The Lehman Debacle Continues
Nathan Greene
54 Comments
By Emily Geiger
Well, I suppose since I started this whole mess, it's time for me to chime in again. It seems this whole Kim Lehman thing just keeps escalating.
Since I first wrote about this situation almost two weeks ago, the proverbial doo-doo has hit the fan. People, including the 2nd congressional district's state central committee members, have called for Lehman to apologize or step down from her position as national committee woman, and now it seems they are calling for both.
There have also now been others in the blogosphere, our friends at the Iowa Defense Alliance, who are calling those who no longer support Lehman as national committee woman hypocrites because, they say, there was no similar action for the removal of Gwen Eilers, the Clayton County GOP chairperson who recently encouraged people to write in Steve Rathje in the race against Tom Harkin, rather than support our party nominee, Christopher Reed.
Ok, let me start at the beginning. I don't have a problem with someone from a pro-life organization holding a position of authority in the state party. I think it is important that we have party leadership that actually provides leadership on the life issue, and doesn't just take that issue, and its supporters, for granted.
What I do have a problem with is someone who is a pro-life leader and a party official utterly distorting a Republican candidate's position on the life issue, calling them "pro-abortion" when they are clearly not. I also have a problem with the hypocrisy of making John McCain out to be a pro-life savior, and then, in the next breath, condemning a candidate who is actually better on the life issue than John McCain.
As for the allegations of the Iowa Defense Alliance, they have a point, but I think they are mistaken on a few counts. I don't know of anyone who thought what Gwen Eilers did was a good idea or that that it was proper action for a county chair, including myself. In fact, as David Chung pointed out, he and other SCC members did condemn her actions and call for her to step down.
The difference here is twofold. First is scope. A member of the SCC (i.e. our national committee woman) stabbing a candidate in the back is a far bigger deal than a county chair doing so. As a hypothetical analogy, it's like comparing a county auditor getting caught for wrong doing, versus state auditor Dave Vaudt getting caught for wrong doing (remember this is a hypothetical... Vaudt is as clean as they come). One is bad. The other is hugely bad and a much bigger deal.
The second way this is different is in the remedy. There are rules that have to be followed. The only people that can remove Eilers are the people in her county, or the other county chairs in her district, not the SCC. With Lehman being on the SCC, the SCC members appear to have more authority to influence and remedy the situation.
And while we are on this topic, I first want to give IDA kudos for the work they are doing in supporting conservative statehouse candidates. They are working hard for those guys, and that is great. However, they need to be careful about who they call hypocrites. They are upset at the people who want Lehman gone, but not Eilers. Yet, it seems they want Eilers gone, but not Lehman. That's a two way street.
Secondly, I don't believe them when they try to imply in their post that their feelings on the Lehman issue have nothing to do with their feelings on Miller-Meeks. Like Lehman, IDA has attacked Miller-Meeks, calling her a "Democrat in Republican clothing" (a jab suspiciously similar to that thrown out by Lehman herself in the primary) without citing a single fact supporting that accusation. I find it ironic that they also bash Grassley on that same page for supporting the bailout. I wonder if they know that Miller-Meeks strongly opposed the bailout? If so, they sure aren't giving her any credit for it.
Miller-Meeks is a remarkable candidate who has the best chance of beating an incumbent of any congressional challenger in the state. And she's trying to take out one of the most liberal, ineffective congressmen in Dave Loebsack that this state has ever seen. We should all be doing all we can to help her.
The last point I want to make is how much this whole thing saddens me. With the huge surge of grassroots conservative support that got Kim Lehman elected (despite the protests from the mods in the party), Kim had a real opportunity to again focus interest on the pro-life issue and solidify its importance in the party. Then, she inexplicably lied about a candidate on the life issue (of all things), and flushed it all down the toilet.
She did exactly what the moderates who opposed her said she would, and now they are gloating, and the lifers in the party are on the defensive, having been damaged by one of the people who could have helped them the most.
Reader Comments (54)
Emily:
Let me say this, as a pro-life conservative who has fought the fight for many years.
If this Lehman problem isn't remedied by some drastic action, notably, her removal before the election, I will never support IRTL again. Or ICA. Or RPI.
Lehman came out in the PRIMARY for Peter Teahen and against Miller-Meeks. She attacked her then, before she was a National Committeewoman. Her excuses that some "junior staffer" sent out the email are as hollow as her head...it came from her private email account AND it has since been mailed in hard copy.
She laid in wait, like a viper snake, until the worst possible time, and then struck with all of her venom.
And this will be the result:
She has irreparably damaged the credible work of all those who label themselves as "social conservatives." Never again will they have the sway with candidates or campaigns after her ridiculous actions. She has set the "movement" back 25 years.
