Blue Dog Oregon

Susan Collins says that she won't support final bill if it's bloated up

2009-02-07T16:09:00.001-08:00

Maine Senator Susan Collins, one of the moderate Republicans to craft the stimulus compromise in the Senate, just said on Fox News that if the bill balloons above $800 billion or contains more spending projects in it in its final form, she won't support it (which would mean that Reid would have to maneuver politically to break a filibuster).

Interesting...

Back from hibernation...and a thought on the stimulus

2009-02-07T13:49:00.000-08:00

So, I'm back to blogging after a hiatus...been a long time, sorry I was gone, yadda, yadda yadda.

On the stimulus, I really have one thought...does anyone actually think senators have thoroughly studied this bill? I don't have a problem with spending the money on the face of it, but it makes me very nervous to pass a huge spending/stimulus bill with so little time to actually go over it, to make sure the bill will actually do what it's intended to do, in the most efficient way possible.

It's kind of like buying a used car...when someone tells me I have to act now, and there's no time to analyze it or think it over, I tend to reach for my wallet.

One of the basic tenets of being a blue-dog Democrat is fiscal responsibility. This doesn't mean not spending money...it means spending it wisely. I hope this bill does that, but I remain unconvinced.

Fight on the Right - George Will lashes out against McCain

2008-09-19T06:42:00.000-07:00

This is why some thoughtful conservatives have grave doubts about his ability to be president.

That's the reaction of conservative columnist George Will to John McCain's recent call for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox to be fired. Will spoke yesterday to a business group in Michigan, and McCain was definitely a topic. Will, a friend of Cox, clearly wasn't in a friendly mood when it came to McCain. Here is more from the article:

In his speech, Will said McCain worries conservatives because he is someone who "can so polarize every argument into a kind of moral melodrama. You can't have honest difference of opinion with John McCain. This is very difficult because to disagree with he who is honor personified is inherently dishonorable."

SEC Chairman responds to McCain

2008-09-18T20:27:00.000-07:00

Christopher Cox, SEC Chairman, responded to McCain's call earlier today for him to be fired:

"While I have great respect for Sen. McCain, we have sometimes disagreed, and
this is one such occasion. The SEC has made plain that we have zero tolerance
for naked short selling. In this market crisis, the men and women of the SEC
have responded valiantly as they always do -- with the utmost dedication and
professionalism. Addressing the extraordinary challenges facing our markets, the
independent and bipartisan SEC has taken the following decisive actions."

My take:
It seems to me that Cox is treating McCain like a senile old uncle...with the appearance of deference and respect, but with a knowing wink.

From Politico - McCain wants SEC Commissioner fired

2008-09-18T11:32:00.000-07:00

Wow...talk about sticking your neck out. McCain said today that SEC Commissioner Christopher Cox, a Republican who spent 17 years as a Congressman from California, should be fired:

"The Chairman of the SEC serves at the appointment of the President and has betrayed the public's trust," McCain said, reading deliberately from set remarks at a rally in Cedar Rapids. "If I were President today, I would fire him."

McCain...will put an end to greed?

2008-09-18T04:20:00.000-07:00

In a sweeping statement, Senator McCain said yesterday at a townhall meeting:

"We're going to reform how Wall Street does business and put an end to the greed that has driven our markets into chaos."

My take:
Whoa. Put an end to greed? While he's at it, why doesn't he end pride, envy and covetousness? I know he probably didn't mean what he said...but still...not the best use of the language I've ever seen.

Big Ticket Buyouts...Thoughts and Questions

2008-09-17T16:59:00.000-07:00

FNMA (Fannie Mae) and FHLMC (Freddie Mac) were essentially taken over by the federal government. They process about 50% of all the mortgages taken out in the United States ($5.3 trillion). What used to be these companies will now be a Federal Agency under the Treasury Department. Stockholders in these companies essentially lost their entire investment.
AIG, the largest insurance company in the United States, with 20 million customers worldwide, has reached an agreement with the Federal Government where AIG will have access to $85 billion worth of credit, to be paid back at 11%+ (a VERY high rate). The Federal Government will own 80% of AIG.

A Question
What the heck happened to letting the market sort things out? This seems like a HUGE government takeover of business. So far, I've heard almost no objections from conservatives to this massive government involvement. They're strangely silent when I would expect them to be squealing.

An Answer
The truth is, the feds simply had to act. As bad as it is to gobble up these entities into the federal government, both these entities, had they been allowed to fail, could have thrust the world economy (not just the U.S.) into a 1930s-style depression. So, even though the medicine doesn't taste good (surely it will cost us taxpayers plenty), it has to be done.

