I'm a big fan of capitalism. I favor open access to a free market, increasing opportunities for competition and ensuring equitable exchanges of value. I oppose those who favor rigging government regulations to favor particular businesses (who just happen, coincidentally, to be big campaign donors). The latter is not capitalism.

Ironically, it's been my experience that Democrats are more supportive of capitalism in their actions. The latter are just better in their rhetoric.

It seems that in Republican circles, "business" has become code for "my college and golfing buddies", just as "family" has become code for "straights only".

Every single small bidness owner I know, with the exception of one, has cast their ballot for Sten, and that includes yours truly.

Hmm. Suddenly, after years and years of Dems railing against "business" in general, the distinction needs to be made between small and large. Finally.

It's easy to get confused, when for years the Dems have been complaining about business' minimum tax rates without making distinctions between small businesses like mine (which keep a high payroll and low profit margins) versus those whose tax rates actually need to be raised.

So for years, I haven't heard Dems make any distinction (although I think Chris is right... it's just a matter of rhetoric), but now everyone's falling over themselves to back up Sten. Well, part of the Oregonian's blurry eyesight on the issue stems from that party-line rhetoric that seems to rile up the base so well.

All I know from running small and big businesses around the world is this -- business does not create one job. Not a single one.

CONSUMERS create jobs by demanding more goods and services.

What I don't get is why the Deja Duo got two indorsments one on April 16th and one last week, as well as the Man of Steel Editorial all within a month.

Kari wrote: "I don't even think that it's an issue of "small" versus "large". It's about those who want to compete openly in a free market - and win on the basis of product, price, and performance - and those who want governments to pick favorites and guarantee monopolies (or duopolies) to favored players."

You'd probably find worth reading Rajan and Zingales, Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists. U of Chicago free-market economists, they make the same kind of point. Of special interest is their argument that generally it's "incumbent industries"--established corporations--who undermine the free market through government favors, generally in the name of helping the oppressed, needy, or worthy.

And in The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America, Micklethwaite and Wooldridge (both Brits) make the point that Dubya et al generally use free market rhetoric while favoring big business over free markets.

I'm another small (very small - I'm the whole firm!) businessperson who voted for Sten.

It's a case of follow the money - Qwest, PGE and Comcast giving large campaign contributions to Ginny Burdick means they'll get payback later on. Don't think that these monopoly utilities give money to candidates out of the goodness of their heart.

And if you complain about your tax money going to Sten's or Amanda Fritz's campaign, what about your electric bill, cable/Internet bill, or phone bill money going to Ginny Burdick's campaign?

If you want a true representative for us small business owners I would suggest voting for Dave Lister. Besides being a small business owner (which Sten has never experienced-large or small), he has a platform that addresses many of the issues business owners need to be represented.

We must be getting near 50% plus one. Clearly, business keepers are no more immune to the infectious contagion than the average city dweller. It is truly amazing the way the Sten-Blackmer Virus seeks to disarm and overwhelm the most unlikely and mild pockets of negativity.

SB-V is pro-labor. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-homeless. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-insider developers. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-overspending. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-BIT. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-employment-based transit taxes on business. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-regulation of business. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-city bureaucracy. But also pro-business. SB-V is pro-long term debt. But also pro-business.

It's a wonder that anyone dares to oppose. The Sten-Blackmer Virus is a real "pro".

I too am a one-person business but I am voting against Eric. It has much less to do with any perceived anti-business stance Eric has than with an overall feeling of disappointment with his time on the city council.

Eric seems to be far too “big picture” oriented in a position where rolling up the sleeves and working out the details is required. The list of projects where Eric’s grand vision got derailed by his disinterest in thinking things through is long: the Water Bureau fiasco, the PGE debacle, the Voter Owned Election scandal, the Tram disaster...you get the picture.

In addition my neighborhood has more transients roaming around now than at any time in the last ten years, a time Eric has been pushing his “10 year plan to end homelessness.”

No, if Eric’s worst failing were an anti-business stance he might still be acceptable on the city council, but with no accomplishments in the last ten years it’s time to turn the soil.

though most politically connected corporations hide behind "free market" rhetoric, some of them will glady admit that they favor socialism, and even call it that.

here are some notable quotes from Dwayne Andreas of ADM (Aurther Denial Midland), in one of the best ever articles on corporate welfare.

"There isn't one grain of anything in the world that is sold in a free market. Not one! The only place you see a free market is in the speeches of politicians. People who are not in the Midwest do not understand that this is a socialist country."

"Tell me, what do they do for us in Bulgaria? Do they fix the prices? Or is there some kind of a free market?"

read the whole thing if you want to find out how corn price supports interact with sugar production quotas/tariffs on imports and ethanol subsidies to give is high-fructose corn syrup in our beverages instead of sugar.

of course this has all been the plan since "progressive" teddy roosevelt got together with the big industrialists early last century to stabilize the market by creating regulatory bodies that effectively act as industrial cartels. sure, good things, such as environmental protection and worker safety standards have come out of regulation, but those are just the crumbs. the primary goals are to raise the barrier to entry into the market, stabilize prices for long-term planning, and externalize as many costs as possible onto the public.

as long as our system is going to be socialist in practice (actually, i think "cuddly facism" is a better term), we should admit it, then we can make it more fair, and spend the money on things that benefit the many, rather than the few.

and for any wingnuts who actually think republicans care about "deregulation", look at what they actually deregulated: worker protection (though they highly regulate unions), electric power--which is a natural monopoly and gave us enron, the fairness doctrine & fcc broadcast licenses (legal monopolies over the natural monopoly of the broadcast spectrum--just try broadcasting without a license. good luck), and S&Ls--though they left that safety net which came in quite handy. it was carter who deregulated the air freight, rail and trucking industries (leading to the end of the icc), telecom (ma bell), oil price controls, and so on. republican "deregulation" is actually "reregulation"--regulatory capture by the industries being regulated. basically, foxes guarding the henhouse.

"Pro-Business"

Pro-Business is anti-freemarket. Pro-Labor is anti-free market. Pro-Customer is anti-freemarket. Pro-Voter is antifree-market.

Pro-anything is antifree-market. Pro-Everything (or anti-everything) Is Freemarket A level playing field is the only way to be a "FreeMarket" advocate.

As a Sten AND Saltzman supporter, I am continuously frustrated with the endless anti-business screed from the media and segments of the population. A segment that is present in every city, but has much more fodder here in Portland. Gosh, that City Council may be doing something right.

(Definition: Important Vote=money) Sten has joined Saltzman in every important vote regarding the promotion of the Green economy, and Saltzman has joined Sten in every important vote regarding Enron/PGE. Look at their records.

A vote for the two best members of Portland City Council is a no-brainer.

I remember a few years back when North Macadam/Tram issues were before the Council and CTLH Neighborhood Assn. had a few meeting w/Erik's staff and a few times with him personally. All the points that are upon us now and to come in regards to NM/Tram were presented to Erik. At the Council hearing he asked a few questions, but he didn't see the whole picture, he was mostly interested in seeing low-income housing in NM. And even that issue has been diluted in the past years in NM.

We need council members that ask hard questions, financial questions,common sense questions, and listens to all the testimony, comments that come before the council and fairly considers it all. North Macadam is a good example of excellent citizen participation but of poor Council digestion. And Council needs to question it's own staff and bureaus, especially when differences occur; and seek the truth.

There are several other examples I could cite in Erik's case. And some of this comment applies to Dan. Consider some of the other contenders for the Council.

Most of these business 'leaders' calling the shots at the Oregonian were complicit in the tram deal.

Jim Francesconi was the transportation commissioner during the tram decisions, and he was the only council member who sat on the tram board, with a host of OHSU fixers and stooges, where the funky deal went down. Ed Grossweiler, Francesconi's campaign manager when he ran for Mayor in 2004, is Ginny Burdick's campaign manager. OHSU is a client of Ginny Burdick's firm Gard & Gerber. Ginny Burdick sold the tram financing plan. Francesconi now works for the contractor building the tram. He has a Ginny Burdick sign on his front lawn. What a beautiful coincidence.

There are many members of the tram board who gave money to Francesconi for Mayor and to Ginny Burdick. The overlap is astounding, and too detailed to list here. It makes you think they actually sat down and planned out some kind of coordinated strategy. Hey, wait a second...

The "business" voices gunning for Sten are the same dickweeds who conceived of and sold the tram, got their friend Jim Francesconi to buy in, hid the truth on the costs from the city council, and then rounded up a whole shitload of PR flacks and lawyers to engage in a public orgy of self-righteous assholery. They are the same people who recruited Ginny Burdick to run for office (and they apparently pay her salary while she runs).

Oh yeah, and the wife of the editorial page chief at the Oregonian is a goddamn spokesperson for OHSU.

These con artists will keep fleecing us until we send them packing by getting big money out of elections, and by trouncing their sorry asses at the ballot.

Serves me right for crashing an Eric (I’m sorry, I meant “Erik”) Sten love-fest by pointing out the commissioner’s failings.

Kari’s man-crush for Erik aside, I understand now that the best way to evaluate Erik’s performance in office is through the looking glass where down is up, bad is good, and failure is success.

Wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on trying to buy PGE was a good thing, as was devising a taxpayer funded campaign program without thinking through the details. The water bureau fiasco was really farsighted as we now have the latest in billing software (along with some of the highest rates in the country). I guess the truth really is in the eye of the beholder.

I’ll need some Kool-Aid to wash down that pretzel.

Paul: I am a supporter of public power, and I blame Sten, as the leading advocate, for fumbling this opportunity away.

And you're voting for Ginny Burdick, who works for the noise machine of Gard & Gerber, who did their best to torpedo public power?

From this article...

"The information coming out of Gard & Gerber was consistently misleading," said Tom Civiletti, a public power advocate. "It was as if they were setting out to misinform by making these sweeping statements that public power was some new, weird thing that would only mean higher rates. It just wasn't true, yet they kept saying it." ...

"The people who don't like our work could argue that in the PUD (People's Utility District) spots, we looked for a place where public power resulted in higher rates and chose to spotlight only those," Gard said. "I'd argue that they said public power automatically meant lower rates."

And you wouldn't argue that money that Portlanders paid for electricity in the late 1990s and early Oughts went straight to Enron, would you, Gard?

Think about it Gard & Gerber represented PGE/Enron. They represented OHSU in jamming the tram through Council. They represented child-rapist Neil Goldschmidt.

I fully expect that Ginny Burdick will do the same Comcastic job she's done at Gard & Gerber for big business in their Qwest to get favors from the city.

Paul - as Charlie Burr said, I mentioned Gard & Gerber's representation of Neil Goldschmidt when the Willamette Week was about to break the story of the statutory rape allegations against him. Gard & Gerber was hired by Goldschmidt for spin control when the allegations hit the media, not back when he was mayor or governor.

The newest allegation coming out of this election is in today's Willamette Week - evidently, the Portland Business Alliance (and by extension, Ginny Burdick) tried to use Dave Lister as a stooge to sue the city over Voter-Owned Elections. Lister didn't go for it (to his credit) and Ginny Burdick wouldn't show her face as a plaintiff.

Burdick's actual positions may be "liberal", but her candidacy stinks of the Portland Business Alliance and Gard & Gerber, two organizations with tons of baggage and self-serving ideas to benefit Big Business at the expense of small business and average citizens.

<h2>If you don't like Sten or think he's a bungler, vote for Lister. I have nothing against him, even though I disagree with him. But Ginny Burdick reeks of the Portland Business Alliance, the spin factory of Gard & Gerber, and her corporate masters.</h2>