Kari, what does your post have to do with the issues in the governor's race?

I grew up on a farm near Eugene. It was predominantly a mint farm, but we did switch over to corn a few years as market conditions changed, plus we had other crops and livestock on the farm. But then, when someone asked what kind of farm we had, I'd usually say "a mint farm" and not a "cattle ranch" or "cannery crops" or.... And even to this day I'll usually call the farm a "mint farm. Who cares?

I'd have to say if Saxton's opponents have subjugated themselves to this low level of politics of persnal denigration, then they've run out of issues.

Don't cherry trees have a production lifespan requiring them to be replaced? What difference does it make if they were replaced with any other crop? It was a cherry farm when he bought it. What's the deal?

Oops, left the O out of personal.

Yeah, here's the quote: "Only when I bought a cherry farm many years ago did [my grandmother] finally think I had amounted to something," he told reporters when announcing his first campaign for governor."

Where in there does it even say he still owns the farm? For all you know from that quote, the cherry farm has since been paved into a WalMart. On reading that quote, I certainly wouldn't have expected that he had any relation to the farm anymore at all. I just don't get what this really has to do with anything.

It's not like you need to stoop this low to pick on Saxton. Why not stick with, you know, actual issues?

Yo, these guys don't get it. Kari's article was meant to be something lighthearted and off-beat. Nothing wrong with bringing this up. In fact it's kind of nice to have something like this every now and again to break up all the wonky political talk.

Plus, Saxon is a meat-head and I love seeing people take jabs at him, no matter how mundane!

Sounds like a bunch of sour grapes to me.

Did I mention Saxton is a meat-head?

;)

Before you call someone a liar you'd better make sure you really look at what they said.

According to your quote Saxton said, "Only when I bought a cherry farm many years ago..."

You admit that he did buy a cherry farm years ago. How is that a lie? When I was a kid I was pretty excited when I bought a '64 Ford Fairlane. Is this a lie if in fact I know drive a beater pick-up? I don't think so.

I don't think that Saxton was lying.

I'm surprised you actually wasted bandwidth with this post, Kari. I can't wait for the future "whoppers" you'll be dredging up.

I refuse to vote for Kulo. He keeps saying he grew up in an orphanage, yet now he lives in a house. Mr. Governor, I think your pants are on fire!

Going from cherries to wine grapes is probably the smartest move Ronnie ever made.

He knows Oregon's low, low, low wine and beer tax hasn't changed since 1976, when a honest man named Jimmy Carter was President and Rummy was hugging Saddam so tight Hussein's bodyguards had to do an intervention.

Think Ronnie and Paul Romaine, the creaky ol' wine and beer lobbyist who sends such fear into our legislators, are pals? Oh yes.

The booze biz RUNS this state and when our kids drop out of high school, they start drinking, so the booz biz makes even more money! No wonder they are against stable school funding, it's NOT in their best interest. Dropouts are. Tons of them!

Excellent investigative journalism! Ranks right up there with the famous Ben Westlund “potato famine” piece which ran a few months ago!

Pass the cherry wine.

First of all, Saxton is continuing to call himself a cherry-farm owner in the present tense. Check out what he submitted to the Statesman Journal. There it is under "work."

Second, the question is why Saxton would represent this was a cherry farm when it hasn't been one for over a decade. Could it be that that owning a vineyard doesn't exactly establish your rural credentials? Puts a whole new spin on the Pinot-swilling urban elite motif, don't it?

The feds got Al Capone on income tax evasion. The media stuck it to Bob Packwood for oafish sexual advances rather than his sleazy campaign strategies. If Ron Saxton goes down for mixing up cherries and grapes, cool.

Cherries or grapes: who picks 'em?

Yes, cherry trees do have a productive life period. Yes, "fast and loose" does imply "lying". Like I said earlier, when I'm asked "what kind of farm?", I usually reply "mint farm" even though hay grass, oats, barley has grown on the property for over 20 years. Get an issue. And what is wrong with grapes vs. cherries, they both make wine?

I'm glad the governors race's decisive moment will become whether it is "cherry or grapes?". Thanks, Kari for defining the moment. And thanks, Oregonian, for helping.

"Full disclosure: I built SaxtonWatch.com for the DPO, and TedForGov.com for Kulongoski for Governor. I speak for no one but myself."

I wouldn't have assumed the Kulongoski campaign would waste its time with trivial crap like this - even if they don't have much better to say.

Your "disclosure" seems like a self-serving plug; Particularly after that lemon of a post.