Now let's hope we get to the bottom of how it happened, and how to prevent it next time.

Interesting quote...given how the campaign has been going...

2008-09-12T09:41:00.000-07:00

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived
and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in
myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.

- John F. Kennedy, 35th president of US 1961-1963 (1917 - 1963)

Speak Up! Alert - Public Hearings on Taxes

2008-09-12T09:17:00.000-07:00

The Oregonian is reporting that there will be public hearings on proposed changes to the tax system in Oregon. Here is the skinny:

The Task Force on Comprehensive Revenue Restructuring has been meeting for
months, examining a variety of alternative approaches such as eliminating
residential property taxes while establishing a sales tax, reducing personal
income taxes while creating a sales tax, and replacing the corporate income tax
with a gross receipts tax. Oregon is one of only a few states with no sales tax,
and personal income taxes provide the bulk of the funding for schools and state
government services.

Chairman Lane Shetterly, a former legislator and state Land Conservation
and Development Commission director, said the group plans to produce a draft
report by late October, then collect public comment at the six hearings. The
panel will send its final report to the Oregon Legislature before the 2009
legislative session begins in January.

Check out the schedule and lend your voice to the process...I'll be there in Tigard on Dec 17.

The Service Forum...oh, that campaigns could be run this way

2008-09-12T05:43:00.000-07:00

At the forum centered on public service yesterday, the candidates seemed more in sync than they've ever been. Some of the areas of simpatico:

Both criticized Columbia University (where Obama graduated from and McCain's daughter graduated from) for not allowing ROTC on campus. This is significant for Obama, as it signifies a move towards the center and a point of disagreement with his party's left wing.
Both candidates praised serving the country and being involved in the community and other causes...they differed however on the approach. Obama strongly favored enhancing groups such as the Peace Corps and Americorps, whereas McCain wanted to stress private groups and churches.

Overall, I think this event was good for Obama. It allowed his team to take a deep breath and gather itself campaign-wise, and Obama was clearly the favorite among the crowd. He also was much more direct, much less academic than he was at the Saddleback Forum. McCain also did fine...he was thoughtful, strong without being strident, and funny.

Final Grade

Obama - A
McCain - B

What Obama needs to do

2008-09-11T09:09:00.000-07:00

It would seem obvious to me that for the next 53 days, Obama needs to, every single day, release a major speech, ad or press release talking in-depth about one of the following topics:

Education
The economy
Afghanistan ("the forgotten war")
Health care
Middle-class tax cut

He should have specific proposals, and call out McCain daily for the fact that McCain talks in generalities and vague concepts, whereas he has solutions that will work. But he needs to start every day with a communication designed to control the topic for that day...even if the McCain camp responds, they'll be reacting to Obama. Of course, Obama also needs to play "defense", aggressively responding to every charge.

Nobody ever said it would be easy. Well, OK, a few people did...but they were dumb.

Disappointment and rebuttal

2008-08-03T10:05:00.000-07:00

As an independent-minded Democrat who really liked John McCain in 2000, I'm disappointed by the negative, nasty tone his campaign has taken. Yes, I'm an Obama supporter, so take this for what it's worth. But two things strike me as interesting:

The McCain campaigns almost complete unwillingness to actually talk about their own proposals, and their almost complete focus on Obama. For example, this morning on CNN's"Late Edition" McCain Economic Advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer was asked if McCain and Obama were in fact moving closer together on the drilling issue. She basically started out her answer with "Well, what's important is that Barack Obama has...". In other words, she totally ignored his question about McCain in order to maintain complete focus on Obama. This, to me, is just wrong. It's OK to talk about the other guy, but you should talk at least as much about your guy. Otherwise, you just look like a hack. Especially when you are asked a direct question about your guy.
The "Celebrity" ad. Here's the thing about this ad that strikes me as really offensive. There are lots of big celebrities, some of them arguably even better-known than Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. There's Bono, Paul McCartney, Elton John, Madonna, Tom Hanks, Johnny Depp, etc. But the McCain team chose Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Why? Is it a coincidence that they are two young, white girls who are known for being promiscuous? Maybe it is just a coincidence...but it smells. Bad.

I just think the John McCain of 2000 would not have behaved this way. I admired that John McCain. This one...not so much.

What Obama Should Do Now

2008-06-05T22:13:00.000-07:00

Now that the dust has settled, and Obama has the nomination sewn up, there are a few tasks that lay ahead of him:

Integrate Hillary Clinton into the campaign (but don't make her VP). To pick Clinton now would inject all the wrong energy into the mix, and would make Obama look weak. I think the perfect pick would be Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, the decorated Vietnam veteran who served in Reagan's Defense Department and is pro-gun and pro-military.
Accept McCain's idea of town hall meetings. Make him wait a little while (but not too long) and immediately go right after him on foreign policy. You don't stay away from an opponent's perceived strength, you attack it head-on...that's what Obama should do with McCain on Iraq. He has most of the public on his side, and if he just holds his own, he'll win this issue.
Take maximum advantage of the money gap. He can contest McCain pretty much everywhere...even in states where he doesn't win, he will force McCain to spend valuable resources...

If he does these things, Barack Obama will be the next President. According to me.

Clinton supporters and women's super-rights

2008-05-20T15:53:00.000-07:00

It strikes me, as I read of some supporters of Hillary Clinton spread their discontent with the outcome, I am reminded of the words of women's rights pioneer Susan B. Anthony.

She published a periodical called Revolution to fight for women's right to vote. The motto of the paper was "The true republic — men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less."

Is it just me, or do these people seem to be asking for super-rights? The fact is that Hillary Clinton had ample chance to make her case. Democrats all over the country heard her many, many times. Many supported her, and I applaud them. But when all is said and done, Barack Obama will have the most delegates, and will have the nomination. The plain, simple truth is that Senator Clinton made some huge mistakes (such as ignoring early caucuses) and Obama siezed his opportunities. I really believe sexism had nothing to do with it, any more than it had to do with the fact that Senator Clinton got many, many more votes than Richardson, Edward, Biden, Dodd, etc. all put together. Last time I checked, they're all men.

Hillary video...yowch

2008-02-15T08:24:00.000-08:00

I'm not a big fan of campaign videos...this one doesn't change my mind...can anyone say "Row, row, row your boat for Roosevelt"?

Northern Illinois shooting

2008-02-15T06:18:00.000-08:00

According to CNN, six people have died, 21 are in the hospital, 7 in critical condition.

Apparently the gunman came out from behind a screen in a lecture all and started shooting.

My take:
Certainly both pro- and anti- gun lobbies will use this very real tragedy to promote their agendas. From all indications at this point, nothing would have prevented this. I think the "lesson" of this incident, if there is one, is that sometimes there are bad people who do bad things, and we can't always prevent it from happening.

Although I tend to be pro-gun rights in general, since the gunman had apparently planned to kill himself as well, I'm not sure how much of a deterrent it would have been to have more people on-campus armed.

It goes without saying...prayers for the families of all affected. May the Lord comfort them.

McCain, Obama win big, start targeting each other

2008-02-13T00:18:00.000-08:00

Here is a link to some shots McCain and Obama took at each other in what is looking more and more like the matchup in the fall.

Funny line from Keith Olbermann tonight...he said all candidates should set a rule to speak BEFORE Obama rather than afterward. No kidding! Whether someone is for Obama or against him (I'm for him), you have to admit - this guy is good.

Mike Erickson on the issues...or not

2008-02-11T23:20:00.000-08:00

Has anyone noticed Mike Erickson's website doesn't really say much at all about where he is actually at on the issues?

It strikes me as a little strange that he's accepting online donations and asking for volunteers, but not saying anything about where he is on the issues.

Thoughts on Not-Quite-Super Saturday

2008-02-09T21:21:00.000-08:00

Here are some random thoughts on today...

Democrats

Saw Obama's speech...wow. I don't agree with much of what he says, but you have to admire his ability to work a room. He reminds me of a young Muhammad Ali...so graceful, so smooth, so quick, that you forget how powerful his shots are.
Clinton isn't out of it...but she's really behind the 8-ball. There's tremendous momentum for Obama, and if it goes to the convention there will be tremendous push for Obama to be the nominee.

Republicans

Not a good night for Republicans. McCain shows real weakness, yet he's inevitably going to be the nominee. So at this point the nomination process has shown there are three candidates, and three factions that have yet to come together: Romney with the economic conservatives, McCain with the national security conservatives, and Huckabee with the social conservatives.
What's the deal with McCain and Romney? I just noticed the last few times McCain has talked, he makes a point about saying he is continuing to have talks with Romney and that "together we will have success in November." Definitely grist for the rumor mill.

Oregonian - Wyden aide talks up Novick for 5th District run

2008-02-09T10:37:00.000-08:00

This blurb in the Oregonian by Jeff Mapes quotes an aide to Ron Wyden as indicating they'd love Steve Novick to run for Darlene Hooley's 5th District Congressional seat. Here's what he has to say about it:

My favorite comes from Josh Kardon, chief of staff to Sen. Ron Wyden,D-Ore.
He talked up the idea of U.S. Senate candidate Steve Novick moving overto the
5th CD race."This is probably the only race where their bench comes close to
ours,"said Kardon. The only potential candidate we could run with high
namerecognition across the district is Steve Novick and I have no idea if he has
anyinterest."

The article goes on to say Novick has no stated interest in giving up his Senate run. Of course, things can change. He could use the money he's already raised. He's also likely the highest-profile person the party could get at this late notice.

Right now, it sounds like Vance Day is supporting Mike Erickson on the GOP side, even though there are some potentials (like Kevin Mannix) who are perceived to possibly be stronger candidates. Time will tell...

Just in Case You Thought Negative Campaigning Started with the Blogosphere...

2007-10-25T12:26:00.000-07:00

Just heard about Joseph Cummins' new book, Anything for a Vote, about the history of, shall we say, strenuous campaigning...it's hilarious and enlightening. Here are some snippets:

1836: Congressman Davy Crockett accuses candidate Martin Van Buren of secretly wearing women's clothing: "He is laced up in corsets!"
1912: Theodore Roosevelt is shot in the chest while preparing to give a campaign speech, then proceeds to deliver it anyway: "I don't know whether you fully understand that I have just been shot, but it takes more than that to kill a bull moose!"
1960: Former president Harry Truman advises voters that "if you vote for Richard Nixon, you ought to go to hell!"

And this tibdit about the election in 1800 between Jefferson and Adams...

The Federalists couldn’t get enough of attacking Jefferson in a very, very personal way---their assaults sound like the insults leveled at Bill Clinton, another Southerner, almost 200 years later. "Jefferson is a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia Mulatto father," said one leaflet. A Connecticut paper raised the specter of the French Revolution, supposedly beloved by Jefferson: "Are you prepared to see your dwellings in flames ... female chastity violated, [your] children writhing on the pike? GREAT GOD OF COMPASSION AND JUSTICE, SHIELD MY COUNTRY FROM DESTRUCTION!"

Oregon Measure 50 and SCHIP - Thoughts on Children's Health Care

2007-10-18T13:53:00.000-07:00

So, there has been lots of talk concerning children's health lately. To summarize:

Measure 50: Would modify the Oregon Constitution to add an 80 cent tax on cigarettes and use the money to pay for children's health. Would not create any new government agencies, but would add staff, so there would be more bureaucracy than now.

SCHIP: would expand plans to provide government assistance for health insurance for children. Families making $80k a year would still be eligible for government assistance. President Bush is proposing a much more modest increase in government assistance.

The Blue Dog View:
I'm not opposed to the idea of government helping provide for children's health for people who truly can't afford it. But government assistance for those making $80k a year? That's hard for me to swallow as a fiscal centrist. the other issue I have is that I think the health system we have in this country is really broken. And I don't think you fix a financially flawed system by simply throwing more government money at it. I haven't heard anything in either one of these proposals about actually making changes to the health care system itself, so to me adding more government money into the system without some kind of structural change is really counter-productive.

Of course I could be wrong...thoughts?

Is the country becoming less polarized?

2007-10-03T16:06:00.000-07:00

Isn't it interesting that the leading candidates for President for each party (Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rudy Giuliani) are both very much centrist candidates? I think it's interesting that both parties seem to be following the "Bill Clinton model" of pretty much taking the base for granted and going after the middle of the country.

It should get very interesting pretty soon.

The MoveOn Ad - Thoughts From the Center

2007-09-21T14:16:00.000-07:00

As a centrist Democrat, I have big problems with the "Betray US" ad. There are many claims in the ad that trouble me greatly.

One example:

Here is the quote from the MoveOn ad:

The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you’re shot
in the back of the head — not the front.

In fact, this is the quote from the Washington Post article:

Intelligence analysts computing aggregate levels of violence against
civilians for the NIE puzzled over how the military designated attacks as
combat, sectarian or criminal, according to one senior intelligence official in
Washington. "If a bullet went through the back of the head, it's sectarian," the
official said. "If it went through the front, it's criminal."

So clearly, the Post isn't making that claim - they are quoting a single (unnamed) source who appears to have said it. That is a HUGE difference.

Another example:

Here's another quote from the ad:

Every independent report on the ground situation in Iraq shows that the surge
strategy has failed.

