More Mannix & Parks: What Republican Should a Good Democrat Vote For?
In last Sunday's column, Dave follows up on the Kevin Mannix-Loren Parks column from the prior Sunday, as if he didn't realize that NOBODY CARES.
So Mannix is in bed- figuratively, you dirty-minded readers- with ex-Oregonian Parks who makes a living counseling impotent men on how to regain their sex life. Parks makes millions through his patented brand of sex therapy and, in return, funnels hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund the campaigns of three-time loser Mannix.
Memo to Parks: it doesn't frickin' matter how much of your fortune you blow on Mannix, no one's going to vote for him all ready! Study up on your history- if he lost to Kunlogoski in the 2002 gubernatorial election, why should he stand half a chance running against an incumbent guv? It's like putting lipstick on a pig, for chrissakes!
Sheesh!
But Dave does detail the email Parks had sent him in response to his first column:
Anyway, Dave goes on to talk about how Parks is now funding an independent campaign- completely unconnected to Mannix!- of negative radio ads that attack Mannix's opponent, Ron Saxton, and frame Saxton as a "close friend" of Neil Goldschmidt who is a) the most influential and important Oregon politican over the past twenty-five years and b) a child rapist.
Newsflash! Republicans are acting mean! Thanks for the heads-up Dave!
Obviously, Dave is voting for Saxton in the primary and is using his personal 'bully pulpit' to defend his candidate. Nothing wrong with that, but it provides the perfect segue...
I recently changed my voting registration to Republican. It's something I've been thinking of doing for some time. It appears that the only way to have bat-shit crazy initiatives (like outlawing divorce to protect the 'sanctity of marriage' or having all homosexuals be registered with the state or forced to move into camp-like 'communities') be taken seriously is if they're sponsered by conservative Republicans. Also, I get to vote in the Oregonian Republican primary.
Why should this matter? Am I not more vested in the outcome of the Democratic primary? I've admitted on this blog a number of times that I'm a Kulongoski supporter, but I would have no problem supporting any of the Democratic candidates for Governor. That said, why not cast my vote for the worst Republican candidate in the primary- the candidate that stands the worst chance of winning over Oregon's Republicans in the Governor's race? Being said, who, exactly, is that? Let's examine the options...
1. Kevin Mannix. As I've pointed out repeatedly, Mannix is a three-time loser for state-wide office, who's banking on the clout of having some measures he sponsered passed about a decade ago. Mannix had the foresight to help pass Measure 11 just before violent crime rates dropped all over the country, yet has been unable to parlay this feat into electoral victory. A one-time Democrat, Mannix does hold populist sway on the more rural 'red' parts of Oregon, whose residents shake their fists in impotent rage at the 'tyranny' imposed by Multnomah County, without realizing that if it wasn't for MultCo's economic base, Oregon's 'red' sections would have no local markets for their products nor money for their schools.
2. Ron Saxton. A one-time Portland school-board member and Republican candidate for Governor in 2002 who lost to Mannix in the primary, Saxton has traditionally painted himself as a 'moderate' in the past. That's what happens to Republicans who reside in MultCo- they lose their ideological blinders and realize that progressive policies aren't so bad. (Unless you're like Dave, whose job resides on having those blinders firmly in place.) As such, Saxton's critics from inside Oregon's Republican Party have tied him with the epithet 'liberal' like it's a bad thing. Obviosuly, Saxton thinks it is, as in this primary season he has gone out of his way to show he is arch-conservative with a vengeance. He's aligned himself with the Grover Norquist 'no taxes, drown the government' school of thought, flip-flopped on land-use issues from 2000 (protecting land-use planning) to 2004 (protecting property rights), and has flip-flopped on his immigration views, claiming support for Bush's guest-worker plan a week after opposing it. The endorsed candidate of choice by Lars Larson, Saxton is trying to make himself big & mean enough by May to win the primary.
3. Jason Atkinson. As a state legislator from Central Point, I don't know a lot about Atkinson. And that can simultaneously work both for and against him. From what I've seen/heard about him, it's clear that Atkinson is young, articulate, and carries himself like a future governor. And he has a rabid band of net/grass-roots activists who hail him as the next messiah (as Atkinson openly courted conservative bloggers to help spread his 'namebrand,' so to speak). If he was only able to illicit more of a response than a quizzical "huh?" from the average voter, Atkinson might have more play in this campaign. Although there is a good chance he'll get a number of votes from being the "other" in the primary, there is no way Atkinson is going to carry MultCo's (not to mention Washington and Clackamas counties') Republicans, so no matter how he polls in Oregon's 'red' expanse that is his home environs, he doesn't have a chance this time around. Also, I was unable to locate an independent un-biased break-down of Atkinson's voting record, which offers me no clues on what kind of leadership he'd offer besides a a few self-serving quotes from Atkinson himself and from the Atkinson for Governor Blog Network.
So, those are the candidates. Now who is a good Democrat to vote for? I'm tempted to vote for Mannix and help get him on the ballot again so he can lose for a fourth time. But Mannix did run a tight race against Kulongoski in 2002, and I can't downplay his support in rural parts of Oregon who are comfortable with him, his creepy relationship with Loren Parks not withstanding. Lars' switch of endorsements from Atkinson to Saxton pissed off the Kids for Atkinson Club, and I find it kind of hard to believe that Republicans, or Democrats, would take this new version of Saxton seriously. And I don't really want to throw my vote away, as every Republican who votes for Atkinson would end up doing.
So conclusion? I'm voting for Saxton this primary. Go ahead and vote for Kulongoski, Hill, or Sorenson- my decision is hardly tantamount to an endorsement. But if Saxton gets on the ballot, Republicans will see him as the RINO he is, and Democrats will have no problem ignoring him next fall....
So Mannix is in bed- figuratively, you dirty-minded readers- with ex-Oregonian Parks who makes a living counseling impotent men on how to regain their sex life. Parks makes millions through his patented brand of sex therapy and, in return, funnels hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund the campaigns of three-time loser Mannix.
Memo to Parks: it doesn't frickin' matter how much of your fortune you blow on Mannix, no one's going to vote for him all ready! Study up on your history- if he lost to Kunlogoski in the 2002 gubernatorial election, why should he stand half a chance running against an incumbent guv? It's like putting lipstick on a pig, for chrissakes!
Sheesh!
But Dave does detail the email Parks had sent him in response to his first column:
"You are not being fair!" [Parks] started off, and ended by telling [Dave] what he really thought: "I think you've done a miserable job of being an unbiased reporter."Okay, two things here: first, Loren, Dave is a columnist and if you've read his columns over the years you'd know he doesn't understand the meaning of 'unbiased.' Obviously, to be a columnist at The Oregonian you can just make shit up and not have it connected to reality in the least. (Hence the existence of this blog.) And secondly this would be a surprise, if the Willamette Week hadn't just done a front-page story last week detailing the near-"Brokeback" relationship between Parks and Mannix, which included Parks' deep disdain for the O. I guess he's going to show no mercy for it's token conservative columnist either.
Anyway, Dave goes on to talk about how Parks is now funding an independent campaign- completely unconnected to Mannix!- of negative radio ads that attack Mannix's opponent, Ron Saxton, and frame Saxton as a "close friend" of Neil Goldschmidt who is a) the most influential and important Oregon politican over the past twenty-five years and b) a child rapist.
Newsflash! Republicans are acting mean! Thanks for the heads-up Dave!
Obviously, Dave is voting for Saxton in the primary and is using his personal 'bully pulpit' to defend his candidate. Nothing wrong with that, but it provides the perfect segue...
I recently changed my voting registration to Republican. It's something I've been thinking of doing for some time. It appears that the only way to have bat-shit crazy initiatives (like outlawing divorce to protect the 'sanctity of marriage' or having all homosexuals be registered with the state or forced to move into camp-like 'communities') be taken seriously is if they're sponsered by conservative Republicans. Also, I get to vote in the Oregonian Republican primary.
Why should this matter? Am I not more vested in the outcome of the Democratic primary? I've admitted on this blog a number of times that I'm a Kulongoski supporter, but I would have no problem supporting any of the Democratic candidates for Governor. That said, why not cast my vote for the worst Republican candidate in the primary- the candidate that stands the worst chance of winning over Oregon's Republicans in the Governor's race? Being said, who, exactly, is that? Let's examine the options...
1. Kevin Mannix. As I've pointed out repeatedly, Mannix is a three-time loser for state-wide office, who's banking on the clout of having some measures he sponsered passed about a decade ago. Mannix had the foresight to help pass Measure 11 just before violent crime rates dropped all over the country, yet has been unable to parlay this feat into electoral victory. A one-time Democrat, Mannix does hold populist sway on the more rural 'red' parts of Oregon, whose residents shake their fists in impotent rage at the 'tyranny' imposed by Multnomah County, without realizing that if it wasn't for MultCo's economic base, Oregon's 'red' sections would have no local markets for their products nor money for their schools.
2. Ron Saxton. A one-time Portland school-board member and Republican candidate for Governor in 2002 who lost to Mannix in the primary, Saxton has traditionally painted himself as a 'moderate' in the past. That's what happens to Republicans who reside in MultCo- they lose their ideological blinders and realize that progressive policies aren't so bad. (Unless you're like Dave, whose job resides on having those blinders firmly in place.) As such, Saxton's critics from inside Oregon's Republican Party have tied him with the epithet 'liberal' like it's a bad thing. Obviosuly, Saxton thinks it is, as in this primary season he has gone out of his way to show he is arch-conservative with a vengeance. He's aligned himself with the Grover Norquist 'no taxes, drown the government' school of thought, flip-flopped on land-use issues from 2000 (protecting land-use planning) to 2004 (protecting property rights), and has flip-flopped on his immigration views, claiming support for Bush's guest-worker plan a week after opposing it. The endorsed candidate of choice by Lars Larson, Saxton is trying to make himself big & mean enough by May to win the primary.
3. Jason Atkinson. As a state legislator from Central Point, I don't know a lot about Atkinson. And that can simultaneously work both for and against him. From what I've seen/heard about him, it's clear that Atkinson is young, articulate, and carries himself like a future governor. And he has a rabid band of net/grass-roots activists who hail him as the next messiah (as Atkinson openly courted conservative bloggers to help spread his 'namebrand,' so to speak). If he was only able to illicit more of a response than a quizzical "huh?" from the average voter, Atkinson might have more play in this campaign. Although there is a good chance he'll get a number of votes from being the "other" in the primary, there is no way Atkinson is going to carry MultCo's (not to mention Washington and Clackamas counties') Republicans, so no matter how he polls in Oregon's 'red' expanse that is his home environs, he doesn't have a chance this time around. Also, I was unable to locate an independent un-biased break-down of Atkinson's voting record, which offers me no clues on what kind of leadership he'd offer besides a a few self-serving quotes from Atkinson himself and from the Atkinson for Governor Blog Network.
So, those are the candidates. Now who is a good Democrat to vote for? I'm tempted to vote for Mannix and help get him on the ballot again so he can lose for a fourth time. But Mannix did run a tight race against Kulongoski in 2002, and I can't downplay his support in rural parts of Oregon who are comfortable with him, his creepy relationship with Loren Parks not withstanding. Lars' switch of endorsements from Atkinson to Saxton pissed off the Kids for Atkinson Club, and I find it kind of hard to believe that Republicans, or Democrats, would take this new version of Saxton seriously. And I don't really want to throw my vote away, as every Republican who votes for Atkinson would end up doing.
So conclusion? I'm voting for Saxton this primary. Go ahead and vote for Kulongoski, Hill, or Sorenson- my decision is hardly tantamount to an endorsement. But if Saxton gets on the ballot, Republicans will see him as the RINO he is, and Democrats will have no problem ignoring him next fall....
posted by true_slicky at 5:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home