Jeanne Harris Deserves Better From Democrats

by lewwaters

Jeanne Harris Official

Jeanne Harris

Maintaining a neutral stance in the Vancouver City Council Position 3 race between 4 term incumbent Jeanne Harris and challengers Frank Decker, Anne McEnerny-Ogle and Galina Burley, I can’t help but feel sad for how Jeanne Harris has been sold out by the Democrats she has faithfully supported for so long.

Yes, we know Jeanne created her own problems three years ago with the now famous incident, but let’s be honest here, if one of us were in the midst of a bitter divorce, might we not lash out towards someone, out of character as well?

That is not to make any excuses, just to remind ourselves of the words once spoken by a very wise man long ago, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”

Voters will decide whether or not the incident three years ago outweighs her many years of service on the city council, as they should.

But, even though I am as guilty as anyone else in beating her up over it, I can’t help but feel sorry seeing how the Clark County Democrats have just written her off, even to the point of writing in their August 2013 newsletter, “frequently identified as a Democrat” as if they never knew her.

If I were permitted to vote in the city council races, I would not vote for her, but because I disagree with her political views, those of a Liberal Democrat. I’m a conservative and it would be expected that I oppose her and not vote for her.

What excuse does the Clark County Democrat Party have for writing her off so quickly and enlisting another for a replacement?

And yes, I know they are hiding behind their claim of “nonpartisan” race and not endorsing, but everybody knows such a claim is pure hogwash, every candidate holding a political view of their own and bringing it into their office if they win.

A party publicly saying they are not endorsing is mostly a lot of hot air as party members do discuss between themselves who they want to see win and offer that candidate support. For either party to state they are not endorsing in “nonpartisan” races is a smoke & mirrors game, that’s all.

But for the Clark Democrats to now marginalize Jeanne Harris and distance themselves after her many years of loyalty to them just shows me that the local party under the guidance of Mike Heywood has lost its heart, caring more about winning at any cost and less about standing with those that have stood with you or actually serving the community they are in.

As you can recall, we have seen this win at all cost for the party attitude before from Democrats as 49th legislative district Representative Jim Moeller blasted the only Democrat challenger to 3rd Congressional District Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler last year, costing Jon Haugen the party nomination for some time that cut him off from party resources until late in the campaign.

Haugen likely would have lost any way, but that is irrelevant to the treatment he received at the hands of Democrats like Moeller and those who would not stand up to him.

We see it again with State Senators Tim Sheldon and Rodney Tom, two moderates who grew tired of the heavy handed one party domination of the Democrats and joined into a true bipartisan relationship with the Republicans in Olympia to actually see the two party’s work together.

Their reward for acting in a manner voters have long called for is to see a campaign waged by the Washington State Democrat Party to oust them, shun them and fight their efforts at bipartisanship.

And now, the Clark County Democrats are doing the same thing to Jeanne Harris and pretending like they don’t even know her with their comment in the newsletter, “frequently identified as a Democrat.”

For someone they can only marginally say today is only “frequently identified as a Democrat,” she ran for Clark County Commissioner in 2004 as a Democrat, receiving the party’s support. She lost to former commissioner Marc Boldt, but she had their strong support in the race.

That same year saw Democrat Craig Pridemore win a seat to the State Senate and vacating his position on the Clark County Commission. Jeanne Harris, even though losing the election, sought the Democrat Party nomination to replace him.

Since she didn’t live in the proper district to gain the nomination, she asked for time to move and for the Democrat Party to postpone the nomination until she met the time qualification for living in the district, most assuredly facing allegation of being a “carpetbagger.”

A November 11, 2004 editorial in the local Lazy C said, “In a nervy, if not presumptuous, political gambit the other night, Harris asked the Clark County Democratic Central Committee to postpone its selection of three nominees for a vacancy on the board of county commissioners so that she would have time to move her residence in order to qualify for that vacancy. And this came despite the fact that voters last week denied her a spot on the board.”

“In an over accommodating, if not inconsiderate, move, the Democrats agreed.”

Steve Stuart won the nomination in the end, though.

But, it looks to me like she was more than just “frequently identified as a Democrat” back then to curry such favor from the same Party that today pretends to have never known her.

Jeanne Harris’ troubles are well known to voters and if they think they are enough to replace her, they will do so. But I have to be honest in that sitting down with her weeks ago and talking non-political matters, she is far from the “screaming banshee” many, me included, labeled her.

In fact, I discovered we share similar views away from politics, appreciation for aircraft, desiring to see a Clark County Regional Airport in North County someday and a few other things.

I still hold strong disagreements with her over political views, but maybe it is just my root for the underdog attitude I’ve held for most of my life, she deserves better from the party she has been loyal to for so long.

If you think this is just a specious attack on the Clark Democrats, I invite you to look back to the 2010 elections and my attitude then towards the Clark County Republican Party as I wrote of the 3rd Congressional District race, “I have made no bones of the dirty tricks and underhanded tactics I witnessed in this campaign. My trust in the GOP leadership was shattered as I saw it all unfolding and last evening, in an effort to severe my ties with the local GOP, it became all the more apparent as I was basically informed that I did not see what I saw and even when confronted with the emails that stirred much of it up, they were marginalized.”

“The corruption within the system that drives many voters away from the polls and convinces potential voters that there is no difference between the parties will never be corrected as long as you are not willing to stand against it, expose it and squash it.”

The Clark GOP has new leaders today that I am watching to see how they do.

The Clark Democrats still has the same foul leadership, although different in name that they have had for some time, evidenced by how quickly they eat their own in order to win at any cost.

I am sure this post will confuse Republicans and get me once again accused of supporting someone I am not and Democrats will scoff.

But in the end, whether she remains on the city council or if voted out for someone else, Jeanne Harris deserves better from the very people she has stood by for so long.

20 Comments to “Jeanne Harris Deserves Better From Democrats”

  1. When we interviewed her she was polite and kind which deserves respect. However she was an extreme socialist in her ideology which for Clark County For Better Government meant she does not deserve endorsement. The two are seperate issues. We must have council members who will come to the table and question the actions of staff properly, who will debate the issues on the table properly, who will respect the citizens and their contitutional rights properly. They have to swear to protect and serve not change, alter and degrade and erode those things which are pertainent to the freedom of all of us locally.
    In her terms of service she has not kept her oath of office and in her interview it became apparent why. She is a socialist and probably doesn’t even recognize it. Being a socialist and an American are in direct conflict with each other as the two seperate ideologies cannot blend. For that she needs replaced…. nothing personal here, just our freedom.

    Like

  2. Jeanne Harris disdained what she considered the “failure” of citizens to support tax increases proposed in November 2012 for light rail and a new tax district with more regulations and administration costs to bear. At the council meeting this was discussed at, she pointed to other areas that voted for tax increases and chastised Vancouver voters. She didn’t discuss cost cutting, or the grandiose plans of the council, or grandiose new city Hall expense, or no bid contracts as areas to consider. The problem was the voters who “failed”, failed to support the proposed tax hikes for light rail and new taxing districts. Harris has been a major proponent of the CRC with light rail and minimized concerns such as 2 failed bridge designs, impact in downtown etc. Frank Decker is a man of integrity that will serve citizens well, and respectfully consider input.

    Like

  3. Clark County For Better Government as a board and I both agree that Frank Decker is the best choice for the protection of freedom and consideration of direction regarding a balanced approach forward for our city.

    Like

  4. Carolyn, I know many Conservatives can’t tell the difference between Socialism and Marxism, but it’s huge. In America, many institutions, such our military and police are socialist, as is our government (“needs of the group over wants of the individual”). Capitalism, socialism and liberty can and do work together. On the other hand, Marxism (“from those according to their ability – to those according to their need”) is not compatible with Capitalism or liberty. Councilwoman Harris is not someone I would vote for because she thinks she knows better than everyone else and is patently wrong almost all of the time.

    Like

  5. I agree Martin with your assessment of her. The part of socialism that she tends to lean towards which is absolutely not compatible with capitalism and freedom are areas where in behavior is controlled, you or I pay for someone else’s food and housing while they do not even make an attempt to contribute for themselves or society. She feels it is okay for the city to take people’s private property from them and continually refers to the “betterment of the community” or “best interest of the collective” kind of language.
    So now you and I pay more property taxes while Elie Kasaab gets a pass on a developement which is built by using tax payers dollars to support low interest loans and grants and will be subsidized by more tax dollars in the form of overpriced rents. He owns the place and he will get rich which is okay if he uses his own money to do so but not when he gets to take some of mine from me to do so. The Rockefeller Syndrome at its finest and a full fledge attempt to drive us into ghetto environments and bankruptcy much like Detroit.

    Like

  6. Carolyn, I don’t think Councilwoman Harris knows the difference either – which makes her unfit to make decisions.

    Like

  7. Martin, I did a two hour speech on socialism in America going back two hundred years and including banking, military, schools etc. If you’d like to see it sometime I will gladly revisit giving it again. Some parts of what is considered socialism are absolutely mandatory, some parts are better done by the free market in private enterprise.

    Like

  8. And I agree with that, Carolyn.

    Like

  9. I would not consider the military to be a socialist institution, due to the contracts signed and the conditions agreed to for the duration of the contract, I do recognize it is not a democracy at work in doing the bidding of the republic.
    I agree with Carolyn that her views on property rights vs the government are not consistent with the upholding of individual rights. She is very knowledgeable about the needs of the county and has demonstrated she has sharp elbows required to play in city hall dominated by the elitist Government spending tax dollars like PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) democrat men currently cowed by the Moeller crowd or faction, I do not know what exactly to call the supporters of that fellow whose ideas about the philosophy of government range from Marxism to a peculiar crony politically form of capitalism (depending on how the best to achieve his objective) which relies on the favoritism of big institutions feeding at government troughs.

    I don’t think that is a characteristic of Ms Harris’ view of Government, however being in the insurance business has affected her perspective.

    Like

  10. Dennis, any institution that is paid for by everyone, and whose goal is what is best for everyone IS a socialist institution. (Contrast this with a private military or a private police force.) Democracy has nothing to do with it, though it is a good way for everyone to express their opinion.

    Like

  11. views on individual property rights

    Like

  12. There is way too much play in your universal joint, Martin. Who decides what is best in socialism. Who decides in a Democracy and who in our republic? How it gets paid for is a part of the decision tree. Under Socialism the deciding part by definition is done the individual political top dog. Everything is viewed through the lens of the big man’s eyes, he defines what you need and tells you what you don’t. Individual rights are nonexistent or subservient to the collective as defined by Mr. Big.
    Democracy is anarchy with a stick for a hand brake, it won’t stop anything down but tends to make the vehicle swerve. The Military under Socialism is tied directly to the Big Man, and functions as an unilateral extension of the Big Man’s power.
    Your definition describes unit functions, which are ultimately subservient to the electorate (of which the unit is still apart) and beholden to the will and not just the ability of the people to pay their wages.

    Like

  13. Dennis, your premise is correct but don’t be so knee-jerk about the word “socialism.” Of course socialism is important – you certainly want a government that is voted on by everyone and looks out for the best interests of everyone. I bet you get angry when they give “elites” special advantages. Special advantages is what liberty is about: I get to use my special advantages any way I see fit – I don’t owe anybody anything.

    You’re jumbling Totalitarianism and Marxism into your concept of socialism.

    Like

  14. No Socialism deals with economic philosophy, Marxism and Totaltarianism and Communism, deal with something else, namely social and political philosophy. Socialism is a stage in the marxist long view of evolutionary development. Socialism is almost everything but what you are trying to make it out to be.
    As for elites getting special advantage, it really depends on whether or not it is a win win, situation and benefit advantages a lot more than just the elite. I do get mad when elites get advantage at the expense of other not elites, for no other reason than they can and it appears to entertain them. But if you see fit to, then you are correct, there is not a thing I can do or would do to stop it, just because my feelings might be hurt. I got over being mad a AZhats a long time ago. Why entertain them.

    Like

  15. Dennis, dude, you need to get your definitions straight then talk to me. BTW, here’s my political/economic forum: http://www.martinhash.com/forums
    Pick a topic and let’s go at it.

    Like

  16. Dude you must be deluded, you should read what Karl Marx (either end of the horse will do to be from the horse’s orifice), actually had to say about the subject. Then get back to me, if you haven’t been overcome with laughter or central nervous system failure.

    Like

  17. You better be Dr. Dennis Henry, expert in political science & all-round genius.

    p.s. I have Marx, Smith, Keynes, Hamilton/Madison/Jay & Galbraith within arm’s reach; I’ve read them, and I can do some quoting from them.

    Like

  18. Martin, Dennis is pretty close to a political history and science genius. Just thought you ought to know.

    Like

  19. Carolyn, that’s exactly the kind of person I’m looking to debate! Hopefully, he logs onto my forum so we can go at it.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: