McDonnell seeking a deal on Frederick?
By JR Hoeft | Thursday, March 26th, 2009 | PoliticsApparently there was a meeting in Albemarle (5th District) this week to discuss such a deal.
Details are sketchy — and I still have to get some primary sources — but it looks like McDonnell feels like he was sold a bill of goods on Frederick’s “embezzlement”.
In related news, it appears that one of the favored candidates for chair by those seeking to remove Frederick is pro-choice.
Apparently Sandy Liddy Bourne – G. Gordon Liddy’s daughter – a name whom some State Central Committee members have whispered as a successor to Frederick, is open about favoring a woman’s “right” to choose. In a 1995 interview with the New York Times, Bourne contrasted herself with her well-known father:
“I’m very different,” she said. “I support a woman’s right to choose, that’s one difference. And I’m more of a fiscal conservative.”
As they say, developing…
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
31 Responses to "McDonnell seeking a deal on Frederick?"
1995 was a long time ago. Is she still pro-choice? Because that would be a deal breaker…
I realize that not everyone who wanted Frederick gone are moderate.
I do believe that, for some, this is an attempt to take over the party’s message in order to make it more moderate.
Deal breaker… and I second Steven’s observations. For some this is a question of process and party building, for others it’s a move to the left.
Shaun, I can’t name a person – except one and only one CD chair – who could even be called as part of a move to move RPV to moderate – which is a far cry from Left. Maybe you can name others. Not me.
I see it as an exercise in power, power, power, and the money that flows through RPV. Control issues, not ideology.
I am aware of speculation on this blog and elsewhere about possible candidates for Chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia. I consider such speculation premature, given that there is no vacancy in the RPV Chairmanship at this time. Out of respect to the State Central Committee, the current Chairman, Jeff Frederick, and the difficult proceeding they will have on April 4, I trust that the State Central Committee members and Jeff Frederick will resolve this personnel management matter in the appropriate manner at the appropriate time.
As such, I consider their conflict an internal party matter.
Let me be clear on where I stand on the Life issue mentioned in this blog. Like Ronald Reagan, I am Pro-Life with exceptions for rape, incest and the physical life of the mother. I support a woman’s right to choose under these limited, tragic circumstances.
As a conservative I look forward to positive and compassonate leadership so that our Republican family can get back to winning elections again.
Gentlemen, I am going back to watching the basketball tournaments…
Best wishes,
Sandy Liddy Bourne
In the next 9 days the accusations are going to fly on both sides, let’s take them all with a grain of salt.
Mr. Bowden,
Would the gentleman for once read the charges and then look at the Chairman’s defense package. I know your intellect so please use it. Your claim of power and money are unfounded and when the truth is known you will see it is young Frederick who fights for total control. His scorched earth policy and folks like yourself are doing the real damage to the Party. This private matter was made public in less than an hour by Jeff Frederick day one, when he included Jeff Ryer on a con call over the package Mike Thomas tried to drop off to him. Yes, he came back to RPV, once the coast was clear. You like the rest of J- Fred’s supporters are purposely working to split the Party. I know who you are Bowden, you fool others but not me.
Greetings from Iowa. I found a free WiFi hotspot.
I just hope the next (I hope I am not wrong in speaking past tense) is not an embarassment.
I hope the next RPV Chairman is not such a pro-life extremist that they insist birth control is a sin. Increased use of birth control would result in decreased abortions.
I hope the next RPV Chairman is not such an Intelligent Design extremist that they insist the world is only a few thousand years old, and that because of this evolution is an impossibility.
If the Republican is going to insist on circling the wagons around the extremists, moderates are not going to join the party (or Party).
I think all this talk of getting moderates to join the party is hilarious. A party without principals is nothing more than a conspiracy to overthrow the government. How about we try convincing people who are currently moderates to become conservatives and join the party? Otherwise we are just pulling more people into our tent that will do nothing but compromise our values like the party has done for decades.
While there is currently no vacancy in the RPV Chairmanship, Sandy Liddy Bourne’s name has been floated by Mike Thomas so she is worth looking into. Is their any evidence of her acting like a pro-lifer recently? With Brownlee we have the same issue, he says he is pro-life, but the direct evidence is scarce. Just curious…
Max,
But you are not a Republican. You are an Anarchist.
Hey Wille, vanity is sin as well and your hero Jeff Frederick has that in spades. Do you think maybe you’re a little too into this guy? I hope it isn’t a man-crush!
