HinesSight

McCain voters, please save our sanity

If you're thinking of voting for John McCain, consider this: you're running the risk of vastly increasing mental illness in this country. Mostly of the depressive variety, though I wouldn't rule out major psychotic breaks if your man wins next Tuesday.

So be compassionate. Vote your values, Christian or otherwise. Perform a selfless act. Help those in need.

Like, my wife and me. We were just talking about what it'd be like to spend the next four years watching Sarah Palin mangle the vice-presidency, while McCain dodders his own way along.

Laurel thought that she'd have to stop reading the newspaper, watching TV, and listening to the radio. Probably even that wouldn't be enough, because her friends would be keeping up with news about the McCain-Palin administration and couldn't help blurting out what's happening.

Thus a vote for McCain could end up producing a recluse who spends her days wandering around our house, muttering to herself. How did it happen... what went wrong... Oh Obama, where have you gone...

Sure, this isn't likely to happen. The odds are less than 3% at the moment. But this is how depressive insanity strikes: when people's guards are down and the future looks oh-so-rosy. Until, it isn't.

Since the core of McCain's support comes from conservative fundamentalist Christians, I'm asking those poised to vote for him to consider: What would Jesus do?

Wouldn't he give of himself to fulfill the needs of others? Wouldn't he lift up the poor, the lame, the infirm, the Obama supporters teetering on the edge of a mental breakdown?

Absolutely.

Jesus would say, "Brothers and sisters, support Barack even if your heart is with John. For he who surrenders his vote in the name of loving compassion shall be rewarded a hundredfold. Including getting your taxes reduced if you make under $250,000."

If Obama loses, which some say could only be due to one bad thing, my descent into madness likely would take a different turn from Laurel's.

I'd still immerse myself in the media. To assuage the pain of seeing Palin and her sidekick, some sort of numbing would be necessary. Alcoholism or drug addiction, probably. Maybe both, just to make sure that I don't feel the horror.

I'm trying to take some preventive measures -- hoping to inoculate myself against the 3% chance of McCain making it into the White House by reading "10 Reasons Why McCain Might Win." Most don't make sense, fortunately for my future mental health.

However, I'm begging potential McCain voters not to take any chances. Keep Obama-supporting Americans like me and my wife off of a depressive slide into a progressive black hole.

Vote for Barack. You may not be happy you did, but we sure will be. Remember: it's better to give than to receive.

Republicans depressed about an Obama win -- I feel your pain

With a week to go before the election, I'm having a burst of compassion for the many conservatives who are seriously depressed about the prospect of watching Barack Obama in the White House for the next four (or eight) years.

Believe me, I've been there. My wife too. We've felt your pain. In 2000. And again in 2004. So here's some advice from a progressive who didn't know if he could make it through a George Bush presidency:

You'll survive. When you wake up on November 5, the sun will still rise. Still, for a while you'll feel like there's nothing to live for, that the bottom has fallen out of your political life. You won't be able to understand how so many people voted for a second-rate candidate who, obviously, is going to drag this country down. Take a deep breath. Relax. Tell yourself: "this too shall pass."

That's what I did. And now it's happened. George Bush and John McCain are poised to pass out of the national awareness.

A new day is about to dawn, one where progressives dance and sing, while conservatives contemplate moving to a state with assisted suicide (that would be Oregon, where I live; but I'm sorry -- you have to be terminally ill to use the law, not just terminally depressed).

On cable news I've seen McCain supporters saying things like, "This country can't survive if Obama wins." I think to myself: My friends, we're on the same wavelength. You're just eight years behind my speaking the same words.

With a minor substitution: "Bush" for "Obama." I was wrong in 2000 and 2004, because the United States has been strong and resilient enough to make it through the mal-administraton of one of the worst presidents ever.

So Republicans, buck up.

I'm confident that Obama is going to be one of our best presidents. It's not going to take long for you to realize that your fears have been unfounded. And every time you see Joe Biden do something vice-presidential, be thankful that it isn't Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

Yikes! That thought is so scary, I'm not sure what I'd do if it became reality.

Often progressives say, "I'd move to Canada." They may not mean it, but it makes them feel better to know that there's a way out of a national nightmare. There's a problem for conservatives, though: where do they go if Obama wins?

It isn't readily apparent what country is the equivalent of Canada for right-wingers. Fortunately, Chris Wilson of Slate has come up with some answers in "The Conservative's Canada: Where can Republicans threaten to move if Obama wins?"

Israel. Poland. The Cayman Islands. Or Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong. Australia and Ireland are other possibilities. Not as easy to get to as Canada, but each has some characteristics that would help sooth a conservative's Obama-stressed soul.

Personally, I like the idea in this article that disgruntled Republicans head north to Alaska, where they can soak up Palin's persona and pretend that she's V.P. rather than Governor.

(Another possibility: join Republicans for Obama and be happy the next four years.)

Obama doesn't spread my T-shirt wealth

I'm relieved! Barack Obama isn't a socialist. Here's the proof: me wearing an Obama-Biden t-shirt that arrived in the mail yesterday.

(A bonus proof -- that progressives have some smarts: another photo taken with my new MacBook in front of a mirror, which reflected the reflected words back to normal.)

I'd been worrying that the Obama campaign had decided to spread my t-shirt wealth with someone in a lower donation bracket, just as McCain has been saying he'd do with our taxes. Months ago I made a contribution to Obama after I'd gotten an email saying that if I donated now I'd get a "first edition" t-shirt.

My daughter got hers a long time ago. I figured the election would be over by the time mine came. So it was thrilling to open our mailbox and find a squeezable package.

Only problem is, I've inspected every corner of the t-shirt and can't find any mention of "first edition." Guess it won't be the collector's item that I'd hoped for. The label does, however, say "Made in USA" (been a long time since I've seen that on clothing) and sports a United States flag.

This is more proof: that Obama isn't anti-American, as a Republican congresswoman has claimed. Man, I'm getting a lot of mileage out of this t-shirt.

It's been a good week for Obama, as well as for my t-shirt drawer. A judge threw out  a ridiculous lawsuit by Philip Berg claiming that Obama isn't an American citizen. I heard Berg being interviewed on a right-wing talk show. He was convinced that the lawsuit was going to give the election to McCain.

So much for that loony plan. Berg could have saved himself some trouble by heading over to FactCheck and reading their take on the He's not a citizen! smear effort.

They've inspected Obama's original birth certificate and have posted photos of it, complete with a close-up of the raised seal testifying to its authenticity. None the less, delusional McCain supporters are still spreading the lie that Obama's birth certificate is missing.

Well, they're entitled to their fantasies. Which includes the notion that Obama is going to lose the election. (McCain has a 3% chance at the moment; even conservative stalwarts are jumping ship.)

No complacency, though! Vote for Obama! Donate to Obama! Volunteer for Obama!

I want to be sure that I get to wear my t-shirt to a victory party on November 4.

Blogging is more fun with Google Docs

I like to write blog posts. What I don't like is: (1) Losing part (or all) of my brilliant musings when a word processor crashes, or the Compose Post screen of a blog hosting service decides to do something weird.

(2) Wasting time on formatting a post because the above-mentioned Compose Post editor is based on buttons that must be clicked to italicize, boldface, underline, or whatever, instead of using keystroke controls like word processors do.

A couple of days ago I decided to help get the economy back on track, and also soothe my financial crisis'ed soul, by purchasing a freshly redesigned MacBook.

I love it so much, I can't count all the ways in this post. So that'll have to wait for another day.

One of the few worries I've had about my new Macintosh relationship is the effect it'll have on my blogging. I've been writing posts in Word 2007 on a PC with Windows XP. 

There's a lot not to like about Word 2007 -- such as the new and not-improved menu system -- but one feature is marvelous. You can write fully formatted blog posts in it, then publish them with a single click (either as a draft or "live").

The only down side has been how buggy the blogging feature  has been on my computer. I haven't had problems with normal word processing. Only with blog posts does Word 2007 crash, which happens with distressing regularity.

Sometimes even after I've clicked "save," but before the saving.

So I've learned to copy into memory what I've written before I save a post, just in case Word decides this would be a good time to test my Buddha-nature by losing my carefully crafted prose. (To its credit, Word 2007 has a generally reliable crash recovery feature; that's good, considering how often I've needed it.)

The Macintosh version of Word doesn't offer this blogging feature, I'm pretty sure. Anyway, Office 2008 for the Mac has gotten such atrocious reviews, I decided to skip it and go with Apple's iWork suite.

Good move, but now I was stuck with using TypePad's Compose Editor on my new MacBook. I gave it a try last night and found it frustrating for reason (2) above. It took me much longer to write a post that way, compared to using a real word processor.

That led me to Google and a further search for some way to easily write and publish formatted blog posts. I'd already learned about the usual Macintosh suspects in this area: MarsEdit, Ecto, Qumana, and a few others.

I'm sure they're good programs. And I resonated with the opening MarsEdit sales pitch:

Browser-based interfaces are slow, clumsy, and require you to be online to use them. While your blog's web interface struggles to perform the simplest of tasks, MarsEdit uses the power of your Mac to provide an amazing blog editing experience.

Well, right now I'm online using Google Docs to write this post. I don't see that as a big downside, since I need to be online to publish to my blog and with DSL there's no penalty to being connected to the Internet (admittedly, with dial-up there usually is).

On the plus side...

-- Google Docs is free.

-- It's basically a scaled down Word, with undo and redo, plus all the other features I normally use in blogging (italics, boldface, quotation indent, insert URL, spell check, and such).

-- It saves the document automatically, and often. Nice. I've had zero glitches while writing this fairly lengthy post, but it's good to know that I wouldn't lose much if a problem occurred.

-- Publishing to a blog with Google Docs is easy (caveat below). Here's how you do it.

I ran into the caveat because TypePad, the blog service I use, isn't one of those on the Google Docs drop-down list. However, after I contacted TypePad support I learned the secret  to making Google Docs work for me. 

All another TypePad user has to do is substitute their personal info in the "Existing Blog Settings" boxes. If you have more than one blog with TypePad, be sure to include the exact name of your blog you're posting to. 

Like life, the Google Docs way of blog posting isn't perfect. So far as I know, there's no way to publish a draft. Thumbnailed photos and HTML code (needed for a YouTube video embed, for example) need to be inserted after the post is published. 

That's no big deal, if you attend to it right away to avoid making your readers wonder where the stuff is that you mention in the post. And a category also has to be inserted via a visit to TypePad.

On the whole, though, I'm happy with Google Docs. It's much easier to write a post with it than to fumble my way through TypePad's Compose Editor. The line spacing between paragraphs is a bit larger than it was in Word, but maybe there's a way to fiddle with this. [Update: well, maybe not.] Again, no big deal.

So bloggers, give it a try. I bet you'll like it as much as I do.

Palin is failin’ to help McCain

Oh, how sweet is the karmic delight! Everything that voters once found so right about Sarah Palin now is turning them off.

A recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that Palin is people's biggest concern about voting for McCain.

Fifty-five percent of respondents say she's not qualified to serve as president if the need arises, up five points from the previous poll. …In the survey, 47 percent view her negatively, versus 38 percent who see her in a positive light. …Now, Palin's qualifications to be president rank as voters' top concern about McCain's candidacy - ahead of continuing President Bush's policies, enacting economic policies that only benefit the rich and keeping too high of a troop presence in Iraq.

Sweet. I'm turning Obama! Obama! cartwheels at this marvelous turn of events. Every day, it seems, there's a new reason to turn away from Palin.

This is a good summary of the sundry screw-up's and "can you believe it?" expressions on the face of American voters. I've also done my own cyberspace walk through the not-so-wonderful world of PalinLand today.

Front and center, of course, is her $150,000 Fashiongate scandal. That's what was spent in a single month to dress up Palin, who tries to claim that she's just an average hockey Mom.

Yeah, right. Her clothing budget in September was four times the median salary of an American plumber. Sarah, please say "elitist" while you look in the mirror.

If you're into fashion, it's entertaining to browse through some photos of what the $150,000 bought (about halfway down the page). She should win the expensive high-heeled shoe vote, for sure. Those high boots also are cool. And how adorable – her daughter carries a Louis Vuitton bag!

You also can see what $8,700 worth of makeup consultations  brought to Palin. (Excessive blush, in my utterly non-professional opinion.) And learn her favorite "hockey Mom" stores: Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue.

An LA Times fashion critic says

Voters must find it unfathomable for Palin, who has been presented as a woman "like us," to spend that kind of money on clothes in these difficult financial times, to see her speaking so passionately about Joe the Plumber while plumbing campaign coffers for Valentino jackets and pencil skirts. And yet, they've eaten it up, tittering on chat sites about Palin's Kawasaki eyeglass frames and her Naughty Monkey red peep-toe pumps.

… You also have to wonder how it feels, as a woman, to have everyone know that you really have been dressed up and trotted out like a beauty queen for the American public to wag their tongues at. Caribou Barbie indeed.

Well, at least she's giving answers befitting her beauty queen background. Palin still doesn't understand what a vice-president does, even though she thinks it'd be cool to be one. No, the VP isn't in charge of the Senate, Sarah.

And somehow she manages to find socialism lurking behind Obama's middle class tax cut, excoriating him for wanting to "spread the wealth," while sucking up redistributive income from the Alaska Permanent Fund – a massive transfer of wealth from oil company royalties to every non-felon Alaskan.

Yes, Palin presides over the People's Republic of Alaska. So she shouldn't be throwing socialist stones at Obama when she lives in such a glass house state of unearned wealth spreading.

Obama poised to whip McCain’s butt

McCain said he was going to whip Obama's "you know what" in the last debate. Wrong. He lost, big time. Just like he's going to lose the presidential election in a few weeks.

Yes, I realize that Obama is telling his supporters to act as if they're behind, rather than ahead.

That's good advice. And my wife is taking it to heart, in a general Democratic sense, since she's been phone-banking away the past couple of days – making calls for Oregon candidates, plus Obama.

Here's a good sign: Laurel told me that after Colin Powell enthusiastically endorsed Obama yesterday, she found that more people were willing to talk with her about why they should support Obama.

We watched Powell's Meet the Press appearance and came away much impressed. Compared to McCain, Palin, and other flyweights, he's a thoughtful Republican with gravitas and substance.

I don't see how any independent voter could listen to Colin Powell and not say to him- or herself, "Obama's my man." Judge for yourself.

Currently FiveThirtyEight judges that Obama has a 93% chance of becoming president. Pollster has him with almost as big an electoral vote lead. Gallup shows Obama up 11% with registered voters, and 9% with an expanded set of likely voters. Obama also leads by 9% in Ohio, an important swing state.

McCain and Palin's only hope is that Americans are idiots. Good luck with that. They're trying to pin a Socialist! label on Obama, but that's not going to fly. After eight years of Bush, people have developed refined bullshit detecting skills.

Heck, real socialists say that Obama isn't one of them. As the story points out:

"Obama is about as far from being a socialist as Joe The Plumber is from being a rocket scientist," said Darrell West, director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "I think it's hard for McCain to call Obama a socialist when George Bush is nationalizing banks."

McCain shows his economic ignorance by equating Obama's "share the wealth" comment with socialism. He doesn't realize that a progressive tax system, where people who make more money pay at a higher rate, is designed to share the wealth.

What is social security? Sharing the wealth. What is Medicare, Medicaid, low cost student loans, and McCain's own health care plan (along with Obama's, naturally)? Sharing the wealth.

What would be the point of government social programs if they left people needing help in exactly the same economic position, because, god forbid, some money flowed from the more fortunate to the less fortunate?

Isn't that what love is? Giving. It's bizarre that taxaphobic conservatives have made sharing one's wealth into something wrong rather than oh-so-right.

That's one reason, among many, why this country needs Obama so badly. Come November 5, a new day dawns.

Love is … paying taxes

A month ago Joe Biden was unfairly bashed by Republicans for saying that those making over $250,000 a year should view paying more taxes as patriotic.

He was right, but didn't go far enough. Everybody should see paying taxes as patriotic.

It's so obvious. Where the heck does the money come from for government funding of our military, roads, public schools, scientific research, Medicare, Social Security, and the other programs that keep our country strong?

Taxes, almost entirely.

So I don't understand the conservative notion that not paying taxes is a badge of honor. The way I see it, it's a mark of me-me-me selfishness.

Barack Obama wants middle class people to get a tax cut. Those making over $250,000 a year, like the temporarily famous Joe the Plumber (if his business dream ever becomes reality) would see their marginal tax rate rise from 36% to 39%.

Great idea.

Say Joe made $300,000. He'd pay 3% more on the $50,000 over $250,000. That's $1,500, ½ of 1 percent of Joe's total income, which would go to help pay for the pressing needs facing our country.

He should love to fork out a little extra, since he can afford it. And I wish Obama would use that very word more often when talking about taxes:

Love. We often say, "It's better to give than to receive." Isn't that the essence of love, giving of yourself?

Yet when it comes to giving to people less fortunate than us through taxation, many resist – wanting to keep their money for themselves, figuring, I guess, that getting another flat screen TV is a higher social value than improving the health of low income children.

Today McCain and Palin basically said that Obama is a socialist for wanting the rich to pay a little more in taxes. Well, if that's true, then Ronald Reagan was a socialist. Also, George H.W. Bush.

It's pitiful to see the McCain-Palin campaign reduced to name-calling. The further they sink in the polls, the more desperate they become to pull Obama down.

They haven't realized yet (but they will on election day) that voters are hungry for honest positive talk about how the United States can bounce back from the current financial crisis.

Obama is saying that McCain is "out of touch." In Missouri 100,000 people agreed with him, showing that love and patriotism trumps name-calling.

“Joe the Plumber” story springs some leaks

Last night's presidential debate featured many mentions of Joe, the plumber – a guy who came to a campaign rally and talked to Obama about his concern that raising taxes on those who make over $250,000 a year would affect his ability to buy a plumbing business.

Let's take a closer look at Joe. I'm confident that there's more to learn about him, but here's a good start.

First, if you watch the video of Joe's conversation with Obama you'll see Obama explain how his tax plan is good for small businesses.

Very few clear $250,000 or more, so raising the marginal tax rate at that level to 39% (from 36%) isn't a big deal. Further, Obama points out that if his plan had been in effect, with his current income Joe would have been paying less taxes, allowing him to save up money to buy the plumbing business more quickly.

Second, the notion that someone bringing home $250,000 a year is an "average Joe" is ridiculous. If he's making that much profit, he's far from a typical small business owner. As Joe Biden said:

"John [McCain] continues to cling to the notion of this guy Joe the plumber," Biden said on NBC's "Today" show. "I don't have any Joe the plumbers in my neighborhood that make $250,000 a year."

"The Joe the plumbers in my neighborhood, the Joe the cops in my neighborhood, the Joe the grocery store owners in my neighborhood, they make, like 98 percent of the small businesses, less than $250,000 a year."

Yes, the average wage for plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters in the United States in 2007 was $47,350.

Third, Joe the Plumber isn't exactly a regular guy in other respects. Let's count some ways.

(1) He doesn't have a plumbing license, nor does his employer, even though the county where he lives requires one.

(2) He's behind on his tax bill, owing the state of Ohio $1,182 in personal income taxes.

(3) He had reporters at his house during the debate, leading to questions that Joe was a Republican plant (he seems to be a registered Republican).

So Joe the Plumber (Joe Wurzelbacher) doesn't strike me as an unwashed voter who just happened to feel like asking Obama a question about taxes.

My bet is that as more is learned about Joe, we're going to find some connections between him and the McCain campaign. Desperation breeds dirty tricks, and McCain is certainly desperate.

[Update: Blue Oregon has a good "Lessons from Joe the Plumber" post. More strangeness revealed.]

Developers seek to rule Sisters (Oregon)

Sisters is one of central Oregon's special places.

Few towns in the country have managed to fend off ugly strip mall commercialism so well. Sisters is frontier-themed, with a friendly down home artistic charm that keeps visitors coming back again and again.

We know Sisters well, since we're part owners of a cabin in Camp Sherman, about fifteen minutes away.

So it's been disturbing to learn that pro-development forces are trying to stack the five member Sisters City Council with three men who have close ties to the building industry. All around town you see billboards with their names, since they're running as a cabal.

A Bend Bulletin editorial lays out the basic issue in the upcoming City Council election:

The city of Sisters may face many challenges, but the divide in the race for City Council is over economic development. Five candidates are running. The three top vote-getters will join the council. And the five candidates are split into two factions about the city's approach to development.

Councilman Lon Kellstrom, business owner Pat Thompson and Jerry Bogart, the president of Steelhead Construction Services, are running together. They are convinced that city government is doing less than it should to encourage business. The trio wants a change in attitude to start at the top. And they want the city to take the lead role in recruiting more business into Sisters.

Here's our plea to Sisters voters: don't vote for these guys! Be smart. Realize how easy it'd be to lose what you've got, and what that would mean to your community.

People aren't eager to visit, live, work, or form a business in Sisters because it's like every other town. It's your uniqueness, and yes, quirkiness, that's the key to your long-term success.

Learn from the financial meltdown that's devastated this country. Greed and over-development pads the pockets of a few well-heeled fat cats, but it screws the average citizen.

I don't know all the details of the Sisters City Council election, but my wife and I are familiar enough with land use issues in our home town, Salem, to understand what letter writers to the Sisters Nugget (a weekly) are justifiably concerned about.

Some samples (selected from here, here, here, and here):

To the Editor:

It would seem wise at this time for the Sister's City Council to consider putting a building moratorium on future development until the current mess is cleared up and only consider those types of projects that are appropriate for retaining the Western theme and are within the ability of current services, ie. traffic considerations, sewer, water, etc.

The one that comes to mind is the Cyrus family's idea for a new destination resort. Sisters needs that like a hole in the head.

One reason folks like to visit Sisters is it's not like Eagle Crest or the surrounding Bend area. It's one of the last bastions of identifiable motifs in Central Oregon.

When people come to Sisters to visit a small Western style community, that's what they, for the most part, get.

Jeff Miller
-----------------------------------------
To the Editor:

In his letter to the editor published last week in support of city council candidates Kellstrom, Bogart and Thompson, Grady Brown points out that building volume is dictated by market forces, not the city council. 

True enough. But what Mr. Brown doesn't point out is that the policy decisions that control how, where and when Sisters will grow, such as the location of the Urban Growth Boundary and the make-up of the planning commission, are made by the city council.

One of the candidates running for city council - Pat Thompson - owns an interest in a large tract of land on the east end of town that is just outside the UGB. Several landowners who have interests in large tracts on both ends of town that lie outside the UGB have made donations to the PAC that is supporting the Kellstrom, Bogart and Thompson campaigns.

Time and again the citizens of Sisters have said that maintaining livability of the community is one of their most pressing concerns. Setting the policies that directly impact the livability of Sisters - including how, when and where Sisters grows and expands, requires taking into account the best interests of the entire community. 

Brad Boyd has a long and successful track record of putting city and community interests first. Wendy Holzmann has worked tirelessly on numerous commissions and committees to maintain the livability of the city. A vote for them is a vote for balancing the interests of the whole community.

Doug Hancock
------------------------------------------
To the Editor:

The election of mayor and council members is as important to the greater Sisters area as it is to the city. The historic Western character of the town, the area's fantastic natural resources and the health of the environment are what attract both new business and visitors.

Let's not shoot the goose that laid the golden egg!

Brad Boyd has proven that he is a champion for the public interest within the City of Sisters and the surrounding area. His support for improvements in Whychus Creek, his leadership on the Sisters Trail System and his opposition to sprawl development, including destination resorts in the Metolius and Whychus basins, are all important to maintaining and improving our quality of life.

We need to re-elect Brad Boyd and not let the city be taken over by moneyed interests, represented by the Developer Three signage around town.

Linda Davis
------------------------------------------
To the Editor:

This last issue of The Nugget Newspaper contained three large advertisements supporting the election of Lon Kelstrom, Pat Thompson and Jerry Bogart for Sisters City Council.

All three ads say "Authorized and paid for by Citizens for Sisters." In the State of Oregon Elections Division database you find out that the contributors and members of the Citizens for Sisters PAC are Bill Willitts, Chuck Hoyt, Steve Rodgers, Jim Bell and Curt Kallberg.  Eric Dolson is the treasurer and appears to be managing the campaign.

Contributions from the list of players listed above are nearly $5,000. Talk about "buying" an election! This is big money politics in Sisters. 

What's the agenda? What are the special interests that are trying to take over the Sisters City Council? As a starting point, this group of citizens are builders, developers and land owners, and the three candidates they support are builders, developers and land owners.

It is not too hard to figure the rest.

Ed Protas

So, please, Sisterians, vote for current mayor Brad Boyd and citizen activist Wendy Holzman. After reading the candidates' views about how Sisters should develop, I don't see how anyone who loves this town as it is could vote for the three "pave it over" guys.

"The most effective economic development is to maintain the atmosphere and quality of life that makes this a great place to live," Boyd said. "We're never going to be the low-cost option."

Holzman said that she accepts that Sisters will grow and change, but she thinks citizens want to go easy on the throttle.

"People want it to be change that enhances and doesn't detract from what we already have," she said.

Amen to that.

Suttle Lake walk irks dog, soothes humans

My wife and I enjoyed an October walk around central Oregon's Suttle Lake, reveling in the red-yellow vine maples, which, marvelously, had nothing to say about the financial meltdown that's been front page news.

Our dog, however, didn't look pleased when I asked her opinion about the "Dog Free Zone" sign prominently displayed at the Suttle Lake Resort.

You can see it for yourself in the You Tube video below, which I took with my new Flip Video Mino – a replacement for my Flip Video Ultra (trying to keep the economy moving).

Snap review: the Mino's stop/start record button is much more responsive; it's lighter, smaller, and cooler looking; the omni-directional microphone might be slightly better, but not terrific; overall, I like it better than the Ultra.

Regarding the Lodge at Suttle Lake's (a.k.a. Suttle Lake Resort) dogphobia, the number of signs disrespecting Canis familiaris is at odds with the "pet friendly" paw mark in the upper left corner of its home page.

They do claim to have pet friendly lodging, so you'd think dogs would be more welcome on the grounds. And a pet fee of $25 per animal seems a bit steep, notwithstanding the gift package offered for "your furry friend."

I just wonder, though, what a vacationing cat or ferret is going to think about opening its gift package and finding "2 doggie bowls, doggie bag, treats, and toys."

Troopergate report says Sarah Palin violated state law

Thanks to the Anchorage Daily News Troopergate blog, I just learned that the legislative committee reviewing the Branchflower report has released it to the public.

The first finding says:

For reasons explained in Section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch ethics act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides

"The Legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

You can read the other findings, which aren't as damning, by downloading the (large) PDF file of the public report.
Download troopergate_report.pdf

Want another reason, among many, not to vote for Palin and McCain? Here you are. She violated the public trust.

[Update: CNN says Palin abused her power but broke no laws. Well, the finding above says she violated an Alaska Statute, which sure sounds to me like she broke a law. The New York Times says she unlawfully abused her authority. I'll go with the Times.]

Big Look chairman disrespects 1000 Friends of Oregon

Oregon's Big Look Task Force, as chaired by Pendleton rancher Mike Thorne, is coming to seem increasingly small-minded. Not a good sign for a group that's supposed to take a broad, inclusive view of our state's pioneering land use system.

Yesterday Laurel, my wife, went to a task force meeting here in Salem. She hoped to be able to speak during the public comment period, since even though The Big Look held ten town hall meetings around Oregon, none were in the mid-Willamette Valley.

She wasn't able to drive to Portland or Eugene to say her piece, so when a 1000 Friends of Oregon staffer (we're members) told Laurel that the agenda for the October 8 meeting included a fifteen minute public comment period, she headed down to a Department of Land Conservation and Development meeting room.

