Anne, Lars is pretty busy these days trying to shore up his sinking ratings by inventing fake death threats on his wife and making sure the camera is rolling in the studio to catch his reaction.

Dear Blues: "Fake Death Threats???" "bad ratings?????", "LITTLE ANNE" HATES COWBOYS!!!!.

 Somewhere in the above posts, again shows why the left are making "shrinks rich!

  Keep it up! Please.

PS. 'What do you call 10,000 libs moving too Canada? ANSWER: A good start.

Dear Kari. (love how you spell your name)

The ratings war, The war here doesn't count.

The national weather when done on TV,ever notice how they go in San Fran, It's 68 degrees, and in Seattle, its 56??? WHO CARES WHAT HAPPEN IN PORTLAND!

Word of advice, better find the "center" fast, or you BLUES will have a shade of black in 08.

I'm not sure what the purpose of this post was. Or what it is supposed to mean.

In hopes of getting clarity on something can seom of you folks help me understand what Oregon is expected to gain with a strengthening control of our State by the status quo Democrats? Pick an issue. Any issue. What remedies does the status quo democrat control in this state represent? It's fine to gloat over your statewide victory but how is it good for Oregon? Is there a greater opportunity to increase revenue? Will it come in the way of an improved state economy and new jobs? How will the affordable housing crisis be addressed for example? I get the impression this and most problems we face have only one democrat remedy. More money. If I am wrong then what are the options proposed by democrats who have an even greater grip on our state.

Thank you, Anne, for your brilliant post... I love sardonic wit. Lars is probably feeling like an ass that despite his legions, Oregon is looking pretty darn blue these days. Perhaps he is looking to move red? Get away from that wife stalker?

This might not be funny or witty, but it is a good story. I have a friend who is a Lars listener. She is fairly politically ignorant and had fallen prey to all the anti-tax rhetoric. She voted no on Measure 30... Then, she moved out to Sandy...Bought 3 acres to the other side of the urban growth development boundary. When 37 came along, she was going to vote yes on it. We wound up having this whole political dialogue and she realized that Lars (etc.) was on a mission to send the suburban development of Gresham into her neighborhood. It led to her questioning a whole lot of stuff and I am proud to say that she voted mostly progressive this year.

One listener down, how many more to go?

Steve,

You ask how policy in Salem may change with an increased Democratic majority, but then later say you basically disagree with most of what Democrats propose.

Just like, nationally, many Americans apparently endorsed increased Republican control over policy, Oregonians gave Democrats a mandate to pass policy solutions for Oregon's problems.

Will it involve revenue increases? Almost certainly, but Oregon is not that different from dozens of other states. Surely you don't believe the rhetoric out of DC that government has shrunk in the last four years? In fact, fiscal responsibility has been systematically shifted to states, and the number of mandates (most notably Medicare prescription reform, no child left behind, and welfare reform).

[Note: the Dems are as much to blame as the Reps on this one, by the way -- both parties want to pass broad new policy solutions and avoid the responsibility of paying for them.]

The Oregon Republican party is dominated by members who are against any tax increase of any kind. Oregon, like many states, is facing a budget deficit caused in part by a faltering economy, but also caused by an increase in Federal mandates and a decrease in Federal support. This has caused even many Republican governors to call for an increase in local taxes (sales, income, others).

So with a strengthened Democratic majority, we ought to have a better chance of solving the state's budget crisis.

The status quo in this state is not Democratic, by the way, it is divided control. Just as a strengthened Republican majority in the US Senate and House may allow their party to implement policy, so strengthened Democratic control may allow the Dems to overcome the legislative gridlock of the last two sessions.

My God, did you see the clip of his 'death-threats to Tina' rant?..SAY'S THE BLUE POSTER. It wouldn't be funny if it was your wife.

You know, Zell Miller said it best."ITS A SHAME ABOUT NOT HAVING THE CHOICE OF A DUEL TO SETTLE THE DIFFERENCES WE HAVE" or something to that effect.

Since that option isn't available,(cannot seeing any of you with that size gonads anyway) guess you just have to excuse the "blue persons" post about the serious nature of a threat against any member of your family.

The idea that somehow you folks here even consider yourselfs "players" on the election scene is laughable.The record of unemployment statistics,the well known fact,Oregon has a not good for business rap.

The idea somehow you will change the national scene by anything you do here or in DC,is just a really bad joke.

As I said..........Find the middle fast, or it will be a "black N blue 08.

Dear Kari,

The Tribune radio story by left wing "hack" Pete S. is the bottomline on why you people don't get it.

Of course Portland is the hotbed for Air America, they don't call us "Little Beruit!" for nothing.

The total picture of the ratings is what Kari?

The ratings numbers here in the total scheme is "notta!" The national media barely finds us at the six PM weather report, if at all.

Unless Vera has a nightmare/vision about the horrible FBI, the media left or right is mute when the "Portland connection" comes up.Hell, I predict Randy Leonard will soon garner national attention with his views on "dogleash laws!"

The impact you wish you had,is a dream, but like K2 said, we are a state for dreamers .......not the dreams I like, but go ahead, its a free country.

PS. Will someone tell Leonard his presentation on the giant grouphome in SE was DOA! Thanks.

He doesn't know the half of it, and you don't either.

Dear John.... My shrink can whip your shrink!

You seem distressed, deep breathing helps, a walk before beddy bye is nice.

Lars is not a friend, I do not always agree on his show content or "flavor" of his presentation.

The calls to his house were real, they are not a joke, and if you think they are, take a pill, and overdsose of them.

Dear Prof You say, "The Oregon Republican party is dominated by members who are against any tax increase of any kind". Isn't it the Oregon people who are against a tax increase? M28& M30 was pretty clear. You say "Oregon, like many states, is facing a budget deficit caused in part by a faltering economy, but also caused by an increase in Federal mandates and a decrease in Federal support".

Doesn't the management of our State share in the blame? How are we at or near the bottom in employment if our State is not to blame?

You say, "So with a strengthened Democratic majority, we ought to have a better chance of solving the state's budget crisis." How? I asked How? You haven't answered my question.

You say, "The status quo in this state is not Democratic, by the way, it is divided control" Huh? Democrats contoll every single government agency in this state and have for years. Every program is essential, none can be abolished and all need more money?
You say, "strengthened Democratic control may allow the Dems to overcome the legislative gridlock of the last two sessions." What gridlock? You got what you wanted last session. Along with a few RINO Republicans last session you passed the biggest tax increase in Oregon history. It wasn't Republicans who then threw it back at you. It was the public at large. Democrats, Republicans and independants. You say democrats will solve the state budget crisis? How? How will our Oregon democrats solve any crisis? Just pick one, any one and explain how the very status quo Governor Kulongoski and likewise democrats in the legislature propose to fix anything?

Leave the feds out and talk Oregon. The public will not permit a tax increase. That's obvious. The tax reform died along with the promised, "time certain" special session last June.

What program or agency will be at the end of the line for funding? I could name a few, such as CIM/CAM & Cultural Competency at Ed., or OLCC, or the Dept. of Economic and Community Development or even the Oregon Health Plan. If we are to hold harmless k-12 and public safety and vital social services some have to go.

Having more Democrats spending more seat time in Salem means little if we can't get a simple explaition of what they have in mind.

