Oregon Refuge Standoff, and the Derp of Knee-Jerk Politics

Well, the fifth day of the year is almost over, and I've yet to blog once! I guess that tells you about my waning desire to blog of late. Utterly committed to keeping it going, but very low on the blogging bug. Too bad I never managed to monetize the thing, that might have done the trick! Annnnyway. . . .

The one thing capturing my attention (especially with sheer boredom setting in with the pre-Iowa, post-never-ending-months-of-campaigning 2016 battle) is the Oregon standoff. It's funny. It's stupid. It's absolutely larded with misinformation, complete with a compounding and conflicting back-story. And the best part is, this is the best they could do.

Don't believe everything you read. Particularly in a Facebook meme.

For years now, the fringy-fringe of the increasingly mainstream fringe of the conservative-Republican-Libertarian side of politics have been threatening revolution. Whether it's over legal gay marriage, abortion, gun "grabbing," government overreach, race wars. . .pick one or all. They've been threatening "2nd Amendment Solutions." The loons over at FreeRepublic have been itching for Civil War for at least since Obama was elected, probably as far back as the Clinton years. And it was easy to laugh, conjuring images of obese, older white men (and a few women) riding their hover-rounds in formation, with big old guns strapped across their backs to compensate for. . .shortcomings.

They're always a combination of vague on reasoning and solutions, and OCD-levels of detailed on their conspiracy theories. They can belch out long strings of data about what the government has done that aggrieves them. It's barnacled with half-truths, supposition, illogic, lies and loads of Alex Jones' InfoWars tinfoil-hat conspiracy crap. Do you see the meme posted here? It's culled from the Facebook page of one of my mother's conservative friends. It has more than a half dozen errors in it. Here are the ones I'm aware of:

- The Bureau of Land Management was created by FDR in 1946, which pre-dates 1964 by 18 years.
- The Hammonds were accused of setting at least one of the fires to cover up poaching crimes.
- Their fires spread to federally owned land. Which is. . .federal land. . .even if portions of it were being leased by the Hammonds.
- The charge was arson, not "terrorism."

That gun is pointing at the Feds. No one was shot. Isn't that something?
Image from Business Insider.

- They weren't charged with "terrorism" again, or ever.
- The BLM didn't send them to prison, a judge did, after a jury found them guilty.
- They were sentenced to complete their original mandatory minimum sentence, as the original judge didn't follow the correct sentencing guidelines.

To top it all off, the Hammonds themselves willingly turned themselves in. They don't support these yahoos in their "freedom fight." The Bundy family and their allies are not from Oregon, either. In fact, it would seem that the Bundy family--not content with their conservative fame when they held of the Feds at gunpoint and miraculously weren't fired upon--is simply spoiling for a fight. They're looking to start that insurrection the conservative whack-a-doodles have been promising for so long. By taking over a closed bird sanctuary. Ooh, how daring. But they are armed and dangerous, I suppose. Idiots strapped to the tits with weaponry usually are. And one can't help but wonder if they would even still be breathing if they were any other group, taking over a government installation with weapons. Any other color, specifically, but I imagine even any other religion, any other political ideology, any other kind of lethal weapons, rather than guns. I suspect we'd have nuked the site from orbit, metaphorically speaking.

But the meme above is eaten whole by people like my mother's friend. They'll immediately believe anything that seems to comport with their politics. They'll somehow blame it on Obama. And they'll insist Trump is the answer. And I'm sure The Donald would insist that he is too! Because he's just as vague but certain as they are.

[Excerpt]
 
Bundy Boys Promise To Hold Refuge Until People 'Claim It'



Wow, talk about a nanny state. For all the proclamations about liberty and freedom, Ammon Bundy is behaving like a protective grandma. . . Read more at: Crooks and Liars

The Gay Thing: "Sweet Cakes by Melissa" Story Built on Lies (Update: Minus One Lie)

UPDATE: This story has been updated by its source, RawStory. Update is below.

Because of the way court cases wend their way through processes and appeals, this moldy old case, Sweet Cakes by Melissa keeps coming around. It's a case about an Oregon bakery that ran afoul of public accommodation laws by refusing to sell a cake to a lesbian couple. I've written about it, and related other cases, several times before, here, for one instance.

Image from source, Raw Story

Let me start this time, by saying that the entire tactic being used by the religious right regarding wedding vendors, civil clerks and magistrates in resistance to same-sex marriage is 100% bullshit. Not just in places, or in some cases, but complete bullshit in every case. It's so wrongheaded, and wrong in so many places, that it's rather difficult to write about, because the list of wrongs--and the tangents it takes you down--are so extensive. But the short version is, we're talking about civil marriage, which is a contract, not a religious sacrament. Civil marriage has coexisted with "holy matrimony" for eons, without causing a religious crisis for vendors, businesses, magistrates and clerks. A lengthy list of examples of past civil marriages that do not comport with mainstream religious beliefs can be hastily brought to mind, and yet there was no flurry of RFRA laws and other attempts to skirt around the rights of Americans to get civilly married. Shorter still: atheists don't have problems buying wedding cakes.

That only happened when gay people started the quest to get the right to marry. Suddenly, religiously delicate wedding vendors were coming out of the woodwork claiming that these civil marriages conflicted with their "sincerely held beliefs." Apparently, only The Gay Thing is "sinful" enough to warrant this brand new understanding of "religious freedom," meaning the right to be exempted from certain laws (or to ignore them), and to trample and trump the empirical rights of gay customers. Oddly enough, they rarely even try to define which "sincerely held belief" prevents them from selling their wares to gay couples, or how these beliefs enter into a typical business transaction in the first place. There's lots of bogus talk about them having to "participate in," "celebrate" or "condone" the ceremony by selling their product or service, all claims that are either in extreme dispute, or flatly disprovable.



Apparently, this is either "Sweet Cakes," or "Melissa."

What makes the Sweet Cakes by Melissa story even more of a lie, is that it started out before there was legal gay marriage in Oregon. This was a story about a couple, the Kleins, who refused to bake a cake for a gay couple's commitment ceremony reception. Not a sacred and/or legal ceremony. The Kleins broke the law doing this, since there is a state law that prohibits businesses from discriminating against sexual orientation, along with the standard list of gender, religion, race, and what have you. Yet, whenever the Kleins' story is recounted, you will be told (usually by the Kleins or by some of the loudly religious groups that have helped martyr them) that this had to do with the legalization of same-sex marriage. The Kleins' legal drama is consistently touted as a consequence. It wasn't.

[Excerpt]

Oregon bakers weren’t fined over cake — they were punished for sharing lesbian couple’s home address [See correction below]

The anti-LGBT owners of an Oregon bakery were not fined simply for refusing to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple – they were ordered to pay $135,000 in damages for intentionally causing their would-be customers emotional distress. e case has attracted widespread media attentiothe couple first filed their complaint in Januay 2013, and that is largely through the efforts of Aaron and Melissa Klein, the owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

Read more at: RawStory

"Correction: An earlier version of this article contained a significant error that resulted from failure to distinguish the difference between the agency’s recommendation and the commissioner’s final ruling. The bakers were not, as previously reported, punished for threats by others against the couple, as the agency had recommended. They were ordered by the commissioner to pay damages to the couple for emotional harm caused by their unlawful discrimination. We regret the error, and we would like to thank Eugene Volokh for clarifying the distinction." --RawStory 07/12/15

Primal Instincts

Succubus attack.

UPDATE 02/26/2015: Pussy so good that if you threw it up in the air it would turn into sunshine...

It's been awhile since I've grabbed a vine & took a swing at the Greenlee Gazette but I figure with our Dear Editor being tied up trying to figure out why he moved into an igloo, I can maybe take a couple of minutes & bless this blog with a little poo flinging.

Here we go.

In case you missed it... Out here in the Northwest sticks of the Oregonian part of the good ole US of A, our governor has resigned due to his, uh, "misassociations"™, if you will.

Now I'm not gonna get into the politics or the lawlessness of it all, there's plenty of that already out there. I'd like to touch on the part of it that belongs solely to the monkeys... Us monkeys.

This entire situation boils down to our animal instincts... Our primal instincts. Governor John Kitzhaber is nothing more than a victim of his primitive monkey loins. Fucking. That's it. Straight, gay, bi, tri or politician - sex is what it's all about. Sure there's money to be made, but really all that bouillon is ultimately used to achieve something primal with one, more or all of the aforementioned monkey fuckers.

"No way!!! That bitch!"

Poor old governor Kitzhaber genuinely got fucked on this one. Seriously, he scored a great piece of ass when it came to Cylvia Hayes. She is really hot by the politically involved litmus scale. She's even hotter than that Sarah Jessica Palin chick.... Or whatever that nasally Eskimo's name is???

He just couldn't see past that chance at some poon. He missed the illegal stuff, the green-card marriages, the pot farm, the money, the pool boy, the reserved parking spaces at the front of the liquor store, the fact that her constant answer to serious questions he asked was a blowjob... He missed it all. Her pussy was just that marvelous, I guess. Like sunshine.



Cylvia Hayes was was able to politically & socially crush a 4th term governor with her primal pussy power (P³ Destruction™). Can you imagine that????!!! A politician losing everything over sex??? I know, I know... It's easy to imagine it. It's happened before & it'll happen again. It's primal instincts... It's the Stupid Monkey in us all.

Spunky little fucker, ain't it?

The Gay Thing: So-called "Religious Freedom" Cases are Not What They Seem

When I started this blog, I never intended for "The Gay Thing" to be anything more than an occasional topic. The news cycle doesn't really permit that anymore, does it? Couple that with the fact that this blog is also my sounding board, the place where I go to get things off of my chest. And this topic often generates that need, particularly when it comes to backlash and stupidity (they often go together).

Here's a FOX "News" story about one of the early
"religious freedom" cases, Sweet Cakes by Melissa.
There wasn't legal marriage in Oregon at the time.
Helpfully labeled so you know he's not Melissa.

Marriage equality is very nearly a done deal. Before the end of the year, we'll likely be past 35 states and the District of Columbia. What's left is pretty much the deep south and the Dakotas, with some stragglers around the edges (come on, Ohio, you're embarrassing me!). But the anti-gay side--and don't kid yourself, that is what they are--isn't ready to give up. Since they're pretty much out of options in regard to the actual legality of same-sex marriage, what they've got left is to make all sorts of claims of "religious freedom." They're actually making a case that the ability to legally discriminate, shun, or otherwise refuse service to gay people, is a central tenet of their religion.

And the story about the
Houston sermon subpoena
thing from Joe.My.God.
That's mayor Annise Parker,
who's caught up in it.

Finding the commandment or verse that calls for this is difficult, but that's not stopping them. This actually started a while back, when the marriage equality tsunami was just a few lapping waves. It was odd too, because it was almost exclusively wedding industry Christians (cake bakers, photographers, venue operators, dress makers, caterers) from states where gay people couldn't marry anyway. It actually rather shone a light on their lie that they weren't anti-gay, just religiously objecting to gay marriage. How can that be true when these weren't legal marriages anyway? Sometimes--as in a religion-meddling-in-politics case in Houston--marriage isn't even a part of the controversy. It's pretty plain: they just don't like gay people, and want to be mean and/or able to ignore that they exist.

So, they've amped up their martyr complexes, and made mini celebrities out of themselves all across Right Wing World. And now that equality has come to the majority of the US, they're turning it up to eleven. The trouble is, their claims have just enough truthiness, and surfacy-outrage to potentially stick. In other words, though their claims are absolute bullshit, it might sound convincing enough to create backlash. Now, why do I say their claims are bullshit?

Well, first there is the above note that they have a difficult time pointing out the specific religious objections they might have to selling products or services to gay people. Second, this often has little to do with marriage itself, it has to do with public accommodation laws, which predate legal marriage. If you have a public accommodation business, open to the general public, you must serve the general public. It's as simple as the Woolworth's lunch counter not being legally able to bar black customers. I don't care if you don't think sexual orientation is a perfect analogy to race, legally, these cases are identical. If there is a public accommodation law that covers gay people (and they are far from universal, lest you think otherwise), you can't refuse to do business with them just because they're gay. Or have a different religion. Or are black. Or anything else covered by the law.

The unbelievable disingenuousness of Las Vegas
wedding chapels (Elvis?) alleging to be solemn
churches is just galling.

Now, there are new cases, even right here in Nevada, where wedding chapels are deciding not to perform marriages for gay couples, using a "religious freedom" excuse. And this is where the truthiness comes in. It sounds like a religious freedom case, because: chapel. And the officiant may very well be religious and homophobic (I'm sorry, your religion doesn't shield you from being a bigot). But these chapels, in every one of these new cases, are not churches, they are businesses. Consider if you will, the parade of couples who have gone through your average Las Vegas little white chapel. Do you mean to tell me every one has been as pure as the driven snow, with a religion that aligns perfectly with the officiant? Really?

