03/17/09
Frederick Responds to SCC
By Loudoun Insider
Jason Kenney has the full letter posted at Bearing Drift. I don’t have the time to dissect it now – but have at it in comments here or there. Needless to say in my first reading I find more than a few statements that leave me trusting Frederick even less than before.
UPDATE: Great graphic sent to me by rabble rouser – thanks! (emperor spelled wrong however!)
Sorry Arthur- the last comment was from me #00.
The rules that elected Frederick, the Party Plan, also allow for removal of the Chairman by a super majority of 75% of the State Central Committee. If they vote that way, he’s gone. It’s very simple.
A of F
Mr. Frederick is not a friend of conservatism. If he is a conservative he will follow the lead in the rules and ethics regardless and not do what other people have done in the past. Politicians are ambitious; that it is what makes them run for office. Mr. Frederick’s ambitions are going one step further. Not only does he want to have control of the chairman position, but also to have a close intervention on the 52nd delegate seat. That is what makes his ambition ANTI AMERICAN. The fact that other politicians have done the same does not excuse Mr. Frederick’s abuse of his chair to accomplish that, nor does it excuse the inequality that other candidates will face. It is likely that other possible good candidates could drop their aspirations when some of them found that Mr. Frederick was going to be directly involved in Mrs. Frederick postulation and campaign. Mr. Frederick has deteriorated the system by making a direct involvement on the race, creating a negative effect on Conservative Republicans like my family. We will support the Republican candidates this year, but we will not support any candidate that is appointed directly by Mr. Frederick or any other chairman. Also we will not support any other candidates that follow abuse of power similarly shown like Mr. Frederick.
A of F. People can think and excuse whatever they want about Mr. Frederick. My family and many of the Hispanic Americans that I know do not support Mr. Frederick. He is an embarrassment to Conservative Latinos in Prince William.
Look Arthur I have said repeatedly I am not a “defender” nor an apologist for Frederick. I just believe people are picking and choosing applications and are creating double standards that are every bit as anti-American as what you accuse Frederick of. Many people here are talking about the central committee. So how about we take the time to investigate those folks a bit and their track records. If they get the 75%, you will not here me gripe about it, so be it. But we all know this thing with Jeff has been an insider ordeal since May with Hager supporters. No one here as been able to explain why this is not a power grab and not simply ego driving the endeavor to settle old scores. How will the State GOP be better without the current Chair? Well no one really knows, but he just needs to go and the State GOP can pick up the pieces afterward. You get your 75% thats fine, but it would be interesting to know who people here think should replace him and guide the Party.
No disrespect but I would venture to say that there a few “conservatives” of Hispanic decent in PWC if exit polling data from last years elections is any indication. Afterall, we are constantly being told that the GOP stance on immigration has created a swell in Democrat support in places like PWC. Maybe they have it wrong.
I’ve just been humored by all the smoke and heat generated since someone started a little pushback against the anti-Frederick forces.
It’s perfectly fine for the elected officials (and don’t tell me Virginians have voted for the last several Democrats statewide because of who our CHAIRMAN was; it’s because of a bunch of pathetic candidates) to destroy Jeff’s reputation to the whole world, but when somebody starts sending out some phone calls urging contacts to SCC members in suport of Jeff, it’s a low blow, and “destructive to fellow Republicans!”
And please, let’s stop calling the SCC the “grassroots.” That’s kinda like calling the President’s Cabinet “grassroots activists.” There are few more insulated and truly unrepresentative bodies around than SCC. Most of the grassroots (defined as the delegates who attend conventions(and 70% of them voted for Jeff)) have no clue who their SCC member even is!
If they can prove truly intentional and illegal conduct, I don’t think anyone will argue that we shouldn’t hold Jeff accountable. But the fact is, SCC has made a longtime habit of trying to remove chairs duly elected by the true grassroots, delegates to the convention.
A couple of comments:
1. Why did McDonnell stick his finger in this? What in the world was McDonnell thinking to turn a fairly peaceful coronation into a bloodbath just in time for the convention? As far as I can see, Jeff hasn’t gone after anyone, but a lot of sharks are circling him.
2. There are two views of what a party is for. To elaborate:
First is the John Warner view: A party is a group of serfs, sworn to work for their lords (the Republican Incumbents) regardless of how the lords betray our platform.
Second is the grassroots view, that a party is a group of people, come together around shared principles, to elect candidates who subscribe to those principles, hold them accountable to those principles, and throw them the heck out of office when they cease to represent those principles.
To the elected officials and SCC types of the Warner persuasion, you deserve a little pushback, and it’s a breath of fresh air to see it.
To the grassroots, if they do “get” Jeff, you have another chance to elect a chairman of your choice on May 30. And in a couple of years, you can express your feelings to your SCC members who flaunt your instructions. Run against them, recruit delegates, and throw them out of office.
As Mr. Jefferson put it, A little revolution now and again is a good thing. Lord knows our party needs it desperately. And yes, we need some new chairmen. But not at the state level. May I suggest it’s time to replace some dead wood in some district chair spots?
Unless and until they prove ACTUAL misconduct, not just political witch hunts, I say, Go, Jeff, go!
A of F
Once again you have gone away from my subject. I repeat to you or any other person who don’t want to debate this point. Is Mr. Frederick correct as a chairman to throw his support for a candidate before a primary? Or should Mr. Frederick be neutral? Is Mr. Frederick direct enrolment in Mrs. Frederick drafting and campaign fair to any other possible candidates? It is this a principle of fairness among Conservatives? To use his power and take advantage of the circumstances for his own personal rule!
Once again you have gone off subject. Mr. Frederick is a disgrace to Conservative Latinos because his behavior is reminiscent of Mr. Peron and Mr. Kirchner in Argentinean politics. It is possibly difficult for you to understand that. Most Latinos have experienced Conservative mistakes in power and many know of that danger. You and others are mentioning immigration as a Conservative issue, while immigration is an American issue. For your information, for you or anyone one else to bring immigration into this discussion is rude and irrelevant. To question that Hispanic Conservatives exist in PWC is an insult. The vast majority of Latinos are conservative. Come to Church on any weekend and look for yourself. Oh I forgot you probably think that Latinos are not free to have a religious service in Spanish, or maybe they are not Conservative enough because they don’t speak English well. Any more insults from you to Latinos? I am all ears!
A of F; you have a long way to go to make your case to change my family or my friends’ position in favor of Mr. Frederick. He can stay in his post. I don’t care. For our family it is simple; we don’t support his use of the chairman position to take an advantaged place in the 52nd delegate race. It is that simple.
Rick, you’ve apparently bought Frederick’s snake oil completely. Read the post above about his PAC and the $130,000 he spent to win the Chairmanship. He is no more “grassroots” than any other member of RPV and its units. The SCC members are also elected at conventions, by more delegates than elected Frederick – that argument is so ridiculous that his election is some huge “grassroots” phenomenon.
For the love Arthur, are we not talking about the guys wife. Yeah I would like to see you not throw your support publically behind your wife with the media hounding you with twenty questions about it. You still reaching here. Plenty of peoolle experienced their support for Jeff and also Hager long before the “vote” at convention which frankly is just like a primary of sorts I guess. Its his wife.
I though you were all about family values? hahahaha
Alter of Freedom.
Family value starts with EQUALITY.
The Chairman is not endorsing equality; he’s not supposed to push any candidate into the limelight and give him or her, the unfair advantage over others, and that includes his wife. Frederick is showing a conflict of interest by asking people to draft and support his wife over other Republican candidates. Hypocrisy is not a family value either. Why is that a difficult concept for you to understand?