Hey let the fun begin for 2006 election cycle. Not Ted Kulongoski or Kevin Mannix will limit thier contributions.

I doubt any of the candidates will limit their contributions as it would be to their detriment.

The idea of limiting contributions (without first having public campaing financing) works advantages well known candidates with name recognition over newcomers. A newcomer may be able to raise money but doesn't yet have the mass name recognition and appeal, thus putting (s)he at a disadvantage out of the blocks.

Rob,

Mr Stucky has a hard long road to travel to win the Republican primary. Being a moderate or centrist nowadays is tough.

Yes let the discussion begin for the office of Governor.

Todd actually provides no details to his tax cut; just whines that the poor are getting hurt. I want to know: what break is he going to give to whom?

And his dream that a tax cut will increase revenues is, shall we say, idealistic?

In theory, such an outcome could happen. Without specifics, however, it's much more likely that the tax cuts will cost the schools money. And the statement that Reagan's so-called tax cuts raised more money is, well, ridiculous. The tax rate changes coincided with removing many loopholes -- i.e. raising taxes while cutting them, so saying we got more revenue out of it may be true, but saying it's because we cut tax rates is incomplete.

In short, Todd's web site seems to be the "cut inefficiency and waste" bullshit without any real targets. Yes, there are targets. Name them, go after them, and then you'll convince me. But general rhetoric is all this is, blowing smoke up somebody's behind.

<h1></h1>

Talk on the street indicates the issues concerning Oregonians are: i.) preparing for a severe drought summer, ii.) bringing Oregon Guards home for state emergency efforts, iii.) getting all the Iraq occupying forces home -- Americans to USA, and Argentinians, Uraguayans, Columbians, Israelis, Malaysians, and the rest of the mercenary and soldier-of-fortune forces, respectively, OUT, iv.) impeachment proceedings and imprisonment of Republican Bush & Co. for war crimes and oath violations, v.) imprisonment and court-directed restitution for embezzlements of Republican Enron, PGE, Qwest, and more, executive officers directors and agents, vi.) and in Salem, restoring parity of corporate income tax with individual income tax rates, as being most acute and broadest achievable for state budget stabilization. Just off the top of my head, a few of the issues in recent discussions.

Now, what's this about someone running for governor. Rob Kremer knows about it and has the inside scoop. (Right there, it's not happening.) Indeed, seems to have the whole story from 'Once upon a time ...' to 'The End.'

Posted by: Rob Kremer

... tax cut resulted in a 9% increase in federal tax receipts last year.

Hardly. Prove that. Cite reference, summarize yr2yr (sub)totals. Without data, common sense says it's a lie. Because lies are the established pattern of Republicans and Bush. And because dead jobs don't pay taxes, and bodies everywhere says a lot of people's jobs died. Just a quick coherence check on whatever numbers you find to cite, 'tax receipts' should rhyme with one-plus trillion and 'withholdings for entitlements' should range a bit more, say one-and-a-half trillion. Even if "9% increase in fed. tax rcpts." is only half a lie, that any "tax cut resulted in" it is a lie and a half.

... it was the Clinton recession. The recession officially began in the last quarter of 1999. Two consecutive quarters of negative growth define a recession. The first quarter of 2000 was the second consecutive quarter of negative GNP growth.

This is ignorant blowhard lying. The kindest view could be "2000" is a typo for '(1st qtr of) 2001.'

Here's the link to outside the propaganda bubble. But based on the lying so far I don't trust a reply's claim to have seen the citation so let's just take everybody's time and trouble right now to read an excerpt inline for the sake of Rob Kremer keeping up with the class: --snip--

...Evans pointed out that "technically" the recession began in March 2001. Later, in an exchange with Alan Colmes, Evans again acknowledged the recession's true start date:

COLMES: But let me also get on this issue of the recession, the National Bureau of Economic Research's business cycle dating committee is the one that the president's own economic advisers say is the arbiter of when a recession begins. They say it began in March of 2001. And that is a group the president himself has said he respects as the arbiter of that kind of thing. So why do we keep saying it is a Bush-Gore -- Clinton-Gore recession?

EVANS: Well, two points, Alan. ... You know, on the other issue with respect to when the recession, you know, you're talking about a technical issue of when a board technically declared the beginning of the recession. Oftentimes what you look to, though, is when you have consecutive quarters of negative growth. And we saw negative growth in the third quarter of -- of 2000. The first three quarters of 2001 were negative growth. So you know, you can debate whether or not it was January or March. The board said March of 2001. But there was no question in anybody's mind that the economy was going straight south. The stock market peaked in 2000, and it began its collapse in March of 2000. So the economy was clearly moving into a recession.[24]

The Commerce secretary of the United States -- who was also Bush's 2000 campaign chairman -- admitted on Hannity's TV show that the recession began in March 2001.

--snip-- [Emphases added.]

... the economy was officially in a recession that began in 1999.

Lie.

Every time in the last century that marginal tax rates have been cut ...

Stop right there. First establish how many times is "every time" and date the occurrences, before combing out statistics in the data.

... three things have happened:

or four. or two. Lies behind us, lies ahead of us, just skip to your 'invisible hand of the marketing reaching for my purse.'

Republicans who can win statewide -- the null set.

The problem in Oregon is that we have chronic ... unattractive here. -- I don't know what you see, but I see what you mean about the lying liars.

If you care ... the government has been short of the money -- I step up, join in, add my effort, work on solutions, but no, it might not be that I care, probably I get paid a lot of money to be abrasive on the radio, magnify conflicts I can find and fabricate others, instill fear distrust and civil unrest, trash tradition and tear down community. And lie. But no, it might not be that I care. As for me and you (the government) being short of money, we popped off this week for another 80 billion bucks for Bush bullets and Bush bombs -- Isn't that guy in prison yet? -- a lump sum amount that could solve Oregon's problems for the next century, which would be our fair one percent share -- one year's federal waste goes to Oregon every hundred years. Signature-gather THAT.

Cutting taxes will help us grow -- 'grow' a little, maybe, or grow worse. Raising taxes will help us grow. Doing nothing, staying stable will help us grow. 'We' are a sustainable crop. The only things I can think of that would cut us back are (lies) poisoning the roots or (lies) calling hatchet work 'standard maintenance.' Besides, I'm less concerned to "help us grow" and more concerned to help us mature.

If we grow, there will be resources -- blahtyblahblahblah. If we contribute, here will be a bountiful land of plenty.

Unless ... you think things are going swimmingly -- now that you mention it I do feel a rising tide. Of counterattack. Lifts all hopes on it. Crabs sink and lie under it.

keep Kulongoski ... that'll fix things -- ain't broke, don't need fixin', except those public-interest broadcast projects you were entrusted with -- they're broke big time. At your station they just lie there.

Look I don't know from no Todd or Troll or Toad for Governor or not. And it seems like Rob Kremer has got all the noise and the news and the nuance that there IS a campaign, behind a Hermit the Toad puppet. Who sings an It-Ain't-Easy-Being-Clean schtick routine. And as a pretense to Let the Discussion Begin tra-la, it's a dead non-issue. To my way of thinking, I wouldn't damn care much how much politicians got in lump sums nor much where they got it if they couldn't spend it on radio and tv ads, because they wouldn't have to get very damn much and 'donors' are not going to 'contribute' anyway to a clip campaign whose position papers are copy-n-pasted.

We tried Republican tax-tweaks for ten years. We found 'em guilty. They put us in a world o'hurt, lotsa property damage. Now we're gonna hang 'em. Oh, uh, sorry, the sunglare off the silver sagebrush got in my eyes there and I couldn't see what I was typing ...

I just was headed over to the next township a couple days to help out their barn-raisin' at their new schoolhouse. I brought some books I'm done reading so the area can start a library. With all the books everyone else is bringing them people are gonna have all the information in the world to help them.

<h1></h1>

<h1></h1>

All the premature pre-promo hoopla here ended in an aerial bomb going off Sunday morning with The Candidate Todd being glimpsed in the glowlight of JeffGannon softballs from Kremer -- no klieg-light third-degree questions on that radio programming.

So there were three points. One, he swerved away from saying the words 'clinton recession' so the truth kept him gagged on that. Two, he did not swerve away from saying 'Bush tax cut raised fed.inc.tax revenue 9%,' so it was truth's turn to gag. Third, and for the millionth time, some lackluster lackey candidate with zero statemanship in his character is campaigning on a 'businessman' resume and claiming the skills and experience 'of meeting a payroll,' say, suitably transfer to Executive Branch duties. Ha. Running for office based on being an entrepreneur is like marrying people based on putting the most gold in the alms box.

That's a bad simile but here's the good rule I'm trying to segue to. Think of this whenever you hear a political candidate with corporate CEO-cred:

When the government runs business it's called socialism.

When business runs the government it's called fascism.

Republicans left the American way when they followed Silent Cal Coolidge down the aisle of avarice under the axiom 'The business of America is business.' See, that's wrong. The business of business is business. The business of America is justice.

<h1></h1>

Well, Saxton is throwing his hat in the ring. Now if only Jack Roberts will join the fray, maybe we can convince Bev Stein or Jim Hill to play in "Bland Gubernatorial Candidates Part Deux: Revenge of the Losers"