Could this actually happen?

I've no love at all for Smith. (Obviously!)

Kos and BlueOregon appear to be loving this up.

(crosses fingers)

Defaz says he's "reluctlantly" exploring the possibility. Since he's sort of a God for those down South and he'll have no problem cleaning up the votes in the pdx metro area, I'd say Smith ought to consider retiring back to the family food processing business and keep an eye on those illegal discharges personally. This way he'll be able to keep his legency (if you think he has one) intact.

I wouldn't even concede Eastern Oregon to Smith cuz Defaz is wierd enough to draw away some votes from him there -- something that perhaps even Blumenauer couldn't do.

This would make a more interesting race than usual in Oregon politics.

After listening to DeFazio on KPOJ this morning speak so reluctantly about even considering running for the Senate (and then admitting, "Well, I am considering it,") I'd be reluctant to support him. Sheesh, someone who is so unenthusiastic about taking the job might just make a lousy statewide candidate, not someone I'd be cheering to get into the race so that Smith could have yet another easy re-election campaign.

DeFazio may have solid liberal creds, but let's remember that Oregon itself is not really an extreme left state, outside of Portland metro and Eugene. Suburban Portland is very much swing and even conservative. DeFazio might be painted as an extremist liberal quite easily. Moderates have the best electoral success in Oregon.

Andrew

Smith showed some guts in voting for the war plan by the Dems. I wonder how that would play out in a race with Dfaz.

Sorry, Chris, I don't think Smith showed any "guts" at all - I think he is now fighting for his re-election and his political life, knowing that he could well lose to a good Democrat running against him. Gordon Smith had no problem supporting Bush and the War wholeheartedly before the Democrats won in November. Had he changed his tune about a year ago and not so blatantly and abruptly after the election, I might give him some credit.

Gordon Smith is a right-wing conservative and made few exceptions to his party's positions over the last four years. He voted to drill in ANWR; he voted for all of Bush's judicial nominees; he supported the Nuclear Option when it was proposed in 2005 by the Republicans in the Senate. He needs to be defeated so we don't have another right-winger back in the Senate in 2009 for another 4 years.

Andrew

Senators serve for 6 years, not 4. Unless their elected to serve a portion of a senator that left office early.

I am well aware that Senators serve six years. I meant that Smith would be a right-winger for another four years then a "moderate" for the last two again to get re-elected, as he's trying to do now.

Andrew

Hey maybe Gordon is going to run for governor in 2010. Any takers?

Andrew- Never said I was going to become a huge Smith supporter in anyway. Like you said his far right agenda too much for me. Never thought of the political angle but you make a good case.

After that vote with the Democrats, I called Smith's office and thanked him for his courage. Now I'm mulling over a slim possibility of voting for Smith. Don't hit me! It's SLIM but if Smith decides it's politically prudent to act like some of Oregon's famous "maverick" Republicans, I could see this as a catalyst of bringing Oregon's Republican Party back to some almost sane policies.

Gordon "Hatfield" Smith.

Uhh . . . No.

Yeah, Skeptical, I know it's farfetched but I'm openminded or nostalgic but I hope I'm not gullible.

Hi Mrs Bug!

Long time....

I think Smith is just doing what it takes to stay in office.

I think so, too, Missing...(sigh) When Ron Saxton was running he starting lying about Kulongouski right away. Then when he saw that he was behind in the polls, he decided to appeal to Oregonians who miss the old Oregon Republicans but it was too late. Saxton had already muddied himself roo much. It makes me hopeful though that he used that tactic. Maybe there's hope for the Oregon Republicans.

Maybe...

I've seen too much of this kind of thing out of Smith. Time for somebody new, IMHO.

It's slippery because he does enough to stick around, waits for solid times, then sides with bad policy when he's got the political support to do so. It's not that Republicans are bad, nor conservative in general being bad.

An example of bad is the various laws passed that clearly are not aligned with the intent behind our Constitution, or that concentrate more power than warranted in the Executive, or legislating moral issues.

Smith is now saying the Iraq mess is not something we need to continue with. That's good. However, he will still support a lot of other things, in line with what I posted above, but will just stay quiet about it.

I'm also quite tired of the current batch of Republicans. So, I would like to see a strong challenge to them across the board. THe Bush (R)esidency has pushed me left, and frankly, I'm gonna stay there for a while.

Might cost me some, in terms of taxes for programs, but that seems quite minor compared to the costs of corruption and Iraq.

If we get a new batch of Republicans, maybe then I'll look 'em over, but not before.

The Bush (R)esidency!! That's a good one! I think I'll steal it.

I'm trying to repair some of my own attitudes about the electorate being so gullible and, thus so dangerous. I'm looking for something redeeming about the recent Republican party. There isn't anyone who's respectable left in that party. Maybe I'll just have to accept that the Republicans are so out of step they need to evaporate forever. They're so tainted right now.

Sorry to say, but Mr. Smith is rapidly becoming little more than a pandering politician.

Herb

Herb is still Herb, I see. Part of that 33 per cent that never goes away.

Go ahead and steal. I typed it wrong though. It's supposed to be (P)residency!

