That sounds about right. Kulongoski's "No new taxes" pledge and his low funding for K-16 education lead many Democrats to think he is more interested in winning the next election than he is in making thing better in Oregon.

What is the point of electing a Democrat if you can not tell the difference between him and the Republicans?

Yeah, Teddy K has pissed off the people who got him elected. It's sort of an ongoing dilemma: do I govern for the people who voted for me, or for all the people? And does that I mean that I follow my own personal vision, or the polls? Or do I just do what's right, damn it all?

Sadly, I don't think Ted has a vision. He's a collaborator, not a leader. And in these times, we need a bold leader, not someone who goes with the easiest compromise. Will he be able to fundraise? Sure. Will he get the grassroots support he needs to win? Nope. Will the Republicans still probably lose? Yes.

I dare you, Democrats. The next time you get a fundraising letter from Jim Edmunson, Chair of Oregon’s Democratic Party, let him know how disappointed you are in our so-called Democratic governor, Ted Kulongoski. Here’s what I wrote to him when I got my letter for the Oregon Democratic Victory Party, which asked for support for, among others, our beloved Governor Ted:

Jim,

Thanks for your letter. I will be supporting, in any way I can, Pete Sorenson, Democratic candidate for governor.
I have already volunteered dozens of hours of my time and a good deal of money to his campaign. And I will be encouraging my friends and political contacts throughout the state to do likewise.

Ted Kulongoski is a BIG disappointment to me and the Democrats I know. We need REAL leadership in this state. Governor K had the audacity to recommend huge cuts in Head Start! Governor K said nothing when Texas Pacific Group made a bid to buy PGE. Governor K has refused to talk about tax reform to make Oregon’s taxes fairer for working families and make corporations pay their fair share. There is so much more.

I’ll only be supporting candidates who I believe have the best interests of the environment and working people and who are willing to stand up to fight the right-wing and corporate bullies. Having “Democrat” after someone’s name has never been enough for me.

Thank you.

--END of letter

It’s amazing to me how, even after the November election, Democrats have been mumbling about name recognition and appealing to a wide base when I bring up the issue of challenging Governor Ted. Have we not learned anything about how powerful it is to stand up and be proud of what we believe in? It should be clear to all of us that even the mention of moral values gets people’s attention. Yes, we can safely argue that poverty is a moral issue. We can argue that the right to health care and the right to free and fair elections are moral issues. And most certainly, the threat to all of us from global climate change (global warming) is the Mother of All moral issues.

I will also submit this radical idea: standing up for working Oregonians and our dwindling natural resources and having the courage to say, “Enough!” will get you all kinds of respect and admiration from everyone in shouting distance, regardless of their political affiliation. I will go farther: what is just and fair has no party affiliation. Doing the right thing does not appear on what we politico wonks and bloggers call the “political spectrum” of right to left. People know that in their hearts. And they are desperately seeking some sign of hope for Oregon’s future.

So here’s my challenge to you blueoregon readers: Do the right thing! Challenge the party status quo. I double-dare you! The battle for the heart of the Democratic Party has begun. I’m hoping the progressives win it back because that’s where it belongs!

For more info. about Pete's campaign, go to: www.petesorenson.com

This is very interesting: So here’s my challenge to you blueoregon readers: Do the right thing! Challenge the party status quo.

I had a very interesting conversation the other day with someone who said "you say you have been a registered Independent for part of your life, so how do you feel about campaign for Gov.?"

My response was that if there were someone of Kitzhaber's caliber in the Democratic primary or a Republican of the caliber of Max Williams or Ben Westlund, that would certainly change my mind--but Sorenson had not made a positive impression and right now I didn't see actively opposing Kulongoski. This person said it didn't look like the Republicans have a serious candidate because too many Republicans worry Mannix will lose again.

Anyone who supports Sorenson should volunteer for his campaign, but Democrats DO have the right to think for themselves. Sure Kulongoski has made mistakes--the AuCoin nomination was the biggest as far as I am concerned--but as the old saying goes, "can't beat something with nothing".

Some Senators opposed AuCoin because they'd heard from constituents, been offended by something he said (is it true he spelled a Senator's name wrong in an email? Now that's a way to lose friends and alienate people!) or some other valid reason, such as he never actually asked for their vote and some see him as "full of himself". They had that right, and saying that the party should drum out all such indep. thinkers will only drive up the rate of those who register outside a party--already over 1/4 of the electorate.

My impressions of Sorenson are 1)that he announced by badmouthing mediators, and I happen to know a mediator or 2 and thus was not impressed. 2)Also, an old friend said "I wouldn't trust Sorenson any more than I ever trusted Jan Wyers when he was in the legislature".

Sorenson supporters may not like that attitude. But take a lesson from recent history--learn to say "Sorenson is better for these concrete reasons", not "I double dare all good Democrats to ditch Ted for Pete".

superficially, it might seem that elcted Republicans represent those who elected them, while Democrats represent all the people. The reality is that all represent their potential future campaign contributors. This makes D's seem more like R's, once in office, because more campaign money comes from conservative interests.

Note to organized labor: the present campaign funding system does not favor your underlying issues, though it may provide your lobbyists a heady power trip.

LT,

I never said ditch Ted for Pete. The main point was to encourage folks who were dissatisfied with Gov. Ted's positions and actions to step forward and make their concerns known--througn whatever means they have available. I also encourage progressives not to wait for the primaries, as we all have an opportunity to influence Gov. Ted to the left NOW.

To make real changes in our society requires, in my view, BOTH carrots and sticks from BOTH the inside (electing good people we can trust) AND the outside (good old-fashioned street protests).

If Gov. Ted wants votes from the progressive side of the Party, he'll have to walk the talk and the more we support Sorenson's campaign, the more Ted will feel the heat to do more of the right thing. (The right thing, of course, means different things to different folks, but for God's sake let's start with tax restructure!)

Also, I hate to see people talk about trust without having met the man. Pete Sorenson is, by far, the most trustworthy politician I have ever met. He is a man of compassion and sincerity. Someone who really listens. These are all BIG reasons why I signed up for his campaign. Meet him and then talk to me about trust, will ya?

I hate to see people talk about trust without having met the man. Pete Sorenson is, by far, the most trustworthy politician I have ever met.

I have met Pete Sorenson, and had email exchanges with him long before he announced for Gov. Which is why I was disappointed by "we need a leader not a mediator". A person who would make such a crack is not a leader in my book. And as far as "too the left" and "tax restructure", which specific pieces of legislation does anyone here on BlueOregon support in that regard?

We need specifics, not generalities.

Leadership involves setting an agenda and using the bully pulpit of the State of the State (or City or Nation) speech to spell it out. . .as well as easier access to the press.

Our own awesome Mayor, Kitty Piercy, did it very well in her inaugural speech. Gov. Ted has made little or no mention of the need for or desire to pursue tax restructure. (Please correct me if I'm wrong. I don't follow all news every day.) When I inquired about the subject with my reps in Salem, they both said that the word from the Governor's mansion about tax reform was that it was off the table as far as he's concerned. (Paraphrasing.)

If folks need/want specifics on the need for tax reform in Oregon, please visit: www.ocpp.org and click on any of the report links in the box on the right called, "Oregon Taxes" under "Who pays state and local taxes?" These are PDF files.

Sorenson has not made all details of his ideas available, but what I have heard is more than enough to support his candidacy. I saw one of his speeches in Eugene. He said that we should bring back a reasonable balance of the tax responsibility. Thirty years ago, big corporations paid 18% of the state income tax responsibility and individuals paid 82%. Now corporations pay a miserly 5% of the whole. All but corporate flunkies and the rich would do well to support the general idea of tax fairness and call for a statewide debate on the subject, regardless of support for one candidate or another.