I care not who brings Oregon out of it's funk. I just want it done. My bias is soley against things that do not work.

Thanks you for the dialogue Steve Schopp

Hey Steve.The idea that clear answers will be returned on the great post you had are slim and none.

The chance your request for dailogue will happen is about as good as the chance K2 will appear on Lar's show.

The bottomline for me is as you put it, As with you,I don't care who fix's these problems either, but the idea we need more money each year is getting old to the point it's going to drive me "Criminally insane", and then Randy Leonard and Diane Linn will have to find me a nicer house then the one I have at Anne Martens expense will be OK with me.

Did I SAY I could do anything?

Well lets look at what I DID do.

The stupid issue I "RANT' about, you know the one, where 5 CRIMINALLY INSANE MEN, with a history of violence can be planted next to a school with 400 plus little kids in it, THAT ONE!

Raised the issue here, with the written support of 80 neighborhood assocations, Did SALEM, senate bill sb1040 99TH session, Traveled too DC ,where I got more interest and help from other electeds then the bunch of "idiots" WE SENT THERE. SHRILL ENOUGH???

The reasons that we didnt get change are simple.....DEMOCRATS," LIBBER DEMOCRATS" here and there.PERIOD!!!

So.... so far a lady died, neighborhoods are dealing with places that do not belong there without more laws, WHY??? LIBBER DEMOCRATS! excuse me, PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS!, so I CONTINUE TO FIGHT.

Heavens. All caps, extraneous punctuation, and even new words! Libber? Maybe for the women's movement, but I don't think that's what you mean Mr. Peek. Yes indeed, you've made your point and I daresay convinced a few people in the process. That is shrill enough.

We have a high unemployment rate because we count better then other places and report true numbers (its the oregon way). You honestly believe your getting correct numbers out of Texas (What don't they lie about)? Alabama? Mississsippi?
THe bastion of free enterprise Vancouver, WA has a higher unemployment rate then Portland and they have to send 90,000 people over the river for jobs here each morning. Simply put; Peek over to another state more to your liking please. I, like others, am proud of my state worts and all. Jack Peek has a nice texas ring to it. See ya.

Jack is just being silly. There are many, many examples of innovative state policy affecting the national agenda. Two examples alone from Oregon will suffice: 1) vote by mail is being considered nationwide based on Oregon's experience; 2) the Green Building conference was held in Oregon because Oregon is a national leader in urban planning.

now to the more serious conversation with Steve. Steve, I am trying to keep this on the level of your original post: what difference will a Democratic majority make? Let's try not to degenerate into a simple argument on policy differences; that's not what you asked nor what the electorate determined.

That being said ...

Steve wrote: "Isn't it the Oregon people who are against a tax increase? M28& M30 was pretty clear."

I agree part of the way (Multnomah County voted to continue their local tax levy; statewide, I think the population is about 55:45 against additional taxes). Also, we have to read something into the increased Democratic majority in OR (just like we have to read something into the increased GOP majority in Congress).

Where I think we may disagree on what we do with that fact. In some states (examples: Alabama, California), state leaders have determined that regardless of what a majority of the population thinks, responsible budgeting requires a tax increase. Ronald Reagan decided the same thing in 1983.

The question is whether we will simply cowtow to public opinion or try to provide political leadership. To go back to your original post: my assertion is with a Democratic majority, it's more likely that they will try to convince the public of the wisdom of a tax increase.

Steve wrote: "Doesn't the management of our State share in the blame? How are we at or near the bottom in employment if our State is not to blame?"

Yes, I think they share part of the blame, but you cannot leave the Federal government or the national economy blameless. Oregon was hit hard by the tech crisis and the long term decline in logging. I voted against Measure 37 for that reason as did many Oregonians. It is not fair to blame Democrats for this.

Steve wrote: "Huh? Democrats contoll every single government agency in this state and have for years. Every program is essential, none can be abolished and all need more money?"

Steve, that is silly. Civil servants are not subjected to any sort of partisan test. What we can look at is the legislature and the governor. For the latter, the Dems definitely get the credit for Oregon's successes in the 1990s (I presume you'll give them that?) and its failures in the 00's. I could only find data on the legislature since 2000 (Republican control), 2002 (split control) and now 2004.

So your posting is factually inaccurate. Our system is NOT "status quo" Democratic. The status quo in Oregon has been divided control, so we have changed the status quo, and perhaps this may result in policy shift.

I could go on, Steve, but i suspect that you actually are not interested in debating the point how Democratic control may change the policy direction in Oregon, and instead simply want to slam Democratic policies.

<h1></h1>

He is Liars because he constantly lies. Last hour: To 'Christine in Oregon City,' who sounded like a teen-age student, he lied:

That the 'first contact' with Saddam Hussein where the U.S. began propping him up and making Saddam do what U.S. government told him and only what the U.S. Govt. told him -- in the end it's called a puppet dictator. Saddam became a U.S. puppet dictator along a trail begun by "Cyrus Vance, first contact, under the -- wouldn't you know it -- no good Jimmy Carter administration," in Liars words.

What a liar.

Here is a slender fact sheet that gives the common knowledge that Saddam was recruited by the CIA in Cairo during his exile for attempted assassination of Iraq's General Kassem, a CIA target. And Saddam was brought along by the U.S. Govt. and installed as second in command in Iraq in 1968 under Muhammad Bakr.

This is standard knowledge and even if not off-hand at least at hand with a mouse in a minute. Google at "saddam egypt school central" and you're there.

Nobody puts the 'I' in Liars like Lars.

<h1></h1>

Back off of Jack Peek and Steve Doelle. Both of them are men who have been seriously harmed and have responded by trying their hardest to prevent others from suffering the same harm. I dare say most people if put in that situation and hurt to that degree might come off as a bit radical, but we are lucky to have people who care deeply speaking out on issues. Whether they're dead-on right in their perspective or dead-wrong, they make points well worth listening to. Think about people on the left like Tre Arrow, or Julia Butterfly Hill, or those wonderful folks at PETA, for example. All extreme and very odd to some, but they, too, have forced people confront important issues they wouldn't have thought about before. I think a bit of understanding here is in order. And I also think that these individuals add a lot of color to Oregon that makes it a very interesting place to live. They certainly make these message boards interesting to read ...

Heavens. All caps, extraneous punctuation, and even new words! Libber? Said ANNE

Short memory..L-I-B-B-E-R, was used as derogatory slang, forever!

Progressive.now there is a word!

Passion, hate, disgust, vomit, words I RELATE TOO.

"Passion",..an issue I got caught up in when the state, an county located something dangerous next to a grade school. I HAD PASSION TO CORRECT A WRONG IDEA. "Hate", Hate the thought that when asked to consider a commonsense idea, that (5) certified by a court, violent people should not be unsupervised for 90 mins. to walk past a grade school with 400 little kids in it, ELECTED OFFICALS DID NOTHING.

"Disgust" Disgust with people who see a "progressive view" that we must get something shoved down our throats like the grouphome deal no matter what it costs, or the real impact of it, as long as it isnt in there backyard.

"Vomit"......Really ill, sick, upset, that someone has too die to get a law passed.

  PS.. just read John D's post.HEY John...ahhhh never mind!

Oh my god. Jack Peek, you're the funniest poster I've seen in a long time. Please tell me that you are a comic and have a standup act. I’d love to see you in character.

Anne, funny stuff. You got some writing chops, alright.

Honey? Sweetie? You arrogant ass.

And here I thought you liberals were all touchy-feely caring people who tried to understand the circumstances behind misbehaving people's misbehavior. Who knew?

All joking aside, why don't you try to see past the ravings and CAPITALIZATION and see if you can figure out what he's trying to say? I think Jack makes some valid points (in a colorful way) whether you like Lars or not.

whatever his experience, doesn't get any kind of free pass SAY'S John.

Look JOHNNY<where is your toooooooolerant, understanding?

Where were you when the lady got killed because some outfit hired by your dollars left here alone to die in her own excrement?

The same outfit I TOLD these "Jackass's" we elected that it would happen if they didn't do the research I did, the same stuff Randy Leonard "roundfiled" because I called him out as a public servent, our elected offical who s/b working for us not the outfit that left that poor lady alone.

If you have kids,god, say you don't) does the idea of people on radical meds, who have a history, a documented history of real violence walking past your kids school unsupervised not bother you?

Ill bet I KNOW the answer already.

As long as its my kids.HELL YES.IT's OK.

John, just a lesson on why you guys lost the election, people are sick to death of people like you telling people like us, we are stupid, or worse.

Last time BLUE POSTERS, You can keep it up like John and Anne and lose in 08, or you can moderate your party, or look at what you lost this time, or it's "black an Blue" next time. My money is on John and Anne to drop you guys off the charts.

Dear Chris.Would you like tickets? I will be happy for you to sit up close.. really close!

 Then Chris, we could "hang" after the show, and you could do outreach and maybe even convert my politics. Lets hear from you soon.

WOW....Johnny, you sound like the guy in florida, that couldn't take another day of depression KOOL IT!

So go f--- yourself to Becky???? and me?

Johnny, your really making a case for why you lost the election, you guys are not tolerent ,not peaceful. nor understanding, your the "AL GORE SCREAMING, CRYING POOR ME" (Don't forget Howard Dean) poor soul you are.

Was I there when whats his name was killed? NOPE!

But, you were, the ACLU IS YOUR FRIEND!

Groups like that and SKINS have had protection by your friends under a twisted interp of the Constitution you "cherish" as long as it works your way.

Cutting funds? your really mad! Diane linn, Vera katz, Leonard etc etc. A MILLION DOLLARS FOR ART AT THE COUNTY JAIL.NO MONEY TO RUN IT...164 million for trains downtown........no business's left to shop at soon. ...KISS MAY AMPLE REAR.

Under FREE SPEECH, if I WANT TO USE ALL CAPS, I WILL.

Social services..'KLINGON TRANSLATORS,go do yourself!

The language you use to a woman...wow, you wife must call 911 a whole bunch, your mom should spank you, but like you, she doesn't agree with punishment of any kind... you know when my Friend Steve Doell asked for resonable justice for the kid who killed his daughter, just to see what it was like.

I will ask you refrain from the language,the board host need to spank you. it OFFENDS ME...HEY REPUBS CAN BE OFFENDED TOO.

Troll. Consider yourself ignored - forever.

ok LIBBER.SEE YOU IN 08.

OH.and A BIG PS.

The points I MADE were not refuted. .Hell, I even like Randy Leonard better. He,so far hasnt gone profane like Johnny,but Randy has a temper. I KNOW!

Dear Prof, If you would please try harder to "keep this on the level of MY original post. Quite specifically I asked how Oregon is expected to gain with a strengthening control of our State by the Democrats? Pick any issue. I am looking for any explanation of remedy for any problem we face in any area.

That's pretty darn straight forward and should be a breeze to answer in many ways.

How is more democrat control good for Oregon?

How will the affordable housing crisis be addressed for example?

What will Oregon Democrats do to remedy any problem Oregon faces?

I appreciate your take and "read into the increased Democratic majority in OR" but I asked what that increase means for our State.

I again for you to explain what remedy will come from that increase.

I fail to see how your view that the "votes on M28 and M30 translate into a public opinion that should be ignored" answers my question.

I also already understand that most Oregon Democrat legislators view increasing taxes as political leadership. That does not answer my question either.

You try when you state "with a Democratic majority, it's more likely that they will try to convince the public of the wisdom of a tax increase."

I already also know that most democrats view the voters opposed to M28 and M30 as unwise.

So where is the remedy when voters say no?

Which is where we already are. Twice.

I can't make out this your point here????

"Oregon was hit hard by the tech crisis and the long term decline in logging. I voted against Measure 37 for that reason as did many Oregonians. It is not fair to blame Democrats for this."

Did you mean M34?

You said "Civil servants are not subjected to any sort of partisan test."

Good grief I'm talking about agency heads and administrative staffs. If you are suggesting Extremely partisan, appointed folks don't run our state agencies few will buy.

You said, "What we can look at is the legislature and the governor. For the latter, the Dems definitely get the credit for Oregon's successes in the 1990s (I presume you'll give them that?)"

Sure if you just give me few examples.

You said, " So your posting is factually inaccurate. Our system is NOT "status quo" Democratic."

I'm not talking about something so simple as the make up of the legislature. I don't need a break down of something so elementary. The status quo I am referring to is public policy being dominated by democrats.

Not only is the status quo strongly democrat it extends far and wide. In addition to the state agencies, Metro is 100% dominated by Democrats. Democrat appointees to LCDC, Port of Portland, TriMet and such, control all of those entities. In our most populated areas, county commissions, city councils and other governing bodies are dominated by democrats along with a few democrat thinking republicans. Beaverton echoes all things Portland, Washington County is right behind.

You said, "The status quo in Oregon has been divided control, so we have changed the status quo, and perhaps this may result in policy shift."

Wrong again. How divided has Oregon been with the RINO republicans joining the democrat polarity. M30, 11 RINO's voted along with EVERY single democrat legislator (except one who wanted a higher increase) to raise taxes. The status quo of widespread domination of Oregon policy by democrats will certainly be enhanced by more democrats. Not changed. There will be no new direction. Only the potential for a strong push in the same status quo direction.

Your suggestion, or hope that "with a Democratic majority, it's more likely that they will try to convince the public of the wisdom of a tax increase"

makes my point entirely.

Who in this state besides you would characterize the upcoming legislature seeking a tax increase as a change in status quo?

That is precisely why I am asking my question.

How is more of the same going to fix anything in Oregon? What will the democrats do when the voters say no yet again?

You said, "I could go on, Steve, but I suspect that you actually are not interested in debating the point how Democratic control may change the policy direction in Oregon, and instead simply want to slam Democratic policies." You "could go on"??? When did you start? When you hoped for a tax increase?

Not much of an explanation. Why is it so difficult for you to explain how "Democratic control may change the policy direction in Oregon"? That's my question and I'm stikin too it. If there is no answer than I suppose that is the answer. Is there someone you could direct me too who could answer the question. If not one person on this blog can answer this question then perhaps I am to conclude that there is no change coming, so there is nothing to explain.

You tell me. Someone tell me.

Steve Schopp

Posted by: Steve Schopp at November 20, 2004 06:56 AM

Dear Steve, Once again you have shown something both of us are trying say, that the " BLUES" prefer emotion and pure ( dare I say it) BS too, substance and reality of the problems this state and nation face.

While my "venting an ranting"is dismissed as(dare I say it) BS, it's based on inner-action with the real base of power here that being "libber" Democrats that continue not to listen to anything that is real and demanding compromise for the good of us all. Until we get action in a way that has force of law on my issue, I'll continue to fight these people.

Its the voter base here in this county that must decide, certain things need compromise for us all to continue to survive in the world today which is going the wrong way. And NO,It isn't all Bush's fault.

To get back to the original post, what I find so scary about LL is not so much what he says (since I think he says outrageous things just to keep his ratings up), but what scares me is the callers who fall for his rants hook, line and sinker, and dont have the critical thinking skills to cut through the BS and realize that the issues and the solutions we face are much more complicated than talk radio indicates.

Dear Engineer.

I sure can relate to your post.

If you people don't stop for one minute and see what I have said, THIS ISN'T ABOUT LARS!

It is about your perception that the rest of us are stupid. Knock it off! We all better find ways soon to get along.

Engineer says, "but what scares me is the callers who fall for his rants hook, line and sinker,"

Having an open and frank discussion about specific issues, involving every conceavable angle is not "falling for anything" Why is it you cast this without a single example of "falling for something" Discussing the pro's and con's of public policy with random callers as well as highly informed guests, activists and others is good. Just because you may not want some of those policies criticized, and possibly even discussed means little to the greater effort to make them sound or get rid of them.

Most of talk radio is simple Q&A and not the unchallenged lectures delivered by our liberal newspapers and some of the folks here.

Engineer said, "and dont have the critical thinking skills to cut through the BS and realize that the issues and the solutions we face are much more complicated than talk radio indicates"

Oh yes. The things are too complicated for open discussion amoung everyday people. Love it.

Why would anyone care what forum a discussion occurs in?

If light rail or CIM/CAM or the Oregon Health plan, or Oregon's land use planning system, or any other important issue is discussed on radio how is the Lars Larson show skewing that discussion?

I've listened to and participated in Talk Radio of alll kinds for years. It has made no difference at all who the host is or what show it is. Whether it is Liberal Sheila Hamilton or Lars Larson. The discussion and disagreements evolve thoroughly through a topic from top to bottom, with the opportunity for anyone to call up anytime and contribute any angle what so ever.

Lar's audience obviously has a sizable cross section of politicos listening and calling.

Is it engineers view that only the republican or conservative members of that audience are short on cognitive skills? I think engineer needs to study some of Oregon's issues a bit more. Bone up on them and find for your self how superficial and dysfunctional many of them are.

Steve says "Having an open and frank discussion about specific issues, involving every conceavable (sp) angle is not "falling for anything""

I'd like to emphasize Steve's use of the phrase "open and frank", which LL definitely is not (as anyone with some critical thinking skills would recognize). Steve also assumes I'm a democrat, which I am not. I am a registered republican. Once again my point is that the issues we face are very complicated, and not simply a matter of "us versus them", or "I'm right and your not" which is the attitude so prevalent on talk radio and the LL show in particular. Most of these talk shows (liberal or conservative) take a very black or white view of any given issue (they have to, after all ultimately they're just entertainment). Unfortunately real life is not that simple.

Engineer

OK."Blue's" you win.

I want to confess,I do reside in a grouphome, Mr. Sammy Clemmons was right.

The left has been right all along, I was "brainwashed by LL.It's all his fault, and I look towards your tolerence for those of us "mentally ill" to forgive my rants.

It is a brainwashing I have suffered, please forgive me.

Going to gun show today on my 90 minutes of unsupervised time, heard they have a sale on 1000 rds of 7.62x39.

Oh please help me for I really have been wrong.GO AL FRANKEN.YEEEHAW GOV. DEAN, VOTE DEMOCRATIC, AND IT'S ALL BUSH'S FAULT.......GOD I FEEEEEEEL BETTER.

All along I have sent this type of data on too electeds Like Randy Leonard, that certain class's of mentally ill community placements are wrong.

The mental health advocates and the "shrinks" that make what turns out to be life or death decisions as too the safety of certain so-called clients ability too walk free, there decisions are a crap shoot, this post confirms it.

I ask your pardon for my lack of "style" for my presentation here, but I seek better for us all.

It was reported in December of 2000, Robert Noyes, convicted pedophile, was granted day parole by the National Parole Board. Noyes, a former school teacher and principal from British Columbia confessed to sex crimes involving 65 children, most being boys aged 6 to 15. He was convicted in 1986 and was declared a dangerous offender.

The National Parole Board released their reasons for the decision saying Noyes has made "significant and long lasting changes" in prison during his incarceration. The board stated, "The board is satisifed you are no longer the dangerous repeating pedophile you were 15 years ago." The Board stated that Noyes "sexual dynamics" had been addressed "through the most sophisticated treatment methods currently available" from Correctional Services of Canada. They also noted Noyes has been in intensive therapy for 15 years with some of the best experts in sex offender treatment.

In 1995, Noyes married a volunteer prison worker from Ontario and in 1997, was granted work release and then unescorted day passes. It was reported in at least 150 of the 350 leaves he was granted, officials discovered he had unauthorized contact with children. Most involved group meetings in homes where children were present. Those incidents prompted BC officials to boject to his release in 1997. The B.C.'s Attorney General stated the province has not changed its view.

A Kamloops lawyer, representing seven victims who are suing Noyes, four school districts and two doctors, said his clients would not be happy about the NPB's decision. He was quoted as saying, "For most of these people, they want some justice in terms of a concession that somebody made some horrendous mistakes which have devastate their lives." The lawsuits are set to go to court sometime in 2002.

In the meantime, Noyes has entered a halfway house in Montreal.

Engineer says, "I'd like to emphasize Steve's use of the phrase "open and frank", which LL definitely is not (as anyone with some critical thinking skills would recognize)."

Boy do you sway.

If someone calls Lars and comments and questions or has any kind of conversation on the air how the heck is that not open and frank. You got to be kidding with your "critical thinking skills" nonsense. The occasional public official who appears on his show engages in total open and frank discussion. As does anyone who appears or calls the Kremer and Abrahms show.

I fail to see how you make any point by deluding yourself that a conversation is no really a conversation because one of the participants is someone you hate.

Engineer says "Steve also assumes I'm a democrat, which I am not. I am a registered republican."

What? Your party registration is irrelevant.

Engineer says, "Once again my point is that the issues we face are very complicated, and not simply a matter of "us versus them",

You sure have a tough time making a point. What is the punchline?

Only a selected few should be publicly discussing public issues? only those with your self proclaimed wisdom?

What the heck issue is too tough to be discussed?

What is so complicated that a broad discussion has no value?

Engineer says, "Most of these talk shows (liberal or conservative) take a very black or white view of any given issue (they have to, after all ultimately they're just entertainment). Unfortunately real life is not that simple."

Is it your view that rarely do any people with your depth participate in talk radio?

You seem pretty full of yourself and I know personally many people with vast knowledge on many issues who particpate, on talk radio, in the open and frank discussion to say don't even exist.

Perhaps many issues are too complicated for yourself to talk about. So you stand aside and declare that talk radio conversations include no knowledge understanding or value.

An example of an issue radio talk is incappable of thoroughly discussing would be a good idea. Do you have one. Steve

<h1></h1>

The lawsuits are set to go to court sometime in 2002. Posted by: JACK PEEK at November 20, 2004

Something everyone certainly looks forward to.

"but ... the callers who fall for his rants ...,"
Why ... this without a single example of "falling for something" Posted by: Steve Schopp at November 20, 2004

Liars Larson is a liar. Simple. He told Anne he needed her and then abandoned her, which is the egg of the 'Dear John letter' parody leading this thread. It's a parody because Liars did not abandon his sociopathic 'public indecency' of harassing public offices, in this case at the Secretary of State's. He was ordered to stop.

See, Liars has been slapped with a restraining order by his civil-unioned contract holder, Paul Allen -- that's why he cannot call Anne for his 'oh, really'-thrills anymore. Paul Allen has started campaigning to involve himself in the Portland community and be received by us, according to Jonathan Nicholas's latest item. Portland to Paul: Lose your lying distaff Liars Larson. Portland Trailblazers to Paul: Ream your racist retard Liars Larson. When Liars is gone, Paul, along with sex pervert Bill O'Reilly, white supremacist Tony Snow, and cretin Ann Coulter off your cute little radio station full of demented nihilists waged in inciting civil faction and unrest and disparaging municipal order and function, then Paul -- and not before -- we can take stock of each other's civic spirit and reciprocal interests. Until you remove the fascist-infecting radio line-up you brought us: Go away and stay out of Oregon. And we don't have to enforce that -- in Paul's case as in all human nature, the unallayed guilty conscience is its own confinement.

Just for the record, I was in Harvard Yard that same day thirty years ago, too, when Gates came running by to show Allen the news (or vice versa), and I was coming from Nini's Corner newstand, too, and I was reading that copy of Popular Science, too, heading over to the (Aiken) computer lab for the day's compile and test of our project's PDP-1 routing handler. I had the rts-8 source code from DEC, too, and I saw it had been illicitly copied and ported into the machine code of the OS that was sold as 'original work' for the MITS microsystem. Later, I disassembled the BASIC interpreter Seattle Computer Products was selling as its own 'intellectual property' and I saw that it was copied from DEC Basic, too. These seeds were the crimes Microsoft monopolism, and the guilty consciences within it, too, grew from.

All this came after, and because, I had spent a year writing forecasting applications code at IBM's Endicott facility, three floors below Thomas Watson, Sr.'s very office in the colonial brick headquarters building. In which a fellow programmer confronted me for having copied a demo program straight out of the manual, without attribution, and developed on its kernel the advanced work that everyone assumed was my own creation, which won some Big Bucks awards; but because he could read and write code, too, only he knew I copied it and, silently approving, only he knew why I declined the award money check, (it was only a quarter-million dollars but, damn, that was a lot of money in those days). I coulda' been a contender. Instead, the Cambridge doors to the computer science kingdom opened for a nature boy from Oregon, and I went through them and into the mephistophelian maw, along the path until it offered pay for programming to guide ballistics down the chimney of any selected human habitation anywhere in the world, and I declined and morally objected and got out. Tried to get out. It's the complex where you can check out anytime you like but you can never leave, unrestricted, with the knowledge you carry. I left. Whatever permission allows me to remain at large seems to justify itself in noticing the 'at large' enfoldment of me wears kid gloves, as in: "humor T., he's looney tunes ... but a nice guy." Wart kind of fool am I? Hey, who's that swimming in the punch bowl? It's Walter Wart, the freaky frog. Fools are outside the reason of justice to try. And the man with the foolish grin is keeping perfectly still, nobody seems to know him, they can tell that he's just a fool ... sees the world spinning 'round.

So it may be understandable how hard it is to bear straight with a bent compass of conscience, Paul. Thoroughly understandable. But paying Liars Larson to dumb down civic sensibility and defile decency as your protection from it, civilization, across a moat he fills of born disfigureds in Bosch bedlam, well, obviously the logical modest proposal that the downtrodden inevitably are delerious to endorse is to eat the children. Your own would be safe on that account. While your world would not.

On point, as for "one" gap of knowledge falsely covered by Liars lying, through which weighty worldviews go "falling for" eternity, look above at the snare in the comments here. Mine. Liars (Friday) lied to a child caller, (anybody can get through, his "lines are open," ... uh, Anne? ;-) faking it that U.S. Govt. support for Saddam began with Cyrus Vance in Carter's 1970s. Truth is, the CIA in 1959 Cairo harbored and thus co-opted Saddam, as an asset, and had 'played' him for 17 years, (like a cicada underground?), as known to Poppy Bush before and used while he was CIA honcho, all preliminary to the Vance advance. So take Liars lie du jour and shove it up your "simple Q&A" to be your standard, "listened to and participated in," and salute it in any forum you wander into since bloody liars and their blackguards appear alike anywhere.

<h1></h1>

Nice discussion folks. Informative? Not hardly.

Oh yes and what is in store for Oregon?

I didn't seem to get any answer other than the legislature would seek a tax increase.

<h1></h1>

Jeff, the special feature of the Liars Larson topic, here on BlueOregon in his face in his market, is to see how much the charges against him have to be compounded to provoke a response from him. First he sends over his two lackeys trying to jam and obstruct. They didn't sidetrack nothin'; rather they fueled a bigger head of steam and helped steer it straight at him. But the minute he says BlueOregon.com on his air, and sets himself to counter it, is the instant his world-in-a-bubble pops. Meanwhile, the longer he grits his teeth to obstensively ignore BlueOregon, the more people learn more of his crimes and are repulsed, increasing the isolation distance of him and his.

Someone was chiding my BOYCOTT Cable TV mantra as too simplistic, but here it applies again. Liars is on Comcast cable now. Each person who sends a check to Comcast this month, and the next month, and the next month, is financing Liars and that GOP propaganda. Here's a claim: If only ten Portland cable subscribers were to notify Comcast that they were cancelling their cable because Liars was on it, (no matter whether or not anyone watches him), the claim says Comcast would dump Liars.

And if there was better established a central reporting site, such as BlueOregon, where a tally got posted everytime someone reported that they had cancelled Comcast cable at their house, and the cancellations began adding up on public display, (because 'they' are never going to report on TV that they are losing subscribers -- never!), the pressure would build ounce by ounce, pound by pound, to crushing. And if an anti-Liars, anti-Comcast crowd count was prominent here, then it would be even bigger poison for Liars to contort himself to "ignore."

This is very powerful stuff. And saying it here, Liars cannot cut anyone off. So one lie was documented on Friday. Liars lied about the Saddam-USA alliance. Hey, all he has to do is correct himself. Or ignore it and try to pretend people can't and don't find out he is lying every time they are listening.

This stuff gets passed around. The two shills in this provoked discussion are clipping and forwarding as fast as we can type it. It reaches Paul Allen. It reaches Comcast. It reaches Mannix and Smith and Reinhard and the whole nest of liars. Look at what MediaMatters.org has done to Limbaugh and Savage and Hume and Hannity and all the liars. All of them tried to sound dismissive of "some little liberal website out there," but all of them started and are still pulling back from their excesses to keep their name off of the Media Matters website. Too late, I think, but either way, now they are neutered.

Hey, Liars Larson, give us some more lies for your resume. Which reminds me, do the bit again you did on Friday when you said "they found WMDs in Iraq." What a liar. There you go, spies. Report to Liars that people see he is lying because there are no WMD's in Iraq and there was not and is not any Iraq threat to us and Oregonians in the National Guard that Liars Larson lied to send there, are coming home dead and Liars is ignoring them and his part in causing it.

<h1></h1>

Why all of anonymity folks? Is there some reason to conceal your name?

And why the trashing of talk radio?

You too can call up anytime you like and voice your opinion.

That's the whole point of talk radio.

Most shows, including Lars, have times when you can pick the topic. You can call up Lars and talk about his lies if you choose.

However you view Mr. Larson and his show, it is ultimately the listeners and callers who make talk radio work.

At least on Lars and other talk shows we can call up and talk about Oregon issues. That's not possible on Air America.

What is your objective anyway? To stop public discussion on the airways? Or to limit it to Air America? To get Fox News off the air so we can get back to CNN and the networks era?

If Larson were to be gone tomorrow do you think talk radio would be gone from Oregon? Your hysteria over this man is really something.

Add your posture that he is evil and you are all things good and you sound nuts.

You make no sense.

Yammering on about how much you hate Lars Larson is pathetic.

And what makes you think the conversations on his show or any other talk radio show are any different from the ones on this web page?

I'd say any day on talk radio has more content that this thread.

People give their opinions, discuss how they view things and explore all kinds of issues, live and local.

But you hate Lars, he should be off the air and everyone should shut up?

How about the other local shows? There is little difference.

860 KPAM Victoria Taft,
1360 KUIK Jayne Carroll, Larry George
or how about KXL's Kremer and Abrams on right now, Sunday Morning?

When Sheila Hamilton was on KPAM she had basically the same audience and callers as Lars. Same conversations, same local issue. But when her ratings didn't cut it and her show was dumped the left came unglued with all sorts of nonsense. Apparently Sheila had created a certain comfort zone for liberals who can't seem to function on the air without it. I happened to enjoy her show because more liberals called up.

Boycott Comcast?

"Look at what MediaMatters.org has done to Limbaugh and Savage and Hume and Hannity and all the liars. All of them tried to sound dismissive of "some little liberal website out there," but all of them started and are still pulling back from their excesses to keep their name off of the Media Matters website. Too late, I think, but either way, now they are neutered."

Now that's a hoot. You should call up Lars Larson and try that on the airways.

I'd like to know of any "pulling back" or "neutering" that exists anywhere other than in your mind.

With such anger and disdain for "Liar Larson" why the heck don't more of you just call him up on the air and take him to task?

What could be more simple? It's only talk. Just like you type here.

And sign your name folks. This isn't the hooded and masked environment of insurgents. If some of you anonymous folks are public officials or prominent people who don't want their views made public doesn't that tell us something?

Peace Steve Schopp

If some of you anonymous folks are public officials or prominent people who don't want their views made public doesn't that tell us something?

Yes, Steve it sure does show us something, it shows me a bunch of things. I'll leave it at that.

Tenskwatawa, ON SEX PERVERT BILLY "O", You mean like sex pervert Bill Clinton?

I will suggest again,if you "BLUES" don't find the middle on issues real soon, I predict 2008 will find Canada's population increasing 10 fold. "WORKS FOR ME!"

Hell, your not even listening too your own party in post-election talk.....'WE BETTER LOOK TO THE MIDDLE has been discussed already and you people here just want the extreme. Keep on as far as I'am concerned.

Tenskwatawa, Don't ASSUME That I'am a lackey, I refer back too "ASSUME and what that can mean.

It isn't true, a few of us have seen changes in Lars over the years we have known him, I for one am loyal because he was the first to support what I seek , so Iam not lackey, just loyal.

Been away for the weekend, but I just didn't want Johnny-dear to think he had run me off. John, honey, you seem to have jumped to an awful lot of conclusions about me that are way off track. Not that you care. It's really too bad it took you getting pissed off to finally get to to express a coherent and intelligent point of view.

On to the topic - I think the original post was a bit childish, but funny. I've quit listening to Lars, Rush, O'Reilly, and all the rest of them because I never learn anything new, I get tired of the hysteria, and I don't trust them to always tell the truth. But I just love listening to Air America because they tell you stuff you don't find out about elsewhere, they help me see a side of the issues I didn't know about before, and they're frankly a lot more funny. I don't agree with them half the time, but it doesn't matter. It's just more entertaining.

As for what can Democrats do? Nothing. It's hopeless. As the entire discussion here clearly demonstrates, this country is split down the middle with an irreparable rift which I believe has been widened by talk radio of all kinds.

Wow. Just spent 25 minutes trying to catch up with this thread. Four conclusions:

Jack Peek is difficult to follow- poor writer, the pertinent observations are swallowed up by his blind anger of liberals;

John Dunagan is a total jack ass. Never really noticed before, now he is distinguishing himself on the short list of posters I just pass over;

however, Tenskewata tops that list. Paranoid ramblings posing as obscure insights. Do us a favor and switch to haiku;

and Becky just stop trying to help the sides understand each other. It's clearly unwanted. You may find yourself adrift between ideologies, but most folks on this list are way too certain of their perspectives for even a moment's worth of introspection.

Now, someone please feel free to tell me how much I suck.

LC, "but most folks on this list are way too certain of their perspectives for even a moment's worth of introspection."

Darn it anyways. I could have sworn my stuff would have been worthy.

Oh well. There is so little flow here that it barely resembles communication anyway. It's tit for tat, disconnected chatter without any real input or outcome. Kind of a crap in-crap out deal I guess. LC wants someone to tell him he sucks. Heck I just wanted some answers.

Steve

Jack Peek is difficult to follow- poor writer, the pertinent observations are swallowed up by his blind anger of liberals;

Dear LC.Hey, no kidding, right as rain, you nailed me.

Since when did anybody appoint you the "LIT" Judge.

You don't suck, really!

Your lack of really trying to see my points are so right about my near "blind hate!" of the left.

The deal is simple, I did not start out like this,I got here by a PHD education of the reality of city hall/Salem/ DC electeds/ so-called non-profits/ and the Mary Claire Buckleys of the PSRB's of the world.

So, here is hoping you have no kids, an a wife, to worry about when you travel for 2 weeks at a time,nor care enough to assume the duties of neighborhood chair an walk point on an issue that can really get someone killed. Don't do it LC, your are not tough enough.I found out I wasn't.

Steve,

I'll try to be clearer. I believe, as do many Democrats, and apparently some Republicans (as evidenced by the M28 referral) that Oregon must have a short term increase in revenues in order to deal with our budget.

I continue to believe this. So, you asked, how will a Democrat majority in the legislature help solve one of Oregon's problems.

How can I be more clear? Because it increases the likelihood that they will successfully pass a tax increase and have the politcal wisdom or will (or folly, depending on your point of view) to try to convince the public of this.

Please don't use quotes to misquote me; I never wrote: "votes on M28 and M30 translate into a public opinion that should be ignored"

What I wrote was the political leadership sometimes requires acting contrary to prevailing public opinion.

Finally, I have written many times that the increased Democratic majority must say something about public sentiments in Oregon. I think it means they want Democratic leadership on public policy issues.

So I've answered your question.

As to your claims about Democratic dominance of all public policy in Oregon for years, Steve, that is just easily demonstrably wrong.

"Not only is the status quo strongly democrat it extends far and wide. In addition to the state agencies, Metro is 100% dominated by Democrats. Democrat appointees to LCDC, Port of Portland, TriMet and such, control all of those entities. In our most populated areas, county commissions, city councils and other governing bodies are dominated by democrats along with a few democrat thinking republicans. Beaverton echoes all things Portland, Washington County is right behind."

I don't have the data to disprove this, but I don't think you do, either.

But to call Port of Portland and Beaverton Democrat? I just know you're blowing smoke, friend.

Prof said,

"I don't have the data to disprove this, but I don't think you do, either".

Now isn't that convenient. Data? How about the people holding office and the policies they advocate. You may not have been paying attention to those driving policies but I have. Many have been eyewitnesses at the hearings, council meetings, debates and summits. You are obviously not one of them.

Prof said,

"But to call Port of Portland and Beaverton Democrat? I just know you're blowing smoke, friend."

I am a nonsmoker and you are entirely out to lunch. If you don't know what you are talking about, as you admitted, why pretend that you do?

Beaverton Mayor Rob Drake might as well be Vera Katz. His companions on the Beaverton council likewise. This is not an interpretation or a debatable assessment. Every conceivable aspect reveals this.

The Port of Portland is of course as much a branch of Portland government as is the PDC and Metro.

Where the heck have you been. Long lunches?

If you have been paying attention so little that you can't grasp the most elementary profile of our local governance that's really too bad.

I wonder how your set of beliefs is supported with such a lack of understanding?

Who do you think has run the Port for Years?

You apparently learned nothing from the shipyard/drydock SCANDAL, know little of land freight mobility gridlock, no little of the dire fiscal straights the Port now faces, watched though rose colored glasses when the Airport Max scheme evolved (Incl. no bid contract to Becktel), know nothing of the Director Mike Thorne saga, nothing of the Port Commission re-vote to get Kitzhaber chief of staff Bill Wyatt appointed. I could go on and on. All of which is a product of the democrat dominated regime controlling our state. Beginning and continuing with pals and relatives of Goldschmidt and company.

The same goes for other major entities such as OHSU where the same people and forces run the show.

Your play that democrats, (along with a few cohorts with republican labels) don't run things is comical and obstructs discussion.

As for answering my repeated questions you have not.

I asked how more democrats in office will remedy Oregon's problems?

Is it your view that the only problem Oregon faces is lack of revenue?

If so then you did answer my question. You should have added that clarification.

However, with the seriousness of circumstances in many policies, programs and agencies which are hobbling our State's ability to economicly grow and thereby rpovide the needed funding, I wonder how Democrats will be delivering the results they want when the public already rejected that one fix objective.

Have a nice lunch,

Steve Schopp

Food for thought.

Two very good examples of the failure of the status quo are the Sellwood bridge which is closed to truck and transit traffic brought about by many years of the Charlie Hales "I'm not a maintainer" approach to spending the public dime. The problem which led to the restricted traffic did not sneak up on us and was not money related. Official neglect was the cause.

Another example is today's Oregonian lead editorial issue. The Police and Fire Disability and Retirement Fund. Again this severe problem did not sneak up on the powers that be, surprising them with the bad news all of a sudden. It was official neglect by the police and fire union supported, democrat dominated status quo. In this case the problem suggests official maleficence as well. The Johnny-come-lately Oregonian, arriving just in time to point out the severity of the problem they ignored and helped enable, is doing the same with other emerging crisis.

It has been reported (not in the Oregonian of course) that TriMet is nearing a severely unfunded retirement problem.

I wonder who has run TriMet for decades.

If the progressive Oregon folks on this site are truly interested in making our state work they better get a grip on what is and has been done by the people they support. Contrary to the progressive rhetoric so often repeated Oregon is not a success story and model for the nation. In the distant past in the days of the beach and bottle bills Oregon shined. That sheen has worn and now exists only in the minds of those with their eyes wide shut.

As Oregon stacks up one severe problem after another and as even worse decisions are being made seemingly every day (Transit mall, Tram, out of control Urban Renewal schemes) the notion that a tax increase will rescue us is becoming insane.

Jack -- Sure, I'd love a front-row seat and to hang after the show. I'm always up for beers with anyone. But, sorry, I don't do conversions

Steve,

Going back and forth on this more is not going to get us anywhere. I look to party voting patterns across the state when I challenge your claim that this state is dominated by Democrats. Multnomah, Benton, and Linn counties are; the rest of the state is Republican. The statehouse has not been consistently Republican. You project far too much from local government in Portland. (The PDC and Port, btw, I think are basically pro-business w/o much party sentiment.)

Interestingly, after reading your last two posts, I expect we agree on much of what is lacking in Oregon politics. If you look back at my older posts, you'll see that I also bemoan the rose-colored glasses vision of Oregon that permeates much of the discussion in Salem and Multnomah County.

However, where you and I part ways is attributing this to Democratic party policies or some "status quo".

I think Oregon's parochialism and inability to face up to the fact that the go-go 90s are at an end, and that Oregon is facing some severe challenges in the future, is endemic within both parties.

I think neither a future of higher taxes, nor one of another set of Prop 5 type tax slashes, bode well. I see little innovative and entrepeneurial leadership coming out of either party. I do see more in Multnomah County, by the way, but as I admitted elsewhere, the candidates I voted for did not win.

Well Said Pat. One of my beefs about Oregon progressives is that while they easily see misleading everywhere in the Bush administration they see none of it in their own back yard. And if one looks truly honestly at a given policy with personal preference subordinated (as they should be) there is no ideologically molded opinion.

For example if one looks at the Quality Education Model and Oregon school reform CIM/CAM it is not anti government to recognize the falscies in both. The QEM has no basis in study, research or anything derivitive at all. It is simply a random number and favorable presumtion that that number will bring 90% or so of our students to standards. Again their is no basis for that claim at all. The CIM/CAM has been nothing short of fraud. In both cases there is nothing to back them up. Even our SAT and ACT rankings are fraud. Yet every year the cocncocted rankings are used to hype our system and present it as worthy of blind support. It is not anti-education or anti-government to demand validation and legitimacy from our government policy makers. Lies deliver only bad policies. Here in Oregon we have plenty of both. Our progressives should be looking more to clean uip our own State instead of dreaming that the country copy it. Steve

May I "SECOND" Pat, very well said.

There is a lesson for me too be learned here, That being to set aside my bias an "blind hatred" as it has been described ,and try one more time with a calm presentation of my views, because as I have said ,"We all better learn from this, and fix somethings ,or we all will pay a horrible price, an soon!

Steve makes a great point about publicly acknowledging the schmucks in one's own party. Maybe it would be a healthy way to vent.

Among Republicans, I am most ashamed of Lenn Hannon. He switched parties when the Senate changed hands. He was part of the Legislature for three decades,knew where all the bodies were buried and kept voting for everything in order to produce S. Oregon pork. He stood for nothing but political opportunism, racking up mega-PERS benefits for himself and his wife, while selling out the financial health of the state government. And accepted a plum post from Gov. K (for who knows what) as he made his hasty exit with the rest of the RINO sellouts of '03.

