I've watched with interest over the past couple weeks as the media follows the campaigns and their statements. Their take on the issue seems to involve making some sort of balance out of the matter. The general theme seems to be that both campaigns are making attack statements; which is true as far as it goes.
The Obama campaign is hitting the line that McCain is Bush III and that he doesn't have a consistent stance. There is enough truth in this to pass the smell test, certainly exaggeration and cherry picking is involved, but within the range expected by voters. The McCain campaign has run with the same types of statement, although the truth content has been demonstrated to be low, and lower than voters generally accept. In this respect the media is quite correct in noting dual negativity, and correct in noting that Obama's volume exceeds McCain's.
Obama has stated quite baldly that the McCain camp has lied, and they have quite baldly done so. This is pretty personal and this is where the actual matter becomes messy and outside the media's balance. The statements about lies were laid onto specific statements which happen to have been exactly that - lies. If voters choose to carry that onto the candidate's character, they are free to do so. The contrast with the McCain campaign's rhetoric in regard to Obama's character is complete. The McCain object is to create doubt and fear with direct attacks on Obama's character, with an undercurrent of fear and race. This is the attack subset of character assassination, it asks voters to dislike a person, not policy or ideology.
I do dislike the McCain campaign, personally, and this is on the basis of their behavior in the personal regard. I strongly disagree with their politics and whatever their ideology is ( a label for it escapes me) but that is a different matter. It is personal enough that I would neither shake McCain's hand nor be cordial in the unlikely event we had close contact. He has become the sort of character I detest. Awhile ago that would not have been the case, I'd have been cordial and quite willing to talk politics - that doesn't mean he'd have liked it a lot. I consider these people to be colleagues in public service, whatever political disagreements exist, right up until they demonstrate a set of character flaws I cannot excuse or avoid.
I don't want Gordon Smith as my Senator and will work to get him out and replace him with Jeff Merkley. Gordon has pushed up against my limits with his ads, but my primary objection to him is his record and ideology. Some of my friends with similar views to mine may find that odd, but I am fairly forgiving of electoral necessity in others. I am willing to be careful in how I state things, but I won't mislead, but that is a personal decision - politically relevant to myself only. I would appreciate and state my appreciation for candidates who follow a similar line. In fact, Jeff Merkely gets my endorsement not only for is ideology and policy ideas, but also for the type of character he has demonstrated. Even if Jeff had followed Gordon's lead, I'd have backed him over Gordon, but with less pleasure. That is a simple matter of what is best for Oregon and the US.
You don't throw the laundry detergent through the window because it says, "New and Improved," on the bottle. It still works better than beating the clothes on a rock even as you understand that advertising isn't Truth. People give me grief for being Democratic, a partisan. I am admittedly that because the Democratic Party, for all its failings, has managed to be better than beating clothes on a rock.
The media balance on this is utter nonsense. You cannot lump apples and oranges together as fruits and maintain that they are the same thing in taste and texture or that disliking one means disliking the other. This is not balance, it is not fairness, it an illogical and politically driven theme. It is a statement on what ails the media and our public discourse. If it is raining it makes little sense to give credence to someone who says it isn't because they don't like it and anyone who takes that seriously is going to find themselves all wet.
Showing posts with label Gordon Smith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gordon Smith. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
$1.5 Million Golf Clubs Paid For By Illegal Serfs
Gordon Smith, a man who has proven his truthfulness with lying political advertisements, may have a bigger lie to defend. That lie would have to do with how it is he makes his millions of dollars to buy golf clubs and mansions and exotic Senate office furnishing with.
Willamette Week went over to Weston, Oregon to take a look at Smith Frozen Foods and - oooh, big surprise - found out that most everyone knows they hire illegally. They pay real crappy also, you can do that and make millions if you've got an illegal source of labor - I've said it before - the new serfs. Minimum wage to process food, irregular work, and apparently draconian employment policies all can follow hand in glove if you have an easily repressed work force. It is real tough to make the case that these jobs are being taken away from Americans, the wages and conditions are way too shoddy to garner much interest. From that point you might start to ask questions - like why are the wages and conditions too crummy?
Yup. Obviously working at Smith's plant is a real incentive for legal immigrants - everybody wants to work for peanuts and get treated badly - while they make a smarmy haircut millions. You may have heard of E-verify, a voluntary program that allows businesses to check that Social Security numbers match the person,
But Smith wasn't pleased with it, they didn't like it,
Well it certainly would be inconvenient to the practice of hiring illegally. It would sort of dry up that piece of the labor market - unless you were willing to blatantly hire illegally. Legally you can deny a certain amount of responsibility for illegal hiring but there are limits to it, not sufficient limits, but they exist. You are supposed to photocopy documents used for employment verification -
But, but...
You have to remember that there is little incentive for the plutocrats to hire legally when they have access to a labor pool that they can exploit. Wages in E OR are below the State's median income, it certainly doesn't help when a US Senator is doing his level best to get rich off the backs of people he can exploit while he does favors for other plutocrats. I think maybe it is time that Gordon got a break from the rigors of Congressional duty and took some care of his business, like before he winds up charged with a crime. He is aware that it is criminal behavior.
What a punk.
Willamette Week went over to Weston, Oregon to take a look at Smith Frozen Foods and - oooh, big surprise - found out that most everyone knows they hire illegally. They pay real crappy also, you can do that and make millions if you've got an illegal source of labor - I've said it before - the new serfs. Minimum wage to process food, irregular work, and apparently draconian employment policies all can follow hand in glove if you have an easily repressed work force. It is real tough to make the case that these jobs are being taken away from Americans, the wages and conditions are way too shoddy to garner much interest. From that point you might start to ask questions - like why are the wages and conditions too crummy?
On Aug. 14, Smith told WW: “We need to support legal immigration and not incentivize illegal immigration.” A year earlier he told KXL’s Lars Larson his company goes “the extra mile” to make sure it doesn’t hire any illegal immigrants.
Yup. Obviously working at Smith's plant is a real incentive for legal immigrants - everybody wants to work for peanuts and get treated badly - while they make a smarmy haircut millions. You may have heard of E-verify, a voluntary program that allows businesses to check that Social Security numbers match the person,
A spokeswoman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement defended the free, voluntary program. “If an employer uses E-verify and they encounter errors, there are steps in place to address that,” says ICE spokeswoman Lorie Dankers. A representative for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services added that E-verify results in errors less than 1 percent of the time.
But Smith wasn't pleased with it, they didn't like it,
Smith Frozen Foods chooses not to use this program. “We tried it in the past, and we were not very happy with it,” Brown says of E-verify, which is used by 80,000 companies in the United States. “It doesn’t work very well.”
Well it certainly would be inconvenient to the practice of hiring illegally. It would sort of dry up that piece of the labor market - unless you were willing to blatantly hire illegally. Legally you can deny a certain amount of responsibility for illegal hiring but there are limits to it, not sufficient limits, but they exist. You are supposed to photocopy documents used for employment verification -
According to a May 23, 1988, memo from the U.S. Department of Justice obtained by WW, Bob Cortinas, who was then Smith’s personnel director, told federal investigators he was instructed by Smith’s legal department not to photocopy workers’ documents “so that it would make it harder for [immigration officials] to find errors.”
But, but...
He is a U.S. senator who voted against granting amnesty to the millions of illegal immigrants currently living in the United States.
You have to remember that there is little incentive for the plutocrats to hire legally when they have access to a labor pool that they can exploit. Wages in E OR are below the State's median income, it certainly doesn't help when a US Senator is doing his level best to get rich off the backs of people he can exploit while he does favors for other plutocrats. I think maybe it is time that Gordon got a break from the rigors of Congressional duty and took some care of his business, like before he winds up charged with a crime. He is aware that it is criminal behavior.
What a punk.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Gordon Smith Would Be A Democrat If Only...
If only Gordon weren't a Bush shill and right wing voter he'd be a Democrat, or maybe if he hadn't done some things...
Gordon Smith, collector of million dollar golf clubs and quick to make international Senatorial jaunts that involve that sport, can't seem to make up his mind how he wants Oregonians to view him. His votes say he's a Right Republican Bush Diehard and Big Money shill. His ads say he's an independent thinker who likes to hook up with Democrats...Democrats like John Kerry. That would be the 2004 Presidential candidate Kerry whom Gordon characterized as "French" as an insult and as a socialist. Oregonians might want to think about that as Gordon touts his "bipartisan" approach to politics. In view of the condition of the nation's economy and Smith's view of Kerry and Bush one has to wonder if that is the course we'd really want to follow.
I suppose Oregonians can figure out why Smith references Barack Obama, though to what end is questionable. He surely didn't think Obama wouldn't notice and make clear his preference for Jeff Merkley. So what happened is that Democratic Senators didn't think too much of their "friend" Gordon using them, there is a limit to Senate collegiality.
Since the Democrats didn't show too much inclination to boost his chances, he ditched his State Co-chair of McCain's campaign and the RNC convention - to concentrate on his campaign... The McCain thing may just piss off ole John, the duties apparently amounted to the use of his name. McCain and St Paul aren't the only Republicans Smith is taking a whack at, Oregon Republican legislators signed off on the bipartisan plan to renovate the Salem building and Smith is now characterizing them as well as Jeff Merkley as spendthrifts. Want to bet they're not pleased to have to defend themselves in their elections from an attack by a fellow Republican?
Gordon's political ambitions and the truth don't have a lot in common, one might note his claims through "Democrats for Smith" to have been amongst the first to oppose the Iraq War. Not even close. This guy will say just about anything to get re-elected, and there is plenty of question as to why. You might expect some legislation to have been authored by someone this desperate to stay in the Senate, but - nope. Maybe he wants an excuse to stay in his mansion in Maryland and not be in nasty old Pendleton, OR. Pendleton's gain, in my opinion.
If you hadn't noticed, I like Jeff Merkley. I first got acquainted with him about 5 years ago and I've watched his Oregon career with interest and admiration from a distance ever since. I've never seen him caught out in a lie or misrepresentation and you can compare that to the pea packer 'from' Pendleton.
Gordon Smith, collector of million dollar golf clubs and quick to make international Senatorial jaunts that involve that sport, can't seem to make up his mind how he wants Oregonians to view him. His votes say he's a Right Republican Bush Diehard and Big Money shill. His ads say he's an independent thinker who likes to hook up with Democrats...Democrats like John Kerry. That would be the 2004 Presidential candidate Kerry whom Gordon characterized as "French" as an insult and as a socialist. Oregonians might want to think about that as Gordon touts his "bipartisan" approach to politics. In view of the condition of the nation's economy and Smith's view of Kerry and Bush one has to wonder if that is the course we'd really want to follow.
I suppose Oregonians can figure out why Smith references Barack Obama, though to what end is questionable. He surely didn't think Obama wouldn't notice and make clear his preference for Jeff Merkley. So what happened is that Democratic Senators didn't think too much of their "friend" Gordon using them, there is a limit to Senate collegiality.
Since the Democrats didn't show too much inclination to boost his chances, he ditched his State Co-chair of McCain's campaign and the RNC convention - to concentrate on his campaign... The McCain thing may just piss off ole John, the duties apparently amounted to the use of his name. McCain and St Paul aren't the only Republicans Smith is taking a whack at, Oregon Republican legislators signed off on the bipartisan plan to renovate the Salem building and Smith is now characterizing them as well as Jeff Merkley as spendthrifts. Want to bet they're not pleased to have to defend themselves in their elections from an attack by a fellow Republican?
Gordon's political ambitions and the truth don't have a lot in common, one might note his claims through "Democrats for Smith" to have been amongst the first to oppose the Iraq War. Not even close. This guy will say just about anything to get re-elected, and there is plenty of question as to why. You might expect some legislation to have been authored by someone this desperate to stay in the Senate, but - nope. Maybe he wants an excuse to stay in his mansion in Maryland and not be in nasty old Pendleton, OR. Pendleton's gain, in my opinion.
If you hadn't noticed, I like Jeff Merkley. I first got acquainted with him about 5 years ago and I've watched his Oregon career with interest and admiration from a distance ever since. I've never seen him caught out in a lie or misrepresentation and you can compare that to the pea packer 'from' Pendleton.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Voting Against Gordon Smith - Jeff Merkley
If you are one of those rare birds, a moderate Republican or moderate right independent, you might find yourself in the position of wanting to vote against Gordon Smith. I'd applaud that decision, he doesn't represent your point of view, his voting record says not. He is in fact a George W Bush lap dog and exercises his "moderate" stance only when his Party knows it doesn't matter to the vote total. He is allowed by the Leadership to "backslide" for left leaning Oregonian voters if they don't need him.
Many of you are finally angry about the corporatism and wealth favoring of the (R) brand, that is the pocket Gordon lives in. He's never seen an ordinary citizen bill he was in favor of, and if you live in OR, you are overwhelmingly in the "ordinary citizen" category. This is not a State of big money interests, not in any comparison to most of the country, our median income lags the average and our business sizes considerably lag the upper end. Our interests in truly big business come mostly in the matter of purchases, we aren't employed by them. When Gordon sides with the Bush faction he ignores the interests of Oregonians.
Jeff Merkley is Oregonian in view point, that is a consequence of his political history and personal history. His business dealings have been small, his contributors small, and as Majority Leader his focus was Oregon. You don't have to think too hard about what that focus means nationally, not that Oregon will get special treatment, but that Oregonian type interests will be served. Jeff certainly is not Republican, not previous incarnations and especially not the current ones, but he is quintessentially Oregonian. He is the guy a nail banger or logger or retailer might know and be friends with, that's his personality but more to the point, his background. It is unlikely a person moves greatly beyond their background, Gordon is wealth and privilege and shows no sign of thinking past that. Unless you're a real wheel, you wouldn't socially find yourself in the same room as Gordon - now or then. I'm not proposing the faux have a beer with George kind of thing, Merkley is the real deal.
I'm a Democrat, and I'm a left Democrat and I've been paying attention to politics for a long time so I don't easily get enthused about politicians. I look at them and take a pretty cold blooded assessment, and no, Jeff isn't as left as I am. That orientation is rare in this country and I don't expect it to be much reflected in politicians with any hope of election. Sometimes I find myself voting against a politician - generally Republican - rather than voting for one; not this time. Jeff Merkley represents what is good about the Democratic Party along with a practical turn of mind that means he can get things done. A frozen ideologue who can't get anything done is useless, maybe it would make for good TV, but that isn't the object of electing people. Jeff knows how to take stands and he's taken some strong ones, but he knows how to make things work. As House Leader Jeff has demonstrated this election cycle already - in Democratic electoral leads - just how successful he has been at reflecting Oregonians.
The Republicans in this State are in disarray, they are getting pounded badly enough that a lot of possible districts aren't being contested by them and they're in trouble in the ones they are contesting. This doesn't happen by accident, it isn't really a reflection of GWB's approval ratings, it is about approval of what the Democrats have done here. Here. Jeff Merkley, House Majority Leader. He gets things done, he gets things done Oregonians approve of, ask yourself how good that is for the nation as a whole to have Jeff Merkley bringing that to national politics.
I have that Jeff Merkley ActBlue button on my sideboard and I'm proud to have it there. I'm proud that the Merkley campaign considers my respect and advocacy of value to them because I seldom give this level of support to any politician. I am a Democratic Party of Oregon functionary and I do work for Democratic politicians pretty much as a matter of course, this is more than that. This isn't a matter of a generalized our guy versus theirs, this is a matter of Jeff Merkley can be a real good Senator, bringing to the US Senate the things about Oregon that are good and right. Jeff Merkley isn't a little better than Gordon Smith with a different ( ) after his name, Jeff Merkely is better than most candidates anybody is running anywhere for any office from any Party. That's strong language - it's merited.
***Use that button - this stuff doesn't happen for free, ya know***
Merkley for Senate
Many of you are finally angry about the corporatism and wealth favoring of the (R) brand, that is the pocket Gordon lives in. He's never seen an ordinary citizen bill he was in favor of, and if you live in OR, you are overwhelmingly in the "ordinary citizen" category. This is not a State of big money interests, not in any comparison to most of the country, our median income lags the average and our business sizes considerably lag the upper end. Our interests in truly big business come mostly in the matter of purchases, we aren't employed by them. When Gordon sides with the Bush faction he ignores the interests of Oregonians.
Jeff Merkley is Oregonian in view point, that is a consequence of his political history and personal history. His business dealings have been small, his contributors small, and as Majority Leader his focus was Oregon. You don't have to think too hard about what that focus means nationally, not that Oregon will get special treatment, but that Oregonian type interests will be served. Jeff certainly is not Republican, not previous incarnations and especially not the current ones, but he is quintessentially Oregonian. He is the guy a nail banger or logger or retailer might know and be friends with, that's his personality but more to the point, his background. It is unlikely a person moves greatly beyond their background, Gordon is wealth and privilege and shows no sign of thinking past that. Unless you're a real wheel, you wouldn't socially find yourself in the same room as Gordon - now or then. I'm not proposing the faux have a beer with George kind of thing, Merkley is the real deal.
I'm a Democrat, and I'm a left Democrat and I've been paying attention to politics for a long time so I don't easily get enthused about politicians. I look at them and take a pretty cold blooded assessment, and no, Jeff isn't as left as I am. That orientation is rare in this country and I don't expect it to be much reflected in politicians with any hope of election. Sometimes I find myself voting against a politician - generally Republican - rather than voting for one; not this time. Jeff Merkley represents what is good about the Democratic Party along with a practical turn of mind that means he can get things done. A frozen ideologue who can't get anything done is useless, maybe it would make for good TV, but that isn't the object of electing people. Jeff knows how to take stands and he's taken some strong ones, but he knows how to make things work. As House Leader Jeff has demonstrated this election cycle already - in Democratic electoral leads - just how successful he has been at reflecting Oregonians.
The Republicans in this State are in disarray, they are getting pounded badly enough that a lot of possible districts aren't being contested by them and they're in trouble in the ones they are contesting. This doesn't happen by accident, it isn't really a reflection of GWB's approval ratings, it is about approval of what the Democrats have done here. Here. Jeff Merkley, House Majority Leader. He gets things done, he gets things done Oregonians approve of, ask yourself how good that is for the nation as a whole to have Jeff Merkley bringing that to national politics.
I have that Jeff Merkley ActBlue button on my sideboard and I'm proud to have it there. I'm proud that the Merkley campaign considers my respect and advocacy of value to them because I seldom give this level of support to any politician. I am a Democratic Party of Oregon functionary and I do work for Democratic politicians pretty much as a matter of course, this is more than that. This isn't a matter of a generalized our guy versus theirs, this is a matter of Jeff Merkley can be a real good Senator, bringing to the US Senate the things about Oregon that are good and right. Jeff Merkley isn't a little better than Gordon Smith with a different ( ) after his name, Jeff Merkely is better than most candidates anybody is running anywhere for any office from any Party. That's strong language - it's merited.
***Use that button - this stuff doesn't happen for free, ya know***
Merkley for Senate
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Who's Got My Million Dollar Putter ? ! !
Today we got the sad news from Kari that Gordon Smith has cancelled his Bandon Dunes Golf Fundraiser. No multi-million dollar corporate jets winging in and the $5K per checks go...where? Kari wonders,
I'm not about to steal much of Kari's snark thunder so you gotta go there...
But he's missed one, you'll have to take my word for it,
#7
He's heard about Karl's analysis and was skeert Obamabi would be there taking up his wall space and one can't have the caddies doing that... Per Strom Thurmond per Trent Lott per Gordo...
Possible Explanation #1: He didn't want to be photographed hanging out with a bunch of special interest lobbyists. (Of course, his people say that's not the case...)
***snip***
Possible Explanation #6:Or maybe, just maybe, there really was a scheduling conflict. Your job, my fellow BlueOregonians, is to figure out where Gordon Smith is on Saturday. What could possibly have come up at the not-exactly-last minute?
I'm not about to steal much of Kari's snark thunder so you gotta go there...
But he's missed one, you'll have to take my word for it,
#7
"Even if you never met him, you know this guy," Rove said, per Christianne Klein. "He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."
He's heard about Karl's analysis and was skeert Obamabi would be there taking up his wall space and one can't have the caddies doing that... Per Strom Thurmond per Trent Lott per Gordo...
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Gordon Smith Puttering Around
Surely by now you've heard about Sen Gordon Smith (R-OR)'s spendy golf clubs, 4 of them for a cool $1.5M and in honor of his "hobby" he's having a $5K per person fundraiser at Bandon Dunes Golf Resort. One could hope he'll get caught in a sand trap.
Gordon and his allies may think the only thing Obama is good for is caddying on those links, not to put too fines a point on it:
Gordon found the whole affair quite unfair, surely Trent didn't mean anymore by it than Gordon meant by saying he's opposed the Iraq War from the beginning.
If you listen to the whole mess, you might find yourself wondering....
(I have liberally used my pals at Blue Oregon)
Gordon seems to have stayed out of the Jack Abramroff dust up, though considering their mutual interest in Golf... Please let's send this pea-picker back to Pendleton by going over to the side bar and giving Jeff Merkley some bucks. This would b a really good time to do it, the election is freshly over and there is a lull until things heat up later.
Gordon and his allies may think the only thing Obama is good for is caddying on those links, not to put too fines a point on it:
Gordon found the whole affair quite unfair, surely Trent didn't mean anymore by it than Gordon meant by saying he's opposed the Iraq War from the beginning.
If you listen to the whole mess, you might find yourself wondering....
(I have liberally used my pals at Blue Oregon)
Gordon seems to have stayed out of the Jack Abramroff dust up, though considering their mutual interest in Golf... Please let's send this pea-picker back to Pendleton by going over to the side bar and giving Jeff Merkley some bucks. This would b a really good time to do it, the election is freshly over and there is a lull until things heat up later.
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Gordo on Libby
Gordo on Libby and George II, KATU , make of this whatever you think you can. I can't make anything of it in light of his votes, except maybe he'll say darn near anything to get elected.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
DeFazio, The Senate, And Eastern Oregon
I won't tell readers that Peter DeFazio will win a Senate race in Eastern Oregon, he could and conditions are good, but it will take smart politics to do it. Democrats out here are hungry for a Candidate and Peter DeFazio has a consistent and honorable record. His easy going populism should play well in an area that has not benefited from Republican economic policies. He would not have to dodge a gun-grabber identity, his "B" rating from the NRA is not too bad for a national Democrat. Gordon Smith has a voting record that he is stuck with, if a campaign makes sure of it.
Democrats can win out here, Ron Wyden (D) has carried or nearly carried these counties, Gov. Kulongoski got good numbers (despite his campaign's early lack of attention) and local Democrats can do well. There are national issues that have, over the years, very nearly poisoned the well for Democrats, but a DeFazio campaign could overcome that. Money and press are a large part of that, but so is grass roots, and Democratic Parties in the counties can be or are active. The $5 contributions mentioned here are the kind of thing that show a grass roots support. A candidate must have visible support out here, signage and press and a campaign headquarters of some sort are a must and that takes attention. Ron Wyden pays visible attention to Eastern Oregon, others have dropped the ball. Fortunately for national candidates most television out here is westside, their ads get play, but on the ground support is essential. Newspapers, radio, and a general noise level are important. A viable candidate will get newspaper attention, but letters to the editor from locals and a general buzz are only possible from grassroots.
Peter DeFazio is a skilled politician and he knows this stuff, that's why a demonstration of support is so important, those $5 contributions.The Senate is very narrowly in Democratic hands, any Democratic losses would be catastrophic and additions would be hugely beneficial. Peter DeFazio is one of the best of the Democrats in the House today, in order to show that the loss of his presence in the House is outweighed by his chances in the Senate he needs to be shown broad support, he and the national Democratic machine. Bloggers can help, but it will take more than that, his Website has important info on his activities and contact information, he encourages E-mail as post mail is slow to reach him. Phone calls and letters:
Washington, DC Office2134 Rayburn H.O.B.Washington DC, 20515Phone: (202) 225-6416
Eugene Office405 East 8th Ave. #2030Eugene, OR 97401Phone: (541) 465-6732
Coos Bay Office125 Central, Suite 350Coos Bay, OR 97420Phone: (541) 269-2609
Roseburg Office612 S.E Jackson Street, Room 9Roseburg, OR 97470Phone: (541) 440-3523
If you'd like to see someone like Peter DeFazio as Oregon's other Democratic Senator it's going to take persuasion. The Smith people have more money than god himself and certain rather stupid editorial boards on their side, Pete needs to be shown that he has more on his side. Not only does Gordon Smith need to be sent home, he needs to be replaced by someone like Peter DeFazio, that being the case, why not have the actual article?
This will be cross posted at Chuck for and Bluesteel Democrats and Draft DeFazio since it's been awhile since I've had somebody to actually be "For." I'm doing my little part, how about you?
Democrats can win out here, Ron Wyden (D) has carried or nearly carried these counties, Gov. Kulongoski got good numbers (despite his campaign's early lack of attention) and local Democrats can do well. There are national issues that have, over the years, very nearly poisoned the well for Democrats, but a DeFazio campaign could overcome that. Money and press are a large part of that, but so is grass roots, and Democratic Parties in the counties can be or are active. The $5 contributions mentioned here are the kind of thing that show a grass roots support. A candidate must have visible support out here, signage and press and a campaign headquarters of some sort are a must and that takes attention. Ron Wyden pays visible attention to Eastern Oregon, others have dropped the ball. Fortunately for national candidates most television out here is westside, their ads get play, but on the ground support is essential. Newspapers, radio, and a general noise level are important. A viable candidate will get newspaper attention, but letters to the editor from locals and a general buzz are only possible from grassroots.
Peter DeFazio is a skilled politician and he knows this stuff, that's why a demonstration of support is so important, those $5 contributions.The Senate is very narrowly in Democratic hands, any Democratic losses would be catastrophic and additions would be hugely beneficial. Peter DeFazio is one of the best of the Democrats in the House today, in order to show that the loss of his presence in the House is outweighed by his chances in the Senate he needs to be shown broad support, he and the national Democratic machine. Bloggers can help, but it will take more than that, his Website has important info on his activities and contact information, he encourages E-mail as post mail is slow to reach him. Phone calls and letters:
Washington, DC Office2134 Rayburn H.O.B.Washington DC, 20515Phone: (202) 225-6416
Eugene Office405 East 8th Ave. #2030Eugene, OR 97401Phone: (541) 465-6732
Coos Bay Office125 Central, Suite 350Coos Bay, OR 97420Phone: (541) 269-2609
Roseburg Office612 S.E Jackson Street, Room 9Roseburg, OR 97470Phone: (541) 440-3523
If you'd like to see someone like Peter DeFazio as Oregon's other Democratic Senator it's going to take persuasion. The Smith people have more money than god himself and certain rather stupid editorial boards on their side, Pete needs to be shown that he has more on his side. Not only does Gordon Smith need to be sent home, he needs to be replaced by someone like Peter DeFazio, that being the case, why not have the actual article?
This will be cross posted at Chuck for and Bluesteel Democrats and Draft DeFazio since it's been awhile since I've had somebody to actually be "For." I'm doing my little part, how about you?
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Minimum Sense
The House lived up to its promise and passed a nice clean minimum wage bill, raise the minimum wage, period. The Senate put one together, same idea. Well, not gonna happen that way, no siree, not in our Senate. This is the responsible outfit, the six year guys, they know better than to go off half-cocked, you gotta look it over real careful like and make some changes.
Now just exactly who has suffered from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? Who is it that has benefitted from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? There is a case for saying there is membership in these classes. This ought to be a part of the consideration given this matter by the Senate. Workers suffered and business gained. So the Republicans in the Senate will make sure this doesn't move forward unless business gains. Even in labor intensive agriculture, labor is the smallest single component in the cost picture. Labor costs do not become significant until you get to high cost labor which is a completely different scenario than minimum wage labor.
The Republicans want a tax credit for small business. This is laughable on two issues, the government is going broke from tax breaks and the outfits they call small business are anything but the mom and pop concerns they want you folks to think of when they say it. Tell your Senators no. Tell your Representatives no. They'll send this back to the House to reconcile the two bills, the House needs to send the clean one back, that's it, period. If the Republicans want to play stupid games, there is less than year until the Senate election games start up, they can damn well be made responsible for their crap.
Now just exactly who has suffered from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? Who is it that has benefitted from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? There is a case for saying there is membership in these classes. This ought to be a part of the consideration given this matter by the Senate. Workers suffered and business gained. So the Republicans in the Senate will make sure this doesn't move forward unless business gains. Even in labor intensive agriculture, labor is the smallest single component in the cost picture. Labor costs do not become significant until you get to high cost labor which is a completely different scenario than minimum wage labor.
The Republicans want a tax credit for small business. This is laughable on two issues, the government is going broke from tax breaks and the outfits they call small business are anything but the mom and pop concerns they want you folks to think of when they say it. Tell your Senators no. Tell your Representatives no. They'll send this back to the House to reconcile the two bills, the House needs to send the clean one back, that's it, period. If the Republicans want to play stupid games, there is less than year until the Senate election games start up, they can damn well be made responsible for their crap.
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Senator Gordon Smith Sez What?? **Update**
*Update* Full Speech At End
OPB News 12/07/2006
On the US Senate Floor:
Gordon Smith: "I'm tired of paying the price of ten or more of our troops dying a day. So lets cut and run, or cut and walk, but let us fight the war on terror in a more intelligently than we have, because we have fought this war in a very lamentable way."
He also stated that he would not have voted for the war if he'd known the intelligence was so faulty.
I've spent the last two days privately scoffing at the ISG Report, and I still have a "so-what" attitude about that, but this is ... I don't know what this is. I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. Gordon Smith is a careful Republican Senator, he really doesn't stick his neck out or get all "het up" about principles.
I caught wind of this from a Kos diary and went looking for transcripts, this is the best I could do. I actually wondered if this was a prank.
We have two Republicans in Congress and they're both careful politicians, Greg Walden wouldn't take a chance if god told him to without checking it with the House Rs. Gordon Smith is a touch more daring - he makes it all the way to boring - and this little speech is right out there. He's just told the Republican President to go f*** himself. Check out his wording, cut and run, the words used by his leaders to qualify their opponents. That's an open declaration of war. I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Senate Majority Leader's office. Good grief, Joe Lieberman must be having a coronary or his head's exploded.
Gordon's played at having a "nice moderate" Republican image, entirely counter to the facts, but this isn't even close to moderate. He just said something I've said and I promise you that ain't gonna qualify as moderate. You haven't been hearing this from any of the other R Senators and I'd be hard pressed to think they'd shove Gordon out in front. Almost as hard to believe as Gordon jumping out there on his own. If there isn't a flood of Rs following real soon, he might as well declare "I" or "D" because he's done in that Party. He just made McCain look like eunuch and Joe Lieberman look just like he is. I feel like I've slipped into an alternate reality.
I can't believe I'm going to say this, "Way to GO Gordon!"
*Update*
I've finally managed to find the entire speech verbatim:
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I know it is probably appropriate to speak of our colleagues, and I will do that on the record. I rise tonight, however, to speak about a subject heavy on my mind. It is the subject of the war in Iraq .
I have never worn the uniform of my country. I am not a soldier or a veteran. I regret that fact. It is one of the regrets of my life. But I am a student of history, particularly military history, and it is that perspective which I brought to the Senate 10 years ago as a newly elected Member of this Chamber.
When we came to the vote on Iraq , it was an issue of great moment for me. No issue is more difficult to vote on than war and peace, because it involves the lives of our soldiers, our young men and women. It involves the expenditure of our treasure, putting on the line the prestige of our country. It is not a vote taken lightly. I have tried to be a good soldier in this Chamber. I have tried to support our President, believing at the time of the vote on the war in Iraq that we had been given good intelligence and knowing that Saddam Hussein was a menace to the world, a brutal dictator, a tyrant by any standard, and one who threatened our country in many different ways, through the financing and fomenting of terrorism. For those reasons and believing that we would find weapons of mass destruction, I voted aye.
I have been rather silent on this question ever since. I have been rather quiet because, when I was visiting Oregon troops in Kirkuk in the Kurdish area, the soldiers said to me: Senator, don't tell me you support the troops and not our mission. That gave me pause. But since that time, there have been 2,899 American casualties. There have been over 22,000 American men and women wounded. There has been an expenditure of $290 billion a figure that approaches the expenditure we have every year on an issue as important as Medicare. We have paid a price in blood and treasure that is beyond calculation by my estimation.
Now, as I witness the slow undoing of our efforts there, I rise to speak from my heart. I was greatly disturbed recently to read a comment by a man I admire in history, one Winston Churchill, who after the British mandate extended to the peoples of Iraq for 5 years, wrote to David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of England:
At present we are paying 8 millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano.
When I read that, I thought, not much has changed. We have to learn the lessons of history and sometimes they are painful because we have made mistakes.
Even though I have not worn the uniform of my country, I, with other colleagues here, love this Nation. I came into politics because I believed in some things. I am unusually proud of the fact of our recent history, the history of our Nation since my own birth. At the end of the Second World War, there were 15 nations on earth that could be counted as democracies that you and I would recognize. Today there are 150 nations on earth that are democratic and free. That would not have happened had the United States been insular and returned to our isolationist roots, had we laid down the mantle of world leadership, had we not seen the importance of propounding and encouraging the spread of democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and the values of our Bill of Rights. It is a better world because of the United States of America, and the price we have paid is one of blood and treasure.
Now we come to a great crossroads. A commission has just done some, I suppose, good work. I am still evaluating it. I welcome any ideas now because where we are leaves me feeling much like Churchill, that we are paying the price to sit on a mountain that is little more than a volcano of ingratitude.
Yet as I feel that, I remember the pride I felt
when the statue of Saddam Hussein came down. I remember the thrill I felt when three times Iraqis risked their own lives to vote democratically in a way that was internationally verifiable as well as legitimate and important. Now all of those memories seem much like ashes to me.
The Iraq Study Group has given us some ideas. I don't know if they are good or not. It does seem to me that it is a recipe for retreat. It is not cut and run, but it is cut and walk. I don't know that that is any more honorable than cutting and running, because cutting and walking involves greater expenditure of our treasure, greater loss of American lives.
Many things have been attributed to George Bush. I have heard him on this floor blamed for every ill, even the weather. But I do not believe him to be a liar. I do not believe him to be a traitor, nor do I believe all the bravado and the statements and the accusations made against him. I believe him to be a very idealistic man. I believe him to have a stubborn backbone. He is not guilty of perfidy, but I do believe he is guilty of believing bad intelligence and giving us the same.
I can't tell you how devastated I was to learn that in fact we were not going to find weapons of mass destruction. But remembering the words of the soldier--don't tell me you support the troops but you don't support my mission--I felt the duty to continue my support. Yet I believe the President is guilty of trying to win a short war and not understanding fully the nature of the ancient hatreds of the Middle East. Iraq is a European creation. At the Treaty of Versailles, the victorious powers put together Kurdish, Sunni, and Shia tribes that had been killing each other for time immemorial. I would like to think there is an Iraqi identity. I would like to remember the purple fingers raised high. But we can not want democracy for Iraq more than they want it for themselves. And what I find now is that our tactics there have failed.
Again, I am not a soldier, but I do know something about military history. And what that tells me is when you are engaged in a war of insurgency, you can't clear and leave. With few exceptions, throughout Iraq that is what we have done. To fight an insurgency often takes a decade or more. It takes more troops than we have committed. It takes clearing, holding, and building so that the people there see the value of what we are doing. They become the source of intelligence, and they weed out the insurgents. But we have not cleared and held and built. We have cleared and left, and the insurgents have come back.
I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day. That is absurd. It may even be criminal. I cannot support that anymore. I believe we need to figure out how to fight the war on terror and to do it right. So either we clear and hold and build, or let's go home.
There are no good options, as the Iraq Study Group has mentioned in their report. I am not sure cutting and walking is any better. I have little confidence that the Syrians and the Iranians are going to be serious about helping us to build a stable and democratic Iraq . I am at a crossroads as well. I want my constituents to know what is in my heart, what has guided my votes.
What will continue to guide the way I vote is simply this: I do not believe we can retreat from the greater war on terror. Iraq is a battlefield in that larger war. But I do believe we need a presence there on the near horizon at least that allows us to provide intelligence, interdiction, logistics, but mostly a presence to say to the murderers that come across the border: We are here, and we will deal with you. But we have no business being a policeman in someone else's civil war.
I welcome the Iraq Study Group's report, but if we are ultimately going to retreat, I would rather do it sooner than later. I am looking for answers, but the current course is unacceptable to this Senator. I suppose if the President is guilty of one other thing, I find it also in the words of Winston Churchill. He said:
After the First World War, let us learn our lessons. Never, never believe that any war will be smooth and easy or that anyone who embarks on this strange voyage can measure the tides and the hurricanes. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
That is a lesson we are learning again. I am afraid, rather than leveling with the American people and saying this was going to be a decade-long conflict because of the angst and hatred that exists in that part of the world, that we tried to win it with too few troops in too fast a time. Lest anyone thinks I believe we have failed militarily, please understand I believe when President Bush stood in front of ``mission accomplished'' on an aircraft carrier that, in purely military terms, the mission was accomplished in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq . But winning a battle, winning a war, is different than winning a peace.
We were not prepared to win the peace by clearing, holding, and building. You don't do that fast and you don't do it with too few troops. I believe now that we must either determine to do that, or we must redeploy in a way that allows us to continue to prosecute the larger war on terror. It will not be pretty. We will pay a price in world opinion. But I, for one, am tired of paying the price of 10 or more of our troops dying a day. So let's cut and run, or cut and walk, or let us fight the war on terror more intelligently than we have, because we have fought this war in a very lamentable way.
Those are my feelings. I regret them. I would have never voted for this conflict had I reason to believe that the intelligence we had was not accurate. It was not accurate, but that is history. Now we must find a way to make the best of a terrible situation, at a minimum of loss of life for our brave fighting men and women. So I will be looking for every opportunity to clear, build, hold, and win or how to bring our troops home.
I yield the floor.
OPB News 12/07/2006
On the US Senate Floor:
Gordon Smith: "I'm tired of paying the price of ten or more of our troops dying a day. So lets cut and run, or cut and walk, but let us fight the war on terror in a more intelligently than we have, because we have fought this war in a very lamentable way."
He also stated that he would not have voted for the war if he'd known the intelligence was so faulty.
I've spent the last two days privately scoffing at the ISG Report, and I still have a "so-what" attitude about that, but this is ... I don't know what this is. I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. Gordon Smith is a careful Republican Senator, he really doesn't stick his neck out or get all "het up" about principles.
I caught wind of this from a Kos diary and went looking for transcripts, this is the best I could do. I actually wondered if this was a prank.
We have two Republicans in Congress and they're both careful politicians, Greg Walden wouldn't take a chance if god told him to without checking it with the House Rs. Gordon Smith is a touch more daring - he makes it all the way to boring - and this little speech is right out there. He's just told the Republican President to go f*** himself. Check out his wording, cut and run, the words used by his leaders to qualify their opponents. That's an open declaration of war. I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Senate Majority Leader's office. Good grief, Joe Lieberman must be having a coronary or his head's exploded.
Gordon's played at having a "nice moderate" Republican image, entirely counter to the facts, but this isn't even close to moderate. He just said something I've said and I promise you that ain't gonna qualify as moderate. You haven't been hearing this from any of the other R Senators and I'd be hard pressed to think they'd shove Gordon out in front. Almost as hard to believe as Gordon jumping out there on his own. If there isn't a flood of Rs following real soon, he might as well declare "I" or "D" because he's done in that Party. He just made McCain look like eunuch and Joe Lieberman look just like he is. I feel like I've slipped into an alternate reality.
I can't believe I'm going to say this, "Way to GO Gordon!"
*Update*
I've finally managed to find the entire speech verbatim:
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I know it is probably appropriate to speak of our colleagues, and I will do that on the record. I rise tonight, however, to speak about a subject heavy on my mind. It is the subject of the war in Iraq .
I have never worn the uniform of my country. I am not a soldier or a veteran. I regret that fact. It is one of the regrets of my life. But I am a student of history, particularly military history, and it is that perspective which I brought to the Senate 10 years ago as a newly elected Member of this Chamber.
When we came to the vote on Iraq , it was an issue of great moment for me. No issue is more difficult to vote on than war and peace, because it involves the lives of our soldiers, our young men and women. It involves the expenditure of our treasure, putting on the line the prestige of our country. It is not a vote taken lightly. I have tried to be a good soldier in this Chamber. I have tried to support our President, believing at the time of the vote on the war in Iraq that we had been given good intelligence and knowing that Saddam Hussein was a menace to the world, a brutal dictator, a tyrant by any standard, and one who threatened our country in many different ways, through the financing and fomenting of terrorism. For those reasons and believing that we would find weapons of mass destruction, I voted aye.
