» Oregonians In Action: liar, liar, pants on fire; (meanwhile, 1000 Friends snoozes)

Oregonians In Action: liar, liar, pants on fire; (meanwhile, 1000 Friends snoozes)

February 11th, 2007

Check out Oregonians In Action Press Release…

Governor Ted Kulongoski announced a proposal that would indefinitely suspend all Measure 37 claims

False. SB 505 would suspend SOME M37 claims for 5 months, at which time they would all be re-activated.

And since most Measure 37 claimants are elderly, many Measure 37 claims will be lost forever while the suspension is in effect.

False. SB 505 would effectively freeze in time all claim activity, and any claimants who die, well, their claims would pass along to their descendants unharmed.

It is simply unconscionable for the Governor to take away your Measure 37 claim.

False. No claims are being “taken away”. SOME are being suspended for 5 months.

Now you see how OIA successfully passed M37: through outright deceit and hysteria. The English are coming! The English are coming! Aaaaaaaaah!

1000 Friends of Oregon should learn. And learn quickly! Enough of the running around with earnest stories. Paint the picture of the apocalypse that is coming with M37 claims run amok. And if 1000 Friends doesn’t get their act together, OLCV and the other environmental orgs in Oregon that have “let 1000 Friends handle this because this is their deal” should immediately step up to the plate.

These environmental orgs in Oregon, vacuuming up huge sums of donations and doing little except for mealy-mouthed DVDs and out-of-date messages… sheesh! These folks seem stuck in a media time-warp circa 1973 circa Tom McCall. Assuming that M37 would die the same death as Measure 6 in 1982 via the same, now out-of-date messages was a fundamental, fatal flaw.

1000 Friends must bring this to urban and suburban voters to show how it impacts them! Urban voters more than likely do not care about “alpaca farmers”, but might care about how their kids’ water might be polluted, or how traffic might increase, or how sprawl will threaten the tourist and aesthetic values of Oregon?

2 Comments Add your own

1. TA | February 16th, 2007 at 11:39 am

I reside in West Linn Oregon and have watched my hometown turn into a contractors haven. Mini mansions with three to five car garages and long with these “developments” will come traffic, traffic that our streets cannot support.

I have watched our city ram rod a water pipe through Wilderness Park and take no responsibility for it.

Willamette Cove, a senior citizens community in historic Willamete, try and try again to buy the land that their homes sat on only to have the land owner sell to a contractor. Our seniors were kicked out. It was heart breaking.

Most of West Linn’s natural areas have been so manicured they really shouldn’t be considered natural areas.

I am not just concerned for West Linn I am concerned for Oregon and its fate.

look to the horizon and you can see the smog line, that news casters refer to as “haze”.

What happened to the politicians that were once so passionate about Oregon and its natural beauty? What happened to the Oregonians that were willing to put up a fight to prevent urban sprawl?

I may not know everything about the politics regarding these matters, but I can see with my own two eyes that Oregon is heading down an unhealthy path.

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

About Land Use Watch

Commentary and hyperbole on land use issues impacting the NW, the US, the world... Contact at peter (at) landusewatch.com ... Please email postal address to inquire about receiving Land Use Watch in monthly hard-copy periodical format.

Recent Comments

DE: “From my point of view, they are the antichrist of the world.” —Ken Salazar, to a Colorado Springs television station in April 2006, about James Dobson’s Focus on the Family group. He later said, “I regret having used that term. I meant to say this approach was un-Christian, meaning self-serving and selfish.”
-- 1:08 pm, December 22, 2008 in Obama (and the Sierra Club) sucks, part 3

DE: “Earned a perfect-100 ranking in 2008 from the League of Conservation Voters, a nonpartisan organization that tracks environmental-voting records in Congress. His lifetime LCV score is an 81.” A 100 ranking from LCV. This is a massive improvement over Bush’s henchmen. You’ll never be happy.
-- 1:07 pm, December 22, 2008 in Obama just doesn’t get it

DE: This blog has become a depressing place to hang out. I enjoyed your coverage of M37-49, but it’s just angry hackery now. Maybe it will be more fun when Nader is elected in 2012 and you can celebrate his excellent appointments, but for now… Unsubscribed.
-- 1:03 pm, December 22, 2008 in Obama (and the Sierra Club) sucks, part 3

Zarathustra: Fremont County Veterinary Clinic in Sidney (the closest vet,) falsely identified as the clinic who would euthanize cats, issued a statement that they would in fact spay/neuter cats for Trap-Neuter-Return in an agreement with Fry‘s Country Bargains, a no-kill shelter in Creston. There are a lot in NE, if you want to go that far. Locally, beware of OHSU. They play loose with the regs and are not above paying people to round up cats, claim cats and dogs at the pound, etc., where they end up in OHSU labs. Hard to believe it can be hard to get that message out, here. I was shocked that saying that there...
-- 8:06 pm, December 18, 2008 in Trap, neuter, release and the Iowa cats

Zarathustra: Like it’s accidental? He gets it; it’s the Dems that voted for him that don’t get it! This was the wost from a third party POV in years.
-- 7:54 pm, December 18, 2008 in Obama just doesn’t get it

Zarathustra: Tomorrow’s my b-day. Hope it’s my last. No change; no hope! Hmmm, maybe a cunning plan to deal with health insurance; people not giving a damn if they live or die. Well, something to hope for. Bill Clinton doubled the Federal non-violent prison population. I’m predicting that BO will stink in the same way, only worse. Dems are suckers for that action and I stand to clean up when it does happen. Like I care about money. Yeah, back to no hope. Which is worse, to run as the face of evil and fulfill it, or run as hope and change and give us more of the same? I much prefer an open...
-- 7:51 pm, December 18, 2008 in Obama (and the Sierra Club) sucks, part 3

R: ***COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC*** Glad to see you’re back from your hiatus. I came to this site to post an obligatory comment about cats and birds, as my indoor cat is obsessed with birds this morning, but will refrain since you’ve posted new stuff. Keep fighting the good fight!

-- 9:10 am, December 15, 2008 in Raul Grijalva for Interior! (NO to Mike Thompson!)

johanna lynch: Mike Thompson is a bad joke here in Northern California. He is a good ‘ole wine boy! Anti-environmentalist and would be disastrous as Secretary of the Interior. Thompson would be as bad as it gets under the Reagan administration re environmental issues. Forestry, land use and wildlife would be brutalized. This man is a “trophy hunter” the worst kind of idiot-recreational hunters. An embarrassment for the US and a disgraceful example of disdain for nature, wildlife and diminishing natural resources
-- 10:24 am, December 14, 2008 in Raul Grijalva for Interior! (NO to Mike Thompson!)

SANDMAN: I don’t know, but when the Bush administration murdered 68,000 salmon on the lower Klamath river Thompson dumped 500 lbs of dead fish on the steps of BOR’s DC office building and demanded change. Last week parties announced an agreement in principle to remove the lower four Klamath dams - this would be the largest river resotration event in World History. Not bad pro-environmental credential if you ask me.
-- 12:06 pm, December 12, 2008 in Mike Thompson: Elephant hunter?

Peter: I’ve been through every vote he has made since 1991. When he votes for Bush’s “Healthy Forests Initiative”, against fish/widlife funding, against roadless areas in Tongass… and many times when he did such votes he was the ONLY California Democrat to do so (or one of only 30 Dems total to do so)… I can only conclude that he is anti-environment. Carl Pope might very well favor him versus a GOPer in that seat. Mike Thompson is a BAD choice for Interior. He hasn’t been a leader for the environment, save for dumping some fish and sponsoring a bill… he has simply...
-- 12:56 pm, December 11, 2008 in Is Klamath Riverkeeper anti-environment?

ed hochuli: You need to take it easy with the hyperventilating…” Bush-lite?” The guy won the Sierra Club’s Edgar Wayburn award last year. I went to a fundraiser of his in Santa Rosa and Carl Pope was there praising him over and over. Ask environmental groups in his district like klamath riverkeeper how he is on the environment. Anyone can pick through a few votes. Do your homework.
-- 10:43 am, December 11, 2008 in Is Klamath Riverkeeper anti-environment?

Peter: Thompson is hardly progressive. He is, after all, a member of the conservative Blue Dog democrats. And I’m not sure how many progressives get awards, such as Legislator of the Year, from pro-hunting outfits like Safari Club International (whose members hunt lions, rhinos, elephants, etc).
-- 7:24 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

John Mccarthy: Look, what were doing here is just having a useless argument between two well-suited democrats who would both do well in this position. I happen to know Mike personally, I happen to know that he just received an award this week from the Sierra Club because of his conservation efforts. Also, I don’t feel it necessary to instigate a battle with someone who does not think Obama is “progressive” enough, or someone who did not support Obama. Actually do some research, go on Thompson’s site, and you’ll find your results. And hey, I support Mike, but you support Grijalva, and power...
-- 6:47 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

Peter: You “could” do it? Well, go ahead and do so. If you don’t, then it is hardly evidence. Look at Thompson’s record. He is bought and owned by hunting interests and will do their bidding every time. Limits on roadless areas? Voted against it. Bush’s anti-environment policies, such as Healthy Forests? Supported them. Thompson may very well win. And that’s one of the main reasons I never supported Barack Obama. He is not a progressive.
-- 6:34 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

John Mccarthy: Mike Thompson happens to be a competent, capable person that I, and many others support to be Secretary of Interior. He has a long history of preserving the environment, which you have obviously failed to mention. Peter, I could do a long anti-environment blog against Grijalva, because I’m sure I could nitpick at all the bills he’s vetoed and passed, but I, unlike you, have better things to do with my time, as well as an actual sense of politics. There’s also a reason Obama has Thompson as the frontrunner, and not Grijalva. When Thompson is picked, I will be laughing at you and your...
-- 6:28 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment