All Politics is Local

Any love for Kitzhaber out there? I was out of the state through most of his tenure, so I have little to no idea. Anyone?

I have been grooving on the Sid Leiken story. For those of you not from here, or those who disdain the City-Region section, let me fill you in on what-I-find-to-be a hilarious example of really inept political corruption.

Sid Leiken is the mayor of the neighboring burg of Springfield, known to many as "Springtucky" because of its relatively lower level of income, education, and cleanliness. It is also my hometown. The street I grew up on was t-boned by a gravel street which conveniently provided the ammo for our semi-regular rock fights. That street remains unpaved in the 21st century; Springfield has other priorities. (I would like to point out that, while it is true that my daughter is technically my half-sister, this has little to do with my Springfield-based origins.)

Mayor Sid is young, good-looking (if you go for that sort of thing), and conservative. As such, he's been tapped to run for the 4th District Congressional seat currently held by one Pete "Peter" DeFazio. Because Leiken is a big favorite of everyone's favorite NW Wingnut, I've been especially looking forward to his trouncing at the hands of the Congress' sexist Congressperson. You see, whereas DeFazio bucked his party leadership to vote against the stimulus bill, Leiken had the political courage to accept the funds, then attend tea party protests against goverment waste. How could he lose?

Leiken is so confident about his eventual victory that he has decided to cripple himself even before the race starts. It seems Oregon has some obscure (and probably fascist) law that does not allow a politician to personally benefit from his campaign funds. (Fascist) Awhile back the Fascist Party of Oregon Democrats noticed that Leiken had paid himself $2000 out of his campaign funds (no links because the R-G archive is protected) and asked the Oregon Elections Division to look into it. The R-G was reporting this story on the inside of the City-Region section, but due to my twin loves of Mayor Leiken's eventual defeat and reading the obituaries to see if any of my peers have died, I was on it like grease on an elbow.

The next Jim Feldkamp had a very good reason he wrote himself a check out of his campaign coffers in violation of Oregon election law. You see, he was just paying himself back for some polling work he had done on behalf of the city regarding a proposed gas tax increase. Who did this polling work? His mother. Sure, this made perfect sense. Whenever I needed polling work done I always turned to my mother. And you know who was the bestest, brightest, handsomest son ever? This guy. Then she had to go and die and you all ended up with the mess of insecurities I am today.

The highly-partisan Democrats did not find this to be a sufficent answer. Possibly because they could find no evidence that Mother Leiken actually runs a polling firm. Simple answer, again. Like so many mothers of mayors, she was just dabbling in polling to see if it felt right. Turns out it didn't, as this is the only poll she conducted or plans to conduct.

Because of the vicious media hounding Sid and his mother were suffering (including a page two City-Region "expose"), the good Mayor held a presser where he pulled a Boehner, begged the media to leave his poor mother alone, refused to give back the puppy, and wrote a personal check (again?) for $2000 to repay his campaign fund.

End of story. Except one thing. Leiken is unable to produce any evidence that he wrote his mother a check in exchange for a poll. The future 25% vote-getter in the 4th is not good with paperwork or the keeping of the finances.

Is it necessary to even say that neither Leiken nor his mother can actually produce any evidence that she conducted an actual poll? The only evidence they can produce about the poll seems to be negative evidence. According to the Leikens, Glenda Leiken used a Springfield phone book and called 286 people to get 200 results for her poll on the proposed gas tax. Leiken has (thank God) stipulated that this poll was not "scientific." No cross tabs, no demographics. Apparently, some people were 'fer it, some were ag'in it. I could have told him that for 1900 dollars, American.

The Demorats, of course, will not let it go. It seems that they are suspicious that no actual poll was conducted. But to believe that, you'd have to believe that a good man like Mayor Leiken was dipping into his campaign fund for personal reasons, got caught, brought his mother in to lie with him, and then did that so transparently badly that absolutely no one bought it. (Well, not no one - go down to the letter from the Muches.)

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the future of the Republican party. I fear them.

Oregon GOP Bait and Switch

The GOP in Oregon is something of a joke, so it's no surprise that their shining light, Rep. Bruce Hanna (who I believe Coyote has already tapped for DeFazio's seat) cannot get through an entire editorial without revealing how completely bankrupt the Republican party is these days.

You may be surprised to find that the Oregon GOP opposes increases in government spending as a solution to the recession. Nope, they've got a better plan.

We must create an environment where businesses can succeed, create new family wage [sic] jobs and lead Oregon to economic recovery.

Prosperity can’t be manufactured in Salem. Prosperity is possible only when Oregonians can support their local small businesses and participate in their community’s economic success.

How is the GOP going to accomplish this goal? Well first, Bruce tells you how they are not going to do it.

Our plan doesn’t raise your taxes and fees, and doesn’t increase pork barrel spending on more “bridges to nowhere.” It won’t saddle your children and grandchildren with billions of dollars in new government debt, and it doesn’t depend on yet another taxpayer-funded government bailout.

In other words, the Oregon GOP's plan is emphatically not a plan that contravenes Oregon's constitutional balanced budget mandate, provide for the building of bridges in Alaska (let's hope that the bridge over I-5 in Eugene is deemed to be going somewhere because it would really be awesome if that was finished sometime), or bailout anything. In other words, the Oregon GOP will not pretend that it is the House of Representatives in DC. Thank God.

But how will the Oregon GOP revive this once glorious state? Not with higher taxes, they can tell you that right now. In fact, taxes must come down. For you. The low-income worker.

Our plan starts by reforming an income tax system that unfairly penalizes low-income Oregonians who work hard every day for their paychecks. Under the state’s marginal tax structure, a worker making $10 an hour pays the same tax rate as someone making $80 an hour. As a result, lower-paid workers must first give a larger share of their income to the state before meeting their own basic needs. By reforming income tax brackets, we can allow many struggling Oregonians to keep more of what they earn and give them more purchasing power in the economy.

Boom! We're done right there. Lower taxes for the working poor. You and I keep our hard earned money, spend it at the Bi-Mart, and we all go away winners. Lower taxes will necessarily mean less money for the state government, but I'm sure there is some fat we can trim somewhere. (Actually Hanna leaves the issue of decreased revenue completely undiscussed. The "fat" argument is mine. If you'd like, feel free to substitute in a rant about teacher's salaries, welfare cheats, and/or SEIU. Hell, you can even contravene all evidence fomr the past eight years and argue that lower taxes leads to increased tax revenue. I am sure Bruce would approve.)

How much of a tax cut will I be getting Bruce? Unstated. But wait! There's more! Heaven forbid the GOP stop at unexplained tax cuts for the working poor, there's more taxes that need a-cutting. But first, let's stop to think about the children.

House Republicans understand that Oregon families are struggling to make ends meet. Rather than asking families to send more of their dollars to government, we propose giving them greater relief by increasing the state’s child tax credit. This measure will help many Oregonians cope with the rising costs of maintaining a home and securing a better future for their children.

That's right, under the GOP plan, the state will pay you to have children, but it won't pay to educate them. I love the vacuousness of that last phrase. "Securing a better future for their children." How the fuck does an extra $100 (guessing!) per child help me secure their future? Am I supposed to sock that away in a college fund or something? Actually, I think I'm supposed to spend it. Possibly at the Bi-Mart. I'd also like to note that despite the GOP's deep, deep concern for working families, everyone would get this credit, regardless of income.

But let's get to the nitty-gritty, shall we? What does any state need to succeed? Capital, of course. And retaining the capital it has should be a number one priority. Capital retention is achieved through lowering the estate and capital gains taxes.

Now, you may be saying to yourself, "Dave3544, I have taken basic economic theory. I have taken advanced economic theory. I have read my Marx and I have read my Friedman. That shit don't make no sense. How the hell can lowering taxes on wealthy individuals keep money in the state of Oregon? Where was this taxed money going, if not into the coffers of the state of Oregon? Didn't those tax dollars get distributed to Oregonians in the form of salaries, safety net support, construction jobs, etc.? Didn't that money make it's way into the hands of hard-working Oregonians who eventually, surely spent it at Bi-Mart?" Don't ask me, ask Bruce Hanna.

With the current financial crisis, Oregon needs to keep as much capital within the state as it can. Oregon must help private sector industries succeed by reforming the state’s estate tax and capital gains tax rate, among the highest in the nation. Under the current system, Oregon can’t compete with the dozens of states that have strategically kept these taxes low to attract and retain businesses and encourage reinvestment.

The state’s high estate tax and capital gains tax rate affects everyone, from working families to middle class investors to large corporations. As securities and real estate markets begin a long and slow recovery process, Oregon should make every effort attract and retain capital. This will promote private investments to enable business to expand and create more family wage jobs.

You might also want to note that out of the 50 or so states in the US, "dozens" out perform Oregon, according to Hanna. Others disagree. But, of course, the main point is that this more of the same tired bullshit form the Oregon GOP. Apparently, the working-class people need to get on board with tax cuts for the rich so that they can get about the important work of creating jobs for the slobs. I feel like I have a very bad case of deja vu. Well not deja vu because that can be interesting and is (possibly) indicative of a glitch in the Matrix, this shit is just tired.

Does Rep. Hanna really think that Country Coach is laying off people left and right because the taxes on its owners and investors are too high? How much would we need to cut those taxes so that they don't shut their doors? Hynix layed off 1400 people. We slashed the hell out of their taxes. Freightliner shutting down in Portland was a killer; maybe if the estate tax was lower that wouldn't have happened. On the smaller business front, a restaurant in Eugene is closing and more are on the way. Too bad you didn't speak up sooner, or you could have cut the capital gains taxes enough to keep the customers flowing. Maybe we can get some sort of "eating out" tax credit in the works.

So Rep. Hanna starts out promising help for Oregon's working families and ends by giving us tax breaks for the wealthy. No surprise there I guess. I'm just glad to know that, with this kind of thinking, we can look forward to keeping the Oregon GOP in the minority for a very long time.

BOOM! and Bust

It occurred to me this morning that Republicans don't fear returning to a 19th-century boom-and-bust economy because their constituents either believe that they are well off enough to ride out a bust, or that they have nothing to lose. The first group surely includes many that have no idea what a bust economy actually looks like, while the second group has clung to the twin life preservers of guns and religion for so long they think that they can ride out any storm.

In sense, the Republican opposition to the auto bailout makes perfect sense. Of course their main demand is huge concessions from labor. A reasonable observer would ask exactly what more the UAW could give. Wages in Detroit are close to to parity with foreign auto manufacturers in the South (who killed American car companies? Maybe the anti-labor policies and massive tax breaks for foreign automakers established by Southern legislatures had something to do with it), there is a plan in place to move the legacy health care off the books, the 95% pay rule is gone...what more is there to give? Of course that is the reasonably informed person. The nationalistically informed person knows that UAW killed the car makers because that's a story that just writes itself, and in the US today reporters don't have the time to do anything but stories that write themselves. (Plus any story that doesn't ape Republican talking points is immediately branded tripe from the liberal media, which influences editors across the country).

What is particularly galling is that not only are Democrats not loudly pointing out that the GOP is in favor of killing a major American industry in favor of turning those plants over to some other company, but they seem to be struggling to make sure that everyone notices that they are perfectly willing to sell out environmental interests , not be particularly vocal in their support of the auto workers who built those goddamn companies, and seek to compromise whenever possible with Republicans.

Somehow, someway the Democratic leadership seems to have internalize GOP talking points. They still seem to see themselves as the party-out-of-power that needs to prove the American people that we are capable of governing the county and the best way to do that is be Republican-lite whenever possible. For fuck sake, the GOP controlled the House for 12 years and the Dems are still acting like they own the place. Let's show some freakin' spine. What's the point of passing an auto bailout if it's basically going to conform to what the GOP wanted in the first place? What the GOP wants is not good for working people or America. Haven't we fucking learned that by now?

What's Green and Red and White and Blue?

A bad Republican come-on for a St. Patrick's Day donation, of course!

I was wondering what was more unlikely than an Irish Catholic Republican when I read this:

Embroidered with the official logo of the RNC, Paddy is a wonderful plush toy and makes a perfect gift for St. Patrick's Day. Or give Paddy to the "Green" Republican in your life who is dedicated to improving the environment.

Alrighty, a Republican concerned about the environment is probably more unlikely than an Irish Catholic Republican, but really how many of these do they expect to sell?

Foolish Heart

You heard it hear first (unless, of course, you heard it someplace else before this):

McCain-Giuliani 2008

You're probably thinking that there's no way the Republicans would run two old white guys against either Hillary or Barack; they'd have to have more sense than that. To you all, I offer this and this and beg of you not to overestimate the GOP again.

Here's my thinking: The Republican establishment hates McCain. From what I understand, passionately. They do, however, think, for reasons unknown, that Giuliani is great. So I am simply going with the notion that McCain needs to mollify the establishment in order to get the resources he needs to win the nomination. Because I don't think this is going to be an election about capturing moderate or independent voters (mostly because I think this race will be too polarizing for many fence-sitters and because as the War is McCain's only issue, which is an issue that most people have already made up their minds about). Instead, I think this race will be about turnout, and turnout is driven by enthusiasm, volunteers, money, and energy. All of those things the establishment can give you.

