Kari, have you delved into Ted's background as much as you have investigated Ben?

Is a 1999 vote by Ben required to be explained but Ted needn't explain his appointments of Les AuCoin and Neil Bryant within his term as Gov.? If Les and Neil had been confirmed, this state would have been a better place because....?

If you want Blue Oregon to be a pro-Kulongoski site where Ben's record is gone over by a fine tooth comb but nothing from Ted's record as Gov. is questioned, that's fine. But I don't see how that gains any votes for Ted.

Or maybe you believe if you can make some crack about Ben every day between now and November it won't matter whether anyone has questions about Ted? Because you believe he made no mistakes in his term as Gov. and every one of his decisions was a wise decision?

Are you capable of stating even one mistake Ted made as Gov?

Was this topic just another way to slam Ben because how dare anyone think highly of Ben if you don't? Or maybe you were trying to convince those of us who don't support Ted wholeheartedly that Blue Oregon is not a worthwhile use of our time?

Why would Ben Westlund want to keep the history of the Irish Famine from Oregon school children?

Just to be clear: Ben didn't vote to prohibit it from being taught. He voted against creating more required curriculum. Perhaps he's pro-flexibility, pro-local control, anti-huge numbers of regulations about obscure things that shouldn't need to be legislated and can be decided by teachers. Was OEA for this bill or against it? AFT?

Or perhaps he's bought off by the potato lobbyists who want to prevent anti-potato history from being spread. Can you imagine the roll call: "The eyes have it, by the skin of the teeth?" er, sorry.

But where does Westlund stand on Corned Beef and Cabbage?

Kari,

Congrats! Another stellar post on a timely subject. Good for you for ignoring the train blasts in India today and focusing on a 1999 Irish History vote.

Better future post:

What is Ted, Ben or Ron's plan for providing security to PDX mass transit systems? This is something that actually matters and that they will have to deal with at some point.

This is ridiculous. Is... is this a joke or something? This is a laughable example of negative politics. I don't know whether it's funny or pathetic.

If this is what one of Kulo's consultants thinks is an important issue to Oregonians, I don't think it will help squelch the idea that Kulo is out of touch with Oregonians.

(And I, for one, would have made the same vote -- I have a teacher in my immediate family, and she can't stand when the DOE mandates a curriculum change... let alone allowing the legislature try to micro-manage what's taught in class.)

FYI, Westlund's fellow 'no' votes in the House are:

Beyer, Bowman, Deckert, Edwards, Harper, Kafoury, Kruse, Lehman, Lewis, Messerle, Rasmussen, Schrader, Shetterly, Simmons, Strobeck, Uherbelau, Wells.

The vote histories for all 1999 Senate measures can be found on the legislative website by clicking this link.

I guess the true question here is: Who (aside from Kari) really gives a crap?

Steven, I can't speak for LT, but here's why I'm voting for Westlund and not Kulo...

the Statesman Journal recently noted in an editorial this morning that Westlund is talking about the tough issues that matter to Oregonians... namely tax reform.

meanwhile, Kulo's consultant has decided to hit Westlund on the fact that in 1999, he did not support mandating a statewide curriculum addition regarding rotten potatoes.

I think that the Westlund crew must be thrilled to have such a concrete example of the disparity of the campaigns' priorities.

Wow!!!

I took ten days off for the 4th of July holiday (Pacific City was really sunny!), and I come back thinking that I have really missed alotta interesting posts and commentary.

What a joke.

Has Kari lost his marbles? I mean that this is so lame, that it can't be a joke, or even a parody of a joke.

Maybe it is a parody of a satire of a joke.

Kari, do you care to explain? Maybe it was somebody posting under your indentity? Yeah, blame it on ID theft!

Steven,

I knew Ted back when he was a state senator--very intelligent, well spoken advocate for all sorts of good causes. What happened to that guy when he got elected Gov>? Is it wrong to have expected an outgoing Gov. (as opposed to the more private Kitzhaber) and someone who would explain his actions as well as St.Sen. Kulongoski did?

I thought the AuCoin and Bryant nominations were stupid and deserved explanation--I won't vote to re-elect my state senator, but she's someone neither white nor male who had a "perfect pitch" response to the nomination.

