to take legal action against a fellow Republican and a military man. I'm very glad to hear that you were not talking about physical violence, but I did NOT know that when I sent you that email. Please don't make me out to be some scheming mastermind out to bring down CCR. All I'm trying to do is get justice for my active group of UCSD CRs.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 8, 2009 at 6:15 PM

    Keep pretending you matter. Your unfounded sense of entitlement makes me chuckle. Not to mention your self-righteous indignation. I just wish you guys had put this much effort into your GOTV events and building up your clubs. Maybe you wouldn't be losing so badly. I hear Adam's school is openly opposing him.....sounds like it's "We'll say and do anything to win" time for RSR. :D hahahahaha

    ReplyDelete
  47. Well, I gotta give Leigh credit for one thing -- the ol' Marine knows to retreat when he's hopelessly outgunned.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Leigh,

    I believe you have the order of events wrong. We endorsed RSR after and because of the problems we had with Megan, Ronsen and Chelsea. I have spoken to Adam all of maybe twice in my life. Again, as I wrote to you in my email, I have no interest in CCR elections outside of the bounds of this conflict, which with April 2nd's hearing has now mushroomed into including the current Excomm board. I have not, and have never had, any intention to ever run for any higher office in the College Republican organization. My only interest in attempting to retain charter with CCR was for the future generations of UCSD CRs, who will unfortunately now be faced with the task of rebuilding connections with the state organization.

    As to the status of our club at UCSD, we're doing fine, and have many exciting events coming up. The members of my organization have no complaints, that I've heard (and I've asked) about how our club is doing, and that's all that matters to me.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Leigh,

    My comment here was to clarify a legal misunderstanding. I wasn't picking a side in either arguments here; nor was I even bringing up RSR.

    Personally though from my perspective I will state this:

    I have a complete respect for anyone going into the military and is willing to fight for the freedoms that WE ALL have used on this blog. I too come from a long line of family commitments in the military. I was raised to salute those that defend the very essence of my personal freedoms. On that note I want to re-illiterate a HUGE THANK YOU on my behalf!

    As for the threats that you receive on your campus, I feel your pain. I too have felt those and know how it feels. I congratulate you on standing for what you truly believe in.

    I feel that all of this has brought about an ugliness in everybody. I have never personally met you, but I'm sure if I did formally meet you, that I would admire and respect you for all that you have done and for who you are as a person.

    I'm looking forward to San Francisco and I want to let you know that if you do want to meet and talk, I am and will be available that weekend.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 8, 2009 at 7:14 PM

    Inez, don't pretend like this isn't directly related to the RSR slate. Ellison was calling ex comm members MOMENTS after the conference call was over. My guess is wiseman was in the room with you and feeding information to adam. Stop pretending like this whole "controversy" wasn't cooked up by RSR in an attempt to discredit the CCR ex comm. What Adam isn't telling you is that even IF you had gotten away with your shenanigans and carried the votes for adam, RSR would still lose by a very large margin. When you have no ideas or experience to run on, you stir up controversy to discredit your opponent. RSR has no website, no ideas, no schools and no respect. You're losing because you're incompetent, not because of some fabricated conspiracy theory. Adams own school doesn't support him, that should tell you ALL you need to know about how "legitimate" his campaign is.

    ReplyDelete
  51. What Adam isn't telling you is that even IF you had gotten away with your shenanigans and carried the votes for adam, RSR would still lose by a very large margin. When you have no ideas or experience to run on, you stir up controversy to discredit your opponent. RSR has no website, no ideas, no schools and no respect. You're losing because you're incompetent, not because of some fabricated conspiracy theory. Adams own school doesn't support him, that should tell you ALL you need to know about how "legitimate" his campaign is.

    Leigh, if this was true (and perhaps it is; I'm not a CR officer so I'm not privy to these details), then why don't you simply let the UCSD CRs vote? Revolutionize CCR would win anyway, and that victory would be all the greater since they'd look magnaminous in the process. (Though it's probably a bit late for the latter effect now.)

    Your actions imply that you don't believe your own story. And I notice that you're no longer trying to answer our arguments; instead you're just copying the same original comments, misspellings and all, to other blogs, and meanwhile you change the subject here. Again, I don't know what the actual electoral facts are, but just judging from your behavior I have to guess that (i) you can't actually answer our arguments, and (ii) you're desperate to win the battle anyway, implying that the battle matters and Revolutionize CCR is in danger of losing.

