Party meeting's actions were shameful

  • Follow Letters

On. Dec. 4, I attended a called committee meeting of the Columbia County Republican Party at the Columbia County Government Complex. I was unsure of the purpose of the meeting, as no prior explanation was sent out by the executive board or ethics committee.

It was not until I received an e-mail from the Columbia County Republican Party chairman, Lawrence Hammond, that I had some idea why the meeting had been called. Once in attendance, it was clear that the only purpose of the meeting was to impeach Mr. Hammond as the CCRP chairman.

No evidence was produced to support the complaints that were filed by the committee. The vote to impeach Mr. Hammond occurred approximately seven minutes into the discussion period. It was apparent that members of the ethics committee rounded up members and acquaintances to attend the meeting to drive the desired outcome.

If the above proceedings were not enough, the committee was unable to properly lead and manage the meeting. The meeting did not begin on time, and half of the members were not present when the meeting was finally called to order. Debbie McCord, a former CCRP chairwoman, had to intervene on several occasions to correct mishandlings of the meeting and try to maintain order. As the meeting continued, committee members became increasingly disruptive and inappropriate comments were made.

Even though I was in attendance at the meeting, and have read forwarded complaints, I still find it hard to determine what Mr. Hammond did to necessitate such a decision. Time should have been allotted to read and expand on the complaints so that the actions in question were understood by all.

As a former chairwoman of the CCRP Teenage Republicans, it is with a heavy heart that I have to take a stand against the actions taken by the ethics committee. I will no longer take part in any activities sanctioned or sponsored by the CCRP until this wrong can be made right.

A. Ashley Greenwood, Evans

Comments (43) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
UncleStrom
2
Points
UncleStrom 12/23/09 - 02:19 am
0
0
Thank you for bowing out of

Thank you for bowing out of CC politics. We'll be better served without folks like you. Have a Merry Christmas!

bushwhacker
39
Points
bushwhacker 12/23/09 - 05:40 am
0
0
Imagine them turning on each

Imagine them turning on each other.

ColdBeerBoiledPeanuts
11036
Points
ColdBeerBoiledPeanuts 12/23/09 - 06:16 am
0
0
Bushwhacker, it's better than

Bushwhacker, it's better than paying each other off with someone elses money!

dashiel
176
Points
dashiel 12/23/09 - 07:36 am
0
0
Depends Packers For Truth.

Depends Packers For Truth.

Pu239
284
Points
Pu239 12/23/09 - 07:37 am
0
0
I bet Ben Nelson, Harry Reid,
Unpublished

I bet Ben Nelson, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi could heal this rift! (sarcasm)

Runner46
0
Points
Runner46 12/23/09 - 08:12 am
0
0
A pack of sharks comes to

A pack of sharks comes to mind. I am an independent voter, so these actions do NOT put the CCRP in a good light.

Yosemitesam
0
Points
Yosemitesam 12/23/09 - 09:24 am
0
0
The little Tadpole Ashley

The little Tadpole Ashley Greenwood is just a little green to party politics. Had she not had her head in the sand she would have known that an effort to unseat Hammond was immenient. A full airing of the reasons why Hammond was not done to save the decorum and not further embarass anyone. I congratulate the ethics committee for trying to keep the rancor as low key as possible. As for the green horn tadpole Ashley Greenwood, she apparently has a lot to learn about politics and should stick to our role in the teenage group till she gets enough maturity to hang around the adult party functions.

southernguy08
532
Points
southernguy08 12/23/09 - 10:03 am
0
0
RUNNER, as an independent,
Unpublished

RUNNER, as an independent, your party has no light, good or bad. Sorry, sad but true. And Ms. Greenwood, when did it dawn on you that politics, whether Republican or Democratic, is a dirty business! Look at the deals being made now in congress to shove this "healthcare reform" down our throats.

jbartley
619
Points
jbartley 12/23/09 - 10:06 am
0
0
Ashley it is obvios you are a

Ashley it is obvios you are a Debbie McCord pupet Like Hammond was, it also appears the majorty of the CCRP county committee has had enough of Debbie"s "I own this party attitude"! AS AND OBSIVER I THANK THE PARTY WILL BE BETER OFF WITHOUT YOU AND HIM!

560
Points
Lakeside95 12/23/09 - 10:12 am
0
0
Are you people serious?

Are you people serious? Fine. I feel certain that if the party is ready to let go of all the young people who lack the "maturity to hang around the adult party functions" we are ready to leave!
Yosemitesam, when the party needs actual work done, or an event organized or campaigning planned I hope you will answer the call....I think the 'kids' will be unavailable.

It has been awhile since I have seen the adults doing anything more than talking...hard work is good for the soul, and I think they could all use the help.

