Thanks Carla for your left wing interpretation of Republicans. How fresh and insightful.

What better place to go for the real story about Republicans than to the enemies who hate them.

Richard said: "What better place to go for the real story about Republicans than to the enemies who hate them."

Richard, you exemplify everything that is wrong with America when you say something like that.

You actually consider your fellow Americans "enemies"? You think they "hate" you? It sounds like you are the one who is full of hate.

Grow up. Join the human race. If you valued your country more than your idiotic idea of "us versus them", then you might actually be part of the solution instead of part od the problem.

... and lest anytone think that a Genesis song has no relation to Ronald Reagan, consider this:

Ronald Reagan acted in "The Killers" with Lee Marvin; Lee Marvin acted in "The Dirty Dozen" with Donald Sutherland; Donald Sutherland was in "JFK" with (the obligatory) Kevin Bacon; Kavin Bacon acted in "Sleepers" with Dustin Hoffman; Dustin Hoffman acted in "Hook" with Phil Collins (and the rest of Genesis).

QED.

"I wonder why Rush Limbaugh wasn't the keynote speaker?"

$$$$$$$$

I had been a Democrat for 15 years before moving to Multnomah County: the potholes, the rising fees and taxes with declining services, the empty jail and the streets overflowing with drug addicts and ID thieves, the green washing everything, and the triumph of style over substance made me a Republican.

The joke is really on you change fools!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0

I love your empty revisionist historical perspective. Instead of a deep article, you throw up a lazy article complete with a youtube video and call it news. It is even shallower than the Obama message of change. So now you have 2.9 trillion in debt. You have a change president that hired Washington insiders. You have a change president that is joined at the hip with the military industrial complex. He is no differnt than Nixon as to LBJ! You have debt with no health care. You have debt with no viable energy plan. You have debt and no fix on illegal immigration. I do not even know why I would respond to such an utterly novice attempt at journalism. You might want to extricate your head out of your dark place and learn some history before you state such pathetically romper room style caca. It is very apparent that you know nothing of history, save what, the Messiah has told you. He played on your ignorance of macroeconomics, philosphy, critical thinking, types of socialized health care systems, wealth redistribution, international relations, but mostly he played on people that are politically ignorant and easily manipulated. Your article is shamefully vague and stupid. I could talk about what a real republican platform is all about, but given your pathetic article, I do not feel that you would have the capacity to understand the fundamentals. The joke is really on you. Well we did run a corpse against a ventrilaquist doll, but we will do better next time. The country will need a true business man that has run a profitable corporation (like Romney), not a community organizer that has elevated racism to the national stage and morphed it into wealth redistribution. I look forward to your paying my Medicare and Social Security check at a 2.5 to 1 ratio. Just stay stupid like you are. We expect you to remain stupid so we can not work and have cheap healthcare that cost $300 for 15 minutes work. Thanks

My word!

www.StephanAndrewBrodheadforCongress.com

Your to afraid to post my last 2 articles because it makes you look stupid. A little censorship? Peace out. Not only are you ignorant of history, you engage in petty censorship. This is not worth my time. You really look petty.

www.StephanAndrewBrodheadforCongress.com

I sorry I said stupid. that was un called for. It would be nice if you really looked at the facts and started a dialogue on how we are going to save this country for our children. Socialsim is not a solution to fiscal stupidity. Its your future after all!

I want to see youngsters enjoy the same opportunities that I had without socialist servitude thats all. I have been to places like germany that require a resume to wash dishes.

www.StephanAndrewBrodheadforCongress.com

Carla,

I am not really into the buzz words of 2008. Had you looked at my platform for 2010, you would have found that I stand for solutions. Forget the You tube videos. forget the buzz words. forget the Socialism BS button. You would not know the difference bewteen true socialized medicine and what Obama supports anyways! I cannot debate rhetoric that is so vague and lacks purpose or vision or even personal understanding. Your observation is easily defended and it is easily defeated. It means nothing, and it said nothing. It is a personal observation that does not seek truth or solution. It was just a rant and not worthy of debate. When you have solutions above and beyond empty change, I am here for synergy and clarification, untill then, your rhetoric is vague and burns me out. I want solutions for our children's not AK47s going off because the dems won this time.So, when you are ready to identify each and every problem that confronts our children's futures and then add synergy for solutions, I am not interested. Solutions go deaper than party line. I do love your control of English Grammar though! Thanks peace/out

http://www.iraqeraveterangibill.com/Platform.html

This thing needs a spell check. I really like your control of english, you must have shown up for class.

For the past thirty years, since Ronald Reagan’s ascendancy, conservatives have been able to implement their world view on America’s policy apparatus. Look at the results: The biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression, the contraction of the middle class, failing schools, 4200 of our most precious resource killed in Iraq, our military overstressed beyond belief, increased dependence on foreign oil, 45 million Americans without health care coverage, and relatively no investments in our infrastructure. Not to mention deregulation schemes resulting in financial disasters perpetrated by Enron, Bernie Madoff, and Sir Alan Stanford leaving many to lose their retirement and pension. As NFL Coach Bill Parcells says: “You are what your record says you are”. What is it that Republicans don't understand about total abject failure?

Stephan Andrew Brodhead | Mar 14, 2009 9:25:59 PM

I sorry I said stupid. that was un called for. It would be nice if you really looked at the facts and started a dialogue ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You certainly have a specific platform, but is it what First District voters want?

Here's something to start a dialogue:

I got an email from someone (part of a discussion of the history of the Republican Party--which does go back to before 1980, at least for some people old enough to have voted in the 1970s and before). The email contained this line: "I once worked for Sen. Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. of Maryland, a real Republican."

Do you know who that person is talking about? Are you aware of Barry Goldwater, John B. Anderson, or many other famous historical Republicans? Have you ever heard of that great gentleman Bill Moshofsky who ran for 1st. District Congress years ago?

On OPB there was an ad for an upcoming documentary about Betty Ford--a woman very popular among many Oregon women of all political persuasions in the 1970s, a woman whose efforts fighting substance abuse are well known. She was one very outspoken First Lady!

In the 1980s, the Republican Party made it clear they didn't want any Ford supporters who thought for themselves. As a result, such people (women and men) left the Republican Party.

You might want to watch the documentary and see what the Republican Party was like 30 years ago, when the First Lady and the President did not always agree on issues. I voted for Pres. Ford in 1976, the last Republican who seemed to want my vote for President.

You do realize, don't you, that your comments here will still be here a year from now if you are in a contested primary?

Those who disagree with your statements here or elsewhere don't have to vote for you.

One more thing: It is 2009, not 1993. Last year the old attack-liberal-Democrats strategy didn't work, and Democrats won big.

You might want to consider talking to folks in the First District and find out their concerns. Do they worry the parents of newborns might not have health insurance in this economy? Are they tired of ideological labels? How many of them like what Tom Friedman said on KGW tonight about the importance of fixing the banking system?

Primaries in Oregon have been known to favor a positive candidate who speaks with the general public in a variety of venues, esp. when that primary candidate already has been elected to a lower office. Armies of volunteers can be as important as money, esp. this early.

The questions I hear coming from future generations center on why we didn't prosecute the GOP leadership that just gave us 8 years of obvious criminal behavior. I suppose there will also be a few questions about why we spent so much money screwing up. So far the harshest penalty Bush and Cheney have received is a show on Broadway by Will Ferrell. If Seymour Hersh's latest allegations that Cheney ran his own hit squad turn out to be true, will that be enough? These people were tyrants and we're treating them like they're behind on their dues at the country club. Wake up, everybody!

Lt, Phil

I appreciate the dialogue. I am taking a stance that makes people think. Current Republican and Democratic dogma on healthcare will not work for our children.

Health care costs inflate at 10 percent a year. When we add 5 million baby boomers to the mix every year for the next 20 years medicare costs will quadruple.

We skewered Hillary Clinton when she and Bill tried to fix health care 18 years ago. I am ashamed to have gone along with the Republican witch hunt. I was more interested in Monica Lewinsky than Bill Clinton balancing the budget and being a visionary on health Care.

So, here we are. Pick up a census. In a few short years there will be 80 million seniors on fullride entitlements paid for at a 2.5 to 1 ratio.