One of the reports they cite, the General Accounting Office (GAO) Report, as evidence (the first and only one I looked at) never judges whether the surge has succeeded or failed. It does indicate that of the 18 benchmarks established by the Iraqi government, 3 were fully successful, 4 were partially successful, and 11 were not successful. Since the surge was mainly intended to reduce the violence, and certainly not to "fix" every benchmark, let's look at what they said about the level of violence:

These results do not diminish the courageous efforts of coalition forces and
progress that has been made in several areas, including Anbar Province.
...
It is unclear whether sectarian violence in Iraq has decreased—a key
security benchmark—since it is difficult to measure whether the perpetrators’ intents were sectarian in nature, and other measures of population security show differing trends. As the Congress considers the way forward in Iraq, it should balance the achievement of the 18 Iraqi benchmarks with military progress
and with homeland security goals, foreign policy goals, and other goals of the
United States.

My Bottom Line:

I'm not in any way defending the decision to go to Iraq or the initial planning. I think it was ill-conceived and incompetently planned. However, to attempt to sully the reputation of a decorated soldier who has devoted thirty years of his life to our country's service, and who has a spotless ethical record based on such shoddy, trumped-up charges is at the very least irresponsible, and does irreparable harm to the very cause MoveOn says they are trying to further. This is evidenced by the many Democrats who have criticized or condemned the ad.

Add my name to the list.

Thought on immigration

2007-06-21T12:41:00.001-07:00

Since everyone is talking about immigration, here is my two cents...

conservatives can talk all they want about the "rule of law"...but what if a law is a bad law? I think the reason the immigration laws haven't been enforced is that they were poorly conceived and funded, and restricted legal immigration to such an extent that they guaranteed an influx of illegal immigration. It would seem to me the answer is to 1. Yes, do a better job of enforcing our border but 2. Provide realistic procedures for people who want to come to this country and work and raise a family. Currently we have two problems:

It's too easy to come here illegally
It's too difficult to come here legally

You can't only fix one of these problems...in fact, they are inextricably intertwined.

Some quotes on immigrants and immigration

2007-06-14T15:14:00.000-07:00

Remember, remember always, that all of us... are descended from immigrants and revolutionists.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt

What, then, is this new man, the American? They are a mixture of English, Scotch, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans, and Swedes. From this promiscuous breed, that race, now called Americans, have arisen.
- J. Hector St. Josh de Crevecouer

In times of shrinking expectations,... everyone feels like a victim and pushes away outsiders to defend his own corner.
- Oscar Handlin

Remember that when you say "I will have non of this exile and this stranger for his face is not like my face and his speech is strange," you have denied America with that word.
- Stephen Vincent Benet

Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
- Emma Larzarus

Everywhere immigrants have enriched and strengthened the fabric of American life.
- John F. Kennedy

Ronald Reagan on Immigration

2007-06-14T15:00:00.000-07:00

This article on the Cato Institute's website shows just how far modern so-called conservatives have strayed from the vision of their inspiration, Ronald Reagan, when it comes to views on immigration.

Here is a snippet:

In his farewell address to the nation in January 1989, Reagan beautifully wove his view of free trade and immigration into his vision of a free society: "I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and heart to get here."
Compare Reagan's hopeful, expansive, and inclusive view of America with the dour, crabbed, and exclusive view that characterizes certain conservatives who would claim his mantle. Their view of the world could not be more alien to the spirit of Ronald Reagan.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Senate approves a big-brother "Going Out of Business" sale law

2007-06-14T06:38:00.000-07:00

The Oregon Senate has approved a bill which would basically regulate going out of business sales. Here is an excerpt from the article in the Oregonian:

The measure would require merchants to submit a notice of intent to conduct
such a sale with the Secretary of State's office. The notice, including the
beginning and ending dates of the sale, would have to be displayed in a
prominent place at the sale location. ...

In addition of the notice of intent requirement, the bill would prohibit
the practice of moving inventory from another store or a warehouse to a store
that is supposedly shutting down. It also defines a "sham" sale as a going out
of business event in which the intent of the owner is to remain open or to
reopen the business at another location in the same area.

My take:
What's to stop a merchant from doing the exact same thing, but simply calling it a "Sale" instead of a "Going Out of Business" sale? This just seems like a dumb law. It's the government getting in the way of a business providing something to a consumer that they could benefit from. If they can show a harm to the consumer from this, I'd be willing to listen...but I don't see it. It just seems like market competition to me.