I am as disappointed by the Gov. I voted for as my local state rep. I once voted for. Is that heresy?

And as for "bipartisan", there are those who see AuCoin and Bryant as cronyism appointees. The coalition to defeat AuCoin stretched from Republicans to Greens. Does Ted want the votes of those folks? Why were AuCoin and Bryant the best possible appointees for the job, or does that question not deserved to be answered? Are you saying Ted is the infallible Gov?

When there is the potential for bright men like Ted and Ben to show up Saxton as the shallow candidate he is, am I not supposed to be angry because Ted has decided to be just as shallow as Ron rather than engaging Ben's ideas and giving us the intelligent Gov. campaign we deserve?

Steven, did you ever support anyone on the list of people who joined Ben in the 1999 no vote? Beyer, Bowman, Deckert, Edwards, Harper, Kafoury, Kruse, Lehman, Lewis, Messerle, Rasmussen, Schrader, Shetterly, Simmons, Strobeck, Uherbelau, Wells.

And do you think this 1999 vote is more important than transportation safety in 2006?

Jeff,

Don't invent words or intention that doesn't exist in my post. Have more heft in your comments than to throw mud in the wind.

..it is nevertheless not obviously clear why we'd post it here.

Jeff, it is quite obvious. Did you even read my post?

With this city(state) running Max Trains and buses, (and expanding the MAX network all the time..$500 million dollar downtwon extension), it should be a concern to the Governor and the other candidates about ways to minimize the chances that what happened in India today, and Spain recently, doesn't happen here.

What happened in India is VERY relevant to life in PDX. What happened in Ireland may have some political relevance to Kari, but is nothing more than a political hot air balloon.

Return with us now to those thrilling days of Jan. 1996. Ron Wyden (after much internal campaign debate) decided that running a 100% positive campaign made more sense than bashing Gordon Smith.

While he won, the margin of victory [as I recall] was something less than the number of votes for 3rd party candidates.

What reminded me of this was hearing Tim Nesbitt and Josh Kardon have joined Ted's campaign.

I hope Josh can impart the lessons of Jan. 1996 to the Kulongoski campaign. Whenever I think of that campaign I remember a conversation in the parking lot at work. A young co-worker was so disgusted he contemplated throwing away his ballot or sending it in blank because the campaign was so brainless. He saw the Wyden for Sen. bumper sticker and said "I thought you opposed negative campaigns, and Wyden was negative for too long before he changed to positive".

I said I'd been one of the supporters arguing against the negative campaign (on the phone, with campaign staff) and that I'd known Ron since 1984. The response was "well, that is different, I can understand if he is actually a friend of yours."

Is it the attitude of the Ted K. campaign that they don't need the votes of JHL or Dan J. or Harry because they have the support of "the base" and that is all they need? If so, then I will seriously consider jumping from undecided to Ben once he makes the ballot.

"We don't want your vote unless you agree with us on everything" never struck me as a winning strategy. But what do I know--only been involved in Oregon politics for 30 years!

Does Westlund drink Guinness or Harp?

Has he ever eaten Lucky Charms? If so, does he eat the purple horse shoes AND the blue moons? What is his favorite charm?

Is he a Celtics fan?

What about Notre Dame?

These questions are at least as important as the original post.

"I gotta have corned beef and cabbage, if I'm gonna manage" - Everlast

bob tucker

* The point was that schools were having trouble developing a curriculum around this controversial issue, so the legislation asked the state to approve a curriculum.

Seeing the list of people who voted against this bill, I can't help thinking there was more than meets the eye. Perhaps it was "the legislation asked the state to approve a curriculum". Was there a budget to approve this curriculum (there are already required items of school curriculum like famous Oregonians or that a certain day there must be commemoration of some day, person, or event),or was this an unfunded mandate? Does a legislator have no right to say "enough, already" on this sort of added instructional subjects? Those of you who support this post, did you speak to your legislator in either 1998 or 2000 concerning their vote on this bill, or is this the first you have heard about it?

Did the sponsors have an already written curriculum they wanted the state to endorse? If not, who would write it? What staffing would be necessary for the state to approve a curriculum?
Would there be a review process? Did legislators ask those questions before voting on the bill (and would we have any way of knowing that now 7 years later)?

