Grassroots Network of the Republican Party of Virginia

Mr. Ditch,

I would hope that a person who is a member of the Republican Party of VA thinks censorship is a thing found in communist Russia, Cuba and East Germany. But alas, it is alive and well in Virginia and propagated by our own Party. But how can this be? Surely one would look at the extremely negative opinion that will be formed when members are made aware of such an action. What do you and the Network administrators fear from the voice of the grass roots? Could it be a overwhelming sense of paranoia? Or is it the reality of the situation and the enormous outcry for Chairman Frederick to go. How does a man that obliviously cares about the Party and its health demonstrate to its grass roots patrons that their voice should be squelched? Maybe you should reread the letter I sent to Patricia Phillips and reread her response. Then look back at our founders and the Veterans since the Revolution who have paid in blood for the right of free speech. What triggered the removal? Maybe the private communication between two members questioning whether we would receive equal treatment in regard to notifying all members of a new group or where the group could be found. O. P., you are squandering an opportunity of goodwill and fair play which only you can set it right. You proudly bear the seal of the Republican Party of VA, yet today you tell 80 % of the elected members of the SCC and their constituents that their voice and opinion does not count. Remember the Seal belongs to all members of the Party.

Mike Wade

Views: 76

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ladies and Gentlemen,

After reviewing these posts it is hard not to point to some of these as shrill and insulting. I doubt that anything the Washington Post could do to us would be as damaging as having us constantly scratch each other’s eyeballs out in public or private. Regardless of where you stand on the issue of Chairman Jeff Frederick, or any other issue, it would do us all well to recall one of the maxims of Ronald Reagan. Two speakers yesterday reminded us of his caution that if you agree with me 85% of the time, you are my friend. In that vein, we should be seeking to conduct the discussions of the Party as a collection of friends. I freely admit that I am passionate in my support of Chairman Frederick and may or may not have “gone over the top” in some of my writing. It is not my intent nor should it be the intention of any of you to demean, degrade, or ridicule the opinions or actions of other well meaning Republicans.

I feel a little like Rodney King pleading for all of us to “get along” – so be it. There are things that are appropriate to discuss and there exist forums to facilitate that. Further, by joining the Republican Committee (at least in Prince William County) you agree to conduct yourself within certain guidelines. In that vein you have voluntarily curtailed some of your “freedom” to say promote Democrat or Independent candidates in this forum or unnecessarily attack Republicans. Accusing O.P. Ditch of “censorship” or curtailing freedom, is an attack and it is wrong. Subscribing guile or secrecy to someone based on inner workings of the software that governs the formation and access to groups is also unworthy of a fellow Republican and friend. All too often people say something electronically that they would never think of saying in person.

Let me make a couple of recommendations:

1. Never click submit while you are mad or hyperventilating.
2. Read what you wrote to someone you trust before you click submit.
3. If in doubt, don’t submit.
4. Imagine how you would feel if what you wrote showed up on the front page of The Washington Times.
5. Take care, once you click submit, you can’t get it back.
6. “I apologize” or “I didn’t mean to offend” are perfectly acceptable phrases for use in a body of friends.
7. Imagine that the person(s) that you are addressing is standing right in front of you.

I have a serious lack of confidence in the State Central Committee, but friends - I don’t mean to offend.

Best Regards,
Bill Card
BillI agree with 85% of what you just said friend.
Well Friend, now that we have lowered the decibel level, how do we proceed to a useful discussion?
It seems that we have a young Chairman who has a great deal of potential and good qualities. Firing him and standing up someone new seems to me to be wasteful and will only create more fodder for the Anti-Republican Press. They will have a field day. On the other hand, were you to help us come together and we walk out of the meeting united – I’m sure that you can see the potential value.
There has to be a win-win situation that we can craft out of this. What say you?

Let me first say that while I applaud your efforts to create a win-win situation I don't believe such an outcome is always possible. Let me say too that sometimes, when people behave poorly, a win-win is only possible when the poorly behaving person recognizes and repents of his or her error. I believe the current situation is exactly that.