I have been rather silent on this question ever since. I have been rather quiet because, when I was visiting Oregon troops in Kirkuk in the Kurdish area, the soldiers said to me: Senator, don't tell me you support the troops and not our mission. That gave me pause. But since that time, there have been 2,899 American casualties. There have been over 22,000 American men and women wounded. There has been an expenditure of $290 billion a figure that approaches the expenditure we have every year on an issue as important as Medicare. We have paid a price in blood and treasure that is beyond calculation by my estimation.
Now, as I witness the slow undoing of our efforts there, I rise to speak from my heart. I was greatly disturbed recently to read a comment by a man I admire in history, one Winston Churchill, who after the British mandate extended to the peoples of Iraq for 5 years, wrote to David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of England:
At present we are paying 8 millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano.
When I read that, I thought, not much has changed. We have to learn the lessons of history and sometimes they are painful because we have made mistakes.
Even though I have not worn the uniform of my country, I, with other colleagues here, love this Nation. I came into politics because I believed in some things. I am unusually proud of the fact of our recent history, the history of our Nation since my own birth. At the end of the Second World War, there were 15 nations on earth that could be counted as democracies that you and I would recognize. Today there are 150 nations on earth that are democratic and free. That would not have happened had the United States been insular and returned to our isolationist roots, had we laid down the mantle of world leadership, had we not seen the importance of propounding and encouraging the spread of democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and the values of our Bill of Rights. It is a better world because of the United States of America, and the price we have paid is one of blood and treasure.
Now we come to a great crossroads. A commission has just done some, I suppose, good work. I am still evaluating it. I welcome any ideas now because where we are leaves me feeling much like Churchill, that we are paying the price to sit on a mountain that is little more than a volcano of ingratitude.
Yet as I feel that, I remember the pride I felt
when the statue of Saddam Hussein came down. I remember the thrill I felt when three times Iraqis risked their own lives to vote democratically in a way that was internationally verifiable as well as legitimate and important. Now all of those memories seem much like ashes to me.
The Iraq Study Group has given us some ideas. I don't know if they are good or not. It does seem to me that it is a recipe for retreat. It is not cut and run, but it is cut and walk. I don't know that that is any more honorable than cutting and running, because cutting and walking involves greater expenditure of our treasure, greater loss of American lives.
Many things have been attributed to George Bush. I have heard him on this floor blamed for every ill, even the weather. But I do not believe him to be a liar. I do not believe him to be a traitor, nor do I believe all the bravado and the statements and the accusations made against him. I believe him to be a very idealistic man. I believe him to have a stubborn backbone. He is not guilty of perfidy, but I do believe he is guilty of believing bad intelligence and giving us the same.
I can't tell you how devastated I was to learn that in fact we were not going to find weapons of mass destruction. But remembering the words of the soldier--don't tell me you support the troops but you don't support my mission--I felt the duty to continue my support. Yet I believe the President is guilty of trying to win a short war and not understanding fully the nature of the ancient hatreds of the Middle East. Iraq is a European creation. At the Treaty of Versailles, the victorious powers put together Kurdish, Sunni, and Shia tribes that had been killing each other for time immemorial. I would like to think there is an Iraqi identity. I would like to remember the purple fingers raised high. But we can not want democracy for Iraq more than they want it for themselves. And what I find now is that our tactics there have failed.
Again, I am not a soldier, but I do know something about military history. And what that tells me is when you are engaged in a war of insurgency, you can't clear and leave. With few exceptions, throughout Iraq that is what we have done. To fight an insurgency often takes a decade or more. It takes more troops than we have committed. It takes clearing, holding, and building so that the people there see the value of what we are doing. They become the source of intelligence, and they weed out the insurgents. But we have not cleared and held and built. We have cleared and left, and the insurgents have come back.
I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day. That is absurd. It may even be criminal. I cannot support that anymore. I believe we need to figure out how to fight the war on terror and to do it right. So either we clear and hold and build, or let's go home.
There are no good options, as the Iraq Study Group has mentioned in their report. I am not sure cutting and walking is any better. I have little confidence that the Syrians and the Iranians are going to be serious about helping us to build a stable and democratic Iraq . I am at a crossroads as well. I want my constituents to know what is in my heart, what has guided my votes.
What will continue to guide the way I vote is simply this: I do not believe we can retreat from the greater war on terror. Iraq is a battlefield in that larger war. But I do believe we need a presence there on the near horizon at least that allows us to provide intelligence, interdiction, logistics, but mostly a presence to say to the murderers that come across the border: We are here, and we will deal with you. But we have no business being a policeman in someone else's civil war.
I welcome the Iraq Study Group's report, but if we are ultimately going to retreat, I would rather do it sooner than later. I am looking for answers, but the current course is unacceptable to this Senator. I suppose if the President is guilty of one other thing, I find it also in the words of Winston Churchill. He said:
After the First World War, let us learn our lessons. Never, never believe that any war will be smooth and easy or that anyone who embarks on this strange voyage can measure the tides and the hurricanes. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
That is a lesson we are learning again. I am afraid, rather than leveling with the American people and saying this was going to be a decade-long conflict because of the angst and hatred that exists in that part of the world, that we tried to win it with too few troops in too fast a time. Lest anyone thinks I believe we have failed militarily, please understand I believe when President Bush stood in front of ``mission accomplished'' on an aircraft carrier that, in purely military terms, the mission was accomplished in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq . But winning a battle, winning a war, is different than winning a peace.
We were not prepared to win the peace by clearing, holding, and building. You don't do that fast and you don't do it with too few troops. I believe now that we must either determine to do that, or we must redeploy in a way that allows us to continue to prosecute the larger war on terror. It will not be pretty. We will pay a price in world opinion. But I, for one, am tired of paying the price of 10 or more of our troops dying a day. So let's cut and run, or cut and walk, or let us fight the war on terror more intelligently than we have, because we have fought this war in a very lamentable way.
Those are my feelings. I regret them. I would have never voted for this conflict had I reason to believe that the intelligence we had was not accurate. It was not accurate, but that is history. Now we must find a way to make the best of a terrible situation, at a minimum of loss of life for our brave fighting men and women. So I will be looking for every opportunity to clear, build, hold, and win or how to bring our troops home.
I yield the floor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)