If we are going to reach back into the last century, let's talk about the Plant Closure Bill. As I recall, that was a big bill for St. Sen. Kulongoski. Atiyeh made his life miserable over it in the 1982 campaign. But later, GHW Bush signed a bill (in 1992 during re-election campaign as I recall) that was very similar. Would Ted support a similar bill this year? Would Ben? Would Ron?

As someone who once got a "don't go to work tomorrow--you'll be getting something in the mail" phone call, I think economic issues like unemployment and underemployment (part workers, college grads working retail, etc.) are more important than whether someone voted for or against an obscure bill in 1999.

Kari,

I have no idea why Ben Westlund or any other legislator would have voted no on SB 771 in 1999. I'll have no idea why any legislator would vote against a simillar bill next session addressing, let's say, genocide against Armenians early last century or more recent atrocities in the Balkans, Sudan or Rwanda.

Given your intererest in the Great Famine, I assume you'll make time from your scedule in September supporting Ted Kulongoski to attend the dedication of the Irish Famine Memorial at Portland's Mount Calvary cemetery. I'll send you details.

This bill is simply not innocuous fluff, rather, it promotes an understanding of an event as central to American history as the Boston Tea Party.

Understanding the Irish Famine is highly important in that it is the genesis of the Irish Diaspora, which is highly concentrated in the United States (there are more Irish people in America than in Ireland). Many, many, many Oregonians share Irish heritage and they should understand how English conquering and harsh rule of Ireland in the 19th cenutry played a significant role in their ancestors' journey across the Atlantic. And because the Legislature does have oversight over Oregon's schools, it makes sense not only to expect such bills and measures, but also to scrutinize legislators on their votes regading such bills.

And Bob Tucker--please send your racist caricatures of Irish Americans to Carlos Mencia, where that brand of tripe belongs.

Why is everyone getting on Kari's case? As I read his post, he doesn't believe this is a top-tier issue either. But he is interested to know why Westlund voted the way he did on this particular issue. That question seems to be totally fair game.

(By the way, it strikes me that the crowd would be a little less flippant if the issue were Holocaust education or a curriculum about American slavery.)

Shoot. Unclosed italics. Closed.

This isn't the first (or last) time I will say this:

Ben Westlund is "Al Mobley 2006." His candidacy (as well as Keating-Morey-Starett) will succeed only to the extent that Oregon's next governor will be either Ron Saxton or Ted Kulongowski, who will win that race with no more than 42% of the vote.

That is the real story of this governor's race. Wishful thinking notwithstanding, the R's are likely to control the House, while the D's hold on to the Senate. Governor Kulo-Saxton will be in the same position as was Barbara Roberts in 1991-94.

I'm sorry. The next four years will not be an improvement on the last.

• Wes

Wes... They must've said the same thing about Julius Meier - 55% of the vote against two candidates who relied on whipping up their base without any solid ideas.

In 1990, They said the same thing about Walter Hickle. They said the same thing about Lowell Weicker. Then they said the same thing about Angus King. And they said it about Jesse Ventura. (Speaking to the feasibility -- not the policy.)

Is it so far-fetched to think that a centrist Independent could win in Oregon? Especially when Oregon starts off with one of the highest (I) registrations in the nation?

Why would Ben Westlund want to keep the history of the Irish Famine from Oregon school children? ... But I can't figure out why Ben Westlund would have voted against teaching the Irish Famine to students in Oregon.

And why would anybody want to distort the question so thoroughly? That's what I can't figure out.

How, exactly, were any of the people who voted NO on this bill trying to keep anything from anyone? As a previous poster noted, was there some state law on the books preventing Oregon schools from teaching anything about this subject?

Yes, of course the Irish Potato Famine was an important historical event with repercussions felt world-wide and especially in the U.S. It wouldn't hurt any Oregon student to learn more about it. The goal of the bill is admirable.

But it wouldn't hurt any Oregon student to learn more about a thousand other subjects as well, and there's a perfectly valid argument to be made that it's not the legislature's job to micromanage the ODE like this. Where would it stop? And when would the legislature have an opportunity to work on, you know, the stuff they're supposed to be working on?

Yikes.

