That's Wilsonville, not West Linn. Also, the WWeek says the district includes Newberg. It doesn't.

Thanks for the catch on Newberg. We've fixed our error on our web site.

Cheers,

Hank Stern WW

Ah, more parenting tips from the party of family values and tough love.

And the single worst one-liner of the 2008 election season so far:

Wingard says he's staying in the race and is confident of winnng. He has not decided whether to return Hanna's contribution. "I don't think voters care about this kind of mudslinging," he says. "This race is about one issue and that's transportation. I've been working on that since 2001 and people in the district know I'm a political fighter."</i>

It's unlikely following up with the claim to be a fighter was of much help in making his case.

I should think not. You have a good eye for irony--I hope for their sake the people of Sherwood/Wilsonville do too.

Hey, even convicts like Wingard deserve a second chance.

Hank,

Do we know if the mother of this child is currently receiving child support or other support payments from Wingard?

If so, it makes it difficult if not impossible for her to speak out against him. She may be afraid to risk those payments she needs to support that child now.

This is a change from the stories about Republican Mark Foley, who was caught hitting on kids.

Is he sorry? Did he get counseling? If he converts to Democrat, will BlueOregon suddenly start defending him, as it does other Dems who break the law?

If "hitting" your kids includes spankings, then I hope my four year old doesn't hear about this one.

He'll want in on this class action for sure.

A NEW LOW IN B/O MUDSLINGING: Have you quit hitting your kids yet?

But Betsy Johnson's little FBI investigation still doesn't merit discussion? Wierd, huh? She's not a Republican, is she?

messieur t: “A NEW LOW IN B/O MUDSLINGING: Have you quit hitting your kids yet?”

Evidentially you haven’t.

I’d like to be there when he's old enough to hit back.

Because the record is expunged, we can not legally even talk about it here supposedly (according to a layer friend of mione). It is deemed to have never occured per ORS statutes.

Pure crap

This is why I feel we should rid ourselves of the expungment process. It causes one to live a lie. To lie is wrong.

...and I apologize for my bad spelling this morning.

Holly Martins,

Evidentially? Must be a lawyer word: couldn't find it in my dictionary.

Obvidently, you haven't procreated yet.

I assume even some of you Democrats were disciplined by your parents. Did they ever lay a hand on you? Palm open or closed? Is that child abuse?

BlueOregon isn't concerned with the fact the courts/state did nothing to protect the child, because they know the child was not in danger. This is the ultimate in character assasination politics: what goes around comes around. Be very careful how you raise your kids: the nanny state is watching.

Time outs don't always solve the problem: spankings aren't going away in our house.

Spanking isn't child abuse in Oregon. It is considered acceptable discipline so long as it doesn't leave a mark that lasts more than a few seconds. Hitting that causes a welt, bruise, cut or other physical damage is considered physical abuse.

It is rather hard to get convicted of beating up your child.

Evidentially, Holly? Obviodently, you're not a parent.

The Nanny State is now a campaign issue. I look forward to learning more about the parenting foibles and misdemeanor expungements of leading Democrats.

They just won't get any airtime on BlueOregon.

Evidentially, Holly? Obviodently, you're not a parent.

The Nanny State is now a campaign issue. I look forward to learning more about the parenting foibles and misdemeanor expungements of leading Democrats.

They just won't get any airtime on BlueOregon.

"Hitting that causes a welt, bruise, cut or other physical damage is considered physical abuse."

Not only that, but the legislator who got all kinds of flack for sponsoring a bill outlawing corporal punishment in schools was a Republican school nurse.

Republicans have often investigated opponents back to when they were in high school. For a Republican to be running for office and not to have told people in his (potential) caucus something that might come back to haunt him is not the fault of Democrats, no matter how much some want to blame every problem on the Democratic Party.

For some convservatives, there is no moral right or wrong. They have no principles. The only fact which determines whether they think an act is right or wrong is who performed the act. If it was a conservative, then it is right and must be defended no matter what. If it was a progressive, then it is wrong and must be attacked no matter what. They don't believe in any true morality.