So, while I believe that these cases are bullshit, and a transparent attempt by the anti-gay to exert some control over a situation where they have none, I do worry. I saw Hobby Lobby, a case that was a

A rustic, wild west, for-profit church?!?
Our latest martyrs from Idaho.

Pandora's box filled with mind boggling implications. One of them could be giving these chapels inherent religious beliefs and rights, out of thin air. And once you've carved out exceptions to some laws for the "sincerely held beliefs" of one religion, tell me, where would it stop? This isn't a slippery slope question, this is an obvious, and clear eventuality: there would suddenly be other beliefs that need to be "protected" by carving out exceptions to other laws. And pretty soon, it wouldn't just be Christians seeking them. Right Wing World rarely thinks about that.

As an atheist, I am a staunch supporter of religious freedom, because it protects my lack of belief, or is supposed to. But I don't like disingenuous, manipulative, dishonest movements like this one. And I have a very hard time thinking it's a good idea to grant legal exceptions for what amount to mythical beliefs.

The Gay Thing: Oregon Makes State #18 for Marriage Equality (Plus DC)

When I started "The Gay Thing," as a story heading, I didn't intend for it to appear on the blog so frequently. Though it's obviously an interest, and has always been a part of the blog, it's not supposed to be the focus. But with the marriage equality movement racking up success after success (something like 17 straight victories since Windsor), there's no way around it!

Image from source, LA Times

The state of Oregon is not fighting the marriage equality decision. The National Organization for Marriage, the hate group whose only mission is to stop gays from marrying, tried to inject themselves into Oregon's politics, but were smacked down. So, we can be fairly confident that Oregon will remain the 18th marriage equality state (in addition to Washington DC). States like Utah, where equality was in effect and then was stayed, and those like Ohio where the stay prevented any marriages, could start to flood in, pushing the tally over 20 and beyond in short order. Not short enough for me, but I'll take it!

[Excerpt]

Same-sex couples marry in Oregon as judge strikes down state ban

For Portland attorney Julie Engbloom, "the biggest stress of the last 48 hours" wasn't waiting for U.S. District Judge Michael McShane to decide whether to overturn Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage. It wasn't whether she had popped the question to the right woman — Laurie Brown has been her partner for 10 years. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

The Gay Thing: Oregon Rules Against Homophobic Bakery

The case of the Oregon baker (along with other bakers, reception hall renters, florists, photographers, etc.) who refused service for a gay couple has been a favorite topic for anti-marriage equality types. They're amazingly wrong in most of their arguments, and not just subjectively, but empirically. They are--typically--knee-jerk reactionaries, and under the illusion that their "religious liberty" is somehow threatened by cases such as this, and that Christians in America are some kind of persecuted minority. It's ten kinds of stupid.

But let me just address this particular case with some quick points that these folks gloss over or flatly refuse to discuss:

• Oregon--though it now recognizes same-sex marriages from out of state--did not at the time either perform or recognize such marriages. So this case is not about "gay marriage" at all, because there wasn't a legal one in the first place.

Does this guy own just one t-shirt? Image from source, Joe.My.God.

• Wedding cakes, the product in question, are not used in wedding ceremonies anyway, they're used in receptions, the party after the wedding. Receptions are almost never religious in nature.
• Civil marriage isn't holy matrimony. It's not religious at all unless the participants wish to include religion in it. It is a legal contract, and is usually quite serious to the spouses and families, but it is not sacred. Sacred is a religious term, not a legal one.
• Many businesses sell or rent their products and services for weddings and receptions. Bakers are not materially different from tuxedo renters or dress sellers. The suggestion that a cake baker is "participating in" or "celebrating" or has "anything whatsoever to do with" the events the cakes are for is as insane as a tuxedo renter worrying about how his customers are going to party in their tuxes.
• A business is not a person, and has no "religious beliefs" or "religious freedoms."
• Public accommodations laws apply to many classes of people, in some areas, gays included. You don't get to say "whites only," and you don't get to say "no gays."
• A person working in the wedding/formal event industry is 100% likely to have his or her products and services used in some event or activity that isn't in line with their own beliefs. This is truly a case of "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

There are more bullet points I could list. Lots more. And while cake is a fairly frivolous thing to get all agitated about, this one really fires me up, because of the lengthy list of either untrue or just stupid arguments from the other side. Think, people!

[Excerpt]

Sweet Cakes by Melissa violated same-sex couple's civil rights when it refused to make wedding cake, state finds

State labor investigators have determined a Gresham bakery violated the civil rights of a same-sex couple when it refused to make a cake for the women's wedding. The Bureau of Labor and Industries said Friday that it has wrapped up its investigation into Sweet Cakes by Melissa. . .

Read more at: Joe.My.God.

Back from Vacation!

Waldport, Oregon sunset, October 2013
(Click to embiggen)

I've just taken the longest vacation--and the longest break away from the blog--that I've had since maybe 2008? Maybe longer. It was the second annual trip to the Oregon coast to visit some dear friends, ex-pats of Las Vegas, making a far more interesting life in a coastal community. It was a very game-plan free respite from daily life, with little more than friends and food on the agenda. We were fortunate enough to be able to stay in a beautiful beachside house, largely due to the generosity of one set of friends and the connections of those we were visiting. It was great. But all good things, as they say, must come to an end.

Plus, no matter how generous our friends are, taking a week off of work and going to a different state is  expensive! Worth every penny, but still! So, I'm back. Blast from the Past will return next week, as will my regular blogging schedule. For tonight, I'm going to settle in and watch The Walking Dead (and its companion, The Talking Dead), and then prep for a fresh week of work after a week away. Sigh.

I also have to get my fat self back on Atkins, and whittle my expanding frame down to something resembling fit. So, that will be exciting. Needless to say, it may not be a Happy Monday. But let's give it a go, shall we?

Another Shooting Spree, This Time Oregon

Image from source, Raw Story

It's hard to defend my sort of Switzerland status in regard to guns these days. As I've said time and again, I was raised around guns and have no particular aversion to people having them for hunting and protection. And as I've also said--that said--I also have issues with people who fetishise guns, and think that the 2nd amendment was etched in stone by God, ahead of all other amendments, acts, laws and commandments.

So I come somewhere in the middle. Except there is no middle, and there is no meaningful opposition any more either. If you're Bob Costas and you react to a (different, earlier) shooting in the mildest of terms, you are excoriated by the gun clingers. You'll be told that any sort of regulation of any kind of guns will only take the guns out of the hands of the good guys (even though in most of these shootings, legal guns were used). You'll be told that if only there were more armed people, all would be rosy. Which is bananas. But mostly you'll be told that, well, that's just the way it is. We have to be allowed to have guns, so we're going to have to tolerate the occasional shooting spree. It's the way it goes, nothing can be done about it. Cest la vie. Which is a bit out of character for conservatives when you consider their reaction to 9/11, but I digress. . .

[Excerpt]

At least three dead, including gunman, in Oregon mall shooting

At least two people were killed when a masked gunman opened fire at a mall in the western US state of Oregon, sparking panic before apparently turning the gun on himself, police said. At least one person was also injured in Clackamas, south of Portland, a sheriff’s spokesman said, after local media reported a gunman wearing body armor opened fire with a semiautomatic rifle near a Macy’s department store. . .

Read more at: The Raw Story

Travelogue, Part the Second

Fun times on the beach.

The Google Blogger software is eating this post worse than the food we were consuming in mass quantities on our just completed trip. I don't even remember what my intro was, other than to say that we spent several days in Yachats, Oregon, and then drove back to Oakland to fly home. We got the Cliff's Notes tour of San Francisco, including lunch at the Wharf. Here is what remains of my post, I know not where the rest went. . .

Friends we were traveling with were expert "foodies," so the eating was a large part of the trip. We ate in great restaurants, and had one incredible home-cooked meal. The six of us have been travel buddies many times in the past, so it was quite an interesting adventure to visit two of them, now ensconced in a tourist destination of their own, separate and apart from Las Vegas.

Homemade grilled peaches with prosciutto!

It will not be possible to encapsulate the trip, its pleasures and its warm memories in this post. Particularly not in the waning hours before returning to work on Tuesday morning. Let it suffice to say that a great time was had by all. And though we spent a small fortune between us, we are now eagerly starting travel funds to do it all again!

The "Gone Fishin'" banner will remain until Tuesday evening, to allow me until then to recharge and start blogging again. Until then, as you were!

See you soon. And thanks to my friends for a wonderful experience.

See what I mean about the diet?

Travelogue, Part the First

As I sit here typing this post, it is just past midnight, and our second day of vacation has wrapped. And--since I'm typing this--it is evident that I did not over-imbibe, regardless of what you may have heard. Our first day was spent flying to the San Francisco bay area, followed by immediately securing a car, for our drive to Yachats, Oregon. Everything went according to plan, except for the abysmal seating comfort (or rather, discomfort) afforded by the 2012 Chevrolet Impala. Simply dreadful. I can only hope that General Motors has improved things in the new model.

We made excellent time on our nearly 600 mile drive, and other than butt-hurt from the Chevy, we arrived tired, but in good spirits. Our wonderful hosts--dear friends transplanted from Las Vegas last spring--have entertained us since we arrived. We've walked several miles along the coast, took a drive to nearby towns, were treated to a fabulous meal at the Drift Inn (seriously, go there), and enjoyed some libations and conversation here at our incredible rental home. All-in-all, it has been a top-tier vacation, and we have days yet to go!

If you've never been to the Pacific Northwest, pencil it in. You'll have a great time, and see a lot of nature's beauty that you won't find elsewhere. But it helps to have friends to show you the way. 

Gone Fishin' - Blogger Break (Kinda)

The ocean, she calls me. . .

I'm getting ready to depart on a vacation of sorts. I'm not gone yet, but preparations and whatnot will absorb a bit of my time. There will still be daily posts, as I'll be sprinkling in some time-released goodness to pop open on schedule. And we'll have internet access most of the time, so I'll stick my head in and say "hi" when I have the opportunity. But it's going to kind of look like a long holiday weekend does on most of the rest of the internet, that is to say, not much new and reruns!

So, if you don't like Greenlee Gazette Lite­™, please come back when I'm at full strength, probably October 2 or 3. Which--as luck would have it--is right in time for the first Obama/Romney debate!

Rachel Maddow "Interviews" Art Robinson (R-Oregon)

I say "interviews," because Art Robinson--who is trying to unseat Peter DeFazio for Congress--barely let Rachel get a word in edgewise.  According to Robinson, Rachel is sarcastic, and a liar. Particularly when she reads his own words back to him.  He's also apparently not responsible for outrageous statements he made in 1995.  Things like AIDS is a government conspiracy, and that gay men without AIDS have an average lifespan of 42!  And he claims to be a scientist. . .and a good one!!!

I know that Rachel laments that she can't get many Republicans to come on her show, despite asking over and over.  It isn't surprising, considering how she laid waste to Rand Paul.  But I'm glad they don't happen by very often.  The clip below is interesting, no doubt about it. It's just that the "shouting over each other" brand of cable news/commentary shows is not Rachel's brand.  One thing has been revealed though. We have yet another kooky conservative to watch out for.

Barack Obama's Amazing Drawing Power

Photo: Chris Carlson/Associated Press

I'll be the first to admit, I'm frankly amazed at Hillary Clinton's staying power. Despite the fact that all the math is against her, she drew huge support in West Virginia, and promises to do so again in Kentucky. This goes against conventional wisdom that voters want to vote for a winner, since it is apparent that Mrs. Clinton is very unlikely to win.

Despite the numbers she is able to draw, it pales in comparison to the incredible turnout in Portland Oregon recently for Barack Obama. Take a look.

[Excerpt]

Obama rallies tens of thousands at Portland waterfront

Tens of thousands jammed Gov. Tom McCall Waterfront Park in Portland on Sunday to watch Barack Obama wrap up a busy weekend in Oregon and a historic campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The Portland Fire Bureau estimated the crowd at 72,000. About 60,000 squeezed inside the gates and 12,000 watched from outside. . .

Read more at: Oregon Live

Thanks to Stupid Monkey Planet for the link.

Peter DeFazio Appeals to Clinton & Obama

Photo from source, Wikipedia

While I personally feel that this campaign hasn't been nearly as ugly as the press is reporting it, it is clear that public perception is following along. I've gotten into heated arguments about it at work, with someone on my own side! So, maybe it is time for cooler heads to prevail, and for Obama and Clinton to bury the hatchet. In John McCain. That's the advice of Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), and let's hope it's heeded.

[Excerpt]

DeFazio to Clinton and Obama: Attack McCain, not each other

Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., today urged presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to stop attacking one another. [snip]

"The heated rhetoric between both campaigns has continued to intensify as we head into the Pennsylvania primary," DeFazio wrote in a sternly worded letter to the Democratic senators. "While you trade barbs, McCain is uniting the Republican Party around his thinly disguised right wing agenda. . ."

Read more at: Oregon Live