Oregon’s Jeff Merkley, (D. Antifa) announced Tuesday that he will not run for President of the United States.
Reaction was swift:
Had he thrown his black balaclava into the ring Merkley would have become the 15th candidate running on the Leftist side of the political aisle. The slate of Democrats/Socialists who have announced so far is: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Jay Inslee, John Hickenlooper, Julián Castro, Tulsi Gabbard, John Delaney, Pete Buttigieg, Andrew Yang, Marianne Williamson. More, such as Joe Biden, Beto O’Rourke and others are still coyly hanging back. Hillary Clinton and former Attorney General Eric Holder announced yesterday that they would not run for office.
Merkley released his announcement on Twitter to avid supporters.
The 62-year-old former Princeton and Stanford student told them of his family’s hardscrabble upbringing, including a story – “family lore” – that his grandmother slept in a boxcar of a train for a short time.
Merkley’s name recognition might have been an issue in his now-erstwhile run for president. Few people know who he is. However, Oregon’s ‘Accidental Senator’ keeps the door open to a Cabinet position with a Bernie Sanders Administration. It’s clear that Jay Inslee (he’s Washington State’s Governor and also running for president) has the inside track to become Sanders’s “green czar” and is said to be preparing his first ‘five year plan’ for the demise of the U.S. capitalist economy, using the Alexandria Ocasio Cortez “Green New Deal” as his blueprint.
So, the world says goodbye to a possible Merkley presidency, remote though it may have been. Oregonians are lamenting a missed opportunity to get rid of him from the U.S. Senate and now Jeff Merkley will go back to obscurity.
Three men stood up for right and paid a huge price on the Max line on Friday when a crazed man threatened two Muslim women on the train. Two of the men died and another was badly hurt as they were slashed by the knife wielding crazed man.
In this video, Twitter user “St. Tenderheart” claims to have been an eyewitness who chased down suspected killer Jeremy Christian who was still foaming at the mouth and in a psychotic episode before his arrest:
First, a spokesman for the far leftist anarchist, self described “anti fascists” in the form of Cameron Whitten said the nutter who killed two people on Portland’s light rail was a Trump supporter and that as long as Trump was in the White House he would feel unsafe:
Yes, the person who likely committed the murder is a repeat offender and suffering from mental illness. But if Donald Trump was not president today, I believe we would still have two bright lights among us today. I believe that stronger than I believe in my own birthday.
Then, Marc Abrams of the KXL weekend radio show Kremer, Abrams and Pasero claimed that the nutter was a Christian. No, Marc. His last name is Christian. He’s no more a Christian than you are Abram.
Attempts have been made to connect the killer to the “alt right” (whatever that means) because the accused killer turned up to a so called “free speech” event in Portland in April. As you can see by the video posted by YouTuber Airliner World, the suspect was disavowed, told to get out, shut up, and even one guy said “he’s on his own.” As the YouTuber put it:
Please don’t put Jeremy with those guys, they have already made it clear that he wasn’t a part of them.
Christian was separated from the so called “Patriot Prayer Group” by the cops because they didn’t want him in their group. He’s shown on tape (surrounded by photographers) complaining about it.
Christian then walked down the street toward the anarchist, black bloc protesters.
But, oddly, Ted Wheeler is not calling for an end to the far left protests that occur nearly every week in Portland — only the so called “alt right” one scheduled for June 4th and 10th.
Remember now, to some people facts are fungible. They’re plug-and-play components for certain intellectually dishonest people to construct them into a jerry-rigged storyline so long as it concludes that it’s all Donald Trump’s fault.
In the left’s and City Hall’s (but I repeat myself) zeal to construct this narrative, Mayor Ted Wheeler has taken it upon himself to urge the federal government officials to stop a planned “free speech” protest by what he calls an “alt right” group on federal property on June 4th and another one June 10th.
I recognize that Portland’s heightened political atmosphere is ripe for riot and the mayor wants to keep things peaceful. But allow me to remind you that the city has been the victim of several such riots without the presence of so called “alt right” free speech supporters. In fact, the street violence has been a function entirely of the left and helped by the city’s inability or unwillingness to confront it.
Scapegoating the “alt right” in this case is absurd, intemperate and unbecoming a serious politician.
I don’t recall Wheeler calling for revoking or disallowing the planned May Day riots and I actually asked him to do that. I’ve also called for the National Guard to protect the citizens of Portland during the leftist’s riots due to the city’s unwillingness to do its job.
It was leftist thugs who threatened violence against Republicans participating in a civic parade and got it canceled.
It’s understandable that Wheeler’s concerned about riots. But who’s been doing the rioting in Portland? Not the so called “alt right.” It seems that the better part of valor would be to appeal to the leftists to leave the permitted protesters alone.
After getting another query about this, I’m reposting this piece I wrote for www.IJReview.com on Oregon’s rules that allow 15 year olds to get sex change operations without parental consent and at taxpayer expense.
Teenagers as young as 15 years old can now get sex change operations in the state of Oregon without their parents’ consent — and at taxpayers’ expense.
Fox News reports Oregon Health Plan gatekeepers quietly changed the rules in January with no public debate:
With no public debate, HERC changed its policy to include cross-sex hormone therapy, puberty-suppressing drugs and gender-reassignment surgery as covered treatments for people with gender dysphoria, formally known as gender identity disorder.
The plan was discussed at four meetings and was passed without opposition.
The New York Times was the first to report the change in Oregon’s law. That story was highlighted by The Weekly Standard, whose reporter asked:
If Oregon’s political leadership thinks that 15-year-olds are so capable of making monumental decisions like getting sex reassignment surgery all on their own … surely someone mature enough … is capable of making responsible decisons about consuming beer, right?
The age of medical consent in Oregon is 15. However, that consent depends upon the topic. For instance, 15-year-olds in Oregon may not:
“Americans Should Not Have to Choose Between Adhering to Their Faith or Closing Their Business, But That’s What This Decision Means”
Likening them to blacks who were denied public accommodation due to their skin color, an Oregon administrative law judge has ruled a lesbian couple was denied their rights when Oregon bakers refused to make a cake for their same sex wedding. See the ruling below.
The controversy began in January 2013 when the [Aaron and Melissa] Klein turned away Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman from their bakery, saying that providing a cake for their wedding would have violated their Christian beliefs against same-sex marriage.
In August 2013, the women complained to the state Bureau of Labor and Industries. The agency conducted an investigation and in January 2014 brought charges that the Kleins had unlawfully discriminated against the couple because of their sexual orientation.
Oregon law bans discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in jobs and in places that serve the public, such as restaurants and bakeries.
One of the Kleins’ attorneys, Anna Harmon, says the Oregon law boils down to toeing the government line and selling out your faith or losing your business.
The (administrative law judge) recognized that all of the State’s claims but one were baseless and not supported by the facts of the case,” she said in an emailed statement. “We view this as a partial victory. However, the (judge) ruled wrongly that the Kleins’ right not to design and create a work of art celebrating an event which violates the tenets of their religion is not protected by the Oregon or Federal Constitutions. This is a wrong and dangerous result for religious liberty and rights of conscience in Oregon…
Americans should not have to choose between adhering to their faith or closing their business, but that is what this decision means.
The Bureau of Labor and Industries Chief, Brad Avakian, has already telegraphed he’ll rule against the Kleins when he takes up the case in March. The Kleins tried unsuccessfully to get the far left former legislator kicked off the case.
Comment on what you think of the case below.
Aaron and Melissa Klein talked about their business and the fallout of the case with the state of Oregon during the Family Research Center Voter Values Summit recently. In it Aaron presents a dilemma he sees between law and the ability to run a business:
I could understand the backlash from the gay and lesbian community. I could see that; what I don’t understand is the government sponsorship of religious persecution
It must be hard to admit the woman whom you’ve personally coronated ‘First Lady’ of Oregon is the same grifter she’s always been.
Her scams just keep getting bigger.
And her men keep getting dumber. Take Governor John Kitzhaber. Please.
Let’s go to the Cylvia Hayes hall of shame tote board:
The scam to ‘marry’ a man for $5000.
The scam to set up an illegal pot farm.
The scam to sell the Governor’s office for personal and mutual gain.
The scam to make money using her title and not reporting it to the government.
Wait, whoa on that last one. A ‘scam to sell the Governor’s officer for personal and mutual gain’? From Willamette Week:
As WW has reported, Hayes in 2013 leveraged her position as first lady and policy adviser to Kitzhaber into private consulting contracts worth at least $85,000. On Tuesday, EO Media reported Hayes was paid $118,000 for unspecified work by a now-defunct Washington, D.C., non-profit.
WW has also reported that Hayes used state employees to help run her consulting business, and conducted private business while traveling at state expense.
Worse? She didn’t report $118,000 to the government. And the Governor didn’t report it on his ethics disclosures, either.
There’s more, but you get the picture.
In the post modern world of moral relativism, you may not know this behavior is not just unseemly, but unethical, lawless and an assault on the consciences of all good Oregonians who have been forced to tolerate this woman much like kids forced to be nice to Dad’s fourth wife named Bambi.
The Governor and Hayes are both under investigation by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission and the FBI. Good. Both deserve to go to jail.
Please see related nearby posts regarding Kitzhaber’s bizarre presser yesterday.
The camp wasn’t a bust. It was a threat. Why weren’t you told?
For years we’ve been told efforts to set up the Bly, Oregon terrorist training camp went nowhere. It fizzled. It was a failure. Now, in stories about the conviction and sentencing of Abu Hamza al-Masri, I read in fact ‘car loads’ of jihadis converged upon the ranch of a woman–a Muslim convert–who turned her place over to the terrorists.
Al- Masri, a British citizen, is the notorious former Finsbury Park imam who funded terrorists, kidnappings and other forms of murderous jihad.
Here’s what the New York Post wrote about the Eva Hatley’s testimony:
But US-born Muslim convert Eva Hatley testified in Manhattan federal court Tuesday [April 2014] that after the “carloads’’ of fellow Muslims she met through her mosque arrived at the 160-acre ranch in Bly in 1999, the couple watched helplessly as their home was turned into an al Qaeda training camp.
“It wasn’t anything like I envisioned for the property,” insisted Hatley, testifying at the trial of one-eyed, hook-handed hate preacher Abu Hamza al-Masri.
Hatley, a two-time witness-protection-program flunky who prefers going by her Muslim name, Ayat Hakimah, said other Muslims from London would soon arrive on al-Masri’s orders.
Hatley said one of the arrivals, militant Oussama Kassir, boasted about previously running training camps in Afghanistan and being a “hit man” for Osama bin Laden.
She said Kassir told her that al-Masri was his “leader” and that al-Masri sent him and others to the Bly ranch to create a “training camp” where men would learn to shoot guns, throw knives and do calisthenics along open, spacious fields abutting a ravine and desolate dirt roads.
“He said he was there to train men for jihad,” she said. “He said that Abu Hamza sent him. He intended to train them to fight.”
I’d like to ask what constitutes a failure in any of this? Foreign nationals, possibly illegal aliens, converge upon a property, take it over, and train jihadis IN OREGON. Sounds like a SUCCESSFUL training camp to me. Perhaps it was short lived, but up to now, the description of the the Bly, Oregon operation has been that it simply never got off the ground, no one was trained and little harm was done except scare to the heck out of people after the fact. Now we discover that wasn’t true. At all.
She added that some had CDs with information on how to make poisons to “kill people” and regularly “talked” about “robbing and killing truck drivers” on nearby roads.
Kassir, she recalled, claimed there were plans to eventually dig a hillside compound at the ranch for al-Masri to hide out in.
“I was shocked,” said Hatley, who claims she fled the ranch in fear in December 1999, four months after moving in.
Now granted, she is a bit of a weirdo and twice got booted out of the witness protection program. That’s right, home girl there was in the witness protection program. Why? Because she knew the people running a TERRORIST TRAINING CAMP IN OREGON, that’s why.
However one arrival, a militant man named Oussama Kassir, told a particularly terrifying campfire story, boasting of running training camps in Afghanistan and acting as a ‘hit man’ for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
…A Lebanese-born Swede, in 2009 he was convicted of plotting to help al-Qaeda build a weapons-training post at the ranch as well as distributing terror training manuals online to help recruit new members.
Kassir claimed at the time that al-Masri was his ‘leader’ and that he had been recruited by hm to the Bly Ranch to create a new training camp where the terrorist group’s future foot soldiers could learn to shoot, throw knives, and use the open fields to practice calisthenics.
In some of the most willfully ignorant and gullible reporting I’ve seen in quite some time, the Zero said the training camp was a big bust, indeed, it was a scam:
What emerges from the trial record is an almost comic account of passwords, night patrols and target practice. Jihad, it seems, couldn’t take root alongside the sagebrush and weeds that greeted Kassir.
