I was in western Montana last week. There was a guy in the safeway giving away free copies of the local paper. As I came in the door, he was trying to give one to 30 something y/o guy. The guy wouldn't read it anymore after having been in Iraq. I was curious so I got a copy. The editorial page was an all out defense of President Bush's handling of Hurricane Katrina which pretty much told me where that paper is coming from.

The point is, Bush's policies may be starting to lose people the republicans have been taking for granted for years.

<h1></h1>

I've often been part of such conversations, (conversions?), Steve, just as you said. I'm living in Portland but I'm not "from Portland" because I grew up 'in the area' -- Crooked, Deschutes, John Day watersheds -- and that gets me past those locals' defenses. They're right, btw, the Valley rats DO NOT comprehend or respect The Way, the dao of the desert, how to walk on rocks, (nevermind farming or ranching rocks). And politics is right, too, that partisan practices advance house by house, and spread rapidly where a single house is a significant percentage in the area.

Two recent Valley views in evidence. One enlightened: Today's Jonathan Nicholas column, on a cyclist's view in Eastern Oregon toward things western, "a chorus line of Cascade peaks." Ohmygawd, I thought I was floating up to heaven reading it. Number two is blind Liars Larson. When his cover-up was busted by game officials -- that he had been one reaching into the cookie jar of illegal elk tags at Hemstreet's place and, by insinuation, smoking pot out there with Greg Clapper, Liars looked out for himself, not the land, and claimed he didn't need a tag on private property so he had found a clever way to short the state fish and game budget by not having the entry fee for an honor system.

And, still on topic in that circumferential manner of sagebrush riders, I caught a new line of sight between some gibberish words of John Dickerson with Al Franken today. Dickerson was busily jabbering recital lines of Democrat Dogma Politics, such as 'candidates have to take for granted the base votes on their wing, and move their image positions toward the center to attract "the middle," the "undecided," the "swing" voters.'

Maybe it was a bumbling-in-the-dark sound in the words, I don't know, but as clear as dawn's first light it occurred out of thin air to me that he and they and all the conventional 'political wisdom' (with ' ' tic marks for oxymoron),is every sense backwards. Leaders win election by tending to, caring for, bandaging up the casualties on their "wing" side, attending their base, and there require the indecisive fence-straddlers to step over and stand on one side or the other before the fencewire under their crotch snaps tight and cuts ... uh, splits their vote, so to speak.

The middle hss no vote until it takes a side. Leftists should show what's on our side worth taking steps to. Universal socialistic health care, for one thing, because it is a social benefit for society. Which (society) is, in large percentage, your home and my home and that home and this home.

<h1></h1>

Sorry, I don't agree everyone must take sides. I have friends in both parties. I get into arguments with all sorts of people, and agree with all sorts of people on some issues but not others. I have supported Indep/3rd party candidates. I vote for the individual, not the "side".

If someone who said that issues don't matter because it is more important to target districts, fit a Democratic Profile, do voter ID from a voter file, pay attention to polls, etc. was running in an election and they were running against someone like Ben Westlund or Frank Morse, I would think seriously about voting for the intelligent, issue-oriented, candid state senator even if he was a Republican.

I really admire Steve, and his writing about rural Oregon. I have been in similar situations. Over here in in the Mid-Willamette valley we have people who voted for Bush and also for Hooley (perhaps as incumbents deserving re-election). Across the state there are people who voted for Wyden even if they otherwise voted Republican. There are people who had been active in a party who are contemplating re-registering (or have already done so) as NAV.

If the movement to "sides" was growing, the number and percentage of NAV registrants would be going down--but it is generally somewhere between 20% and 25%. I have been hearing (interestingly, heard it first from a Republican activist) that "the fastest growing party in this state is no party at all". Less than 1000 people voted in Wheeler County in the last election. Even there more than 15% of the people voting were NAV or "other".

Some of us believe the day will come sooner than expected when there will be a uniting person or idea which will sweep away "left" or "right" sides, perhaps in the way Tom McCall did all those years ago. People who yearn for solutions are getting tired of the polarizing rhetoric of "sides". Not to mention the concept that everyone is supposed to pick a "side" and then never question the issue policies of that "side" as if indiv. thought is somehow subversive.

Steve,

Thank you for the insightful post. I wish I knew what the next step was.

I agree that many people who live in rural America would vote Democrat fast if they turned off Fox News and found the truth.

And maybe they have started too. Pew Institute says CNN stomped Fox News in the Katrina ratings (by 50%!) because people thought Fox News was telling lies and falsifying timelines to protect the President's butt.

BTW, here is the url for that great Dionne piece. It is SO over for W and the boyz.

Your serve, Hillary.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/12/AR2005091201433.html

Thanks for the comments Sid and others.

Yes we are so close. Standing there in that living room with my clipboard sketching out where the interior walls were located, and talking with these people - it was like I was sketching out the interior of the rural conservative mind.

Government does have good common purpose even in the view of the conservative. Government exists to do those things that we as individuals, families, or even small communities cannot do for ourselves. I cannot make a road by myself, I cannot built a 2-lane bridge myself, I cannot take care of all the foster children myself, and by myself I am powerless in the face of the health care system or lack thereof. Government is how we join together to accomplish these and other things that need doing.

The great weakness of the conservative line of thinking, is that things undeniably need doing. The failure of our government with Katrina is the result of budget cuts - based upon the denial of the need to take action. The failure of what we "say" we are doing in Iraq is denial that doing it takes expensive resources we didn't commit to - more people and more rebuilding. (I know I know, the lies came first.)

Those nice people in Spray have had it with denial.