Yosemitesam
0
Points
Yosemitesam 12/23/09 - 10:48 am
0
0
Lakeside95 AH GRASSHOPPER!

Lakeside95 AH GRASSHOPPER! Every party needs the infusion of young blood to thrive, no question about that. They have energy and enthusiasm. However, I don't think it's very healthy to publicy rebuke party leaders for taking action they don't fully understand, (for whatever reason). If the young Grasshopper Grenwood had concerns about actions taken during the meeting she didn't understand, I'm sure her questions would have been answered afterwards, unless of course whe is just a Lawrence Hammond fan. Let there by NO mistake, I do not begrudge teenagers from party activities. I just believe expressions of gross indignation should be kept in the family and not aired in this forum. If you're on the team, be a team player. Whether you believe it or not Hammond was spared a public flogging.

USA4Life
0
Points
USA4Life 12/23/09 - 11:51 am
0
0
This is what is wrong with CC

This is what is wrong with CC Republicans and the Republicans across the nation. They run off the younger members who are wanting to learn and get involved to help, not hurt, the party. Ashley is a wonderful young woman. She is a former TARS chair but no longer a teenager. She is exactly the type of person the Party needs to be bringing in if they want to enhance their image. Unfortunately, while the CCRP may have been within their rights to call the meeting I wonder if the validity of all those participating had been verified? Anytime their is a major vote there shoudl be a Credentials committee to validate the results. It is my understanding this was not in place. The party does not know if all the votes were cast by valid members. Im just thankful that this Young Republican got out of the CCRP before all this mess. Im no tadpole and I could see it coming once 2 or 3 certain people came onto the board.

LBenedict
2
Points
LBenedict 12/23/09 - 11:57 am
0
0
Correct. The meeting started

Correct. The meeting started late...at 6:05 rather than the 6:00 scheduled time. See, it started late because in order to have a quorum, you must have X amount of voting people present. I would think that a past Chair would know that prior to submitting a letter. "No evidence was produced to support the complaints that were filed by the committee. The vote to impeach Mr. Hammond occurred approximately seven minutes into the discussion period. It was apparent that members of the ethics committee rounded up members and acquaintances to attend the meeting to drive the desired outcome." No evidence? What then were the FOUR complaints read, and what was mentioned in them? Fruitcake recipies? The vote occured seven minutes in to discussion? Perhaps. But the purpose of the meeting was to present the Ethics Committee's and the Executive Board's findings, have a discussion, and then a vote to remove or not to remove, with 2/3 needed to remove. The vote was 29-9, or 76.3% which is greater than 2/3...or 66.6%.
Those present were more than welcome to ask any of the four complainants to expand; did the letter writer? No!

RIPAmerica
0
Points
RIPAmerica 12/23/09 - 11:58 am
0
0
USA, you make a valid point.

USA, you make a valid point. Thankfully, the current DEM regime is driving our youth away also by attempting to force them to purchase health insurance. The vast majority of people without said insurance are our young people.

RIPAmerica
0
Points
RIPAmerica 12/23/09 - 11:59 am
0
0
Major props to LB for having

Major props to LB for having the intestinal fortitude to offer a rebuttal.

LBenedict
2
Points
LBenedict 12/23/09 - 12:06 pm
0
0
USA - roll was taken and the

USA - roll was taken and the number of eligible voters per precinct was established at the very beginning. So I must disagree with your statement of not knowing whether all votes were cast by valid members. Actually, at the very beginning the non-voters were identified. The Credentials Committee is something that can be looked into, and thank you for the suggestion and for your other input. Now back to the letter: "As the meeting continued, committee members became increasingly disruptive and inappropriate comments were made." That is a matter of opinion. I will say that active members of the Party have been dealing with this since July with no cooperation from the accused. But I would not label that "increasingly disruptive". In politics there will be heated discussions and strong opinions...even happens with Church groups and school boards and PTAs and Little League. I would like to ascertain who put her up to writing this letter, or, who wrote it for her to submit as her own???

LBenedict
2
Points
LBenedict 12/23/09 - 12:12 pm
0
0
BTW, all voting members

BTW, all voting members were...WERE invited, and, keep in mind that being a voting member is NOT the same as paying $25-$500 to be a member of the CCRP. Voting members were voted upon in March, and some have since been added, mostly precinct chairs, by way of a motion, a second, and a vote of the Executive Board.

USA4Life
0
Points
USA4Life 12/23/09 - 12:14 pm
0
0
Lee, I find it discouraging

Lee, I find it discouraging that you would accuse Ashley of not having the ability to write her own letter. Are the Columbia County School systems so bad that a graduate of their schools would not be able to write a letter to the editor? Maybe you are so biased as to think that because she is not a male she deserves no place in the politics and cannot offer criticsm of her own. Just curious about it thats all.

USA4Life
0
Points
USA4Life 12/23/09 - 12:18 pm
0
0
According to CCRP bylaws in

According to CCRP bylaws in order to vote you must be a supporting member in the least. For clarification that means each voting member must have also been a paid member at the time of the meeting.

560
Points
Lakeside95 12/23/09 - 02:14 pm
0
0
Are you kidding me? To quote

Are you kidding me? To quote YosemiteSam:
"If the young Grasshopper Grenwood had concerns about actions taken during the meeting she didn't understand, I'm sure her questions would have been answered afterwards, unless of course whe is just a Lawrence Hammond fan.
If she had questions during the meeting, they would have been answered AFTER the meeting? If you were supportive of Hammond your questions would not be answered?
THIS is an example of the types of overbearing, condesending and assine behaviour that is causing all the problems.
"Kept in the family" Are you serious? The county committee meeting in question was open to the public. So how is repeating what happened at a public meeting wrong?
I think most, if not all younger members (18-40ish) have heard and understood the points of the 'adults'. Keep your mouth shut, do the work and maybe when you are 60 we will let you eat at the grown-up table.

LBenedict
2
Points
LBenedict 12/23/09 - 02:19 pm
0
0
USA: based on the accuracy

USA: based on the accuracy content of the letter, I asked if Ashley wrote the letter. How you extrapolated that I said she does not have the ability to write her own letter is beyond reason, and, to bring up gender shows ignorance of someone who hides behind a pseudonym because s/he refuses to post under his/her real name, or a good chunk thereof.

USA4Life
0
Points
USA4Life 12/23/09 - 02:26 pm
0
0
Lee I am quoting from your

Lee I am quoting from your earlier post -"who wrote it for her to submit as her own???" This implies that she is unable to think or write for herself. 1. Since she is a female it could be implied that you believe females are unable to formulate their own opinions. 2. Since she is a product of the Columbia County School System it can be implied that she did was not educated at a level that would permit her to compose said letter. Thanks, Brian

LBenedict
2
Points
LBenedict 12/23/09 - 02:35 pm
0
0
OK. At times, people will

OK. At times, people will write letters/statements and all of that good stuff, and have another sign it and submit it as his own or her own, and those who have been involved in politics long enough know this. I have no clue where she went to school, and it's really none of my business, but if she came up through Columbia County's system, she had access to a fine education, no doubt. I think that your females formulating their own opinions is a stretch. Why stop there? It could be implied that since she attends worship service at _______________, or since her favorite color is______________, it could be for those reasons. In short, her letter is laden with sensationalistic words and inaccuracies; I thought that she knew better. I guess that we can agree to disagree on this one. Merry Christmas to you and yours.

USA4Life
0
Points
USA4Life 12/23/09 - 02:39 pm
0
0
Merry Christmas to you as

Merry Christmas to you as well. I am just sticking up for someone who I know to be very bright and intelligent. Im just thankful that Im not involved in the mess and will keep my distance until real leadership is restored in CCRP - something lacking since Lee Muns left.

750
Points
Barry Paschal 12/23/09 - 02:42 pm
0
0
LBenedict asks, "What then

LBenedict asks, "What then were the FOUR complaints read, and what was mentioned in them? Fruitcake recipies?" I've read the laughable "complaints" against Hammond. At least a fruitcake recipe would contain substance.

USA4Life
0
Points
USA4Life 12/23/09 - 02:44 pm
0
0
And probably manufactured

And probably manufactured with fewer nuts as well Barry.

750
Points
Barry Paschal 12/23/09 - 02:52 pm
0
0
Hahahahaha, USA4Life. Good

Hahahahaha, USA4Life. Good one. (I think I'll stay away from "fruit" references, though...!)

560
Points
Lakeside95 12/23/09 - 03:13 pm
0
0
There is now a forum post

There is now a forum post dedicated to the CCRP and their issues....

travelp
31
Points
travelp 12/23/09 - 04:03 pm
0
0
I live in North Augusta and

I live in North Augusta and I'm glad. It sounds like the people involved think they are more important than they really are. What a waste of time it is to fight about these things. All these losers think they are doing something significant and nobody will know who they are in ten years.

augustalawyer
0
Points
augustalawyer 12/23/09 - 04:33 pm
0
0
I is sad that Lee Benedict is

I is sad that Lee Benedict is the new standard bearer for the CCRP. Really? Seriously? Lee is about as successful in politics as he was in the military. How about running for office again Lee, I need a good laugh. :) So now the CCRP has this dimwit out in front trying to talk down promising young Republicans who can actually accomplish something with her life. Lee is so retarded that he cannot even recognize when he is being used as a pawn in Bob Beckham's continued attempt to organize a "shadow government" like Woody Merry in Richmond County. Of course, when it comes to ethics complaints, Bob should know about those.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs