LD23’s Very Own Obama-Pelosi Duo – Part II

We return to the saga of duplicitous actions on the part of the wanna-be party chairman, Jim O’Connor, and his mouthpiece, Lynne Breyer, who abused their positions by rigging the election of state committeeman, manipulating proxies and illegally insuring the majority of the electorate were their supporters. Enter the other beneficiary of the hijinks, Nancy Ordowski, the illegally elected chairman of LD23. Perhaps it is she, and not Lynne, who best plays the role of Pelosi with O’Connor pulling the strings.

What is this all about? Remember when the Dems held the closed-door session and wouldn’t let the GOP see what was in the Obamacare bill, keeping it only among the votes they knew were theirs? In an effort to channel the Obama-Pelosi duo, Jim O’Connor and Nancy Ordowski maneuvered their own “shut-out” of elected PC’s that began when a huge number of newly elected PC’s were not notified of the nomination process, then denied the ability to run. Then, according to many long-time PC’s, O’Connor and his minions failed to send a call letter, as defined in Arizona Revised Statute Title 16 and AZGOP Bylaws, to all eligible voters! This is beyond unethical. It is a direct violation of Arizona law.

The O’Connor-Ordowski plan reveals an effort that wouldn’t notify everyone of the right to run, limit the time frame and manner of nomination so they are shut out, fail to notice the full body of the meeting and deny proxies carried by those outside their tightly held control – between the anemic turnout and proxy count, it insures victory. That about sums it up. Obama and Pelosi would be proud.

The apathetic participation in LD23 left “a mere” 29% of elected PC’s to make the decision for the entire district, a suspect turnout in what has been historically a robust district giving credence to claims that the LD election was rigged to give O’Connor an advantage in the state party elections. The evidence of the illegally held meeting is enough that AZGOP Chairman Robert Graham has ordered a “do-over” of the meeting or he will utilize the legal option of seating a new group of state committeemen from LD23.

The illegally elected, therefore in name only, Chairman Ordowski fired back to Graham with pages of a “the lady doth protesteth too much” response. It is complete with a circular thought narrative always leading back to a denial of truth and full of arrogance and disdain for the rules.

O’Connor’s response, through his mouthpiece Breyer, never denied the accusations of failing to send out the call or hiding the call for nominations in an email sent prior to the canvas of the election. Breyer tries to push the fault onto the PC’s, deflecting attention away from O’Connor – the real culprit – saying it isn’t the district’s responsibility to see the all letters are received.

So – here we have a candidate for state party chair who presented a last-minute proposal to the MCRC Bylaw committee trying to completely eliminate proxies. Yet, this same person manipulated the election for state committeeman, making it heavily dependent on proxies, to maximize his potential votes for party chairman. Do as I say but not as I do?

The same candidate has failed to meet the statutory duty to notify all members of their right to participate in the election. Is this how he intends to run the Arizona GOP? This should concern all PCs, and particularly those who have seen their rights trampled upon by Jim O’Connor.

What needs to be said is this:

The law applies to everyone Mr. O’Connor. You don’t get to pick and choose which laws, or rules, matter. Your motives may have some special purpose to you, but they do not represent a higher calling that absolves you of the guilt you hold and betray any sense of morality you propose. Those PC’s you failed to notice were elected representatives of another 250 registered Republicans in your district. You attempted to silence their voices. You told them that they didn’t matter. Yet, you want to be the representative of the Arizona GOP? Sounds like it is time to Drain the Swamp and it starts with you.


Comments

  1. Dennis Weiland says

    It seems that all this drama could be eliminated with the elimination of proxies.

    A discussion about this proxy delimea should be held at the state meeting.

  2. Edith E Stock says

    Many fine hard working PCs in Fountain Hills have experienced the judgement by LD23 leaders as unfit for any participation in any capacity exactly because these folks work hard & practice accepting ALL registered Republicans as equals in our efforts to support GOP platform. The consistent rude, skirting rules/regulations by these “leaders” has seriously reduced the ranks in LD23 to a group of ghost PCs & those willing sycophants.

  3. Here we go again.
    I left a comment to Part I, seeking answers to some basic questions, as the article seemed to be very long on name-calling and innuendoes but very short on facts.
    As is this article.
    So, here are some questions that would help this reader understand what, exactly, is being alleged.
    You allege the rigging of an election. What does that mean? And, what facts do you have?
    You allege the “manipulation” of proxies. What does that mean?
    Who manipulated the proxies?
    How were the proxies manipulated?
    Whose proxies were manipulated?
    You allege Nancy Ordowski is an “illegally elected chairman of LD23 [sic].”
    What statute was violated?
    How was it violated?
    Did you or anyone else report this to some legal authority?
    Which one?
    What are the criminal penalties?
    Under what statutes?
    If the members of a legislative district committee meet the quorum requirement for holding a statutory organizational meeting, and then hold an election, and the officers elected received fifty per cent plus one of the votes, then they were properly elected. I was not at the meeting. Were you?
    Did any members object to the way the meeting was conducted?
    If so, what are their names?
    If they made objections, were their objections heard?
    Please, can you name which members of LD 23 did not get notification of the meeting?
    My what authority can the AZGOP Chairman “order” a new election?
    Can you please cite to authority for the alleged so-called “legal option” empowering the state chairman to “seat[] a new group of state committeemen,” undoing the rights of the LD 23 PCs to be represented at the statutory organizational meeting of the state committee by state committeemen of their choosing?
    You state Jim O’Connor “failed to meet the statutory duty to notify all members of their right to participate in the election.” What facts do you have to back up this allegation?
    Again, what are the names of the members who did not receive notice of the meeting?
    Again, I think the letter from Chairman Graham to Jim O’Connor, copying Nancy Ordowski, and Nancy’s reply to Chairman Graham, will inform the readers here of many the omitted facts.
    Please go here for the letters:
    http://www.ld23gop.org/documents.html
    Thank you.

  4. These articles, both I and II, are ridiculous to the point of being farcical. Posted on Briefs is the info that there are 356 PCs in that LD, 202 were present. Simple math determines that is 57% in attendance. That is an amazing turnout in any district. To call Breyer’s statement false is itself false. A simple reading of the state statutes clearly spells out the conduct of district meetings and clearly gives the COUNTY dominion over certifying state committeemen as pointed out in the Ordowski letter. This is none of AZGOP’s business, proven by a reading of the bylaws & statute. This is easy to understand. The author of Duo I and II has provided nasty opinion but no facts to his/her claim because all facts point to the falsity of this hit piece. This is nothing more than a witch hunt against two PCs/SCs that the author wants to damage.
    Edith Stock, who comments below Duo II, is part of the problem in that district and is part of the Boe James/Chris Brant troublemakers there. Can she prove she comes to meetings, participates in committees, does anything for the district, even that she voted in this election? The ulterior motive here is clear: damage O’Connor so he can’t run for AZGOP Chair against Graham’s chosen candidate. This seals the deal for me, I will vote for O’Connor. We should ask why Graham helped to elect his totally unknown paper proxies to board positions & state committeemen in LD15 using proxies to outvote the real PCs who have kept that district together. He’s the real culprit. By the way, I was sent a copy of the LD23 Call by a friend in that district so that statement is also false. The Call WAS sent.

Leave a Reply