Current Democrats and Republicans want to work within the current health care system. They expect our children to pay doctors and insurance companies $300 dollars for a 15 minute appointment (medicare) while not having insurance themselves. They want our children to pay social security at a ratio of 2.5 to 1 while they themselves are on a globalized service based economy. We are not even considering rampant government spending. We need a hybrid of both True Socialized medicine and private sector insurance. If we are going to provide health care for seniors off the backs of our future generations we must make it cost effective. We have many other issues that require cash fuel like the stock market, 401ks, small busines etc. Government spending should always be less than 18 percent of GDP.

If we factor in Obamas 36 percent of GDP budget and deficit, and 16 percent of GDP for health Care, and 12 percent for state taxation, we come up with a huge figure. 64 percent of GDP either goes to the federal government, the state or heath care. Thats as nuch as a Socialized country, however, 50 million people are uninsured.

As far as my platform, it is there to demonstrate that I stay with current events and have an agenda. As far as candidates that have served in lower offices being better candidates, I beg to differ. How many insiders go to washington only to become a puppet for corporations or the parties easy vote? How many candidates are so pathologically congenial that they are worthless. They tell you what you want to hear. I do not operate that way. I tell the truth whether you want to hear it or not. Just as Ron Paul told the truth, I am going to tell how I see the truth. Debate before the primary and constituent influence will dictate the finally platform. If that platform dooms our children to servitude, I am out. I will not be part of that.

If I am defeated in the primary, I will endorse who I feel is the better candidate. if you look at my family history you will see that we do not go with the status quo. We are free thinkers and do what we feel is right for the country. I woud rather take a beating than to fall in line with undeserved dogma. I understand that a synthesis of both Demcoratic and Republican ideas are the best for our people. After all, Brodheads were Democrats from 1776 to 1945. Many still are. I just happen to be a Republican because I believe in low taxation, strong defense, border security, stemming illegal immigration, free market system, pro-life etc.etc.etc.

http://www.iraqeraveterangibill.com/Brodhead_military_history.html

Kevin,

Carla didnt call me on anything. I just dont answer tha vague of a question. Ask specifics on Health care that will better our situation. Offer synergy. Ok you won, now lets move on.

Why didnt LBJ or Nixon get prosecuted?

hey GW never rented rooms in the Whitehouse to chinese businessmen like Billy.

GW did not get Buffets endorsement after he bought 3 billion in GE stock only to see GE get a big part of the stimulus package. Isnt that fascism? Yeah yeah Halliburten, Black water etc. lets just move on.

Lt,

I read your comment again. It was chock full of good stuff.........thanks. i will add it to my favorites and reference it once in a while.

I am not sure if dialogue on this website is worthwhile. I have read many of the super sarcastic attacks made by the writers against Republicans over the past 3 years. This is the first time I have posted.

You are right. Just as Newt stated early on, " we will not win attacking Obama in a sarcastic way"! We have to attack his record in a positive way. It seems Democrats are trading places with Republicans. Now they attack sarcastically while Republicans are introspecting and coming up with a better plan. You still supported a flipflopping idiot and nothing will "change" that!

As far as stating "wading in here, and dont give a damn etc.">>>>>>>>>whatever! As far as getting votes, I received 4000 votes for 2008 and I was not even on the ballot. Besides its about the platform.

Democrats do not have a platform. They stand for infanticide, open borders, spend and tax, no border security, amnesty for illegal immigrants, every manner of decadence, failed energy policy, huge deficits, military industrial complex, staying in Iraq indefinately, and handouts. Thats your Change!

Thanks for the time. I will be seeing you!

www.Iraqeraveterangibill.com

"The national party isn't faring much better. As they try to extricate themselves from the ample jaws of right-wing talk show hosts, National GOP Chair Michael Steele swooped in to Portland to help pull the locals off life support. Unfortunately, those talk show hosts are still the hangers-on, like cockroaches who won't die even with the onset of their party's nuclear winter."

Carla, I love this paragraph, especially the last line - a tremendous visual. It's Dr. Hunter S. Thompson-esque, and there can be no higher praise.

Maybe it is not PC to say this, but the real problem with the Republican party is that to normal people, conservatives are repulsive and stupid, yet these people are the face of the party. Reagan got a lot of traction among normal people since he was the exception - someone who was genuinely likable. His acolytes and spawn of the present day, not hardly. Historically, except in the South, "conservatives" of today were underground, hidden under rocks. This is where they belong, and to where they will return.

I think it's cute the way conservatives talk a great game, then venture into the leadership arena, and blow it. Right now they're lost because it's too soon to start bragging about themselves again. The magnitude of their recent screw-ups is just so titanic - even the most fervent deniers of reality have to acknowledge it. Shock and awe? The only shock and awe people are feeling right now is at how bad the Bush team screwed up.

When Dick Cheney says blaming the Bush squad for our economic fiasco is "interesting rhetoric", it just doesn't fly. He's claiming it's a global problem and that's true, but it came out of another global problem called the Bush administration. The people minding the store have to take some blame when the store is looted and then burns down - especially if it was arson.

So why does this group thrive at failure? Why does it embrace dumbness to honor, worship, and obey? Why does it feel entitled to walk on the dark side where the rule of law is just an impediment?

I think it all goes back to the belief that government is a bad thing. That's a weird approach to take if you are actively trying to be the government. It's fine when you're just talking about it, but when you take over and start running things, results may vary.

That's it, isn't it? They might have shredded the Constitution, too - at least they still said they believed in it. But with the actual practice of governing, their message was, "We don't believe in what we're doing." To them, Katrina didn't prove they were wrong - it proved they were right.

Would you buy a car built by the Amish? Would you go on a round-the-world cruise planned by the Flat Earth Society? Would you hire a witch doctor to operate on your heart? No, but we did all this when we put conservatives in charge of America.

President Bush makes his first speech on the lecture circuit in June. He'll talk about his 8 years in office and the challenges we face in the 21st century. Of course the main challenge we face in the 21st century, is getting over his 8 years in office.

So, what does our new pal Stephan Three Names have in common with GOP fat cats Rush and Lars?

No kids.

Plenty of partying. Yes.

But, no kids.

Christian conservatives like this graying dude "just aren't into kids."

They are into... themselves.

Carla, I guess I do have to agree that your usually excellent writing style and investigative verve was missing. Like it or not, the democrat party in Oregon and nationally NEEDS a strong alternativeparty. Without that, the dems are subject to exactly the same foolishness that took over the republican party.

The r's certainly are a party adrift and in search of their identity. The situation was much the same for the d's from the Regan Revolution through the debacle of 2004. Finally, they identified that in order to be the other party one needsto stand for something other than "we aren't them".

I give the d's some license because it has only been 2 years since they took over congress and 2 months since Obama took Office. However, so far the only thing non-affiliated voters have seen is the same excesses (only aimed at d projects), the same scorched earth policies and the same divided governing. The d's seem to have taken Bush's worst legacy (If you're not with us; you're against us.) and boldly assumed that mantle. Too Bad.

The most succinct evaluation of El Rushbo was Garafolo's observation that he is a self loathing narcissist. It seems to apply to another here.

Thanks to Carla for helping us learn about El Stephan.

Carla, if that is the point of the post, I suggest that in future posting you refrain from writing from the standpoint of glee and mirth. The "point" was lost. Instead it appeared to be a tedious piling on.

Yes, the r's are a shipwreck (much like the d's after 1988) and turning to the likes of Rush, Hannity and Larson is a real painful thing to watch for anyone who wants to see at least 2 good parties in Oregon. What the r's need is some to stand up and begin the painful process of introspection and restructuring. That is not going to come from media inventions.

Phil said,

"For the past thirty years, since Ronald Reagan’s ascendancy,conservatives have been able to implement their world view on America’s policy apparatus."

How is it that you libs make up stuff like this and brainwash yourselves to believe it?

The idea that we've had 30 years of implementing conservative policies is absurd. We've had a few short lived eras of minor conservative advancement that were quickly overwhelmed by the big government nanny state you libs forever deny even exists.

The collective march of the past 4 congresses and administrations towards the expanded government left is irrefutable. The collapse of management, oversight and accountability has resulted.

Even in the current face of rapid acceleration of the nanny state and massive deficit spending libs can't recognize what is happening.

Instead you folks cling to the fallacies that have you viewing Democrats as the only people who care about society as you cook up these boogie men caricatures of Republicans. And like I said above, then you brain wash yourselves to believe your fabrications.