Which leads me to the main weakness of my theory, that McCain will have to pick a evangelical Christian to attract their support. This would be a better argument than your lame "two white males" argument I previously had you advancing (Die straw man! Die!). Obviously, this is a strong argument that puts Huckabee, Santorum, and...?...into play. I guess that's my man point. Is there a standout evangelical candidate these days? If so, why didn't he/she(?) run in this most wide open of fields? I think McCain is going to have to count on getting the votes of the evangelicals, but needs the support of the establishment. At least, he has a better chance of getting establishment support through a VP pick than he does getting the evangelical support.

Back to my pro-Giuliani argument. Giuliani seemed to have run as a version of George Bush, with a messier personal life and worse hair. He pretty much went with the neo-cons for foreign policy and Reaganomics for fiscal policy. This makes the establishment happy. Because they actually think things have been going pretty damn well these past 7 years. (Which is why McCain's VP choice is likely not to make a wit of difference when Obama takes office). The GOP loves Rudy so much I bet they even think he could challenge Clinton or Obama in New York. Make 'em spend resources where they don't want to. And obviously he could help in Florida. (Remember, until about a month ago, GOP politicians were still endorsing Giuliani, thinking he was going to take Florida, California, and New York and bury McCain and Romney). There is nothing Captain 911 can't do.

Straw man lives! What about the idea of running Condi? Wouldn't Condi be perfect? You see, if the Dems nominate Hillary, the blacks will be irate and they'll vote for John McCain's VP! And the GOP will win! Or, if the Dems nominate Barack, then women will be irate and they'll vote for John McCain's VP! The GOP cannot lose! Yes, Condi Rice is the answer to all of the GOP's problems. Taking my own advice, I will not overestimate the GOP, but I can't believe for a second that anyone with actual political sense (and, yes, I'm looking at you Kathleen Parker) would think that women or blacks are going to vote for John McCain in order to put Condi near the White House.

Anyway, there you have it. Like the Oregon lottery, this post should be used for entertainment only and not investment purposes.

Progressive Eugene

The fine students here at the UO, well the ones in the vaunted "Pit Crew" that attend basketball games anyway, spent the better part of last night's basketball game "taunting" UCLA's center, Kevin Love, with the chants "Love is a faggot" and "Love is a pussy."

Despite my fervent wishes, I don't believe there was any irony intended, this was just the best they could come up with.

I am mollified only be the fact that this was not the most objectionable thing I saw yesterday. Surfing the sphere, I came across this, from Republican operatives.

This is the smallest consolation you can imagine.

Democrat, Indeed

I was listening to the NPR earlier and they were doing a story on the candidates' Christmas "postcard" ads. I came in late, but when I got there a man and a woman were discussing the Edwards ad. The woman though that it was a bad ad. They quickly moved on to a discussion of the Huckabee ad, which she described as the perfect ad that hit just the right notes, avoiding politics(!) and focusing on the spirit of the season. There was discussion of whether it was really a political ad focusing on Huck's Christianity, but it was agreed that he has already established his Christian credentials, so this ad was just a genuine expression of goodwill during the holiday Christmas season.

They both hated the Hillary ad. The man thought that it was cringe-inducing. He hated it. Apparently, he finds it cold and calculating. Hmmm.

She then went on to express that Hillary and Edwards went for "issue ads" in their Christmas "postcards," which she felt was the wrong way to go about it. Again, in contrast to the Huckabee ad.

They both thought the Giuliani ad was shit, which is something I think we can all agree on.

So, I was driving along pretty pissed because NPR is supposed to be liberal radio, or at least fair, and ascribing pure motives to Huckabee and falling into the storyline that Hillary is a calculating b-tch. But the kicker was that the woman doing the analysis is Anita Dunn, DEMOCRATIC consultant.

No wonder we're fucked.

I Did Not Know That

I was reading the TownHall blog about the Larry Craig (R-Idaho) scandal and learned a couple of things in the comments section that I thought I'd share with you all.

1. Larry Craig is a morally righteous man. His airport incident proves this. You see, because he is so moral and righteous, he is able to resist these urges he has, but sometimes the pressure gets to be too much and he explodes in a rather spectacular manner. Because he's so moral and righteous.

2. Democratic Senators and Representatives engage in this kind of behavior all the time. You don't hear about it because of the liberal media.

3. You know the GOP is the party of good, moral people, despite the repeated evidence otherwise, because when a Republican gets caught doing this kind of thing, other Republicans call for his resignation. Democrats applaud this sort of behavior.

4. David Vitter shouldn't resign because, while what he did was bad, it wasn't, you know, gay.

5. Clinton.

6. Clinton.

7. Clinton.

8. Barney Fag Frank.

9. Clinton.

10. Ted Kennedy.

11- /infinity. Clinton.