Mental gymnastics at best.

So a $500 donation is not an endorsement? I am guessing it depends on what the definition of 'is' is.

Then he hides behind the 1st Amendment. Clue for you dear sir, the whole non-endorsement thing does not strip you of your 1st Amendment. It punishes you for violating neutrality. Back to Kojack or Beretta (don't remember which) "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime."

You can donate/endorse all the people you want, right up there with Stan Lockhart and Curt Bramble (implied in this story), just be prepared to live with the consequences of your action.

You are just like another Republican, relying to an extent on the fact that your Republican buddies are the foxes guarding the hen house. You can break as many rules as you want, and play as much mental gymnastics as you want, you win becuase you and your buddies are the judges.

Talk about crooked!

And you campaigned on ethics! Holy cow buddy!

As a staunch, die-hard Republican, you have become exactly what you campaigned against. When you accept responsibility as a Republican officer you are to ensure FAIRNESS. You just blew it!

Todd Weiler, a true class act, in the mold of Stan Lockhart, Enid Greene, Curt Bramble, Becky Lockhart, Susan Bramble, Hannah Lockhart, Marian Monnahan, Greg Curtis, James Evans, Dana Dickson, Clair Ellis, Mark Barton, Lois Bulloch, Carrie Dickson, Mark Towner, Carrie Towner, David Linford, Jack Powers, Chris Cannon, Joe Cannon, Rob Bishop, Steve White, Spencer Stokes, Jon Huntsman, Jr., Jon Huntsman, Sr., Marty Stephens, Denise Lindberg, Chris Herrod, Orrin Hatch, Bob Bennett, Ellis Ivory, Mark Cluff, Patti Florence, Robert Wright, John Solomon, Jeremy Roberts, Amy Roberts, Charles Hardy, Jennifer Hardy, Sarah Thompson, Will Thompson, Marreen Casper, Nancy Workman, Gerri Shaw, Kevin Wright, Mike Lee, the Fabulous Five, the Jefferson 12, the Magnificent 144,000, the keepers of the Rameumpton, Ivan Dubois, Land Reay, Jeff Hartley, Chris Bleak, Alan Dayton, Kat Dayton, Spencer Jenkins, Scott Simpson, Scott Parker, Rich Kuchinsky, Christie Moore, Tom Feeney, Bruce Hough, Energy Solutions, Skoal Copenhagen, Tetris, Parents for Choice in Education, Dick Perry, Doug Short, rGrumpy, Sneezy, Jack the Ripper and Hannibal Lechter. Okay, so a couple of those "people " are fictitious, and the corporations and lobbyists that keep them fat, happy, barefoot, and degraded. It's enough to make a man bulimic.

That's ridiculous to say the guy can't donate to anyone. This is still America (barely).

Bernick writes that party officials are being "lamblasted" -- but he is the only one doing the "lamblasting".

This article amounts to a whole lot of fluff. Where's the meat? Bernick's theme this past month is that party officials are using their influence to help incumbents stave off challengers. In this race, there was no incumbent. Weiler is only guilty of being a loyal friend.

If Weiler had stood up at the convention and said he was the party vice chairman and asked the delegates to vote for Parry, then fine -- that would have been inappropriate. Likewise, if his name or face had appeared on Parry's campaign literature, again that would have been inappropriate.

But to give a long-time neighbor and friend some of his personal money -- I don't see a scandal. This state needs more individuals who are willing to get involved and donate money to good candidates. One of the reason that lobbyists have so much influence is that they are the only ones who give money to the candidates.

To publicly say you support one candidate over the other, would be endorsing him. To publicly support him with a substantial donation, publicly says you support him, and with more than just words.

Let's not get silly with "rights". Yes, Weiler has the right to support whomever he wants. All he has to do is resign his position as a party officer.

He voluntarily restrained that right when he became a party officer, and thus became subject to the Neutrality bylaw of which he proudly claims authorship.

To say that donating money to one contestant in a race is not supporting him over his opponent is just silliness and dishonesty. I would expect this type of statement from Bill or Hillary Clinton, but not from the Vice Chair of the Utah Republican Party.

