I think it would be excellent if Dr. John Kitzhaber ran for Gov. I've known him for a quarter century, and greatly admire the guy. He would raise the intellectual level of the debate just by being part of it.

Ironically, on Tuesday a friend and I were talking about standards of excellence. For instance, as a measure of eloquence, inspiration, connecting with ordinary voters and addressing their concerns, whatever anyone thinks of Pres. Obama, his campaign showed him to be a 10 on that scale.

Those of us who were not happy with the tone of debate in the 2006 Gov. race are likely to regard those 2006 candidates as maybe Ted being a 5 (not the guy those of us who had known St.Sen. Kulongoski thought we had elected in 2002) and Saxton maybe a 3.5.

My friend and I were wishing there could be a 2010 Gov. campaign where at least one candidate would rate a 6 on that scale.

Talked to that friend yesterday and we were joking about how the addition of Kitzhaber to the Gov. race would certainly grant our wish. Kitzhaber would be a 7 on that scale on a bad day, and his friends would say he's at least a 9 when at his best.

Another standard of excellence is how Ron Wyden can stand in front of those famous town hall meetings and answer every question asked. That is a gift--not all politicians are capable of that. Kitzhaber is one politician who has done an excellent job of that in the past.

One more thing: there is a well known poll question where people are asked to rate public figures on the scale of "cares about people like me, understands my problems".

I submit Obama won the primary and the general election because he scores very high on that scale among ordinary folks (as opposed to those who make a living in politics or journalism).

The above may not be what some people like to hear.
But in a recent interview, someone from Newsweek who had interviewed the president says Obama made the comment that people are hungry for complexity and explanation.

Folks, think about the campaigns you worked on in recent years. How many of those candidates won using talking points and listening to the advice of consultants over the wisdom of ordinary folks? How many thought slick ads would compensate for outreach to voters in person?

I think it would be wonderful if Kitzhaber ran for Gov. If someone disagrees with me, that is their right.

Yes! If he were Gov this session we would have had real leadership on health care reform from the executive branch. There is still much work to be done next session even with the reform measures that will likely move this session.

Health care reform advocates need a strong leader who will push measures through and make the case to the public. Frankly, Gov K was lacking in that front. We may accomplish a lot this session on health care but imagine what we could have done this session with a vocal exec.

Voted for the man in the past and would vote for him again.

This time instead of being thwarted by the GOP legislative leadership, he'll be thwarted by the state being broke.

The real issue is this, however: could Kitzhaber find Kulongoski's undisclosed hiding place in order to get the keys to the governor's mansion?

Heard him today at the City Club. One of the most forward thinking people in Oregon (possibly the USA). His key question was: what are the objectives we are trying to achieve? Once objectives are established, create the optimal program. PERFECT APPROACH!

I would be absolutely shocked if he did not run, based on what I've been hearing from my friends at the capitol.

You can listen to the speech here

"Folks, think about the campaigns you worked on in recent years. How many of those candidates won using talking points and listening to the advice of consultants over the wisdom of ordinary folks? How many thought slick ads would compensate for outreach to voters in person?"

Those talking points and advice from campaign consultants sure as hell didn't do Gore or Kerry any good. As for Kitzhaber running again, to repeat a previous bumper sticker, "Run, John, Run."

As for LT's scale, if Kulongoski rates a 5 then Kitzhaber has to be at least a 10.

I can tell you this from my past experience with Kitzhaber, he'd never sign or support the travesty of a transportation package moving through the Legislature right now.

Ugh! Doesn't he do this every few years? Starts rumors, whispers, tries to cultivate intrigue around himself, his political aspirations and this "will he or won't he?" question, and then he backs off and say no. Frankly, it feels like a tease. There are reasons he was passed over by the Obama administration. Do you think Obama didn't know who he was? Gen Xer Bus Project types are the only people who still care about him. Barely anyone under 30 and few recent transplants even know who he is. In my experience, Kitzhaber likes to play games and stroke his own ego. Oregon deserves something more.

After the current Democratic mistake I would welcome him back. I just hope he makes a quick decision

As a just-over-30 transplant, I'd rather not see reruns.

As a 26-year-old native Oregonian, I'd love to see Kitzhaber back.

"Isn't it someone else's turn?"

I dare anyone to campaign for their favorite candidate by saying it is their "turn". I'm guessing there were some Hillary Clinton supporters with that attitude. How well did it work for them?

I was involved in a primary campaign more than a decade and a half ago where this subject came up.

In the previous election, few thought the incumbent could be defeated, but there were candidates who ran in a contested primary and one was nominated. That nominee did better in the primary than anyone expected, regardless of having a very uphill campaign.

But the next election came around and an office holder who couldn't have been bothered to get involved in the previous election decided it was his "turn". It was a very nasty campaign, the office holder who thought it was his "turn" won the primary by a 3 digit margin, and never reached out to those who were not primary supporters. As a result, the incumbent won.

I like Dr. John Kitzhaber, and would very likely campaign for him if he runs (although life is unpredicatable and I might not have the time to do that dep. on my own life).

If anyone thinks it is someone else's "turn", then by all means campaign for that person. Make sure that person has a strong grass roots network and doesn't just rely on paid ads. Make sure that candidate can appear in town hall settings and answer questions ( the way Wyden does) and engage in debates. And my the best person win.

But I will tell you right now--if someone tries to peer pressure me into "Kitzhaber had his chance--you are supposed to vote for our candidate whose turn it is", I WILL find a way to campaign for Kitzhaber if he runs, and tell everyone I meet that the "someone else's turn " crowd has no right to expect my vote. Out in the real world, the ordinary folks who are the bulk of the electorate don't see things the same way that insiders do.

And Carl, do you know that Kulongoski would have made more than one joint appearance with Kitzhaber had he run? And do you really believe no candidate has the right to decide for themsselves what year they run for office?

Maybe it is because I grew up a politician's grandchild, but that kind of statement bothers me. Politicians do have the right to make their own decisions and live with them!

Kitzhaber sounds like he is 80% ready to run. I thought it was telling in The Oregonian article a day or two ago that Steve Novick, who thus far has been an all but announced candidiate, said he won't run if Kitz does. No one I talk to thinks that DeFazio will run because of his seniority in congress, although he could surprise us. Many were surprised in '01 that Kulongoski gave up his court seat to make another run for gov.

Come on back, Dr. John.

I think he's for real this time. The man is in.

Golpe--as a "transplant", did you live in Oregon when Kitzhaber was Sen. President or Gov.?
Are you saying that public figure with such a fan base (in one poll 49% of the sample and 63% of the Democrats in the sample) that only someone who has never run for Gov. before should run? That lets out not only Kitzhaber, Mannix, Saxton, Jim Hill, (well known names) but also Jason Atkinson.

Exactly who do you believe should run? Or is this just a "principle of the thing" statement that has no relation to who might actually run?

Grant, thanks for this: "... thought it was telling in The Oregonian article a day or two ago that Steve Novick, who thus far has been an all but announced candidiate, said he won't run if Kitz does". I had missed that.

I believe Steve Novick is a very bright guy who should get elected to lower office before running for Gov. If he does that and hones his grass roots skills and the ability to talk to audiences around the state the way Wyden does, he could be an excellent candidate in the future.

I really like what Kitzhaber said (heard it on the radio tonight) about education and health care.

Golpe, who do you see as a potential Gov. candidate who can speak as intelligently on those issues? Or are you just being anti-Kitzhaber without being FOR anyone?

Of course he should run. He did everything he could to decimate rural Oregon in his first terms. Given another eight years, he can finish off rural areas for good.

I've been expecting him to run for two years now, ever since I tried to talk him into running for the U.S. Senate and he said no way, but he did volunteer on his own that he was thinking about the Governorship instead.

It looks like that is coming true.

"I like Governor Kitzhaber. And we do need a transformational governor. If he runs, I may support and vote for him. But he is not all that I want. I think the Democrats have a strong bench, lots of them younger with a fresher view of the world. Maybe one of them can be transformational, too. "

Dave, who exactly on that "strong bench" is talking about ways to accomplish goals, not just the goals themselves? Who is talking about how education and health care are related? Who is talking about the need to educate students as the goal and things like class size as a means to an end, not the end in itself?

I have been unhappy at the number of otherwise smart legislators this year who too often fall back on "that's the way the system works" or something like that.

I loved the Kitzhaber speech at Portland City Club. A totally new view of things. It can't hurt to have someone from the outside asking inconvenient questions, and if another candidate has better ideas, that candidate will win the primary and the general election. And btw, I was born some months before John Kitzhaber and I am tired of everyone in my generation being lumped together. How would anyone here like to be compared to everyone else born within a couple years of their birth?

http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2009/05/kitahber_ive_definitely_learne.html

is the Mapes column about what Kitzhaber has learned and what he would do differently.

Who else in politics is talking about what they have learned in recent years?

No governor is perfect--McCall was the closest to that and Barbara Roberts was underrated given all the problems she faced, not the least of which was Measure 5.

I think some day Westlund would be an excellent candidate for Gov., but right now I believe we need him as State Treasurer.

Who on the "bench" do you support, Dave or Carla? Is that person as outspoken as Kitzhaber and as comfortable answering audience questions?

What part of the City Club speech did either of you disagree with?

From his days in the State Senate, Kitzhaber has been willing to discuss substance in ways others don't. Sen. Pres. Kitzhaber and Speaker Katz used to have joint press conferences on a regular basis. Can you imagine that happening now or any time in the last decade or so?

PLEASE DEAR GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Does anyone remember the 8 years of Kitzhaber's "leadership?" Yeah me either.
Very reminiscent of the current Governor who has a wonderful plan for changing the tax structure which he will reveal the second the legislature is adjourned. JK did the same with health coverage here and essentially walked away from the political battles in Salem twice - noting the state was ungovernable.

What exactly are supporters nostalgic for from his eight years in office? Specifics please, cause my memory is of a whole lot of nothing!

North Coast --- I have a pen pal who was a Republican legislator when Kitzhaber was Gov.

He finally admitted to me that there were Republicans who passed bills they knew Kitzhaber wouldn't like, just to make him veto those laws. Then made fun of him as Dr. No. The politics of polarization really did great things for Oregon, didn't it?

I don't recall Gov. Ted ever publicly standing up to Karen Minnis.

I do recall Kitzhaber standing up to Republicans. The State Senate was 20-10 Republican (reminder things can change from current circumstances). Sen. President and Majority Leader made a big deal of "the Gov. won't even talk to us about this bill!".

So Gov. Kitzhaber's office released his communication with the Senate leaders. He made the correspondence publicly available incl. copies in the Gov. reception area of the capitol. The letter basically said "If you wish me to sign this bill, it will need to have the following components, and if it doesn't, I won't sign the bill."

Their bluff having been called, the Sen. GOP majority leadership had to admit he had contacted him, just not said what they wanted him to say. Not the same as never having contacted him.

North Coast--same question for you that I have for others. Who is your favored Gov. candidate? "Not Kitzhaber" doesn't answer that question.

Kitzhaber, Novick, or Bradbury It doesn't matter. I like them all. But before casting your ballot, make damn sure that whoever we nominate can beat Walden. If you are disappointed in the transportation bill this biennium, just wait to see what you get with an elephant in Mahonia Hall.

Any of the three will beat Alley or Atkinson.

A recurring motif in Kitzhaber's renewed "interest" in running for governor again is that we now have a Democratic legislature, and, also, a Democrat in the White House.

In short, it looks like an easier job now.

While I voted for him twice, and I'm sympathetic to how frustrating his years were as governor with a Republican legislature, count me as troubled by two things: One, how Kitzhaber left the field in 2002; and two, his lack of participation since then in building the Democratic party and in building the Democratic majorities we now have in the state legislature.

His interest seems, frankly, a little opportunistic.

He pronounced Oregon "ungovernable" in 2002 and dropped out for a long long while, reminding me of how Ross Perot peevishly withdrew from the presidential race years ago.

Well, yes, arguing with Republicans is hard work. And it requires vigilance. But checking out is not an option.

Now that thousands of Democrats have worked hard for many years raising funds, recruiting candidates, riding the bus, blogging, and knocking on doors, Kitzhaber would sort of like to sit on top again.

I've helped out on numerous campaigns, and attended many events, and there's one former Democratic governor who's always been there, and done everything to help build the party, and her name ain't Kitzhaber. I've never seen him the last seven years.

If anything, his flirtation with running in 2006 as an independent should be remembered by Democrats, and questioned (though he's smart enough to have now tempered his remarks on Governor Kulongoski considerably....).

Will Kitzhaber run? If we guarantee him that the waters will part, that he is adored and will be anointed, that answer is a clear "yes".

Is that what's best for Oregon?

I was disappointed in his speech at the city club. He entirely ignored the biggest problem facing Oregon right now. It's about jobs. Anyone running in 2010 needs to talk about creating jobs in Oregon.

I don't think that's Kitzhaber's strength.

On the issues he did address -- systemic changes in health care, education, and energy -- few if any Democrats disagree with his goals, his ideals. We're all on a similar page. But Kitzhaber is very short on the details.

And on how to pay for anything. He basically dodged a real question on how to pay for things -- he was asked about how to get a stable revenue stream in Oregon, and offered nothing. That just doesn't cut it for me.

There are many other Democratic candidates out there that bring something to the table, in contrast to Kitzhaber. Bradbury gets the seriousness of climate change and the need to transition from oil and coal to renewables, and the jobs associated with that transition. Novick has fresher ideas than Kitzhaber, and brims with the energy and activism of those ideas (some of them are useful, some not so, and some could be transformational). DeFazio simply gets the average guy better than Kitzhaber, has a strong work ethic, and doesn't stand for crap.

So Kitzhaber doesn't automatically get my vote if he declares. He'll have to earn it, and I'll want to see some concrete plan of what he'll do come 2011, and how he'll pay for it.

And if he plays this game of "will he?" of "won't he?" for too long, sucking up media attention, and delaying the start up and fundraising of other potential campaigns, I'll have to conclude that Kitzhaber is much more about Kitzhaber than he is about helping Democrats succeed in the 2010 election.

Kari, thanks for the line "I get as annoyed as anyone by self-centered boomerism".

I really get annoyed at the idea that anyone born in the late 1940s is "self centered". Ron Kovic (of Born on the 4th of July fame)was born months before I was. One of the guys in my high school graduating class lost a leg in Vietnam. That has a lot to do with why I was a national Democratic convention delegate ---supporting the Senator who introduced a major piece of veterans legislation the same year Ron Kovic spoke to the Democratic National Convention.

Were my friends in high school and college who became teachers self-centered? 2 members of my high school graduating class became probation officers, one became a nurse.

Peter DeFazio is in this age group. Is he self-centered?

Dave, thanks for mentioning an actual issue, "Converting to a sustainable and low carbon emission economy/lifestyle is the big item on our current agenda."

Folks, I am more inclined to respect those like Dave who discuss actual issues than those who deal in generational stereotyping. If you don't like ethnic stereotyping, if you were unhappy at those who never served in the military saying Kerry was nothing but a " Mass. liberal", think very carefully about whether you want the Gov. debate to be about issues or only about soundbites and stereotypes.

It will be an open Gov. election next year. The object is to have the best candidate win the election. My friend Cathy was right when she said 95% or the voting population may not be that into all politics all the time, but they are the folks who decide elections. Same could be said about people who are not strong partisans--upwards of 25% as I understand it.

The time is now to decide which is more important: a) bashing someone who is not your ideal candidate, or b) finding a specific candidate to support and discussing that candidate's issues with your friends. It can be very useful to know people whose politics you don't always agree with. That's how I convinced someone who is a swing voter to go see Kitzhaber speak in 1994, and he ended up voting for him as someone who actually talked about substance.

Not everyone votes on a strict partisan basis.

A named candidate (Kitzhaber or anyone else) is going to beat "...I could say that for any number of candidates" any day of the week.

Pedro, loved your comment. And it is possible the Republicans will run someone completely different. Just as Kitzhaber was not ready to run for Gov. in the mid 1980s but ran a great campaign in 1994, so Jason Atkinson may not be Gov. material yet but may be in the future--having survived his injury, he is more serious this session.

"Back to Basics " is only a valid way to balance the Oregon budget if you believe keeping taxes low is more important than a sizeable ending fund balance. But Frank Morse is one of the co-sponsors, and I don't think someone like Novick could necessarily defeat the man from Linn County. Sen. Morse has more people skills than some would like to admit. And having served on both the Public Comm. on the Legislature AND the Revenue Restructuring Task Force, he earned a reputation as a workhorse.

Don't forget the possibility that there might be a wild card--someone we can not now imagine, perhaps even a 3rd party candidate. (How many people knew much about Obama in May 2007?)

BO bloggers will not decide the Gov. election. It will be the professionals who supported Kitzhaber in 1994 because Denny Smith was just (in the words of one friend) "just another slick politician", the young working parents around the state who may be too busy to pay attention until sometime next year, the folks E of the Cascades, the folks in Jackson County, over on the coast, and voters of all types in Washington, Clackamas, Marion, Polk, Yamhill counties as well as those in Multnomah and Lane counties who will all be part of the winning coalition of whoever is elected Gov.

I'm more interested in which office Kevin Mannix is going to run for next. Personally I'm hoping he'll move to Portland and run for mayor, help us put an adult in charge, restore traditional family values and all that. You know, just the way George W. Bush did in 2000.

Is it possible Kevin has finally learned the voters don't want him?

LT- Don't count on it.

Typical. Not one critic proposed an example of what would constitutes "deserves much better". Any what, exactly has the average voter done to deserve better?

I asked five random people, only stipulation being that they don't EVER participate in political debate. Every one said, "You know, he's a Jew". Leadership?!? Deserves better? The average citizen had to get off their fat ass and have enough mental content to BE led.

I think it would be great if he ran and won. Dave hit the nail on the head. My only hesitation is that I like the guy and think only a bastard should be under that microscope. The fact that the dyed in the wool hacks have reservations has me taking a serious look at his candidacy.

Prediction: if he runs, he will be massively tarred by out of state interests. Think about it. Health care, medical marijuana, death with dignity, environmental pollution...they are all health issues! He can rock the boat in any debate by simply saying, "that's a bunch of party line non-sense, I know, I'm a physician". That is why the current, status quo administration in D.C. will stab him in the back. That's why they tried to get him at Human Services. D.C. BS could be anticipated to thwart him, but in Salem he can drive the tone of the debate. Once done, once sucessfully executed, the dithering loses its credibility.

Obama is obviously the least amount of change necessary for the current political climate. It's what we always get. Kitz don't serve in that army. Speaking of which, BHO won't have us out of Iraq by 2010, contrary to all promises. You think Gov. Kitz will tow the line, like Teddy Bear has, with the Guard? That's another reason he needs to watch for the knife in the back. I think most the hesitation among those here, that voted for him last time, is a matter of not wanting to get to chummy with the guy they might have to waste, at the behest of the national committee.

He should really put the cat amongst the pigeons and run without party affiliation. The right are so feckless at the moment, it's actually practical. (And to know the regulars that I was referring to, watch the reactions to THAT statement).

Hey, if he napped less than 6 hours a day and had one original thought a month, he'd be better than Teddy.

Scott, it is only a hunch. But unlike most people, I've known Kevin Mannix for roughly a quarter century--or, as I like to joke, "back when he made sense". There was a time when he was the only Democratic legislator to regularly attend local party meetings---people might have disagreed with him, but at least he showed up. And at times people argued with him.

Then he became a Republican, and one young man I knew saw he had won the Gov. primary . This young man worked in retail in Salem and thus like many others in Salem knew public figures as customers. "If those are the choices (in 2002 general election), then I know I am voting for Ted, not Kevin" even though he had not voted in the Democratic primary.

The hunch I have has to do with Oregon's birthday party back in Feb. when there was such a crowd at the state capitol. I spotted Kevin and his wife, but they might as well have just been a married couple of a certain age ---no one seemed to recognize them, no one stopped him to talk, etc.

Speaking as someone who is close to Kevin's age (I think he's a few years younger) it is just possible that the nasty 5th Dist. primary (that is how many losses in a row, now?) was kind of a last straw moment.

I've come to the "life is too short" point where I no longer care about certain things anymore--no longer a worthwhile use of my time (3 funerals for old friends last summer had a lot to do with that). You could be right, Scott, but I wouldn't bet money on it. To the best of my knowledge, Kevin's been involved in politics in one way or another for at least 35 years. It was a major "course correction" when he left the legislature to run for AG, then again when he became a Republican. I know he didn't make many friends as GOP state party chair. Maybe there is another course correction going on in his life--who knows?

Posted by: Jobs, Dr. John? And a plan...? | May 30, 2009 11:34:02 AM

OK, what issues should be discussed and who do you believe should run for Gov.?

Dave Porter is serious enough to name both issues and candidates for the next Gov. election.

It is very easy to bash people you don't like. Does that elect anyone, or isn't that the point?

Seems to me that one lesson which should have been learned in 2008 is that someone who impressed people, inspires people, stands up in front of a town hall meeting and answers questions deserves to be taken seriously as a candidate.

But "sucking up media attention, and delaying the start up and fundraising of other potential campaigns" ignores the fact that smart campaigns begin when potential candidates talk to their friends about the possibility of running, and discuss with friends and with experts in various fields what issues they would spotlight if they ran.

Bob Packwood once said he decided to take on Wayne Morse when he came to believe it was a longshot (known if long odds) rather than a gamble (unknown odds). It doesn't cost money to think things through like that, and a serious candidate shouldn't worry about someone else getting publicity while the serious exploratory process is being thought through.

Think back to Steve Novick's beer ad. He was talking about various issues while opening the guy's beer bottle. Suppose instead of that attention grabber, Steve had done an ad where he said something about each of those issues (no, I don't remember what they were). Might he have had a better result?

I remember a 1990 ad for a candidate against Mark Hatfield which began, "Like many of you, I voted for Mark Hatfield in the past. Let me tell you why I am running against him this time." and then went on to give reasons.

Recently I discovered an old tape with a 1992 Clinton-Gore ad. In 30 seconds it made statements about 4 or 5 issues.

It doesn't take money to come up with ideas for such intelligent ads, it takes THOUGHT. Is it possible there are people here who favor candidates who want to put more emphasis on fundraising and campaign tactics than on thoughtful approaches to issues?

I come from the old grass roots tradition where thought and people skills are more important than fundraising and consultant-driven campaigns. I'd like to see a thoughtful candidate for Gov. next year. If anyone here complaining about the publicity a former Gov. has gotten because his official picture was hung within days of his speech to the Portland City Club really has an alternative candidate for Gov., let's hear some facts about why this other candidate would be such a good Governor.

How would that candidate deal with the situation in Carla's Penny Lane post?

How would that candidate respond to this from BO's Crook County contributor ?

Highway Robbery: Exurbs win, Portland loses (and pays double) guest column

Posted by: Steve Bucknum | May 30, 2009 11:51:04 AM

1. If the food and products we grow and make in rural Oregon don't get to market, then the Port of Oregon (Portland) will not have jobs and money. It takes roads to get stuff to Oregon's Port. Therefore, it is only fair that the roads that subsidise the Portland metro region by being their supply route should be in part paid for by the Portland metro region. Roads don't just favor the people that live by them, but in fact favor the people at the end of them. All roads in Oregon lead to Portland, and Portland would not exist as it does without them. <<<

If the only message is that someone doesn't like Kitzhaber, that point has been made clear.

But what is your alternative? Or are those who bash Kitzhaber once again (as has been true over a quarter of a century) proving my friend Julie's wisdom about people who attack but don't offer positive solutions,

"When they act like that, you know they know they are losing"?

I happen to think Steve Novick is very bright but his Senate campaign could have used some grass roots "street smarts" and more thought before the campaign got off the ground. For that, I was called a "Merkleyite" and worse---and then a dear friend phoned me and said he loved everything I said on the subject and to keep up the good work.

The Merkley bumper sticker is still on my car--obviously that negativity didn't work on me.

If anyone can show me a Gov. candidate whose approach to issues is something I can support (asking for my support, not telling me all good people agree on something), who I find inspirational, common sense, willing to answer questions, I will look seriously at that candidate.

But "Kitzhaber is bad, someone else should be running" will not get my support, no matter what anyone says. So don't even try.

If you don't like Kitzhaber, what is your alternative? I have no use for the folks who are incapable of stating the affirmative, but by golly they can tell us what they don't like.

I'd vote for The Kitz again in a heartbeat. Imagine what he could do now that the legislature is actually friendly to Democratic leaders!

I just hope I don't have to choose between him and The Faz in a primary. That would be an agonizing decision to make.

Yes! On many levels this would be great. There'd be NO on the job training in the midst of a crisis; tactful consensus building; increased national stature on the health reform front; a state-wide perspective balancing environmental protection and economic development. Oftentimes, the transition in the governor's office results in immediately stopping all policy direction or complete reversals, followed by a tedious rebuilding to arrive at similar point near the end of the term. He's stayed connected and focused, demonstrated interest in issues, rather than his ego or legacy. This reflects favorably on his motivation for running.
I am certain there will be twists and turns up to the filing deadline. Regardless, it's great that Oregonians have talent such as Dr. K.'s to consider as opposed to the choices that other states face.

LT -- you ask me what issues should be discussed:

Jobs.

Kitzhaber said nothing about how to create jobs. About how to address our economic mess. He should try that city club speech in front of a crowd of unemployed Oregonians worried about foreclosure.

At this stage, it's a good possibility all other issues will be secondary to jobs in 2010.

I can't jump on the bandwagon for Kitzhaber right now because he doesn't address how to grow desirable business in Oregon, and he has no plan I'm aware of to stabilize our revenue stream and make it possible to pursue his long-term idealistic goals.

I'm also less than enthused about Kitzhaber because he had little to do with building the Democratic majorities in the Oregon legislature.

From my experience and observation of Oregon politics, the route to enacting the agenda on health, education, and energy that Kitzhaber wants runs through a legislature with significant majorities of Democrats over the course of numerous legislative sessions. I really don't see any other route.

Since Kitzhaber left in 2002, lots of folks worked tirelessly, cycle after cycle, to get those majorities -- the bus project, Jeff Merkley as house minority leader, the netroots community here at Blue Oregon, leaders like Barbara Roberts who show up all the time to help elect fellow Dems, to name a few.

Kitzhaber was largely absent. In fact, in 2006, he flirted with running as an independent for governor.

In short, as a party and coalition builder, his recent marks are rather low.

That's admittedly partisan. I'm a Democrat. The values and agenda I want by and large find their representation through elected Democrats, and the more of them, the better.

Look at the U.S. Senate -- if Al Franken (D-Minn) gets seated -- a caucus of 60 there may actually get something substantial done. But if too many folks here in Oregon had despaired and given Gordon Smith a pass, we'd be looking at 59. But we did our part, and Merkley makes 60.

I'm looking for a leader in Oregon we can rely on cycle after cycle to fight for Democratic values, and, I'm sorry to say, Kitzhaber has come up short.

LT - who would I support for governor? Peter Defazio, Steve Novick, Kate Brown, Brad Avakian, Earl Blumenhauer, probably many others.

John had his opportunity - time for something new.

Jeff Merkley was a specific candidate--just like Kitzhaber is.

Exactly how did Jeff Merkley talk about jobs or Democratic values in a way Kitzhaber has not in your opinion?

Exactly how do you think a Gov. creates jobs other than Atiyeh going to Asia and elsewhere on trade missions, this year's stimulus package, Gov. Kulongoski in the last recession bringing Amy's Kitchen to Jackson County, or this in today's Oregonian?

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/05/a_good_health_care_deal_for_or.html

Legislative approval of the plan is no sure thing. If it passes, though, it will spark an unprecedented flow of federal cash into Oregon's tattered health care system. There's no way that wouldn't help expand coverage, improve health care and improve cost-control in the state.

Legislative analysts say the infusion would stimulate the economy, too. They estimate the provider tax would create 2,100 jobs and the insurers' tax would create 1,500. <<

I worked on a campaign in the early 1980s recession where the child of a WPA worker talked about the Job Training Partnership Act and how it should be implemented through community colleges. The local comm. college has a number of programs including one where the Center For Business and Industry --Customized Training Program works with specific employers in a training facility. If a current or new local employer needs a specified number of people trained in a specific skill, they will find trainers who know that specific skill and hire them to train the new workforce.

So what exactly do you want a Gov. candidate to do? Say all of the above?

What exactly are "Democratic values" and does every registered Democrat believe in them? I ask because when I was on the Dem. state central comm. there were heated debates over just such questions.

I went to a legislative town hall meeting recently. I liven in an area represented by Republicans. They had no idea on how to stimultate jobs--it wasn't the tax code alone, it might have to do with the business climate or the decisions of out of state owners of businesses.

There is a fascinating story in the Sunday Oregonian today on whether the former GI Joes really had to close so suddenly, or whether it was treated poorly by creditors and that is why the shutdown happened.

Byron Dorgan wrote a book about trade stealing jobs titled "Take This Job and Ship It". Is that what you want a Gov. candidate to do--quote from that book?

Or is there something in Sen. Dorgan's voting background you don't like?

We were driving S. on I-5 today. The Woodburn Outlet Mall parking lot was packed. Obviously there are people working in the mall (I see want ads for stores there on a regular basis) and people with enough income to shop there.

Dave---an old friend at a party today was talking about someday wanting to see Max Williams run for Gov.

That is someone of a younger generation, and someone that folks who recall what Republicans used to be when McCall, Atiyeh, and other common sense Republicans were politically active.

How does that factor in to your intelligent remarks above?

TJ, that's not what I saw in Marion County. One friend in Polk Co. was supporting Steve, but was more open to debate on the campaign than you.

I saw Merkley at a town hall style meeting. Often such events take more thought, volunteer time, and logistics than money (room rent or an organization lending space would be the major cost). It was a great opportunity to ask Jeff questions and listen to his answers. Some people there appreciated his work in the legislature and said things like "Jeff, really loved what you did on the issue of ... in the legislature and have this question for you----.
Money doesn't answer such questions.

Maybe those sorts of events happened with Steve in private homes, but you are wrong to believe it was money alone which won the primary for Merkley. At the beginning (regardless of what anyone said here) I was agnostic on the Sen. primary--not really impressed with either candidate (have a Sap with Tester vs. Stand Strong with Steve were not appealing) as opposed to some past statewide elections esp. Senate.

However, Merkley seemed to want my vote, while the Novick folks had the attitude "Novick is the one you are supposed to support". Sorry, I'm not the only one here who would have tuned out Novick ads had he had the funds to run them every hour on the hour. I don't buy the money excuse--that may have been true of May 1996 when Bruggere had more money than substance. But talking to one's friends about which Sen. candidate is better is not something required to be reported on an FEC report.

When I worked on a statewide campaign some decades ago (which won a primary although everyone thought we would lose) I knew the names of the county coordinators in many counties. How many counties in Oregon had Novick county coordinators outside of the counties Steve carried? How many volunteers outside the Portland area did you speak with yourself, TJ? Or were you too busy blogging to have time for such personal interaction?

I can think of positive reasons to vote for Kitzhaber or for DeFazio for Gov. I would have to see a different campaign than 2008 before I would consider voting Novick for statewide office before he was elected to a lower office.

A neighbor could never understand what opening a beer bottle had to do with the US Senate. A friend thinks Max Williams should run for Gov. someday.

When I hear Steve or his supporters discussing how they would win over such voters, then I will believe he is serious about winning statewide. Until then, I believe he should get elected to lower office first (local, county, legislative, etc.) and get more experience.

Wholesale cigarettes

cheap cigarettes

Obama is certainly not an Xer, and virtually no prominent voices anywhere have said he is an Xer. By contrast, many influential voices have repeatedly said that Obama is part of Generation Jones, born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and Generation X. Google Generation Jones, and you'll see it’s gotten a ton of media attention, and many top commentators from many top publications and networks (Washington Post, Time magazine, NBC, Newsweek, ABC, etc.) specifically use this term to describe Obama.

It is important to distinguish between the post-WWII demographic boom in births vs. the cultural generations born during that era. Generations are a function of the common formative experiences of its members, not the fertility rates of its parents. Many experts now believe it breaks down this way:

DEMOGRAPHIC boom in babies: 1946-1964 Baby Boom GENERATION: 1942-1953 Generation Jones: 1954-1965 Generation X: 1966-1978

Here's a 5 minute video with over 20 top political figures discussing the existence and importance of GenJones: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ta_Du5K0jk

Here is an op-ed about Obama as the first GenJones President in USA TODAY: http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20090127/column27_st.art.htm

To agree with Jobs and Plans? One of the reasons I do not like Kitzhaber as a gubernatorial candidate is that when I knew him (04-06), I was working as an employment contractor for DHS, essentially welfare to work with an indirect relationship to the displaced workers program. Whenever I tried to talk to him about my work, it was met with wry cheeky comments about DHS. I got the feeling the topic simply wasn't flashy enough to engage with. He preferred to talk about his healthcare plans or his environmental plans. He did not appear remotely interested in job creation or fighting poverty, which are two of Oregon's biggest challenges right now. (along with education and tax restructuring) In the end, he struck me as an elitist. Kari's term "self centered boomer" actually fits. I don't know who to offer you as an alternative, but there has got to be somebody out there who can respond to the serious situations that Oregon faces today.

Additionally, I agree with the person above who said this is a "safe to go back in the water" syndrome. Now that the legislature is Democratic, it would be easier for any Democratic governor to "lead." But what happens if that changes over the next 4 years, or if Obama loses in 2012? Will Kitzhaber dig in and try to work across the aisle or will he throw up his hands once again and declare the political system FUBARd?

To agree with Jobs and Plans? One of the reasons I do not like Kitzhaber as a gubernatorial candidate is that when I knew him (04-06), I was working as an employment contractor for DHS, essentially welfare to work with an indirect relationship to the displaced workers program. Whenever I tried to talk to him about my work, it was met with wry cheeky comments about DHS. I got the feeling the topic simply wasn't flashy enough to engage with. He preferred to talk about his healthcare plans or his environmental plans. He did not appear remotely interested in job creation or fighting poverty, which are two of Oregon's biggest challenges right now. (along with education and tax restructuring) In the end, he struck me as an elitist. Kari's term "self centered boomer" actually fits. I don't know who to offer you as an alternative, but there has got to be somebody out there who can respond to the serious situations that Oregon faces today.

Additionally, I agree with the person above who said this is a "safe to go back in the water" syndrome. Now that the legislature is Democratic, it would be easier for any Democratic governor to "lead." But what happens if that changes over the next 4 years, or if Obama loses in 2012? Will Kitzhaber dig in and try to work across the aisle or will he throw up his hands once again and declare the political system FUBARd?