    ReplyDelete
  52. http://mohel.dk/grafik/andet/Someone_Is_Wrong_On_The_Internet.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  53. Second time commenting here.

    My name is Michael Knudsen. I'm a recent UCSD College Republican alumni.

    Here's what I see, as an alumni.

    The CCR Executive Board has given me, and every single solitary UCSD CR alumni, the finger.

    You have told us that a 23 year old organization...does not matter.

    Nor does anyone now or previously involved in that organization.

    http://tinyurl.com/cdscog

    For the record, that again is the (now former) UCSD College Republican official response to the board vote.

    Of course, in politics, one can't always be certain what the meaning of the word "is" is.

    So, apparently, one side's de-chartering is another side's misunderstanding from "disenfranchised opportunists."

    (Just as an aside, I thought, as Republicans, disenfranchising people wasn't our thing?)

    http://tinyurl.com/d2nudo

    "No chapters were un-chartered, and no one removed from the organization. The vote was simply to determine which club was the rightful owner of the original UCSD charter based on the facts presented and the actions of those involved."

    Ok...So, if one club is deemed to be the rightful owner of the original UCSD Charter, which the Exec Board said now belongs to the Triton College Republicans (with their proud 50 day old history)...just where, pray tell, does that leave the original UCSD CRs?

    The original UCSD Charter, which once belonged to them, now, does not.

    “Oh, you weren't un-chartered, guys. You just don't have your charter anymore. Get it?”

    And how, pray tell, are alumni supposed to feel about this?

    Taking a step back from the entire sorry affair that got us here, what has happened?

    Based on the events with ONE class, the Executive Board has summarily dismissed ALL twenty plus years that came before.

    By all means, explain to me why this should not be a big deal to alumni. You know, the people who built and made UCSD CRs into an active and successful chapter for two decades.

    Explain to me why one of my best friends, Mark Mendoza, who had a fantastic year as UCSD CR Chair, should not care about the Executive Board's vote. Explain to me how this in no way negates his work, and the work of all the other UCSD CR Chairs. Explain to me why Inez shouldn't care about this.

    For that matter, tell me what you have to say to those 500+ individuals who are on the UCSD CR mailing list.

    Explain to me how your statement to them does NOT go something like this: "Hey, thanks for your involvement and interest in the College Republicans.

    Now piss off. You don't matter."

    Two plus two is easy math.

    In that same vein, it sure looks like there just might have been just a teeny tiny conflict of interest with this board vote.

    I mean, what do I know, right? I'm just a dumb UCSD alumni who doesn't matter, and I just don't know what I'm talking about, right?

    This decision couldn't possibly have had anything to do with eliminating opposition votes, and anyone who disagrees is obviously listening to that "sniveling weasel" Alec Weisman.

    As an alumni, and more importantly, as a friend of Alec's, how the hell am I supposed to take that?

    How do you, Mr. Wolf, think that comes across not just to alumni, but to outside observers of this matter?

    How are they supposed to take this: "Yes Matt Schenk it is a threat."

    You know, when you say that something IS a THREAT, you might not want to act surprised when it is taken as such. Even if you follow with saying that you will "only" embarrass someone, it's pretty hard not to fixate on the acknowledgment that what you just said was INTENDED to be threatening.

    And I'm just wondering, is all this honestly your idea of a mature, reasonable way to resolve this matter?

    So you're pissed that Alec and the UCSD CRs aired out dirty laundry in front of visitors.

    Issuing publicly viewable slurs, harassment, and threats is OBVIOUSLY the best way to show that you know how to resolve a crisis. Way to be a better man. Way to show the world how CCR solves its problems. Threats, insults, and intimidation. Truly, that's an inspiration to the Republican Party.

    But I digress.

    Back to what I see.

    I see a good friend of mine threatened and degraded. Friends of mine, really, including all the current UCSD CRs.

    I see an Executive Board flipping off anyone who has ever been involved in UCSD CRs. I see them deciding that an upstart "club" that doesn't even meet matters more than a 23 year old organization.

    I see them siding with individuals who, it seems pretty damned clear, tried to manipulate matters within UCSD CRs to get their way. Worse, they lied to UCSD CR members to try and force the issue on Dejah's impeachment.

    Last I checked, there was a word for that. Starts with "C", rhymes with "eruption."

    I see my friends and former CR mates trying to exist as a club and move past the strife of this past year, only to be greeted with more threats, intimidation (they'll never work in politics again), and now, disbarment, because these "Triton Republicans" who didn't get what they wanted before, through outright lies and deceit, have some friends in high places.

    The "Triton Republicans" didn't get Dejah Stanley kicked out as Chair before, so now, they're taking the ball home, making their own club...and you just gave them our charter. MY charter.

    So really, aside from reminding us that we're all stupid friends of the sniveling weasel Alex "Wiseman,” do you have anything else to tell CR Alumni? Care to explain how proud CCR is of its actions? I sure as hell hope you are.

    I know this much.

    If this action is not reversed, and the original charter is not returned to the UCSD CRs, I will make sure to tell my children not to ever bother becoming California College Republicans.

    I will tell them that the organization is a waste of their time. I will tell them that it not only tolerates infighting, it picks sides when it suits those in power.

    I will tell my children that there is no point in them devoting their passion and their energy to such an outfit. It will only bring them disillusionment and despair. They won't spend their time actually fighting for what they believe in.

    They'll spend time fighting amongst themselves, and the Executive Board will pick who wins. They won't actually be mature adults and solve the problem. Oh, and if my kids are on the wrong side, they'll all be a bunch of sniveling weasels.

    My kids deserve better.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Ok Leigh, I see you have resorted to playing low ball, no one else is playing with you…but JUST to clear up this bit of mess you just created AGAIN, let’s review the facts (or lack thereof) with your last post…

    You say Adam’s school doesn’t support him?

    Well, everyone…I’m gunna let you in on a secret here…your co-chair here has been quite divisive with CRs here lately. The point of CCR is to SPREAD conservatism…not rip it in two so nothing can get done. Wanna know what Mr. Wolf, Mr. Antonopolous, and some ex-chairs did directly following cutting off UCSD? They invited some insecure girls from University of the Pacific to come smoke cigars with them and flirt with them. Little do these girls know they’ve been used.

    Picture one: Leigh is doing the under-the-boob hold on ____, and Michael’s paying extra close attention to _____.
    http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu306/cr4truth/wc1.jpg

    PROOF IS IN THE TITLE OF THE PICTURE: “THE WRECKING CREW”

    Meaning, they are WRECKING a club and attempting to wreck a slate. Doesn’t work like that Mr. Wolf. As co-chair, you are supposed to spread conservatism, not kill it and rip and use some attention-starved girls to do it. You’re RUINING CONSERVATISM.

    Picture two: All these lovely comments left under the picture just prove the current slate, Revolutionize CCR, and their supporters are all over it as well.
    http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu306/cr4truth/016.jpg


    I've known about this for awhile yet wasn't going to air that dirty laundry, but since you INSISTED on bringing it up, it only reveals more about you, your motives, and your character.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 9, 2009 at 2:05 AM

    HAHAHAHA, SEE WHAT I MEAN!! It's "say and do anything to justify our imminent ass kicking" time for RSR. Next thing you know they'll be saying i'm gay and Michael Antonoplous is a pedophile!

    ReplyDelete
  56. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 9, 2009 at 2:21 AM

    EXTRA! EXTRA! EXTRA!
    Moon landing a hoax!, CCR Co-chair out to destroy conservatism!, Big Foot caught on camera by local photographer better known as "CR4truth" HAHAHAH

    Joseph Ostunio, you realize everyone knows "CR4Truth" is you right? You've kind of been using that tag for a long time.

    ah, now we're having fun!!

    ReplyDelete
  57. that is definitely NOT Joseph...there you go assuming Mr. Wolf. You have the wrong gender even. Keep talking though...it's only proving my case.

    ReplyDelete
  58. But you have still avoided letting us know why that picture was titled "The Wrecking Crew"...If I am wrong, you may have a chance to explain.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Anonymous @ 4/9/09 12:52 AM:

    I, at least, do not approve of serious ad hominem attacks. We don't need to pollute this discussion with that kind of trash.

    The immediate facts are overwhelmingly on the side of College Republicans at UCSD. Stick to them.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Please, can anything and everything about Leigh Wolf's personal life and Adam & Pacific be taken elsewhere? I am concerned only about College Republicans at UCSD. Our focus is not and should not be to dig up every weird picture that anyone has ever taken at a party.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Leigh Wolf - CA Co-ChairApril 9, 2009 at 11:40 AM

    hahaha, You guys sound like leftists attacking Bush. "Bush is a fascist!" What evidence do you have to back that up? "The evidence is overwhelming!"