Seems like once again Karl...er...Kari has had a few too many Republican Lites, and decided to publish a non story to avoid talking about Ted's failed governorship. As a native New Yorker with 3 grandparents from Ireland, I can Assure you we're more interested in meat, potatos, and Guiness than the Republican Lite being served up here.

What happened in India is VERY relevant to life in PDX.

No, its not. Not any more than a suicide bomber in a popular cafe in Tel Aviv is relevant to security at the local McMenamin's in Beaverton. I think complaining about Ben Westlund's stand on the potato famine education is great parody (it has to be parody doesn't it?). I think finding some relationship between the bombings in India and Portland is pure fear mongering. Its like the ridiculous decision to evacuate Portland's World Trade Center on 911. It may damage the local egos, but I doubt many terrorists see Portland as much of target and they aren't going to be seduced by the presence of train tracks.

We are not divided into the media's red and blue, we are divided into those who have let bin Laden terrorize them and those who haven't.

Is it so far-fetched to think that a centrist Independent could win in Oregon? Especially when Oregon starts off with one of the highest (I) registrations in the nation?

I agree with JHL.

I admire Angus King and Lowell Weicker. When a friend was in a Minn. airport right after Jesse Ventura's election, this person said there was something in the local paper there implying one reason for the Ventura win was that he was in a debate, the 2 major party candidates did 2 min. answers that sounded like political-speak, and when a particular question was put to Ventura, he responded with facts, figures, and something like "and that is why I don't think this is a worthwhile use of taxpayer money".

He may have turned out to be a lousy governor, but that can't be said for Weicker, King, and for that matter Julius Meier.

If someone wants to vote for Ted, fine. But don't think bashing Ben will gain the votes of those who don't already support him. At some point there are going to be people who don't follow politics closely who may like Westlund for his candor.

And didn't the Oregonian just have an editorial about how the non-major party candidates could decide who is the next Governor?

And for those cynics who believe the Rs will likely control the House, why did Wilhelms already retire and just today on the Oregonian politics blog the Speaker's spokesman Diester is going to the private sector. Could this possibly be getting out before the Speaker is defeated?

If Brading wins, Cowan wins, and even one Marion County challenger wins a state rep. election, that's a tied House (all other things being equal); one more and it becomes a Dem. House.

When a friend was in a Minn. airport right after Jesse Ventura's election, this person said there was something in the local paper there implying one reason for the Ventura win was that he was in a debate, the 2 major party candidates did 2 min. answers that sounded like political-speak, and when a particular question was put to Ventura, he responded with facts, figures, and something like "and that is why I don't think this is a worthwhile use of taxpayer money".

He may have turned out to be a lousy governor, but that can't be said for Weicker, King, and for that matter Julius Meier.

1) Most people I know in Minnesota thought Jesse did a surprisingly good job as governor, even while thinking he was a complete jerk personally. But his administration was marked by constant partisan battles in the legislature where he had both sides sniping at his proposals as well as at each other. His election did nothing to relieve partisanship.

2) Ventura did win based on his performance in the debates relative to the other two candidates who spent most of their time trying to out-bland one another. Its tough to be too bland in Minnesota, but they accomplished it. Jesse was anything but bland and he managed to generate a large number of new, younger voters with Minnesota's same day voter registration system. He still only got barely over one third of the votes.

3) Ventura was not running as an independent and had zero expectation of being elected governor. He was running on the Independence Party ticket and his goal was to get enough votes to keep that party on the ballot as a qualified third party under Minnesota state law. I believe at his victory news conference when he was asked what the first thing was he would do as governor he said he didn't know. He had never really thought about it, he didn't expect to be elected and he was as surprised as everyone else that he won.

Criticizing Westlund for his vote on potato famine education really sounds like a parody of negative campaigning.

Ross,

your ramblings have once again put a smile on my face.

Thank you.

I went to today's labor rally against the Bush NLRB draconian rules changes that would kick millions of working people out of their unions. It's union busting, plain and simple.

The Gov was the keynote speaker, and during his speech, a handful of Westlund petition gatherers made a point of getting to the front of the crowd and turning their back on the Governor while he spoke.

Not only was it a great speech -- and he didn't seemed to be phased at all -- but this kind of behavior is pretty immature to do to any sitting Governor, no matter what your politics. I lost a lot of respect for Westlund today.