Immigration Bill Post-Mortem (for now)

2007-06-09T01:48:00.000-07:00

Well, as most have probably heard, the immigration bill that was in the Senate is dead - at least for now. I have two thoughts about this issue:

Why all the happy-dancing among conservatives? OK, I do understand they got a victory of sorts by defeating a bill they honestly see as bad for the country. But where does that leave us? Exactly where we were. With a President solidly behind a comprehensive bill and congress sharply divided, the likelihood that there will be a "fence-first" immigration bill passed into law in the near future is exactly zero. Which means the status quo is the best the conservatives can hope for, unless they compromise on something that's less than what they want.
The total lack of trust from both sides. Wow. This last week has been amazing. Democrats lambasting Democrats, Republicans smearing Republicans. It occurs two me there is a total lack of trust on both sides. On the one side you have the "fencists", who want enforcement first largely because they feel they were hoodwinked in the past concerning immigration legislation, and are simply not willing to trust the other side when they say a comprehensive solution will also include vigorous enforcement. Then on the other side, you have the "comprehensivists" who do not trust the good faith of the fencists. They believe that if the fencists get their fence law, they will simply abandon the whole idea of a guest worker program. So, what we have here is two groups who can't trust each other father than they can throw them. And that, more than any particular legislative issue, is what is the biggest roadblock.

Where this blue dog lies - my political leanings

2007-06-05T16:16:00.000-07:00

I have a very diverse political background. My father was a staunch republican, my mother a moderate democrat. I come from a strong Catholic family, but have sisters who are members of NOW. So, that being said, I would describe myself as a “Bill Clinton democrat”. Here are some of my positions:

Abortion: Let’s get the biggie out of the way early. I am pro-choice, which is somewhat controversial for a Mormon. I just don’t believe in criminalizing abortion. However, I do favor waiting periods, notification of some responsible party for minors (although I recognize this might not always be a parent). I completely endorse the position of President Clinton - that abortion should be safe, legal and rare.
National Defense: As a veteran and the son of a World War II veteran, I have strong commitment to national defense. I wouldn’t have chosen the war in Iraq, but I feel we need to complete the job as well as we are able. In the future, I would hope that we will be more intelligent about the use of our military resources, and use them in places where there is a more direct threat to America (like we did in Afhganistan).
Social Programs: Again, I am with President Clinton on this issue. He said the era of big government is over. I believe there can be a mix of public and private money, working together, to make things better for people. I believe strongly in the free enterprise system, but am NOT a believer in the idea that all government is bad. I think the answer to bad government isn’t no government, it’s better government.

Anyway...that's where I am. I'd love to hear where you are.

Gordon Smith challenger claims they'll stay positive...

2007-06-05T15:55:00.000-07:00

Bates' strategist: don't go negative on Smith

The above BlueOregon post concerns Sen. Alan Bates and his possible challenge of Gordon Smith for his U.S. Senate seat. His people are saying he pledges not to go negative. Here's a snippet:

Former Ashland Mayor -- and Bates' campaign strategist -- Cathy Shaw commented in response (and quoted in the Daily Tidings) that a Bates campaign would stay positive and not engage Smith directly.

Cathy Shaw on a Bates candidacy:
Of Novick and Bates, they’re both great with each bringing different strengths and weaknesses. Although I do not know Steve well, I do know Bates and he will never go after a democrat in a race. How do I know that? Because, he won’t attack a republican opponent either; never has, never will. Before all of you roll your eyes and say that anyone refusing to go negative is an “amateur” or doesn’t know the game, I would suggest reading Kathleen Hall Jamieson’s book entitled: Everything You Think You Know About Politics…And Why You’re Wrong (A New Republic Book, 2000).

And in the Tidings:
As for running an aggressive race, Shaw said Bates "never has, and never will" run a negative campaign. "He just doesn't do that," Shaw said. "People say it wins elections, but it doesn't."

My take:
It all depends on what you mean by "negative campaigning". If a candidate refuses to aggressively point out flaws in their opponent's actions or positions, then they have no business running for public office. However, pointing out an opponent's bad policy decisions or faulty political ideas is not the same as attacking someone personally. I'd expect a candidate who is tough and courageous, but also principled and wise. The end is important, but it ultimately doesn't justify the means.