Kassir recently was sentenced to life in prison for his effort, and his two partners in the enterprise are awaiting extradition to the U.S.
The whole set up was in fact a hustle by a petty crook from Seattle named James Ujaama.
Weird. The Feds didn’t think having ‘carloads’ of jihadis coming into train — seriously or not–was a big nothing burger or a hustle.
Then the paper reported on the bad actors involved in the ranch.
Kassir and Aswat took refuge in a Seattle mosque and tried taking the training to the Muslims who hadn’t wanted to move to Bly.
After a few classes, the men from London gave up and packed their bags for home. Kassir explained his exasperation to Osman.
“I’ve been trying to train these brothers,” Kassir said. “They’re not taking it seriously.”
The Oregonian purposely tried to minimize the seriousness of the real and potential threat from this camp. I suppose they’d take it seriously when–what?–a cell from the camp had successfully carried out jihad? And, how do we know people complicit in it did not. We DO know the organizers did and were very bad actors to the highest degree. They’re going to prison for life for it.
The Zero lived up to its name in coverage of this trial.
Al Masri –you know, the guy who inspired this camp in the first place– has been found guilty on eleven terrorism counts, each worth a life sentence. It’s undetermined yet in what prison he’ll spend the rest of his life.
If he is sentenced to the supermax in Florence, Colorado, he’ll join these… er … people …already locked up. See my story on this for Independent Journal Review here. Note the bad guys who are scheduled to get out in the next few years. I’m sure they’ll be trade bait for President Obama in the future. Watch.
John Kitzhaber’s disastrous leadership and his girlfriend need to go. Girlfriend Cylvia Hayes’s illegal pot farm, marriage for money scam, and reputed corruption, means her “boyfriend” has worn out his welcome at Mahonia Hall.
It was a clash between those attending a meeting about Measure 88, an Oregon ballot measure to give illegal aliens driver cards, and protesters yesterday in Portland. It didn’t need to be a clash. Opponents of giving illegal aliens driver cards–and legal imprimatur–quietly protested outside a Portland church. When the meeting broke up, protesters were harassed and their signs and presence blocked by people whose only crime, as the self satisfied woman above said, “is loving my neighbor.” I give Laughing at Liberals mad props for not laughing in her face.
Here’s how he describes the event:
A small band of protesters showed up and were immediately harassed, ridiculed, blocked, and interrupted when trying to do interviews with TV stations. On hand supporting the lawlessness were Governor John Kitzhaber, staterepresentative Lew Frederick, Pastor WJ Mark Knutson, Reverend Kate Lore, Tom Chamberlain (Oregon AFL-CIO), Reyna Lopez (currently with Causa, former Bus Project organizer), Graham Trainor (organizer with AFL-CIO), and a few local TV stations who completely botched trying to ask the governor the tough questions as he slithered out the back door.
Just because you believe in national security doesn’t make you a bigot. Just because you think it’s foolish to give legal imprimatur to people who broke the law doesn’t make you a bigot. Just because you take a stand against giving American ID to people who will parlay that into other ID’s and use it to do –what, exactly?– doesn’t make you a bigot. Activists have to cloak themselves–literally–in the idea that giving a driver card to an illegal alien is somehow a moral imperative.
A pastor dressed in robes lectured Laughing at Liberals on helping illegal aliens break the laws. She said she would help anyone break laws she considers immoral. Here’s how he described the scene:
Reverend Kate Lore, “social justice” minister for the First Unitarian Church, wants to help people break immoral laws, but then has a hard time explaining what exactly an “immoral law” is, and seems perplexed by realistic situations where immoral laws would be broken that are counter to what her church supposedly stands for. All the while, her church is supporting a political rally that welcomes illegal aliens.
Measure 88 supporters have lied about the proposal. They’re asserted the driver card could not possibly be used as an official ID card. That is not true. In fact, Lars Larson checked with TSA to find out if such cards to be used to get on planes. TSA said yes.
Illegal aliens –visitors who overstayed their visas–who had multiple driver’s licenses between them, pulled off the 9/11 hijacking. It is for national security reasons Oregonians fought hard to stop giving out driver’s licenses to people who were illegally in the state. Now these same simpletons want to place national security on par with their good intentions. Do you trust these people to make the right decisions for the security of Oregonians? Me neither.
He’s already accused his opponent, a female neurosurgeon, of conducting a–wait for it–war on women, and now Senator Jeff Merkley’s back with an equally laughable charge of “plagiarism”.
Jeff Merkley, who “plagiarizes” seemingly every policy idea from a woman who plagiarized her Native American heritage for personal gain (hence the nick name Fauxchahontas), Elizabeth ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Warren, and champions the crash and burn policies of Barack Obama, is now accusing his senate opponent of “plagiarism”.
I can understand why Jeff Merkley probably planted the plagiarism story with Andrew Kaczynski of Buzzfeed about his opponent using other people’s policy ideas. Jeff Merkley gets the compliant media to put his opponent’s name and the word “plagiarism” in the same sentence in every searchable database in the universe. Maybe Merkley hoped his phony plagiarism charge would bully his opponent out of the race like Democrat senate candidate John Walsh--who plagiarized an entire thesis to receive his post graduate degree from the Army War College.
Here’s a thought: maybe Jeff Merkley plagiarized the idea to charge plagiarism against his opponent because he can’t hold his own in the operating theater of ideas. Quick, check to see if that phrase “operating theater of ideas” is plagiarized.
One of Merkley’s idols, Democrat Joe Biden, now gets a pass for plagiarizing a speech–indeed a life story–from a UK politician. But Biden also plagiarized: a LAW REVIEW article, passages of speeches from Robert Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey, lied about participating in protests in the civil rights movement and lied about his law school accomplishments. Jeff Merkley’s idol Joe Biden is a serial plagiarizer whose pants are on fire.
The smart neurosurgeon Dr. Monica Wehby chose policy prescriptions from one of the smartest people in the US Senate, Rob Portman who coaches candidates on policy ideas, of which Wehby is one. She adopted policy ideas from a guy who runs a POLICY IDEA SHOP and is one of the more moderate political operators out there, Karl Rove. In a world where politicians can openly lie about an opponent and it’s considered protected free speech, this isn’t even close to plagiarism, it’s politics.
If Congress ever stopped borrowing ideas, turns of phrase and whole bills from lobbyists and affinity groups, there would be no legislation. Ever. Indeed, those groups actually write legislation most of the time. Merkley wouldn’t actually know that perhaps because he doesn’t have his name on much, if any, legislation.
But if we were to adopt the Jeff Merkley’s definition of plagiarism imagine the fall out:
Jeff Merkley’s doctors would have to come up with unique ways to write the same prescriptions or else be accused of plagiarism
Jeff Merkley’s lawyers wouldn’t be able to use plagiarized boilerplate language.
Jeff Merkley couldn’t use a ghost writer to plagiarize a book or speech.
Jeff Merkley’s campaign couldn’t use plagiarized anti Koch Brothers slogans anymore which means he would have no more campaign.
Jeff Merkley wouldn’t be able to sign the letter siccing the IRS on his political opponents (see below) because someone else wrote it.
Jeff Merkley could never sign on to any legislation written by someone else–like ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, through the ceiling spending–because it was plagiarized. Hey, wait…that actually might be a good idea!
Jeff Merkley could never do a Facebook posting again because someone else a) does them and, b) they’re always someone else’s plagiarized ideas.
Wehby’s reaction, to remove the policy ideas from her website, was silly. She should have owned them, defended them, and ask Merkley to debate her on the issues. Instead she retreated.
Merkley’s campaign is a side show and embarrassment. I’m now changing my Merkley moniker from “The Accidental Senator” to “Sideshow Jeff”. He’s earned it.
Women in Governor Kitzhaber’s office earn just 79 cents for every dollar a man earns. Dennis Richardson believes in equal pay for equal work and experience.It’s about fairness and equality.Dennis Richardson for Governor.
The basis for the commercial is this survey of wages done by the Salem Statesmen Journal.
Gov. John Kitzhaber’s office is less equitable that state government generally.
The governor has asked Department of Administrative Services Director Michael Jordan to study the state’s disparity in how men and women are paid and find a way to fix it.
But Kitzhaber is not leading by example.
His office employs 27 women and 16 men. The average monthly salary for women is $6,507 — about 79 percent of what the men are making. ($8,203 per month.) That pay gap isn’t enormous; it’s about the same as the statewide average. It is, however, quite a bit wider than the gap for state employees overall, where women make about 88 percent of what men do.
Note: Kitzhaber’s staff includes several policy advisers who are actually paid by other departments and listed on their payrolls even though they work for Kitzhaber. I don’t have a full list of who all those people are, so the numbers above reflect only the people listed as working in his office.
This reminds me of when ACORN refused to pay their signature gatherers a minimum wage and overtime to gather signatures for a minimum wage initiative. They told detractors it wasn’t fair! If they had to pay their people minimum wage they couldn’t hire as many.
Candidate calls media on their games, but here are more moves for his playbook.
I know he didn’t ask, but I’m giving Mark Callahan some advice anyway. I figure if a candidate for higher office this year thought my advice was worth paying for, then maybe Callahan will value my input.
First, the housekeeping. In case you don’t know the back story, Mr. Callahan, a candidate in the Republican primary for US Senate, was tossed out of an endorsement interview with Willamette Week. See the video below.
Candidates were on one side of the table (with Jo Rae Perkins on the phone) while Willamette Week Editor in Chief Mark Zusman, Managing Editor Brent Walth and star reporter Nigel Jacquiss were arrayed on the other.
Things got a little sparky starting at 53:17 when Callahan questioned why only two candidates, Monica Wehby and Jason Conger, were getting most of the questions.
“We came to be interviewed…it’s not the Monica and Jason show,” Callahan complained.
I believe it was Brent Walth who then said “if you don’t want to be here, you don’t have to be here.” Callahan shot back, “I’m just requesting some respect for it not being the Monica and Jason show.”
But his query had its desired effect. Soon all the candidates were asked what they would cut in the federal budget (see more below). When it got to Callahan he expounded on the president misusing the EPA whereupon at 57:40 he was asked a question which sounded like, “What’s the EPA?”
Sensing he was being mocked, Callahan shot back, “the Environmental Protection Agency, I think you would have heard of that.”
At 1:03:49 Jo Rae Perkins was asked what she would cut from the budget. But during her answer, Callahan asserted WW was being disrespectful. Nigel Jacquiss retorted (1:04:23) “if you don’t like that, I’m sorry…”
He may as well have challenge him to a duel. It was ON.
A moment of chaos ensued with everyone talking over one another and fingers being pointed. Order was eventually restored while Jo Rae continued her answer.
As the candidates looked down to concentrate on Perkins’ answer, Callahan’s eyes fell on Jacquiss’ notebook which lay flat on the table.
That’s when it happened. Callahan pounced,
“You want to talk about disrespect. You just wrote down blah, blah, blah. You have to give respect to get respect. Right now on that side of the table, you’re not giving us very much respect.”
Instead of apologizing or sounding embarrassed, the next voice from Willamette Week’s side of the table invoked a threatening tone.
Walth: Mark let me ask you a question, do you believe in climate change. Is is a myth or reality?
Callahan: It’s a myth.
Walth: A myth?
Jacquiss: Where are you on the Easter Bunny?
Callahan: What’s that?
Jacquiss: Where are you on the Easter Bunny?
Callahan: Are these really the questions I was called here to answer? Really? I called you out on the blah, blah, blah and you ask me questions like this? Really, really? Are we talking about this now? OK, how about you ask me a serious question instead of asking me a childish question?
Walth: I just asked you a question about climate change. ‘kay? That’s two strikes. I’m going to ask you to leave.”
Callahan: (scoffs) Who do you think you are?
Editor: Ok, you may leave now. Go ahead. You’re done here. This is neither a fair or [sic] balanced meeting. This is a meeting for us…
Callahan: I know. …it’s a meeting…asked by thin skinned liberals like yourself.
Zusman: There’s the door
Now for my unsolicited advice.
Contact the publication in advance to determine who will be at the table and the general nature of the questions that will be asked. It doesn’t hurt to ask and it can only help you prepare.
Good for you for calling out Nigel Jacquiss for writing his “blah blah blah” comment about one of your opponents in the Oregon Republican primary. Jacquiss is an excellent reporter, but even excellent reporters need to have a reality check now and again. It was absolutely appropriate to highlight this. Your sense of outrage was palpable.
Ask these guys to define their terms. What does the editor mean when he asks about “climate change?” To what climate change does he refer? Global warming or global cooling or…? Never fall for open ended, black hole questions. Say, “when you talk about the politically explosive ‘climate change’ issue, what specifically are you referring to? When you don’t get their cards on the table you allow reporters to expand the parameters of the issue after an interview. They seldom report the issue to a conservative candidate’s satisfaction. This is what Politi”fact” does. A person makes an assertion and the reporter later expands an issue beyond the scope of your answer, thus distorting your original statement. It’s unethical, but there it is.
Don’t accept the premise of a question if it doesn’t comport with your understanding of an issue. Ask the reporter to re-ask the question to give them an opportunity to hone it. If you don’t agree with the premise of the question at this point, you re-state it and answer your own question.
Don’t be demeaning. You were being mocked on the EPA question, but don’t lower yourself to reporter’s level. If you can’t abide it, preface your answer by saying, “I sense Mr. Walth’s contempt but I’ll answer his question by saying…”
Be specific. When you think WW is “unfair” and “disrespectful,” be specific about why. While you were specific on a couple of occasions during this exchange, make sure you re-state every time while you think something is disrespectful. Use the “when you say this…you are disrespectful.” They’ll still get techy and it will sound like a counseling session, but so what? You’ll be on the moral high ground–and it will be on the record.
Ask them questions when their interview is winding down. Did they ask these same questions about cutting the budget, climate change, ObamaCare votes of the Democrats? That’s a question worth asking in these kinds of settings. Did they ask Senator Jeff Merkley why he wrote a letter siccing the IRS onTea Party groups? Ask them where their publication was on that issue. Ask them if they think that’s fair.
Don’t fall for false choice questions. Ask reporters if those are the only choices they see. This does a couple of things. It makes them see that their questions are restrictive and allows you to expand your answer.
Be a warrior, but be a happy warrior. A few years ago I was in the audience watching a debate between two folks running for Congress. I sat next to a US Congressman who occasionally chimed in with commentary. At one point the Congressman said under his breath, ‘If you’re not likeable, nobody will vote for you.’
One contestant came off as a happy, competent warrior and the other like an angry man. Guess who was adjudged the winner? Not the surly, cranky pants candidate.
Ask the other candidates to come with you next time. WW was being unfair and sparky and clearly had an agenda. You were willing to fight it. Constituents see that and see a man willing to fight for them and for what’s right. The others were just going along to get along. Ask them to join you if there’s ever a next time.
In most cases, call back the reporter and ask if they have any further questions or anything you can more fully explain. Ask if they were confused about any of your answers. Use this opportunity to change an answer you believe you didn’t properly articulate.
Don’t let this be your last run for office. Do it again.
I feel sorry for Oregon State. No, really. They have just put themselves on the radar screen for an IRS audit by ousting Craig Robinson, Barack Obama’s wife’s brother who has just been fired as basketball coach.
From USA Today,
“I want to thank Coach Robinson and his family for their contributions to Oregon State University,” said athletic director Bob De Carolis. “This was a difficult decision, but after further evaluation, I believe it is in the best interests of our student-athletes, our basketball program and our University.”
Robinson was 93-104 in six years at Oregon State with no NCAA tournament appearances. The Beavers were 16-16 last season and will lose all five starters. Robinson had three more years remaining on this contract and the university is expected to owe him more than $4 million.
In short, OSU Athletic Director, Bob DeCarolis, decided the angsty fans and boosters had more juice than Craig Robinson’s brother in law. Now that’s saying something considering President Obama has drones, the NSA and IRS doing his bidding.
Sure, it was great that Robinson could sometimes get the country’s highest profile hoopster, Barack Obama, on the sidelines for some games. He could even wrangle an oval office visit for Beavers players. The problem was Craig Robinson’s team didn’t actually earn the trip to the White House. Those trips are usually reserved for winning teams.
I remember being the first to get the broadcast interview with Robinson upon his hire in Corvallis. I worked at the then Beavers flagship station and asked the usual basketball questions but I also thought I’d make the interview topical for my mostly politically inclined audience. I asked Robinson about his brother in law’s church which had been in the news. Robinson lectured me on how truth was spoken at the most wrong Rev Wright’s church. Whoops.
Then I asked the University of Chicago MBA about the one time conscience of his business school, Milton Friedman, and whether he had ever talked to his famous in law about fiscal conservatism. Robinson icily responded that he had not.
I was mocked in the sports media. I was never again invited to host or attend any Beavers sporting event.