    ReplyDelete
  62. Again, I would implore those people who are trying to start a fight about Leigh's personal life, RSR, conspiracy theories, or any other side issues to stick to the issue at hand. I am not a lackey for Adam or RSR. Our club is one of many schools to endorse RSR, though our school did so BECAUSE of the problems we were having with the current Excomm board.

    As for no evidence, we have posted, and will continue to post, every piece of evidence about every step of this conflict on our website, gop.ucsd.edu. I have yet to see Triton College Republicans, which by the way is no longer a recognized student organization at UCSD (http://wailua.ucsd.edu/studentorg/StudentOrgList.aspx?frmLetter=t), show any evidence of their legitimacy. The Constitutionality for our club, along with accompanying evidence, is available, once again, at http://gop.ucsd.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44:constitutionality-and-legitimacy&catid=18:constitutional-legitimacy-by-inez-feltscher&Itemid=20.

    ReplyDelete
  63. What evidence do you have to back that up? "The evidence is overwhelming!"

    I said that because you conceded it yourself, when you stopped replying to our arguments and switched to off-topic comments.

    ReplyDelete
  64. is it just me or is chris chang kind of a douche? The longer this goes on the more pompous he becomes. Who the hell is chris chang? And why does he think people will listen to him?

    ReplyDelete
  65. is it just me or is chris chang kind of a douche? The longer this goes on the more pompous he becomes. Who the hell is chris chang? And why does he think people will listen to him?

    Well, you're welcome to your own opinion of me.

    I am a Caltech alum, UCSD grad student, and conservative who has been watching these goings-on over the last few months. I expect reasonable people to listen to me since my arguments are usually correct (and when they aren't, I'm willing to quickly concede my errors when they're pointed out to me).

    And when somebody stops engaging in fair debate and starts acting like a bully, I'm not afraid to point it out.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Mr. Wolf, if anyone is the weasel here, it’s you. You are a POOR example of the Republican party. Are you sure you’re not Liberal Mr. Wolf? Most of you San Fransisco residents are. You’re just another Obama wanna be posing in a Republican mask just so you can get your own agenda going and bring down the good Republican party. Plus, you’re siding with Megan Rodriguez and Chelsea Green because you are a lecher and you’ll do whatever it takes to keep getting a stable supply of tail action.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Mr. Wolf, if anyone is the weasel here, it’s you. You are a POOR example of the Republican party. Are you sure you’re not Liberal Mr. Wolf? Most of you San Fransisco residents are. You’re just another Obama wanna be posing in a Republican mask just so you can get your own agenda going and bring down the good Republican party. Plus, you’re siding with Megan Rodriguez and Chelsea Green because you are a lecher and you’ll do whatever it takes to keep getting a stable supply of tail action.

    Let me repeat: this is NOT the place for ad hominem attacks.

    I don't personally know Mr. Wolf, but despite all my snark, I do respect him as a Marine and, assuming this Dana Report commenter's testimony is accurate, as a motivator of people. What I have a problem with is the intellectual dishonesty he has exhibited in this thread, directed against my friends.

    This doesn't make him evil, or even liberal. It is human nature to rationalize conclusions you've already reached, and be highly resistant to changing those conclusions even in the face of very strong opposing evidence.

    The only thing it does is make him wrong, on this particular subject. So, in this thread, our primary job is to point out all the evidence that he's wrong, to minimize the share of neutral readers who join him in his error. And we can hope against hope that he might swallow his considerable (and not entirely unjustified) pride and concede that our dechartering occurred due to faulty information and should be reversed. But if that never happens, I hope we can still work with him as fellow Republicans in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Kikitink,

    What you've said is disgusting, and I in no way support it. As Chris wrote, and I wrote earlier, this is not the place to attack Leigh Wolf for anything other than being wrong about College Republicans at UCSD.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "Stop pretending like this whole "controversy" wasn't cooked up by RSR in an attempt to discredit the CCR ex comm."

    And somehow I'm the conspiracy theorist. Alec was NOT in the room. I don't even have Adam Ellison's phone number, though I'm sure someone in my club called someone who called someone, etc. This hearing was not a secret.

    All I wanted to do, and all I still want to do, is charter UCSD's legitimate club and get representation and recognition in CCR for its large membership. You would think that living in a true-blue state like we do, that CCR would not want to forcibly eject over 500 College Republicans from its ranks. Can we really spare those numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Please do not attack Leigh Wolf on this forum.