Do you feel that Weiler, Lockhart, et al? It's a new, cleansing wind blowing in the Utah GOP.

The writing is on the wall. Your days are numbered.

I happen to know Weiler very well and have no doubt he is an honest and forthright person. In this situation he supported his friend in the best way possible, given his position with the party. Weiler sought to hide nothing and is completely up front when confronted by those who are seeking to slander. Any attempts to diminish his great character are ridiculous.

What's wrong with supporting your neighbor/great friend?? Weiler is an honest, hard working American, not to mention a dedicated person who cares about our great state! Go Weiler!!

The problem is that there is different treatment between individuals who break party laws. Patrick Reagan and Drew Chamberlain were removed from their precinct chair positions because he used a voting method the party did not like. Even though only two people in his caucus complained he was removed from his position.

We have party leadership openly violating party laws and nothing is done.

We get he is a nice guy, he is honest. So was Patrick Reagan and Drew Chamberlain.

Houston we have a problem.

A true difference between conservatism and liberalism the concept of laws. Conservatives believe that laws are meant to punish conduct. Liberals, prohibit conduct.

I know it's half full, half empty but there it is. We have freedom given to us by G--. Free agency to do what we want. We can drive drunk, we can rob restaurants, we can help old ladies across the street. Freedom is our inherent right as divinely created beings.

Laws measure what we consider appropriate conduct and weigh the severity of the conduct by attaching penalties, or consequences to those actions. Steal a pack of gum as a 5 year old, one consequence. As a 30 year old, another consequence. Rob a bank with a pistol a different consequence.

The concenpt of the Republican Party process is to create a fair mechanism whereby the rank and file can make the best decision. We the People make these decisions. As of late we have seen high ranking officers play favorites.

As a measure of this conduct we have added consequences to doing so. Mr Weiler as an attorney knows he has his right. He also knows it comes with consequences.

He's wrong. Let the consequences follow.

ENOUGH! Enough with deceit and hypocrisy! Enough with rhetoric and semantics! Enough with making up new rules to cover yourself when you get caught! Enough with crying "victim" when you get caught! Enough with the "rules were made to be broken" routine we all heard in middle school! Enough with the bully routine in having it both ways! Enough with the diversionary events to keep the focus off of what you are doing! Enough with the pointing finger to "blame" somebody else for what you are doing! Enough with breaking RNC rules and your own party by-laws! Enough with the "vague interpretation," the same way criminals do, to justify your actions! Enough with the lame excuses to "explain" fundraisers for incumbents, withholding/charging for free lists to the candidates, appointing buddies as automatic delegates, and getting elected or appointed as a delegate in a district that you don't live in! Enough of hearing from family members that the Kansas City TV station mentioned in passing that the Utah GOP is the most corrupt GOP in the entire nation! Enough with arresting and discrediting people who object to your corrupt, criminal behavior!

Thanks, Deseret News! John Q. Public: DO something!

Enough with enough, that comment was painful to read. It seems that no one knows the difference between the definitions of "donation" and "endorsement" so may I suggest to all of you that have commented negatively, especially BBKING, to put that wonderful Webster's dictionary to use and look it up. Weiler has done nothing wrong. If any of you knew him personally, as I do, you would know what a great person he is, and of all the corrupt and crooked politians that there are in this country, we should feel lucky to have someone with real morals and standards representing the Republican party.

endorsement

noun
1. a promotional statement (as found on the dust jackets of books); "the author got all his friends to write blurbs for his book"
2. a speech seconding a motion; "do I hear a second?" [syn: second]
3. formal and explicit approval; "a Democrat usually gets the union's endorsement" [syn: sanction]
4. a signature that validates something; "the cashier would not cash the check without an endorsement"
5. the act of endorsing; "a star athlete can make a lot of money from endorsements"

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

Hey Utah... Wake up! Lockhart's daughter is made a delegate in a district she didn't even live in. Weiler endorses a candidate when the bylaws say nada. Republican delegates continue to nominate the pro-voucher, most Right-wing pro-voucher candidates out there.

The Utah GOP is so out of touch with the needs of everyday Utahns it is sickening. Continue to push your privatize everything ideology and you will find this Republican voting a straight Democratic ticket.