Rob Kremer's post on this subject (which seems factual) makes it clear that this was not a matter of a parent spanking his son. Messieur t doesn't care what the facts are. All he sees is his side is under attack and must be defended. If that means sacrificing his moral judgement, then so be it.

He didn't tell anyone about this because, legally, once a item is expunged, it has been deemed not to have happened. He can, legally, say he is not a felon when, in fact, he is. He was under the assumption that, legally, this can never come up again unless it is an extreme curcumstance to reveal it - and judge has to OK that revelance. This is why we need to get rid of expungements and stop people from lying about their backgrounds. If you made a misatke - thats just too bad and you will have to live with the fallout from it.

Eric Parker Said:

"He can, legally, say he is not a felon when, in fact, he is."

Actually Mr. Parker, Wingard was never a felon. He was convicted of a misdemeanor. Get your facts straight.

Bert Lowry said:

"For some convservatives, there is no moral right or wrong. They have no principles. "

Of course, and all progressives are chock full of principles. What principles were Neil or Betsy demonstrating?

People in glass houses.....

And the sparkling show of intellectual prowess by SpankMe: "if I can find a Democrat who is being investigated for something, or who has done something wrong, then no one has any business talking about a Republican who did something like assault his child." Idiotic.

And as for spanking, I come from a conservative religious house, and got plenty of spankings. But I don't spank my own kids. All of that, though, is a ruse, because this isn't about spanking, it's about hitting a kid on the head out of anger. I think that even the most ardent spankers would say that if someone physically punishes their child while angry, they are making a huge mistake.

So is this kind of assault technically a precursor to a Measure 11 offense? Maybe this guy would be an ideal representative to speak to crime and punishment issues!

He can, legally, say he is not a felon when, in fact, he is...

No, actually expungement means that legally it never happened...i.e. there were no charges, arrest or conviction. It doesn't mean that the "crime" didn't happen...it's a second chance at a clean record.

If you made a misatke - thats just too bad and you will have to live with the fallout from it.

That's just plain vindictive...and clearly you don't understand the expungement process and rules (and nor do I claim to be an expert or a lawyer). First of all you have to meet certain qualifications and then the local DA and a judge have to OK the expungement.

So the juvenile and/or young adult that shoplifts once and has a Theft II or III on his/her record but cleans up their act and gets things together should have to carry that conviction on their record for the rest of their life? Since theft is a "crime involving moral turpitude" that frequently prohibits licensure to professional boards (i.e. lawyers, realtors, mortgage brokers, etc.) and must be disclosed on job application forms, should the "criminal" be made to "suffer the consequences" (i.e. un(der)employment) for the rest of his/her life? I believe in second chances, which is what expungement grants to certain people...it's not living a lie, it's an opportunity to turn over a new leaf. Could there be reforms? sure. Should we get rid of expungement? No.

I'd like to know more about what exactly Wingard actually did before I go casting stones, even at a damn Republican. I've seen cases where someone got charged with felony child abuse for something laughably small, and who jumped at the chance to plead down to a misdemeanor because the stakes were high. Maybe Wingard's matter was like that, or maybe he did something really bad. I just don't know yet from the info given.

"hitting" a seven year old could mean a brutal punch in the face, or it could mean a light cuff upside the head, or something in between. And yes, prosecutors can and DO charge people for light cuffs upside the head if they feel like it.

Please, please, how much longer are we going to play gotcha politics in this state. Both sides have scalps on the wall. Both sides can claim victory and do a Kabooka dance, scalp in hand in front of their own political fires.

But should we revel in the poltical theater coming out of the dungeon of Oregon politics?

I say dungeon because it seems like political torture to me.

Maybe this kind of stuff (political gotcha and dirt digging) has always gone on, but it seems to me that it's more prevalent now, than in the past.

I would like to know, though I probably won't get an answer, what efforts were taken to resolve this in private?

