Seems kind of like running a campaign to be Captain of the Titanic, to want to run the Confederate Party of Republicanism of Oregon. Have a blast, Bob, and whatever you do don't rein in the rhetoric, remember you've got to defeat the traitorous terrorist hugging Defeatocrat socialist commie fags or god will do some smiting.

I'm old enough to remember a time when I could have respect for the Republican Party, though I didn't agree with it. Now, not so much. Evidently.

Tiernan has more of a clue about politics than Snodgrass.

But as long as there is someone from FreedomWorks as one of their officers, I'm guessing the GOP will not be taken seriously in this state.

Gee Chuck I remember when the Democrats were the party of segregation. Not that I really give a rat's ass as to what either the republicans or democrats do because both say one thing and do another.

If you were Bob Tiernan and you just became the LEADER of the Republican Party of Oregon. What would you do?

Oh I don't know,,,maybe point out that it's the 100% of elected Democrats who are recklessly endangering the State with insane policies to fight a global warming fraud. That it is Democrats blocking additional sustainable logging. That it is Democrats blocking the LNG terminals and Palomar pipeline. That it is Democrats who obstruct M37/M49 claims and the needed construction business.

That Democrats are opposing these energy supplying, job creating, revenue building and economy building opportunites that provide tax dollars instead of devouring them.

Gee T.A. it wasn't I who used the phrase "Confederate Party of Republicanism of Oregon" and reached into the past of segregation. And do you know how many people those policies harmed? Maybe lynched? And do you know those policies are still around today, only not quite as obvious?

“Gee Chuck I remember when the Democrats were the party of segregation.”

Yeah -- well, so what? It was conservative democrats (called “Dixiecrats” in case you’re historically challenged) who fought against civil rights for minorities. And they had more in common with today’s brand of conservatism than they do with today’s version of the democratic party.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!

Seems like the Troglodite wing of the Repulikook Party is alive and well in Oregon! Best of luck, Bob!

Heck, why not elect Karen Minnis your chair, or Kevin Mannix, for goodness sake?

Your relevance in a 21st century that will be defined by Green Industry and a rebirth of the working class will be stunningly nonexistent, thank goodness. But the next time I need to hear some rugged individualist absurdities, I'll know who to call!!!

This election was a big ho-hum for most of us. There really isn't that much difference between the winner and loser. Both of them have enough skill to operate the 3 person office that the Republicans can afford IF they do some hard fund raising.

But in the bigger picture, nothing changes. Tiernan is a party regular who can't move his Party out of the box they are in. Specifically, to define that box: to win a Statewide Republican primary, you have to be so far to the right that it is impossible to win a general election. (Gordon Smith attempted to sound one way in the Primary, and another way in the general election, and only ended up losing Republican voters.) The only solution to that "box" is to get new Republican voters who are more to the center so that Republicans that can win Statewide survive the primary. Yet, to do that the Republican Party would have to work at changing itself to at least sound more a centerist party. It can't/won't do that due to the current membership - Catch 22.

It just might take an entire generation for the Republicans to rebuild. They need a generation to die off, and a new definition of "conservative" to energe that attracts younger people. I just don't see that for at least 20 years.

point out that it's the 100% of elected Democrats who are recklessly endangering the State with insane policies to fight a global warming fraud.

I would love to see every elected Republican in this state trumpet that message as loudly as possible. We could use a few more seats.

SCB:

Specifically, to define that box: to win a Statewide Republican primary, you have to be so far to the right that it is impossible to win a general election.

Bob T:

Well, I don't about that. Last time for guv the Repubs nominated Saxton --hardly the kind of candidate you describe. So in response to that nomination the Dems had to trash Saxton and paint him as being much farther to the right than he actually was. But that's politics, I guess, and Democrats are not above lying about their opponents, either.

So the question is: If the next state-wide Republican candidate is not as far to the right as you expect the candidate to be, will you again try to make enough voters believe that s/he is?

Bob Tiernan

jk: Anyone know where he stands on separation of church and state? As in:

Abortion Birth control Gays Marriage

Thanks JK

Howard, you make a great point, and Bob T should be listening....

"Democrats who are recklessly endangering the State with insane policies to fight a global warming fraud....Democrats blocking additional sustainable logging...Democrats blocking the LNG terminals and Palomar pipeline....Democrats who obstruct M37/M49 claims and the needed construction business".

