2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Zach,

Does the MLS make more money and garner the same level of interest and media coverage as the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL?

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

True enough. The best IMMEDIATE fit for Portland is NHL.

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Question for Mr. Paulson:

Since the proposed new PGE Park MLS version would be city property, would he and MLS be opposed to an MLL team (or other sport) being placed in the stadium?

 

Open question: show us the real true numbers of MLS teams add to their city in the rest of the country? How about Fort Worth? Are all MLS teams profitable?

 

Next: to the poster who mentioned if we can’t get an MLS what chance would we have to getting an NFL/MLB/NHL – makes no difference. No disrespect to the many Timbers Army fans I know are on here, but MLS is still a bit of a fringe sport and cannot compare to the NFL. ANY city in America would love to have an NFL team. With the TV deals, merchandising and profit share every NFL team is profitable.

NHL we already have a stadium build perfectly for hockey.

MLB – there is the rub. If the new Beavers stadium isn’t built with the plan of expansion to MLB that becomes a problem, and lessens the chance of eventually getting a MLB team.

 

Lastly: Portland compares very well with Denver, CO which has: NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NLL, MLS and even some minor league teams like AFL. So far Denver’s teams have been highly successful and profitable, ADDING to the city coffers.

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Oops, Tim McCabe. Sorry Mr. McCabe. And Mr. Miller, no I do not.

I think we were posting at the same time; I edited my above post once I heard his argument.

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Regardless of how one defines Green Jobs, the bottom line is now that China is retooling multiple factories to build solar panels, it means two things. More US money will go to China and even fewer Americans will be employed under the broader “Green Jobs” umbrella.  Yes there are many things Americans can do every day to be more sustainable, and here in Portland there is a higher level of awareness than in most of the country, but when talking about green jobs, or a green economy it is a farce until the problem of the Chinese is addressed. 

 

BTW – I do shop with reusable grocery bags, I unplug everything when not in use, and I recycle mercury laden compact fluorescents correctly.  But I read the label and still see “Made in China” on many things supposedly “green”

 

I just heard McKay's argument, and I don't buy it. Why would ANY company PAY MORE for something when they can get only slightly inferior product for much less? His argument of the power supply in China is suspect. If that were really the case, why would the US Military have production facilities in China? It seems like burying one's head in the sand and ignoring the huge advantage China has in labor and costs.

 

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

I just heard the response on air, and I do not believe the math adds up. Straight Jacks or Better isn't even close to full pay, so I am unsure how the Lottery official can make the claim that the odds are better than Vegas. I can still find Full Pay JoB and Dueces Wild in Vegas without looking too hard. I haven't seen those at tribal casinos in nearly 10 years - Chinook Winds had ONE left, a bank of $0.05 FP DW when I was last there in September. Could not find ANY on the floor at Spirit Mountain, found one in the high roller section for $25.00.

As for the slot machines - the payout is likely similar to most of the Strip casinos, would be my guess, slightly better maybe. But the house advantage is always going to be between 5% and 20%. So even if they payout slightly better than Vegas, it is still horrible for the gambler.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

Is that from being on a mailing list?

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

Had the former mayor and Portland city council had more foresight a new casino would be within the Portland city limits and the city would be employing thousands of construction workers building a new multiuse sports stadium. Not only would this have put Portland in better position to get a sports team, the revenue raised by the taxes on construction, hotel taxes and the funds from the metro casino would have more than offset the lottery losses by now. 

 

I do gamble, and I am grateful for the smoking ban, it allows me to gamble more than I would have in the past.  I still trek out to the tribal casinos but the distance makes that a once a month or every two months thing vs. the weekly Powerball and occasional video poker. 

 

One thing I noticed at the tribal casinos is the games have gotten worse for the gambler, as have the new “reel” slot machines in taverns. How much of the drop off can be attributed to the “newness” of the slot machines wearing off and the reality of the horrific pay tables coming into play?

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

I never said nor implied the election of Obama was the "nail in the coffin", however it would be foolish to believe we have not made strides since the 1960's. Would Obama been elected in 1964? Acknowledge not just the distance left to go, but the distance traveled as well.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

To truly honor Dr. King, I think we need to understand that the very fact that Barry Obama himself and many of his supporters immediately made his Presidency about ?race?, even though throughout the campaign insisted the election should not be about ?race? means we are NOT adhering to Dr. King?s ideas. I believe what Dr. King would have preferred was a world where we elected someone to be President because we believed he would be the best President for the country ? i.e. the content of the character of the candidate. By calling attention to his skin pigmentation repeatedly does a major disservice to Dr. King?s dreams.
As a minority I know we have a long way to go, but we would be foolish to think we have not made major, major strides toward a more tolerant society. If racism was as active as many would have you believe, then how does someone like Obama get elected? Why is it OK for some minorities to favor reverse racism? Many African-Americans frequently express racist remarks about Caucasians, and even a cursory listen to Black music in America sounds similar to attitudes found in the KKK, only in reverse. All racism and sexism should not be tolerated, and it is appalling that no one ever thinks anything about racism directed at Whites.

I have a dream that one day my child will grow up and live in a world where it does not make news if there is a Black President, or Asian, or Female, but rather what the person who is President DOES makes news. Where he or she is judged by the capacity to conduct the Constitution of the United States of America, not any physical appearance, color, or sexual orientation. Where poverty is obsolete and the privileged no longer live in ivory towers and the destitute no longer suffer. I have a dream where we live in world where the country I love and in whose military I served no longer sends it?s sons and daughters to fight and die to make rich people richer, where education is not just a word to get elected, but granted the importance it truly has. This is my dream. RIP, Dr. King.

posted 4 years, 4 months ago
view in context

On the contrary I thought that Emily did a good job of asking the hard questions, the ones that normally the media is too meek to ask, and when Merkley did not answer the question, she appropriately pressed him. It?s not a ?gotcha? it?s simply good journalism and if we had MORE of this in the US, we might actually be a better nation. I did not hear attacks, just good hard questions that deserve answers.

