"Novick’s the man for his time and place. We may not agree on the top of the ticket, but we both know this: Novick’s the dude."

He really ties the State together.

I'm not the biggest Novick fan but I voted for him by default. The reasons are simple: Jeff Merkley is one of those politicians who calls himself a Democrat, but who really is just out for his own career and in support of that is just a water carrier for the elitist faction of the Democratic party who he thinks can help him most.

Merkley is the DSCC pick and the DLC is happy with that.

Merkley's health care plan is Wyden's pro-corporate health plan, and exactly in step with DLC Clinton's plan, to force us all to buy heath insurance from private health insurance companies at whatever price it costs because he certainly doesn't care to risk his personal career to fight for public health insurance.

Merkley said poor people who smoke more should pay for their own kids health insurance through higher taxes rather than tax wealthy people (and this morning on KPOJ he said he was proud of that); the M50 plan he pushed through with the selfish elitists in our Party would have given all that money to private health insurance companies. (And all of you selfish, finger-pointing elitists who supported that sat on your hands this last session when Merkley told poor familes to pack sand and get in line for a lottery for health care rather than bring it up in the 2008 session when the controversy might have hurt his run for Senate.)

Merkley has done nothing except make sure he is looking out for the comfortable and powerful who happen to call themselves Democrats, but who are out to protect their own selfish interests and privilege. They are the rot within our own party and they are the people to whom Jeff Merkley is happily sold out.

Earlier in another topic in BO, there was this comment about Milquetoast Merkley:

"The guy that finally figured out how to take back the Oregon House - after sixteen years"

It should have been sooner - regardless of the republican attitudes.

Jeff represented me and my district in the Oregon legislature. When he replaced Frank Sheilds, he promised a lot but didn't have the backbone to deliver them when he actually needed to deliver them. It was like he just sat in the back like he was told to so he could 'learn something'. Only when it was safe and in vougue to actually do something (i.e. without retaliation and reprisals from his fellow big wigs), he did. In short - he waited too long to invoke his promises to his constituents. It may look good now, but it should have come sooner. As constituents, we can't wait another batch of years for Jeff to get off his behind and go forward like he did as a rep. I do not think he will act on his promises until he feels it is safe to do them without him getting reprisals and retaliations from other big wigs that are important to him, but by then it will be too late.

Thats why I feel Merkley is Milquetoast.

Novick, however, will dive in head first and deal with anything no matter what. He won't wait - he will do. He has shown that he will use the backbone initiative to do whats right NOW - not wait until someone is ready to coronate you simply because you say "ok".

Smith will be taken down - by someone willing to get into his face directly. Merkley is too timid to do this immediately. Novick will without reservation.

Amen! I'm so glad Steve Novick is running. We need someone who is honest to a fault, someone who can speak their mind without being a politician.

The way Steve Novick and Jeff Merkley have dealt with the Palestine/Israel issue and with Oregon's respective Arab and Jewish communities tells me all I need to know about the two candidates. This controversial issue, for me, quickly separates serious, principled persons from the rest of the overcrowded pack.

Jeff Merkley is anxious to please everyone he comes across, but he knows where is bread is buttered and when push comes to shove, he follows the terrible advice of his handlers and publicly supports the most right wing of Israel's policies and virtually ignores the Palestinian suffering caused by the occupation, colonization, and collective punishment. He took this (to the Arab community) extreme public position despite the fact that he has seen it for himself and has had close ties with the local Palestinian community and despite the fact that his private discussions to Palestinians were quite different. Imagine the rough and tumble of national politics and how he will fair in that venue? He will be tossed about like a cork in the sea. His heart might be in the right place, but he doesn't have the personal courage to risk his position for his principles. On this issue, I am not even sure he has a developed set of principles, knowing, as he must, that he will need to support the Party elites on this issue. He will always be susceptible to the Chuck Schumer wing of the Democratic Party and may unable to be an independent voice for Oregon progressives.

In contrast, look at this photo of Steve Novick: http://www.politickeror.com/laurenlafaro/1606/novick-gets-endorsements-activists-both-sides-middle-east-divide

In the photo, Novick is surrounded by Jewish and Arab American supporters who are impressed by his stand for fairness on the Palestine/Israel issue and his willingness to say so publicly. This is exactly the kind of principled stance we need from our politicians. These are exactly the kinds of issues that need to be addressed in an honest and open fashion by our politicians. Novick has not had the close ties (until now) with the Arab community that Merkley has had. Novick admitted that he doesn't know as much as he should about the issue but he expressed great willingness to learn more from both sides and his basic sense of fairness and his personal courage is obvious.

Novick gets it, Merkley doesn't. Novick is willing to challenge the sacred cows of the Democratic Party, Merkley will not. Novick holds principles of fairness and human rights higher than simply positioning to various groups in order to get elected. Merkley is overly concerned with job security. Ultimately, Novick may help unite two disparate communities while Merkley will continue the politics of division.

So..I wonder if Kari has and comments on this...

Come on, Kari...you know you want to...

That's because, Kevin, Milquetoast Merkley tends to put extra sugar in his "Kool-Aid" that attracts those who really don't think for themselves, or just vote for him because they are told to - much like the reason why Milquetoast Merkley is running in the first place...someone told him "you're the one" and he said "OK" - thereby coronating him before the fact (cart before the horse).

And besides...Steve drinks beer, not Kool-Aid.

i agree with andrew. calling merkley names isn't helpful in any way.

he is a good democrat and a good public servant.

(i don't think much of his campaigning skills, but that's another post)

Many people are tired of their representatives in Congress and state legislatures behaving as politicians which often means sacrificing some of their humanity. Therein lies the appeal to some extent of Obama and more so of Novick. We can have some hope of change from Obama though not as much as his more starry-eyed supporters might prefer to believe. If he goes too far he might be like Carter and find not only the Republicans against him but also many Democrats. With Steve Novick the change should be more dramatic as people compare him with Gordon Smith and his platitudes. Unlike others, I have no fear of Novick being a "bomb thrower" but to continue the military metaphor he will be more like a sharpshooter carefully aiming at well-defined targets.

I had no dog in this hunt until about two weeks ago when I saw the ironic Jeff-Merkely-doesn't-tear-people-down hit piece on Novick. After I finished laughing I decided I couldn't reward that kind of intelligence insulting hypocrisy.

Then a few days ago Merkely hit one of my all time great political pet peeves- using kids as a mouthpiece for your agenda. Eight and nine-year-olds simply do not have the experience necessary to critically judge the merits of sophisticated political arguments and should never be given speaking roles in political ads. But here Merkely is having his daughter agree that "the change we need means ending the war in Iraq." I totally agree, but, no offence, what the hell does she know about it?

Using kids to parrot partisan talking points is immoral. Period. End of story.

The Merkley daughter ad just shows how much more "sugar" Merkley is willing to add to the already extra sweetened "Kool-Aid" he has been giving his devout followers to drink on. It was kind of patronizing (sp).

This race is a tough call for me and I gotta say I was REALLY dismayed with Novick's comments over the weekend that he'd basically be willing to sacrifice some salmon runs in the name of global warming purity or some such. I think Steve is smarter than that and, unless that quote was taken way out of context, he grossly oversimplified the issue and needs some serious straightening-out if he makes it through the primary.

local mom: "unsophisticated tactics like ... celebrating beer drinking!" In Oregon, the beer center of the universe? You've got to be kidding!

milquetoast Merkley? That is a sick burn. How about Unpredictable Novick as a counter.

All I ask from a candidate is that they stick true to who and what they are. People are fired up for Novick and rightfully so, but there are quite a few people who are turned off by Novick's overreaching style as well. Merkley is by far a "safer" choice with all the good and bad connotations that may bring. He is the John Kerry to Novick's Howard Dean.

Yes, Novick will take the fight to Smith, but in the chess game that is politics he could misstep badly and lose the election. Politics is like chess in the sense that you can be aggressive but expose yourself to a counter attack. Novick looks downright immature, careless, and wild with the comments that he has made whether in or out of context.

I know that Merkley doesn't fire up the crowd and certainly isn't as progressive as Novick, however he is a PROVEN leader. He also will not self destruct on the campaign trail as I am fearful that Novick will in the general election.

"Jeff's adorable daughter"

I never thought I would see the day when someone would equate a patronizing stance with "adorable" (sp).

Like I said, Jeff has sure sweetended the already sugary "Kool-Aid" he has been letting his followers enthusiastically drink up. I am suprised he hasn't started to wear the robes that come with it.

Yes, Novick will take the fight to Smith, but in the chess game that is politics he could misstep badly and lose the election.

Merkley isn't immune to making political missteps, either. There was the ... Well we don't need to recycle that one again, do we?

I want to pick up on a comment 'Rhett' posted earlier in the string. As a person who puts the environment at the top of my list of election issues and why I want to oust Gordon Smith, I too was deeply dismayed and troubled by Novick's comments in the Oregonian last weekend that he outright opposes removal of the four Snake River dams and would sacrifice salmon in the name of global warming 'purity.'

Given that those four dams provide just tiny fraction of the region's electricity, and are mainly to make Lewiston, Idaho a seagoing port, I was stunned. The dams also help for irrigation of the desert for crop production, a very petro-dependent proposition which has its own serious global warming impacts. Energy efficiency, conservation and new renewable energy coming online can easily make up for those dams. Additionally, those of us who put global warming on the top of our list view its threats to fish and wildlife as very important. Restoring cold water ecosystems (such as by removing dams that create high-temperature lakes the kill vast numbers of baby fish) is a key way to protect species like salmon that are threatened by global warming.

On other environmental issues, I've found Steve to be fairly sound bite heavy, while showing a poor understanding of specifics. Contrast this with Merkley, who has a real record working on many environmental issues and actually helping write or shepherd policy through a tightly divided legislature.

Merkley's the best choice for a whole lot of reasons, and there are very tangible reasons many of the state's leading environmental advocates are backing him over Novick.

A sharp toungue, left hook, a bottle of beer and a lot of negative whining is not the way to win against Smith. Jeff is not timid - he is an issues guy, down to earth who has the political and legislative wit to get things done. That is what we need - not a wild west left hook and a bloody nose at the end.

I agree with enviro4merkley that we SHOULD strive to both save the salmon and take decisive against global warming. Novick is facing the issue; I think incorrectly, that we may be forced to engage in environmental triage. What if keeping the dams saves hundreds of other species, polar bears, narwhals, etc. etc? Would it be worth it? What if nuclear power would allow us to do both? Would that be worth it? I happen to think we should go all out for "energy efficiency, conservation and new renewable energy," but will it be enough? It is not that Novick is anti-environment by any means, but that the BIG environmental problem, global warming, is running away from us and will impact billions of human lives and thousands of species.

Speaking of triage, though, the Democratic Party, as represented by Merkley, is quite happy to engage in its own form of human triage by ignoring our role in the plight of the Palestinian people and by supporting, either directly or by silence, the aspects of Israel's settlements, walls, and occupation that are destroying a chance for a Palestinian state. This conflict continues at our pleasure and with our money and involvement, yet all but a few Democrats are silent. Racists? Probably. Hypocrites. Absolutely.

Evan,

Novick's position on hydropower and salmon as expressed in the Oregonian is completely retrograde, only now under the banner of global warming 'purity.' I'd expect that kind of answer out of Gordon Smith who always tries to play it both ways. If Novick listens to the best data and science, and if, as you claim, unnamed dam removal advocates support him, why would he preemptively rule out dam removal? Are you suggesting the Oregonian got it wrong? We can 'discuss this with him'? Please. I'm really concerned that Novick's environmental supporters either haven't done that already, or were similarly blindsided by his position this late in the game. At least Merkley's left the door open for dam removal while putting himself on record that we should bring the science to bear. That is in fact a lot more than many other Northwest elected officials have done.

Novick's Love Canal work, while commendable, happened nearly 15 years ago in another part of the country. And serving on the board of an environmental group, and a fairly business friendly one at that, is hardly something people who want to see a real change in environmental policy should hang their hats on. The only environmental group to endorse in this primary - the Sierra Club - is supporting Merkley in fact. And a quick Google search will reveal the Sierra Club is both fighting global warming and advocating for removal of the four Snake River dams. Those four dams account for something like 5% of the region's electricity, but are responsible for wiping out 90% of the inland West's wild salmon runs over the past 25 years. Energy efficiency and renewable energy policies that Jeff Merkley helped bring to this state in 2007 should make those dams even more obsolete.

Merkley's got the record of fighting for the environment (this decade) that Novick just can't match. I'm not sure we can trust what Steve would do, and the dam comment really confirms that.

Kevin is way out of line. Evan Manvel has every bit as much right to advocate for his friend Steve Novick as OLCV executive director Jonathan Poisner does for Jeff Merkley. Both have thoughtfully evaluated the race without ever losing sight of the fact either candidate will be an exponential improvement over Gordon Smith.

As someone who serves on the board of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, the only "besmirching" here is coming from Kevin's attempt to draw a neutral organization into the muck. There is nothing remotely inappropriate about Jonathan or Evan's personal endorsements. Nor do I even pretend to understand the argument that its is inappropriate for Evan but not Jonathan.

I'm with opinionated.

And I am very glad not to be affiliated with a campaign which would do what Mapes wrote about here.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/05/novick_raises_ruckus_with_new.html#more