Up thread, Joe Liddy | Mar 14, 2009 4:27:19 PM said, "Richard, you exemplify everything that is wrong with America when you say something like that. You actually consider your fellow Americans "enemies"? You think they "hate" you?"

Yeah Ok Joe.

We're all friends right? It's the blue way?

All things nice.

Joe, everything Blue is about "us versus them". Especially right here at BO. The extent which this blog takes it on a daily basis is exhibit one for you. Much of it travels to such nonsensical extremes that all of us conservatives laugh at your perceptions and portrayals while always wondering who and what the heck you're talking about. When you plunge into mind reading and the motivations of Conservatives your interpretations really get loony and entertaining. Unfortunately that pours gas on the fire of the "us versus them" reality and drives us further from any solutions.

For a while you'll be in full control of our local, state and Federal government.
As we all watch more and more of "your" implementations it will demonstrate the extremity of the Democrats us versus them world.

And for the record Republicans never appointed or anointed Rush or any other talk radio personalities to head or lead the party. That's been a total political fabrication by your lib friends in the aftermath of Rush saying he wanted Obama [policies] to fail.
Just another stunt that you all picked up and ran with.

Peace

Sid leader,

I wish we had kids. It just never happened. I love children. I admire people who have children love and nourish them. I especially admire adoptive parents that love and nourish their children. As far as partying, I might have a beer once every six months. Your attempt at some sort of behavioral analysis from a picture is a false assumption and petty. My mother grew up in World War two Germany, and she was not into the habit of taking us to the doctor for every little symptom. Therefore, we never received boat loads of antibiotics. Whatever relevance this has.

On another note, I can listen to Rush Limbaugh for about 5 minutes every 5 years. I do not listen to talk radio because they sound like uneducated rednecks that harp about the same things over and over. It would be different if they talked of specifics, but they dont. Its embarrasing.

The precious bodily fluids thing is excellent humor. That was awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdATuDKYlgA

Carla you talk about berating, while submitting an article that starts off berating Michael Steele. Michael Steele is not perfect, but he is a symbol of a new era for Republicans, eventhough, Republicans have been the inclusive party since 1860. As you recall we rejected the Tennesse RNC candidate and his attempt at berating Obama with "Barack the magic Negro." This falls on deaf ears. The Democratically controlled "yellow press", while not exposing Barack Obama's possible citizenship issues, skewers Michael Steele at every turn.Just as "only Obama" is the only one allowed to leave 50,000 troops in Iraq indefinately,Michael Steele is not allowed to represent a new era of societal change.

Obama can bad mouth Bush's policies in Iraq for years and years and demand removal of the troops, but when he is in charge, he changes his mind. He decides to surge in kabul, eventhough, he told us the surge would never work under Bush. He ultimately will only let 20,000 troops come home. He also increased military spending. This is no different than when LBJ passed the torch to Nixon on Vietnam. We lost LBJ's war, while winning George Bush's war.Vietnam was fought with draft troops, while Iraq was fought with all volunteers. In the democrats war, troops were forced to be there. In Bush's war, volunteers won the war for democracy in Iraq. When troops came home from LBJs war they were spit on and called baby killers. When troops come home from Bush's war they are nourished, taken care of and called heros. It is sad that so many people could not see the difference and fell for the Anti-war theme! Its even sadder that Obama flip flopped on bringing the troops home! Its a tragedy that he pretty much changed his position on every issue except infanticide, and zero sum game energy policies. The line by line on budget and spending became "charge it to the children"! Dems dont care, for, the rich will pay the bill. The rich will become every American.

As far as a constinuent, you will vote straight party line regardless of the democratic candidates platform or lack of legislative acheivement.

The change message morphed into status quo Washington DC with extreme spending. The change message forgot about most of the issues that the change message ran on.

Hey George Bush obliterated the gains Bill Clinton made on the deficit. republicans have nothing to say about that. they presided over it, and cannot place blame other than with themselves. I believe Hillary Clinton would have made a much better president than Obama. The only reason she is not president today is because Bills "depending on what the meaning of is is". I believe Hillary would have went straight for Health care,as well as cutting the deficit, instead of burdening the tax payer with upwards of 2 trillion in debt. Bill's "under the desk adventures" cost Hillary the Whitehouse.

I am no narcisist. I just do not know how to stop fighting for our country. I believe government should be no more than 18 percent of GDP. I believe the health care industry must adapt to the needs of our future taxpayers. I believe in the free market system. All that has been put on the back burner. We will soon find that the economy is not in the shape that Obama tokk advantage of. In another 2 years 10 million baby boomers will have left the work force. there will be jobs for our young like never before.

The only area where I differ from republican Dogma is health care because it has become a fiscal issue. I am not a centrist like Gordon Smith who became so centrist and so Status Quo that he stood for nothng save his own vanity.

Oh well.

Sid leader,

I wish we had kids. It just never happened. I love children. I admire people who have children love and nourish them. I especially admire adoptive parents that love and nourish their children. As far as partying, I might have a beer once every six months. Your attempt at some sort of behavioral analysis from a picture is a false assumption and petty. My mother grew up in World War two Germany, and she was not into the habit of taking us to the doctor for every little symptom. Therefore, we never received boat loads of antibiotics. Whatever relevance this has.

On another note, I can listen to Rush Limbaugh for about 5 minutes every 5 years. I do not listen to talk radio because they sound like uneducated rednecks that harp about the same things over and over. It would be different if they talked of specifics, but they dont. Its embarrasing.

The precious bodily fluids thing is excellent humor. That was awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdATuDKYlgA

Carla you talk about berating, while submitting an article that starts off berating Michael Steele. Michael Steele is not perfect, but he is a symbol of a new era for Republicans, eventhough, Republicans have been the inclusive party since 1860. As you recall we rejected the Tennesse RNC candidate and his attempt at berating Obama with "Barack the magic Negro." This falls on deaf ears. The Democratically controlled "yellow press", while not exposing Barack Obama's possible citizenship issues, skewers Michael Steele at every turn.Just as "only Obama" is the only one allowed to leave 50,000 troops in Iraq indefinately,Michael Steele is not allowed to represent a new era of societal change.

Obama can bad mouth Bush's policies in Iraq for years and years and demand removal of the troops, but when he is in charge, he changes his mind. He decides to surge in kabul, eventhough, he told us the surge would never work under Bush. He ultimately will only let 20,000 troops come home. He also increased military spending. This is no different than when LBJ passed the torch to Nixon on Vietnam. We lost LBJ's war, while winning George Bush's war.Vietnam was fought with draft troops, while Iraq was fought with all volunteers. In the democrats war, troops were forced to be there. In Bush's war, volunteers won the war for democracy in Iraq. When troops came home from LBJs war they were spit on and called baby killers. When troops come home from Bush's war they are nourished, taken care of and called heros. It is sad that so many people could not see the difference and fell for the Anti-war theme! Its even sadder that Obama flip flopped on bringing the troops home! Its a tragedy that he pretty much changed his position on every issue except infanticide, and zero sum game energy policies. The line by line on budget and spending became "charge it to the children"! Dems dont care, for, the rich will pay the bill. The rich will become every American.

As far as a constinuent, you will vote straight party line regardless of the democratic candidates platform or lack of legislative acheivement.

The change message morphed into status quo Washington DC with extreme spending. The change message forgot about most of the issues that the change message ran on.

Hey George Bush obliterated the gains Bill Clinton made on the deficit. republicans have nothing to say about that. they presided over it, and cannot place blame other than with themselves. I believe Hillary Clinton would have made a much better president than Obama. The only reason she is not president today is because Bills "depending on what the meaning of is is". I believe Hillary would have went straight for Health care,as well as cutting the deficit, instead of burdening the tax payer with upwards of 2 trillion in debt. Bill's "under the desk adventures" cost Hillary the Whitehouse.

I am no narcisist. I just do not know how to stop fighting for our country. I believe government should be no more than 18 percent of GDP. I believe the health care industry must adapt to the needs of our future taxpayers. I believe in the free market system. All that has been put on the back burner. We will soon find that the economy is not in the shape that Obama tokk advantage of. In another 2 years 10 million baby boomers will have left the work force. there will be jobs for our young like never before.

