Tuesday, June 13, 2006

CHAIRMAN ADAM N. PUHARIC

Adam N. Puharic of Aberdeen Township was elected Chairman of the Monmouth County Republican Committee tonight by a resounding margin over James Giannell of Red Bank and Edward Stominski of Eatontown.
Former Holmdel Mayor Mollie Giamanco was elected vice chairman.
While this blog had been critical of Puharic and some of his alliances, that stops here and now.
Chairman Puharic was elected fair and square, by the same County Committee that chose Anna Little and Andrew Lucas.
Our new chairman must be given the opportunity to do a good job; we must now look to November and beating the Democrats.
Remember the Democrats?
In a show of unity Giannell joined Puharic on the dais after the winner was announced; Puharic asked Giannell for his help in fine-tuning the convention process. It is time now for us all to unite as a team and work for victory this fall!

15 comments:

Everyone Loves Anna ;( said...

Remember the Democrats?

I was hoping you forgot.

Honest Abe said...

Elephants never forget.

It's not going away, Lenny.

JIM_PURCELL said...

Congratulations to Chairman Puharic. May he have a long and productive tenure.

Rich Kohler said...

Hey Abe,

Are you only posting happy, myopic feel good posts?

Honest Abe said...

No. Read the new one.

Rich Kohler said...

I wouldn’t exactly say the election was “fair and square”. The voting process for Ms. Little and Mr. Lucas were conducted differently than Tuesday’s vote for chairman. It appears that the fix was in before the first vote was cast. How did Mr. Puharic go from the last person to enter the race, to the frontrunner and eventual winner in just over one week?



Signs for Puharic lined the road leading up to the voting place, (don’t try that during a general election). When someone tried to question the voting process, they were shouted down by a very vocal (dare I say) faction supporting Puharic. This same “faction” cheered rather loudly during Puharic’s Howard Dean-esque speech.



Mr. Puharic must realize that a large portion of the membership will scrutinize his policies and especially his appointments. I hope he can succeed where others have failed, but given the manner in which he came to office, I reluctantly predict two more years of the same power mongering that divided and subsequently weakened our Party during the last few.



Although all the talk of uniting the Party against the Democrats sounds inspirational, I can’t shake a nagging suspicion that it’s just rhetorical code for a “no dissension” approach to leadership, and that the real losers are the people who thought they were voting for change by electing Puharic.

Honest Abe said...

Rich Kohler addressed...
"I wouldn’t exactly say the election was “fair and square”. The voting process for Ms. Little and Mr. Lucas were conducted differently than Tuesday’s vote for chairman."
And the vote for Mrs. Little was conducted differently from that of Mr. Lucas. Each was different from the other. That's been a problem with Fred Niemann's chairmanship; Puharic has asked Jim Giannell to help straighten out the convention process. Let's see what they come up with.
"It appears that the fix was in before the first vote was cast. How did Mr. Puharic go from the last person to enter the race, to the frontrunner and eventual winner in just over one week?"
If you know of a fix, please come forward. I do know that Puharic campaigned very hard once he decided he wanted the job. So did Jim Giannell, but the committee has spoken. I didn't see any people Tuesday night complaining that their vote was stolen. If someone had messed with the machines, don't you think that would have been evident. It was clearly a Puharic crowd that night. Each individual committee person obviously would have their own reason for voting for Jim, Adam or Ed.

"Signs for Puharic lined the road leading up to the voting place, (don’t try that during a general election).
No, don't try it during a general election. This wasn't a general election and was not subject to the same laws. I would refer back to Jim helping Adam refine the convention process. Consistency is important. Rules will go a long way towards that end.
"When someone tried to question the voting process, they were shouted down by a very vocal (dare I say) faction supporting Puharic.
Actually he was told by Mark Sheridan that the candidates for chairman agreed on the process. Simple plurality as opposed to outright majority, which Puharic got, incidentally.
"This same “faction” cheered rather loudly during Puharic’s Howard Dean-esque speech."
Howard Dean-esque? He didn't scream. He gave a very rousing speech, which the others had the opportunity to do if they chose to, or if it were their style. Everyone has their own delivery style.

"Mr. Puharic must realize that a large portion of the membership will scrutinize his policies and especially his appointments.
Very true. I'm sure he does realize that. Let's see what he does first, then criticize if it's appropriate.
"I hope he can succeed where others have failed, but given the manner in which he came to office, I reluctantly predict two more years of the same power mongering that divided and subsequently weakened our Party during the last few."
I hope you're wrong. Let's see what he does first, then criticize if it's appropriate.

"Although all the talk of uniting the Party against the Democrats sounds inspirational, I can’t shake a nagging suspicion that it’s just rhetorical code for a “no dissension” approach to leadership, and that the real losers are the people who thought they were voting for change by electing Puharic."
I hope you're wrong. Let's see what he does first, then criticize if it's appropriate.
Like it or not, he is the chairman for the next two years. For the sake of our party, let's hope he does a good job. No, a great job.
Right now, the party has to unite behind Tom Kean, Chris Smith, Leigh-Ann Bellew, Joe Sinagra, Rosemarie Peters, Andrew Lucas and Anna Little.

Rich Kohler said...

Well abe, at least we can agree on some things.

The republicans have a great slate of candidates for this fall.

Let's see what he (Puharic) does first.

Honest Abe said...

That's fair.

William H Seward said...

Rich Kohler said:

"it’s just rhetorical code for a “no dissension” approach to leadership

That would be silly, given what we've been through, and I don't think Adam is silly. Like Rick also said, many will be watching closely. I predict Adam provides happy surprises and wins over the cynics.

Rich Kohler said...

From Mr. Puharic's campaign letter:

"The next chairman must not waste one word battling fellow Republicans"

??????????

William H Seward said...

Rich Kohler said...
"From Mr. Puharic's campaign letter:

"The next chairman must not waste one word battling fellow Republicans"

?????????? "


Come on Rick, I would think you would like that line. I read it to mean that the chairman ought not be fighting with Republicans, but rather focusing on winning elections. The line is consistent with Adam's speech as well.

Back to the campaign signs at the elections...I liked it a great deal as was disappointed that my candidate didn't do it. Electioneering at conventions is not illegal and is actually a common practice. To me it showed that Adam's team was leaving no stone unturned to get elected, and that's the kind of leadership we want and need. Adam's team had a vote count on Monday that told them they would win, yet they kept working and pushing to the very end. As I said on my blog, I considered changing my vote to Adam...I was caught up in the excitement he created. I can't have been the only one. That's the kind of energy we want leading our party, and so far Adam is the only one I've ever see provide it around here, for years, if ever.

It feels good to be defending a chairman for a change. :-)

Rich Kohler said...

I appreciate the comments regarding Puharic’s ascension to County Chairman, which have duly persuaded me to put aside my suspicions and lend another vote of confidence to the optimistic momentum of the Party’s leadership. I fully recognize the spirit in which Puharic said, “The next chairman must not waste one word battling fellow Republicans,” but I also recognize the rhetorical ambiguity of this statement.

“Battle” and “debate” share a long list of synonyms. My wife, who is new to the County Committee, clarified her apprehension (which she characterized as minor and potential) as such:

“By vilifying dissension, the leadership creates a kill-the-messenger atmosphere and the balance of power ends up teetering unproductively between “disruptive” naysayers and self-interested “public” servants.”

William H Seward said...

Rich Kohler said...

“By vilifying dissension, the leadership creates a kill-the-messenger atmosphere and the balance of power ends up teetering unproductively between “disruptive” naysayers and self-interested “public” servants.”

Mrs. Kohler is a smart cookie. She summed up the Neimann era in one sentence.

Rich Kohler said...

And Neiman backed Puharic.

Don't get me started!