Sorry, there IS no reason to watch Survivor.

It pains me to admit this, but I agree with Joe White!

Laura and Fran both did a great job at the LMC this past session. And, to Laura's credit, I visited with her many times during the session and could not have guessed her political affiliation or personal political philosophy. Being nonpartisan is a requirement for that particular job. Perhaps that stealth ability will help her on a show I've never watched and likely still will not. I wish her Godspeed.

Hey, this is off topic, but what is it with Democratic gubernatorial candidates and blue, button-down shirts. I see Kitz on the left and Bradbury on the right. Looks like they share a closet (although Kitz apparently took his photos slightly upstream from Bradbury). Aren't those shirts a bit cliche by this point?

There is not one, and never will be any, redeeming social significant reason to watch Survivor or any simular ubiquitous drivel of it's kind. If you do watch this program, you are either bored or inherently retarded.

Darrell -

Traditionally in public relations, light blue conveys a trustable, almost pious individual. (Think Mother Teresa.) Often, political wives will wear light blue standing behind their "still-powerful-in-a-dark-suit-and-red-tie" husbands during a mea culpa to imply their forgiveness.

During the 2008 AG primary, Kroger needed to overcome an experience and power issue, so he was constantly in dark suits. Macpherson, who needed to overcome his corporate attorney persona, was the one in the light blue shirts.

In the case of the two blog ads, I think that the added bonus is that many people own light blue button-up shirts and can say, "Hey, I have a shirt just like that! That means [Candidate] must be just like me and share my values!"

But I think that Kitzhaber, with a background darker than his head, gets an edge on "power," while Bradbury, with a background lighter than his head, gets an edge on "trustable."

(This is not to say that these are or are not actual characteristics of the candidates.)

But then, this IS off-topic. Maybe Kari can give us a thread where we can over-analyze candidates' clothing choices ad nauseum?

If Carla, Kanye West, Joe Wilson, and the guy who threw the shoe at Bush were all going to be there with her, I would force myself to watch.

I'm not a huge tv watcher, but I will come to Survivor's defense. I've enjoyed past seasons because it's all about situational game theory, which is fascinating. Contrived and edited, sure, but less so than most reality shows. And let's face it, it is REALLY hard to live in the wilderness with limited food and shelter for 39 days.

Also keep in mind that Survivor is produced by the same guy who used to do Eco-Challenge. If you've ever watched THAT awesome race, you'll understand that Survivor is just his (wildly successful) attempt to produce a related show for mainstream audiences. So lighten up on my pop culture already!

The term 'reality show' has always been a source of great humor.

No one acts the same with a camera in their face (or at their back, or in every room of their home) as they would without.

Laura was a delight to work with in the Lobby Message Center and I am truly excited for her opportunity on Survivor! We didn't always agree on issues, but she was always ready to help in any possible way she could. I will watch this show for the first time in a long time and I hope she goes all the way!!!

Good Luck Laura!!! Sending you all my best wishes!!!

The only reason I'm watching Survivor is because of Laura, who is a completely wonderful person in the capitol. She has barely been on so far. BUT there is a contestant who makes Machiavelli look touchy feely. He's a millionaire Texan posing as a firefighter from New Oreans. He even has a story about losing his dog in the flood. I have to admit...it is lots of fun--and a bit scary--to watch him manipulate everyone to do his bidding. But you have to keep in mind..this is a game and he is playing it.