Today, I found out I don't really exist!

Update: I want to make something abundantly clear, after reading some of the comments about this matter on Blue Oregon. The 98 people in my Facebook account KNOW ME, including my last name. Generally speaking, we have spent some time together IN PERSON. I don't accept anonymous invitations from people who I have NEVER physically met (with one or two exceptions). So, as far as Facebook goes, I AM NOT ANONYMOUS. I hope this is clear. I merely control who I am friends with and I generally restrict it to people I KNOW.
---------------


'Tis but thy name that is my enemy.
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name;
And for that name, which is no part of thee,
Take all myself.

Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2)


I want to just say something at the outset here. I bear no ill will towards BlueOregon or its proprietor Kari Chisholm. I wish the site nothing but success. Lord knows, we need more blogs for Progressives and Liberals and we need to value and protect the ones we got. We've already lost a few aspiring and fledgling Progressive blogger sites over the years here in Oregon so,... Godspeed man. Whatever.

However, as of today, apparently I am not welcome to post there. A while back, Kari made the decision to switch from anonymous comment posting to Facebook-verified posting. As a policy, I have no problem with this. Yes, it had the unfortunate effect of cutting down the number of posts by 2/3rds, easily, because many people are not on Facebook. The "old" Blue Oregon had so many commenters, there was absolutely no opportunity for discussing the issues. And then there was the problem of the anonymous "troll" flamers. Yes, it was as bad as any anonymous posting site you've ever seen, but I guess I wasn't so bothered by it because the sheer number of comments out numbered and overwhelmed such comments. But in the end, someone has to moderate all that, and I can see where Facebook-verified comments assists greatly in minimizing the work involved in comment moderation. The switch to Facebook-verified comments just makes sense from a practical standpoint. Here are BlueOregon's stated rules of participation.

However, Kari has more faith in Facebook and the Internet in general than I do, because when I mentioned in a post about Facebook that I keep much of my personal information on Facebook private, including my last name, Kari removed my posting privileges. I have been posting there as either Sonya Lee or ChickieBlue for the past 5 years. The reason he gave me (in an email response to me when I discovered I could not post) was: "We have a rule at BlueOregon -- we're requiring real identities for all commenters."

Real identities? On the Internet?

The lack of a "real identity" he is referring to is, of course, the fact that I freely admitted that I dropped my last name. Now, any internet security expert would tell you that, as a woman, this is only smart. Also, I have a business in my small town to protect. Plus I write this blog and another blog and I absolutely have a right to determine who knows me on the Internet. I also have a right to my views and I thought BlueOregon was a safe place to post them along with other people who shared my views. The fact that Kari could not ascertain that I was really "someone" based on my Facebook account strikes me as missing a point: I can be anybody I want. I can call myself anything I want. I can pretend to be anyone I want. I can open a Facebook account right now with a real-sounding last name and have my privileges restored without a question. Facebook does not legitimize the person I am. It does not lend its stamp of approval that I am a good person, a Liberal, a Conservative, a real person at all. I could have taken my husband's name when I married him, but I didn't. Facebook does not legitimize my marriage. No, I admitted that I omit my last name for the sake of my privacy and to protect other people in my family with the same last name. And for that, I am deemed as not using a "real identity".

Sonya Lee is my first and middle name. My parents gave me those names as a baby. When I was in trouble as a child, I knew it because my mother would address me as "Sonya Lee", and you knew a scolding was coming next. My friends and family on Facebook know my names. All of them. The ones I use on the Internet and the ones I don't. There is no reason that anyone posting on BlueOregon needs to know my last name. What matters more is my behavior while posting. I am consistent. I have never been disrespectful or flamed anyone. I am not a "troll", which was apparently the reasoning behind BlueOregon's switch to the Facebook verification. I had a two-hour lunch with one of the editors of BlueOregon last week, and I am friends with one of their regular contributing writers, who ironically also goes by a pseudonym. A real human being went to lunch last week, and a real human being regularly meets with the writer. But, hey, rules are rules. And "REAL" Fakebook identities are real identities.

But here is the thing: I have been Sonya Lee with a kitty avatar on the Internet for close to 2 years now. In lieu of telling the world my last name, I've effectively branded myself. I seldom change my avatar on Twitter and I almost never change my photo on Facebook because I want to be known and TRUSTED by that. That name and avatar is ALSO an identity. And these days on the Intenet, it is as much of an identity as knowing my name. Many people know me ONLY by my Internet identity and that is as much as they will ever know about me. They have learned to trust that I am presenting my ideas honestly here, on Facebook and on Twitter and on every blog where Sonya Lee and her kitty in the sink shows up and that a real human being stands by them, regardless of whether or not they know my last name or even my name at all. Hell, I have been using the nickname "bujeeboo" for 10 YEARS!

Is Blogger Sonya Lee any more or less credible than Sonya Lee with a last name on a Facebook account? In this day and age, is ANYONE who they say they are? And must we sacrifice our privacy (and even our personal safety) for the right to speak publicly?

Kari also said this to me in his e-mail: "Do let me know if you decide to do it differently, as I'll need to manually remove the block.". Decide to do it differently... I guess that means tell the world who I am "really" in order to post on BlueOregon. Sorry, Kari. I don't know you or anyone visiting your site well enough to tell you that information, Facebook accounts not-with-standing.

The escalating war with KGW

Honestly, when it comes to the point where Producers are accusing you of assuming the identity of every person or troll on Twitter that has taken an interest in this story in order to get out of having to take any responsibility, what is the point of trying to deal with them? A few folks on Twitter have been our heroes in taking on KGW (since we are blocked), one of them being a certain Mayor of Camas. Apparently, that was a bridge too far for the producer of Live @ 7, The Square Aaron Weiss and he saw fit to blame us for a tweet he got.

Belo Corp., do you have any adults in your organization that we can talk to???

Click here for the e-mail exchange between my husband and Aaron Weiss. I'm sorry that it's come to this. I really am.

A lesson for KGW on Social Media

Since my last post, my husband has posted an update on the KGW matter on his Posterous page.