This is really the best angle R's have at this point, hate them or not. The economy is really the issue, and will be for quite some time to come. Views on "Abortion, Birth control, Gays, Marriage" become less relevant to those out of work.

Offer Dems a weak fight and they tend to become complacent. Offer them a strong fight and the best among them rises up. It would be really foolish to underestimate the R party in Oregon. So here's to you Bob T, and remember....."If you can't win, make the fellow ahead of you break the record".

Since I have only looked in from the outside, it is an assumption, but I figure that as in the DNC the RNC state parties are the activists and less reflective of the voters registered as party members than they'd like to think. From what I've see the RNC members are as likely or more so than the DNCs to take hard shots at their own for being heretics.

The herding cats metaphor is probably as apt for any grouping of activists as it is for Democrats. If Tiernan can move his party off the Confederacy model I'd be perfectly happy, I just doubt such for quite some time.

They're caught in the Catch 22 of their policies, since trickle down economics and 'small government' only seem to result in cronyism and the uplifting of the rich they have to use the 'poor choices' model of personal responsibility to castigate those who don't benefit and the bottom of that pile see it rightfully as racism. And it is that as well as classism. The only way to get somebody well down the ladder to vote for that idiocy is to make sure they have someone under them to feel better than.

I don't have the least problem with a government that is unintrusive in the individual citizen's life, but the Republicans certainly do, despite the rhetoric. They mean 'our kind' when they don't want intrusion into a citizen's life.

The Confederacy as a model is deliberate, particularly in the States Rights arguement, the only right the Confederacy gave a shit about was slavery, not the concept itself any more than the Republicans mean anything about the concept itself. Doubts? See assisted suicide and any other non-rightwing agendas from states. See the electoral distribution and state wide elected power.

And Libertarian Guy, since the Dixiecrats formed the basis of the modern day Republican Party your point would be exactly what? But the tag you use gives one an idea of exactly how seriously to take you, put Ayn down - it's fiction, and not really that good once the hormones settle down a little. You brought up segregation, the Confederacy was about the South and slavery, it is only a little exageration...

So the question is: If the next state-wide Republican candidate is not as far to the right as you expect the candidate to be, will you again try to make enough voters believe that s/he is?

Probably not. We wouldn't have to, because the fringe Right would denounce the Republican candidate as a RINO Socialist and urge a Constitution Party spoiler candidacy.

The Republican Party has sown discord and is reaping the whirlwind. They've created a base that will accept nothing less than full-throated belligerent Palinism. They can't win with it, or without it.

Sen Ted Ferrioli in the Bend Bulletin regarding Democrats and guns and assorted...

“A great deal of the registration in rural Oregon is Democrat, but they are conservative, gun-owning, God-fearing, red-blooded American citizens, and they vote conservative,” he said.

So if you don't vote Republican you will note who you are excluded from being. He really didn't like the DPO Gun Owners Caucus shoot. As someone who is not a theocratic racist plutocratic tool I'm happy to be excluded from their definition of red-blooded and to oppose them at darn near every turn.

Chuck Butcher writes; "And Libertarian Guy, since the Dixiecrats formed the basis of the modern day Republican Party your point would be exactly what? But the tag you use gives one an idea of exactly how seriously to take you, put Ayn down - it's fiction, and not really that good once the hormones settle down a little. You brought up segregation, the Confederacy was about the South and slavery, it is only a little exageration..."

Well Chuck you were the one who used the word Confederate, not me. I haven't read Ayn Rand in years and don't recommend her to people. There are a lot better works. And for the record I used to vote Democrat, but gave it up when I found out the party wasn't sincere about solving problems. Just a lot of talk.

Fred Stewart,

You posed the question, "If I was the LEADER of the Republican Party of Oregon what would I do?"

First, I would take stock of the political reality here in Oregon. The Democrats with the financial backing of the public employees unions and the GOTV effort of Oregon college students have a lock on the process at the moment. Running moderate Republicans has lost the party 2 Gubernatorial contests now (Mannix and Saxton). The Oregon GOP is full of a bunch of rural reactionaries who believe that the if we only run honest candidates with Bible Belt values, then we will start winning again.

Second, I would resign because the party is screwed for the next decade or two because the values that the party has is increasingly being marginalized by the number of transplants moving in from the East Coast and California who register Democrat and will not vote for someone who is pro-life and socially conservative.

That is all. Republican politics with "Southern" values does not fly here in Oregon.

YOM, don't think it's the unions & college students who've locked things up for Oregon Dems. the former are a big part of the package, but the latter are not. there are a multitude of groups working to elect Dems, not because of party loyalty but because that's the choice these days: Dems or nothing (this is especially true for unions). thankfully, there are so many great Dems in this state, and not a homogenous bunch, either. they are local leaders who represent the people in their district, which gives the party a lot of natural diversity.

T.A.,

I know full well that we are not a homogeneous group who claims to share each and every other member's values and upbringing. We Democrats are a heterogeneous bunch with many different value sets that cause bickering, but ultimately a better party that is a "big tent" that the Republicans in Oregon will never be. I agree with you fully there.

The problem with Republicans as this last election has shown, is that ever since the Spotted Owl crap of the late 1980s onto today, they are a party that defines itself by being what those in the Portland Metro Area are not. I call them rural reactionaries, while they refer to themselves as having values that "made America what it is today" and as the "Real Americans," which is a basic implication that anyone not from and living in a small town who votes the way they do is not a "Real American." That being said, Republicans will be on the sidelines for a long time.

Most Republicans will blame the recent electoral losses on "Bush" fatigue. Realistic assessors and political scientists will blame their electoral losses on shifting values and failing to adapt to the current technology. The abortion debate is shifting to the realization that abortion is here to stay with overturning Roe v. Wade as the dream of a bunch of extremist wingnuts who deserve to be marginalized at every turn. Furthermore, the use of blogs is the natural evolution from radio, television and talk radio to what is the prime medium for reaching the current and next generation of voters.

Rush Limbaugh won't reach many young voters like myself when over half of us have Sirius in our cars and are busy listening to Howard Stern or some other channel that plays the music we want to hear.

Republicans,

Adapt or die. Looks like you are dying at the moment. Keep on dying while you wait for 5 more Blago-esque scandals in 2010 and 2012.

That short term "scandal" stuff is only a band aid over the major artery laceration that will kill you in the long run if you don't get your act together.

I am greatly amused by Bob T. saying that Saxton was "moderate" and then Moon bat saying the same about both Saxton and Mannix.

Don't they know who these people are?

I have met both of them. Well, my meeting with Saxton was really strange, as he chased down all the good old boys at the County Fair, and tryed to take them aside into corners for quiet little talks where he could find out what kind of deal would get more people to vote for him - while I sorta chased him around to see what he really thought (without much response). Mannix I knew from way back from Legislative hearings in Salem. He was the meanest SOB in the legislature. Just didn't see the point of human services.

Both of those guys are no where near the middle in Oregon political life. If you think they are middle, your point of view must originate far, far, far to the right.

YOM, calling Mannix and Saxton "moderates" totally obscures the meaning of the word.

True moderates would consider that comment to be an offense to the mermory of true moderates like Mary Alice Ford. http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/12/rip_mary_alice_ford_former_ore.html

It is a quality issue. There are those of us who would like a truly intelligent contested race for Gov. next time instead of merely "Vote for Ted because the opponent is awful!" which is what we got the last 2 Gov. elections. When a Republican who has worked in retail says "well, if that is who won the primary, I already know enough about Kevin and Ted to know how I am going to vote, so I will just ignore the campaign" (true story), that is not good for the political process.

Many issues in this state need to be debated openly and intelligently, and that won't happen until we get GOP candidates of the quality of Atiyeh. Saying that to people in political conversations makes them think. Try it sometime and see the reaction.

In 21st century terms, it will take someone of the quality of Max Williams (on the young end of the spectrum) or Frank Morse (on the older end of the spectrum) to make that happen.

If the Tiernan/Russ Walker Republicans want to scream RINO at such a statement, they are saying they would rather be ideologically pure than win elections.

LT,

Yeah, my tone can get pretty harsh, but then again all I see and hear from the GOP perspective is a "lets get back to the good ole days, run with no apology, answer to no one, but God and my gun, and raise hell!" So the tone of which I speak of the Oregon GOP is pretty harsh at the moment.

Politicians such as Packwood, Hatfield and former Governor Vic Atiyeh are RINOs according to the standards set forth by the Bible Belt beast that is the conservative wing of the Republican party in all US states.

I refer to the conservative wing as the Bible Belt beast because this wing as epitomized by individuals like Snodgrass and Tiernan tend to think that the values predominant in the U.S. South "happens to be" the values that are held by Americans in every town across the nation, which is patently an untrue false assumption that will cost them elections in the future.

Furthermore, the Republicans never showed grace or allowed intelligent debate on the issues beyond brass knuckles when they were in office. Likewise, I will not show grace in kicking the shit out of that elephant when it is on the ground and struggling to breathe.

Brass knuckle politics begets an equal reaction when you are the one on the ground.

Honesty is all I can give at this point. When Republicans approach us with the tone of a Hatfield and the grace George HW Bush, then I will treat them the way I want to be treated. So long as they contextualize the debate as if it is an "us versus them" war, then I will play along ;)

The biggest problem for republican prospects in Oregon is that the Republican Party does not consider Oregon part of America. the Eastern part, maybe, but that's not enough to make up a majority.

So go ahead and keep defining America as meaning Dixie, the farm belt and those parts of the inland west with more Mormons than latinos. You'll probably keep doing well in those PARTS of the country; but you'll find your brand kinda hard to sell in the parts that you denounce as Non-American America.

"Furthermore, the Republicans never showed grace or allowed intelligent debate on the issues beyond brass knuckles when they were in office. "

YOM, this certainly describes the Snodgrass, Tiernan, Minnis, Scott, Larry Campbell wing of the party.

However, when the Republicans like Atiyeh held office, the term RINO had not yet been devised by what is basically the juvenile wing of the party.

Corrections Dir. (and former legislator) Max Williams, and St. Sen. Frank Morse are current members of a wing of the party which believes in good manners and common sense problem solving. The people who scream RINO might not like that, but how many elections have they won lately?

When I talk to Republicans about the soul-searching that the intelligent activists should engage in (like Democrats did in the years after Mondale lost to Reagan--which to a young person might seem like ancient history), I say,

"I campaigned for Tom McCall's re-election and voted for Pres. Ford. About the time Tom McCall died, the GOP was saying to people like me, 'we don't want your kind, you think too independently'. Now the GOP has to decide if they want to appeal to such people and to young independents, or if they want to remain ideological purity at the price of losing elections".

When Terry McAuliffe was DNC chair and made money & the use of political professionals the trademark of his chairmanship, that didn't mean every grass roots activist was supposed to say "yes, Terry, you're right, volunteer help isn't really needed on campaigns". As I recall, the Oregon Bus Project was founded while McAuliffe was DNC chair and it seemed the Oregon Democratic Party shared many of the same sentiments.

All I am saying is not to fall into the broadbrush trap we heard for so many years from the right wingers, "You Democrats all believe that....".

Democrats all believe the same things? Who are they kidding?

Partisans and nonpartisans alike are individuals. Be harsh towards those who deserve it, but don't dismiss everyone who is a Republican. It was, for instance, a Republican chairing a subcommittee of Ways and Means earlier this decade who said "those cuts on programs for the neediest Oregonians are too deep and I will not allow them to leave this subcommittee as long as I am chair".

This state senator announced that view at a town hall meeting, and there was nothing that the "cut it all" Republicans could do. That Republican is still in office (although got a strong challenge from a young Democrat in the last election---someone the grass roots supported more than those "professionals" who thought "doesn't have a chance"). It annoys the daylights out of some ideologues to point to that example and say "see, not all Republicans think and act alike".

Kaarlock was wondering about Tiernan's position on the wingnut hot-button social issues like gay marriage. Methinks that Kaarlock, a Libertarian Party canidate for the state legislature in 2008, is being a bit disingenuous: after all, Tiernan has in recent years actually been affiliated with the Libertarian Party, which is well known for advocating no governmental intervention in personal matters like gay marriage. So I think we can assume that Tiernan in his Libertarian incarnation similarly echoed the Libertarian Party line on this. However, now that he has flipped back over to the GOP, he will certainly start echoing the evangelical wingnut position.

Gee I didn't know Bob Tiernan, former member of the legislature, was involved with the Libertarian Party of Oregon. Can you give us some specifics as to when? I never saw him at a meeting.

TLG

A gee Kari I knew that.

TLG

advice to the GOP - come up with real solutions, not mantras. Realize some battles should be given up, or at least set aside, to focus on regaining a foothold in the state. Public employee unions aren't why the GOP is struggling. It's not money, its ideas.

As the guy said in the Harvey Milk movie, you can't just complain about the way things are, you've got to give people something to vote FOR.

WHOA, sorry about my Bob Tiernan Libertarian /Bob Tiernan wingnut confusion. I honestly thought that the wingnut version had been flipping back and forth between Libertarian Party and GOP. Excusable error, I think, given that there are other examples of such flip-floppers: Ron Paul and Bob Barr are the two that most readily come to mind.

But anyway, given that the Libertarian Party motto is "I've got mine, Jack; now you fuck off", what about the GOP motto? Some options:

"Memo to Barack the Magic Negro: Back of the Bus, Boy" "In Waterboarding We Trust" "Friendly Christofascism" "Sarah Palin / James Dobson 2012" "Dwight Eisenhower was a RINO COmmie Fag"

joel dan walls:

But anyway, given that the Libertarian Party motto is "I've got mine, Jack; now you fuck off"

Bob T:

Not that I know of. You must be jealous of the fact that libertarians out-do your types on freedom across the board.

What else is left for you to do but to make up stuff.

Bob Tiernan of Mult County

SCB:

I am greatly amused by Bob T. saying that Saxton was "moderate"

Bob T:

Well he was, which is why lots of people predicted he wouldn't get nominated again. But he was despite that. The fact that he was labeled a big bad right winger told me that it was just the usual case of his opponents needing to put that label on him to paint him as too far to the right to be governor. Are you saying that campaigns don't do that sort of thing? Are you that ignorant? Like you and your friends would have said, "Gosh, a moderate Republican! I guess I don't care if the Dem wins or not this time!" Get real.

Bob Tiernan of Mult Co

Posted by: Bob Tiernan | Jan 13, 2009 10:38:49 PM

SCB:

I am greatly amused by Bob T. saying that Saxton was "moderate"

His record isn't, but a lot of people feel that if he were to run as an independent he would be much more so. His main attraction, imo, is that he is an anti-anti-intellectual.

Willamette Week described Tiernan well in '97. His chairmanship could be described as Mannix, Part II. They wrote:

TIERNAN'S FOLLIES

The bad boy of Oregon politics stalks a new quarry.

He's back.

Bob Tiernan, the brawler who for two terms masqueraded as a member of the Oregon House of Representatives before losing his seat last year, hasn't given up his holy war.

His latest target? The Oregon judicial system.

Tiernan wants judges to be more political. Or rather, more politically attuned to his views. He was furious last year when the Oregon Supreme Court threw out Ballot Measure 8, the initiative he backed that would have curtailed the pensions of public employees. "This is but one example of the judicial policymaking that the court has all too vigorously engaged in during recent years," Tiernan wrote in an article for the Oregon State Bar Bulletin.

Tiernan then filed a number of initiatives with the secretary of state's office that would radically alter the way in which judges become judges. If approved, any one of these measures would do more damage to Oregon than anything Tiernan accomplished while he was in Salem.

Finish reading here.

Depends on how you define moderate:

``````````SCB:

I am greatly amused by Bob T. saying that Saxton was "moderate"

Bob T:

Well he was, which is why lots of people predicted he wouldn't get nominated again. But he was despite that. The fact that he was labeled a big bad right winger told me that it was just the usual case of his opponents needing to put that label on him to paint him as too far to the right to be governor. ```````````````

Today is cold and foggy, but it is not as cold as when we had the ice storm. So, is today a cold day or not? If under 40 degrees is cold, today is a cold day. So, what is the definition of cold?

What is the definition of moderate--towards the center from Tiernan? If so, one could make the argument about Saxton being a moderate.

But if the great Oregon tradition of Tom McCall, Clay Myers, Norma Paulus, Mary Alice Ford and others is the definition of moderate, Saxton is nowhere close.

Mr. PERS=ENRON in 2002 was nowhere to be found at the capitol in 2003 advocating for a particular PERS reform bill. The KATU commentator used to preach about something and then end the commentary "Think about it!". My sense has always been more preachy (agree with me because I say so) than ideological. Less interested in solving problems than in telling people what to think.

Not that Kulongoski was a great candidate when he ran for re-election. In 2006, before he dropped out, Westlund was the candidate someone looking for an intelligent moderate could easily have voted for.

And what do those labels mean anyway to the young legislators? At least one of those legislators is identified with the slogan "not left, not right, but forward".

<hr/>