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.
m.seda
0
Points
m.seda 12/23/09 - 06:07 pm
0
0
To be fair, I must say, that

To be fair, I must say, that at least Lee is posting under his own name. There are others posting here whose familiarty with the topic leads me to believe they are members of Executive Board and perhaps even then ethics committee. I do think that Lee is one of the few (there are others) who genuinely feels he is doing what's right in this situation, even if I don't agree with his interpretation of the facts at hand. I suspect this small group of people is going to feel very used in due time.

ron_rlw
1
Points
ron_rlw 12/23/09 - 06:14 pm
0
0
Ashley I commend you on your

Ashley I commend you on your stand, however if I may make a suggestion go back to the CCRP meeting and make your complaints known back up through the chain of command. That might not do any good at all &#0133 but it is the best method you have and you have a much better chance of getting your point across than most of the rest of us.

I will make the assumption your description of the meeting was accurate &#0133 and I have no reason to believe it isn't &#0133 then you may help them understand that some form of order has to be maintained and that those invited to a special meeting need to have a firm understanding of what's going on. I assume those in charged knew what they were doing and just assumed everyone else did also &#0133 this is almost never a good assumption, as you have very ably pointed out.

Don't give up on the system even if the system seems to have given up on you. As far as those that has posted bad things about you &#0133 don't let them discourage you either. I don't know what your leaning on political issues are, but several of these folks seem to be upset with your political views &#0133 which is none of their business as long as you are willing to engage in a frank debate about those

jbartley
550
Points
jbartley 12/23/09 - 06:32 pm
0
0
This is how McCord tought

This is how McCord tought people play when they louse put it in the paper and stir the pot with half truths. Barry Paschal could have sent a reporter to the meeting because he KNEW about it and it was open to the public. ron rlw Has a good point you must play by the committee rules and bylaws of a group and a vote.

ron_rlw
1
Points
ron_rlw 12/23/09 - 06:40 pm
0
0
If Barry Paschal knew about

If Barry Paschal knew about the meeting ... why wouldn't a reporter be sent to cover some as important as a move to remove someone.

brookslaw
0
Points
brookslaw 12/23/09 - 06:43 pm
0
0
So everyone who has

So everyone who has questioned the rules and procedures followed is part of some Hammond/McCord plot to take over the party? Wow.

m.seda
0
Points
m.seda 12/23/09 - 06:44 pm
0
0
Like I said, at least Lee

Like I said, at least Lee posts under his own name, why don't you man-up and do the same? Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

brookslaw
0
Points
brookslaw 12/23/09 - 06:46 pm
0
0
There was a very short notice

There was a very short notice given for the meeting...as well as the invitation list was a bit short....

All of these posters are assuming that the rules were followed and that the Manion/Beckham/Boeglan/Bartley/Goodwin group WANTED witnesses! Duh.

466
Points
Lakeside95 12/23/09 - 06:49 pm
0
0
Since Lee and M.Seda have

Since Lee and M.Seda have asked those who post under pseudonyms to share.... My name is Sarah Harper Scott. But since my picture is with my forum posts... I am not really hiding behind a fake name.

ron_rlw
1
Points
ron_rlw 12/23/09 - 06:54 pm
0
0
Brookslaw ... the original

Brookslaw ... the original article wasn't about the removal of Mr. Hammond. Ashley didn't express an opinion on that subject, either way. The article was about the way the meeting was miss handled which I believe several of the posters have lost sight of. Ashley was there and I believe she has good reason for her opinion ... and therefore those issues should be addressed.

LBenedict
2
Points
LBenedict 12/23/09 - 09:19 pm
0
0
Thanks m.seda. As for

Thanks m.seda. As for augustalawyer, you wouldn't happen to be Chaquita Johnson now would you? You might want to be careful about your "retarded" comments as they are borderline slander, and as an FYI, my son has mental and physical disabilities...but what do you care? You know, someone sent me an email and used the word "retarded" in it...are you one in the same? I can find out easy enough, and should it be you...gabar.org baby to file a formal complaint. Why do you hide behind a cowardly pseudonym? What do you know about my military career? You post about it and open yourself up for things, so tell us, did we serve together? If you, and it goes for all, hide behind pseudonyms and are ashamed to put your name on it, that is so sad. When facts and reason are against you, start name calling and spouting lies and baseless opinions and slanderous tirades that can be traced to an IP address. If you bother to actually read what you are writing about, you will see that Ashley and I have different opinions, and since I was at all of the meeting pertaining to the matter in question, I may have something to offer to the discussion. At least I post under my own name.

corgimom
33235
Points
corgimom 12/23/09 - 09:30 pm
0
0
Lee, give it up. You don't

Lee, give it up. You don't even know what slander means. Slander is spoken, libel is printed. And Lee, if you are going to be the leader, you need to toughen up. People can and will say anything about you. There is nothing libelous about what was said. People are entitled to their opinions, and the post you just wrote does not leave a good impression as to your character. Grow up. Show some maturity.

corgimom
33235
Points
corgimom 12/23/09 - 09:38 pm
0
0
And, Lee- if the Banana

And, Lee- if the Banana doesn't like you, I'd consider that a GOOD thing.

augustalawyer
0
Points
augustalawyer 12/23/09 - 09:53 pm
0
0
oooooohhh, Lee you are as

oooooohhh, Lee you are as scary as your poll numbers. That is to say irrelevant. Man up as the special needs politician that you aspire to be and look up the phrase "public figure." Perhaps before you sided with Bob Beckham perhaps you should have seen if there were any ethics complaints against him in the past or perhaps before you pal around with Lee Benedict you should see about his criminal arrest history or the number of times he has been sued in court. It is apparent that you are too stupid to see that the company you keep may not be the best for your wet firecracker of a political career. As far as your limited military career, while I respect any member of the military, I am waiting for you to regale us with even one significant accomplishment. So grow a pair, toughen up the skin and bring it on ding dong.....or should I say "retard."

FallingLeaves
27
Points
FallingLeaves 12/24/09 - 12:29 am
0
0
augustalawyer define "us",

augustalawyer define "us", please. I hope you aren't a lawyer. A lawyer who would stoop to anonymous name-calling and coarse language on a thread like this has some maturity issues.

722
Points
Barry Paschal 12/24/09 - 09:37 am
0
0
If the meeting was important,

If the meeting was important, we would have covered it. Its actual importance was one step below a sandbox fight, interesting only in historical context as the Columbia County Republican Party's continuing effort to find something to fight about since taking over all county offices.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs