Candidates visit Multicultural Fair

The Multicultural Fair has a message that there are a variety of people here in southern Oregon, and they are all pretty wonderful.

The Fair has been going on for twenty five years.

The City of Medford has a Multicultural Commission and a Multicultural Fair. It showcases and celebrates the various people, cultures, religions, music, food, clothing, dancing of southern Oregon. 

The Fair has an underlying premise and value: that variety is OK, that the community is richer and better for the diversity, and that we can all get along. 

That premise has critics. Trump's campaign energized a signifiant body of people who believe differences brought here by immigration are eroding American culture and changing it against the will and best interests of the majority of native born Americans. Trump--and they--say it is too much, too fast, and the wrong kinds of people from the wrong places.

The Fair celebrated everyone, which made it indirectly political because the definition of "real Americans" has become an issue in the culture war. The local Democratic Party had a booth. There was no Republican booth. The event had display tables for a variety of social services, arts groups, veterans groups, and groups with a political agenda on climate, the LNG pipeline controversy, labor laws, and immigration.

I saw and photographed Republican Jessica Gomez and Democrat Jeff Golden, candidates for the State Senate, and Democrat Amy Thuren, a candidate for County Commissioner.

Photographs from a lovely Saturday afternoon:

Honor Guard

Republican Candidate Jessica Gomez, multitasking

Jessica Gomez--GOP candidate for State Senate

Democrat Jeff Golden, with supporter

Jeff Golden--Democratic candidate for State Senate

Democrat Amy Thuren, with daughter

Amy Thuren--Democratic candidate for County Commsr.

Scenes from the event:

Oregon Shakespeare Festival

Holly Theater Rebuild

Bollywood style dancing on stage

Master of Ceremonies

Political Tee Shirts for sale

Choose Christ or Hell

Library outreach

Prepare to go on stage

Fox: "Some new lunatic"

"The Democratic strategy is to delay and wait for some new lunatic to come out of the woodwork and accuse Brett Kavanaugh of some crazy new crime."

                                                                Fox News commentator, Saturday 5:40 a.m. PDT

The battle lines aren't just Democrat vs. Republican. It is also the weak vs. power and privilege. The GOP and Fox are scrambling to change that narrative by demeaning the accusers.

Georgetown Prep.

The big narrative is Democrats versus Republicans. Lindsey Graham's stopped the query of Dr. Ford and called the whole hearing a travesty of justice. But Americans could not help but see another frame, another battle line. Kavanaugh was a rich, white, frat boy. He exemplified privilege and entitlement. 

The good life: America has been learning about Georgetown Prep. We have also heard about high school summers spent at Country Clubs and at parties. These weren't summers of washing cars at minimum wage, nor of bucking hay bales on a farm. It was swimming and hanging out with friends. There were problems, of course, problems of too much alcohol, vomiting, blackouts, and maybe on at least one night, a sexual assault.

The party lifestyle continued into college, at least according to a roommate and an accuser. One of his accusers described a drunken penis-in-the-face incident as she awoke from an alcohol haze of her own. The story creates an image of Yale debauchery, a version of the parties at Jay Gatsby's home from the novel, where Tom and Daisy, careless people, smashed things up, damaging lives with their sense of entitlement. Or of the world Trump described. "When you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."

Twice in the hearings Kavanaugh tried to revise that image of his youth and replace it with a modern day log cabin story of meritocracy, first with Senator Whitehouse:

Whitehouse: "So the vomiting that you reference in the Ralph Club reference, related to the consumption of alcohol?"

Kavanaugh: "Senator, I was at the top of my class academically, busted my butt in school. Captain of the varsity basketball team. Got in Yale College. When I got into Yale College, got into Yale Law School. Worked my tail off."

Then with Senator Hirono:

Kavanaugh: "I got into Yale Law School. That's the number one law school in the country. I had no connections there. I got there by busting my tail in college. . . . I studied. I was in Cross-Campus Library every night."

Kavanaugh is attempting to reposition. He earned his success. Not by privilege of birth, not by connections, not by partisan service on the Starr team, and not by taking the position that the President cannot even be investigated while in office. All of those affirm who he is, in a team of rich, white, male, Yale Republicans. Circle the wagons. 

Instead, "I worked my butt off."

It is undoubtably true that he worked hard and is highly intelligent, both. 

Wealth. Power. Alcohol.

But it is also true that he carries a biography of privilege. The FBI investigation of his high school and college friends may flesh out this picture, either of the entitled prince who--like Trump--can grab pussies, because if you are a star, as Trump noted. Or of the serious student who studied hard and partied well, and of course never would assault anyone.

Trump can get away with things that Kavanaugh cannot. Trump needed the affirmation of the voters and it was only for four years. Kavanaugh needs the Senate, and it is for a lifetime. 

Trump, in the Access Hollywood tape, revealed the vulnerability of the entitled, whether it be a billionaire or a handsome Yale student with a big future. They can get away with things, so some do. And for some, the past comes back to haunt them.

Meanwhile, Fox News and GOP Senators cannot allow the accusers of Kavanaugh to appear reasonable. Either they are cynical Democratic operatives, or they are lunatics. Kavanaugh is the victim, set upon by "lunatics."

The FBI investigation may uncover comments and testimony of classmates and people at the parties he attended. Possibly a strong clear image will emerge. Frat boy or merit scholar. 

If nothing clear emerges, then the tie will favor Kavanaugh. Republicans will close ranks.

Judging Kavanaugh

The Senators aren't evaluating witnesses. They are weighing the politics consequences of a vote.

If this were a trial, then Dr. Ford won. 

Kavanaugh made sure it wasn't a trial.

Judge Arnold is right, but that is irrelevant.

A wise and experienced judge, Phil Arnold, posted some Facebook thoughts yesterday about the demeanor and testimony of Dr. Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh. He asked the question: "Are you persuaded by anger or by a reasonable recounting of events," and posted this photo of angry faces.

He posited some questions a judge or juror should ask in order to evaluate credibility, including:

   ***how did the witness look when speaking?

   ***what were the motives of each witness?

   ***did the witness use emotional or other tactics to sway the jurors?

  

Retired Judge Arnold noted that neither Ford nor Kavanaugh looked "shifty eyed" or in any other way betrayed obvious dishonesty. He thought Ford's had no apparent motive to lie, but that Kavanaugh certainly did have motive. He thought Ford's emotions seemed genuine and that she did not appear to be operating out of anger or vengeance. He took close note of Kavanaugh's anger, directed at the Democratic Senators, and thought it convenient and tactical because it cut off dialog, and perhaps revelatory of a guilty conscience. 

Judge Arnold, with lots of experience evaluated witnesses, believed Dr. Ford. "Kavanaugh certainly is protesting too much, but there's more.  Anger is a classic defense when one is wrong," Arnold wrote.

It started as a trial. Which one is telling the truth? Even Trump in anticipation of the hearing briefly wavered, saying he had an open mind and saying he wanted to look at the testimony. 

A trial would have been a disaster for Kavanaugh, and we saw that unfold in the first hour. Senate Republicans let a female prosecutor try to clarify Dr. Ford's testimony with her questions. Dr. Ford looked clear and credible.

Then it all changed, from a trial, to a Republican loyalty test.

Disaster was averted for Republicans because Republican Senators and Judge Kavanaugh switched the frame. The hearing stopped being about whether Ford or Kavanaugh was telling the truth. They made it about whose side you are on, Democrats or Republicans. Republican Senators quit questioning Dr. Ford and started condemning Senator Feinstein. Feinstein was on trial and Kavanaugh was the victim, and Dr. Ford was the unwitting tool.

Kavanaugh said he was innocent, totally innocent, was not a sexual aggressor nor a problem drinker. Period. He left no door open for middle ground. He didn't attack Dr. Ford. Instead he openly contested Democratic Senators, the process for revealing the allegations, and the very hearing itself. He said this whole hearing was a travesty of justice, a smear job, part of a comprehensive plan to stop Republicans from placing judges onto the courts. 

The interruptions and stall tactics that Judge Arnold observed as indications of a dishonest testifier, now served him well in the new frame: partisan warrior.

Republicans have a narrative: Democrats will stoop to anything to stop Republicans from putting a conservative on the court. It makes the veracity of Dr. Ford's testimony irrelevant, because the issue is Feinstein, not Kavanaugh. Relevant is whether Republican Senators will let Democrats get away with this. 

It tests party loyalty versus gender and reproductive rights. Are Senators Lisa Murkowski and Sue Collins Republicans first, or pro-reproductive rights women first. They are in a bind. They lose crucial support whichever way they choose. The Democrats on the supposed fence are actually not in play, because the conservative Democrats from Indiana and West Virginia, Joe Donnelly and Joe Manchin will go along with Collins and Murkowski either way. The smart vote for Donnelly and Manchin is to be part of the majority, not be the swing vote. Hide in the crowd.

The question is which is the smart survival vote for Collins and Murkowski. Lose women or lose Republicans. Are you with the lying loathsome Democrats, or against them.

Fairbanks Newspaper

Either way, also lost is the truth about what happened to Dr. Ford or the behavior of Judge Kavanaugh in his youth and how he testifies about it today. He evaded that truth, but asserted a different one: he is a Republican under attack by Democrats. 

Either Collins and Murkowski stand by their party or they stand by women. I expect them to be Republicans first.

Take Two: Alex Poythress, candidate for Medford City Council

Alternatives to Ankerberg:

Medford can avert a disruptive mess. Voters have choices.

Alex Poythress

Sometimes it really matters how people vote in a City Council race. This is one of those times.

A Guest Post from one of the candidates.

One candidate in that race for Medford City Council Ward One has name familiarity, Curt Ankerberg. He gained it by repeated runs for public office, by getting into the newspaper for being sanctioned by the Federal Tax Court for underpayment of taxes, and for writing angry and obscene comments and threats in public places.  Some were at me.

Bad publicity is still publicity. 

Attempts to starve him of attention has not worked. This blog tried it. Voters forget why they recognized his name. I decided to reverse course and publicize Ankerberg fully and uncensored. Surely he is is own worst enemy, and will be displayed as unsuitable for public office. I quoted him verbatim from comments he sent me and others for publication. They are part of the public record. They are ugly and obscene. I have screen printed and kept them.

See for yourself: 

Click: Ankerberg part one. Warning. Vulgar language.  

Click: Ankerberg part two. More of it.  

The Tribune joins in

On Monday, the local newspaper adopted the same approach. They did an article publicizing the pure, unfiltered words of that candidate for City Council.

Voters have other choices. Avoiding Ankerberg requires people to vote for someone else. Three other people filed for the position. None are well known, and one, Dobrin, even failed to get into the Voters Pamphlet. All three told me they are staying in the race, which will make this a more complicated task for voters, and will likely split the anyone-but-Ankerberg vote.

I want to give attention and visibility to each of the three alternative candidates--Alex Poythress, Steve Dickson, and David Dobrin--so voters might cast an informed vote for an alternative. I wrote profiles on each candidate based on long interviews.  Click: Alex Poythress interview and write-up.  

I suggested each might do a Guest Post. I had quoted Poythress carefully in my post last week, and my impression then was that he brought self confident discontent to the table. He had sharp criticisms of the city and its office holders. He saw problems to fix and policies to change.  But now he seems to me to be refining his message and tone.

Here he is in his own words:

Alex Poythress: Guest Post

"I love Medford. My wife and I chose to make our home and raise our family here. I want to address in detail a few of the issues that are closest to my heart and have inspired me to seek political office in our beautiful valley. I’ve received a lot of questions about three issues in particular, and I’m grateful for Mr. Sage’s invitation to discuss these concerns in more detail.

-      Medford is facing a workforce shortage that adversely affects many businesses

-      Homelessness is a complex issue, that requires thoughtful, diligent attention

-      Our City Councilors deserve our respect for the many ways they serve our community

 

Building a Lasting Workforce

When Mr. Sage asked me to name the biggest challenges facing local businesses, I mentioned a “lack of talent”. I learned very quickly not to use industry jargon in everyday conversation! 

As a small business owner, I use the word “talent” to refer to the great people I have the privilege of employing. I also use the word when referring to the difficulty I’ve experienced when attempting to fill available job postings in Southern Oregon. I celebrate the highly talented professionals who live and work here—the nurses and doctors who care for my family, the attorneys and financial advisors who help me run my company, and the countless fellow small business owners who make Medford thrive. I also know that the need we have for employees is greater than our current workforce can fulfill.

The last time I attempted to fill a position at my business, the job was left vacant for fourteen months. We were left to scramble on many jobs. I know from fellow business owners that this is a common experience.

When we finally managed to fill this full-time position, which included medical benefits, we had to hire a long-distance professional. Instead of supporting a household in Medford, I now send a family-wage annual salary to Florida. Many employers hear this recurring theme when trying to attract new hires: the cost of living in Medford is higher than the salaries small businesses here can offer. Rental vacancies are difficult to find, and home prices are out of reach. If we do nothing to increase the workforce through appropriate education, varied and available housing options, and a safe and attractive downtown, we will face even greater employment issues in the future. We are situated in an idyllic place and enjoy incredible natural beauty. We can and must build a stellar workforce so that we do not end up sacrificing the things we love about Medford.

Homeless Population: “Make them Uncomfortable”?

The homeless population in Medford is personal to me because I have family members who have struggled with homelessness. To begin to solve this complex issue, we must be able to see different types of homelessness for what they are. There are three major causes of people living unsheltered: mental illness and substance addiction, lack of affordable housing, and criminal homelessness.

Our non-criminal homeless population deserves our help and attention. The statewide housing shortage means that when people fall on hard times, being without a permanent address is a looming reality. When we can differentiate people who are working to change their situations from those who are a menace to our public areas, we can start to provide meaningful services to citizens in need. By strengthening our mental health services and building the housing we so desperately need, Medford can become a place where homelessness is rare and dealt with quickly and compassionately. 

I also believe it is important to identify the criminal homeless population and house them accordingly, which is in the justice system. Medford’s sidewalks and parks should not be an inviting place for people to break the law and make us feel unsafe. I applaud the current City Council on its addition of Kid Time to the Carnegie Building and Youth for Christ to old Fire Station 2. I look forward to adding more after-school and family-friendly organizations and activities to our downtown core. Bringing safe, engaging events and non-profits to the city center will serve to improve our parks and streets. We need to continue to make downtown Medford a place where families and children are welcome and safe.

City Councilors Deserve our Respect

When pressed to name which incumbent City Councilors I take issue with, I felt I would be letting my interviewer down if I left him unanswered. I personally know and work alongside all of our current Councilors. They are hard-working people who have the best intentions for our city, and they have earned my gratitude and respect for their service to Medford. Running for office and serving in volunteer positions is not a task for the faint of heart.

I believe it is important to take a collaborative approach to problem solving and reach the best solution for our city, taking into account our differences in opinion and background. I am currently the chair of the Parking Commission and a member of the Planning Commission. I volunteered for these agencies because I am excited and willing to work for the common good in Medford. 

The current Council has implemented many positive changes in our community. From putting the final touches on our Urban    Boundary to adding exclusionary zones that aid in keeping downtown safe, we as a city have many things to thank this group of eight citizens for. 

Moving Forward Together

Medford is succeeding in so many ways that should be celebrated and encouraged. I am happy with where we are as a city, but we are not in a place where we can grow complacent. I think we should all continue to do our best, to address issues that need our attention, and to be bold in the face of difficult decisions. I consider myself infinitely fortunate to be your neighbor, and look forward to the opportunity to serve you as a City Councilor by continuing the work of so many before me."

Charles Kochlacs and Laura Cromwell: Candidates for Judge.

Kochlacs won the preference poll of local lawyers, 109 to 39.

Does it mean who is better? Or who is better known?

We elect our judges in Oregon. Down at the end of the ballot there are the names of people most voters have barely heard of. Lots of voters skip this section. A few voters mark a ballot, mostly in ignorance.

The Voters Pamphlet is only a little help, because under the rules of judicial campaigning,  they are allowed to campaign only on their background and experience and on general issues of law and justice, so everyone sounds competent and reasonable.

Charles Kochlacs

Two candidates will be on the ballot for position 4, Charles Kochlacs and Laura Cromwell. On election day a great many voters will know two things. One is that Cromwell is the incumbent, because the ballot will be marked "Incumbent." They will know she is a woman, cued by her first name, and that Kochlacs is male, cued by his first name.

A judicial vacancy was created by the retirement of Judge Pat Crain. Governor Kate Brown needed to appoint someone to fill the vacancy temporarily, for the short interim before this election. She looked at both Charles Kochlacs and Laura Cromwell, and chose Cromwell.

Some people will think her appointment by the governor gives her a leg up. She was picked. She is the incumbent. But people inclined to disagree with Brown's judgement in general may vote against Cromwell for that same reason. One knowledgeable local attorney close to this process told me "not to overthink this" saying "both candidates were just fine, and Brown picked the woman."

Laura Cromwell

To help guide voters, the Oregon State Bar Association organizes a Preference Poll of lawyers in the jurisdiction of the candidates. Charles Kochlacs won handily among the 40% of lawyers who participated. He said he thought it was significant that he won the preference poll even though he was not the incumbent, meaning attorneys were open to a change. "I'm very flattered."

He said, "I think it's clear that I was the better choice. The local bar [i.e.lawyers] appreciates that I come from a civil background and have the most experience and a great temperament." Having an extensive civil law, rather than criminal law, background was important and valuable qualification, Kochlacs said. "I have domestic relations, juvenile, and criminal law experience. Those are the areas I think the court needs help the most." 

"The court is stacked by people who come onto the bench with primarily criminal law backgrounds. I think it's important to have a diversity of practice areas."

Laura Cromwell acknowledged Kochlacs' having done civil law gave him an advantage, but in his ability to win a preference poll, not in being better qualified for the job of judge. "Unfortunately, I think it's fairly standard for prosecutors (and often times criminal defense attorneys as well) to lose the judicial bar polls. It doesn't come as a big surprise to me." She noted that "civil attorneys far out-number our criminal bar, and we're obviously known more by our criminal folks because that's who we're dealing with on a daily basis."

In the DA's office Cromwell developed a reputation for being well informed and adept at handling cases involving arrests of people with mental health and addiction issues, a primary cause of people entering the criminal justice system. Even attorneys who plan to support Kochlacs have acknowledged this point.

Cromwell affirmed to me the good-government, justice-for-all sentiments that characterize all campaign talk by every judicial candidate. "I was appointed to the bench to serve all the citizens of Jackson County, including those 330+ active members of the bar. I look forward to impartially applying the law, holding offenders accountable, and helping to fight the very serious addiction and mental health issues that are affecting our community."

Kochlacs' campaign web page strikes the same tone: "Charles has exceptional understanding of the challenges and nuances of the region. . . .Charles will bring insight, compassion, and experience to the bench."

Everyone expects to be fair, reasonable, intelligent, compassionate, and an excellent judge.

Cromwell's dog

I asked Kochlacs if he "campaigned" to win the bar poll. He said he sent a link to his Facebook page and campaign website to every member of the local bar. "I'm a Facebook novice," he said, only having an active Facebook page for a short while. 

Cromwell began campaigning two weeks ahead of Kochlacs. Each have the expected elements of a popularity contest, each hitting the expected political cliches on Facebook and in campaign websites.

Laura Cromwell's Facebook page starts on August 22:
   ***photo of her being on TV.   
   ***photo of her dog.
   ***photo of her wearing glasses and not wearing glasses.
   ***photo of her in front of non-profit programs, saying they are great.
   ***photo of her with "Cromwell" lawn signs and campaign material.

Kochlacs' Facebook campaigning starts on September 5:
   ***photo of him with his family.

Kochlacs' dog

   ***photo of him with his dog.
   ***photo of him with a suit jacket slung over his shoulder.
   ***photo of him in front of non-profit programs saying they are great.
   ***photo of him with "Kochlacs" lawn signs and campaign material.
  
Charles Kochlacs won the bar poll. It means something. It means that the lawyers who interacted with him in his diverse practice liked him enough to mark his name. If they didn't respect him they would not have done so. Quality judges matter to attorneys.  His web page shows endorsements from retired judges Pat Crain and Mitchell Karaman, and sitting judges Lorenzo Mejia, and business owners Jerry Evans and Bill Thorndike, Jr. People I have talked with speak highly of him.

Laura Cromwell was looked at closely by the Governor, who spoke personally with members of the local legal community to get their recommendations, and then, having heard from them and considered Kochlacs, chose Cromwell instead. So did some members of the local bar, perhaps in general proportion to the people who have had interaction with her in her work as an assistant District Attorney, a narrower practice area. Her web page shows endorsements from Judges Lisa Greif, Timothy Barnack, Benjamin Bloom, and David Hoppe. People I have talked with speak highly of her.

The most important takeaway I have is that people who have seen their work speak highly of them both.

Laughingstock.

World leaders laughed at Trump.  

It puts America at risk. 

The world saw it in full exposure. There are no limits to his need for adoration. 

Cringing as they laugh at him.

Trump was at the United Nations. It was a scripted speech, with teleprompter. Someone wrote that speech, knowing it would be given to world leaders in the most public of places. Then Trump delivered it with gusto, like he really meant it.  

See for yourself:  Click: 30 seconds

"In two years my administration has accomplished more than almost any other administration in the history of our country."

There was a pause. The audience considered what he had just said. And laughed. 

It was so preposterous, so grandiloquent, so self aggrandizing, they had to laugh.

Trump just demonstrated that there is no limit whatever on his narcissism and self deception. The problem for Americans is not that we have a president who will think or say anything. Actually, there is some value in that. Foreign leaders see that Trump has no common sense boundaries, which makes him unpredictable and therefore especially dangerous. He isn't rational. He might do anything. Having an unpredictable leader is sometimes good strategy.

The problem for America is that Trump revealed, once again, his "tell".  Trump wants desperately to be liked and admired. The world is re-affirmed the lesson people saw when Trump blushed at being called "brilliant" by Putin, when France gave him a military parade, when Kim Jung-Un appeared to show respect, and when his cabinet went around the table telling Trump he was great. Flatter Trump. Lay it on. Tell him how wonderful he is. 

America has interests but Trump wants and admirers. And that is what is dangerous. America has economic and security interests that exist independent of whether you tell Trump he is the most extraordinary president in history, done more than Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR, anybody.


Won't Trump have West Wing staff, plus State Department and Pentagon and others who will warn him that he is being played?Apparently not. This was no campaign speech in front of his base supporters. This  was a staffed out scripted speech, and it included that section. 

Apparently there are no grownups in the room who could say, "Mr. President, this sounds maybe a little overdone. I suggest we tone this down.' If they are there, Trump overruled them. 

Certainly there are Americans who will watch the 30 second clip above and think that Trump is simply telling it like it is. That Trump is, in fact, wonderful. And maybe they will consider the astonishment of the audience as a good thing. After all those were foreign leaders. What do we care what foreigners think?

Sings.

But they were not laughing because they disagree with Trump. They were laughing because they thought what he was saying was preposterous.

If that 30 second clip is heartbreaking, then this post has a remedy. 

This video clip below will make you happy to be an American, indeed, happy to be alive and living in a country that can produce such children. 

Really. Take a moment. Click on the video. You will feel better about everything.

Click Here. 2 minutes