2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal 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 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 portland mayor 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 timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

The primary difference between the two candidates they say is growth. Sam says yes sho says no. Most of the growth is being encouraged through tax breaks for development close to major transportation infrastucture. The trans. corridors also are source of pollution putting low income and housing in the worst polluted areas. What are the candidates ideas to improve/correct this policy including cleaning up of the brown field, and superfund sites.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Sho is a business man with credentials from the port of portland board chamber of commerce and other pro business advocacy groups. These business interests have been against the peoples utility district and have influenced portlands local scene with out of state money.If he is hiring "qualified" professionals, what is Sho going to do to keep out of state influence from local political issues in the future.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Lets not get off subject. If you are a farmer there are lots of organizations that will help you export and market your products overseas. There is certification for commoditys to be sold overseas (www.ocia.org) JAS. Local agricultural marketing boards or your oda or state ag rep will direct you. Shipping containers is cheap because most are being returned empty.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Adopting a mcmansion approach to selling American goods to China and the rest of the world only serves to alienate people. China and it's people with such a rich culture and history have much to teach us and yes we have much to teach them. I see the free flow of ideas from Amercian corporations to their Chinese production plants, but what do we stand to gain by serving one billion burgers to China? If we start marketing and selling American consumption style goods to China then the resources of the world would be too few, to maintain the staus quo. We have much to learn from one another's culture, from preventative and allopathic medicines to building a sustainable transportation network. If we simply want to serve American goods to a potential Chinese market we must start to put value into our consumer goods beyond their packaging and appeal. That is what is being exported now airplane parts, computers and technology. To fill the empty containers being shippedx back to asia with our mixed recycling and building blocks for finished goods to be assembled in a cheap labor market overlooks the real value of China. It's people have a rich history and we have much to learn and collaberate with one another to build a sustainable future beyond mass consumerism and atomic bombs. Let get a real dialogue rolling about the rich history of organic and sustainable agriculture in China. Lets recognize the value of this way of life before we drive the chinese off the farm only to import GMO food for their hungry.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

A public fiber optic system is in all of our interest since it seems to me there is a monopoly on who provides internet service to which community.
Qwest or Comcast? I choose neither.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

A small possibly elite representative fror portland corporate interests.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Lets not question that there is a cost for publicly financed elections. Lets question how those costs are paid for. Bob Caldwell in my opion represents the top 7% of the donors whose voice is heard from the old election style. What public financing is about, is choosing the priority to include voices that may have been excluded. THat to me as a 25 year old is about democracy, and "new style" of elections the hip hop generation represents. The oregonian is losing readership and circulation and Bob Caldwell's view suggests he represents the minority, a small possibly elite representative of Portland poultaion.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context