September 4, 2014
Four Fauquier Republicans sue state party leadership
Four Fauquier County Republicans this week sued the state political party and its First Congressional District Committee.
Somebody lost an election and just couldn’t accept that. They’re trying to disenfranchise the people who voted (in the March 22 canvass) and that doesn’t happen in the United States.
— James E. Rich
The lawsuit escalates a bitter feud between old-line Republicans, often aligned with Fauquier’s land conservationists, and Tea Party loyalists.
Those factions faced off March 22 in an open election, which drew 1,200 voters, to select new Fauquier County Republican Committee leaders.
With support from the conservationists, Scott T. Russell defeated Cameron Jones by 206 votes for the committee chairmanship. Mr. Russell’s allies also won other top committee positions.
Charging that opponents recruited Democrats to vote, Mr. Jones on April 19 contested the election. His appeal to the First District Committee came 27 days after the deadline, under rules of the canvass.
But, the district committee on June 28 voted, 16-8, to overturn the canvass results and to order a new election.
The state committee voted, 51-24, to uphold that decision.
“Somebody lost an election and just couldn’t accept that,” James E. Rich, one of the plaintiffs who filed suit this week, said of Mr. Jones. “They’re trying to disenfranchise the people who voted (in the March 22 canvass) and that doesn’t happen in the United States.”
Mr. Rich, a longtime Republican leader who lives near The Plains, said that for at least two decades the county party hasn’t required “a loyalty pledge” from those who participate in GOP activities. The rules for the county committee elections had no such requirement.
The state party eliminated loyalty pledges in 2012, according to a Richmond Times-Dispatch story about the lawsuit.
But, in weeks leading up to the March 22 vote, Mr. Jones pushed county committee leaders for some mechanism to identify Democrats who might show up in Warrenton to cast ballots for GOP leadership positions.
Local conservation organization members sent mass emails in the weeks leading to the election and encouraging registered voters to show up and support Mr. Russell.
Mr. Rich contends that none of that matters.
Republicans want a “big tent” and welcome “former Democrats,” he said, noting that description would include the late Ronald Regan.
Mr. Russell, George C. Beveridge and Thomas Valk joined him as plantiffs in the lawsuit, filed Tuesday in Fauquier County Circuit Court.
The suit (below) alleges breech of contract, because the local election complied with party rules, and asserts that the March 22 canvass results should stand.
Other Republicans have agreed to help fund the unprecedented lawsuit, Mr. Rich said. “It’s gonna be expensive.”
State party Chairman Pat Mullins declined to comment on the lawsuit Thursday, according to the Times-Dispatch.
Republican Lawsuit by Fauquier Now
Please, be polite. Avoid name-calling and profanity.
For credibility, sign your real name; stand behind your comments. Readers will give less credence to anonymous posts.
No.IRS.Audit · September 10, 2014 at 3:39 pm
Commonsense Republican - I am confused… what insult are you talking about?
So disagreeing with Republicans is bad behavior? Great, then Cameron Jones has a lot of explaining to do:
He has a very, very long history of bashing conservatives or any Republican with whom he disagrees -- and using dishonest and dirty tactics to do it. And yes, anyone who purports to admire or follow him is bad news in my book -- whether that be you or anyone else.If you want to know the true character of any politician, you look at the people he surrounds himself with, and endorsements, voting record, etc. Hardly a novel concept.
Wow, that is an impressive blog post you linked to, it is very long on opinions and short on any facts. And the blogger is a Fredrick apologist to boot. Since when is a Congressional District Chair responsible for every election in their district. Whereas the State Party Chair is responsible for statewide election - do you want to know how well Mullins has done on that front?
As for the lawsuit, my guess is that it will not go to trial until after the new year, you know how courts are, so your point is moot.
By the way, do you know what blasphemy means? I don't think you do.
Commonsense Republican · September 10, 2014 at 11:33 am
Nice try, No.IRS.Audit. It was your failed analogy, not mine. Pretty awkward backtrack on your part--"I hope you realize that we are all sinners"...well...duhhhh. And I don't think name calling is appropriate conduct here, or anywhere else for that matter, so I'll ignore your insults. But you asked for examples of Jim Rich's bad behavior...which is kind of like asking the Tropicana company for proof they make orange juice. He has a very, very long history of bashing conservatives or any Republican with whom he disagrees -- and using dishonest and dirty tactics to do it. And yes, anyone who purports to admire or follow him is bad news in my book -- whether that be you, Russell (two L's this time!), or anyone else. If you want to know the true character of any politician, you look at the people he surrounds himself with, and endorsements, voting record, etc. Hardly a novel concept. And again, try and resist your failed, and most certainly blasphemous, Jesus analogy here. But anyways, here is more on Rich:
He's the Democrats best friend. Again, wouldn't surprise me in the least if they pay him to do what he does. And actually, I can't think of any other reason he would do it...unless he's just THAT committed to big-government, Democrat principles. Who knows. But I wouldn't trust anyone who pals around with him, or conspires with him in lawsuits against the Virginia Republican Party.
Which by the way, makes me think of another thing. Rich says this is going to be an expensive lawsuit in the article above. This is a pretty big election year, is it not? He's smart enough to know that money spent by the Party dealing with his and Russell's silly lawsuit would be better spent helping get Ed Gillespie elected and beating Mark Warner, right??? I guess this is just one more obvious example of how he's the Democrats' best friend...and Mark Warner's best friend this time. And I don't think by accident, because I don't think he's dumb. By all indication he helps the Democrats by choice.
No.IRS.Audit · September 10, 2014 at 10:44 am
Regarding this moment "Those who were in the Scott Russell camp have publicly started to question their choice and it is very obvious from the meetings that many were starting to object to some of the acrimonious activity by the cabal."
Really? Who exactly are you talking about? If they have publicly started to question, then you shouldn't have any issues naming names. But you won't, because you can't. Just because you say it, doesn't mean it is true.
How about I say this: all but 55 Cameron Jones votes have personally told me that they are not sure they can support his continued efforts to destroy the Fauquier GOP. The other 55 are the Democrats that voted for Cameron in the canvass.
It must be true, because I posted it on a website.
Conservation is Conservative · September 10, 2014 at 9:38 am
Anton, you are confusing candidate, voters and intent of the Republican Party.
Lets start with Candidate Cam. It was discovered after the election that Cam in fact voted in a Democratic Primary. That discovery shows he was not a legitimate candidate for office. So, if there is a need to contest anything that would be the one to contest. However, Cam got whipped in the election and there was no need to go there. There is nothing disingenuous about the truth.
Second, lets talk about the voters, per the rules, a call goes out. All sides agree to call. The call did NOT stipulate that we request oral or written loyalty oaths.
Third, lets talk about the focus of the Republican Party and its RULES. "The Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty, the party of equality of opportunity for all, and favoritism of none. It is the intent and purpose of these rules to encourage and allow the broadest possible of all voters in the Republican Party activities at all levels and to assure that the Republican Party is open and accessible to all Americans." Read this Preamble of the Republican National Party Again and let that soak in for a minute.
Any you way you cut it, Cam lost this election in a significant way. Cam's actions have divided and distracted the party from the task at hand --- winning in November. Cam should be embarrassed and ashamed of his actions, unless, his intent is to sabotage the GOP in a county that still votes Republican. While other counties are trending Blue due, in large part, to the feather bedding going on in the Federal Government, people like Jim Rich and other hardworking republicans that respect and honor rules and the will of the people are, are building and preserving the GOP.
Anton Afterwit · September 10, 2014 at 8:25 am
The bottom line for all of this is for the Membership of the Committee (whoever they may be) to understand that the citizens of the County DO NOT need the support of the Committee but the Committee definitely needs the support of the citizens. The tactics used by Jim Rich and team should be judged by their results in the 10th District. As written about by Bob Maistros:
You may not have noticed, but over the past four election cycles, [the 10th District] district has been transformed from solid red to a deep blue. Our local party has suffered defeat in a series of key county, state and national contests – with little apparent effort on your part or that of your leadership team to stem the tide.