And this is what troubles me the most. Every single time that Congressman Loebsack votes against life and for abortion and the liberal agenda of Obama, Kim Lehman will have the responsibility for it. She will own each and every vote. Because rather than work with a pro-life candidate (Miller-Meeks), she chose to sabotage her and in effect, support pro-abortion Loebsack.
How in the hell does that "advance the agenda"?
Kim Lehman, if she is anything other than an ego-centric hate mongerer, should do the right thing and step down.
Now.
Thank you for complimenting us on the work we are doing for the Iowa candidates. We only are focusing on two federal candidates: Reed and Hartsuch. They are the strongest federal candidates out there on the issues of education, life, and family. We don't choose candidates by what chance they have of winning. We choose them by their convictions. We haven't covered Miller-Meeks campaign since the primaries so that is why you won't see any posts about what she is saying or doing now.
Thank you for complimenting us on the work we are doing for the Iowa candidates. We only are focusing on two federal candidates: Reed and Hartsuch. They are the strongest federal candidates out there on the issues of education, life, and family. We don't choose candidates by what chance they have of winning. We choose them by their convictions. We haven't covered Miller-Meeks campaign since the primaries so that is why you won't see any posts about what she is saying or doing now.
Sorry, fat finger.
You SHOULD be covering Miller-Meeks's race Iowans Rock...for the VERY reasons you cite covering Reed and Hartsuch.
Education--this is a woman who WORKED her way through school..college and med school..she of ALL of our candidates understands the value of an education.
Life--she's stated on the record multiple times she's pro-life. For God's sake she's a very Catholic woman married 25 years to the same man, 2 great kids..What more do you people want?
Family--This is a woman who comes from a family of 8 children..her husband a family of 9 children. Miller-Meeks understands the importance of family. The family has been her base of support ALL her life..
Yet somehow to you all over at IDA..that's just not good enough for you...She's just not PURE enough for you. Instead..you'd rather tie your flag to candidates who've been completely inept in their campaigns.
Hell..Hartsuch couldn't even show up ON TIME for his debate with Braley last night!! Reed's spent more time making a fool of himself than actual campaigning..
But NO...No..we can't support Miller-Meeks..I mean..she's got two names ya know..That means she's not Christian enough for us..and yeah..we heard she did an abortion ya know..Oh..she's an she's an EYE doctor? Umm..umm...
Now do you see how FOOLISH you all are? I'm guessing not...and thats...the most pathetic part of it all..
Sorry, Mike, but too many candidates and not enough of us. We can only support so many and these are the ones we feel strongest about. Plus, we have the Iowa statehouse to worry about. If you believe in Miller-Meeks so much maybe you should blog about her instead of cutting us down.
Mike,
We have our reasons for not supporting Miller-Meeks. However we are not going to air them at this point in time because we don't want to provide any information that the Democrats can use against her.
As for your accusation of her not being pure enough. We have criteria that candidates must meet to get our support. She didn't meet that criteria. It is as simple as that.
I am sorry if you can't accept that someones opinion differs from your own.
Al
The IRTL led by Lehman disparaged Miller-Meeks not only in the primary but also via the newsletter. Namecalling and an intentional mischaracterization of her position on life is very disturbing. Even after being confronted by the very people who elected Ms. Lehman, and after her 10,000 weak-ass excuses she STILL sent it out via hard copy in the mail.
No credibility here Al, zip, none, nada, zilch.
Al, I'm sorry if you can't accept this factual account of the situation.
Not supporting a candidate because of 2 last names?
Too funny ya know!!!!
oh and supertramp fan.... your views on "al" mean zip, none, nada, zilch to me. At least Al seems to be working hard on as many candidates as he can while some people just comment away to make themselves feel important.
name calling like pathetic and foolish just goes to show that anyone can comment anything.
Won't be checking back here for others who seem to have so much time on their hands and low vocab skills as to take on people who do work for quality candidates.
Two last names and being pro-abortion do it for me. As a conservative I cannot vote for Miller-Meeks. Sorry, just can't do it.
You all think that Miller-Meeks was wronged by this. She has NO name ID at all in district and I have hardly seen or heard an ad for her.
You got it! We don't support no two-namers. I guess you found us out.
Welp, I'm going to disappoint most of you and vote for that hyphenated name person anyway.
MILLER-MEEKS for CONGRESS!!!
have you even spoken to her?
Reed-Reed for Senate!
Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks is candidate above this type of politics. Most of these comments have little to no fact supporting them. I cannot believe anyone is actually associating Dr. Miller-Meeks with sort of libelous statements.
Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks is the spirit of the Republican party that we need. She is pro-life and pro-family.
If you don't believe me, contact the campaign: helpheal@millermeeksforcongress.com.
I am just asking for you to get the facts. The campaign will be more than happy for you to be able to communicate with Miller-Meeks about her positions that everyone seems to be distorting. Please, don't be ignorant, be informed.
Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks is the best thing that could have happened to the Republican Party this year. Right now, she seems to be the only Republican congressional candidate to be able to beat a Democratic incumbent. The numbers and volunteering is there. I am sure the campaign is not asking for handouts. They understand that not every organization is now going to be able to support every pro-life, pro-family candidacy. I just ask that people stay respectful and professional.
We need to start holding people to higher standards. Do we expect future generations to act disrespectful and make up illogical, non-factual statements? NO! Please set an example. We are all better than this.
Dr. Miller-Meeks a great candidate and a great visionary leader. If you have a question or problem, contact the campaign (helpheal@millermeeksforcongress.com) or at the very least keep your ignorant comments to yourself.
If it was not considered a conflict of interest from the very beginning for Kim to be National Committee woman and IRTL head, why does it become a conflict of interest when she states an opinion while wearing only one hat of her two hats, and the IRTL hat at that?
I read that somebody said Kim sent her IRTL letter about MMM from her personal e-mail and that this represented a conflict because it wasn't sent as IRTL business from an IRTL e-mail address...
but then again it was NOT sent as National Committee business from Kim's email as National Committee woman ....
To me, unless Kim sent the email out as National Committee business, it is NOT National Committee business and therefore there is no conflict...
Is this logical or not?
Miller Meeks pro-abortion? Where's the proof? Oh yeah, the 'proof' in the IRTL letter was the same 'proof' that Peter Teahen, the pathological liar gave in one of his mailers during the primary campaign, the same campaign the Lehman was heavily involved with.
Lehman has an axe to grind. Her boy Teahen lost and she's still carrying the torch, and she used the IRTL letter to spread Teahen's pathological lies. Her credibility is zero and she needs to step down from her GOP position.
I think that not voting for someone who has two last names is crazy. What on earth does that have to do with ANYTHING? Listen to her. She is awesome! She is doing so much for this district and she will continue to do so for a long time to come. I have gotten involved and I have spoken with her and her family on many occassions. Stop using your eyes to let you decided what to do and start using your ears. If you would like to ask her any questions, she is wonderful at returning phone calls and emails. As for the abortion thing, if she has performed one, then I have had one! If she had performed one then she would lose her license to operate on EYES!
What this bickering is all about is nuts. I don't know Kim that well, but I think that there was a person that was a million times more suited for the National Committee woman position in Sandy Greiner!
neighbay - because we aren't liberal Democrats. Your post sounds like some Algore 'no controlling legal authority' stuff.
Sending it via her email means she read the contents before sending in and in essence gave her approval. She has done nothing to distance herself from that letter since.
She has a taken a position to represent ALL our GOP candidates. She should be 1000 miles away from this letter, yet she not only emailed it from her computer, it looks like she may have borrowed the language verbatim from Teahen's campaign.
It's starting to smell way beyond conflict of interest and looks more like she's using the IRTL to grind her personal axe and deliberately undermine a GOP candidate while being in a position where she's supposed to support GOP candidates.
Proud American-- you aren't getting the jokes. It has nothing to do with her having two names. It's called sarcasm.
I've been sitting on this site for a while just shaking my head.
This issue (Emily's post) isn't about IRTL or Miller-Meeks. It's about Ms. Lehman not being able to support nominated republican candidates in the general election. She cannot fulfill her role as national committee woman.
In the Quad City Times Ms. Lehman was quoted as saying:
"the anti-abortion plank makes up an important part of the Republican Party’s platform," and she said "it’s her job as national committeewoman to uphold basic Republican principles."
Ms Lehman has EVERY right to say that as the IRTL President. But she PLAINLY says in this quote that she feels it's her role as national committeewoman to police/vet nominated candidates for the general election relative to policy.
I SO disagree with that. Ms Lehman is wrong and must leave the SCC and the national committee woman position.
The totally SAD thing about this is Miller-Meeks is pro-life and so am I!
It's doublespeak IowaFan, and after the Clinton's and Obama I have no use for it.
I agree, Lehman needs to go.
As National Committeewoman Lehman has every right in the world to not support a Republican who does not uphold the planks in the platform. But she did not lash out at Miller-Meeks as the National Committeewoman, she did it as head of the IRTL. Who cares what computer she used. You can argue all you want that Miller-Meeks is pro-life, but IRTL must have thought otherwise. The only mistake they made was not throwing Mac under the bus with her.
The issue everyone seems to be ignoring is the WAY IRL's rejection of MMM was handled.
It could have been handled without the 'showboating', and they could have simply not endorsed, if they had reason to believe she isn't Pro Life. (I've talked to her and I believe she IS Pro life)
But to bandy about slurs is going a little overboard, especially for a group who wants to be identified as Christian. This was not handled in a Christ like manner, nor in a PROFESSIONAL manner.
Proud American,
I have to disagree with your comments that she is wonderful at returning emails and calls. I tried to repeatedly contact her during the primaries, but I never heard a word from her.