    So far, it is him that has used logical fallacies and fallacious arguing techniques to attack opposition in these comments.

    And while I agree with many of the things said about him, I also want everyone attempting to communicate with this boy to do so on a scholastic and professional level.

    Don't use fallacies to argue with fallacies.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Anonymous said:
    " I also want everyone attempting to communicate with this boy to do so on a scholastic and professional level."

    Last time i checked the Marines don't allow "Boys." Keep insulting him though, i'm sure that will work out well for you. You people really are disgusting, first you say you're glad leigh's getting deployed to a combat zone, then you dive right in to his personal life, now you're calling a UNITED STATES MARINE a boy? It's pretty clear why this entire group has no credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Excuse me Mr. Jackson, I didn't realize that one word invalidated my entire post.

    I'm sorry if i wasn't politically correct enough to call him a "guy" or "man", and you're so offended by my lexicon that you totally ignore anything relevant here.

    You know, I don't take it too personally when I'm called a "girl". I don't think I've been slighted if someone doesn't use the term "woman". But obviously you know right from wrong, and the macho bravado about "being a man" certainly falls under your jurisdiction.

    Leigh has initiated the attacks Mr. Jackson. His conduct on this forum is unbecoming of an officer; (and a marine, since this fact is apparently so adamant for some reason).

    Know what I see? I see a bunch of people name-calling and acting the same way I used to when I was in fifth grade.

    So please, forgive me. I truly seek your forgiveness, for inappropriately labeling Leigh Wolf a "boy". He is obviously not a boy; but I think that a real man wouldn't stoop to the same juvenile behavior we've seen presented here.

    How about we compromise and call him a guy?

    P.S. After you're done lecturing me about political correctness, would you mind informing me as to what a board member being a part of the marines has anything at all to do with this debate?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Oh, great. I've been out of town----to San Fran. actually----and returned to read about this mess.

    Maybe the new group move on with a new name, become THE group to join, demonstrate their decency in time, etc.?

    Anyway, keep involved! This nation desperately needs committed conservatives.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Mountain Mama,
    I am writing from the hospital. I have been cut off from the Brickyard for most of the last month. Did I miss anything?
    WOW, Adam sturred the pot, didn't he?
    I hope you are doing well, happy Easter. He has risen.

    ReplyDelete
  75. He has risen INDEED! I hope you and your beautiful wife enjoyed a blessed Day of Resurrection as well.

    Yes, Adam stirred up quite a hornet's nest here! Meanwhile, over at the ole "Palin for VP" blogspot, Adam wrote a new post (as you know), and dear "Lisa Mother of Nine" checked in (she's been very busy with her restaurant) and sparked a snarky comment from a (*ya-awn*) troll. Lisa's great; I'm praying for her schedule to "free up!"

    Otherwise, the ever-brilliant and always-well-read Techno faithfully keeps posting those insightful quotations there. What a guy! (I wonder if he's Adam or a friend?)

    Lately, < I > keep trying to get people to notice, investigate, and fervently support and promote the simple, extremely-low, and entirely-just Automated Payment Transaction ("A.P.T.") Tax reform. See www.apttax.com for more information.

    I especially wish I could persuade the Tea Partiers to make their movement COUNT by forcing our rotten, self-serving politicians to give up their power (derived from holding the tax code over Americans' heads) and actually enact this wonderful APT tax reform, which is possibly the "Silver Bullet" that can save this economy, and thereby preserve this nation!

    *sigh* Unfortunately, tax reform ain't "sexy to Americans, even as they (especially conservatives) watch in horror as Obama grabs power left and right.... How do I reach them!? I am praying for insight.

    Is your wife doing okay, Gelston? I am praying for her, and for you to HANG IN THERE. God is in control, but quite often we have NO idea what God is actually doing in tough situations.

    Also, PALINISTAS: Pray for the Palin family. The attacks have NOT LET UP on them.

    ReplyDelete
  76. thank you Mountain Mama. I will reply on the other site, the ole "Palin for VP" blogspot, later today

    ReplyDelete
  77. I think the college Republicans are really shameless backstabbing, political vendettas, i am really agree with this blog. i think they are really corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  78. You people SUCK! That a group of kids would be disenfranchised in such a manner is despicable. Mr. Wolf, you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

    ReplyDelete