Setbacks experienced by the party over four consecutive election cycles have included:
- The losses of the 32nd and 67th legislative districts to the Democrats in 2005 and the opposition party’s successful defense of the seats in 2007
- The loss of the 33rd Senate district to the Democrats in a special election in 2006 and their defense of the seat in 2007
- Tim Kaine’s carrying of Loudoun and Prince William Counties in 2005
- Jim Webb’s carrying of Loudoun and Prince William Counties in 2006
- The loss of the Republican majority of the Loudoun Board of Supervisors in 2007
- And now, Barack Obama’s and Mark Warner’s carrying of Loudoun and Prince William Counties in 2008.
While these losses can be attributed to a number of factors, one constant is that they occurred on your watch. ... You’ve been in place for 16 years.
Mr. Maistros also stated in a letter to Mr. Rich, "I was stunned not only by your efforts to undermine our local committee and our candidates, but also by your public disparagement of our ticket of incumbent Republican Supervisors in the Washington Post less than a week before the election." and "your remarks in today’s Post publicly ridiculing the duly elected state chairman of your own party – as part of a concerted campaign on the part of the party’s Old Guard carefully timed to peak on the eve of the annual Advance – you have truly crossed the line."
The citizens of Fauquier (heavily Conservative and Republican) should think wisely about why Mr. Rich is involved in the Fauquier Committee and the others who have teamed up with him.
Anton Afterwit · September 10, 2014 at 8:23 am
Conservation is Conservative - I cannot tell you what Mr. Jones agreed to or not. I have simply put out the rules here for discussion.
Stop trying to rule Mr. Jones ineligible. This issue has already been resolved by a matter of rule. He was declared eligible by the Membership Chair and no appeal was made to the Committee, District, or State to challenge his eligibility.
When you cite only part of the rules trying to convince people of something, you come off as disingenuous at best. Failing to recognize the importance of paragraph 4 and 5, you want to gloss over those who participated who were directly ineligible under those paragraphs. Whether it was 1 or 100, there were ineligible voters identified. It was proven clearly to the District and State that the participation was a direct result of active solicitation of individuals sponsored by Mr. Russell and also running for positions on the Committee. As I understand the ruling by the District and State, as a result of unauthorized individuals knowingly participating in the election, they have called the results invalid and have ordered a new election which will require the rules to be followed.
Many do not view Mr. Jones as an extremist trying to destroy the GOP. He followed the procedures within the Party Plan to seek office and to appeal a flawed election. He did not sue the party (nor has anyone ever shown he threatened to do so). On the other hand, your heroes Jim Rich and Scott Russell have taken the extraordinary step of suing the very organization they hope to represent. That in itself has already caused backlash not only within the Party but also from others outside the party.
The citizens of Fauquier are very smart and no amount of prevarication or partial facts will get them to not see the obvious. Breaking the rules to try and put in a particular slate of individuals, slating off members, slating on members, all appear to be a direct attempt to take control of an organization by force rather than by popular acclaim. Those who were in the Scott Russell camp have publicly started to question their choice and it is very obvious from the meetings that many were starting to object to some of the acrimonious activity by the cabal.
The citizens of Fauquier now need to take the next step and ask themselves WHY a certain group is so bent on taking over the committee by any method. They need to start asking what the end goal is and why they should be concerned. They need to ask those within each group where they stand on: Property Rights, Taxes, Tax Relief, Abortion, Governance, Regulation, Zoning, Code Enforcement, etc. I think once they start looking into the answers they will find that one group is determined to control the citizens for the benefit of a few, and the other group is determined to have the least amount of control to ensure the benefit of the many.
Conservation is Conservative · September 9, 2014 at 9:41 pm
Under your first point, as it relates to voters in a canvass, the key phrase "if requested". The rules of the canvass as agreed to by Cam and Russell, did not request orall or written intent.
Cam Jones, according to the voter records of Fauquier County, participated and voted in the Democratic Primary within last five years. This is strictly prohibited under Article I, paragraph 4.
So not only was he unqualified to run, the party plan did not "request" oral or written voter loyalty oaths. Even, if the Canvass had, the amount of democrats that Cam and company has identified would not have altered the election.
The long and short, is Cam was not a legitimate candidate, the rules where agreed upon, and the illegitimate candidate Cam lost fair and square.
Even if you assume that the 108 voters would have voted against their brother Cam, as evidence by his participation in the Democratic Primary in the last 5 years, he still would have lost. No matter how you cut it, Cam lost and Scott won. All the actions are nothing more than a bunch of extremist trying to sabotage the GOP. Thank God for Jim Rich.
Anton Afterwit · September 9, 2014 at 8:02 pm
It is funny how so many claim what is and is not required or is in the Party Plan. Maybe posting it here will help. I will only post the information germane to this discussion. If you want to read the full document, go to: http://rpv.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Party-Plan-Amended-March-2014.pdf
. There are requirements and authorizations for party loyalty statements to be made by all voters, especially those who have voted in the nomination process of a party other than the Republican Party. Now let the discussion continue.
1. All legal and qualified voters under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, regardless of race, religion, national origin or sex, who are in accord with the principles of the Republican Party, and who, if requested, express in open meeting either orally or in writing as may be required their intent to support all of its nominees for public office in the ensuing election may participate as members of the Republican Party of Virginia in its mass meetings, party canvasses, conventions, or primaries encompassing their respective election districts.
2. A voter who, subsequent to making a statement of intent, publicly supports a candidate in opposition to a Republican nominee shall not be qualified for participation in party actions as defined in Article I for a period of four (4) years.
3. Paragraphs 4 and 5 shall cease having any effect at such time as the Election Laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia shall provide for party registration, at which time only those registered as Republicans may be deemed to be in accord with the principles of the Republican Party, unless otherwise stipulated by the appropriate Official Committee.
4. In addition to the foregoing, to be in accord with the principles of the Republican Party, unless otherwise stipulated by the appropriate Official Committee, a person otherwise qualified hereunder shall not have participated in Virginia in the nomination process of a party other than the Republican Party with in the last five years.
5. A single exception to Paragraph 4 shall be approved for a voter that renounces affiliation with any other party in writing, and who expresses in writing that he/she is in accord with the principles of the Republican Party and intends, at the time of the writing, to support the nominees of the Republican Party in the future. Any voter that utilizes the foregoing exception, and thereafter participates in the nomination process of a party other than the Republican Party, shall not have the benefit of the exception identified in this paragraph thereafter. Within 30 days of receipt, the Official Committee shall provide a copy of this signed renunciation statement to the Republican Party of Virginia, to be maintained for a period of 5 years.
No.IRS.Audit · September 9, 2014 at 11:07 am
Commonsense Republican - It was not an analogy and definitely not blasphemy. It was merely the suggestion that you like to play the guilt by association game. That said, I will try to bring the intellectual debate down to your level so you can understand it better. In my humble opinion, Jim Rich is a great guy, he has worked for decades for the Republican Party and has done a great jog electing Republicans at all levels of government. You say there are "bad and dishonest dealings," please enlighten us with some examples.
Also, if you had read the lawsuit, you would realize that Russell is spelled with two L's.
Finally, I hope you realize that we are all sinners. None of us are clean except through the saving grace of Jesus.
Conservation is Conservative · September 9, 2014 at 9:16 am
Commonsense Republican, have read the law suit and have you read the Party Plan? If you had you will see that Cam and Buchanan have no foundation to their claims. The Party Plan does not require a loyalty oath. Cam agreed to the rules of the canvass, which also states any challenges must be filed 24 hours after the election. He filed 27 days later. He claims that dems voted in the election. Yet, Cam agreed that no loyalty oath was required. Now that he got whipped, he wants one. Cam and his comrades claim 108 dems of 1200 voters that participated. Given that Russell won by 206 votes that is statistically insignificant even if a loyalty oath were to be applied, which we all know is not required. In The Plains (a 5th district race), Cam's guy got 16 votes and the other three candidates got 144,150 and 152 respectively. Again, statistically insignificant. Yet, Cam and Buchanan cried to their comrades over at the 1st District and the 1st District had the nerve to interfere with the 5th District. Cam and Rick act more like Obama --- disregard the rules and employ cronyism to get their way. So read the Plan, then read the suit and you will see Cam and his comrades have breached the contract with republicans. Jim Rich is a man of principle. I wish we had Jim as our Del. or Senator. He understands rules, process, truth, integrity and the art of leadership. We need more people like him in our party.