The only area where I differ from republican Dogma is health care because it has become a fiscal issue. I am not a centrist like Gordon Smith who became so centrist and so Status Quo that he stood for nothng save his own vanity.

Oh well.

David Wu won with 76 percent of the vote in 2008. Where were the conservatives? Like I said, the only issue I differ from maintstream conservatives is on Health Care. Our position on health care does not work.

I am still prolife and all the other goodies.

Ok as far as Gordon Smith, go back to the campaign you were on. Did he not attempt to align himself with Obama a little? Did he not atempt to seem centrist? Did he not try to adapt to the democratic tide and still maintain rural conservative backing. Your the expert. You were there.What were his positions on frair trade, fair tax, health care, illegal immigration etc. etc.

Hey its Sunday and I have a life, see ya.

Stephan, There are those who say Merkley won the primary because he already held office, and as Speaker of the House as well as state rep. he had a public record.

Novick did not have a record of actions in office.

If you think this is just about political labels, and not about whether a person has held public office and thus has a public record of voting and speeches (not just campaigns worked on) before declaring for federal office, I suggest 2 things: 1) use the little Google window at the top of this page, type in Novick, and see what Blue Oregonians debated about Novick.

Then look at which counties in the 1st Cong. District Novick carried.

Yes, Wu won without holding elective office first, but that was in a different century than this one.

If voters in 2010 want something more than a glib "conservative" ---perhaps, someone who actually answers their questions at public town hall meetings---nothing you say here or on any other blog or website will change their minds.

Posted by: M | Mar 14, 2009 5:05:59 PM

... and lest anytone think that a Genesis song has no relation to Ronald Reagan, consider this:

Ronald Reagan acted in "The Killers" with Lee Marvin; Lee Marvin acted in "The Dirty Dozen" with Donald Sutherland; Donald Sutherland was in "JFK" with (the obligatory) Kevin Bacon; Kavin Bacon acted in "Sleepers" with Dustin Hoffman; Dustin Hoffman acted in "Hook" with Phil Collins (and the rest of Genesis).

QED.

Keep going! Ronald Reagan was the broadcaster that started this format. At a similar meeting in 1979 he said to watch Limbaugh, that he was the voice of true conservatism.

Posted by: Stephan Andrew Brodhead | Mar 15, 2009 12:10:31 PM

David Wu won with 76 percent of the vote in 2008. Where were the conservatives?

Real progressives consider him pretty conservative; a total apologist for big pharma and an apologist for all that take the Hypocritic Oath. He voted against Barney Frank's bill that would have legislated that the DEA respect state law. You must live in Washington county if you consider that liberal.

I am still prolife and all the other goodies.

Great to hear you're against the death penalty and the war in Iraq! The other goodies would presumably include defining "real Americans" as persons of faith and that the founders envisioned a faith-based country, even if they didn't understand the Constitution the way you do. Flag burning amendment? Marriage definition? Hell, anything that differs from what Rev. Joe Moneygrubber said this morning needs to be prohibited by constitutional amendment! It's all good. Maybe support Mor(m)on child abuse, since you like Gordo between the ears so much.

Hey its Sunday and I have a life, see ya.

Maybe spend it with a copy of Strunk and White.

For me, it's more fun to imagine the Republican party in ten years, vs. this year or next.

I would say to any emerging political movement, anywhere on the spectrum, the following:

"See that brand name, the one that looks like a hulking, empty shell right now? Take it over. Tell the marginalized social conservatives to find another home. Take the short term hit, and muscle them out. Become, if nothing else, a party of smart people who will have ANY kind of resonant alternative message that can be translated into a serious and credible approach to governing."

What is that alternative? Beats me. But if you're reading this, you know you're out there. So who are you?

Yes, I know 46% of Americans chose Sarah Palin to be their Vice-President last November. But let's suppose...that number was artificially high, out of a combination of habit and the lack of incumbency that tends to even out Presidential elections. Let's suppose the conservative ownership of the Republican party really is dying.

If so....smells like an opportunity, for somebody.

I'm confused. I thought the head of the Republican party was Sarah Palin. She can field dress a moose, right?

 Richard, I read that the term "Nanny State" came from a British MP. So you're clearing Europeanizing your talking points.

   But at any rate, I'd love to hear you ask Dick Cheney if he felt he was a real conservative, and if he felt he had been in power the last 8 years, or had he been overwhelmed by the Nanny State?

   Watching the conservative movement try and distance themselves from themselves is truly a joy to behold. It's not working, but go ahead and try.

   Oh, one other thing: If you were so disappointed when Bush and Cheney were overwhelmed by the Nanny State, why did conservatives stick with them? Where was the principled stand? Why didn't Rush call out Cheney for example? He certainly had opportunities on the radio show. Cheney was on so much I thought they were dating, and Rush went right on being the good cheerleader. Did you hear those interviews? I'm surprised the FCC didn't fine them for oral sex.

Lt,

your sober and positive reflection and imput is refreshing.

My public speaking skills need work. I plan on working on them.

I was on Duncan Hunter's campaign staff. except for Fair tax, our platform was adopted to the T by McCain. We drove the republican agenda.

Its not about me, its about the platform.

Its about the border fence, illegal immigration, fair trade. Whomever runs for the nomination in 2010 will have to confront these issues.

lastly, in a few short years, there will be 80 million baby boomers on fullride entitlements off the backs of a 140 million person workforce. The Social security fund has been plundered. 401ks have been plundered, first in 2002, and again from 2007 to present. Plundered from media collusion, greedy Wallstreet, and very powerful interests.

2.5 of our children will have to pay for the following: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, social programs, the military industrial complex, illegal immigrants, state taxation, high energy costs, high food costs, federal spending, rising medical costs, inflation, devaluation of the dollar, and so on. All this at a 2.5 to 1 ratio. Not 28 to 1, 2.5 to 1. So while the baby boomer is on fullride entitlements in that nice paid for home, our children will be watching their flat screen TVs on a milk crate in an apartment. I forget, the rich will pay for it. Unless of course dems socialize everything. Your mortgage payment will go to the government. Your energy will come from the government. Your food will come from the government. Your job will come from the government. All GDP based on globalized Socialism will go to the US government. The stock market will be government owned. The sum total of your existence will be owned by the government.

Just as you stated, " people want to hear a positive candidate!" They want to hear a positive leader. Hey you can be a positive leader, but if you are facing an economic Stalingrad, it means nothing.

The government is used to a high performance reatil sector (70 percent of GDP), dissavings rate, plundering the Lockbox etc. All the fiscal arguments went to the wayside.

As far as website Obama got 13 million email addresses off of his. I will get out there one of these days.

In the meantime, lets just

"Charge it to the children!"

Thanks LT

WWW.StephanAndrewBrodheadforCongress.com

Stephen said, "I do not listen to talk radio because they sound like uneducated rednecks that harp about the same things over and over. It would be different if they talked of specifics, but they dont. Its embarrasing."

What a BS, wrong, extreme generalization.

There are abundant speicifics discussed on essentially every topic. I listen left and right radio and there's plenty on both.

Apparenlty you're too good for either?

Swell.

I think you are confusing a few of your kneejerk opinions with facts.

Like this of yours,

"Hey George Bush obliterated the gains Bill Clinton made on the deficit. republicans have nothing to say about that. they presided over it, and cannot place blame other than with themselves."

Geroge Bush had plenty of help. 922, the wars, his swaying from fiscal conservatism and a willing congress who would have been delighted to grow goverment even more. All are to blame. The idea that Republicans have nothing to say about that is 180 away from the truth. Republicans have had plenty to say about the runaway spending under Bush and both sides of the aisle. You missed it all? You didn't hear any of it? Well perhaps you should listen to more radio and stay more boned up, and on the specifics you claim aren't discussed.

922? geeze 911

Maybe 922 is coming? :)

Stephan, how long have you lived in Oregon?

I give Duncan Hunter HUGE respect for one thing--worrying about the safety of actual battlefield troops. His 2004 hearings asking why the military couldn't make armored HUMVEES when he had personally seen a process to make them safer. He invited the officers in decorated uniforms testifying in his committee to come to that place with him and see the assembly process for themselves. THAT is leadership.

BUT, I also know the history of the Oregon 1st CD. I much admired some of the former Republican legislators from that area. This is why I thought it would be educational for you to watch the upcoming PBS documentary on Betty Ford.