As liberals, Democrats, we don't need to move to the middle in our views or positions. We need to stand tall and attract the middle to us. Liz - that is what I think Tenskwatawa meant, more than creating a great divide in the political middle. I think we on the left should all climb up on our rooftops and proclaim that -

I am for a govenment that cares about its people and puts them first. I am for universal health care from the government and not from profit making companies. I am for individual rights of privacy, limiting government intrusions into my life, freeing people held without charges being brought against them, and having everyone pay their fair share of the real cost of doing these good things - even if that means the rich pay more because they get more.

Do you hear my bullhorn from Prineville over in the valley?

Steve, Did you happen to talk to the stupid rural people about PERS, M30, a sales tax for Oregon(or other tax increases) M37, gay marriage, CIM/CAM, the kicker, global warming, logging, grazing, or roadless wilderness areas?

Perhaps that should be your next step. Careful you don't step in it though.

Hey Demo gal,

Nice laundry list. You sound like W as New Orleans drowned, "We sent three bags of ice, two cans of Coke, a worn out blanket, blah, blah, blah."

Let's move beyond the cut-and-paste function, shall we?

Come on, bring it on as some coward once said!

Steve:

Great post and more importantly great outreach!

I had a similar experience at a conference I was at today. I was speaking to the folks at my table and telling them that I was very involved in the Democratic party locally and was really making an attempt to reach out to people that might not agree with every single issue that party hardliners might, but that doesn't mean that they aren't welcome at the table (especially when they agree with the majority of the platform anyway).

After the meeting a retired doctor came up to me and asked for information. We exchanged email addresses and I told him how to switch his party registration and when the Democratic Party of Lane County meets. He just needed to be invited.

Mr. Leader, What does this mean? "Let's move beyond the cut-and-paste function, shall we? Come on, bring it on as some coward once said!"

I haven't the slightest. I asked a pretty good question I thought.

Is the notion here that Democrats can swing voters by promising "free" health care but not move any any of the other deviding and competing issues?

Perhaps you can explain this. You seem like you are pretty smart.

Steve Bucknum: I was able to interject that a group I was in had taken a position in favor of national health care. These people really liked that idea. Due to necessity, they have come to view health care as something that should be a universal right.

JK: The right to eat is also a univeral right. We don't provide free food for the wealthy along with the needy. Why should we provide free health care to the wealthy along with the needy?

Just help the needy. Why give free stuff to people that can afford their own? Thanks JK

Another excellent post, Steve. A lot of us sense, at least on the state level, the Democrats have a real shot at winning rural Oregon. To use Kari's words, "the West is not the South." Or in my words, "they're conservative, not crazy."

So, how can we effectively reach Central Oregon? I think two things will make a difference:

1.) Acknowledge Central Oregon exists outside of Bend. That means send candidates to John Day, Prineville, etc. Sure, these are small towns, but they share a connection. If you visit Fossil you show Dayville that you care about Oregon east of the Cascades. If you just visit Bend, you show you care about rich donors.

2.) Talk about issues that matter to Central Oregon. Develop a plan to jump-start the economies in timber-dependent towns. Or talk about a way to keep community hospitals open.

This post has me laughing my ass off!

Oh yeah... those poor rural folk with health issues think free health care sounds great, so they are just about there.... Democrats but don't know it yet...

Until - OOPS! You mean the Democrats were the ones who voted to increase taxes, which they voted to repeal? You mean the Democrats want to get rid of Measure 37? You mean the Democrats supported the idiotic measure to outlaw cougar hunting with dogs? You mean the Democrats supported euthanizing the timber industry in the name of some stupid bird?

Oh yeah they are just that close to being Democrats..... until they think about it for about a nanosecond.

Yeha you got your finger right there on the pulse of those rural folk. Yessirree.

You are a very funny man.

Thanks for that "insightful" post. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You mean the Democrats supported euthanizing the timber industry in the name of some stupid bird? It may be unpopular to say this, but the timber industry would have fallen on hard times as soon as the last tree had been cut down, spotted owl or no spotted owl.

If PKR thinks all Oregonians would have preferred delaying the inevitable and that having clear cuts all over Oregon would have been good for the rural economy, fine. Clear cuts don't help tourism, but if "cut it all" is one's philosphy, a little thing like that wouldn't stop them. But many don't consider that a laughing matter.

Of course, serious people have been debating for over a decade such issues as retooling lumber mills for second growth trees rather than old growth trees. But that requires thought.

PKR:

I think you missed the point of Steve's post (and others on related topics). Steve's point is that the Portland domination of the Democratic party has resulted in a party that, while not anti-rural, doesn't seem to acknowledge many of the important issues in rural Oregon. Honestly, neither do the Republicans, but they do better PR.

Telling rural Oregonians that they should be Democrats because they don't understand the issues they face is ridiculous and unlikely to succeed. Telling Democrats that they should try to understand real rural issues is likely to succeed. And it's the right thing to do.

Why is the Oregon healthplan unworkable for people in Fossil? What can be done to improve it? These are important questions for Democrats. After all, we're all Oregonians, even those of us who live east of the Cascades.

As a Democrat teacher in Sisters I have a hard time interpreting the near total ignoring of my earlier post and list of issues we Democrats need to tackle. Many rural, suburban and urban folks want to know what Democrats have done, are doing or will do to put people to work. Jobs and the rest of my earlier list need addressed.

I'm more than certain the folks in Wheeler and the rest of the State are more concerned about jobs than becoming dependent upon government health care. Although many of my liberal peers regularly vote Democrat they have a hard time grasping why democrat politicians in this state continually oppose large majorities of Oregonians on multiple key issues.

I asked for explanations and am not getting any. Perhaps my newly found blog is not the source of such explanations. In which case my visit will be short lived.

Democrat Gal,

You start off an post calling people stupid, then react that you haven't had a response overnight. I for one do sleep at night, and work in the daytime - I'm actually taking a break from work now to write this.

When you start off calling people stupid, you really don't deserve a response. You say you are in Sisters, a nice little tourist town with a great school system, but you talk like you are from New York.

Your laundry list was impressive. But your political sense stinks. You don't go hit people over the head when they first wake up to being fooled by the Republicans. They need adjustment time. They have had the rug pulled out from under them. They were promised by that big parent figure in Washington DC that all would be well, and it isn't.

You wrote, "I asked for explanations and am not getting any. Perhaps my newly found blog is not the source of such explanations."

Specifically, I think I was very clear that I was in that house for another purpose, and what I recorded was a side conversation. I felt limited by my professional role, and could not go into every little issue.

Generally, do you really think that we are here to answer all your questions about liberal and Democratic politics? I know that the Oregonian is sold in Sisters, you might start by reading the paper.

Welcome to Blue Oregon - but please calm down a little.

PKR, besides laughing his ass off, has made a fundamental mistake lots of people do - he has confused ballot measures with the Democratic Party.

PKR, the Democratic party didn't do the Cougar hunting measure - I for one have always been against that measure, and today we see a doubling of cougars and increasing urban penetration as they look for food like family cats, dogs, and children.

The Democrats haven't been the party to reward the rich with tax cuts like you seem to imply, that was those other guys.

The Democratic Party hasn't taken a position on Measure 37 - I'm on the Platform and Resolutions Committee, and it just isn't there. I could act like Bush looking for weapons of mass destruction all over the White House in an attempt to see if any Democrat supported the repeal of Measure 37 - but you accuse us of something we didn't do.

And lastly, you bring up the Spotted Owl. Did you know it was Republican Richard Nixon that signed the endangered species act? The problem all along with that act isn't that it protects rare and endangered species, it is that it fails to compensate people displaced and economically hurt by the act - a Republican skin flint attitude. If it isn't corporate welfare, they don't like it.

Well, PKR - HAHAHAHAHA back at you. Your reactionary Republican views are part of why that family in Spray live near the edge of bankrupcy due to health care expenses. If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. PKR, please send a check to general delivery in Spray to pay your part of the ownership society back to those you stole it from.

If "Democrat Gal" is really a DEMO, does anyone have the number for the Libertarian Party, The Greens, The Wobblies, anyone but her party!

Steve, This has become rather peculiar and I am quite calm.

I did not call anyone stupid. In fact I was resenting the implication by you and others that rural people are stupid. I injected a different perspective and posed a question or two. I fully understood how long you were in that house. My inquiry was about the unfolding conversation. Not your specific visit. I really can't see how my inquiry is so difficult to respond to.

You took the time to respond but not to anything I asked.

If it is more time needed or a reluctance to take on these time of questions I guess I will find out at some time.

I for one would choose to have this conversation broaden and progress.

Is that too much to ask?

Clarity helps 8>)

One of the toughest questions that Democrats continue to face in the state is how to maintain government programs and benefits, much less grow them, without raising taxes. The inability to cope with that question provides Republicans fodder to gain, or at least keep votes.

Almost none of our Democratic leaders are willing to tackle this issue directly. Yes, some advocate raising taxes on large businesses, sins, etc. Some advocate raising income taxes and slag, bemoan, etc. people for not agreeing with them...to cover up the fact that they are bereft of ideas to change how the majority of Oregonians inevitably vote on such increases. Almost none are willing to confront the very good retirement benefits that Tier 1 PERS folks get and how that rising percentage of the state budget is hurting other government programs.

The majority of Oregonians leans towards Democratic programs, but at Republican prices. Here in Josephine County, the budget is in a terrible state, yet most government workers want at least to maintain their pay and benefits (which are the largest portion of the budget) without paying higher taxes...wonderfully illogical. Republicans say no to higher taxes, but are cowardly at justifying and taking ownership of the impacts that has on the government and who its serving.

Little wonder a number of moderate voters won't be loyal to either party.

Interesting that more Eastern Oregon voters voted no on Siemores anti PERS inuititives then urban counties did. A friend from Pendelton told me it was because PERS people were neighbors not just faceless government wokers.

One of the toughest questions that Democrats continue to face in the state is how to maintain government programs and benefits, much less grow them, without raising taxes. The inability to cope with that question provides Republicans fodder to gain, or at least keep votes.

Oh, so for the rest of our lives we are not allowed to discuss raising taxes? When did that happen?

I would suggest going to this website http://www.benwestlund.com/ and reading or watching Ben's speech last session upon returning to the House after cancer surgery. Ben does not say we aren't allowed to discuss raising taxes or otherwise changing the revenue system in this state. Given a choice between what Ben said in that speech and any Democrat who claims the question is "how to maintain government programs and benefits, much less grow them, without raising taxes", I'd vote for the one who was honest about the budget/ revenue picture in this state.

Put another way, RUN, BEN, RUN!

I have a friend who was a school teacher in Spray for a couple of years. He is about a radical left wing as you get and still remain peaceful (his saving grace is that he also is a great C & W singer and guitar player). We had thought of moving out there, or at least buying a house on the John Day that was really, really cheap. He counseled us that the people there are really fine people, but you better show up in one of the towns three churches on Sunday. He didn't and after awhile, he was pretty much ostracized.

Seems like Eastern Oregon is in pretty much the same mindset that was described in "What's the Matter With Kansas." That said, the rural towns and the big cities frequently have some issues more in common (especially school funding) than the suburbs that unfortunately control the state.

I wonder if it's possible to forge an alliance. I also wonder if it's worthwhile.

GREAT insight from jim l on rural folks voting against PERS reform because their neighbors work for the state and would get screwed.

Reminds me of my favorite First Lady. Nancy Reagan, raised in Chicago, like me.

Well, Nancy was 100% against all abortions her whole life, then her dear husband became ill and she found stem cell research (through abortions) is the answer.

It's ALWAYS who you know, right?

We're turning a corner alright, if only because the middle is generally apothetic to all things political and, thus, sways with the political winds. Fox News did not accidentally stumble into this truth... they've banked on it.

But the GOP/think tank talking points they spew, in and of themselves, aren't the greatest threat; they're fabricating a new 'conventional wisdom' that puts the Dems platform on the outside looking in. In other words, they're trying to establish what is 'normal' thought and marginalize what doesn't jive with corporate america's wish list. Remember this the next time they say, "The typical American...", or "Middle America will not stand for this!".

To our bretheren in E. Oregon, I say this: The city slickers you shouldn't trust are the very ones that evoke your humble, pragmatic spirit for corrupt means. Don't trust the government? Don't like taxes? Don't support the wasteful money and power-grab currently on display by Bush and his cronies.

Ms. Democrat Gal

You wrote, "I did not call anyone stupid. In fact I was resenting the implication by you and others that rural people are stupid."

You also wrote, "Steve, Did you happen to talk to the stupid rural people about PERS, ..."

You know, I really don't think I implied that rural people are stupid, after all, I am one. Here I sit accused of calling rural people stupid after a year long campaign in the Democratic Party to be sensitive to rural people, respectful of rural people, and that has resulted in the formation of the Rural Caucus within the Party.

Whew!

Lt, I didn't mean that Democrats couldn't discuss raising taxes...that's obviously ridiculous. They just don't tend to when running for election statewide or districts that aren't "safe"...it's a well-proven loser of an issue.

I said almost none, and you came up with one example...a good one, but all too rare.

I agree with you Jeff. The Great Plains and the farmers and the New Deal made America.

Two generations ago.

Today, you can shoot a cannon down the main streets of Clutterville, Nebraska and no one will even bother to come out and see what's up. The whole town's at the Wal-Mart down the road in Kearney.

Millions of people are fleeing the farms for the cities on the two coasts and nothing will change that scene for the forseeable future.

Here is a link to a big multi-state group, based at a university in North Dakota, that is trying to re-populate the Disappearing Great Plains.

http://gppop.dsu.nodak.edu/i_exec_summary.htm

Jeff's take on rural America is historically accurate, but that was then, and this is..well, you know.

All of Eastern Oregon and a chunk of Southern Oregon is represented by just one guy (currently Greg Walden). That's just 20% of Oregon's population. Three of our other four representatives in Congress have at least some of their district in the Portland metro area, and the fourth, DeFazio, has a safe district with the college towns of Eugene and Corvallis.

A century ago, rural America had the numbers. Today, they don't. It's wise to pay attention to their needs, but every last citizen in Eastern Oregon could become a raging liberal Democrat and not have much effect on the politics of our state. Okay, I exagerate.

But the course of our state over the past decade has been dictated by Republicans from the suburbs. Suburban, total car-oriented living fosters a kind of alienation that can't understand the benefits of community, and thus is a perfect breeding ground for anti-government Republicans.

Transit oriented development and urban growth boundaries help create Democrats, while sprawl creates Republicans. That's why the battle over Measure 37 is so crucial. It's not just a battle over land, but over the future of the state.

One thing that could forge an alliance with rural areas is for urban politicians to advocate more funding for rural road projects, even at the expense of urban road projects. That would give an economic boost to the rural areas and make our cities even more dependent on alternatives to the automobile.

But that's something for another topic.

Sid Leader wrote:

"Millions of people are fleeing the farms for the cities on the two coasts and nothing will change that scene for the forseeable future."

Really! Donald Trump recently was asked where people should be buying real estate. He said Redmond and Prineville of all places!

I just don't think whatever Sid's quote means has any application in Oregon. I can't speak for South Dakota.

I have been involved in real estate in Central Oregon, which by the way does NOT mean Bend, for 11 years now. Every year I meet urban flight people moving over here to escape those cities. It has recently spilled over a little into Wheeler County. We are 150 miles from Portland, and Salem, and Eugene - not exactly commuting distance.

I have relatives in Florence that report the same influx. I own property in Coos County, and see the influx over there. I recently visited Lincoln City were I spent a lot of my childhood, and see lots of growth there. We have family friends in Pendleton, and I see growth there. Farmers going to the city? Did you accidently read literature from 1925?

STEVE "PKR, the Democratic party didn't do the Cougar hunting measure - "

Do you deny that it is overwehlmingly Democrats who supported it and got it passed?

The Democratic Party hasn't taken a position on Measure 37 -

Do you deny that it is overwhelmingly Democrats who supported it and got it passed?

And lastly, you bring up the Spotted Owl. Did you know it was Republican Richard Nixon that signed the endangered species act?

Duh! And do you deny that it is overwhelmingly Democrats who have supported using the ESA to take people's property from them?

Just because the offical stance of the D party machinery did or did not take positions and/or put measure on the ballot is irrelevant. These issues are OVERWHELMNGLY Democrat issues, and they explain why rural folk just are not going to vote Democrat.

They understand how Democrat doctrine has screwed them time and again.

Well, PKR - HAHAHAHAHA back at you. Your reactionary Republican views are part of why that family in Spray live near the edge of bankrupcy due to health care expenses. If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. PKR, please send a check to general delivery in Spray to pay your part of the ownership society back to those you stole it from.

Russell Sadler: No, I was not talking about Measure 5. I was talking about Measure 28. That is, Democrats voted in a tax increase in the legislature (with the help of RINO R's) and the voters repealed it. And the rural areas of the state OVERWHELMINGLY voted no.

In other words, as I said in my post: the Democrats raised taxes, which they voted to repeal.

As I read this discussion I am being to conjure up my own explaination for what I was seeking earlier.

Some of you drifted for a while with the mistaken impression that I was calling people stupid. You spent an unexpainable amount of time on that irrelevant sidebar.

My inquirly about some key issue, "PERS, M30,M37,M36,CIM/CAM, the kicker,global warming,logging, grazing, roadless wilderness areas" and how our Oregon Democrat party intends to square itself with the voters for being on the side of the minority, has resulted in nothing.

At this point I can only assume this is not the place to seek an objective and thoughful exchange of idea. Is it the collective veiwpoint of the BlueOregon participants here that Oregon democrats have no work to do on these issues? I think M37 passed in Multnomah County. Meaning many fellow Democrats voted for it. Same for the M30 tax defeat. Yet we have every single Democrat legislator and nearly every county and municipal leader on the other side. Are all of the Democrats who voted along side republicans on these issues somehow in need of pursuation or is there some room for the leaders to diversify their viewpoints.

Somehow I feel we need to loosen the one sided grip on some of these issues. I and some of my fairly liberal friends voted for M37.

The hysteria coming from every democrat politician simply does not mesh with the cross section or breakdown of democrat votes.

Mr. Johnson's comment, "Transit oriented development and urban growth boundaries help create Democrats, while sprawl creates Republicans. That's why the battle over Measure 37 is so crucial. It's not just a battle over land, but over the future of the state."

is a prime example of the extreme and often counter democrat problem as I see it.

I guess believes he must battle fellow democarts along the way as well. He certainly isn't about to compromise of moderate.

On taxes it's the same way. Many democrats voted against the M30 increase. I, as a teacher, am not one of them but I know a number
of democrats who did. Multnomah County, where I come from, voted agianst the tax. That means many democrats voted against. How can every single democrat politician be in favor of it?

It makes nosense.

In the end it appears that all of our elected democrats are representing the 30% to 40% of Oregonians who voted their way on these key issues.

In my opinion that is not healthy. These are critical issues in need of policies which the majority of Oregonians support.

If we, as Democrats, can't even get rid of the ball and chain CIM/CAM school reform then how can we expect to broaden our support?

Free health care? And how is it free? The Oregon Health Plan sure isn't free. I would prefer it meets it's demise and have some of the money go to schools. But there again I am probably in the minority of democrats with not one democrat leader agrees with me.

Any specific explainations yet?

Maybe this is the problem: My inquirly about some key issue, "PERS, M30,M37,M36,CIM/CAM, the kicker,global warming,logging, grazing, roadless wilderness areas" and how our Oregon Democrat party intends to square itself with the voters for being on the side of the minority, has resulted in nothing.

In Wheeler County, 662 people voted yes on Measure 36 and only 574 voted yes on Measure 37 (214 no on 36, 286 no on 37). That tells me that maybe the same people didn't always vote the same way even there, and do you know for a fact that the individuals who voted yes on 36 and 37 voted on the prevailing side of Measure 30? In 2000, 587 Wheeler County voters supported putting the kicker in the Oregon Constitution, and 238 voted against. How many of those individuals do you suppose voted on the prevailing side of 30, 36, 37?

Do several hundred voters in Wheeler County believe there is more value in clear cuts than in saving some old growth for their grandchildren (not to mention tourists) to see? CIM/CAM was part of the Educational Act for the 21st century--a piece of legislation and not a ballot measure, back more than a decade ago. Isn't it Steve's point that maybe Wheeler County residents have more down to earth concerns than CIM/CAM or global warming?

Democrat gal claims to be a teacher, but if so is a teacher who does not proofread (or else "fellow democarts" was intentional).

As far as Measure 30, I would remind those who did not watch the debate in the 2003 session that there was no alternative presented to HB 2152, which passed both houses of the legislature and then some out of state petitioners collected signatures and put it on the ballot. The only alternative presented was "don't vote for this because we can do better but don't ask for a bill # because there isn't one". Would it have been better for the legislature to have remained in session for a month or more? What should that alternative budget have said?

Given a conversation with a Republican friend last night, I wonder if "Democrat gal" really is one. I noticed something my friend said (and this is someone who follows the legislature), so I asked "When the Senate was split 15-15, Bev Clarno was the Republican Leader. What was Kate Brown's title?". When he said "Democrat Leader", I said "Only if you want to insult people".

Any teacher should know what a suffix is. In English, sometimes words are confusing. Here is an example. Bush is a Republican. Kerry is a Democrat. In 2004, Bush was the Republican nominee. Kerry was the Democratic nominee.

The only reasons that mistake is made (such as Oregon Democrat Party) are ignorance, sloppiness, or the intent to insult.

<h1></h1>

The first clue, LT, that 'gal' ain't who 'she' is, comes in the first word that doth self-promote too much. It could have been simply 'gal' verbalizing as best as 'she' could what 'she' had to say and letting everyone for themselves judge by the words 'she' used whether or not it was Democrat quality. But no-o-o, the title is self-said, staking an inside-the-camp claim whereat to drive snide wedges. Except, it didn't drive.

I am being to conjure up my own explaination ,,, to seek an objective and thoughful exchange of idea. It makes nosense.

'She' would have got that right except, as you say, 'she' couldn't spell.

The gestapo-agent troll provocateurs show up at the websites that are scoring direct hits against the Republican fascist parades. When we read them here undercover to wedge and weaken us, then we know we are strong. There's not much risk in a mistaken judgement that alienates a 'real' Democrat by saying their words sound like rightwing methods undercover. What is 'she' going to do, rebel against such judgementalism and go off in a huff to vote Republican? Well, that's where those words belong so the best situation is for 'her' to be among 'her' own unkinds. (Gee, 'gal' Teacher, I grammarticulated a word joke at your expense. Oh, there's an other'n. And an other. Whoa, like lashing reins -- leather, whipping foamy flanks, they just don't stop.)