G. Gordon Liddy: The only thing liberal I can think about those five concerns my daughter Sandy Liddy-Bourne’s position on abortion. She is an officeholder in the Commonwealth of Virginia. She’s pro-choice and I’m pro-life. However, she opposes any government funding of abortion. I disagree with her, but she’s 37 years old, married, has three kids and is entitled to her own opinions. She has a strong independent streak, anyway.
http://www.playboy.com/magazine/20q_archive/g-gordon-liddy.html
Mr. Wade,
Your words are self-contradictory, and lend all the credence necessary for anyone to tell that Jim Bowden is right.
You say that it was Mr. Frederick that made things public, but in the same paragraph you recycle one of the most oft-repeated innuendos and smears that has been floating around on the blogs since this whole thing started (i.e., Frederick fled RPV HQ when Mr. Thomas tried to serve him a package). This one “fact” illustrates nicely who has been fanning the flames of this entire mess.
Where did the smear originate? Who has been spreading it? How on earth did it become part of the discussion from day one? The answer is simple: it can be traced back to you and Mr. Thomas and your allies, who have consistently done everything to quite publicly paint Mr. Frederick in the worst light possible. Your sneer is visible over the internet, when you write in conpiratorial tones about “a con call” with that boogeyman Jeff Ryer, and how the Chairman slinked back to RPV HQ “when the coast was clear.”
If there was any solid merit to any of the charges you have made against the chairman you wouldn’t need to rely on such childish underhandedness, as you have from the beginning of this affair. If you were sincere in your protestations that this isn’t about power, and that it is “young Frederick” who is to blame for ripping the party apart, you wouldn’t be responsible for the spreading of such nastiness on the blogs for all the world to read. Is that your conception of how a party leader should behave? Real classy, Mike.
Now, it seems that the McDonnell campaign might be realizing how much of a phony controversy this is. You have oversold it Mr. Wade. You’ve been patiently waiting for your opportunity since last June, but it seems you might not have been patient enough.
Steve –
Aren’t you RPV’s official blogger? If so, how is it that you are supporting your chairman and attacking a State Central Committee member at the same time?
And are you doing this on RPV’s dime?
http://www.rpv.org/blog/detail/interested-in-new-media
Hope your opinion of the netroots has changed…
Regards,
Shaun,
I’ve tried to post a reply to this question on your blog, where you originally asked it. http://shaunkenney.com/index.php/2009/03/the-trial-of-jeffery-m-frederick/
I keep getting timeout errors. I’ll try again later. In the meantime, I post the relevant portions here:
First, I don’t know that RPV has an “official blogger.” I volunteered to serve the party in any capacity last summer, and was later asked to contribute to the blog. I have. That’s it.
Second, as I stated in the post you linked, “I don’t speak for RPV in any respect (I just blog part time).” What part of that makes you think that I’m doing anything on RPV’s dime? I don’t get paid by RPV (or anyone else but my fulltime employer), don’t use RPV offices or facilities, and only use RPV servers when I make blog postings, which assiduously avoid intraparty issues. Any suggestion of impropriety is inappropriate.
Third, yes, I am defending the Chairman where I think he has been unfairly maligned, but no, I am not opposing the SCC. The SCC has not spoken on this issue. When it has, I will respect the outcome, and will continue to offer my services to the party in the same spirit.
On the netroots question, I’m not sure what you’re getting at, but yes my opinion has changed somewhat. I think we’re not so far behind the left as we used to be, and that our new media activism is going to surprise a lot of people in November. That’s not to say there’s not still a lot of work to do. Do you agree?
A pro-choice chair of the RPV? Really? How can they even suggest that?! Say what you will about Frederick, at least he’s a true conservative. We can’t replace him with someone who’s not going to stand up for our true values. Keeping him is much better than sacrificing our principles!
No worries, Steve — I think we’ve sorted things out nicely back at SK.com.
Glad to see you’ve worked it out, gents (honestly).
However.
Steve, I’ll quote you, from over at Shaun’s site:
“Even the appearance of a conflict can be troubling, so I’ll be mindful of that going forward.”
You obviously have the maturity and integrity to recognize this even at your self-described lowly post.
The chairman you defend is another story entirely. He either couldn’t see what his actions (giving himself contracts; keeping any monies–even “temporarily”) would appear as, or just didn’t care. Either is totally troubling–and would be grounds for removal anywhere else he worked.
This baffles the great majority who know it’s time for Jeff to go. Why do otherwise good soldiers (who wouldn’t tolerate even the hint of impropriety in themselves) of the party look the other way when it’s the group’s “leader”? You can talk about the atmospherics all you want–SCC, idealogy, whatever–but those can never answer that one central question.