Many 1st Dist. voters (regardless of party registration) are more likely to admire Betty Ford than Duncan Hunter--assuming they are old enough or have read about the former First Lady, and engaged enough to know the name Duncan Hunter. Parents of infants and toddlers are more likely to be so busy in their own lives they don't have time to be concerned about politics so soon after a major election year. How will you win their votes?

Have you ever even heard of the late Nancy Ryles and Mary Alice Ford, or know that those female Republican legislators still have admirers even though they are no longer living? Have you read Fire at Eden's Gate about the McCall years?

If you think you can shoehorn 1st Dist. voters into your political views, you should be aware of how Washington County turned from being a county electing moderate Republicans (wasn't that the county Atiyeh represented in the legislature?) to what is now a county electing Democrats of all ages.

Mary Alice Ford was a hero to many of us--a reasonable Republican legislator. She was defeated in a primary by a challenge from the right--someone who became a legislator and who earned the reputation of not listening to constituents. Eventually, this person was defeated by a young Democrat who struck people as having good manners, common sense, and most importantly a skill at listening to ordinary voters. That was the beginning of the turn from Republican Washington County to Democratic Washington County.

It was in Mary Alice Ford's obituary that one of the issues in the primary which she lost was that campaigners didn't like her being an Episcopalian--they wanted "born again" Republicans in office. As if voters of other faiths don't matter.

You do realize how many weeks Obama has been in office, and that he didn't create the budget deficit all by himself, don't you? For several years, any of us who questioned the wisdom of tax cuts in a time of war were called some kind of subversive. But, after not fighting the deficit while they were in charge, Republicans complain NOW about spending?

Where do you stand on the F-22 and other weapons which aren't currently being used in wars but someone says we need them because that is what the defense contractors say?

Where was your outrage at Duke Cunningham? At Jack Abramoff?

If you think you can win office by saying nothing bad happened prior to the 2008 election and everything since is Obama's fault, you are going to run into organized opposition (esp. in Washington County) where people are tired of the GOP rhetoric.

Posted by: Ed Blatch | Mar 15, 2009 12:40:05 PM has a great idea.

He would say to any emerging political movement, anywhere on the spectrum, the following:

"See that brand name, the one that looks like a hulking, empty shell right now? Take it over. Tell the marginalized social conservatives to find another home. Take the short term hit, and muscle them out. Become, if nothing else, a party of smart people who will have ANY kind of resonant alternative message that can be translated into a serious and credible approach to governing."

Stephan, I think you want to be Duncan Hunter in the Oregon 1st CD, and I just don't think there are enough people of that persuasion, any more than I think Wu could get elected in Hunter's S. California district.

Carla, great post. Mr. Brodhead, while I may not have the apparent grasp of chronological 'facts' you purport, it seems the amount of time and fixation with this exemplify two things: One, embracing the power of historical determinism and using government as tool for economic policy change and simultaneously the contradiction in fostering social change, except for things that you'd like to dictate. Note: I don't really care if the specifics are not accurate.
Two, an inability to present a cohesive ideological framework that has inherent appeal, rather than an argumentative dialectic in which you look to be the only participant. In short, Mr. Brodhead, it appears you have unwittingly reinforced the point being made. I hope your campaign is more successful at fostering public discourse.

"Hey George Bush obliterated the gains Bill Clinton made on the deficit. republicans have nothing to say about that. They presided over it, and cannot place blame other than with themselves

Richard you might want ot read this again.

I do nto get my news from talk shows or bloggers. I stick with news organizations that have a long history of acurate nonbiased artcles. Like the New York times

I am kind of like the guy behind the counter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1kq0eL-ly8

Take it over. Tell the marginalized social conservatives to find another home

Sorry, LT; it's going the other way, big time. Taft presided over the last Lincoln Republican administration, and Eisenhower tried to resurrect it. Both times the party chose to go another route and has become what it is today. It will continue as it is, eventually becoming, effectively, the Fascist Party in America, where Fascism is conceptualized as a Mussolini styled state.

Turn aside, party faithful, lest you vomit. I really think the moderate Reps will eventually join the Dems, as they have moved so far to the right that there is no difference in their positions; only mild differences in their assumptions. BUT, that will only happen after the left breaks away from the Dems and creates a viable third party. That probably couldn't happen without going to proportional representation, but the current schism in the Rep Party, might hasten it. One can only hope.

Anyone that thinks that Palin evangemorphs and progressive PDX Dems are miles apart should read the prologue to Rep. Ben Cannon's beer tax leg. Can people not see the position is identical, if you associate with very different looking companions? You betcha!

Chelsea on health Care

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhEYgk1EHBM

Jesus H Christ, this may be the first Blue Oregon thread I've ever read in which the majority of ppostings were by trolls. And this Brodhead fellow is quite the piece of work:

After all, Brodheads were Democrats from 1776 to 1945. Many still are. I just happen to be a Republican because I believe in low taxation, strong defense, border security, stemming illegal immigration, free market system, pro-life etc.etc.etc.

From 1776, huh? I think Mr. Brodhead is a wee bit weak on his US history. Well, he and richard have all the wingnut talking points covered. (I was going to write "RNC talking points", but given Michael Steele's state of permanent confusion and his "clarifications" of what sounded like plain English, I'm guessing that the RNC talking-point delivery system is temporarily kaput.)

I think Stephan Andrew Brodhead may well emerge as a LEADER in the new, re-energized Republican Party of Oregon. His is the most thoughtful, intelligent, conciliatory, bipartisan voice I've heard from a Republican in YEARS!

If his views reach the public, there may be a loss of seats in the next election....

Re Hunter S. Thompson, it's interesting to hear from those here who claim that a harsh tone is "impolitic" say that they respect Dr. Gonzo.

Christopher Buckley: One of the things that made Thompson an "outlaw" hero to this reviewer’s generation was the demonic zest of his invective and contumely. The DNA of Thompson’s adjectival lexicon is made up of the following, often in sequence: ”vicious,” ”rancid,” ‘’savage,” ”fiendish,” ”filthy,” ”rotten,” ”demented,” ”treacherous,” ”heinous,” ‘’scurvy,” ”devious,” ”grisly,” ”hamwit,” ”filthy,” ”foetid,” ”cheapjack” and ”hellish.” Favorite gerunds and other verb forms of abuse include ”festering,” ‘’stinking,” ”crazed,” ”deranged,” ‘’soul-ripping,” ”drooling,” ”rabbit-punching” and ”knee-crawling,” to say nothing of even more piquant expressions.

Working for Edmund Muskie, Thompson wrote, "was something like being locked in a rolling box car with a vicious 200-pound water rat."

Of Hubert Humphrey: "There is no way to grasp what a shallow, contemptible and hopelessly dishonest old hack Hubert Humphrey is until you've followed him around for a while."

"The exposure of the Democrats as both the party of imperialist war and violent repression at home radicalized a great many. In Generation of Swine: Tales of Shame and Degradation in the ‘80s, Thompson writes: '1968—The Death Year ...The Democratic Party has never recovered from that convention. It is a wound that still festers and these people are not quick healers.'

"Increasingly disillusioned by the right-wing trajectory of the Democratic Party, he became more and more convinced of his own irrelevance." (Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson)

Fear and Loathing is preferable to imperialist-lite pap.

Too weird to live; too rare to die. Bye bye.

It is fascinating to watch Stephen 3 Name practice modern elephant reasoning in an attempt to prove his position. Repeat the lies over and over until someone believes that they're the truth. Good luck with that!

I am old enough to remember the Republican party in Oregon before it was hijacked by the current group of meanies. Tom McCall, Mark Hatfield, Vic Atiyeh, and a guy named Wayne Morse (who became a Dem later). All of these guys would be called RINO's by Larson and crew today.

The lesson I cherish from the Good Doctor was his reaction when he was arrested and charged with some fairly serious-sounding things. As I recall it was possession of LSD and dynamite - maybe some other drugs and weapons thrown in. He came out on the courthouse steps and called the prosecutors a "nest of rats" who would be lucky to escape prison time when his case was over. And yes, he beat it.
This was good information for me. At the time I hadn't completely learned the importance of being bold.

Yea Pedro!

Time for the old pre-Reagan, pre-RINO GOP to return--at least if they ever want my vote again. I voted for Gerald Ford, campaigned for Tom McCall's re-election, was once a constitutent of Norma Paulus.