Commonsense Republican · September 9, 2014 at 8:44 am
"no.IRS.audit" -- Wow! Nice blasphemy! If I understand your attempt at an analogy, you're saying that Russel is Jesus and Rich is the sinner. Okay. At least we agree that Rich is a bad guy in need of repenting. But Russel, very much unlike Jesus, is collaborating with Rich and serving as a willing and active participant in his bad and dishonest dealings -- just read the joke of a lawsuit above. Jesus welcomed all sinners and showed them how to repent and receive salvation. I don't see anywhere in my bible where he joined them in their sin and encouraged them to sin more. See the difference?
Conservation is Conservative · September 8, 2014 at 8:36 pm
R Buchanan, all I see on Fauquier Free Citizen is a bunch of yelping. Don't like getting whipped in a election, you Yelp. Don't like following rules, you contest and yelp some more. Don't like the verdict of local democracy in action, you complain to Richmond and yelp, yelp some more. Kind of reminds me of a two year old that does not get what he wants --- throw a fit. Jim Rich is totally right on in his comments. We need more leaders like Jim. Plus, his track record is superior.
No IRS Audit · September 8, 2014 at 8:21 pm
I agree Dick Buchanan, you side just yelps and yelps.
R Buchanan · September 8, 2014 at 5:53 pm
Man, oh man. What a bunch of yelping, name calling and venom. As Huckabee reminded us last week-end, "when you throw a rock over the fence, it is the hit dog that yelps."
Conservation is Conservative · September 8, 2014 at 4:03 pm
Rick B. speaks with a forked tongue. His actions and words have been nothing but to exclude people in the GOP who don't agree with him. He and his comrades have consistently attacked conservation and land-use laws. Just go to his media outlet called Fauquier Free Citizen and read how he and his comrades believe Land Use Laws are racist. http://fauquierfreecitizen.com/racist-roots-virginias-land-use-laws/
When at their media outlet, notice the venom that spews from snake fangs of the Free Citizen webpages. If Rick B and Cam were for Party Unity, they would have not contested an election where they lost, fair and square, in a significant fashion. Their actions of --- control rather than govern --- show them in the plain light.
No.IRS.Audit · September 8, 2014 at 2:15 pm
Commonsnese Republican - Yeah, I could just see you in biblical times:
"I don't know Jesus. But I do know if he's pals with sinners, he must be bad news. Crucify him!"
Commonsense Republican · September 8, 2014 at 12:43 pm
I don't know Scot Russel. But I do know if he's pals with Jim Rich, then he must be bad news. Rich spreads his special brand of hatred and lies wherever he goes. He did it in the 10th district and now he's doing it here. He spends most of his time sucking up to blue blood Democrats in the rich areas of our county anyway. Wouldn't surprise me if those same Dems are paying him to destroy our Republican Party. Just in time for the election too!
No.IRS.Audit · September 8, 2014 at 9:58 am
Anton - I could ask you the same question, does it seem like that behind most of the controversy coming out of the local party and some of its members, the same names keep popping up: Cameron Jones, Madge Eicher, Dick Buchanan, and Mark Fitzgibbon? Aren't the citizens of Fauquier County tired of people like Jones and his crew trying to purify the Republican party and kick everyone who does not agree with them out? They continue to drive the party in the direction of the "small tent." Regardless of your affiliation, there is no room for Cameron Jones' tactics in our leadership. Cameron and his crew are an embarassment to Fauquier and has made Fauquier the laughing stock of the state because of a few heavy handed indivdiuals who want power at any price.
Dick Buchanan - It is nice to see you believe in the Democratic principle of class warfare. Shame on those "ultra-rich" for being wealthy. Maybe you can work on redistributing their wealth. What happened last Tuesday was nothing more than one side being well prepared and Cameron's side being completely incompetent. Rich's side followed the rules and made motions that supported their position, it was nothing more than that. Just because you and Cameron were unprepared, you cannot blame the opposition for being prepared. You could have made any motion you wanted, but failed to do so. Kind of like you being on the canvass committee and not asking fora loyalty oath. As for your comment about the RPV rules trumping local rules, that seems a lot like big government coming down and telling state and local governments what to do. I guess you like the idea of top down party politics, where your buddies in the RPV can usurp the will of any county unit.
Matthew007 - Great post. lets compare elections under Jim Rich vs. the current RPV central committee. Jim Rich won every congressional race when he was chairman. The RPV has lost every statewide race since they took over the committee. While I don't always agree with Rich, I think I will stick with him. As for which side of this lawsuit to be on, how about all the facts? Like the fact that Cameron Jones was a vocal opponent of George Allen, saying after the primary that he would not help Allen? Or how about his continued comments about Wittman, his blog telling Congressman Hurt to "watch out," and his campaign manager, Dick Buchanan, opposing Gillespie? I guess that doesn't matter, does it?
Silii - You should name the GOP officer who approached you and get it out in the open. If you don't it is nothing more than hearsay. The fact is, out of 1,206 votes, the FCRC only found 55 Democrats (including Cameron Jones) and the 1st District were only ably to identify 107 Democrats, using the most liberal definition) so Cameron still lost by between 99-151 votes. It is really that simple.
Silii · September 8, 2014 at 9:01 am
I was approached more than once and pressured by a Fauquier County Republican committee officer to sign a petition and to show up to vote in the Republican reorganization election. I am a Democrat and the person soliciting my signature and vote knew that. The verbal tactics used regarding the petition made it sound completely non partisan and, in fact, when I asked the officer, was told it had nothing to do with political party affiliation. I did not sign the petition and did not vote in the Republicans' reorganization election. I can easily understand how some Democrats may have voted in the Republican reorganization election because of the misleading pressure tactics Republicans used to solicit signatures and votes. Shame on the Republicans for blaming Democrats for 'skewing' their election. Republicans dirtied their own house.
MTG · September 7, 2014 at 8:44 pm
At the February 18th meeting of the FCRC, Mr. Rich made quite a presentation about why Ken Cuccinelli lost in The Plains, the precinct Mr. Rich is Captain of (proudly for many years he says) Fact is, this was the only precinct that Cuccinelli lost in Fauquier.
In his diatribe against Buchanan (and Jones), he said that Cuccinelli failed to pay adequate attention to the “life style issues” of those in The Plains. We’re not sure what “life style issues” he may have been speaking about, but one thing is clear, he did not support Mr. Cuccinelli.
He may not have worked against him, but from the results in his precinct, it certainly appears that he did not do much to secure a win in The Plains.
George Beveridge on the other hand, railed for 15 minutes against Cuccinelli to two members of the FCRC who knocked on his door during the campaign; what else he may have done to insure Cuccinelli did not win the Governor’s seat is undetermined, but he certainly did publicly voice opposition to Cuccinelli on more than one occasion, to more than one FCRC member.
Republicans should consider these facts before deciding which side of this law suit they are on.
Frankly speaking · September 7, 2014 at 9:50 am
"He is known more for bashing Republicans he doesn’t like, than for working hard for all the Party’s nominees. "
This is about Rich but could certainly be applied to tea party types, including Buchanan and Jones, that shout RINO at every chance. This us nationwide too, and at every level of government. So I don't condone Rich's tactics, they are disgusting. But the grassroots use the same tactics, it is a fact. Do Buchanan and Jones support all local Republican pols? Heck no!! The average conservative knows this. We should throw all the bums out: Rich, Russell, Jones, Buchanan. We don't need them. They have poisoned the Republican well. They are to blame for all the party's woes. I suggest that people take note of this, band together and take back the local unit from both sects of extremist views. This needs to happen all the way up to a national level. We need the Republican Party to be relevant again and stop allowing the Riches and Buchanans of the world to hand us loss after loss.
MTG · September 7, 2014 at 12:46 am
I did a little googling and look what I found in the past regarding Jim Rich. Is this relevant information? I think it’s very relevant to the present conversation…
Comments from an article about the 10th District Convention in 2006, long before Buchanan or Jones appeared on the scene. Rich and crew, including Fisher steamroll their opponents by seizing the temporary chair, and throwing out the rule book.