Domo arigato for baiting me after I just stepped out of the ring.
Let me just say this: I disagree, but I don’t have all the facts. What I have seen of the charges and the Chairman’s initial response don’t lead me to the same conclusion, which I suggest is only possible if you are predisposed to think the worst of the Chairman.
Where I have been outspoken is regarding the way in which the charges were brought…how the ground was softened by rumor and innuendo, the vicious hyperbole that has been used to magnify them, the personal slanders that are relied upon to justify the hit job, and the petty vindictiveness that makes the attackers feel so good. Hitler videos!? Bitching about pictures on the website?! Saying nasty things about his wife and his military service? These things, and the whole “run and hide” schtick I posted about earlier, are all great examples of what I mean when I say the attacks being made on the Chairman are more about personality and style than about substance. Even on the merits of the charges, the only “evidence” we have seen are the charges themselves…charges that were spun by the same people who are engaged in the unseemly character assassination on the side, which only serves to undermine their credibility. A few spins around the echo chamber of the blogosphere, though, and suddenly we have an earth-shaking scandal.
I can’t wait for a time when the most reviled person in the Republican blogosphere is actually a Democrat.
There. I’ve said my piece.
Steve, since you’re so close to him, how about enlightening all of us as to the circumstances surrounding his “military service”? Can you ask him to release his discharge papers?
Steve Albertson,
Interesting, let me quote you:
“I can’t wait for a time when the most reviled person in the Republican blogosphere is actually a Democrat.”
So Republicans should shut their mouths and follow the leadership. I have news for you. Just such an attitude is what has been causing Republicans to lose elections recently. Attitudes that insist the Republican must be supported even when he is wrong against the Democrat even when he is right.
How can I quickly make my point clearer? How about this? What was it about John Warner that gave him many terms in office while George Allen got thrown out after a single term? Now do you get my point?
Steve… There you go again. What is being done here is not character assassination no. It is establish a trend, a pattern of behavior. To show the depth of the lack of character and how far Jeff will go to serve his own vanity even at the risk of destroying our (Yours and Mine) party. You are a lawyer and trained by the Military in Information Warfare you understand that a persons trends and tendencies when followed will most accurately predict their future actions as well. Take out the fact that Jeff is right or wrong, we will argue this for a long time, look at his willingness to let his supporters attack Bob McDonnell and potentially cost us the election in November. The very fact that Jeff places his position over that of getting a Republican Governor elected in Virginia shows me that he can no longer be chairman. Simple as that…
Great point, Lee, but Frederick seems to have cast a spell on his rabid followers. Don’t expect that very simple undeniable logic to get through to them.
Jim, the word I’m hearing is that your source on this was Gerry Scimeca. If that is the case, then you should have known better than to put up this falsehood. If I am off base, then apologies.
[...] Drift provided speculation that McDonnell might be seeking a deal with Frederick here and that silly parody of a trial here. I wonder if the folks who made the video realize how much [...]
This is laughable that You blame Frederick for attacking McDonnell and thus jeopardizing McDonnells chances!!!
McDonnell came out against him. According to you, he’s just not supposed to defend himself. McDonnell is the one that attacked his own chairman and risked alienating a good portion of his party that back Frederick. Now, McDonnell has been said to have claimed to be sold a “bill of goods” on the embezzlement issue. I wonder how that happened?
THE ONLY WAY McDonnell can do that to Frederick and not come out undamaged is if Frederick was indeed PROVEN to be a thief. McDonnell weighing in because of peer pressure without a good amount of proof was just bad decision making right before an election.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that you would blame that poor decision making process by McDonnell on the RPV Chair Jeff Frederick.
There is word on the street that Frederick will resign Friday because he doesn’t have the votes to survive the oust.
Resigning would be admitting to all the BS charges that he’s accused of. If he was gonna do that, he shoulda done it long ago. What does he gain from resigning? The embarrassment won’t change and lots of people will be convinced that he’s a thief when he really isn’t.
It would be a sharp contrast to what he said he would do.
[...] will be no eleventh-hour deal to save embattled RPV Chair Jeff Frederick. Apparently the one meeting that could have fostered a deal devolved into a shouting [...]
?????, ? ? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? c ?????? ? ?? ? ???? ??????? ??? – ???????? ? ????????. ? ???????, ??? ?????? ????? ?? ?????????? ?????????.
Leave your response