I'm thrilled we candidates agree so massively, but there is a huge distinction between me and the other candidates. Like the majority of citizens, we are all against the war. I am running to END the war. It is doable when I have the force of the people with me. If two men can start a war, surely an entire nation, specifically the state of Oregon, can end it.

Wait. I must be missing something. Last week, the entire state witnessed the "dirtiest thing ever seen from a Democratic campaign in Oregon" and yet somehow it didn't come up during last night's debate. That doesn't make any sense. How can the Merkley campaign let the Novick campaign get away with that? How come the moderators didn't raise it?

After all, this was the "dirtiest thing ever" from a Democratic campaign in Oregon, right?

Right?

Miles, please let it rest.

What I take from that whole affair is two things: 1. Liz Kimmerly may have suffered an overabundance of enthusiasm when trying to set up an endorsement meeting. 2. Kari Chisholm was not the right person to make an issue of it. In fact, I wish Kari would quit commenting on the Senate race in general; it just generates a bunch of circular backbiting that is both tiresome and destructive.

but OMG what about teh ETHICZZ!!!1!!1!!!

sorry, couldn't resist.

seriously, i'm glad to hear that the debate went off in a civil fashion, and that the candidates all stuck to the issues & tearing down the republicans. that is as it should be and reflects well on all of them.

i'm looking forward to some more indepth coverage from whomever was there to report on it. on-line video would be even better.

Novick's action on an issue of ethical conduct was to delay and avoid it, rather than address and resolve it. I'm disappointed.

I am the usual odd man out. But I must speak up and say that Steve Novick and his assistants have been very encouraging and kind to me as a lesser known candidate.

Democratic Party of Oregon and the Oregonian do not invite me for debate of Candidates for US Senate in Pendleton. Well, it shows up the bad faith of Dem. Party and corrupted media. I lose NOTHING. Merkley said that he does not run negative campaign, but is doing opposite: he said no one word that this debate was a dirty debate organized by the Dem. Party and the Oregonian - they didn't invite me. "For the wages of sin is death" - Proverb / Bible Copy of announcement of my Candidacy for US Senate:

PRESS / MEDIA RELEASE: 01/19/07

"Put Loyalty to the Highest Moral Principles, to Country above loyalty to a person, party or government department". (Code of Ethics). For violation of this the punishment should be at least two years prison term. "No person shall be US Senator .... or hold any office who does not support the Constitution of the USA". (Amendment XIV, Section 3)

        To:  We the People                                  Pavel Goberman - Candidate (D, but honest) for 
                                                                                    US Senator in 2008 FEC ID C00412700
                                                                        "Stop Political Prostitution!",   OR ID # S4OR00065
                                                                         P.O. Box 1664
                                                                        Beaverton, OR 97075
                                                                        (503)643-8348
                                                                        www.getenergized.com/vote.html 
                                                                        [email protected] [email protected]

  ELECTION, BESIDE TALK, WHAT IS THE AGENDA AND ISSUES OF CANDIDATES?

People of Oregon, for your, state and national benefits vote for me, Pavel Goberman as US Senator (against G. Smith). Change dirty diapers.

Candidates for US Senate are accepting money (but not me) and are selling themselves, our state and nation to the media, unions and very rich. They have no issues, no agendas, no platforms and no strategy. They do not specify concrete how (if) they will benefits the People of Oregon and nation, and use words: "we must", "we need", "somehow", "I will fight for the little guy" and etc. But I have a plan, Be a Judge: 1) First, as I said: I do NOT accept money from no one, 2) Beside of to win a war in Iraq without loss of our troopers, I could help the People of Oregon and USA in: 3) National security: protect our nation from a weapons of mass destruction. Lock up borders, 4) Economy: stop moving jobs abroad. I have a plan to create more jobs in the USA, 5) Make health care and insurance affordable for all citizens, 6) Stop our dependency of foreign oil or it will cripple this country. I promise to reduce very heavy traffic in all states without spending big money, that will save people time and money, reduce pollution and global warming. Develop vehicles powered by not ethanol, but by electricity and solar energy, 7) Car and truck insurance: if a person has no an accident - insurance companies must return 50% money back. Insure a person, but not his / her vehicles, 8) Reduce property and income taxes for low and middle income families, 9) Reduce cost of drugs: demand to reduce, but NOT negotiate the cost of drugs, 10) Stop oil companies from making huge profits by increasing gas prices as BP had profit $22 billion in 2006. Reduce price of fuel, 11) USPostalService is making $1 billion profit each year. Reduce postage rate, 12) Improve quality of education and discipline in schools, help teachers, 13) Harder punishment for crimes. Protect victims, 14) Stop corporate welfare, that will create a big money for children health insurance, 15) In 2 years reduce huge national deficit. It is an obligation of US Senate, 16) Protect the Flag of the USA from desecration. Many people died for this Flag, 17) Establish child care on all workplaces, 18) Protect seniors and veterans from abuse, neglect and fraud. Nation owes them, 19) Sate courts are robbing people: took filing fees, but dismissing cases without jury trials. It is a crime. Courts must return money and pay fine. Legal Aid Services must help all citizens who need help, 20) I'm against NAFTA because it doesn't benefit our nation, 21) Stop spliting apart and separate parents from children by US government. It is immoral, it is not human. Same did German Nazi during World War II, 22) I'm not a Mormon, but I'm Honest, Incorruptible, with Faith, Integrity and High Moral Principles and promise to support the Constitution of the USA and fight against bribery, corruption and political prostitution. And etc (in my web page). Vote for me is investing in yourself, family, state and nation.

Pavel Goberman

P.S. Message for women with breast cancer in the early stage: sing up for my special fitness program "Get Energized!". It is very possible prevent mastectomy for many women through this fitness regimen: I'm teaching how to make microcurrent, produce microelectricity in the body which may kill the cancer cells, prevent many illnesses, diseases and slow down the aging process. Confidential. On donations. If have no money - I will teach you free of charge: prevent mastectomy is more important than money. P.G.

Hey, Pavel! It's just not a party until you're here.

You Merkley and Novick fans should be interested in this:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18343051

is the audio of Talk of the Nation Wed. Political Junkie segment.

Ken Rudin the Political Junkie responded to a call from someone who lives in Pendleton and had gone to the debate. The caller mentioned that Gordon comes from Pendleton and there was a discussion of Gordon's vulnerability.

Rudin: "He may not be the most vulnerable, but he is vulnerable and someone strong like the House Majority Leader or the Speaker of the House is running against him" and then the caller said he'd been most impressed with candidate Steve Novick.

I just listened to it online because I hadn't heard the whole thing in the car today. Though you folks who have chosen a candidate might find that interesting.

And Novick has you, Steph, and a host of others posting on the blogosphere. Both candidates have people writing negative things about the other on blogs.

None of the candidates touched on Gordon's enviromental record at Smith Frozen Foods nor did they touch on how sleezy he is to work for. what's more they didn't touch on how awful it is that he lives in a million dollar house when thousands need employment and even more need affordable housing. Gordon has done nothing for Veterans and that was not mentioned and it should. Gordon must be sent back to Weston to work on making Smith Frozen Foods a better to work at.

Missing The Boat On Health Care?

By John P. Geyman MD. A professor emeritus of family medicine at the University of Washington. He is past president of Physicians for a National Health Program and author of The Corporate Transformation of Health Care: Can the Public Interest Still Be Served

http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/tik0801/frontpage/missing

The leading Democrats’ health care plans, if enacted, are a prescription for failure by giving the private insurance industry another bonanza: a carte blanche opportunity to sell more limited benefit policies to healthy people and prevent a structural health care fix.

"In their rush to build consensus for universal coverage, all three leading Democratic presidential candidates avoid taking on the real culprit—a failing private health insurance industry. There is abundant evidence of the industry’s failures, such as premiums increasing by three and four times the rates of cost-of- living and median family income. Projections show that, at this rate, premiums alone will consume all of household incomes by 2025. [This also applies to public institutions contributing to public employee health care plans.] Administrative overhead will become five to nine times higher than Original Medicare.“Denial management” is a vigorous growth area within the industry, while proliferation of near worthless limited benefit policies under the guise of insurance (e.g. deductibles up to $5,000 or annual caps as low as $1,000), and successful avoidance of regulation by state and federal regulators for many years is standard. Even as employer-sponsored insurance declines, the insurance bureaucracy keeps expanding as it seeks to exclude higher risk enrollees and keep its “medical loss ratio” attractive to investors (the industry’s often-stated goal is to keep at least 20 percent of premium revenue for overhead and profits). [This is the 20 percent reduction found in the Oregon Community Health Care Bill]

Hi Folks: This is a MUST read.

http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/tik0801/frontpage/missing

Richard Ellmyer Oregon Community Health Care Bill author and project champion President, MacSolutions Inc. - A Macintosh computer consulting business providing web hosting for artists and very small businesses. Writer/Publisher - Oregon Health Watcher commentary - Published on the Internet (http://www.goodgrowthnw.org/health.html) and distributed to 15,000 readers interested in public health care policy in Oregon. To Subscribe: [email protected]

Stephanie, about this:

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha OF COURSE he isn't running a negative campaign! Why should he, indeed, when he has Mitch Greenlick, Mary Nolan, and Kari Chisholm to do that for him?!

Are you saying that nothing else matters in the campaign because of a guest opinion 2 state reps wrote here?

I was talking to a young friend of mine who had seen both candidates in person. He was positively impressed by one and negatively impressed by the other. Should he base his vote on his personal impression, or on what bloggers say?

Thanks Kari. I think you are right to point out anything you have done, esp. if it punctures the "Kari as Merkley operative" balloon.

Stephanie may be a lawyer, but does she realize that her approach is not helping?

At the risk of being called a Merkley attack bot or some such, I believe the caller mentioned here Posted by: LT | Jan 23, 2008 11:58:13 PM who called into Talk of the Nation Political Junkie and said he was impressed with Steve Novick is giving more help to the Novick campaign than Steph. and TJ and all the other bloggers in that he got Novick's name and that he was impressed with Novick to the outside world.

I've lived through a lot of contested primaries. On Steve's front page of his website he now has debate video. Fine, but what about issues not discussed in full in the debate?

Where do the candidates stand on health care beyond the language on their websites? Do they have opinions on the current stimulus package being discussed in Congress which has yet to be passed by the Senate?

OR, was the whole shape of this Senate primary framed when Steve used part of his time in front of an audience of Democrats to attack Merkley's 2003 voting record, and anyone who objected to what Steve said (which we could all watch here via video) was a part of the Merkley negative campaign and the Novick campaign does not want the votes of anyone who didn't think that entire Sunriver speech is the best speech they had ever heard in their lives?

TJ and Stephanie, there is an alternate view of the Greenlick-Nolan post here. It is that 2 state reps were offended by an attack on their Speaker and wished to do pushback on his behalf. If you think Steve does not want the votes of anyone with that opinion of the Greenlick-Nolan post here, I suggest you communicate with Steve and ask if that is his view. He may well want the votes of people who were offended by that part of the Sunriver speech but liked other things he has said and done.

If we are all supposed to be little robots and support Steve because TJ and Stephanie tell us to (that strategy worked real well for Tom Bruggere, didn't it?), then I will decide my vote in May, seal the envelope, take it to County Elections, drop it in the box, and never tell anyone how I voted. Peer pressure politics does not work with me! I think for myself!

And Novick has you, Steph, and a host of others posting on the blogosphere. Both candidates have people writing negative things about the other on blogs.

So far I've just dipped my toe in the latest Merkley-Novick shark pool, but James X. I have to say I see a big difference between Stephanie/TJ and Greenlick/Nolan/Chisolm. Greenlick and Nolan clearly coordinated that Novick hit piece with the Merkley campaign. You just don't write something that inflammatory against your boss's opponent without checking first with your boss. And Kari admits that the Merkley camp asked him to "investigate" the PDA incident. I'm not aware of any formal connection between Novick supporters such as Stephanie and TJ and the Novick campaign.

So on the one hand you have Novick supporters saying negative things about Merkley. On the other, you have the Merkley campaign coordinating personal negative attacks against Novick. There's just no equivalency between the two.

But you know what's really pissing me off about the latest episode? Merkley's going to kick Novick's ass in the primary. Everyone except my friend TJ knows that. It's probably going to be like a 15 to 20 point win. So the fact that Merkley is going to such lengths to tarnish Steve's reputation -- on a personal level -- just doesn't sit well with me. It's like a Division I college team going up against the state high school football champions, and instead of just playing the game and beating them, they start talking trash, blowing small controversies into "the dirtiest football play ever", and generally acting like beating the high school team requires them to pull out every trick in the book.

The reality is that if Merkley, with the entire establishment behind him, cannot beat the maverick Novick, it will be one of the biggest upsets in political history. Merkley needs to save the personal stuff for Smith.

So the fact that Merkley is going to such lengths to tarnish Steve's reputation -- on a personal level -- just doesn't sit well with me.

It's apparent to me that Mr. Novick is tarnishing his own reputation.

