It's over!

I can think of no more succinct way to summarize the Republicans' electoral defeat than to quote the late Gerald Ford: Our long national nightmare is over.

The real McCain speaks up

Just 15 minutes after the polls closed here on the west coast, John McCain gave the most gracious and eloquent concession speech I have ever heard in my life.

It was the real John McCain who gave that speech.  I like that guy.  I've missed him.  I still might not have voted for him, but the McCain who spoke tonight would have made a much better president than the McCain who's been campaigning all year.

Economist made the right choice

Sir -

I have been hoping that the Economist would not endorse John McCain. Self-admittedly ignorant of economics, he would slash federal spending when consumer spending has already collapsed. He would also retain George Bush's lopsided tax cuts, robbing us of the fiscal breathing room needed to maintain stimulus now and to lay the foundation for a stronger economy after the recovery. If, as many fear, we are falling into an abyss with respect to liquidity and demand, these plans would be disastrous.

Barack Obama has proposed more sensible policies than Mr. McCain on economics and across the board. I am delighted that you have endorsed Mr. Obama, and that you have done so "wholeheartedly."

McCain would bring economic doom

Manufacturing activity collapsed last month. Interest rates fell almost to zero. Deflation started to set in. These are signs of an impending depression, where monetary policy fails and spending is the only tool left in the toolbox.

John McCain's plan? Slash government spending when it's the only thing still propping up the economy. Keep the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, perpetually robbing us of the fiscal balance needed to enable rebuilding.

Barack Obama's smart plans would limit the damage, while McCain and his ignorant Hoover-Bush policies would bring economic doom. Never have we had a clearer choice in front of us.

Why I voted for Obama over McCain

You know, I used to like John McCain. When he was a maverick.

Recently he has abandoned principled positions on two of the greatest issues facing our nation. He now wants to keep the Bush tax cuts that spread wealth upward and plunged us into deep deficits. He also courts the religious right leaders he once properly called "agents of intolerance."

While McCain has demonstrated frequently erratic and undignified behavior, Barack Obama has remained steadfastly calm and Presidential through brutal attacks and serious national crises. Every time I look into the biggest "character" charges against him, what appear from a distance as mountains turn out to be molehills and mirages.

Obama has taken more sensible positions than McCain, understands the economy better, and appears to have the temperament and intelligence needed to lead us through the troubled waters ahead. That is exactly what I am looking for in a President.

Economist sharing mismatched names with Republicans?

Sir -

Last weekend, I found two copies of the Economist in my mailbox: one addressed to me, and one to a "Dan Wrislit." Around the same time I also received a fundraising letter from John McCain intended for the fictitious "Dan Wrislit."

What disturbs me most about this is not that your respectable paper might be sharing its subscriber lists with the Republicans, but that you might be doing so through one of the Republican-friendly database companies who have improperly purged voter registrations in several states by mismatching voters' names.

Willamette Week shows integrity, Alley doesn't

I was just about to vote for Allen Alley as [Oregon state] Treasurer when his on-air lie about supporting John McCain called his character into question. This prompted me to do further research and to conclude that Ben Westlund was better qualified for the job. Thank you, Willamette Week, for showing the integrity to report Alley's breach even while it undermined your own endorsement.

Palin shows typical Republican hypocrisy

While Sarah Palin enthusiastically bashes Barack Obama for wanting to "spread the wealth around", it is now revealed that just this summer Palin herself said, "collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs."

Well, under Palin's definition I guess that means she and Obama are both "socialists". Which makes her something else that Obama is not: a hypocrite.

Keep gas prices down by conserving

The Tribune reports that gas prices are headed below $3 per gallon. This is great, but let's not get complacent. In the short term, OPEC is already talking about cutting production to drive prices back up. In the long term, we'll be out of this new recession in a couple of years and global demand will put price pressure on energy again.

We can't drill our way out of this mess. Conservation is the only real answer, and we can all help. Drive less. Slow down and don't race up to red lights. Try taking transit once a week, and catch up on your reading while you're at it. Ride a bike once in a while. Get a home energy audit, and use a programmable thermostat.

It's not oil companies that set the price of gas. It's the demands of consumers.

Wealth is already being redistributed - to the wealthy

John McCain and Sarah Palin are still at it, harping on Barack Obama for wanting to "spread the wealth around."

The fact is that money earned from actual work is taxed at far higher rates than money made from interest, capital gains, inheritances or corporate dividends. The higher tax rates paid by people who make their living by working are the main reason why the rich keep getting richer, while the rest of us struggle to keep up.

Our current tax structure is sickeningly unfair. Rolling back Bush's tax cuts to the wealthy will help level the playing field, and will return the deficit to where it was before he took office.

ACORN flap distracts from real election shenanigans

As near as I can tell, only a small percentage of the voter registrations turned in by ACORN were fraudulent. Most of those were already flagged as suspect by ACORN, which is required by law to turn in all signatures collected, so I hardly see how this is a great burden upon elections officials or a threat to "the fabric of democracy" as Republicans like to put it.

No, what really scares the Republicans is that ACORN has signed up millions of legitimate new voters who are unlikely to vote for them. Given that ACORN disproportionately represents poor black people, this seems like a last-ditch appeal to latent racism.Worse still, these attacks are a distraction from Republicans' own attempts to suppress the vote. Indiscriminate purging of voter rolls and a systematic failure to properly staff and equip Democratic-leaning polling places have stolen the vote from millions in the last two elections, and the damage done by overtly partisan voting machine vendors simply cannot be measured.

These problems will be even worse this year, and the Republicans are simply trying to make enough noise to drown out this important news.

What's wrong with spreading the wealth?

Class warfare is nothing new. The rich have been winning for a few years now, as our tax system increasingly rewards investment over work. To quote a popular phrase from Wednesday's debate, what's wrong with "spreading the wealth around" a little?

Thanks to economic changes I make less money than I used to. When I made more back in the Clinton era I paid higher taxes, and that's exactly as it should be. Historically, progressive taxation corresponds with greater economic growth and lower taxes. Those who benefit the most from our capitalistic system, and are struggling less to feed and house their families, should pay more to help run it. It's fair, and it works.

John McCain originally opposed George Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, and now he supports keeping them in place. This flip-flop is one of the biggest reasons I cannot support him for President.

Don't be fooled! [Initial] Bailout plan is a scam

It was investors who speculatively drove up housing prices for years, forcing millions of homeowners to pay inflated prices simply to shelter their families. It was investors who later bailed, trapping millions in upside-down mortgages. It was bankers who failed to screen mortgage applicants properly, misled them about the terms in countless instances, and built a financial house of cards on top of them.

Now the American taxpayers are supposed to spend Trillions - with a T - to bail out the bankers and investors who got us into this mess, without even gaining us an equity stake in return? And while failing to protect the homeowners whose bad mortgages are at the core of the problem?

This bill, if passed, will be by far the biggest scam ever perpetrated upon the American people. It will leave the middle class enslaved to debt for decades, furthering the Republican's grand scheme to divert more and more tax dollars into their buddies' pockets and away from programs that actually help improve ordinary Americans' quality of life.

Bush is right that "the world is watching." They're watching to see just how gullible we are.

McCain lies about Palin's earmarks

John McCain has just gone on a talk show claiming that Sarah Palin never requested earmarks as governor of Alaska. In fact, she has requested over $200 million as governor, and McCain should know it. Are we dumb enough to elect yet another liar President?

No surprise MAX is unsafe

As a regular MAX rider, I am sad to say that I am not at all surprised that the trains have a crime problem. A recent incident opened my eyes to the fact that there is no effective law enforcement on the trains.

The incident itself was minor: a woman sat next to me on a 6-foot bench at the Beaverton Transit Center and lit up a cigarette. When she refused to put it out, I asked an off-duty (but uniformed) TriMet driver to ask her to do so. He refused, saying he did not have the authority, and he wouldn't have time anyway with all the serious crime he has to deal with. A call toTriMet confirmed that this is their policy: Only police officers have the ability to enforce rules and laws.

And then it occurred to me that I rarely if ever see actual police officers on the trains. The system is wide open for anyone to get away with anything they want at any time. Now I'm not going to stop commuting on MAX, nor will I stop riding it to the zoo with my toddler. But I am going to be more careful, knowing that if something goes wrong there is a good chance there will be no one to help.

Governor Kulongoski: A liberal urges you not to fire George Taylor

Dear [Oregon] Governor Kulongoski:

Like most sensible people, I believe that human-caused climate change is a grave threat, but I urge you not to move [state Climatologist] George Taylor's office to a state agency and replace him. This would be ethically wrong, and would cause tremendous political damage.

• It's a violation of his academic freedom. If he's wrong, better to just let him turn into a laughingstock as evidence piles up against him.
• Firing an academician for political reasons will make him into a political martyr.
• It will backfire on us liberals more broadly. Conservative bloggers are drooling over the chance to prove us "hypocrites" for preaching tolerance and freedom of thought while persecuting those with a different viewpoint. Please don't prove them right!
• It plays right into the key claims of the skeptics: that the science cannot be trusted because scientists are biased, promoting climate theory to get more research dollars, and that dissenters would lose their jobs. Again, please don't prove them right!

Toy Terrorism

I'm glad Boston moved quickly to neutralize the terror threat posed by Lite-Brites stashed around town. But just to be on the safe side, I hope we deploy our G.I. Joes and Milton-Bradley Battleships to guard the city for a while.

Democrats finally show their backbone

Senator Jim Webb, responding to the President's Speech, made bold claims that "the President took us into war recklessly," that the resulting disarray was "predictable and predicted," that it "damaged our reputation around the world" and that it cost us "opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism."The only thing outrageous about these statements is that we've been waiting nearly five years for the Democratic leadership to make them.

Rove is the reason for the buildup

Why is George Bush proposing a buildup of troops in Iraq when he knows he won't get it? Even many Republicans oppose the move, with Congress looking likely block funding for the proposal.

The reason can be seen in the domestic agenda of the new Democratic Congress. On the docket are ethics and lobbying reform, a minimum wage increase, immigration reform, medicare drug price negotiation, enhanced port security, student loan relief, a shift from Big Oil subsidies to alternative energy, voter rights protections and increased stem cell research.

All of these reforms will make America stronger. All are supported by large majorities of Americans. All have the potential to pass within the first 100 days. And all are opposed by the Bush administration.

Gee, what better way to obstruct the will of the people than by tying up Congress for weeks in a pointless debate over an ill-advised policy that won't happen? Even more critically for Bush's allies, a hamstrung Congress will have less chance to take on big reforms like universal healthcare and campaign finance reform. Looks to me like Karl Rove is back on the job.

Senator Smith: Sign on to Bicycle Commuter Benefits Act

Dear Senator Smith:

I urge you to co-sponsor Senator Wyden's Bicycle Commuters Benefits Act, S. 2635. As an Oregonian who has been commuting by bike for 6 years (usually 3-4 days per week), I have learned the benefits of bicycle commuting: I have lost weight, I have gotten in better shape, I get sick less often (yes, even riding inOregon rain!), I am more refreshed and productive at work, I use much less fuel and I contribute less to both traffic congestion and to the environmental downsides to driving.

For most people, there are still substantial barriersto bicycle commuting, but stronger incentives would encourage many to try it out. Although there is a cost associated with this program, we must remember that driving is enormously subsidized in our society, far beyond the contributions of fuel taxes. A tiny bike subsidy is only fair! Besides, every person who gets out of their car and on a bike is reducing congestion and wear and tear on the roads, not to mention using less fuel. Thus, bike commuting incentives actually pay for themselves in reduced operating costs for our transportation system as a whole. Again, I urge youto sign on to S. 2635.