Civil rights vs. the needs of the government to administer justice - keeping things in perspective

2007-06-02T15:40:00.000-07:00

In all this talk of NSA spying and the Patriot Act, some critics of the President have said we have moved to living in "a police state" and called the president "a dictator". There are serious issues to be decided to be sure...but let's review a little Civics:

The President can be removed from office by Congress at any time, for virtually any reason (the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the Constitution is left entirely up to Congress to interpret - the Supreme Court has consistently refused to weigh in on what this means).
Congress, by getting a 2/3 majority, can pass any law they want, at any time, and there's nothing the President can do about it.
Congress can effectively end any war by cutting off funding for the fighting of it - this is essentially what they did during the Vietnam War.

As far as turning the U.S. into a police state...it might be helpful to read a description in Parade Magazine of daily life in North Korea (published in Feb 2005):

The Ministry of People’s Security places spies in workplaces and neighborhoods to inform on anyone who criticizes the regime, even at home.
All radios and TV sets are fixed to receive only government stations.
Disloyalty to Kim Jong Il and his late father, Kim Il Sung, is a punishable crime: Offenses include allowing pictures of either leader to gather dust or be torn or folded.
The population is divided into “loyalty groups.” One-third belong to the “hostile class.” These people receive the worst jobs and housing and may not live in the capital, Pyongyang.
Below the hostiles are the estimated 250,000 held in prison camps, some for crimes allegedly committed by relatives.
Executions often are performed in public.

The decline and fall of eco-terrorism

2007-06-01T22:21:00.000-07:00

Susan Nielsen has an editorial in The Oregonian on the decline in the popularity of eco-sabotage in recent years...it's definitely worth a read.

Here's the gist of recent punishments:

The largest prosecution of eco-sabotage in U.S. history hit a milestone last week. A federal judge in Eugene sentenced Stanislas G. Meyerhoff to 13 years in prison, and two others to long terms, for their roles in a serial arson campaign that crossed the West and caused at least $40 million in damage to corporate and government property. Seven more people in the ring are scheduled to learn their punishments by early June.

She then goes on to show the complete inconsistency in their actions, including times when attacks had the exact opposite of the intended effect:

...they caused a lot of damage without coming anywhere near a global hub of power. They terrified scores of innocent people without sticking anything to The Man.

My take:
I think anytime you use destruction of property and killing of innocent people to make a political point, no matter how apparently valid the point, you become a terrorist. And you do something evil. There is simply no getting around it.

Who owns a student newspaper?

2007-03-29T19:15:00.000-07:00

"Timely help for student speech", The Oregonian, March 29.

This editorial, among other things, says "And there's no bright line between teenage speech that's clearly out of line and speech that's simply juvenile, inspired or uncomfortably true. "

Actually, I think there is a bright line. To quote:

Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. ~Abbott
Joseph Liebling, "Do You Belong in Journalism?" New Yorker, 4 May 1960

Who owns a high school student newspaper? That is, after all, the ultimate question isn't it? If I am a reporter for the Oregonian, and I turn in a story that is unacceptably biased, and my editor chooses not to run it, are they engaging in censorship? Of course not...the owners of a press (and their representatives) have every right to exercise editorial control over the entity they own.

Do students own the student paper? My thought is that they don't...it is ultimately the newspaper of the school, and is owned by the school (and, ultimately, the state of Oregon). Certainly there should be significant deference given to freedom of expression. After all, a school paper is supposed to be an educational endeavor. But if a faculty member exercises their editorial control over a paper they ultimately own is not an infringement on freedom from speech, but is rather an editor/publisher...well, editing. If the students truily want something they completely control, they should do as I did in my subversive youth...and start their own paper, independent of the school.

To pause and think

2007-03-10T09:56:00.000-08:00

I was musing tonight about polarization - about the continuing divide in this country between groups of people. I heard a commentator talk about "red states" and "blue states" as if we were two different countries. It struck me that it's possible different states have not been divided up into two factions in such stark terms since the civil war.

And then I read Robert F. Kennedy's talk the night Martin Luther King was shot. (Here is a link to it if you are curious.And I was struck by something...perhaps we don't always realize the danger of attacking the motives of good, honest people who we disagree with. Because the road isn't necessarily long between vilifiying and subsequently dehumanizing our political opponents, and sticking a rifle to the head of a fellow American citizen and pulling the trigger.

It's interesting to note that with all the wars we've fought, it's still true that the one where the most life was lost...was the one we fought against ourselves.

Student's Public Praying - Legitimate Expression or Dangerous Activity?

2007-03-09T08:53:00.001-08:00

Where two or more students are gathered in God's name . . . there is controversy

This article in the Oregonian today piqued my interest. The basic facts are:

Some students gathered to pray regularly in a “commons” area of the school.
The principal, feeling it was blocking the way of students and teachers, asked them to move to a classroom to pray.
They refused.

Of course, both sides are lining up for the show. Here’s an excerpt:

"The case has already been seized upon by national figures and advocacy groups.
The Liberty Counsel, a Florida-based conservative legal advocacy group aligned with The Rev. Jerry Falwell, has thrown its support behind the students, threatening to sue the district over the principal's suspensions. School officials received numerous complaints Thursday from radio listeners in Wisconsin, and a Christian radio station in Florida plans to air a discussion of the incident and issue, and area churches have phoned in solidarity.
On the other side is Heritage High and Evergreen Public Schools, whose administrators say they were just trying to get students to class safely and on time, and evenhandedly apply rules about student gatherings. The school, just north of east Vancouver, is nestled in a working-class neighborhood of modest homes. "

Not all the folks in the religious community in the area are lining up behind the students, however. Here is what Roger D. Miller, principal of Vancouver Christian High School, had to say:

Do I think students should follow policies for how to organize a group? Yes. Do I think sometimes religious groups in schools get unfair treatment? I'd probably agree with that, too. Whether this is one of those cases, I don't know.

My take

To me, it boils down to one basic question…were the students actually blocking reasonable access to areas of the school for other students and teachers? If so, it’s a no-brainer…they have to pray somewhere else. If the reverse is true, then this is clearly a case of an attempt to deny freedom of expression.

"The Barack I Knew"

2007-03-08T20:35:00.000-08:00

This article on townhall.com by Carol Platt Liebau, who worked with Obama many years ago on the Harvard Law Review, is fascinating. She is a strong conservative who doesn't agree with Obama on much of anything policy-wise...yet she has many complimentary things to say about him.

She said he is:

intelligent
colorblind
self-confident
a good listener
has a great sense of humor

As Obama is my choice (at least early on), this sounds pretty encouraging, coming from a conservative.

Barry Goldwater - a real conservative

2006-09-19T13:12:00.000-07:00

Saw an interesting biography last night of Barry Goldwater. Interesting to note that:

he was pro-choice (he thought it was none of the government's business)
he actually supported civil rights laws before 1964, and only opposed the 1964 law on constitutional grounds
he hated Nixon ("the most dishonest politician I've ever known"), had a very low opinion of the Christian right's influence in the Republican Party (thought all good Christians should give Jerry Falwell a kick in the ass) and thought the Republicans needed to lay off Clinton in the impeachment issue.

Interesting to see how the "father of modern conservatism" viewed some of these issues...

Ted Kulongoski...against Ted Kulongoski?

2006-09-18T20:24:00.000-07:00

OK...I'm new to Oregon...so I'm still learning all the issues...but this opinion piece in the Oregonian is pretty brutal to Ted Kulongoski. It basically says that he indicated he wouldn't go looking for more taxes, then went about doing exactly what he promised he wouldn't do.

Anyone with a viewpoint on this? I don't have an opinion...yet.

Colin Powell

2006-09-18T19:35:00.000-07:00

This is what George Bush said about Colin Powell when he left his office as Secretary of State in 2004:

He has been one of the most effective and admired diplomats in America's history. Secretary Powell has helped to rally the world in a global war, has helped to resolve dangerous regional conflicts; he's helped to confront the desperate challenges of hunger, poverty and disease. He has been tireless and selfless and principled, and our entire nation is grateful for his lifetime of service.

It's interesting now that Powell is being critical of Bush, conservatives seem to be coming out of the woodwork criticizing him. This is a guy who basically put his reputation and 30+ year-career at risk to deliver the administration message at the United Nations, among other things. I think to rip him to shreds now, simply because he expresses a contrary opinion (which he has every right to do), is frankly shameful.

Why I like Hugh Hewitt (and Alan Colmes) and hate Air America and Michelle Malkin

2006-09-18T19:33:00.000-07:00

It's really quite simple...I am about fair, honest, respectful debate. I am a person who occasionally has a conservative perspective, occasionally a liberal one. I think conservatives are basically decent human beings (for the most part)...same for liberals. Hugh and Alan have the ability to disagree without frothing at the mouth or calling the other side hateful names simply for having a different point of view (unlike the aforementioned Michelle Malkin, whose book, "Unhinged," has to be the ultimate in the pot calling the kettle black, or Air America, a network whose entire corporate charter is based on disgust with President Bush on every level). By the way, Lanny Davis has a new book which talks about this very issue...it's excellent and even has a ringing endorsement from conservatives like Michael Medved. Check it out.