When you look at all the great economies in the history of the world, you will see they were all built on weatherizing schools.

Garage Wine, Yes, all great economies are based on weatherizing schools which typically have over 75% of their exterior walls in glass with heat loss coefficients around 1.0 to 2.0-about one-half or less coefficients than their walls, and 1/12 of their ceilings. Great Idea-Kitz.

About the only reason I'm voting Dudley is he nuanced the issue of reducing headcount, erm, increasing employee efficiency.

Kitz will never do it and the minute he has some breathing room he'll hire more and increase benes just like Teddy.

I think that's about the only solution without increasing taxes or really hacking services.

Dudley just captures all the discontent vote. Discontent with how the money gets spent. It is amazing, in this enduringly blue state, that he is even a contender, and proof of how great the discontent is.

I finally got an answer about charter school support from the Kitzhaber campaign, the campaign caller said that the Kitz "signed the charter school bill into law", is an avid supporter, etc. Funny, his website does not mention the two words, "charter schools" . Dudley's does.

The unions (teachers and police, specifically), and the overstocked Oregon government bureaucracy, have me so ticked off that in the moment of truth with the ballot, my pen will be feeling an iron, invisible grip that will take a mighty act of will to overcome, to fill in the dot for Kitz.

We can't tax, borrow and spend our way out of the mess we are in which is Kitz's plan.

The only way to get out of this mess is to reduce gov't spending. At least Dudley has addressed that issue.

How do we make up for all that lost tax revenue?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Inf9oysBb24&feature=related
"Legalize it" & let the OLCC market it and collect the tax for us.

"Dudley just captures all the discontent vote."

I wouldn't trivialize it by calling it discontent. Some of us see the state heading in the wrong direction financially and none of the candidates addressing it.

In other words, calling all Obama voters Bush discontents is not fair either.

Dudley won't be able to cut taxes without the legislature. He'll just provide a wake-up call and talk about things this state has been avoiding for 25 years.

I thought that retroactive tax increase on the wealthy was going to solve the problem?

What's that? They're moving to Washington, Nevada, and the Southeastern States? Slippery SOB's aren't they.

the wealthy . . . moving to Washington, Nevada, and the Southeastern States?

Well, good riddance to them, then!

The only way to get out of this mess is to reduce gov't spending. At least Dudley has addressed that issue.

But the irresponsible tax cuts he wants will cancel out any benefit.

Posted by Allan L.
Well, good riddance to them, then!
JK:
And they can take all the companies that they run with them too!

Who needs stinking family wage nobs when we can hire more bureaucratic parasites to build K's power base.

Thanks
JK

oops:
Who needs stinking family wage jobs when we can hire more bureaucratic parasites to build K's power base.

Thanks
JK

Great idea Allen L.: Let's turf those ungrateful "rich" people and replace them with folks who really appreciate all the services our beneficent state provides.

Allan L,

They already tried that in New Jersey. It didn't work.

Large swaths of citizens escaped Detroit, while the recipients of social services stayed behind.

Ask anybody who's visited in the past 10 years: it didn't work.

Oregon needs wealthy taxpayers more than they need Oregon.

allan L, how would you feel if someone applied your words to you after your family has been Oregonians for three of more generations helping to develop the state to what it is today? Why can't those of us who have spent several generations of our lives, take an active interest in our state and contribute, be critical of our direction? I'm disgusted with the comments like yours.

Here's a slightly different point of view and I won't take credit for it. Heard on NPR a few years back. One of the problems with civic involvement and civic responsibility is that a lot of folks are not in fact long term residents of a place nor do they intend to be. Outsiders who move and say are a different story.... say like Jack and me. We've, for whatever reasons, made a commitment to a place. And many of us have some involvement in the places we've chosen to live. However, if you are here until your next career move, why would you care about much of anything? And why not leave the status quo in place if at least on the surface it appears that some kind of progress is being made. Now who cares about the real value (and I literally mean ROI) of crap like bioswales, bike paths, if you are not really in it for the long term. Actually, this may be part of how the kiddies at kiddie hall stay in office.

Allan L,

I think your use of tongue-in-cheek is lost on the many over-earnest (or over-literal) readers of this blog. (Karlock, for example, has no discernible irony detector.)

But I get a kick out of your comments. Keep 'em coming.