{Full disclosure: I built a house for my dog, but I don't speak for the dog. I have no idea who he'll vote for.]

Obviously Saxton’s supporters are freaking out about this. That’s because it’s not about cherries or grapes it’s about honesty. Why own a farm that’s been a vineyard for close to twenty years and call it an orchard if there isn’t something to be gained from the deception. Maybe it was once cherries but what’s going on here isn’t a confusion of crops. It’s the deliberate creation of an image that’s false.

Which image is better for a Republican running in Oregon? Cherry farmer or vineyard owner – that’s not even a hard one. I’d be surprised if Saxton ever even got dirt under his fingernails on that farm anyway. It’s typical for wealthy attorneys to “invest” in vineyards with their buddies. It’s a great tax write off and they get to be wine snobs with all their rich friends.

And by the way – how many vineyards, or cherry orchards, in Oregon are harvested without illegal workers? Can Saxton tell us if all the workers in his fields are legal? Probably not, he’s probably never met most of them. Still if it's his vineyard, he's responsible.

Saxton’s a corporate attorney and an absentee vineyard owner - not a farmer.

Unlike George Washington, Ron Saxton appears to be lying over and over again about chopping down his cherry trees. That wouldn't amount to much except for the fact that Saxton has made "cherry farmer" a prominent feature of his political life story. Is he hiding something? Is there something rotten in the fields of Rickreal?

If it is important, I am a demo. Anon, I don't find much difference between a cherry orchardist and a grape grower. Your comment infers that someone growing grapes are snobs, etc., compared to a cherry orchardist. That is not going to set well with the predominate number of grape growers that are demos. This is turning into an important issue, I think.

Oh come on, how can ANYONE vote for Saxton? Which version should even the conservatives think they're voting for, Saxton 1.2 from the 2002 election of Saxton 2.2 from 2006. The fact that he's bashing the Gov over illegal immigration when he was personally profiting from the least enforced EXISTING anti-illegal immigration law (danctioning employers who exploit these people) shows what he's really made of. It would be VERY BAD if progressives or anyone sat on their hands this election because the Gov doesn't do EVERYTHING they like. I'm supporting him and he's made several decisions I disagree with but he's a good and decent man who speaks truthfully and doesn't pander.

LW - of course there's a difference between and orchard and a vineyard in the publics’ mind. Maybe you're a Portland liberal but in rural Oregon, and that’s probably 30 of our 36 counties, we're mostly farmers and ranchers. Many of us see Portlanders as a bunch of chardonnay sipping elitists. That perception is part of why Portland Ds do so poorly here. Also, serious teetotaling evangelicals are already uncomfortable with Saxton, thanks to his abortion waffling, so the fact that he’s enough into wine to own a vineyard won’t help.

Saxton’s trying to create an image that is less Portland Attorney by adding cherry farmer to his resume, adding vineyard owner would not have been nearly as helpful. The Oregonian makes it clear he didn’t have a whole lot to do with that farm either way. They said “he portrayed himself as a hands off partner.” Still, on his website and in his voter’s pamphlet statement, cherry farmer is as prominent as attorney in his occupational background.

How did Shakespeare put it .... full of sound & fury, signifying nothing.

I believe an apt conclusion to this lively debate is simply this:

Saxton is a meat-head.

I don't find much difference between a cherry orchardist and a grape grower. Your comment infers that someone growing grapes are snobs, etc., compared to a cherry orchardist.

My question is this: Why is this issue so important that Saxton would lie about it to the Statesman-Journal?

More importantly, if Ron Saxton is willing to lie about growing grapes versus cherries, what else is he willing to lie about?

Ah, truthiness...

Saxton wouldn't call it a cherry orchard when it's really a vineyard if he didn't think it would get him more votes. And rural voters outside the Willamette Valley do care about the difference. So I agree with Kari, Wacky and others of the opinion that Saxton's sneaky bit of campaign-speak is worthy of note.

In a similar vein, please take a look at West Mult. Soil and Water Conservation District director-at-large (second term) candidate Rick Sander's statement identifying himself as the owner of a 360 acre cattle ranch. (League of Women Voters Guide, current election, p. 20). What candidate Sanders doesn't admit is that his cattle ranch is in CALIFORNIA -- and that his usual method of participating and voting at board meetings for the last couple of years has been via telephone conference call. (Apparently phoning-in your vote at a board meeting is not illegal at West Mult. SWCD, though the state legislature doesn't allow it... Any opinions?)

<hr/>