The insurgents who took over the GOP roughly 30 or so years ago didn't want people like me who thought for themselves.

To use Winston Churchill's language, they are now reaping the whirlwind.

" that will only happen after the left breaks away from the Dems and creates a viable third party."

Who is "the left" these days--and I want names of actual people.

I thought "the left" died with Communism. I'm one of those old enough to have been college age (roughly) when Tom Hayden and others formed the New Left (Old Left was those folks who remembered FDR and the debates of the 1930s).

The picture that struck was the one of lars, in the background it says “Oregon Republican” They are that desperate that they need some who can’t even vote in our state. If I was a member the Clark Co Republicans I would non too happy that instead of participating in our functions lars is spending time across the river in a state he can’t even vote in! What a loser!

Admiral,

Have you heard any thoughtful, intelligent, conciliatory, bipartisan voices from Democrats in YEARS?

Carla,

Even though we sit on the opposite side of the political spectrum (and I often find myself disagreeing with you), I've always found you to be an intelligent, insightful, and caring person; however, I have to agree with Richard on this one.

I do believe Republicans are at a crossroads and need to find an identity that's not wrapped up in abortion and gay rights. The party needs to stick to a platform and create cohesive ideas. Has this been the case in recent years? Obviously, that's rhetorical question.

Being a member of the Republican Party, it would be naive of me to paint a rosy picture; but, I also don't believe the situation is as dire as you make it sound.

It may take a few election cycles, but I guarantee you that the party will rebuild. Look how long it took for Democrats to regain power on Capitol Hill.

Oh Carla, Is that really telling?

I didn't infer anything. But that's yet another example of your inaccurate interpretation of a conservative's point.

I was simply flipping a question back to admiral Admiral who DID infer there were few if any thoughtful republicans.

AdmiralNaismith | Mar 15, 2009 2:49:29 PM "His is the most thoughtful, intelligent, conciliatory, bipartisan voice I've heard from a Republican in YEARS!"

And Democrats weren't so weak for so long. Their big government nanny state overwhelmed every effort to brign about genuine conservative principals.

So we ended up getting NCLB, Prescription drug entitlement that includes the affluent and expanded goverment year in year out.
Bush and the GOP congress abandoned conservative values and lost control to the Blues who are now spending and taxing us into oblivion.

Obama change?

SA Brodhead,

While it is refreshing to see a Republican want to address health care from something other than ideological stupidity, you will win no friends here with your approach - well maybe Richard, but he's...

As someone who ran with exactly the opposite problem you have, appealing to a red district, I'll tell you that some are a lost cause, period, and the others won't react well your Republican talking points approach. We aren't here to for that and frankly even conservative Democrats (they exist) don't go for it. You don't have the skills of a movie star Ronnie Reagan and his record speaks for itself shorn of the Republican myth making. He did manage to sell a bunch of stuff, the problem you now face it that used car salemen are real low on the popularity scale. Once that shiny POS gets home and breaks in a month, he's no longer your pal. You don't have his shiny words and you don't have his manner and you will get your ass kicked for it.

If you want to represent 1CD then you better find out what it is and what they need, rather than recycling BS. That's risky with the base when it is the minority. If you're going to proceed down the path you set from your first post, I'd suggest you save yourself a lot of grief and forget it.

I won't be following this thread for the simple reason that I'm one of those just lost to you.

LT is correct. There is no "left" in the DP.

However, most DP members are centrist progressives who need to leave their party of the right (as opposed to the party of the far-right) and form a party that represents them.

And true libertarians need to leave the RP and form a party that represents them.

Posted by: Richard | Mar 15, 2009 1:09:41 PM

922? geeze 911

Maybe 922 is coming? :)

No, 9/22 was when they covered up Rudy's controlled implosion so that lower Manhattan could get back to normal relatively quick.

Filthy Hippage,

From 1776, huh? I think Mr. Brodhead is a wee bit weak on his US history. Well, he and richard have all the wingnut talking points covered. (I was going to write "RNC talking points", but given Michael Steele's state of permanent confusion and his "clarifications" of what sounded like plain English, I'm guessing that the RNC talking-point delivery system is temporarily kaput.)

1776

By golly you are right

The Democratic-Republican Party was founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison around 1792. Supporters usually identified themselves as Republicans,[1] but sometimes as Democrats.[2

We started out as big Military style Federalists, or was it whigs

The British Coercive Acts of 1774 aroused Daniel Brodhead's indignation. Because the Boston Port Act crippled the economic life of Boston, Paul Revere traveled to Philadelphia to seek sympathy and assistance. Philadelphia leaders formed a committee of correspondence to circularize all Pennsylvanians in behalf of the Bostonians. This committee called upon each county to send delegates to a protest congress in Philadelphia in July, 1774. Daniel Brodhead was on the Berks County delegation; and was appointed to the convention committee for drawing up a set of instructions to the Pennsylvania colonial legislature. On that committee with Brodhead were other young men destined to be among the Founding Fathers of the new nation - John Dickinson, Joseph Reed, and James Wilson

Sorry the democratic Republicans didnt start until Jefferson, and my Great Uncle did not like Jefferson that much. he kind of pissed off Thomas when he wouldnt let William Clarke's older brother have some troops.

In late 1780, Clark traveled east to consult with Thomas Jefferson, the governor of Virginia, about an expedition in 1781. Jefferson devised a plan which called for Clark to lead 2,000 men against Detroit. Recruiting enough men was a problem, however. In time of war, most militiamen preferred to stay close to their homes rather than go on extended campaigns. Furthermore, Colonel Daniel Brodhead refused to detach the men because he was staging his own expedition against the Delawares, who had recently entered the war against the Americans.[16] Brodhead marched into the Ohio Country and destroyed the Delaware Indian capital of Coshocton in April 1781, but this only made the Delawares more determined enemies and deprived Clark of badly needed men and supplies for the Detroit campaign.[17] Most of the Delawares fled to the militant towns on the Sandusky River.[18]

When Clark finally left Fort Pitt in August 1781, he was accompanied by only 400 men. On 24 August 1781, a detachment of one hundred of his men was ambushed near the Ohio River by Indians led by Joseph Brant, a Mohawk leader temporarily in the west. Brant's victory ended Clark's efforts to move against Detroit.

So filthy hippage you are correct.

Maybe he was just a Federalist

The Brodheads would winter with George Washington at Valley Forge. Luke and Daniel would take "The oath of Allegiance" along with: Alexander Hamilton, Charles Lee, Nathaniel Greene, Benedict Arnold, Anthony Wayne, Baron Von Steuben, Peter Muhlengurg, Tench Tilghman, Marquis De Lafeyette and so on. Luke would become very good friends with Marquis De Lafeyette. Battle after battle, Col. Daniel Brodhead would prove himself a very competent and brave field commander for the Thompson's rifles 8th Pennsylvania. So much so that George Washington placed him in charge of the Western Department headquartered at Fort Pitt even as a Colonel. A command equal to any of other department.

Other famous battles were the Defense of Philedelphia, Princeton, Paoli , and Germantown, and command of the Western department headquartered at Fort Pitt (Pittsburg)

Duncam Hunter:

Here is where I differ with Duncan

Guantanamo detainees and torture Nope

Partial True socialized health Care Nope

Offensive use of Nuclear weapons nope

23 percent fair tax nope

(15 % consumption tarrif) nope

Stemcell research nope

freeze military pay increases nope

freeze goverment pay raises nope

fast track status for agriculture related illegals nope

increase legal immigration 1000 percent nope

I could go on and on. Duncan is a 100 percent conservative Repubican

I consider myself a Fiscal Conservative.

I do not want to be Duncan Hunter

In fact, I also Like Ron Pauls ideas on the FED and reducing government. I can go for withdrawing a little from the world stage (South Korea)

I like Bill Clinton on Health Care

I like Romney's billion dollar CEO experience

I like Newt Gingrichs Contract with America

I like how Sarah Palin looked in a bikini

I liked Ross Perot

I dont like Obama on Leno.

I like to feed my dachsund table scrapps

any questions

May I just call you hippage?

We started out being real ss holes

We actually started out being Parlimentarians or was it Royalists 'help me hippage '

Was Lord Cromwell a Royalist or a Parlimentarian? I yield the balance of my time!

