That's kind of indicative of the attitude people accuse liberals of taking part in as a group. In order to get you to donate to this charity you have to be hurting someone in the process? Can we just...not...be this way...for once? Why is it that someone has to be a target of our disdain? This is not the kind of mending the democrat party or Oregonians in general need right now. My two Lincolns.

Ct Lostalgia's comments echo what is wrong in Washington, DC right now.

I'm in for 25 bucks.

Yes, by all means!

. One man vs. the Oregon progressive grassroots? ... And remember, this is key: Tell 'em you're a Democrat calling to match Bob Tiernan's donation.

You just won't accept that those aren't synonyms, will you? It's a good cause. I'll lie. At least I know I'm doing it.

Kari Chisholm posts: "So, folks, this is our chance: Donate to a worthy cause - and empty Bob Tiernan's wallet. All of us, combined, can surely put a little hurt on Tiernan's bankroll. One man vs. the Oregon progressive grassroots? We can do this."

Wow!

That's the first time I recall ever seeing such a worthy cause (and generous offer) being twisted into such a mean-spirited and vindictive attack.

If it was meant to be "tongue in cheek" or humorous, you missed the mark. Instead, you betray a spiteful nature.

Shame on you.

I am down for $50!

Howard: Are you going to donate?

Interesting Chris, and I respect your opinion too much to dismiss it outright, but the phrase "never look a gift horse in the mouth comes to mind".

OMG! I just noticed the URL line is gone. That's one way to deal with link spammers.

Startled me so much I didn't close the quote right!

Chuck U

In answer to your question: No. Were I to state on any public forum how much I contribute and to whom, it would come across as little more than self-aggrandizing, hollow or defensive.

Why do you ask?

Well, I'm sorry Kari, you seem like an otherwise kindly type of fellow, but I just see in the attitude and literal delivery of this article a certain stigmata that has attached itself to the progressive movement. That is to say, it is great to help people out, but it is better to help people out while injuring an opponent. Redistributive change is a great example. I guess my point is, why not just take him up on the noble challenge and do it with a little style--regardless of what your ulterior aims may be. That's all. And no, I won't ask you to prove your charitable donations, I totally believe you.

That's kind of a shame, Kari. I have always hoped in my heart there are things that R's and D's could come together and find common ground over. Maybe helping sick kids might be one of those...but you make it all about hurting Tiernan. You don't inspire your readers to give to help kids...you inspire them to hurt a Republican. Is that really what motivates Progressives?!? I can't believe that to be true. You should be ashamed. Man up and change the tone of your post. You have every other day and every other post to be a partisan asshole. I would expect this from Carla or someone who doesn't know how to act any other way...but you know that being decent doesn't mean being weak.

Howard,

That is one way to take respond to it to Chuck. Do you feel as if Chuck sounded self-aggrandizing, hollow or defensive? I think the original statement was ambiguous and he may have wanted to simply donate $50 to a worthy 501c3 organization.

"Donate to a worthy cause - and empty Bob Tiernan's wallet."

A perfect setup for Mr. Tiernan to illustrate yet another pickpocketing attempt by those pesky dems but I can't think of a much better reason in this case. Hat tip to Bob, Kari and all else who donate.

Chris Lowe commented: But if it was a dig at Ds, attempting to paint them as less personally charitable than Rs, that would be a different matter.

Well, I don't know if it was a dig... but if it was, appears there wouldn't be any 'attempting' about it.

I honestly am NOT trying to be critical, but to explain why I won't join you: I've always had a hard spot with Children's Miracle Network and Make-a-Wish and all the other groups that seem to spare no expense on children with grave diseases while, all the rest of the time, arguing that we can't possibly have universal access to health care for all children.

I think the proper response is that Republicans should give as much as possible to Make-a-Wish etc. but that Democrats and progressives should be giving to organizations working to make sure all kids (and their parents) can get the timely diagnoses and treatments that are so often the difference between a malady and a mortal illness.

Mr. Chisolm,

Nice to see that your desire to stick it to someone has motivated you to donate money to charity. Instead of thanking Bob Tiernen you make a dig. Very noble of you. I am new to BlueOregon; is this what it is all about?

I'm in for $50, and I totally disagree with apparent closet rightie ct lostaglia's premise. We're "hurting" zillionaires by asking them to contribute something back to the commons that created the wealth for them? Sorry, "redistribution" is a great thing. Manditory in the Old Testament (every 49 years). A badge of honor for NW Native Americans. And if you ain't about tax fairness then liberal, progressive and Democrat aren't in your philosophy. Giving to a good cause AND costing Tiernan is great. Thanks Kari for the heads up.

I had an opportunity to have a discussion with Bob about the condition of the Oregon Republican party and where he wants to take the party. http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/apple-ipad-tablet-review-where-to-buy-ipad-at-cheap-price-1825606.html

SORRY BUT IT IS NOT ON MY CHARITY LIST. I PREFER TO DONATE TO CHILDREN'S MIRICLE NETWORK

Any charity that would take Bob Tiernan's money doesn't need mine! Spend your money getting Democrats elected. If we get enough D's elected, there won't be a need for Make-A-Wish...we can cure the diseases instead of just treating the symptoms with trips to Disneyland. Let's keep our eye on the prize, people!

Herb commented: ...we can cure the diseases instead of just treating the symptoms with trips to Disneyland. Let's keep our eye on the prize, people!

Geesh... So now Democrats can heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, and drive out demons. Soon you'll be telling us the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Herb,

And after more Demorats are eleted higher taxes will accelerate the curing of diseases.

Bless you.

Herb Herb Herb. You really can't be helped.

Thanks Kari, for throwing the challenge out there. Nice to know we can have a little fun with politics while helping kids. And no, I don't think throwing 50 bucks over there in my name and posting it is "self aggrandizing". No one knows if this is all I ever give or how much more I give to particular causes. I am really not expecting a confetti parade, honest.

Fools! You're all fools!

Can't you see what Tiernan is doing - he is SINGLE HANDEDLY DEPLETING THE ENTIRE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF ALL OF IT'S DISPOSABLE INCOME!

That devious bastard.

Oh Kari, gasp.....you evil-doer! This is way worse than cutting vital public services in order to protect corporate profit. Shame on you.

Yeah and we all know all of the things you progressives demand are "vital public services".

As a Lake Oswegan I have to ask this-

Do you people NOT know Bob Tiernan?

Have you not heard of his self aggrandizing, spiteful ways?

Please donate.

Where did he get all this money from? He has stolen it from its' rightful owners...the people! You ought to be ashamed of yourself for asking people to accept corporate fascist money! Sounds like the Bush-Cheney cabal is alive and well!

Posted by: Richard | Feb 6, 2010 10:51:03 AM

Yeah and we all know all of the things you progressives demand are "vital public services".

YOU believe in all kinds of "vital public services" that I don't, Mr. Conservative! I wouldn't spend a dime on automobile based infrastructure and I would disband the Guard. Eliminate the tax credit for baby mongering.

Let's get real. Few want a return to the Wild West. It's a question of priorities. By painting it in simplistic terms of big v small gov, you completely sidestep the real decisions for a cheap sound bite. If you add up expenditures on extreme liberals top 10 list and do the same with the far right, I would bet that you far outspend. If your rhetoric were accurate, you'd only have like three things you could put on the list. Look at our deficit. Between Clinton and 2008, that huge bit of irresponsible spending was for what conservatives call "essential services". The war in the Gulf has been of no service to anyone except neocons, and maybe, someday, big oil.

Actually, that would fit your postings better than "Richard". "Cheap Sound Bite".

"That's one ugly photograph"

That's Tiernan's happy face!

Think of it as Bob's turn in the dunk tank.

He may finally have found a seat for which he's the perfect candidate.

Posted by: Jeff | Feb 7, 2010 2:47:23 PM "That's one ugly photograph"

That's Tiernan's happy face!

You're talking to a goddamned Jamaican link spammer that will never look back here. Yeah, I know it's just a pretense. Classic BO "dialog".

Lascells Broderick Ocho Rios, St Ann JAMAICA Email : [email protected] Phone : 8764564872

Posted by: Richard | Feb 6, 2010 7:27:12 AM

Herb,

And after more Demorats are eleted higher taxes will accelerate the curing of diseases.

Ameliorating the symptoms is about the best one can hope for when the patient is suffering from terminal Reaganomics.

Posted by: Roy McAvoy | Feb 6, 2010 8:35:58 AM

Herb Herb Herb.

Got that right.

I thought being progressive was about not donating to charity, it was about making other people pay their "fair share"?

Posted by: Galen | Feb 9, 2010 10:00:27 AM

I thought being progressive was about not donating to charity, it was about making other people pay their "fair share"?

If this is where you look for your example of "progressive", then, a) stop listening to Rush's definitions, and b) realize that Dems have very little to do with progressive politics.

Hey, right wing trolls, every time you call these folks progressive- even to insult them- you help their argument. For them, progressive is what you say because they don't want to be made fun of in a Rushie diatribe on liberals. Go back to calling them liberals. Why let them change the rules of the game? There progressive from all across the spectrum. Letting tepid Dems make it mean "not what Rush sez" is pandering to them.

Feckless attacking inept.

"Go back to calling them liberals. Why let them change the rules of the game?"

The reason I do not call the liberals is often they are not. Liberal in the original sense is someone who wants liberty. You cannot implement progressive policy and facilitate liberty. They are not liberals, they are statists. Big difference. Jefferson was a liberal. Most people who are called liberals today do a disservice to the word. If you do not understand what Liberty is as most Americans both Rep and Dems seem not to anymore, look it up in a dictionary.

You cannot implement progressive policy and facilitate liberty.

So, are the plethora of countries, like the Netherlands, that have attempted to do so, less progressive or less free? Having lived in both I can tell you that they are much more progressive, and what we call free they would call custodial supervision.

Thanks for the explanation, though. Clears up the disconnect in right wing logic for me. It's an ancient argument. So, do you own a dog? Take the dog to the dog park? I ask because you get the same two attitudes with pets. Some look at their dog and think that teaching him discipline and creating a behavioral framework for the dog is taking away the dog's freedom and making it a ready to hand object of the owner's pleasure. Others can see that the dog suffers living an undisciplined life. Can you deny that well-trained dogs live a happier life, and are freer to do as they choose, than ill-behaved dogs? Aren't most of the vaunted "good ol' days" institutions that you all love exactly that kind of framework, where less freedom to act capriciously leads to greater freedom to actualize your ownmost possibilites? This is where you are hypocrites, from where I sit. Conservatives have always been for highly engineered social structures, promoting common good. It's only been since those policies are based more and more on data, and less and less on primate hard coded assumptions, that you've decided that social engineering is incompatible with freedom. Next time you are working from home and sitting the kids, let them do whatever they please and see how free you are. You want to live in a state of nature, and have laissez-faire social systems, then stop breeding. At the current population density humans are combative and slaves to hard coded, counterproductive drives. If you want to fill the world with people, you have to engineer the society if they are to be free to actualize any degree of individuality.

Perhaps this is why so many conservatives believe that there is some magical, unquantifiable character that makes human life special. Without that deus ex machina the laws of behavior would show your approach to be flawed.

<hr/>