Smith reminds me of, from what I've read up and studied on him, Mitt Romney. Quick to change the tune when the waters get murky for the GOP. Voted for, and vociferously supported the Iraq mess for years before the beginning of THIS year, when he did an instant complete about-face. Championed the causes of gay rights his last campaign, including having Matthew Shepard's mother voice an ad promoting Smith's pro-gay stance ... but his voting record definitely speaks otherwise.

Again, will the real Gordon Smith please stand up?

Given that he has become largely a RINO [republican in name only], this website endorsed by the Oregon democrat party is kind of humorous:

http://www.stopgordonsmith.com/

I signed up!

We do not need this guy.

BTW Herb, it is DEMOCRATIC party. Did you make a mistake maybe? Just having a bit of fun perhaps?

My favorites are (P)resident, Repuglicans, Asscroft (and that is a really great one), clowns, etc... Oh, there is GOP too. Generally Old Party. Always a good standby, but lacking the punch some of the others do.

Have any others for the Dems? That one is tired, not wired anymore. Give us something good!

I signed up too.

Thanks for the link Herb!

You're welcome.
In some ways, I actually think Mr. DeFazio would do an OK job.
At least we know where he stands.

Herb

Herb knows exactly what the real name of the Democratic Party is - he's just using the same insult lots of other Republicans have been so cutely using. George Bush is making a showing of supposedly trying to stop using this slur, which is about as nice as calling their party the Re PUBIC an party. (Sam Seder pronounces it the "Rape ublican party".)

Andrew

In Oregon where Bush is really not popular, standing up to him IS......Smith is unbeatable at this point. Frankly Wyden and Smith's ability to work together is talked about all over.....Not a bad balance at all...

"BTW Herb, it is DEMOCRATIC party. Did you make a mistake maybe? Just having a bit of fun perhaps?"

No, the party to which you refer is actually anything but democratic, hence the more accurate moniker of democrat party.

How did democrats earn this distinction?

By selling out to the NEA by voting against school vouchers, thus ensuring that poor kids can't attend the school of their choice. And ensuring that teachers cannot be paid on a merit system, and making it almost impossible to fire the bad ones.

By disallowing pro-life democrats like Governor Casey from speaking at the democrat convention.

By taking money from groups like the aclu, who attack faith from every angle and sue to remove any reference to God, whilst defending Nazis in Skokie, Illinois, plus NAMBLA and the 'freedom' to possess child pornography as evidenced by the recent arrest of one of their leaders.

Let us know when your party acts democratic and then we'll call it that.

Herb

I think that Dems should ignore "Democrat Party" phrases. It's just baiting them. I heard liberals call it the Democrat Party by mistake because democratic is a description besides being the name of the party. It confuses people who aren't thinking about it too hard.

Just for Herb and his poor tired old horse that I should call the SPCA on:

ACLU Statement on Defending Free Speech of Unpopular Organizations (8/31/2000)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.

What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not.

It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive. That was true when the Nazis marched in Skokie. It remains true today.

I don't favour 'freedom of speech' for NAMBLA or flag burners and I'm not alone, either.

Freedom of speech is not absolute. The supreme court agrees that you can't cry fire in a crowded theatre.

You guys wanna run on defending that kind of 'speech,' then fine. It will be easier to beat you in 2008.

Herb

I'm pointing out that the NAMBLA case from 7 years ago is about A MURDER OF A CHILD that the defendants blamed on NAMBLA. I (and probably every single person here) basically think anyone who belongs to NAMBLA, or thinks it's a great group should be shot and killed by any kind of gun, legal or not, or at least be castrated and turned into a limbless and mouthless vegetable. Oliver North may not be quite as bad as NAMBLA, but they represented him as well.

The flag thing doesn't bother me in the least. What Bush has done to the flag is so far beyond that. He and his buddies have pooped on it, had oral sex under his desk with it and basically NAMBLA'd it all by themselves in the last 7 years.

The aclu has defended NAMBLA and their ilk, including the right to child pornography.

If you wanna name call and belittle the president, you've got the wrong guy. It was Mr. Clinton who had a dalliance with a page in the oval office.

Herb

As far as I know Mr. Clinton and Miss L were both consenting adults. Take the oval office out the picture and what do you have, the same thing happening in the office of a school principle, the confines of a church, a discrete hotel room or your neighbors house.

Let's see here, party bashing is good, why not? After all, both parties are merely rhetoric mills full of opportunists who provide no opportunity for Americans. Election after election we ignore the fact that most of their time is spent with their hands firmly around their ankles, skirts rumpled in the small of their backs, faking orgasm after orgasm for big business.

So, when a fellow like Pete comes along -- and he keeps his cheeks mostly devoid of cheap rouge -- I do not give a damn whose party he belongs to, I want him to work for Oregon. To continue the nostalgia bit, I think we need more fellows like Morse who have the balls to switch horses if the party takes a tone that is reactionary or warmongering.

When DeFazio talks, I listen. It's rare to find a politician like him. Maybe it he were senator, he'd shame Wyden into being more bold when taking a stand.