Monday, April 8, 2013


Today one of Lisa Byers primary supporters attempted to neutralize an otherwise poor performance by Pratt and Stephens at the candidate forum put on by Orcas Eagle Forum this past weekend. The supporter also commented in this Orcas Issues post about the uncivil nature that she felt this campaign has taken. What she failed to make note of was that almost all of the bad vibes written in the local publications came from Lisa Byers supporters, Jamie Stephens, Lovel Pratt, and their supporters. To the best of my knowledge Hughes, Jarman and McClerren  are free of any negative commenting and very little, if any, from their supporters in local publications.

Here is my response to the guest editorial: 

I too attended the forum and agree that all 6 candidates are smart and concerned people who will do what is “their best” in reference to our County if elected. I respectfully disagree that all gave good answers and showed impressive knowledge of different aspects of the issues.
I too am concerned and saddened concerning the dialogue in this election. Therefore I must take issue with your comments on feelings, intolerance and civility. Any candidates past and current beliefs will affect how they will govern and it is our responsibility as citizens and voters to question those beliefs. Those queries are not “over-the-top feelings” or “all-or-nothing intolerance”, but the questions of concerned citizens seeking truth and information in a civil dialogue.
For example, in response to presenting facts concerning Lisa Byers stated beliefs past and current, I and others have been referred to as “smear-tactic”, “Joe McCarthy Era”, “inaccurate and inflammatory” and “mud-slinging and innuendo.” The last 2 come from Byers herself. Jamie Stevens considers questioning facts about the CAO as “fear mongering.” At the forum last Saturday both Pratt and Stevens outwardly attacked those who publicly question their beliefs or openly support other candidates. Pratt believes the First Amendment only applies to her and her supporters. While all 3 of these candidates have attacked others in an uncivil way, I find no record where Rick Hughes, Brian McClerren or Bob Jarman has done so.
In ORCAS ISSUES February 27, 2013 at 9:50 am. “Susan McBain says: “Socialism” means so many things that it means nothing, other than a scare word. (I’ll ignore the use of “communism,” which smacks to me of McCarthyism.).” I’ll get you a dictionary. The rest of your comment does not addressed facts and questions raised but divert the conversation.
I too am looking for civility in the questions, answers and responses. If you believe “civility” means suppressing thoughtful dialogue concerning all of any candidate’s beliefs, past and present, and how they might apply those beliefs in governing our County, then I must challenge your understanding of civil dialogue.
Civilly and respectfully

1 comment:

  1. Susan has responded to the above comments on Orcas Issues. Well, kind of but not really.
    She again attempts to move the dialog from facts and reality to a fanciful diversion. Sorry Susan, bait not taken.
    You can read her comments @ http://orcasissues.com/guest-editorial-eagle-forum-showed-six-good-candidates
    Here is my response to it.
    You addressed civility in your post. A civility you had already violated as had Lisa Byers. Lisa started this with an attack on an e-mail that rightfully questioned statements she made in a video as to how she arrived at the OPAL Community Land Trust model. The people she quotes and the organizations she is involved with in building this model certainly raise this as a valid question.
    Instead of directly answering the concerns of the voters about her beliefs and the CLT model specifically, Lisa and the rest of her supporters have attacked the persons posing the queries, your comments being among them. “No one in Lisa’s campaign mentioned communism or socialism; others mentioned those labels in referring to her.” That is correct. It is also correct that neither she nor anyone in her campaign has yet to directly explain her long held career beliefs which point directly to those claims. Need a dictionary?
    “What is your position on regulations that affect property rights?” Lisa this past weekend said that she approved the San Juan County Democratic Party endorsing her because she wanted the rest of the county to know in general where she was coming from in a “non-partisan” election. She said that would give them a sense of how she would govern. AMEN. That is exactly the point.
    You wrote, “Yes, let’s have open dialog, but on the issues.” For example, “Lisa, in your speech to the NEI you state that the model for OPAL Community Land Trust is developed by you and others who believe individuals do not have a right to privately own land. In light of that and your affiliation with organizations who are committed to the ‘New Global Economy’ through communal, instead of individual land rights reform, what is your position on regulations that affect property rights? In other words Ms. Byers, even though you now claim you believe in the private ownership of land, will you push and/or pass regulations like the CAO and its strict enforcement to effectively suppress the land owner’s rights?”
    Yes, I too welcome this discussion Susan.