Members of the SCC have:

1) tried to remove Jeff, in secret, while attempting to keep the thousands of people who voted for him completly ignorant of the charges against him. While I understand the need for a certain amount of discretion, e-mail to the delegates to last years convention would be a simple, easy way to put the power back in the hands of the people. To try to do so in secret stinks of contempt for the people who, in good faith, elected Jeff and suggests to even the most trusting soul that they are up to no good.

Can I remind you of some famous words penned by our third President of the United States? Thomas Jefferson said that:
"When in the course of of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

Where is the decent respect Thomas Jefferson spoke of?

2) made misrepresentations as to the actions, attitude and character of Jeff, trying to paint him as the unreasonable tyrrant who made unilateral decisions regarding votes or procedures for votes when all of those signers knew or should have known before signing such a letter that those accusations were false. They should have known because not only are there rules to prevent such things (Roberts Rules of Order) and they are able to question how things are done, but also because they are obligated to do so under those same rules.

3) the charges that Jeff somehow kept money for himself is really laughable in context. The context I am referring to is that 1) he kept no money whatsoever. 2) He did what he did as a stopgap until another contracter had their system up, and 3) in 3/5 the amount of time, he raised 10 times the amount of his predecessor. How does one summon righteous anger over success that broke no legal or moral codes?

The more I read about this, the more I want open meetings, frank discussions, a recorded non-voice, vote, and an apology to Jeff once all the accusations are proven false.

To me, a win-win would be Jeff keeps on doing what he has been doing in service to the Virginia Republican Party, and on the other side, the SCC rejects this vote and gets their integrity back.
I don’t disagree with a thing you said – how do we get the party mandarins to recognize how foolish this all looks to the outside world?
Bill Card said:
I don’t disagree with a thing you said – how do we get the party mandarins to recognize how foolish this all looks to the outside world?

Short of mind control techniques (if they even exist), I don't know. See Proverbs 26:11 for a description of fools returning to their folly.

Is there some way to force them to show cause? Come up with real evidence or kill the vote?

Maybe start calling local members of SCC and demanding a recorded vote that is NOT secret. This breaks with all kinds of tradition but when there is such taint of a railroading as there is in this case, I honestly think it is warrented. And a non-secret, recorded vote means that the SCC members would be accountable to us, the grassroots. If they can't stand the light of day intruding upon their proceedings, doesn't it make it that much more obvious where the problem lies??
Since the meeting appears to be still taking place on April 4, everyone with an interest should attend that meeting. Then you can see for yourself what transpires. If the SCC has a firm case against Frederick, it will be brought up and discussed (hopefully). If I am not mistaken some of their charges against Frederick was in him not properly allowing voting to take place within the committee. Let's see first if they have any case, and let's see if they hold themselves above what they seem to be accusing Frederick of. For me, they need to do the proving, since they are the ones that brought this mess up. If they can't, they should be held accountable for their wayward ways. I hope the Mariott is filled to overflow with people who want to see honesty and integrity in the RPV.
So let me get this straight. McDonnell is the only Republican running for governor, and you're not going to support him over one issue? What will you do in the general election when it's between him and one of the Democrats?

And why do you feel the need to curse? There's no need.

Dave Briggman said:
Wow...Mr. Ditch:

Why the hell would you remove negative postings about those who currently hold or seek office? You can attribute the lack of success in the Republican directly to many of those individuals.

You have numerous candidates for office (Bob McDonnell is the first candidate which comes to mind) who either sponsored or voted for legislation to allow non-attorney employees of a state agency to engage in the practice of law — a power no other similarly-situated non-attorney employee has throughout Virginia.

Additionally, because McDonnell failed to adequately oversee this particular agency, the legislation he requested, above, was implemented in such a manner (retroactively) so as to constitute either a Bill of Attainder or an ex post facto law.

I for one, will do my best to ensure McDonnell's not elected as the Governor of Virginia.

It is very concerning to me that you would even think of removing such information whether it be in your "mission statement" or not.

Please take a deep breath and back off. Comparing management of this site to communists is neither productive nor accurate. If you don't like something please state your objection without resorting to such hyperbole.

Otherwise, I second what Bill Card said at 8am

Reply to Discussion









(sales help fund this site)




© 2021   Created by Tom Whitmore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service