By refusing to address the fact that a member of his staff is leading a group which worked toward shoving through an endorsement for him, Mr Novick is completely at fault for this problem.

The effort to blame Mr. Merkley for this is shallow. It also assumes that those of us who generally read Blue Oregon and don't comment are too stupid to see through it.

I think the Greenlick/Nolan hit piece was the first low blow of the campaign. I know that view depends on where you stand on the war resolution, but I think Novick's critique of that vote was firm but respectful. The Greenlick/Nolan piece in response was personal and offensive. (Nolan's my rep, and while I rarely vote on any one issue, she won't be getting my vote again. Come to think of it, neither will Burdick after her run against Sten. Hmmm. . .I'm running out of candidates.)

As for the PDA endorsement "scandal", I'm bothered by the fact that Merkley sent his attack dog (Kari) on a hyperbolic jihad over a pretty minor ethical infraction. Oregon politics is a small pool. Everyone who works for a candidate is going to be involved with other groups. In this case, Kimmerly tried to get the PDA, a group that she's been a member of for a long time, to endorse her candidate. That also happens all the time. What she did wrong was that she failed to be up front about her involvement with Novick. That's a lack of judgment, and it's fine to point that out. But it's not a capital offense.

Kari -- a paid Merkley staffer -- showed just as much of a lack of judgment by engaging in what the national director of the PDA called the "swiftboating" of a Democratic primary candidate and misrepresenting his conversations with PDA national.

So you have one campaign trying to boost its own candidate up through an underhanded endorsement. You have another campaign trying to rip the other candidate down through a concerted, months-long attack strategy.

I'd love to hear Kimmerly apologize for the PDA thing, and Novick follow that up with some statement about how he's reasserting to all of his staff the importance of being ethical in everything they do. I'd also love to hear Merkley apologize for directing his staff to engage in a scorched earth campaign against Novick.

I'm not holding my breath for either, so I'm back to supporting who I think is the candidate who most has the characteristics that the Democratic party needs in DC. And IMHO, that's Novick.

kevin and marnie both know there isn't any evidence of wrongdoing--either executed or attempted-- by kimmerly, and that the primary source for those allegations believes them to represent a false smear against her--so their persistence here begins to approach libel.

I've been waiting for Mr. Novick to address the basic factual assertions of the situation. He has refused to do so. No one, including Ms. Kimmerly, is denying that she is leading an organization who is potentially endorsing her boss. She isn't stepping aside. And accounts of the process so far show that the endorsement would have gone through if several people hadn't stopped it, despite what Kimmerly's attempt to push it along.

torridjoe has sought for awhile to downplay what has gone on here. In my opinion, what Kimmerly has done is unethical and takes legitimacy out of what should be an honest process for a good organization.

His attempt to make this about libel is just another sad ploy. And he himself tarnishes Novick by that kind of association.

This is false information, as I noted.

If it is false information, then Ms Kimmerly should say so. It appears to me from reading the email originally sent to Mr. Merkley that the first meeting was to endorse a candidate, not to just hold a meeting about it. That evidence goes completely against what you are saying.

And this still doesn't address the issue of Mr. Novick's staffer running the organization that's might be endorsing him. I know you don't like to hear this torridjoe, but it just doesn't smell right. And Mr. Novick is STILL NOT ADDRESSING IT.

The accounts you're referring to are not discredited at all. Not by you. Not by Kimmerly. Not by Novick.

I'm done on this issue until or unless Mr. Novick makes it right.

Appearance is not fact. The first meeting might have been in part an endorsement meeting, but the email is to invite him for an interview. Nowhere does it say there will be a vote.

Then there shouldn't be a problem with Mr. Novick or Ms. Kimmerly clarifying the situation.

Yet they aren't.

Reps Nolan and Greenlick accurated characterized the it and have been ruthlessly attacked every since for simply speaking the truth.

I don't have a problem with Nolan and Greenlick's view of the resolution. It's one issue where reasonable people can disagree on what Merkley should have done, and each person's view is probably colored by their larger view of the body politic. I do have a problem with their tone and language. To wit:

Our passionate commitment to changing this kind of demagoguery and false leadership in Washington, D.C., is why we will be working hard to make sure Jeff Merkley is our next United States Senator.

Wow, so because Novick's view on the resolution is different than theirs, he's a "demagogue" and "false leader".

We are with Jeff because he stands up for what he believes in, regardless of how politically popular it may be. He doesn't engage in petty backbiting of the kind Novick is all too willing to embrace.

What we don't need is an opportunist so narrowly focused on a short-term political gain that he loses sight of what makes us proud to be Democrats.

So Novick is a petty backbiter and an opportunist, narrowly focused on his own political gain, with no vision as to what it means to be a true Democrat.

The attack was purely personal by the end, attacking Novick's character, and that set the tone for most of the bickering that's followed. So yeah, I guess I'm still upset at the Merkley camp for not distancing themselves from the personal attacks, and then launching another one about Novick's "ethics" over a pretty "low stakes" (thanks Mapes) endorsement.

Sorry I was out today. I doubt Nolan, Greenlick, or Kari would write what they have if they didn't feel it. And I don't think the Merkley campaign can tell Kari what to write, either.

I said that the Nolan/Greenlick letter had been the most negative message of the campaign at the time, and that it seemed unlikely that it wasn't OK'd by the campaign. It was surprisingly strong in emotional intensity defending Merkley and the rest of their colleagues and attacking Novick. While I'm sure the Merkley campaign had an opportunity to kill it, I doubt they could make Nolan and Greenlick say such intense things if they didn't mean it.

But from my perspective, I see so much negative, negative, negative on the blogs. It has ceased to be important to me how close the people posting it are to the campaigns.

Folks, I was in the process of writing a long comment offline to copy into this comment box. I did considerable research for it.

But after reading TA's post about the accident, perhaps it is time to just think what Paul Wellstone would have done had it not been for the plane crash, and what kind of people we are as Democrats. It was said 40 years ago that when Bobby Kennedy died it wasn't just that a candidate died, it also drained hope and passion from many people. Don't let that happen here, especially in the year when the Republican who took Wellstone's seat and the Republican who defeated Max Cleland actually have to run for re-election in a year Republicans are having an uphill battle.

Just think of some of the things Republicans have done in recent years. In one of his books Al Franken documents what they did to the Wellstone funeral--complaining because Trent Lott was not greeted with cheers when he came into the memorial service along with other Senators; saying Tom Harkin and some of the other speakers who had just lost a close friend should not have spoken from the heart but rather had some authority (who they never said)"approve" their remarks so they wouldn't offend Republicans; basically acting in ways they wouldn't have approved of for Lee Atwater's funeral but it was OK for them to intrude on a Democratic funeral.

How would Paul Wellstone (how would Tom Harkin, whose run for the US Senate seat the year he beat Sen. Jepsen was about as bad as can be imagined) react to some of the things which have been said here and elsewhere? We can't discuss what Steve says on his website about the FISA vote because we are stuck in an endless loop of charges and counter charges about campaign events last October? Is that really campaigning in the spirit of Paul Wellstone? He defeated an incumbent with wit, humor and hard work. How is attacking other Democrats going to win in November? And if the mild campaign tactics bother people now, what will happen when Republicans try the really nasty attacks? Will all Democrats be united at that time, or as turned off by the primary as many were in 1992 and 1996?

Al Franken is running a more inspired US Senate campaign than we are seeing here in Oregon. Isn't it time to go that route instead?

If someone who has just discovered Blue Oregon wants to know what the fight is about, Steve's Oregon Summit speech at Sunriver is at http://www.votehook.com/files/images/Summit.doc

The response by the 2 state reps can be found by using the Blue Oregon Google window at the top of the page--just type in Greenlick and Nolan.

But let's get to some issue questions for the candidates and see how specific the answers can be.

1) Whether you support Wyden's health care proposal or one of the presidential candidates or a proposal you have written yourself or signed onto, why do you support that? Would it help the person who is working part time, temp, 2 jobs, or unemployed? Is Westlund's idea of standardized medical billing forms a worthwhile reform?

2)Our candidates are supposed to be very bright and experienced, so what do they think of the just announced stimulus package? Are their views closer to those of Speaker Pelosi or Gov. Kulongoski? Why?

3) Ever heard of the Concord Coalition? Is it time to bring their point of view back into the discussion? Why or why not?

4) If elected, do you promise to do the every county every year town hall meetings that Sen. Wyden does?

If our very bright, very experienced US Senate candidates can't talk in the level of detail required by those questions, I suggest we all tune out of this Senate race and turn our attention to the races where people are capable of having at least semi-intelligent debates relevant to the lives of ordinary people: presidential, statewide (yes, I've had some interesting conversations and email exchanges on issues from statewide campaigns) and legislative.

Then the people who want to argue over last October can do so without bothering the rest of us.