The time has come!

What's wrong with helping your friend or neighbor? Weiler is the vice chair! Notice that the Democrats don't seem to pull the same bull.

To those who sincerely question whether this is really wrong:

When Todd Weiler talks about "writing the language" of the neutrality Bylaw, he isn't joshing.

At the time that a neutrality provision was first submitted to the Utah Republican Party State Central Committee, by a grassroots member of the committee from Sevier County, party insiders Todd Weiler (attorney), James Evans (party chair), Dana Dickson (party vice chair) and Representative Becky Lockhart, who had majority control of the State GOP's Constitution and Bylaws Committee hijacked the proposal and carved the very loophole into the language that Mr. Weiler and his apologists so gleefully point to as they proclaim their innocence.

This same group then secured changes the rules to make it impossible for grassroots members of the party to make any changes to the party's rules without approval of this same captured C&B Committee.

Want reform chickens? Get four foxes on a seven-fox committee to agree that your idea is a good idea. If it puts the chickens back on an equal footing with the foxes, you probably won't get too far.

A better use of your time would be teaching pigs to fly.

I love that the democrats care so much about how the Republican party is run...

If you are voting Democrat then you are a democrat...sorry...

If the republican party is out of touch with the people then why is this state republican, and one of the most republican...I think you're out of touch with the people...

Wow, let's hope the mext time that Weiler decides to donate a dollar or two to the Salvation Army Santa Clause he stops to make sure that said Santa is in no way affiliated with the Republican party! What a joke that this thread has attracked so much attention!

Wow. Let's hope that the next time Weiler decided to donate a dollar or two to the Salvation Army Santa Claus he stops to make sure that said Santa Claus is in no way affiliated with the Republican Party. It's a joke that this thread has received so much attention!

While I can't comment on the true intent within Todd's heart this situation certainly smells funny to say the least.

I can see how Todd might justify his actions by saying this is not a public endorsement of a candidate (even though there is no opponent) but it sure does walk a fine line in my book.

I mean giving a candidate a cash donation may not be done in public but it sure is an endorsement.

The main point here is that the people in power are trying to put people in power that will keep them in power. Lots of back scratching and favors to keep the same people in power.

Should there not be term limits for these things?

Todd Says, "I know that bylaw well. I helped write it."

You know it too well Todd. You helped write the loopholes.

I wrote the first Neutrality bylaw that was proposed. It said, "No State Party officer or National Committee member shall endorse, support, oppose, contribute money or in-kind aid, or work
for the campaign of any Republican candidate before the candidate has been declared to be the official nominee of the party for the office sought by the candidate.

Can you see the difference between what a grass-roots Republican thinks nuetrality is and what the party insiders would like it to be?

I didn't leave any loopholes in my proposal, so Todd's C&B committee cane out with one that they liked better because it had enough loopholes to allow themselves to do candidate mailers, contributions, or anything short of an outright endorsement. But if anyone they didn't like were to dance to close to the line they would get clobbered!

Todd, if you don't want to remain neutral you don't have to be a party officer.

NEUTRAL
1. taking no sides: belonging to, favoring, or assisting no side in a war, dispute, contest, or controversy
Encarta® World English Dictionary

Donating to the Salvation Army has no relevance to the situation mentioned in the Deseret News article which states Mr. Weiler (an elected Republican Officer) gave money to one Republican candidate (friend or not) in an election where there are multiple Republican candidates running for the same office!

As a past member of Cache County's Republican Executive committee, it was extremely important not to endorse one specific candidate when opposed for the same office within the party.

Giving money to one specific candidate is not a "neutral" act. It shows favoritism, no matter how you word it. Supporting a neighbor or friend is great...when you are not a Republican Officer in the area where your friend is running as an opposed candidate.

I think Tood knew exactly what he was doing and knew what the chances were for blowback, but being in the officers chair apparently did not deter him in the least, that smacks of a very arrogant attitude especially if you consider he helped write
the language for the rules in the first place, at the very least it is the appearance of an endorsement even if he claims it isn't.......

Todd has tried to intimidate other candidates as well by accusing them of not being "Republican" enough. That is not neutral.

Todd Weiler needs to resign!