Sorry, LT, I got to horsing around there. 'Gal' is a goof, promised to go away and threatening not to. 'She' will be back, different label, same loony; this is 'her' assigned 'beat' I believe.

LT, my earlier comment wasn't organized well enough to preclude the interpretation you took of it. I agree with your political good sense that noncommunicative stand-off only makes more difficulty and civil matters worse. I advocate bipartisan communication. At the same time, none of us need suffer fools tolerably. The nuance between debate against someone who sees things a different way and debate against a blind person, is a subtlety I still am fumbling for words to express.

I happened to be doing some side reading on the history of the Welsh, (Jonathan Nicholas's Cycle Oregon went by my driveway this week), and in finding the Welsh are the remnants of pre-Stonehenge 'Isle' natives who (only?) survived unlatinized and uncatholicized from the Roman invasion and inhabitation, by 'taking to the hills' and survivalist redoubts, I recognized some interesting similarities with the eastern Oregon agrarian self-sufficiency and way of life in remote regions, social aspects, reverence for the land, politics, and culture. So I started an essay on the Welsh as representative of aboriginal tribal and clan cultures around the world who didn't or barely did survive the Roman and its descendant 'Western civilization' conquering genocides and culture-obliterating enslavements. This is not that essay, but only a teaser. Here's the source document which transported me, (chapter 2), and in chapter 17, substitute our predicament with oil today for the Welsh's 1840's problems with coal, and consider the Welsh and eastern Oregonians alike as 'the remote people in the hills' away from "the valley," as said by locals in both places. Steve, I think the Welsh offer insights which relate to your experiences and comments in rural settings, especially especially the sustaining power of language and education in it. (A gorgeous large map I have of the British Isles shows all the unheard-of towns and terrains in Wales and it immensely aided my reading survey.)

Lastly, let's return to buffalo gal, (who won't come out tonight and dance by the light of the moon, won't dance with the dolly with the hole in her stocking ... oh, uh, sorry, got a little druidic Cymanfa Ganu goin' there for a minute), and the issues o' the day. 'Her' list of wedgies I got a flick of the wrist and one word for: They're "fired." Here's The ISSUES - Establish Justice (Fascism ain't getting it done.) - Insure domestic tranquility. (Starting a war of terror in this country ain't getting it done.) - Promote general welfare. (Universal health care is in the Constitution, electric chairs and gas chambers ain't.) - Provide for common defense. (Using our Guards militia for offensive invasion of Iraq ain't getting it done.) - Secure the blessing of liberty. (False arresting Brandon Mayfield in the middle of the night ain't getting the blessing of liberty thing done at all, and maybe should cost those agents theirs. Let's do that 'issue' debate, buffalo gal -- Proposed: That officers conducting false arrest be imprisoned themselves along with their superiors who sent them.) - Most perfectly what unites us is our respect for diversity. E pluribus, unum. Maybe you've seen it, it's printed on all the money and it's what we stand for, believe in, and sacrifice our lives for: All the different peoples -- all people.

Ya' know that allegiance thing to 'the republic nation with liberty and justice for all'? Republican fascists ain't delivering liberty and justice for all and thus no one is allegiant to them and their corruptions.

<h1></h1>

Quite the pandemonium over my typos. And my lack of the correct "Democratic." (I don't know anyone who cares about that)

It's almost as if no one wants to answer my question.

So,,,,suppose I were a neo-con, right wing, talk show host in Sisters asking the same question. Or a Democratic legislator.

Yes, imagine a Democratic legislator asking the same questions. I happen to know one.

Why is there no Democratic representation for Democratics who vote along with the majority on some key issues in Oregon? It doesn't seem plausible that our elected Democratics would not have some resemblance to a cross section of their Democratic constituents. Does the Democratic party of Oregon have no room for moderation on any of these issues?

I ask these questions because I believe there is much more support to be gained for Democratic causes, especially schools, if we moderate and reform on some key issues.

As was the case in Multnomah County, my peers and I have a hard time staying aligned with the whole Democratic package. Doing so seems an uphill battle with little ability to get traction on the most important issues such as school funding. Demonstrating commitment by repealing CIM/CAM would be a great starter. Improved credibility by leading the next round of funding activism with real fixes would be very helpful.

M37 is tainting our broader efforts as well.

There is a wide area of wiggle room in land use which should have been utilized years ago to avoid the uprising and backlash we are experiencing now.

Why is there no Democratic representation for Democratics who vote along with the majority on some key issues in Oregon? It doesn't seem plausible that our elected Democratics would not have some resemblance to a cross section of their Democratic constituents. Does the Democratic party of Oregon have no room for moderation on any of these issues?

Exactly what do you define as moderation? What legislation do you define as moderate? Which stands by which legislators of any party?

I ask these questions because I believe there is much more support to be gained for Democratic causes, especially schools, if we moderate and reform on some key issues. OK, fill in the blanks: Moderation on ___(issue) means this:

M37 is tainting our broader efforts as well. Transferability was not in the language of Measure 37. Does that make me not a moderate to say that? Do you support transferability? Which versions of the attempt to fix Measure 37 did you support--the D version which the Home Builders liked but was so late in the session may did not understand? Or is it "not moderate" to ask specific questions? What do you propose exactly--that it is not the responsibility of the authors to have written a clearer measure but the responsibility of Democrats to know what your vague suggestions mean?

Finally, I have more respect for public figures who post here under their own names discussing their views publicly than I have for Yes, imagine a Democratic legislator asking the same questions. I happen to know one. On a talk show we would likely know the identity of the people talking and not have to imagine a conversation about vague suggestions.

But maybe details are too challenging for some people.

I'm not sure why Democratic Gal (or Person) seems to have hit such a nerve here. For some reason a lot of people are jumping on her in a way that makes me uncomfortable. She's not raising any particularly divisive or contentious issues. Her questions seem to be:

Why aren't there any moderate Democrats (Dems in favor of M5, M37, etc.) elected to office in Oregon? And, wouldn't it behoove Democrats as a whole if we moved to the right in order to more align ourselves with the electorate?

Now, there are two false assumptions built into the questions, but the questions are still valid.

False assumption #1: there are no elected D moderates.

I think a lot of the reason our Governor is getting so much competition is a lot of Democrats feel he's too moderate. I don't agree. But the perception is there.

False assumption #2: the Oregon Democrats are too far left to appeal to Oregon voters.

On the whole, our party does much better in this state than the Republicans. We hold the Governorship, Secretary of State, Attorney General, the Senate, one of two Fed. Senators and 4 of 5 Fed. Reps.

Still, should the party move right in order to appeal to more voters, especially those east of the Cascades? That's a reasonable question to ask.

Personally, I think the answer is no. We need to be better about combatting the Republican portrayal of our party, but I don't think we should become more Republican. We need to do outreach to the people we've traditionally ignored. We need to be clearer about what "rural" stances we endorse. But I don't think we should change our philosophy just to win elections.

That's lying. And lying is wrong.

Why aren't there any moderate Democrats (Dems in favor of M5, M37, etc.) elected to office in Oregon? And, wouldn't it behoove Democrats as a whole if we moved to the right in order to more align ourselves with the electorate?

If "Democrat gal" or "Democratic person" can find someone who is a big fan of Don McIntire (5) and David Hunnicutt (37) then by all means convince them to run as a Democrat. Neither seem to me to be proposing solutions, just "we won ballot measures, so you should put your mind in neutral and agree with whatever we say".

My experience is that Democrats believe schools and other government services are more important than tax cuts and undetermined budget cuts; and that farmland once paved over can never be farmland again. My guess is that there are Republicans who believe the same thing. If someone doesn't like that attitude, not my problem.

No one gets elected to office without getting more votes than the competition, but it seems that some who post here think that if all Blue Oregonians would only agree with what they say we would be living in a perfect world. To those I say: "Turn off your computer, go out and talk to your friends and neighbors. And if one of them wants to run as a pro-Measure 5, pro-Measure 37 Democrat, then work on their campaign. But don't try to tell people on a blog that in order to attract moderate votes it is important to give up long held beliefs and accept the views of someone posting on a blog who for all we know has never worked to elect a Democrat they are willing to name".

But maybe some post on a blog because actually working on a campaign and persuading people in person is hard work? That would be my guess.

Thank you Russell.

How many ordinary folks ( of the sort this post is supposed to be about) could say in the midst of a busy day that they remember 28 and 30 vividly and could tell you which one was a legislative referral and which was put on the ballot by CSE (now have changed their name to FreedomWorks) with the help of out of staters like Dick Armey who came her to help the effort?

For those of us who do pay a lot of attention, perhaps it is time for some thought provoking writings. The beauty of living in 2005 is that anyone anywhere in the state with an Internet hookup can read the same things as anyone in a big city.

http://www.willamette.edu/publicpolicy/OregonsFuture/archives.php#Vol6No1 has this interesting item where (omigosh!) Chalkboard statistics are actually discussed rather than being treated as "accepted" and beyond discussion:

Education Funding in Oregon -- "How We Got Into This Mess, And How to Get Out" by: Scott Bailey

Sidebars: "A comment on the Chalkboard Project Data" by Scott Bailey, and "The Chalkboard Project: What Do You Think, Oregon?" by Sue Hildick

And then there is Howard Fineman, writing about elected Democrats vs. activists and bloggers.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9339261/

The Democrats' dilemma An independence versus capitulation wrestling match by Howard Fineman

It includes these quotes:

"It’s not a fight between liberals and conservatives,” Rosenberg told me the other day. “It’s between our ‘governing class’ here and activists everywhere else.”

"In other words, it’s The Beltway versus The Blogosphere............

if Rosenberg is right, the key is not ideological purity but combativeness, and an appreciation of the power and tone of the internet. Hillary must adapt – she has to “join the Resistance” – and her history has shown that she is nothing if not adaptable."

<h1></h1>

LT, you are awesome gold. You, too, Russell Sadler, appreciating more how long you have shown bright in the public square.

Steve Bucknum, one point I forgot to mention is the media in The Capital Press. More ranch homes 'over East' collect their worldly words from it, and long have, than from broadcast media. The paper's partisan presentation, (rife with neo-Republican 'free market' and 'propertied entitlement' slogans, whereas the practices that the lip-flippers effect on the ground go to monopolize markets and invoke elected entitlement), seems to be a presentation with its coherence left to chance, as it looks like the Capital Press prints all the material from its valuable field reportors on the gound and (governmental) procedural material found by its internet rangers, and for editorial and tone-setting material it prints everything it gets handed. And, in the newspaper's circulation area, such grotesqueries as Idaho's Larry Craig and Utah's Orrin Hatch and Oregon's Gordon Smith and Washington's dead snag Slade Gorton coordinate handing out the neo-fascist party-line puff-pieces like throwing buckshot at the sitting-duck Capital Press. The point is, where you can manage to Steve, and any of us, steer volunteers to write for the Capital Press such material as your post leads this discussion with.

Nowadays, in addition to that newspaper and besides putrid tv toxins and throwback radio rancor, rural Oregonian settlements are internet informed, as was noted in earlier comments. The element of internet media which is as strong as the newspaper and stronger than broadcast, is not that worldwide information can go down the pipe to remote ranchhouses but that they can pipe up from there, ('this is Steve Bucknum with the Ochoco report'), and become identified to each other, meet the neighbors ten miles over the ridge or downstream in the watershed. Census is the first step in organizing cooperative movement, or 'consensus.'

Related to the preceding comment about "combativeness" and "resistance": the neo-Republican infestation is parasitic and opportunistic. 'Democrat Imposter' agitprop invites progressives to take this opportunity to reword left principles in rightist 'issue frames' -- but such "opportunity" only deserves to be knocked. The policies and working wisdom in leftism can well be expressed in its own fashion and the internet is a boundless opportunity for it.

As for the parasite component of neo-rightists' fascism, their succor is from the flow of wage-pay that laborers spend for their necessities and beyond that, their "infotainment." Neo-rightists get their 'private security' funding like a mosquito probing for bloodflow near the surface of the worker's muscled arm. The general rule for starving the parasites is by reducing the circulation of blood, I mean, money.

Stock touts and their CEO's do not get their 'broker's percentage' when their paper certificates are not bought and sold. Leftists: Don't trade in those issues. Spend for production, not speculation. Farmers and ranchers know this and they could teach it to their cohorts-in-sympathy earning and spending wages in the Valley. In general, Don't-buy-corporate-things (DBCT) Day can get to be every day. Commerce in the homegrown, homemade, craft made and friend helped. In the Depression ditty: "Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without."

Others can add their understanding of ways to restrict money circulation. (Maybe this: Money from taxes should not go through public auspices and out to private contractors -- when our state wants work done we can hire the workers into our state employ, not pay private employers who then 'take a cut.') My individual item is mass media: Don't buy it. If you do consume it you end up thinking like everybody else is told and thinks -- thus losing your personality -- and the rightwing fillers of media end up with your money. Especially Boycott 'package' (dish or cable) TV, and boycott paying for non-interactive (inert) 'boss newspapers' wherein bosses speak for each other about their latest mosquito tricks and traps, and labor matters get excluded or perverted. The flow of money going to infotainment is not the largest vein the vampires feed on, but it has special significance since the channel connects to our brains, where our addictions are set.

Combativeness, (I call it 'contrast' or 'counterpoint') in our information diet. Resistance to brainshock-causing massmedia-produced sensation and feast on stick-to-the-ribs homegrown information and personal accounts.

<h1></h1>

On the road the last two days helping my son move.

I think you all are having an interesting debate over points I didn't raise in my original post, but interesting. Democrat Gal looks to be a fraud to me, posting during school hours, when she says she's a teacher. If I understand her ten issues, it sounds like she wants a response for every one. Please refer to the Democratic Party Platform and Legislative Agenda at the DPO website.

Tenskwatawa mentions the Capital Press. My wife did a little work with them years ago, and I'm familiar with them. They are pretty much a subscription paper and are not on newstands here. With the advent of increasing TV and Internet access, more and more rural Oregonians don't depend on that type of newspaper for editorial views. It is a slow change, but a change nonetheless. They have their influence at the Capital Press, but it is declining.

And in some ways that was my point with the Wheeler County story I shared. Little by little, here and there around rural Oregon, viewpoints are changing, political beliefs are changing, and we are inching closer and closer to that corner. Once around the corner we will come to my main proposition in so much of what I'm doing within the Democratic Party --

When the Democratic Party learns how to capture the rural vote, then the Neo-con era will be relegated to a chapter in a dusty history book, rarely looked at and by-in-large ignored.

Mr. Bucknum. You said, "When the Democratic Party learns how to capture the rural vote,,,"

That was precisely what I was asking about in my initial comments.

"Learning how to capture the rural vote" may involve understanding and moderating on a few of the issues I listed. Perhaps only one or two.

Especially since we have yet to even capture enough of our own Democratic urban votes on some of them.

Teachers have a rare free moment during the day.

Just as Mr. Leader has shown.

In my short stint at BlueOregon I can't remember anyone calling him a fraud for commenting during school hours. Or for typos.

I wonder if perhaps Democratic Person is a student.

In the summer of 2001, i got this grand idea. I was going to visit every single city in oregon, IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER--from Adair Village to Zigzag. Well, that worked for a while, until i got to the middle Cs. No way was i going to head all the way across the state again. So instead i just started to visit every city in a relatively geographical order. Took me over 3 years, but i did it.
Talking to people in the rural communities (that is, ALL the rural communities) gave me a perspective that i don't think most Portlanders have. I mean, a lot of us probably can't even realize how difficult life would be if our livlihood were taken away by people hundreds of miles away, be it because of a dike in k-falls or an empty lake in detroit or a new land-use law in monument. Toward the end of my trip--during the election--i brought a bunch of copies of the mercury with me to condon. It was the issue about measure 36, which implied that dry-siders were all hicks if they voted yes. I was in the lobby bar of the hotel there, drinking a mirror pond and enjoying meatballs with dry-roasted peanuts (must be an eastern oregon thing?), talking to a crusty local wheat farmer named walt about gay marriage and democrats and politics in general. He said something that i'll never forget, and it's the philosophy i've decided to make my own. He asked me, "Do you know how to run a combine?" I said no, i didn't. Then he said, "Well, I've never had a goddamm mojito, so i guess we're even." I wasn't sure if he was insulting me or not, so i half-jovially asked him to clarify. He looked at me as if i was stupid, which i probably am, then told me that it was about as much HIS business what gay people wanted to do as it was MY business what he wanted to do.
I promised him that if the whole cougar trapping thing ever came up again, i'd vote no for him. Or yes for him. I forget how that part went.

<hr/>