Maybe if more folks on this list felt free to vent about their own party's doubledealing rotten hypocrits (hello: Ben Westlund, Max Williams, Mary Gallegos, etc) we could get past the whole "my party is more ethical than yours" bit and just deal with the important issues before us.

Just a thought, "Maybe if more folks on this list felt free to vent about their own party's double dealing rotten hypocrits"

Absolutely but even more important are the programs, policies and agencies which seem to get a total pass on legitimizing and worthiness simply because of who happens to support them.

For instance. It is absolute certain that the proposed Portland transit mall is a monumental mistake. Literally every angle is a red flag with the opposing supposed benefits being pure fantasy. The harm this project will do will last for decades while devouring hundreds of millions over many years.

I contend there are many people who simply go along with it becasue Katz and other democrats want it and some folks who are cast as anti-government right wingers oppose it?

Why? It is a huge mistake. Period.

There is data all over the place which points to the impending disaster this project represents.

Our convention center is another model. The original center floundered so the public was asked to pay for expansion. Voters said no, the expansion went forward and now the losses are higher. The next step is moe of the same with a convention center hotel inthe works. Again we have solid data which shows convention center hotels as being notorious for losing money. Apparently it's a good idea anyway because Portand officials want it.

As the region and state stakes up tasks requiring perpetual support we become weaker and weaker.

Sorry that "just a thought" doesn't like Ben Westlund and Max Williams. I happen to think they were among the most candid legislators in 2003.Maybe that was because they talked about actual budget details and not just generalities. Among those "important issues before us" is whether the 2005 session will share budget information and tradeoffs with the general public.

What exactly do the folks who oppose new taxes plan to cut? Will they make that list public or just say some version of "we must prioritize"? Do all incoming legislators realize they will be paying taxes on their legislative salary contrary to the rhetoric of some that "public employees don't pay taxes"?

Does anyone believe they can pass any proposal without the votes of 31 House members and 16 Senators? Will there be serious discussion of the tax breaks included in the Tax Expenditure Report--or is it easier to talk about cuts than about why this state gives tax breaks for everything from second homes to mobile field incinerators? Should administrative salaries and job descriptions be examined, or should all salary cuts come from unionized employees because every administrator in this state (state agency or school district) earns every dollar they are paid? If a Ways and Means subcommittee chair says what one said last session--that some cuts were excessive "and won't leave this subcommittee as long as I am chair", does that legislator have the right to say such a thing? I don't believe that whole parties are ethical or unethical, I believe individuals should be held accountable.

And I believe that legislators who explain budget questions in clear language are the heroes. Seems to me the hypocrites and "double dealers" are those who talk in generalities or obfuscate.

Kair, "You have data? Would you care to share? Let's see it. The brilliant thing about the internet is that you can link to stuff. So, link away!"

I quoted an Oregonian story of last year. In that Major League baseball story a comparison of compting cities revealed that Charolette NC would likely be having diffictuly gaining public support for a new stadium because voters had recently approved many millions for a Convention Center Hotel. Becasue convention center hotels are notorius for losing money voters may be reluctant to take on a new stadium at this time. Notorious means a well known track record. Presumably in the hotel biz there is some common knowledge. But you asked me to provide data and links.

Kari, I ask you, If those hotels are notorious for losing money why aren't the staff at our planning bureaus doing the linking and data gathering? This has been one of my beefs for along time. Why aren't our public officials checking to establish viability? We don't pay enough planning folks to do a thorough job? The answer can only be that personal preferences are clouding judgment. Dishonesty may likely be in the mix as well. No one likes to be tagged with promoting a failure or bad investment. Since the convention center expansion only made the problem worse it is convenient to come up with another needed component to make the whole thing work. This approach can work of course. As long as the revenue source widens and deepens.
I suppose some folks can see extra future dollars to pour into this growing money pit. I am not one of them. Especially considering the broad competition for those dollars and the lack of industrial growth in our State. Frankly I can't see how we pay for what we already have.

Steve,

I suspected once we stripped the "democratic status quo" rhetoric away, we'd find common ground. Huzzah for that. You are "progressing" well my friend. ;-)

I agree with you: many of the Portland initiatives now being promoted are a product of a mentality that was developed during the heyday 90s when tax revenues were rising, the population was growing, and even white elephants (PGE Park anyone?) didn't seem to make much of a dent.

Now things are very, very different. I hope for a new spirit in the Potter administration. Taking over all bureaus is one good start: there is no reason that I can comprehend to randomly assign bureaus council members, then switch every few years. Can someone explain this whole portfolio system to me?

I don't think it's party that we're seeing here, it's just city boosterism, and the influx of folks into Portland because it has things like transit malls is not likely to change things.

Hey, Steve, way back you asked about any projects delivered on schedule, and I just wanted to note the Bybee Bridge which finished below budget and ahead of time. Yippee! The Sellwood Bridge debacle is another sad story ...

Prof says, "I suspected once we stripped the "democratic status quo" rhetoric away, we'd find common ground. Huzzah for that. You are "progressing" well my friend. ;-)"

What? I'm still wondering what State you live in, what public entity any of you are well versed in and why every serious topic I raise results in cherry picking responses around the inane edges. Anything but dissecting what your democrat officials are doing. I can't even get one of you to defend any status quo program, project or agency. Nothing. Kari is busy clarifying that BlueOregon is not an organization and like others, appears to be empty headed on the convention center and/or PDC/Metro/PDX dysfunction. God forbid if any discussion which criticizes their decisions would appear on this site. After all you wouldn't want to undermine those efforts by openly discussing their illegitimacy.
Randy Leonard said on Sunday talk radio he CO-hosted that the proposed Transit Mall is vital to downtown. OK I guess that's enough? Not hardly. The proposed mall, in reality, is the confluence of a series of boondoggles which thrown together in a mall is expected to make it all click. What wisdom, data, study, research, or proven workable concept is Randy relying on? The reason nonsustainable wasteful boondoggles happen is elected officials are not forced to legitimize their views and decisions. No need to make the case when voters are not asked to approve the venture. Throw in the enabling local press who talk of accountability yet never acknowledge anything to hold anyone accountable for.

The Sellwood bridge is not a "sad story". It is the product of official maleficence resulting in the crippling of basic infrastructure.

The Transit Mall, with it's hodgepodge connections of unreliable, haphazard light rail lines will prove to be the disaster of all disasters. Every single hidden shortcoming of our light rail system will emerge and balloon with this horrible and totally avoidable idea.

The $350 million Interstate Max which lowered overall transit ridership from the pre-rail bus lines is also maleficence. It is because the numbers, data, red flags and fatal flaws have been many, apparent and ignored.

The same goes for South Waterfront where your comrades in the effected neighborhoods worked tirelessly to raise them only to be completely repelled by the reckless forces pushing the chaos. The thousands of volunteer man hours by neighbors you respect were met with a process which collected their works for the sole purpose of collection and disposal without consideration.

Further exacorbating our status-quo is the near across the board desperation for more revenue at every agency and purpose.

We are stuck with perpetual crisis.

did you people know that lars no longer live in this state and did not even vote in this. If you don't beleive me call Mult. County elections and the Clark County elections and they well give you the info. He lying to his aduience and to the views