I don't think KGW understands the power of social media. One time I tweeted something about my Comcast bill that I didn't like. Before the day was over, "ComcastBonnie" tweeted me and asked how she could make it better. Another time, I was complaining about how I really wished there was a personal finance software that worked on the Mac that integrated with my cell phone or PDA. I even tweeted to Quicken as an existing customer, explaining my needs and inquiring if there would be any products coming out soon that would help me. The very next day, someone from a company called iggsoftware tweeted me and said "Have you tried iBank? Works with the iPhone". I downloaded the trial, used it for a few days and fell in love. I NEVER heard from Quicken after several attempts, and they lost a customer. When Bank of America sent us a letter saying they were raising our credit card interest rate by 75%, you better believe we went on a screaming terror about it on Twitter, as did MANY people. To B of A's credit, they hired a cadre of agents to scan tweets and deal with the outcry on Twitter. In the end, no one had the authority to make any decisions to change the interest rates on anyone's account, so we walked and took our personal and our company's banking business to our friendly neighborhood community bank where we remain happy customers. The point is, any business in today's world understands the advantages and opportunities inherent in reaching out to people seeking solutions and even to unhappy or angry people. The reason is, a problem resolved, or at least an honest attempt at it often leaves the complainant with the feeling that their patronage matters to someone. Who are you in the community to serve, KGW if not the public? There are A LOT of people who are unhappy about the slant of the KGW minimum wage story. For every person on Twitter who has read our tweets about it, or read this blog, or my husband's blog, there are literally thousands who are angry and aren't doing anything about it. But they do remember and there are other choices for news in the Portland Metro area.

In this day and age when people have choices as consumers of news, why on earth would you a) allow your reporters to engage unprofessionally with viewers on Twitter and b) not have an ombudsman or community liaison to engage with people who have a complaint? What was initially a legitimate complaint about the story (which I won't go into again here) has now turned into a story about KGW. Smart? Not at all.

Originally, I had posted a comment on KGW's comment section of the story page expressing our concerns with the piece. Those comments were removed. We asked @TheSquare who we should contact to discuss our concerns. They tweeted an email address. We wrote the email address and heard nothing. We waited 3 days and never heard back. When we again tweeted to @TheSquare to let them know that no one has responded to our complaint using the avenue THEY PROVIDED, we discovered we were blocked. This prompted my husband to post on his Posterous page. Yeah, we're angry.

So, KGW will run out the clock until the election and it will all go away in a week. But I want it to be known that if you have a complaint about KGW's reporting on something in the future you might be treated like we are being treated. It's unfortunate. Before this we felt KGW was the best news source in the area. Trusting a media outlet is something you take for granted until you find yourself betrayed. And that's EXACTLY how it feels. Like a betrayal of trust. We aren't just "customers", your public are your partners. We WANT KGW to succeed. Your customers can tell you a lot if you will listen. That is the beauty of social media.

Chris Dudley should stick to not voting

When he does vote, it reveals his confusion.

OPB's "Think Out Loud" has been able to follow-up on Chris Dudley's claim that he voted for Obama. Here is his capriciously fickle response, paraphrased by Emily Harris:

"Dudley says he liked Obama's message about working across the aisle, but now says he is disappointed in how that's turned out. He cited the health insurance reform bill as an example. He also says he thinks the president has lost some of the well-tuned connection he had to public sentiment during the presidential campaign."

I will not add much to Harris' analysis (click the link above and read). It's spot on. But someone needs to remind Chris Dudley (or perhaps inform him for the first time) that President Obama actually ran on a slightly more "extreme" (from a Conservative's perspective) version of the Health Care Reform bill. Much to my and other Progressive's dismay, the President conceded much even before getting to the bargaining table with Senate Republicans. The Republicans sought and got over 300 amendments to the Health Care Reform bill which did not net the Democrats a single Republican vote when all was said and done. I am only left with one belief, and that is Chris Dudley is a complex mix of naivete, misinformation and lack of understanding of the political process. Dudley is an interesting political figure by now, but every week he seems to prove that he is not ready for the task of being Governor of this state with its complex problems. Think about it. He's never held office, so he doesnt have working knowledge of how to reach across the aisle and persuade people to vote for his ideas. In his eagerness to sound like he has a grasp of the issues, he's stepped in a mess with his minimum wage comments and has been trying for weeks to walk them back. As for his strange voting philosophy, you don't vote for someone because you "liked his message" about reaching across the aisle, while completely disregarding what Obama campaigned on, and then blame him when he did EXACTLY what he promised. If Chris Dudley had ANY real, meaningful experience in setting policy and seeking consensus, I'd feel a lot better about Chris Dudley as Governor of Oregon. As it is, at this point, I'm terrified.

Another scolding for the Oregonian - by me

Okay. So it's been 3 days since Dudley, with Harry's help, let the little nugget drop that he voted for Obama.

I gotta say, when I tell Dudley's supporters about it, they say "well he made a mistake". See, the thing is, no where in this article does it say he feels his vote is a mistake. We don't really know what it was about Obama's platform he agreed with. In fact, the story before this was that Dudley never voted. So you can understand why I believe this is a ploy to get moderate Dem cross-over votes, given the recent polls.

But the biggest jerky thing in this story is that Dudley is leaving it to his supporters to defend, explain, or give a rationale because no one is following up in the media and asking the obvious questions about it. The way it was leaked, in paragraph 48 of a fluffy bio piece, as a quote by his father (which warranted follow up on that basis alone), in the middle of October on the eve of the election is sketchy at best, and looks coordinated at worst.

Here's why it matters. Allen Alley, who was far and away, a more qualified candidate didn't pass the GOP Purity test because he was perceived as too conciliatory to Democrats. But this tid bit, coming out now as it has, is to be consumed and digested by voters, with no explanation? If this is a race between two Democrats, one being a RINO, the voters should view it as such.

And Dudley, to borrow the phrase of the day, "MAN UP" and tell your supporters what you agree with about Obama's platform. Was it health care reform? How about the stimulus? Cap and trade? A candidate for governor should have a better reason than I didn't like Sarah Palin. The views you are running on now are more in line with John McCain's views. Are you a liar? Or a flip-flopper? Or just unprincipled and undisciplined? Please stay away from Salem. Our problems are too serious for someone who doesn't know where he stands on any given issue on any given day.

Oh My, but the Duds does pander

I don't know if you caught it in this weekend's Oregonian profiles of the Gubernatorial candidates, but in Chris Dudley's profile by Harry Esteve, Dudley's father happened to casually mention that his son voted for Obama in 2008.

Of course, I made a big deal about it in the comments of the article because the next question ought to have been "why are we hearing about this now?" but I hardly expect that from Esteve who has never had a kind or charitable word for Kitzhaber. But I wasn't shocked. I am a little doubtful of the truth of Dudley's admission, which I will entail reasons for in a minute. But shocked? Not at all. Being a Lake Oswego resident I had heard some months back from a Chamber of Commerce member that Mrs. Dudley was an Obama supporter and I privately wondered when that was going to come out. I sort of felt when she was named in Dudley's "18 Point Plan - Education for our Economic Future" that he had an ethical obligation to introduce his wife to the public. Certainly, we only need to look no further than Hilary Clinton to see how unelected wives can be perceived. He's been asked (if memory serves me, I believe it was in the Register Guard interview) who he would appoint to help him on various committees and came up expectantly short on names. But his wife has been named to a position, should he be elected, and she has been traveling the state attending Women for Dudley functions and speaking to Republican Women's Groups. I wonder if she mentioned she is an Obama supporter. Somehow, I doubt it. and the media hasn't seen fit to ask about her. I guess I am the only one with expectations on that front.















Chris Love Dudley speaking to the Linn GOP women’s group on July 12th

No, of course, I have no proof that I can provide to you that she is or isn't a Republican. But I DO feel, at the point when she was named in Dudley's plan, it's a fair question to ask.

So now what to make of Dudley supposedly voting for Obama. We aren't talking about a lot of time since Obama's election and when Dudley decided to run. Let's see, when Dudley filed his papers, Obama was still operating under Bush's budget. Dudley was attending teaparty rallies a mere 9 months after Obama took office. Health care reform, the stimulus, NONE of this was a surprise to Obama voters. The problem that Obama voters had with Healthcare Reform is that it didn't have a Public Option. Is this Chris Dudley's view? Hardly.

Folks, this is pandering in its lowest form. We don't KNOW who Chris Dudley voted for. What we DO know is that he is behind in the polls. What we DO know is that Oregon tends to vote Democratic. What we DO know is that he must get Democrats to vote for him in order to win. At the same time, Chris Dudley cannot alienate his extremist base. I mean for Pete's Sake, Allen Alley didn't pass the GOP Purity Test because he DARED accept an appointment to then Gov. Kitzhaber's Counsel for Knowledge & Economic Development. How will this bit of news sit with the same people who want Art Robinson for Congress?

I rule this one as a LIE. Two weeks ago, also in the Register-Guard interview Dudley made some rambling remarks about how half his family are Democrats and half are Republicans. I think this was not only a way of sticking a toe in the water to test this lie out, but it addresses the topic of how his wife voted, should anyone ask. So will the media press with the follow-up questions? I won't hold my breath. And if he DID actually vote for Obama, why the big secret? Secrets in politics are usually BAD and elude to... dare I say it? An Honesty Problem.

--------
Errata: In my two references to the Register Guard, I meant Statesman Journal. My apologies to the RG! The entire interview with the clips I refer to above is posted here.

Dudley's Going Wobbly

Seriously, he's off his game.

First of all, the Right-Skewing Rasmussen came out with this poll on Monday showing Kitzhaber with a small but significant lead. I attribute this to Dudley's meager and barely adequate performance during the one and only televised debate on KGW. But Nate Silver who, this week, flipped the predicted outcome of the race from Dudley to Kitzhaber as the likely winner showed Dudley already beginning to make his descent down and Kitzhaber shifting up even before the debate on September 27th. In order to overcome the Blue Tide of Oregon Democrats' GOTV efforts, Dudley needs to be up in the polls by a good 5 points or it's a lock for Kitzhaber. That's the reality that the Dudley campaign is grappling with.

So, here Dudley is at the Freethrow Line again and what does his campaign do? Dredge up that wicked little "investigative journalism" piece on KGW's "The Square" explaining away what we all heard him say about Oregon's minimum wage, dismissing it as just an editing job. In fact, he uses the KGW reporter's own words in his brand new ad "Don't". Let's be clear. This is why letting an inaccurate piece of journalism float out there, largely unaddressed and uncorrected, is such a bad thing. Leaving aside for the moment, the appearance that KGW is just a media flack for a candidate, the "Don't" ad claims that "Kitzhaber highly edited Dudley's words" and cites the Oregonian on Oct. 11th.












Really?

The Oregonian piece quoted in the "Don't" ad pictured ACTUALLY reads thus:

"The fact is, the Kitzhaber ad does take some highly edited snippets from a rambling answer that Dudley gave to a questioner about the minimum wage back on Sept. 9 - and that Democrats have used against him ever since." Watching Dudley's ad, you'd get the feeling that Kitzhaber sat in a dark, smoke-filled room somewhere and edited the piece himself. Laughably, Dudley's campaign cherry-picked what they wanted from the article and left behind the nuggets that buttress THE FACTS. Mapes goes on to repeat what anyone with a brain and basic comprehension skills already knew:

"But the Kitzhaber campaign could point to parts of Dudley's answer that buttress their ad. The commercial quotes Dudley as saying that "having the highest minimum wage in the country negatively impacts the state." You can see from the transcript (or the Youtube video of his statement) that it is reasonable to think Dudley was agreeing with a questioner who expressed unhappiness about the minimum wage."

...it is reasonable to think because Dudley's mouth moved and his words said he was agreeing with a questioner who expressed unhappiness about the minimum wage.

Enough with this foolishness. First of all, whoever is responsible for the original KGW piece needs to, at long last, make a correction on this story! Stop painting the sentient, intelligent voters as unable to understand what we heard. The reporter in the story, or WHOEVER is responsible at KGW, edited the original video in a fashion to "prove" that the Kitzhaber people edited the video, and then gave a platform for Dudley to respond to it. It's disgusting, appalling journalism. And NOW, Dudley himself is using a snippet in his ad to attack his opponent. KGW should be concerned that it looks like someone there is in the tank for Dudley and I just don't think that's a good policy for a TV station broadcasting over the public airways.

But of course, the desperate Dudley camp is pulling out it's "big guns" now that HE is down in the polls. And KGW gave them a nice sound byte to do so.

KGW - FIX THIS NOW!

Next on the blog, yeah that claim that Kitzhaber wants to tax the homeless is a load of garbage too.

Tracker trespasses in PDX Urban League event, gets what's coming to him?

BREAKING: The trolling tracker with the video camera has been identified as Daniel Sandini, 48, of Southwest Portland.

Mapes has the story here. And yes, he is apparently pressing charges, which is his right. But I hope this was a teachable moment for Mr. Sandini about the 1st Amendment and private property rights. (Somehow, I doubt that.) Anyway, he refuses to speak to the media because they will ask him, you know, QUESTIONS!

So here is my question: If Chris Dudley isn't a member of the Tea Party, then why is the Tea Party sending trackers to his opponent's speaking engagements?

-----------------
By now many of you have seen the video of the citizen who was allegedly assaulted at the Urban League forum with featured guest John Kitzhaber, Democratic candidate for Oregon Governor. Here's what I know about this matter. At least two people who regularly attend these events have told me privately that this videographer is a tracker and attends these events with an eye for disrupting them. While I don't condone punching anyone to get them to stop filming, it seems to me this person had it coming if he was looking to cause trouble. So here's the deal. I want to know who this guy is. And I want the rest of his unedited film to be made public. There was another person filming it from the other side of the room, which leads me to believe this was a coordinated effort.

Does anyone know who this guy is?













I'm also perturbed that KOIN, who was streaming the event, will not post the archival footage of the event anywhere on line. Is it because it's now evidence in a police matter?

My best guess is that this will not be pursued by the videographer because a) we would then know his identity and b) the unedited version of his film will be made public and we can then see his role in the events. But I don't think someone whose motive was to embarrass an invited guest to an event should be allowed to languish in anonymity after his stupid prank.

The guy who punched him should not have done that, but it's not the responsibility of the invited guest to say or do anything about it as it is happening. If anything, the church where this took place owes Dr. Kitzhaber an apology for their mishandling of the situation. But this guy with the camera has some culpability too.

Anyone know who he is? DM me at @bujeeboo. And while you're at it, some stern word to KOIN, @KOIN_Local_6 are also in order. Who are they protecting?

The irresponsible journalism of KGW

One of the stickiest issues so far in the Oregon Governor's race has been this video taped comment made by Chris Dudley:

"it doesn't make sense that our waitresses are getting tips plus the highest minimum wage in the country."

Last night on Live @ 7 on KGW, Anne Yeager took a scatter shot approach to discrediting the people who are RIGHTFULLY appalled by the quote, implying that Dudley was somehow taken out of context due to the editing of the video. In an appalling piece of slipshod "investigative reporting" Yeager's piece ALSO edited the video to leave out the question that Dudley was answering in agreement. And THEN, she sticks a microphone in his face and gives him a platform to backtrack the comment. There's no doubt that this quote has been reflecting badly on Dudley and that he would take it back if he could. He has been careful about the whole matter up til the September 9th venue where he said the quote. Jeff Mapes seemed to get it when he addressed the matter of Dudley's stance on the tip credit back in July and that Dudley didn't want to go on record about it at all:

"At any rate, it's clear that Dudley - who didn't rule out taking up the tip credit issue if he is elected governor - is a favorite of the Oregon Restaurant Association." (who incidently, as of this morning, have given $90K to Dudley's campaign).

I became aware of the quote from Blue Oregon on September 21st, before it was edited into the "short" version. The Democratic Party posted the full, unedited version on You Tube on September 20th. Judging by the comments on the Blue Oregon page then, we were outraged then because, oh I dunno... we understand English and nuance and context. Elements that apparently Anne Yeager does not understand.

To be sure, there has been a backlash against Yeager already this morning. My husband and I, being vocal pains in the ass, challenged her investigative methods on Twitter. We mentioned the fact that she left out the $90K donation by the Restaurant Association. She kept trying to put the focus on Dudley's idea of a training wage. And then she admitted that she didn't understand the "lingo" of "tip credit".

Did she even watch the video herself? Dudley pretty much breaks it down for her. But in case she or anyone else is still unclear about what "tip credit" means, here is a nice explanation and breakdown of how it works in North Carolina.

Note that tipped employees make $5.12 LESS an hour than non-tipped employees. Furthermore, it amounts to less payroll tax, Social Security, and unemployment insurance being paid.

At 00:43 into the "long" unedited version of the video, Dudley says "I agree" to the question being asked about employees making too much money and then uses a third party's story to corroborate his point. Is this not AGREEMENT? Dudley COULD have used the opportunity to praise people who wait tables for a living for the relatively low wage they make. No. Instead, he commiserated with the whiny, cheapskate restaurant owner who was complaining about how much money his waitresses cost him. He has NEVER addressed tip credit and Yeager failed to ask that when she had the chance.

So here it is. The full, unedited video of Dudley agreeing that minimum wage (which he incorrectly claims is the highest in the country) PLUS tips is too much money.



And yes, he does offer up a training wage as a "first" step: "that’s one area I would like to tackle first is to at least get a training wage going" The follow up question to that matter should be: "what's to stop restaurant owners from overly relying on young wait staff making training wage and putting older, experienced workers out of work?" Think you can handle that, Anne Yeager?

The really inexcusable part of Yeager's report is that Kitzhaber is tacitly being blamed for the video. It didn't require investigative journalism to unearth the source of the video... the unedited video has been posted from the start, by the DPO and, in turn, by Blue Oregon.

And finally, please note: As of today, Chris Dudley has still not stated where he stands on "tip credit". This question must be explicitly asked on Thursday's debate on KGW.

I am constantly amazed at how woefully inept the media has been on the Oregon Governor's race. This comes from having to do research myself that I often post here. But this incident fails every journalistic standard of fairness. I wish the media would put as much effort in finding out the identity of the tracker who disrupted the Urban League forum as they did in giving Dudley his opportunity to backtrack off this quote.

Anyone know who that guy is?

Chris Dudley's Change

This is just the most awesome and powerful visual reminder WHY anyone who cares for the environment and our Oregon beaches should NOT vote for Chris Dudley.

Will Dudley's capital gains cuts help? nope.

We own a small business, our taxes have NEVER been lower. What are we doing with the money? Banking it. just like everyone else is doing:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/rich-americans-save-money-from-tax-cuts-instead-of-spending-moody-s-says.html

http://www.upsidetrader.com/2010/07/19/the-great-corporate-cash-hoard/

The problem with Dudley's plan is that its' capital gains cuts creates an amazing imbalance. Cap gains are taxed as income in OR, Dudley's plan reduces cap gains to 3%. What that means is that his company Filigree Advisors which has no employees, stands to make millions and not create a single Oregon job. When large corps with large numbers of employees have piles of cash on hand, how do they grow? They BUY marketshare. Acquisitions and consolidation don't create jobs they create huge job losses.

He plans to "pay" for the loss in revenue to the state "with all the new jobs it creates!". Seriously? isn't that how we got into this mess in the first place... you know, projections?

We moved our company here from California. I'm never looking back. Oregon is a great place for a business (and an amazing place to live) and the statistics actually show that:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/22661.html

Because we are a B2B business, we're growing. 2010 will be our best year ever. As a business, cap gains has nothing to do with our hiring decisions. demand does.

Oregon does not exist in a vacuum, what happens nationally affects us. In the past year AFTER 66&67 we've closed the unemployment gap between OR and Nat rate by about 50%.

Under our last GOP Gov, Atiyeh Oregon went from a national tax burden rank of 6th to 3rd highest in the nation. Since Atiyeh we've risen to 26th (under Kitz we improved from 15th to 20th).

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/476.html

Yeah pick the guy who never had to balance a budget and assumes the best way to pay your bills is to reduce your revenue ... and watch how quickly Oregon collapses.

My comment in the Oregonian about Chris Dudley's 20-pt plan

Wow! If Oregon elects this guy, we're pretty stupid. This plan benefits Filigree Investments (Dudley's company) and the wealth-on-paper crowd he represents. I DO think there is a story here, if the Oregonian would pursue it.

Let me put it to you in perfectly understandable terms. My husband owns a corporation. He is based in Oregon and is the proverbial "small business" that Dudley is aiming to stimulate. Capital gains cuts won't help him. It won't help him employ a single person. Small businesses don't make purchasing or hiring decisions based on capital gains. Meanwhile, day traders and companies like Filigree are going to pay 66% less in taxes than a cop, firefighter, or teacher. Or you or me for that matter.

Dudley keeps using this disengenuous figure of 11% capital gains and that it's "the highest in the nation". What he's not explaining is that it's 11% above $500,000. This applies to millionaires. Dudley doesn't like the fact that he has to pay taxes on money made speculating in the market as if it were income. This plan is redistribution of wealth to people he represents at his firm with money that belongs in the Oregon coffers.

This gift for speculators WILL NOT CREATE A SINGLE JOB.

Reject this fraud!

(Link to article)

Dudley's Donors - Part 2

Be sure to see Part 1 of Dudley's Donors

Seneca Sawmills (Name filed on their ORESTAR record: Seneca Jones Timber Company)
Aggregate Donation to Dudley: $35,000


If you live anywhere in or near Eugene, you probably already know about the Cogeneration wood burning power plant that Seneca is bringing on line as I type. According to the Oregon Toxics Alliance's report (PDF here):






"This project is being marketed as a source of “green” energy, but it has the potential to be a significant source of air pollution in West Eugene.

Attempts to compare the plant’s emissions to all sources in the County as a whole (including vehicle or wood stove emissions) is overlooking the fact that this power plant will be one of the single largest sources of air pollutants in Eugene and Lane County.

Air pollution facts:
• As proposed, the power plant would be the 2nd largest emitter of NOx and CO in Eugene, the 4th largest emitter of NOx in Lane County, and the 7th largest emitter of CO in the County.

• The power plant would be Eugene’s single largest emitter of styrene (a carcinogen), acetaldehyde (a carcinogen), hydrogen chloride (causes respiratory illnesses), and napthalene (a carcinogen). Furthermore, all of the existing sources of those toxics are located in one neighborhood - West Eugene.

• At 1.7 tons, the proposed plant will be Eugene’s 3rd largest emitter of formaldehyde (a carcinogen). All 9 existing sources are located in West Eugene.

• At 1.4 tons, Seneca will be the 4th largest emitter of toluene (a carcinogen). 19 of the 21 existing Eugene’s toluene sources are in West Eugene.

• A natural gas power plant of the same capacity would have significantly less emissions


Stronger Pollution Controls (NOx)

• As proposed, the power plant would be the 2nd largest emitter of NO in Eugene and the 4th in Lane County.

• The plant would emit and 186 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx).

• A natural gas power plant of the same capacity would release 115 tons.

• According to the EPA, NOx causes respiratory problems and aggravates heart disease. It can damage lung tissue and cause premature death.

• NOx is a major component of ground-level ozone and global warming."

Wow! I don't know about you, but all the assurances in the world wouldn't make me feel better about living near this thing. Environmentalists used to get happily excited about biomass plants for energy generation until they found out what these plants do to the neighborhoods situated near them.

Just a cursory Google search on pollution violations of this type of plant yielded the following results:

State settles pollution case at wood-fired plant
New Waterbury powerplant cited for pollution violations (I checked other sources, it is a biomass plant)

Closer to home, this article came out in the Oregonian today:
"Freres Lumber (Note: CEO is also a Dudley contributor) fired up its biomass plant in 2007 as part of the green power rush, banking on tax breaks to generate steam and electricity at its Lyons mill by burning forest slash and mill waste. But proposed rules from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency -- including new regulations on boiler pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the plants -- could force the company to sample emissions more and put "pollution controls on top of pollution controls," Freres executives say. The proposed regulations would make it very difficult to operate the plant, says Kyle Freres, a vice president. "And I really don't think new plants would have much incentive to start up." "

ENTER CHRIS DUDLEY!

Just what is Chris Dudley's stance on the environment: a well-known local Republican says on his blog that Dudley has dodged this question when asked. So he speculates (with much disdain and imagined eye-rolling) that Dudley believes in man-made causes of global warming. I would say, in typical Dudley fashion, he's merely dodged the whole subject. I was able to find something a bit more official-looking as far as a stance here comparing the Republican candidates for Governor before Dudley won the primary

(Under Environment/Energy):

"Chris Dudley: Would focus state policies to promote, not stand in the way of, sustainable development of ranching, timber and agricultural industries. Supports Oregon's emphasis on green economy but should re-evaluate state subsidies for renewable power. Says he is open to liquefied natural gas facilities but doesn't see public appetite for oil drilling off Oregon coast."

So the truth lies somewhere between "promoting" ...timber (et al) industries and if you consider biomass renewable power. Greenpeace does not consider it renewable, and neither do I since biomass is fueled largely by our forests. Until someone asks Chris Dudley specifically about this matter, we're just going to have to take it on faith that all Seneca (and Freres) will get in return for its donation is a Christmas card. The citizens in and around West Eugene would probably like more reassurance.

Further reading: Interesting article about biomass and why enviros aren't thrilled with it-
http://www.ecofriendlymag.com/sustainable-transporation-and-alternative-fuel/biomass-power-renewable-or-rotten/

We didn't do our job, therefore you suck

Have you noticed that the Oregon GOP's approach regarding Kitzhaber's first run as Governor is, 'We didn't do our job for Oregon, therefore you suck'

Kitzhaber vetoed 5 budgets, why? because of GOP deficit spending. The GOP consistently presented the Kitzhaber administration with budgets with deficit spending, they refused to either cut services or raise a tax to pay for them.

Fast forward... GOP now accuses Kitzhaber of tax and spend. ironic, eh?

More Honesty Problems

Next time you see the Chris Dudley ad "Deserve", you might pay closer attention to a certain Oregonian quote:














Of course Team Dudley didn't include the ENTIRE quote, the rest of which reads:

... and state government appeared powerless to help.

That would be the REPUBLICAN-controlled Legislature aka "State Government".

Just want to supply you with the TRUTH. When Dudley tries to tar Kitzhaber with "negative campaigning", he's at best obfuscating.

Tell me again how Chris Dudley is an outsider? He seems like just another politician to me.

Added by Bodiegroup:

I'd add to that that in every one of Dudley's attacks, pay careful attention to the dates of quotes or statistics and ask yourself why each one is post 9/11...

It appears that Dudley has a "PRE 9/11 mentality. Maybe you should ask him who was running the US when all of these horrible stats happened in Oregon and EVERY OTHER STATE in the nation.

Dudley's Donors - Part 1

First, an administrative note: I want to apologize for not moderating comments in a timely fashion. I was pulled in reluctantly to start this blog when I witnessed the RGA's disappearing tweets bragging about Chris Dudley's meeting in Aspen, CO when he should have been debating John Kitzhaber. I'm still figuring out how this all works. Doing the research is easy (yes, you can do this yourself). Finding the time to write about it is harder. I'm also an artist, always trying to get some time in the studio. And I am a principal in my family's corporation. You will find no one who is happier than I am for the elections in November to be over with, but in the meantime I will try to be more aware of the mechanics of this blog. And so, I apologize. Your comments should be posted in better time from now on.

And now, on with the show...
-----------

In case you were wondering who is contributing to Chris Dudley's campaign, the high rollers are a veritable who's who of environmental ne'er -do-wells and inhumane shitbags. Are you surprised? I'm not. If you believe as I do, that Dudley's function at Filigree Advisors is to glad-hand and essentially pimp his celebrity for his company (and now his party) and if you read Filigree's application for IAR (see below), the types of investments they are involved in jump out at you:












Real Estate. OK. Oil and gas partnerships? Just looking at this alone, it comes as no surprise that Chris Dudley nonchalantly told Laurel Porter on KGW Straight Talk that he was "open" to off-shore drilling EVEN AS the BP oil spill nightmare unfolded before the nation's horrified eyes.

This is the "nugget" that Dudley wants the voters to believe: Because he is "pro-business" (supposedly more than his opponent), this translates into job creation. When you look at Dudley's donors, you have a list of persons and business entities that are certainly expectant of wealth creation, especially through use of our natural resources. That, however, doesn't necessarily mean "job creation". And when you look at some of these donors' behaviors, it seems downright disgusting to reward them with anything, least of all a friend in the Governor's Mansion in Salem.

So, let's start the Dudley's Douchey Donors list with the natural resources category:

Stimson Lumber
Aggregate Donation to Dudley: $50,000
Personal donation form CEO Andrew Miller: $8450

As a special interest group, these guys are no stranger to an election.

No on Measure 49 involvement (2007):
The Portland Mercury explains better than I can why scrutiny of political donors is so important:

There's a reason journalists and good government activists spend so much time poring over campaign donor lists—the motives of each side's backers can reveal what's really in store for the state. That's clearly on display with M49, and with M37 three years ago. The biggest M37 claimholder, with over 109,000 acres in contention, is Stimson Lumber, who donated the largest contribution yet ($200,000) last week to the Stop 49 campaign. Stimson, a major player in the Northwest timber industry for over a hundred years, was the preeminent sponsor of M37 three years ago.

Understand: Stimson logs and then parcels the land for housing.
"In Washington County, west of Beaverton, Stimson Lumber holds the largest M37 claim, for nearly 15,000 acres subdivided for residential development. The cumulative area slated for development under various Measure 37 claims would immediately double the suburban land area in Washington County—and the Stimson claim is the lion's share of that potential sprawl."

In explaining the Stimson claims, CEO Andrew Miller told the Willamette Week "his company’s claims are 'political leverage'.” It should be mentioned that Stimson was also a $30,000 contributor to the original Measure 37 campaign.

Luckily, the voters prevailed and M49 passed.

No on Measure 67 involvement (2009/10):
Stimson Lumber has not been in agreement with the majority of Oregon voters on other issues. As explained in an excellent article regarding campaign funding which is worth a full read, it is not surprising that they pumped massive cash into defeating M67 campaign which passed this year. Measure 67 primarily effected large corporations such as Stimson, and closed a huge inequitable tax loophole for large corporations in this state. The anti-tax crowd is still complaining about it and Chris Dudley has plainly stated he was against it. But so far there is no proof that a single company has left the state as a direct result of Measure 67. No doubt, this issue will still be discussed this election until there is proof positive to shut the Chicken Little's up. In any case, Measure 67 was not the job-killer that the lousy economy in general is.

More Stimson/Measure 49 links:
http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics/2007/10/stimson_lumber_adds_money_to_m.html
http://www.wweek.com/editorial/3349/9812/
http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/print_story.php?story_id=116906024346035100

More Stimson/Measure 67 links:
http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=5692411&auid=5773288 (Some of the same donors to both the campaign to defeat M67 AND Chris Dudley are named on this list.)

Legal matters:
Being a company over 100 years old, you are bound to run afoul of the law and regulations now and again. Stimson has its share of polluted ponds, DEQ and OSHA violations and deplorable as those are, three more egregious matters should make anyone wonder why any campaign would take this company's money.

Most recently, just this year "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ... Northwest Environmental Defense Center (NEDC) v. Brown, No. 07-35266, a three-judge panel overruled a Federal District Court's dismissal of NEDC's suit alleging that the Oregon State Forester and several private timberland owners had violated the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA)." Stimson was named as one of the defendants in this case. Basically they fought for and lost the right to dump their polluting run-off water in the ditches where they log without a permit.
More:
http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=infco20100817216


Before that, there was the biggest fire-related settlement in Idaho's history, paid by Stimson Lumber for negligence.

"BOISE – A North Idaho logging operation is one of two companies that must pay $1.5 million to the state to settle negligence claims stemming from a 2003 wildfire.

The Hunt Creek fire torched nearly a square mile of state-owned timber on the eastern shore of Priest Lake.

Babbitt Logging Inc., based in Coeur d’Alene, and Portland-based Stimson Lumber Co. signed the settlement Oct. 9. The state had alleged that the companies caused the fire by improperly rigging logging equipment.

The money represents the largest forest-fire-related settlement Idaho has ever received, said Roger Jansson, head of state Department of Lands’ northern operations."

That takes us back further to Oliver vs. Stimson Lumber, a case that by everything I could find and understand (I am not a lawyer), seems to be some sort of precedent case regarding evidence destruction through negligence where an employee was injured on the job and evidence was re-tooled so as to render it useless even after it had been named as evidence.


But there's nothing like a Civil Rights case against a Reservist to really drive the case home: These guys suck.

Department of Justice

Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Justice Department Settles Lawsuit Against Stimson Lumber Company to Enforce the Employment Rights of Oregon Reservist

WASHINGTON - The Department of Justice announced today that it has entered into a consent decree with Stimson Lumber Company (Stimson) that, if approved by the court, will resolve the Department’s complaint, also filed today, that Oregon-based Stimson failed to reemploy Oregon reservist David Eckhardt in violation of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA).
...

The Department’s complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Portland, Ore., alleges that Stimson violated USERRA by failing or refusing to promptly reemploy David Eckhardt upon his return from military service in the Naval Reserves. In March 2007, Eckhardt attended a required military training program. After a short recovery period from an injury sustained during his military training obligation, Eckhardt contacted Stimson in April 2007 to seek reemployment as a boiler operator. The complaint alleges that Stimson failed or refused to reemploy Eckhardt, notifying him that the company had hired another individual to replace him. Under the terms of the consent decree, Stimson is required to provide remedial relief to Eckhardt in the form of an undisclosed monetary payment. Stimson is also prohibited from retaliating against persons who exercise their rights under USERRA.

Regulations? Laws? Who cares about laws?

In closing, Stimson already has its tentacles in all levels of forest management, and I realize that the timber industry in Oregon has fallen on hard times in recent years (ironically causing much of the job loses that Dudley is blaming on John Kitzhaber during the time when he was Governor). But Stimson has proven by the examples shown here and by their political activism that they are scrambling hard to get a Corporate Welfare Savior in Salem. Dudley is their guy and the association may not be beneficial to the rest of us.

If you have links to other Stimson Lumber stories, please tweet them to me @bujeeboo

More of Dudley's Donors in coming days...

And allow me one last divergence. What is up with the Republican Party of Oregon? No platform yet? I guess they have Empty Suits and no standards by which to judge them, even amongst their own party.

Kitzhaber on education funding.

While Dudley spent the last 6 months having his Washington DC staff and Haley Barbour tell him what his "positions" were, John Kitzhaber was laying his out.

Here is his short answer on education funding.For the long answer go to his website.

Dudley when recently asked "what SPECIFICALLY would you do to imporve education" responded with "I'd make sure we're doing everything we can to move education forward"

gee that's specific, dud.

Kitzhaber takes the High Road. Voters get No Road.

Update: We've been asked to show some examples of the information we cite below. It's all available, public record stuff. And I was rather angry about matters last night when I wrote my piece that my feelings at the time were essentially "I won't do the media's job for them, let them find this stuff". Trust me, it wasn't hard! But here is a screen grab of the Biography section of the Form ADV so you can see what I am talking about. Chris Dudley is a biography for Filigree. He has a super awesome title and no apparent role.




























This is the ONLY mention of Dudley with the SEC.












-----------------------------

In light of the very recent news that John Kitzhaber, who I have the greatest respect and admiration for, has told the Democratic Governors Association (in effect) to cease and desist with any negative campaigning for the time being, I thought I had better make a few things abundantly clear about this blog and vent my frustration.

First of all, this blog is written and researched by my husband and myself. We are Oregon residents. We are not part of the Democratic party in any official or unofficial capacity. You may have noticed a lot of this blog is formatted in the form of questions. As voters, we have questions! The media seems to have exhausted and bored itself with research on Dr. Kitzhaber because he is a known quantity. But we know even less about Chris Dudley.

We are not impressed with Chris Dudley. That is obvious. For one thing, the media seems to have bought into this enchanting notion that Dudley is somehow this experienced business person who knows how to create jobs. Chris Dudley doesn't create jobs in his career at Filigree Advisors. He (supposedly) creates wealth on paper for a living. And there's really no proof of success there either. The guy who did have some direct knowledge of business and job creation was Allen Alley but the Republicans didn't think Alley was glamorous enough so they invested no resources in his campaign. Chris Dudley, is above all, a campaign donation machine. So we "get" why his party likes him.

We fell into our role of exploring Chris Dudley quite by accident when we witnessed the Republican Governors Association post and then remove some tweets about where Chris Dudley REALLY was when he said he was unable to attend the ONPA debate because he was on a "family vacation". Now that we see how much the RGA has received from News Corp, the parent company of Fox News, we understand why Oregon voters came last on July 16th when Dudley had a choice between debating and going to a fund raiser. Screw us, the dumb shit voters of Oregon. Oh boy! The RGA has money and Haley Barbour to rub elbows with! What do we matter?

Since my husband and I witnessed Dudley's lie firsthand, we have been curious about him but there is little to know about him. Everything we can find on our own in local press says he has no specifics and that he has no experience in government. Then his 26 point plan comes out, and all be darned. It's true. The man needs a civics class on how Oregon government works!

So here's what I want to know based on my own research:

Why does the CFP Board website list Dudley's CFP license as current but that he is not practicing? A call placed to the CFP Board told me this means he's licensed but he isn't taking new clients.

Update: Chris Dudley is also not registered with SEC as an IAR (Investment Adviser Representative)

The Willamette Week in their July 21st article said Filigree has a value of $55 million in accounts they manage and the article speculated how much they made using a very generous 1% commission rate. The actual rate (if you do the damn research) is a sliding scale with the most generous being .85%. They have 30 clients according to their most recent filing with the SEC. We can assume that these clients are not all equal in wealth. So if we use the highest .85% commission rate, that's $476,500 annually that this firm makes. Hardly Fortune 500 stuff. It's three guys on commission in a high rent office in Lake Oswego, which I found leases from anywhere between $21 and 25/sf/yr. Oh yeah, a real job and wealth factory there. I'm not impressed.

All this leads me to my pivotal question: what the hell does Chris Dudley DO? His bio on the Filigree Advisors website says he is a "Wealth Strategist". In fact, the Filigree website doesn't even mention Ian Crawford, the third partner but instead leads the visitor to believe that it's Gerald Graves and Chris Dudley's s show. However Filigree's FORM ADV with the SEC says lists Chris Dudley's biography and that's it. No duties, no detail. He's not a controlling partner. The ADV goes into some detail what Graves and Crawford do. But for Dudley, it's just a biography.

And I would contend, that's all he is in his job and that's all he is in politics. A biography. A story. A hand-shaker. Someone to bring clients in, or bring donors in. The thinking is, where the money goes, the voters will follow. Where is the evidence that Chris Dudley has created a single job? Where is the evidence that he's even created any wealth?!

As for negative ads, Dudley's expensive campaign ads have already gone negative on Kitzhaber in spite of Kitzhaber wanting to take the high road. In Dudley's recent ad, he blames Kitzhaber for poor job creation in Oregon during the recession in 2001 after we were attacked on 9/11 and when the whole country was in recession. He neglects to say that the Republican Legislature at the time also shares the blame if there is any blame to give. He neglects to say that the Oregon Progress Board set goals for itself and basically gave itself the F grade as depicted in the ad. It's disingenuous crap and half-truths. If Kitzhaber doesn't have the money right now to put out something positive in defense of this BS, then I have concerns that this will never be an even race, which I believe most Oregonians believe in.

So John Kitzhaber may have shut off the DGA, but this humble husband and wife team will keep on chipping away at the facade that is Chris Dudley, "economy fixer and job creator" until we see evidence that he can do either.

Your Humble Blogger
~bujeeboo

The Tax Foundation

this publication represents a big problem for the Oregon GOP candidates, why? cause it pretty much exposes everything they've been telling you about taxes and democrats as lies. Please note that during 1979-1987 Oregon was under GOP rule. 1987-current, Dems. Note the improvement in Oregon's rank under Dems and the fall under GOP. Then ask them why is that?

On a side note: Did you know that over the last decade Oregon spending as a percent of GDP has gone down?

Question Dudley

The next time you see Chris Dudley ask a few simple questions.

1.) if you suggest taxes are the cause of Oregon/US recession why is it that Oregon currently has the 14th best business tax climate in the country yet jobs aren't here?

2.) If you suggest that Dems had a "failure of leadership" why is it that under Vic Atiyeh Oregon went from 6th highest tax burden to 3rd and under dems it went from 3rd to 26th?

3.) If reducing taxes is what creates jobs, how many jobs were created by the Bush tax cuts?

4.) If Democrats are "tax and spend" please explain question 2

5.) If GOP is fiscally responsible, please tell me how much GOP cut federal discretionary spending when they owned executive and legislative branches of government.

After he stumbles through those questions. Ask him to name a company that left Oregon when their minimum corp tax was "increased 1500%!" from $10 to $150.

Remember that debate, no... family vacation? Errr... couple hours of RGA work?

UPDATE: Further investigation on ORESTAR reveals that Chris Dudley was also reimbursed for one plane ticket on United to Aspen. (Ironically, my husband took the exact same United flight the week following Dudley's trip and it cost EXACTLY the same.)

Given that Dudley was so adamant that the trip was a family vacation, and that he told Lars Larson that he did "a couple hours of work", should the campaign be paying for this trip at all? Even if these charges were for a staffer, that's quite a hefty hotel charge. Also, whoever bought the plane ticket got an upgrade. Must be nice working for the Dudley Campaign.














A real-time charge for a United upgrade:














Frequent Flyers: Please feel free to corroborate or refute. These charges EXACTLY match my husband's who took that same flight (with upgrade) the following week.


++++++++++++
Weirdness surrounds the Chris Dudley family vacation back in July.

Recap: Dudley begged out of the ONPA debate because he had a pre-scheduled family vacation.

"Chris made a commitment to his family and he's going to uphold that commitment," said campaign spokesman Leroy Coleman.

Then it was revealed that he was caught in a lie when the Republican Governor's Association tweeted that they had spent a "productive couple of days" with Dudley. Those tweets were promptly removed so as not to implicate The Tall One in a lie. Too late! The Dudley Camp is then in the awkward position of having to explain that vacation/RGA meeting overlap (from Mapes' column):

Dudley's spokesman, LeRoy Coleman, said Dudley had long before blocked out a period of Wednesday through Saturday for a vacation in Aspen with his family. He chose that location in part because of the GOP meeting, Coleman said.

So imagine our surprise while sipping coffee in bed on a fine Saturday morning and scanning Dudley's campaign expenditures when we ran across this (click to enlarge):















Yup, that would be the hotel charge for the 2010 Dudley Family Summer Vacation Extravaganza and Debate Dodge. And it's a reimbursement. It's not illegal. At least, I don't think it is. But to be sure, we've written the Secretary of State and inquired.

However, it still eludes to an Honesty Problem and a problem if you happened to have donated to his campaign. You might have purchased a family vacation at a luxury hotel in Aspen for a family that can afford to buy its own vacation or even its own house in Aspen. I think it warrants an explanation because controversy has been surrounding this event from the git-go.

Gosh... A free vacation in Aspen in July sounds wonderful.

What part of tax deductable don't you get?

Idiots piss me off, the assumption that tax cuts to the rich trickle down to the rest of us is assinine.

Let me ask a simple question to Dudley supporters.

How many jobs did the tax cuts to the rich create under Bush?

Or how much of a budget surplus was created by those tax cuts? 

Over the past 30 years unemployment skyrocketed under GOP presidents and dropped dramatically under Dems. It is indisputable. But since when did facts actually matter?

I've created 3 businesses: 1 event consulting that I merged into my 2nd business (graphic design and media production) which I sold, and started a new similar business which is doing quite well. When taxes are very low I pull money out of my business & I bank it. I don't re-invest it & I don't hire new employees. 

Under Bush corps have stashed HUGE amounts of cash. They aren't hiring. In fact many are buying new businesses to drive growth (as opposed to growing their own business and hiring new employees) and as a result they lay off employees. don't believe me... look at unemployment stats from 2006-10.

BREAKING NEWS: employees are tax deductable. yes, it's really that simple.

All thinking people understand that there is a cause and effect between what is happening nationally and what happens in Oregon. The rest vote for the tall guy.

Daddy, please tell me again how the GOP are deficit hawks?

Seriously, do facts matter anymore? If you think Dudley is out to protect Oregonians, think again. He's GOP, what else do you need to know.

This chart shows deficit spending as a percent of GDP note the trends in the past 30 years. Curously Obama is driving HUGE deficits, you hear that meme all the time from the right. The part that they leave out? $1.2T of the debt generated under Obama was handed to him by Bush, and much of the other deficit spending is the result of several things:

1.) an economy left in ruins by the GOP

2.) wars started under Bush

3.) wall street bank bailouts under the Bush

Nope facts, don't matter, right Chris Dudley?

George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America"

It's really rather frightening how true this is:



Remember this when Chris Dudley and other CORPORATE PUPPETS come knocking on your Statehouse door.

Is Dudley ducking ANOTHER debate?

This little nugget appeared tonight in the Eugene Register-Guard:

The two nominees for governor will speak to about 70 mayors from across Oregon at a conference Friday in Cottage Grove.

The candidates are scheduled to appear separately. Both will speak for a few minutes and then take questions from mayors in the audience.

Democrat John Kitzhaber is slated to appear at 11:15 a.m. Republican Chris Dudley is scheduled to speak at 2:40 p.m. The Oregon Mayors Association conference is being held at Village Green Resort.

The Democratic Party of Oregon is calling it a debate and flatly states Dudley is ducking it:

Dudley Dodges another Debate - Mayors Edition

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PORTLAND, Oregon (July 27, 2010) -

Chris Dudley has already dodged a debate organized by Oregon newspapers - and now he is skipping a debate in front of Oregon's mayors.

This Friday, the Oregon Mayors Association was scheduled to host a gubernatorial debate. Democrat John Kitzhaber accepted the invitation outright. Republican Chris Dudley declined - again. This time Dudley refused to show up to the debate, agreeing to show up after Kitzhaber had left the building.

+++

Can we get some media types on this? Either it's a debate or it isn't.