Laurel got there well before the 4:45 to 5:00 pm time for that agenda item. But she found that the meeting already had been adjourned, with no opportunity for public comment.

Someone suggested that she talk with the chair of the task force, who was still in the room. Mike Thorne turned out to be an irritable guy who wasn't much interested in hearing what someone highly knowledgeable about land use issues had to say.

Seemingly, because Laurel was involved with 1000 Friends of Oregon. Thorne said, "I'll be straight with you if you'll be straight with me. I suspect 1000 Friends of Oregon put you up to this [coming to testify]."

Well, they did let Laurel know about the meeting.

But Laurel explained to Thorne that she'd wanted to speak at one of the town hall meetings and had been disappointed that none were held in the Salem area. So this was a chance to tell the task force about her experience with Measures 37 and 49, declining groundwater, and why clueless local government officials shouldn't be able to undermine statewide land use goals.

Her impression, which also is mine, is that Thorne and some of the other task force members already have made their minds up and don't want to let inconvenient reality-based facts intrude upon their desire to give Oregonians in Action and other pave Oregon over types what they want.

It's too bad that the credibility of The Big Look already is down the tubes even before its recommendations are released, because some tweaking of our state's land use laws is in order.

However, it's becoming evident that The Big Look intends to view Oregon through a teeny-tiny keyhole shaped by an extreme property rights perspective – ignoring the rights of those who already live in an area where additional development would trash valuable farmland, forestland, and limited groundwater.

An October 8 editorial in the state's largest newspaper, the Oregonian, cautioned that the Big Look Task Force not run rough-shod over citizens who want to speak their minds about keeping this state green, clean, and livable.

One real concern is whether the task force is hurrying people or truly allowing them enough time to speak. The task force is working at a feverish pace (it is supposed to report to the Oregon Legislature in January). But if any attendees are walking away from these meetings, feeling ignored or slighted, that's inexcusable.

The editorial also points out that an in-depth Oregon State University study of our land use system concluded that its working well.

In dry, bureaucratic language, the study even cautions that the task force shouldn't be too eager to overhaul the system. "While recommended changes deserve full consideration,'' the study concludes, "they need to be made with careful deliberation regarding how changes might affect the state's ability to maintain a system that, based on intensive, objective analysis, generally meets its goals."

That's the truth. But those who want to see laws tilted in favor of over-development, urban sprawl, and destruction of irreplaceable resource land aren't much interested in facts. Dollar signs make excellent blinders.

I suspect one reason Mike Thorne brushed off my wife with such little courtesy is that he was ticked off at another opinion piece in that day's Oregonian: "A success story that's well worth protecting." More truth:

A recent study done for the Big Look Task Force by Oregon State University's Institute for Natural Resources found "an overall consensus that Oregon's land-use program has been effective in preserving the agricultural land base."

The task force is asking the wrong questions. Instead of offering proposals to open up more rural land for development, it should be initiating proposals to increase economic stability in rural communities, including infrastructure improvements for the agricultural economy.

Oregon agriculture is doing well. Our land-use planning system has played a key role in helping Oregon farmers prosper. This is no time to weaken land-use planning and put Oregon agriculture -- and Oregon's economy -- in jeopardy.

Yes, one of the authors was Eric Stachon, a 1000 Friends staff member. But the other author was Gary Rhinhart, a fourth-generation dry land wheat farmer in Umatilla County.

Listen up, Mr. Thorne. Oregonians don't want your task force messing with what makes Oregon such a great place to live and work: a well-crafted balance between environmental protections and economic development.

Never too old for a mid-life crisis

Having turned sixty, an absurd act on my part, wholly out of character with whom I feel myself to be, I've decided to focus on throwing myself into a mid-life crisis.

Now, there's good reason to argue that every day of everyone's life should be experienced in crisis mode, following the Zen adage of whole-hearted "hair on fire" living.

But the older we get, the more we understand that our days are limited. As is the value of our investment portfolio, particularly after the past few days.

A neighbor who's in my age ballpark cruised by a few summer months ago in a silver Miata with the top down. Naturally my first words to him included the phrase mid-life crisis. He replied that his wife told him that he's too old for one, that he must be having an end-of-life crisis.

I disagreed, pointing out that sixty is the new forty. So both of us had plenty of years to cultivate our mid-life crises.

If you think too much about how to throw yourself into a mid-life crisis, you're not having one. A crisis demands fast-acting intuition, responding to the situation without hesitation.

That said, my analytical side doesn't like to be ignored.

Thus for quite a while I've been pondering what to give myself when I turned sixty. Like my neighbor, my first (and really only) thought was what sort of two- or four-wheeled transportation would best mesh with my mid-life crisis psyche.

I've lusted after a Mini Cooper ever since they came out. However, God has not answered my prayer to have one delivered to our driveway. This led me to (1) become an atheist, and (2) turn my attention to two-wheeled cheaper alternatives.

Over a decade ago I had a motorcycle. Eventually, though, my wife's frequent prediction that I was going to kill myself helped lead me to sell it and get a Honda del Sol – which offered a quasi-open air experience but wasn't nearly as much fun.

Eventually it dawned on me that if anybody is going to take physical risks, it should be older people, because they have the fewest years of life left to lose.

With this solid philosophical foundation to guide me into older age guilt-free lusting, I felt free to fire up Google and explore today's two-wheeled motorized possibilities. Soon I came upon the Suzuki Burgman 650 maxi-scooter.

Yesterday I put down a deposit on the 2009 model, choosing white for its yin-yang balance (and visibility). It likely won't arrive until February of next year or thereabouts – in time for dryer and warmer Oregon weather.

I felt great as soon as my VISA card passed over the counter of the Suzuki dealership. My mid-life crisis had taken another turn down the just do it road. Tonight we're going to our fourth Argentine Tango lesson, more turn, turn, turn.

Dancing, particularly Tango, is a two-footed version of motorcycling/scooting. You're in the moment, not trying to get anywhere particular, intimately connected with your surroundings, not thinking much. I've vowed to do more dancing and less worrying from now on.

And, come spring, more scootering. I won't get a lot of respect from the Harley folks, but they're them and I'm me. I was pleased to see on this You Tube video, though, that the two can coexist.

My favorite part is around the seven minute mark, where a guy on a Sturgis street filled with Harleys yells to the Suzuki Burgman 650 driver, "Dude, what is that?!" He's told, "It's a giant scooter."

Here's a faster moving Burgman 650 video, showing how quiet they are compared to a Harley.

“Naughty toddler” Tango teaches a life lesson

What to do when life pushes you around? Resist? Give in? Something else?

Great questions. Because unless you're in a coma, or have attained Buddha nature, every day there's going to be times when you feel like life is a naughty toddler who screams No! at your oh-so-reasonable request.

Last week's Argentine Tango class taught me a valuable lesson, adding on to what I learned from instructor Elizabeth Wartluft before (check out her blog).

She had us practice "Naughty Toddler" Tango. Usually in dance the follower does her best to comply with her partner's lead. But in this exercise the follower was supposed to do anything but what was being led.

At first Laurel was resistant to playing this dance game. "This is silly," she said. "Come on, give it a try," I urged. And oh boy, did she!

After the music started it took Laurel about two seconds to fully embrace her inner naughty toddler. She was resisting me beautifully. If I tried to take a forward step she'd move backward. If I stopped, she kept going. If I attempted to lead her to the left, she'd go right.

Most of the other women were naughty toddler'ing with equal abandon. I saw a sweet young thing throw her guy right through a doorway with the force of her No!

It took me a while to figure out how to handle Laurel.

Elizabeth had laid down a few rules. The leaders weren't supposed to use raw strength to wrestle the follower back in line – just as you wouldn't manhandle a recalcitrant three year old (especially in a public place).

Early on I realized that the exercise felt marvelously Tai Chi'ish. In Tai Chi force isn't met with resistance. Rather, it's redirected.

This was the only way I could manage Naughty Toddler Tango: relent to whatever Laurel wanted to do, then change the energy of that doing so she was headed in my intended direction.

Which didn't last long, because once I'd gotten her briefly on course she'd start resisting again and the naughty toddler game would start over. I found the exercise fascinating.

Not to mention energizing.

Elizabeth had told us that Tango, like life, is founded on energy. Without sparks flying between the leader and follower, usually a man and woman, Tango dance steps produce a largely mechanical façade of the real deal.

After the Naughty Toddler Tango song had ended, Elizabeth asked the class what we thought. I blurted out, "This anti-Tango exercise felt more Tango'ish than what we'd been doing before."

Laurel's resistance, her No!, brought out my Yes, you are!

The interplay between the two resulted in a lot more energy being exchanged between us. I could use the force of her naughtiness to guide her back on my desired track, almost always in a circular fashion.

If I wanted to step forward, and Laurel pushed back, I'd let her have her way. But with a turn thrown in, so we'd end up having spun completely around with a forward impetus.

Just as I wanted – until the next fuss-up had to be dealt with.

Life lesson: almost always the best thing to do is roll with a problem initially. Don't fight back with ferocious resistance right off the bat.

Tell the clerk who won't give you a refund, "OK, so you're saying the store rules won't let me return this." Bend a bit. Embrace what you want to change.

Then alter the direction things are moving without undue force. "I'm just wondering, though, if there's a way to make an exception for a regular customer like me. I don't want to start shopping somewhere else."

And remember that life is a dance. Everybody is trying to lead or follow in their own fashion, hearing the beat of desire-music that may be very different from what you're attempting to move to.

That's fine. Entirely normal. I might see you as the naughty toddler, while you view me as the person who is out of step.

There's no ultimate right or wrong here. Just people doing their best to dance with life the best they can.

Sarah Palin’s alleged affair and fake pregnancy

There's something deliciously karma'ish in the ongoing rumors that Sarah Palin had an affair with her husband's business partner, Brad Hanson, and/or isn't really the mother of Trig Palin, born last April.

Sarah Palin is notoriously loose with facts. Her speech at the Republican National Convention was filled with untruths, and she got quite a bit wrong at last night's debate with Joe Biden.

So she doesn't have much room for complaining about allegations which have more basis than some of the whoppers the McCain – Palin campaign has been telling about Barack Obama.

What goes around comes around to deceptive politicians.

The National Enquirer is staying on the affair story. I picked up a copy of the October 6 issue a few days ago and learned the newest juicy details. They were lacking in the initial Enquirer report, but now have been fleshed out considerably.

--"Sources tell the Enquirer it's [the affair] now an open secret among close family members of Hanson's wife Carolyn."

--"Burdett [former brother-in-law of Carolyn Hanson's brother] passed a rigorous polygraph test regarding his claims about Palin and Hanson."

--"And as rumors of the affair blazed across Internet blogs [wow, I'm mentioned in the Enquirer!],a source close to Carolyn Hanson claimed she confirmed the liaison."

--"Despite that [denial by Hanson], multiple sources and now the three family members have told The Enquirer that Hanson and Sarah did have an affair and that it is being covered up."

As if we needed more proof, my wife pointed out that Brad Hanson looks a lot like Todd Palin, down to the facial hair. That settles it.

OK, now that we've determined that Sarah Palin had an affair, let's move on to her fake pregnancy.

I'm not up on this to the same degree, mostly because I haven't been able to research the subject by browsing through tabloids in the supermarket checkout line.

However, Portland blogger Jack Bogdanski continues to pursue the story, asking "Is Bristol Palin really pregnant?"

Conspiracy theories concerning the birth of Trig Palin have been around since Palin was chosen by McCain as his V.P. nominee. If Trig really is Bristol Palin's child (Sarah's daughter), then it wouldn't be possible for Bristol to have gotten pregnant when it's claimed she did.

To me it seems unlikely that Palin faked her pregnancy in order to cover up her daughter's illegitimate birth. You can decide for yourself, though, with the help of some folks who have delved into this in considerable detail:

Sarah Palin's lies
Top Ten Clues in the "Who Is Trig's Mother?" Mystery
Who is Trig Palin's Mother?
Sarah Palin's Pregnancy Decision Map

(don't confuse the latter with the Sarah Palin Debate Flow Chart, though each show a similar confused thought process)

Jury duty sucks, is un-American, and stupid

There's something deeply disturbing about jury duty. And I'm not saying that just because I had to be at Salem's downtown courthouse way earlier Monday morning than I'm used to functioning.

I'll get up at 6 am when I want or need to. But it ticks me off big time to get a government letter that says I'm required to do my supposedly "civic duty," and if I don't, a warrant may be issued for my arrest.

I don't understand why this isn't a bigger political issue. Just about everybody hates jury duty, yet Americans meekly put up with this affront to liberty, justice, and my ability to sleep late.

The Libertarian Party (of Michigan, at least) has called for an end to this enforced servitude. Great idea. If Ron Paul had made this a centerpiece of his presidential campaign, maybe I wouldn't have been such a strong Obama supporter:

The current practice of forced jury duty should be replaced by volunteer juries.

As I said the last time I was called for jury duty, in a sardonically titled "Well, that was fun" post, it's like going to the doctor for no good reason.

Getting there right on time and then waiting for three hours. Uncomfortable chairs. Having to fill out forms that ask personal questions. Outdated reading material. Other people being called while you sit… and sit… and sit. Why, I found that jury duty is just like going to the doctor. Except you go to the doctor because you have a problem that needs to be fixed.

With jury duty, the problem is that you are there and you want to be somewhere else. At least, this seemed to be the case with all of my fellow jury duty selectees this morning, and it certainly was with me. Notwithstanding the annoyingly cheery video that we were shown about the patriotic nature of jury duty, how our presence was assuring that the Republic Would Stand, blah, blah, blah, the mood in the jury assembly room for those three hours was seriously sullen.

Last Monday I also spent three wasted hours in that room. About 11:15 am a judge walked in and said, "The defendant has decided to plead guilty. You're excused."

Terrific! I thought.

I'd already decided that the guy was guilty, because if I ended up being picked as a juror, that seemed to be the fastest way to get the trial over: get a quick guilty verdict. I suppose a quick innocent verdict would work just as well, but I was so ticked off at the whole jury duty process, I wanted somebody to be punished.

This is why compulsory duty is so stupid. You've got irritated people, who don't want anything to do with a trial, being forced to render an important decision.

Midway through the morning we were given $1.50 coupons for the snack shop on the first floor and allowed to leave the jury room for twenty minutes. I'd studiously avoided talking with anyone else up to that point, being in a sullen mood. So I decided to say a few words to the guy next to me in line, to avoid looking like a complete jury duty hermit.

"About now is when I wish I'd committed a recent felony," I said, "or when asked about my hobbies on the form we filled out, put down tinkering with new formulations in my basement meth lab." (I assumed the guy hadn't read my blog post from four years ago where I used the same lines.)

He didn't even smile. "Jury duty is required by the Constitution," he said. "We're entitled to a jury of our peers. It's something we have to do."

I persevered. "Well, even though I'm entitled to a jury trial, that doesn't mean I should be forced to serve on a jury. I'd rather have some wise retired volunteers deciding my case who want to be in the courtroom, rather than a bunch of people whose only thought is I don't want to be here."

Permanent panels of judges manage to render verdicts competently. So why can't we have permanent juries made up of citizens selected for their intelligence, fairness, and willingness to listen to boring testimony for long hours?

Call me an elitist, but I'd just as soon not have a "jury of my peers" if that means having average Americans decide my case. Some of the people with me in the jury assembly room looked to have their wits about them, but not all.

Sherri, forgive me if somehow you happen to read this, but I've got to offer this advice: next time you're called for jury duty, make your personal cell phone calls either before or after.

I was halfway enjoying reading my book, having partially forgotten where I was, until you began having a series of conversations that weren't at all pressing. I really didn't think that Kaiser Permanente was going to assign you a doctor until you were officially enrolled, but it was sort of interesting to hear you try to talk your way into having them change their policy.

However, the lengthy discussion with your friend about baby names went way over the jury room edge for me. The miniscule amount of Buddha nature that I have prevented me from getting up and changing my seat, because I figured you'd recognize it was because of your loud cell phone conversations and I didn't want to hurt your feelings.

I wasn't worried, though, about insulting the security screener at the courthouse entrance. He told me that I couldn't take my Flip Video camera inside and would have to walk six blocks back to my car, then up three flights of stairs to the Marion Parkade roof where I was parked.

"Um, my cell phone also can take videos, and you're letting me have that," I told him. "You can't have a video camera in the courthouse," he replied robotically. "But just about every cell phone nowadays can take videos!" I repeated.

To no avail.

There's no reasoning with a clueless security screener. Or, sadly, with a justice system that considers mandatory jury duty to be a good thing.

Someday this will change, hopefully. For now I'm off the jury duty hook for two years. Maybe the Libertarians will come into power before my name is chosen again.