A Pattern? Sure is! But not the one you’re thinking of .
“10th District suffered a reprimand for the manner of which their election for chair occured. The video has definitely made the rounds, and no one is happy with the manner of which the convention was conducted. It certainly has stained the reputations of those involved, and that sentiment has been made very clear.”
“It was an incredible display of thuggery or incompetence, take your pick, something I'd expect in a country whose name ended in 'stan', or perhaps Chicago, but certainly not in Virginia.”
Fast forward a few years to 2012. Same old pattern emerges again. This time Rich aligns with the Bolling camp and the WaPo to make sure Cuccinelli doesn’t become governor.
“Jim Rich, the GOP’s 10th District Chairman, is a prime example of Republican Good Old Boy politics. He is known more for bashing Republicans he doesn’t like, than for working hard for all the Party’s nominees. His private disdain for many hardworking grassroots activists is, unfortunately, public knowledge.”
“Perhaps Rich’s most notable contribution to the legacy of Harry Byrd was the disaster of the 2006 10th District Convention. Rich signed up people who were Democrats — demonstrated by their campaign contributions to Democrats during the then-current campaign cycle — to show up at the convention and support him. His acolytes tore microphones from the hands of speakers, causing a near riot and garnering notoriety as the worst example of tyrannical abuse of power ever in RPV history.”
“Rich has wriggled from whatever grave he has been ensconced within for the past four years to try to ramble his way back into political relevance for Republicans. [One of his first moves was to] lend his name to the Washington Post’s opening salvos in what is certain to be their focused effort to prevent Cuccinelli from becoming Governor.”
“Let’s see here. Jim Rich, Anna Lee, and Bill Bolling. …they don’t all fit together in some way, do they? They don’t happen to all be good-old-boy, screw the grassroots, bring in the Democrats to defeat conservatives types now, are they?”
R Buchanan · September 6, 2014 at 4:00 pm
Too Conservative is a dying blog site (8 posts this year that I could find) and back in 2010 the Loudoun blogger was dead set against Howie Lind challenging the Jim Rich dynasty. So they wrote about me because I was in Lind’s camp. What they said was usually fabricated or misleading. The comment about “supercharged growth” is total fabrication. What I did run on is re-energizing and reinvigorating. I took the following from the campaign pieces referred to by ‘Save the Fauquier GOP’ :
Re-Energizing on the Issues
•Restore Constitutional government
•Preserve 2nd Amendment rights
•Protect life and marriage
•Enforce our immigration laws
•Achieve energy self-reliance by developing our natural resources
If I become your chairman, I’d like to reinvigorate our Party from the ground up. We need to concentrate on three specific steps.
Party unity and inclusion
Albeit, I do see a similarity here. It seems whoever the opponent of the Fauquier Ruling Class may be, the campaign is made into a zoning battle. Neither Mr. Jones nor I in our past campaigns even talked about growth, or super growth, or any growth except the growth of the Republican Party here in Fauquier. However, the opposition seems to be fixated on the issue and have made every attempt possible to link us to paving pastures.
For the record, I am not a developer. I remodel kitchens and baths and build out stores and offices in existing buildings. And despite popular belief, I do not own a bulldozer.
And as far as voting irregularities, I knew of none and so would not have made any such comment.
What is similar, however, is the presence and influence of Jim Rich and the PEC and how my run for chairmanship 4 years ago is somehow tied back to the same thing Mr. Jones was falsely accused of in this election: Development issues.
Save the Fauquier GOP · September 6, 2014 at 2:41 pm
Save the Fauquier GOP · September 6, 2014 at 2:40 pm
There's goes Rick B. criticizing another credible local news source. So will you and your cronies come up with a silly name for this one like Fauquier Times? Nice of you to link not one but two "stories" from your own site. I do sometimes read it...when I need a good laugh.
I actually recall a story on too conservative, another blog site, in which it talked about your loss of a chairman position to jim fisher, I believe. One of the comments posted on the article talked about your attitude after the contest and how there were accusations of voting irregularities. Flash forward many years and the same thing happens when Cam loses the canvass. There is a pattern there, and don't think people don't notice.
R Buchanan · September 6, 2014 at 9:35 am
Whoever wrote this piece for Fauquier Now did a great job telling the story….. for one side. So I find myself here to add to the conversation.
The reporter certainly hammered one point over the fence. This is all about the PEC, the environmental group that has controlled politics here in Fauquier for 20 years, and Jim Rich is their political leader. Knowing how the political game works, Jim and his cronies filed a frivolous lawsuit to get just what they wanted – publicity. And funding is certainly no problem to them, as he explains to the reporter. The same ultra-rich in Fauquier that have controlled politics here in the county are more than glad to throw out a few of their many shekels to maintain their control.
And what better person to lead the charge than Mr. Rich, the ruthless Chicago-style “Republican” who spent 20 years bullying the 10th District. Afterwit only scratched the surface with the 2006 railroaded convention he posted. The same thing occurred last Tuesday evening when the Chicago engine was cranked up to run over good people who worked hard for a position on the tightly-held Fauquier County Republican Committee seats. Here are two stories told by members who witnessed this sordid affair. They are not, nor have they ever been, in the too often vilified Tea Party. They are just concerned citizens, like the ones summarily dismissed Tuesday evening, willing to spend their time in order to make a difference in the political world of today. Read their stories for yourself. Look them up. I am sure they will talk about what they saw.
Oh, and one more small point. The State rules override any local rules that go against the State Party Plan. This prevents unfair behavior when local committees try to overstep the bounds of fairness. The State Party Plan gives anyone a 30 day period to file an appeal. It is the only fair way to handle matters of this magnitude. Don’t you agree?
Anton Afterwit · September 5, 2014 at 11:45 pm
Is it just me or does it seem like that behind most of the controversy coming out of the local party and some of its members, the same names keep popping up: Russell, Rich, Beveridge, Valk, Lienhard. This isn't a tea party vs. RINO issue. This is a handful of folks that appears to want to stir crap up.
In fact, looks like deja vu all over again. Flash back to May 20, 2006. Don't take my word for it, take a look at: http://www.novatownhall.com/blog/10th-district-convention/
. You can learn more about how some view the Jim Rich team by reading: http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2012/05/07/jim-rich-the-undead-politician/
Interesting similarity to what is happening in Fauquier. Listen to the video and you will hear the attempt by the delegates to remove several Fauquier delegates as they were actually participating in Democrat party activities.
Are the good citizens in Fauquier going to fall for the same old tired tactics? Are they going to support political parties factions tring to take control through subtrofuge? Are the good citizens in Fauquier going to tolerate bullies who are bent on their own agenda at the expense of doing what is moral or ethical?
Regardless of your political affiliation, there is no room for this in our leadership. If you are of a Repbulican, TEA, or Conservative leaning, your support is needed to ensure the leadership of the FCRC is placed in the hands of individuals who follow the rules and ensure equal treatment under the rules. This is an embarassment to Fauquier and has made Fauquier the laughing stock of the state, not because of the TEA or other caucuses within the Republican party, but only by an action of a few heavy handed indivdiuals who want power at any price.
There is more to the story, so ask your friends and neighbors who may be enlightened about this what they know about the background on why this hostile takeover was initiated.
martinkus · September 5, 2014 at 2:29 pm
Mr. Jones lost, fair-n-square. He's a sore loser, like his tea party comrades.
Southerner · September 4, 2014 at 8:45 pm
Is it just me, or does it seem like that behind most of the controversy coming out of the local party and some of its members, the same names keep popping up: Jones, Buchanan, etc? This isn't a tea party vs. RINO issue. This is a handful of folks that appears to want to stir crap up.
martinkus · September 4, 2014 at 7:54 pm
Tea Party knuckleheads!
Enter your email address above to begin receiving
news updates from FauquierNow.com via email.
Friday, June 25
Only a few sections of the recently-adopted, 300-page law actually will take effect July 1
Thursday, June 24
Total receipts in county increase 7.4 percent, with big retailers producing double-digit sales increases amid pandemic
More Fauquier news
Thursday, June 24
Piedmont Hertitage Area’s 25th, Emmanuel PopUp Market and Great American Campout among weekend options in Fauquier