On the heels of receiving the last of the questionnaires from the candidates for Snohomish County Sheriff, an endorsement round-up is in order too. In low name ID races like this, I think newspaper endorsements actually carry significant weight. Most campaigns of this magnitude in a county this large don't have the money for a major mail program, so often the most voters will read about the candidates is in the voter pamphlet and such editorial coverage. Likely primary voters tend to read the newspaper religiously, including their local weekly (hint, hint for future, local candidates).
The Seattle Times, wither readership heavy in south county, endorsed Rob Beidler and Tom Greene to get through the primary; notable in part because they pointedly chose not to endorse John Lovick in this race after doing so repeatedly for the Legislature.
The Everett Herald, with readership heavier in central, east, and north county, endorsed Rob Beidler, while pointedly saying good things about Tom Greene and John Lovick.
The candidates offer a stark contrast in the other endorsements they've received. Press coverage, including the editorials above, note Rob Beidler has been endorsed by organizations representing rank-and-file law enforcement and fire fighters. Tom Greene has been endorsed by a host of fellow leaders in the law enforcement community and a sizeable number of recognizable local Republicans (including yours truly). John Lovick has been endorsed by just about every major Democratic organization and elected official around.
If any reader has seen endorsements from any of the local weeklies in this race feel free to post the information in the comments. As of this typing, the largest weekly in the county, the Enterprise (Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mill Creek, and Mountlake Terrace), has not published an endorsement.
Personally, the whole process of the questionnaires verified my support for Greene. That being said, I think Lovick probably gets through the primary thanks to name ID as a veteran, sitting Legislator and being the recognizable Democrat. That may not be fair, but that's campaign reality. The primary contest likely comes down to who advances to face Lovick: Beidler or Greene.
Posted by Eric Earling at August 09, 2007 08:49 AM | Email ThisEric you are right on for your endorsement!
I know you sometimes get flak on this website for being a different type of conservative than the Stefan but this is an important race for conservatives of Snohomish county because Tom Greene is the one and only conservative running in this race.
And I have also heard that in fundraising Lovick is far behind.
Posted by: Andrew Roberts on August 10, 2007 09:48 PMJust wondering Pudge...what's your opinion of an administrator like Greene within the Sheriff's Office that ends their emails with something like, "Remember, we're doing God's work"...or, "In his Shadow". Now, this is on County emails to the Deputies. Is this ethical, or moral...because clearly everyone has their own religious preference? My understanding was you couldn't mix church and state?
And what's your thought on Greene having the anti-gay activist Rev. Hutcherson as his keynote speaker at his kick off dinner? Doesn't this denote some sort of bias, or god forbid prejudice in his thinking?
And what about the Minutemen leader James Gilchrist speaking at a Greene function? Isn't Gilchrist the wacko guy who supports anti-immigration and is directly leading many of the people being arrested for violence against immigrants...attacking them and harassing them - even legally documented?
You know how the majority of SCSO Deputies feel about Greene as a leader (not good), but some of us also question his personal beliefs and choices as well.
Just wondering.....
Posted by: GVL on August 16, 2007 02:08 AMwhat's your opinion of an administrator like Greene within the Sheriff's Office that ends their emails with something like, "Remember, we're doing God's work"...or, "In his Shadow".
Positive.
Now, this is on County emails to the Deputies. Is this ethical, or moral...because clearly everyone has their own religious preference?
Freedom of religion does not mean freedom FROM religion. I have no problem whatsoever with public officials expressing both a belief in God, and the belief that in public service they are doing God's work.
If someone tried to make a deputy go to church or say a prayer or something, that would be one thing. That's not what's happening here. Love the fact that you live in a free country and get over it.
My understanding was you couldn't mix church and state?
Your understanding is incorrect. I would have hoped that our fine deputies would understand the Constitution better than that.
And what's your thought on Greene having the anti-gay activist Rev. Hutcherson as his keynote speaker at his kick off dinner?
Positive.
Doesn't this denote some sort of bias, or god forbid prejudice in his thinking?
Not in particular, no. I sat next to Rev. Hutcherson a couple of weeks ago, at the kickoff for the Family Policy Institute of Washington, yet my views on homosexuality are very moderate, compared to both the Institute and Hutcherson (I am in favor of civil unions, for example).
I would have thought our fine deputies would not so easily fall prey to the logical fallacy of Guilt By Association. Please learn to think, not just to react. I will feel safer as a citizen if I know our deputies don't so quickly jump to illogical conclusions.
And what about the Minutemen leader James Gilchrist speaking at a Greene function?
I don't believe that ever happened. I only know of one event where Gilchrist spoke recently in our area, and it was not a Greene event. Greene was at that event, but it was not his event. I was at that event. I believe Greene spoke, but I had to work late and showed up afterward. Most of the speakers I heard were not anti-immigrant at all (including Gilchrist), but were anti-illegal-immigrant.
I would hope that our chief law enforcement officer in the county would be in favor of enforcing the law, so I see no conflict here whatsoever. I hope you don't, either, as a law enforcement officer yourself.
Isn't Gilchrist the wacko guy who supports anti-immigration and is directly leading many of the people being arrested for violence against immigrants...attacking them and harassing them - even legally documented?
Nope, not at all. I would have thought our fine deputies would not make such careless and false accusations. In fact, the Minutemen never advocate violence, publically or privately, except, of course, in direct self-defense, which is our absolute right as American citizens. There is, in fact, no significant examples of Minutemen being involved in violent incidents. I don't even know of any incidents where Minutemen have been arrested, though I know of incidents where anti-Minutemen protestors have been arrested.
You could try to claim that some people who have been arrested for violence against immigrants were in some way linked to Gilchrist, but I've never seen any such evidence. Again, that is mere guilt by association (except in this case, there's merely guilt by association of ideas, not actual association!).
You know how the majority of SCSO Deputies feel about Greene as a leader (not good)
No, I don't know that, and given that your other claims above are mostly incorrect or irrelevant, I wouldn't take your word for that anyway.
but some of us also question his personal beliefs and choices as well.
And many people question the same of Beidler, of course.
By the way, as best I can tell, Beidler was wrong. And VERY wrong. He said Greene asked for the deputy endorsement, but that appears to be false. He said he had it in writing, but since it apparently never happened, Beidler has something to answer for here.
I think Beidler owes us either proof, or a public apology and correction.
Posted by: pudge on August 16, 2007 10:21 AM