"My ponderings of late have tended to dwell on the perceived schism between Oregonians who reside in the rural areas of our state vs their urban brethren."

A frequent problem with these them-and-us and the them-and-them debates is that commentators tend to pigeonhole people into little compartments. Instead of seeing things as black and white we need more to recognize gray is more accurate.

"Urban Oregonians are often emotional and idealistic about nature and how rural communities should look and function. "

And, just as often urban Oregonians are the opposite not giving a damn about nature.

In agreement with Bill, perhaps it is a natural progression of your ponderings, but it seems to be an unfounded charge to say that she wants to “create” and then “use the division to push fear and misunderstanding”. I don’t see it.

I’m not sure what words may have worked better for you to read in this case, but how exactly (in a non-partisan way) do you identify the problem of the division? Seems like she just identifies it and suggests that both sides be more aware of it in their actions.

Interestingly, your message may be intended to lessen divide between the rural and urban, but it seems likely to stoke its own divisions by attaching motivations to action and discrediting the message-bearer.

Carla wrote: The truth of course is that there's a great deal of effort being put into locating and harnessing renewable energy resources all over the state. These efforts are advocated by Oregonians from both rural and urban areas. We all need renewable energy. We all need jobs. We all see the need for Oregon continue to push to the forefront on this issue.

The CPI piece you find so offensive references 'renewable resources' and 'natural resource products' - not just the 'renewable energy resources' so much in the mind of urban-dwellers these days...

So your 'truth according to Carla' here seems to only extend as far as what is of most particular benefit/interest to Carla.

"Urban Oregonians are often emotional and idealistic about nature and how rural communities should look and function."

What are we emotional about? Define idealistic. How often do we truly get emotional and idealistic? Is 55% of the time? 80%? And how should rural communities look and function? I don't remember reading about this in my liberal manifesto they passed out on election day.

And does anyone really give a rip what the CPI publishes?

Oh Carla, you just make it up as you go don't you?

You know it's not always good idea tto think out loud.

Carla says "As I noted in the piece, it's subtle..but obvious".

Only when you reword it. But that what you do. Dream up some caricture of the real person or the real words and start casting stones.

It could possibly be that Karla Kay Edwards of Cascade Policy Institute meant exactly what she actually wrote and not your "researched" interpretation.

But you don't like her, and it's not subtle.

Political commentary should be based on facts. Unfortunately, the preponderance of what purports to be political discourse is fiction tailored to advance the author's ideology. This helps to explain the more extreme claptrap polluting the media and the blogsphere just now with such contradictions as referring to single-payer/public option health plans as socialistic and their promoters as fascists.

Carla, this is the 3rd or 4th such piece that you've written on the subject of the urban - rural divide. This is the second time that you've tried to blame "outside agitators" for this divide. Clearly you just don't get it Carla. The divide DOES EXIST because many liberal urban dwellers insist on deciding what is best for the rest of the state. They want to dictate issues to the rural communities.

Examples could be the cougar hunting issues, forestry and logging activities, land use regulations and even the Metolius, your pet project. We do resent urban dwellers dictating to us, we do wish that they would just live where they do, visit our areas, spend their money and then leave us the hell alone.

I've said it before, this is not a Portland centric issue. This is an issue that occurs in many states with limited population and a few population centers. Kentucky outside of Louisville and Jefferson County detests this area dictating to them, Seattle and King county are anethma to the rich farming areas of eastern Washington. The Carolinas try their best to ignore Columbia and Charlotte.

Careful boys. Ya'll are doing such a grand job of piling on here ol' Joe White has found it completely unnecessary to raise a single digit to the keyboard this day! Yeesh.

Yes, but you will notice that we are keeping vaginas out of the discussion ;-)

Laughed so hard I quacked, Kurt. Hah.

:),.,. good for you. Ack.

Carla, you're just pissed because Karla Kay Edwards used one of the democRATS oldest tricks on you.

Divide and Conquer is exactly how the democRAT party works:

Rich against Poor Straight vs. gay blacks vs. white . . victim vs. non-victim employed vs. unemployed

One group is played against another. You see this all the time. The democRAT party has never been about bridging the differences between groups and bringing people together. It's about the hate and intolerance of religion, family, American culture, capitialism, small businesses, borders, guns, etc.

It's laughable to see this same tactic, that you people perfected, used against you.

Carla, Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden are no more representative of rural Oregon outside the I-5 corridor between Eugene and Portland than I am representative of the Pearl District. The logging restrictions placed on the rest of Oregon by ultra left leaning city dwellers and some transplants to southern and eastern Oregon is not supported by the general population. The cougar hunting ban foisted upon the rest of Oregon by Lane and Multnomah counties has led to a dramatic rise in the cougar population.

We will continue to disagree on the Metolius, outsiders, mostly urban folks and their elected representatives claimed "some" in that area were not being heard and swooped in and userped the land planning process. Damn them if they try to do the same in southern Oregon.

Here is a little example of the urban hubris. Seattle led King county councilors decided without a vote to create a ferry district so that King county could take over the foot ferries from Vashon Island to Seattle. So EVERY property owner in King County pays an extra $25 - $75 each year in property taxes to support foot ferries for fewer than 1000 commuters living on Vashon and wanting to commute to Seattle.

In 1992 I bought my treasured 1956 Chris Craft Sedan with Flybridge. The floor in the cabin was plywood with the original green linoleum. I decided replace it with a floor to match the rear deck, which was douglas fir planks, caulked with Secaflex. Going to the lumber store I was SHOCKED to discover that solid mahogany, from the philippines presumably, was cheaper by quite a bit than lumber that may have originated from trees a hundred miles away.

The mahogany floor does look great, though. Thanks Democrats.

I did not find the quote you used to be divisive at all. It is a matter of fact that obstacles are put in the way of rural people in coming up with alternative energy. Your interpretation, probably accurate in context, did point to potential divisiveness. Divisiveness exists, and denial gets us nowhere.

I think rural and urban Oregon are united on renewable resources. For example, I see a great deal of interest in alternative vehicle fuels in rural Oregon. Last summer, when I conducted our Democratic candidate for US Congress around the Crook Co. fairgrounds, that was the subject that came up most often. I talked to a farmer experimenting with hydrogen fueled farm equipment at length. I talked with several people involved with solar power and wind power systems in use for their homes.

I’m sure Carla will think I’m whining. But I have a point.

My point is this: in the political reality of Oregon, those of us in the Democratic/progressive/left/liberal side of the spectrum have a choice. We can lecture rural people not to feel what they feel, not to believe what they believe, and not to be the way they are; or we can join rural people in their perspective, experience, and life history – and build the future of Oregon together. It is a political reality that most rural people in general do not currently identify themselves as “Democratic/progressive/left/liberal”. It is a political reality today that for most rural people the “Democratic/progressive/left/liberal” part of Oregon is seen as the “other” that lives in the Willamette Valley.

I (Steve Bucknum) have placed 19 posts on Blue Oregon starting in April of 2005 when I wrote about how the then proposed ban on studded tires played out east of the Cascades to August of 2008 when I wrote about the difference (as a Democrat) between the 2004 and the 2008 Crook County Fairs (improvement). In every post, a theme was to assist urban Oregonians to understand what was actually happening out here in this part of rural Oregon. Now, not every comment made on my posts were hostile, the majority in fact were either neutral or favorable. But a large number were hostile, argumentative, and worst were plainly of an attitude that I found unacceptable – as I will explain:

On the far right we find a nexus of attitudes that we have all seen in the summer of the “crazies”. The home schooling, church going, Bible thumping, government hating, anti-tax, gun toting, somewhat racist, generally ignorant, and clearly lacking civics education crowd we have seen on TV is the extreme right. In Crook County, those that vote make up roughly 40% of the total voters per my analysis of elections back to 2002.

Of the far left we find a nexus of attitudes too. These people have opinions ahead of facts, an urban supremacy attitude, a tendency to “make fun” of rural people (hicks, ignorant, etc.), tell rural people they shouldn’t live in rural areas assuming that rural people are spoiling the environment, are anti-gun and assume that all rural people are pro-gun, are pro-environment and assume that all rural people are anti-environment, are in favor of increased taxes and assume that all rural people are anti-tax, and assume most of all that all rural people lack the information that they have available by virtue of their urban living. Based upon Blue Oregon comments, it appears that this attitude is frequently found among younger people, reaching as high as 25 to30% of the younger people that comment on Blue Oregon. Urban Oregon has no standing to lecture rural Oregon until such unacceptable attitudes are routinely confronted and corrected.

Where is the middle? If Carla and others have a high priority to be “ONE OREGON” how do you get there? You just can’t start with denial like Carla. Yes, it is denial when you simply say that the conservative/Republicant/right wing types are using a strategy of creating divisions. They are simply using the divisions that exist. Really, this is like a 12 step program for progressives. Step One, admit you have a problem …

But unlike a 12 step program, we aren’t looking for a “higher power”. As I have frequently advised, we need to listen to rural people and address their problems, starting with believing that the problems exist. Yes, all of Oregon has problems with school funding, but the solutions for urban might not work in rural. This is a slow slog with no fast solutions. Sen. Wyden, and now Sen. Merkley have it right. You have to go to rural Oregon and listen. You have to go frequently. Both of our Senators visit every County once a year. That is all 36 Counties, the majority of which are east of the Cascades or south of Eugene.

To be credible, Carla should get out of Portland to write her posts. She should be interviewing the Chairs of the Curry County or Wheeler County Democratic Parties. She should be quoting the East Oregonian or Central Oregonian not the Cascade Policy Institute. She should go to some of the rural Counties and sit in on “Senator” day with either Wyden or Merkley. You might get bored hearing about roads and bridges, the details of Federal legislation about beef tagging, new requirements for irrigation districts/water allocation issues, or a thousand other details of life – but that is where life really happens, in the details and not the ideals.

Kurt Chapman writes:

"The divide DOES EXIST because ...."

and Carla responds:

"Do they? I heard this ad nauseum during the Metolius issue and found it to be completely and utterly false. Protections for the Metolius were driven by those who live in that rural area. The local government in Madras blew them off--so they went to the legislature for redress."

Carla, you are just plain wrong about this.

Yes, some local people were up in arms to protect the Metolius. They were not a majority, and they did not represent the "truth" to you. They told you something false that you bought into like a fish presented with a flashy lure.

There was nothing wrong with the Jefferson County Planning Commission process. To this day you fail to understand how the planning process actually works. It is not the fault of Jefferson County's Planning Commission whether or not the public pays any attention to a planning matter. All planning matters are published in the newspaper of record and are posted in advance of hearings in public places. If in fact something contrary to the law had happened in this regard, the County's lawyer would have had it thrown out, and started over. If not the County, then the LCDC would have thrown it out.

Carla, you have made the conclusion that the County Commission "blew off" the opponents of the Metolius several times. That is not possible. All persons are permitted to speak at Planning Commission hearings as a matter of Oregon law. There is no obligation that the Planning Commission has to be influenced by the testimony of those that oppose something. For example, people have opposed the development of subdivisions next to their property. But if the zoning is right, and all conditions are met by the applicant, then the Planning Commission has no basis to deny the subdivision.

Several years ago, the Jeld-Wen corporation went to the Oregon Legislature, and got a land use law passed that made it a requirement of all Counties to create a "map" that identified areas for destination resorts or make a decision not to have a "map". In Crook County we had an election and "removed" our map from the County Plan (see my prior Blue Oregon post on this here and here). Jefferson County, following the law, created a destination resort “map”. Once that was created, with public input, then when an application was made that met all the requirements – the Planning Commission can make restrictions, but cannot outright deny an application.

So, “blew off” opposition is not the reality. These local protestors have slandered the officials of Jefferson County for following the laws of the State of Oregon. The County followed the law step by step, as set up by the State, and then was over-ruled by the same State. This is a clear case of undermining local control.

These protestors that you listened to failed to protest at the proper time and place when the “map” was created, and failed to take the steps to remove the “map” once it was created. They made improper protests at the Planning Commission meeting as the Planning Commission cannot legislate, it can only work to decide if proposals met the laws and regulations or not. The County Commission can only deal with the appeal of a decision made by the Planning Commission in terms of it being done correctly – again it cannot change the law that the application is based upon.

Carla, you continue to engage in willful ignorance of the facts. There is no excuse.

Carla Axtman says,

"WE ARE ALL OREGONIANS. It's about time folks stop nursing these false perceptions, grow up and work together."

Good greif Carla. Who are you talking about?

You're the head of the BlueOregon divisive immature falsehoods and smear department.

I suspect you meant for Republicans to stop objecting, resisting and undermining your left wing movement.

Isn't that your idea of growing up and getting along?

You getting your way?

Richard: did you eat your Wheaties today? Play nice.

Dan - EVERYONE uses division. Everyone.

Don't kid yourself. You are all sucked into thinking a politician is not a politician, and a spin team will only spin if they are truly evil.

Goodness. Can you hear yourselves?

ALL of the tactics used by one have been used by the other. We are trying to climb OUT of that mire now!

Dan - "Straight vs. gay blacks vs. white...." these are not the domain of divisions used by the Dems... those are all constituencies of that Party.

Related of interest: ‘Rural Brain Drain’ Turns Small Towns Into Ghost Towns

Carla -

I never thought I'd write this on Blue Oregon.

You are a liar.

You have never laid out the Jefferson Co. process in a understandable way, always making vague references to a flawed process, but never getting into exactly what those flaws were.

You are a liar.

As a former Planning Commission member, I know exactly what the steps in the process of land use decisions are, and how the system works. It is obvious you do not. You have never once described what the opponents to the Metolius did or did not do at the mapping hearings, at the hearings on the specific proposals, or whether they testified at all.

In summary, you are a liar.

"As a former Planning Commission member, I know exactly what the steps in the process of land use decisions are, and how the system works."

Were you one of the many planning commission members throughout Oregon complying with the wishes of developers? The system appears to work that way.

Carla, I generally respect your writing and stand on issues; even when I disagree with them ala The Metolius. Please understand I'm trying to be constructive. When you ask about the Urban - Rural divide, which we all agree exists, but then argue with those of us out here in the rural areas you lose credibility.

I'll give you one example. Logging in Oregon is certainly something that has been affected by eastern urban interests as well as Portland/Eugene interests. The affected areas are on BOTH federal and state land. You asked for an example. i gave it but you want to argue the merits. Face it. Logging restrictions, many deemed unreasonable by rural communities exist primarily due to urban dwellers. Look at the initiatives a few years ago regarding proper forest harvest planning for state-owned forests as well.

If you want to begin to approach the divide that exists, don't argue with the rural interests who have personal and tangible reasons for believing that the divide exists. It shoudl be enough that the divide exists. As I stated previously, it isn't something unique to Oregon. Heck, just ask about anyone in western Canada about Montreal and you will get a familiar response.

Another example of what we in rural areas deem unwanted urban interference would be the bussed in protestors to Astoria today to spark the re-call election for Clatsop county Commissioners who voted in favor of the LNG terminal. While the people of Clatsop County certainly have a say, and a right, to voice an opinion over an LNG terminal; what right do folks from Portland and Eugene have to expect a voice in the matter? The urban centric Sierra Club is bringing in these city folk to tell Clatsop County what to do. Not Cool.

<h2>OK carla, I agree with you on Bush and the WMD's. On the Urban-Rural divide I disagree vehemently. We will need to agree to continue the discussion from opposite viewpoints. In the opinion of many the divide Does exist. The very fact that the mythical state of Jefferson flourishes proves that point.</h2>