Like Usemity Sam said, "I'm not hession for aggression."

What is to blame for all this?

Human nature.

Politics should take into account human nature.

Also, sadly, there is a mentality, tribal in nature, that has been seperating the Oregon family for the last ten years or so.

Talk Radio: Plays to this kind of poltics.

Blogs: Have recently played to this lowest common demominator.

Look or listen to me (says the radio personality), how can I get your attention and ratings?

Dirt, dirt, dirt, and more dirt. It's corrosive and seems to empty us of the milk of human kindness that is the salve for human failing.

Also, the diverging of both parties from the poltical center.

We have less in common with folks across the aisle, therefore, see them as a foreign tribe.

I've been guilty of dancing with a scalp -- vicariously, of course, but just the same, when will we remember we are all Oregonians?

Maybe never, but I shake my head and understand why many folks want to stay out of the tribal warfare called politics.

I, for my part, know I have relished in the political blood of my opponents, but in the back of my mind, I know they are our neighbors and even our friends.

Stop me before I dance around the Kabooka fires again.

Anon Me,

We don't yet know the answer to your question.

Cheers, Hank

Ditto on Pat's remarks - also from personal experience.

Mister Tee aka messieur t ought to shuffle back over to Team Bogdanski and post some more abuse about Neil Goldschmidt. I hear there's a temporary shortage over there these days.

By the way, messieur t, since you're correcting other people's spelling, please note that "messieur" is a plural form in French, so calling yourself "messieur t" is like calling yourself Misters Tee. Of course, why you'd even want to use the 2nd language of John "he looks French" Kerry is beyond me. WTF?

Aargh.

I meant MESSIEURS.

"messieur" isn't a word at all.

There is not enough information here for any of us to really judge what happened.

I was raised by a loving, supportive father. He was a community leader where I grew up, volunteering for everything. He coached little league, led boy scouts, served in his church, led civic organizations and attended almost every one of my sporting events in high school. I hope that I'll be as good a role model to my children.

Over the course of eighteen years, however, I can remember two occasions where a punishment from my father left a mark (arguably it was "physical abuse" under the definition offered above). There no trips to the doctor, just a swollen lip/bloody nose from a backhand once and three welts from a belt across my bare fanny the other time.

These incidents were separated by about 4 years in time and in both cases I was misbehaving after being explicitly warned of the consequences (and both times Dad apologized within an hour).

Looking back I can't see how it would have helped me or my family if my Dad had been prosecuted for this (the very idea seems ludicrous to me twenty some years later).

But if my parents had divorced and were in the middle of a nasty custody battle who knows what might have happened.

I don't know what happened in Mr Wingard's case, but I would not be quick to jump to conclusions. It says something that the judge and DA both agreed that matter should have been expunged from court records.

Looks like there has been ongoing custody/visitation fights between Mr. Wingard and his child's mother, including the mother's request to have his rights terminated back in 2001; it's been in court as recently as last May, though.

But leaving aside that prurient part of this, should one be excluded from office because of this? Sometimes? Always? I'm not convinced there's an easy answer, but if a BJ for Clinton is appropriate "character" information for Republican voters to trot out, then surely a plea of guilty to a charge of assaulting your own child is, as well.

Don't Republicans support hitting kids? Isn't that James Dobson's whole schtick?

But leaving aside that prurient part of this, should one be excluded from office because of this? Sometimes? Always? I'm not convinced there's an easy answer, but if a BJ for Clinton is appropriate "character" information for Republican voters to trot out, then surely a plea of guilty to a charge of assaulting your own child is, as well.

No one is harmed by a BJ. Assault on the other hand can cause serious physical and mental harm.

PanchoPDX: You've got it all wrong. You're a victim and are clearly suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. Your international human rights were violated and your father should be prosecuted in The Hague. Boy Scout leader, active in his Church, likes to hang out at high school sporting events: need I say more?

There is no statute of limitations on these kinds of abuses. Remember: IT LEFT A MARK! He was probably wearing his VMI class ring, wasn't he?

And Bernard is right: quit harshing on Bubba's private affairs...he had the oral office steam cleaned before W moved in. No harm, no foul.

I grew up in a spanking household. Once I ran away from home and my dad found me at a local schoolyard. He threw me in the car and spanked me in front of everyone. I didn't have any marks, but he probably went to far. The police were called but no charges were filed. I think my dad realized he went to far and never laid a hand on me again. My kids are really young and I've never hit them and can't imagine doing so.

At any rate, I think my dad was a great father who learned from his mistake. He because a better parent because of it. The Wingard incident apparently happened in 2001 - a long time ago. If he's learned from his mistake the incident has no bearing on his qualifications to serve. In fact, you could argue the learning experience makes him even better qualified.

Elections are about the present and the future; not the past. What Bush or Kerry did in Vietnam was irrelevant to the 2004 campaign. If someone has a pattern of committing serious crimes that's one thing; but one-time misdemeanors are another. I think it's pretty shameless partisanship for Blue Oregon to post this item here. Where are the posts about Congressman Wu's alleged rape or Goldschmitt's rape of a 14 year old girl and the following cover-up.

This story sounds like a split in the GOP between those who support Matt Wingard and those who don't.

If Scotty is not just a troll and really wants an answer to his question, there is a Google window at the top of the page where he can type "David Wu" or "Neil Goldschmidt" and find the answer to his own question.

The larger picture is this: On the Mapes blog there was a mention that others had been interested in running for the seat until they learned a candidate had been chosen.

And partisans wonder why a nonpartisan legislature looks increasingly good to some people!

If the guy down the street or the neighborhood association chair or the city council member wants to run for state rep., must they first get permission from the caucus? Is it OK for that caucus to say "we already chose someone" or "registration in that district is so unfriendly, why would you want to run?" or "the famous candidate has so much money, how could you afford to run against someone like that?".

Seems to me that my state senator from decades ago once said something about the cost of shoe leather vs. the cost of mailers, ads, etc.

As I recall, the first time Brad Avakian ran for state rep., the Oregonian did a story on his Republican opponent. That candidate was proud to have hired a young person simply to "dig up dirt" about the opposition. That's why I was so glad Brad won--we shouldn't have such a cynical, negative attitude in any of our legislators. I wonder where that former candidate stands on the question about dirt coming out about a Republican.

Seems to me the system would be healthier if people actually living in the districts had more of a voice than the folks in the centralized caucus campaign office!

Chris, I don't know if you just don't bother to read what you cite or if I'm reading something different than you are (or if there's a new "reading" they're teaching in schools these days).

...you may, after a period of three years from the conviction, apply to set aside the record of the proceedings. You must meet these conditions before applying to set aside the conviction... (emphasis mine)

Your citation of my link to the state bar's explanation doesn't say that you have a right to expunge a conviction after your meet these requirements, it says you may apply to the judge and DA after you have met these requirements. If you have a problem with the application of the law by the DA and/or judge...they're elected in Oregon so deal with it that way. And P.S. your original point was about doing away with expungement entirely, where did you address any of the points I raised in my post? You didn't.

For the record: I think hitting your children (or anybody else's for that matter) is inexcusable. Furthermore I was surprised to find out a couple of years ago that the practice of corporal punishment was only banned from Oregon schools in the early '80s. 1980s. And talk about some bad votes from the Republicans on THAT bill. I'm sorry, but I just have to point out how awkward that would be for Mr. Wingard if he was in the legislature in the '80s..."Yes, Mr. Speaker...I need to declare a potential conflict of interest before voting on this bill. I hit my children. Thank you."

Chris-what a well reasoned, respectful response...especially in pointing out my mistakes ('scuse me while I munch on some crow). I apologize for my unexplainable bitchiness...I'm really not sure what got into me. I'm too am unsure that the expungement has any bearing on the veracity of the original charges and/or rehabilitation of the ex-con. We certainly shall see. Again, my apologies.