The Duke of York sends an armada of four British men-of-war carrying 500 soldiers, under Colonel Richard Nicholls, to the Port of New York which is coveted for its growing trade. Nichols anchors in the Narrows and captures Staten Island. On August 34th, Nichols makes demands to Peter Stuyvesant that he surrender New Amsterdam. Stuyvesant hesitates, and Nichols then anchors opposite Fort Amsterdam and disembarks troops in Brooklyn. On September 6, prominent citizens urged Stuyvesant to yield to Nichols demands, and and two days later he signed articles of capitulation. To make the transfer of ownership definitive, Nichols promptly renamed New Amsterdam -- New York!

In September 1665, soon after New Netherland had become a Province of Great Britain, the English Governor, Richard NICHOLLS, had visited Kingston and placed Captain Daniel BRODHEAD in command at that place. Owing to BRODHEAD's tyrannical conduct, and the many acts of oppression and cruelty by the English soldiers under his command, the inhabitants rose in open hostility in 1667, and in a petition to Governor NICHOLLS for redress, they set forth numerous deeds of cruelty by the soldiers

True Socialized medicine

Government infrastructure

salaried employees

German health Care provides health Care for 83 million people for $333 billion with an economies of scale 1/3 higher than ours

We provide Bastardized healthcare for 45 million seniors for over $450 billion

Germans pay about $333 per individual per month

we pay almost $700

Finland health Care costs about 10 percent of GDP

ours is 16 percent and projected to double to 32 percent in 7.2 years

If we took US economies of scale and applied German per individual statistics, we could provide health care for everyone for 8.5 percent of GDP.

Both republicans and democrats will not go for this scenario, nor will the AMA, or citizens

Still in the middle of 2015, Medicare will be 1.6 trillion or the size of a single Clinton budget year.

So do we Truely socialize Senior health care and pay employees to take care of 30 million needbased seniors or do we just sock it to Carla's generation?

While the boomer gets a full Social Secuirty check of lets say $1600 a month, as well as, medicare that ranges from $16,000 per year to $6,000 per year. Worst case in 7.2 years will range from $32,000 to $12,000 per recipient. Oh and Social security will go up to lets say $2000 per individual. So, a senior in Hollywood or Grenich Village may cost up to $52,000 a year in entitlement. meanwhile, Carla is watching "lost in confusion" on her old 32 inch flat screen and has milk crate marks on her heiney.

So what is the answer!

I almost forgot, then there is OBAMA government of 36 percent of GDP and the military industrial complex.............oh well

LT,

My family roots in Oregon date to the link below, but My wife and I have been here since 2003. I served in the Portlan Air reserve in 1989 , so 20 years if that qualifies!

http://iraqeraveterangibill.com/My_Oregon_roots.html

this is blueoregon

Herr fisher,

Shall I go through project Vote Smart line by Line?

Here lets look at Illegal immigration first:

David Wu voted No on controlling our borders.

I would have voted yes and then ensured that every bit of the fence was double row!

Project Vote Smart's Synopsis:

Vote to pass a bill that authorizes the construction of an additional 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S and Mexico and grants the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to take necessary steps to stop unlawful entry of immigrants into the U.S.

Official Title of Legislation:

HR 6061: To establish operational control over the international land and maritime borders of the United States.

Highlights:

-Calls for the use of a systematic surveillance system of personnel, aerial and ground-based sensors, cameras and other technology to monitor all U.S. international borders (Sec. 2)

-Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the feasibility of implementing an increased security system along the northern boarder (Sec.4)

-Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security review the technology and training procedures of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and make updates as necessary (Sec. 5)

Link to Legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:hr6061:

House Passage: 09/14/2006 : Bill Passed 283 - 138 (Roll no. 446)

Senate Passage: 09/29/2006 : Bill Passed: 80 - 19 (Record Vote Number 262)

President Passage: 10/26/2006 : Signed Became Public Law Number 109-367

Sponsor:

Herr Fisher,

Lets talk about his allwoing children to have abortions without so much as a parental consent

Project Vote Smart's Synopsis:

Vote to pass a bill that criminalizes the transportation of pregnant minors across state lines with the intention of the minor obtaining an abortion, with certain exceptions.

Official Title of Legislation:

S 403: A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines in circumvention of laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions.

Highlights:

• Prohibits an individual, excluding the minor's parents, from knowingly transporting the pregnant minor across state lines in order to obtain an abortion, as a way to escape state laws requiring parental consent (Sec 2431(a)(1))

• Establishes a fine or up to one year of imprisonment or both for anyone who violates this law (Sec 2431 (a)(1))

• Provides an exception to the law if the life of the minor is endangered (Sec 2431(b)(1))

• Suggests that an affirmative defense to prosecution may be used if a person was presented with documentation that the minor's State had waived the parental notification requirements, or reasonably believed that the minor's parent was notified and/or gave consent (Sec 2431(c)(1-2))

• Prohibits an individual from transporting a minor across state lines to get an abortion after the individual has committed incest with the minor (Sec 2432)

• Stipulates that physicians may be fined or imprisoned for up to one year or both if they perform an abortion that violates parental consent notification requirement laws of another state (Sec 2435 (a)(1))

• Provides exceptions to the law if the physician was presented with documentation from the minor's State waiving parental notification requirements, the minor declares that she is the victim of sexual abuse, the life of the minor is endangered, or the minor is physically accompanied by her parent (Sec 2435 (b)(2-5))

Link to Legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s403:

Senate Passage: 07/25/2006 : Bill Passed: 65 - 34 (Record Vote Number 216)

House Passage: 09/26/2006 : Bill Passed 264 - 153 (Roll no. 479)

this issue:

David Wu loves to kill the unborn! who cares if the fetus is 7 months old!

Project Vote Smart's Synopsis:

Vote to pass a bill that would prohibit any individual from knowingly performing the procedure known as intact dilation and extraction, in which a fetus is partially delivered before it is aborted. The only exception is if the life of the woman is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury.

Official Title of Legislation:

HR 760: To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.

Highlights:

• Allows for criminal prosecution of the individual that performs the act

• Prohibits prosecution of the woman on whom the abortion was performed

Link to Legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:hr760:

House Passage: 06/04/2003 : Bill Passed 282 - 139 (Roll no. 242)

Sponsor:

In fact, next to Obama, David Wu is the "King of infanticide! Its ok we dont have to tell your mother!

06/06/2007 Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007 HR 2560 Y Bill Failed - House (204 - 213) 12/06/2006 Abortion Pain Bill HR 6099 N Bill Failed - House (250 - 162) 09/26/2006 Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act S 403 N Bill Passed - House (264 - 153) 06/04/2003 Prohibit Partial-Birth Abortion bill HR 760 N Bill Passed - House (282 - 139) 07/31/2001 Human Cloning Substitute Amendment H Amdt 285 N Amendment Rejected - House (178 - 249) 04/26/2001 Violence Against Fetuses/Unborn Children Amendment H Amdt 27 Y Amendment Rejected - House (196 - 229) 06/22/2000 Prison Abortion Funding Amendment H Amdt 882 Y Amendment Rejected - House (156 - 254) 07/29/1999 Abortion Funding Amendment H Amdt 360 Y Amendment Adopted - House (221 - 208) 06/09/1999 Overseas Military Abortion Amendment H Amdt 156 Y Amendment Rejected - House (203 - 225) 06/08/1999 Prohibition of Chemically Induced Abortion Amendment H Amdt 142 N Amendment Adopted - House (217 - 214) "

He is also the "King of Entitlements" 07/15/2008 Medicare Bill HR 6331 Y Veto Override Passed - House (383 - 41) 06/24/2008 Medicare Bill HR 6331 Y Bill Passed - House (355 - 59) 05/15/2008 G.I. Bill Expansion and Other Domestic Provisions HR 2642 Y Concurrence Vote Passed - House (256 - 166) 03/13/2008 Substitute Amendment for the House Budget Resolution H Amdt 972 N Amendment Rejected - House (157 - 263) 03/13/2008 Concurrent Budget Resolution H Con Res 312 Y Resolution Passed - House (212 - 207) 02/07/2008 Economic Stimulus Plan HR 5140 Y Concurrence Vote Passed - House (380 - 34) 07/28/2006 Pension Reform Bill HR 4 Y Bill Passed - House (279 - 131) 02/01/2006 Budget Reconciliation Adoption H Res 653 N Resolution Passed - House (216 - 214) 04/02/2003 Social Security Protection Act of 2003 HR 743 Y Bill Passed - House (396 - 28) 06/28/2002 Medicare Modernization and Prescription Drug Act HR 4954 N Bill Passed - House (221 - 208) 07/19/2001 Community Solutions Act of 2001 HR 7 N Bill Passed - House (233 - 198) 07/27/2000 Social Security Benefits Tax Relief bill HR 4865 Y Bill Passed - House (265 - 159) 07/27/2000 Social Security Benefits Tax Relief H Amdt 1041 Y Amendment Rejected - House (169 - 256) 05/26/1999 Social Security Lock Box bill HR 1259 Y Bill Passed - House (416 - 12)

that enough for today

David Wu supports the immigration lawyers though 100 percent: He does not give a crap about our immigration problem!

2007-2008 In 2007-2008 English First gave Representative Wu a grade of F.

2007-2008 Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to Federation for American Immigration Reform's position, Representative Wu received a rating of 15.

2007 Representative Wu supported the interests of the English First 0 percent in 2007.

2007 In 2007 U.S. English gave Representative Wu a grade of F.

2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 50 percent in 2006.

2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the English First 0 percent in 2006.

2005-2008 Based on lifetime voting records on immigration issues in 2005-2008, the Americans for Better Immigration assigned Representative Wu a grade of F (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).

2005-2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of Americans for Better Immigration 22 percent in 2005-2006.

2005-2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Iranian American Political Action Committee 100 percent in 2005-2006.

2005-2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the U.S. Border Control 8 percent in 2005-2006.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 100 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Immigration Control 0 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 57 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 17 percent in 2004.

2003-2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Better Immigration 15 percent in 2003-2006.

2003-2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Better Immigration 15 percent in 2003-2005.

2003-2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the U.S. Border Control 20 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 0 percent in 2003.

2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 50 percent in 2002.

2001-2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 0 percent in 2001-2002.

2001 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 50 percent in 2001.

1995-2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 90 percent from 1995-2004.

1989-2003 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Better Immigration 31 percent in 1989-2003.

1989-2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Better Immigration 18 percent in 1989-2002.

1989-2001 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Better Immigration 14 percent in 1989-2001.

But above all, David Wu is the go to guy on big government and robbing our children

2007-2008 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Tax Limitation Committee 0 percent in 2007-2008.

2007 In 2007 Americans for Tax Reform gave Representative Wu a grade of 0.

2007 Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to FreedomWorks's position, Representative Wu received a rating of 5.

2007 In 2007 National Taxpayers Union gave Representative Wu a grade of F.

2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 18 percent in 2006.

2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the FreedomWorks 8 percent in 2006.

2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 11 percent in 2006.

2005-2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Citizens for Tax Justice 83 percent in 2005-2006.

2005-2006 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Tax Limitation Committee 9 percent in 2005-2006.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 17 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the FreedomWorks 24 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 15 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 88 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Shareholders Association 30 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 20 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 16 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 50 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the FreedomWorks 18 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Tax Limitation Committee 9 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 15 percent in 2003.

2003 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 18 percent in 2003.

2003 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 50 percent in 2003.

2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 10 percent in 2002.

2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 17 percent in 2002.

2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 83 percent in 2002.

2001-2002 On the votes used to calculate its ratings, the Concord Coalition attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 2001-2002, the Concord Coalition gave Representative Wu a rating of 63 percent.

2001-2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the FreedomWorks 5 percent in 2001-2002.

2001-2002 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Tax Limitation Committee 14 percent in 2001-2002.

2001 Representative Wu supported the interests of the American Shareholders Association 0 percent in 2001.

2001 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 5 percent in 2001.

2001 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 17 percent in 2001.

2001 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 59 percent in 2001.

2000 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 25 percent in 2000.

2000 On the votes used to calculate its ratings, the Concord Coalition attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 2000, the Concord Coalition gave Representative Wu a rating of 33 percent.

2000 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 38 percent in 2000.

1999-2000 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Tax Limitation Committee 24 percent in 1999-2000.

1999 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 22 percent in 1999.

1999 On the votes used to calculate its ratings, the Concord Coalition attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 1999, the Concord Coalition gave Representative Wu a rating of 85 percent.

1999 Representative Wu supported the interests of the National Taxpayers Union 26 percent in 1999.

1999 Representative Wu supported the interests of the Taxpayers for Common Sense 57 percent in 1999.

How to Interpret these Evaluations:

When I clicked I saw a big picture and an old letter written 200 years ago. After that point, you lost me. Right now the biggest tool you have is the website. If it doesn't have something that keeps me digging for more info, I'm just going to click onto a different website.

<h2>It doesn't tell me anything about what you plan to do for the citizens of the first congressional district. What votes you've disagreed with David Wu, what votes you've agreed with etc. As Walter Mondale asked, "where's the beef?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug75diEyiA0</h2>

every other candidate has maybe a 5 page wesite with vague platform declarations. My website deals entirely with specifics and I lose you? What part of "finish border fence", "stem illegal immigration", or "no torture" and "no offensive use of Nuclear weapons" dont you understand? You do know what battery technology and Nuclear power are dont you? What about "no Nafta super highway or unsafe Mexican trucks on U.S. Highways. These are extreme specifics that Educated Republicans, Democrats, and Independents will understand.

While david Wu is "Charging it to the children," I am want to curtail government spending. if we leave it in the hands of Wu, there will be no money left for our children's futures. Every vote to increase the budget deficit are dollars that our twenty somethings will have to pay. I am done now!

Thanks for the imput on the content however!

Co-Sponsored Bills: Rep. David Wu [D, OR-1] Back to David Wu's Profile

Search Co-Sponsored Bills:

« Previous 1 2 3 Next » Bill Status Last Action H.R.1483 To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement a National Neurotechnology Initiative, and for other purposes. (111th congress) Introduced Mar 12, 2009 H.R.1443 Complete Streets Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 11, 2009 H.R.1409 Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 10, 2009 H.Res.224 Supporting the designation of Pi Day, and for other purposes. (111th congress) Voted on by House Mar 12, 2009 H.R.1388 GIVE Act (111th congress) Introduced Mar 16, 2009 H.Res.211 Supporting the goals and ideals of National Women's History Month. (111th congress) Introduced Mar 10, 2009 H.R.1346 Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 05, 2009 H.R.1324 Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 05, 2009 H.R.1337 America's Energy Security Trust Fund Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 05, 2009 H.R.1310 Clean Water Protection Act (111th congress) Introduced Mar 04, 2009 H.R.1296 Access for All America Act (111th congress) Introduced Mar 04, 2009 H.R.1283 Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 03, 2009 H.R.1256 Thrift Savings Plan Enhancement Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Mar 03, 2009 H.R.1211 Women Veterans Health Care Improvement Act (111th congress) Introduced Feb 26, 2009 H.Res.194 Supporting the goals of International Women's Day. (111th congress) Voted on by House Mar 11, 2009 H.R.1210 Arthritis Prevention, Control, and Cure Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 26, 2009 H.R.1240 Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act (111th congress) Introduced Feb 26, 2009 H.R.1188 Access to Emergency Medical Services Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 25, 2009 H.Con.Res.55 Recognizing the 30th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act. (111th congress) Introduced Feb 23, 2009 H.R.1102 Keep Our Promise to America's Children and Teachers Act (111th congress) Introduced Feb 13, 2009 H.R.1068 Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street’s Bailout Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 13, 2009 H.Res.170 Recognizing the sesquicentennial of the admission of Oregon into the Union and the contributions of Oregon residents to the economic, social, and cultural development of the United States. (111th congress) Introduced Feb 13, 2009 H.R.1032 HEART for Women Act (111th congress) Introduced Feb 12, 2009 H.R.1024 Uniting American Families Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 12, 2009 H.R.985 Free Flow of Information Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 11, 2009 H.R.936 National Trauma Center Stabilization Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 10, 2009 H.R.912 Airline Flight Crew Technical Corrections Act (111th congress) Voted on by House Feb 10, 2009 H.R.893 American Anti-Torture Act of 2009 (111th congress) Introduced Feb 04, 2009 H.R.808 Department of Peace Act (111th congress) Introduced Feb 03, 2009 H.R.836 Brewers Excise and Economic Relief Act of 2009

<hr/>