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context

Please ask Merkley:

The US Constitution requires the Legislative branch to check the powers of the Executive branch. How exactly would you fulfill this obligation to the Constitution knowing your election was due to Obama?s endorsement?

Thank you

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context

I am not, I think it would make for a great topic for TOL. By all means, it is an important discussion to have regarding open government.

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context

This is an interesting conversation and I am surprised it became here on the site more about openness of government rather than the original question. The idea of 100% of government meetings should be open to the public is an interesting topic and maybe TOL can do a show on in the near future?

But as for today?s topic, it reminds me of a Bob Costas special where he dealt with the rise of internet bloggers in sports and Buzz Bissinger (who I never even heard of) was clearly scared of the emergence of new medias ? particularly bloggers. It appears the issue is the same here, the diminishing old guard trying to hold there positions where and when ever they can. The changing landscape of America means as the boomers gray and yes, die the driving force in the country is Gen X and Y. These are the people who grew up with computers and the advancement of the internet. The immediacy of the internet and blogging is not just the future, but the present of media and journalism. Because this new paradigm also is becoming the target demographic with the means to purchase the items advertised in so called ?mainstream? media of course those entities would like to hold off the blogosphere as long as possible.

It has become a tiresome bother where the privileged (in this case literally) media elite continue to try and discredit bloggers and lump all bloggers as one, while simultaneously saying the Washington Post is more credible than the National Inquirer or the Oregonian is more credible than Willamette Week. As with everything in life it is impossible to categorize a million differing blogs all as the same thing. It is time for local governments like Lake Oswego to move in the current century and allow the most populous media (internet) into these executive sessions. Kick out a print media if you feel two is enough.

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context

How does your husband feel about your weight gain? Size 5 to 12 is a significant gain.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

I honestly don?t care about making obese people feel comfortable by using words they like. I am Asian, and yes I have been called names (by obese people and skinny people, but always white) so I can relate and understand. But obese is a medical term and these people on your show are in fact obese. I agree it can be difficult for obese people in society, but obesity isn?t gender, or age or even race. There is a degree of control that say the 64 year old forced to retire before 65 might face, or the woman not being hired simply because she is female. It is a relative degree of control. Does this make discrimination against obese people acceptable? No, but sometimes it is necessary. Personally I do not like sitting next to overly obese individuals on planes, because they literally are in my seat. I am in favor of paying air fare based on weight and if the person is unable to physically fit in the seat, yes, that person should have to purchase two seats.
I also believe in fairness in medical insurance ? and treatment of conditions that are caused by or exacerbated by excess body fat should have higher co-pays than other treatments. I also believe in accident insurance and pay a higher premium for my motorcycle insurance ? so I think this is fair and equitable. Obese individuals should either pay a higher premium, or pay more out of pocket when the inevitable treatment is necessary. Someone posted on here about taking their friend to the ER five times. Guess who is paying for all five times to the ER? The heart attacks, strokes, knee surgeries, etc that come with this much weight all cost everyone.
Instead of trying to change society to have them look upon obesity and an OK thing, maybe the answer is helping those that need help maintain a healthier body weight? In the long run isn?t that better for everyone, including the obese? Since the human body isn?t built to carry that much extra weight it would be a more comfortable existence for those that are obese and help those that aren?t financially.

As the guests on the show prove, everyone of them would rather be thin or HWP than obese. If everyone that was obese was so happy being obese, would they wish their children to be even more obese?

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

Silly argument. All of these COST us more, everyone of us that pays taxes and pays for health insurance or works for a company that buys insurance for their employees. It is naive at best to assume that adding one more health risk, and YES it IS a health risk to be OBESE and yes, you are obese if you are over 30 lbs over wieght. The human body is not designed to be fat, which is why there were likely no fat cave dwellers as humans evolved. It was a subsistence existence. So yes, obesity costs us ALL.
I really am tired of hearing obese people complain about how they are treated. Either do something about it or deal with it.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

Of course, the FBI is completely incorrect in their assessment of the number of both foiled and completed school shootings that attribute their inception to the Columbine shootings, and your are right.
As a prior military (AF Special Forces) I am trained in the use of firearms and understand the immense responsibility that comes with all weapons, be it a gun, knife or my own limbs. I do not espouse everyone be allowed to carry firearms, but there are instances where victims have stopped gunmen. This is indisputable fact.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

How many fewer people would have been killed if someone had been able to defend themselves and others? Maybe less guns isn't the answer? VT ALREADY banned firearms on campus BEFORE Cho's rampage. Would you feel the same if your child was killed by a gunman when he/she could have defended themselves and others? Knee jerk reactions do not save lives.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Despite the best efforts of school administrators, they will never, ever catch all issues before they become major incidents like that at VT. One answer is to remove the long standing ban on legally carried weapons on campus. I know when I was in college here in Portland; I would have felt much safer with my own firearm and the ability to defend myself.

One other note: it must be recognized the high media coverage of school shootings, especially Columbine has INCREASED the number of instances across the country. The Media must bear some of the responsibility for other school shootings that followed the extensive and overly dramatic coverage. It is precisely this attention the shooter frequently seeks.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context