google/civil_comments · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 1 1.91k	toxicity float32 0 1	severe_toxicity float32 0 1	obscene float32 0 1	threat float32 0 1	insult float32 0 1	identity_attack float32 0 1
Hi there, Xavier...it's always a pleasure to read your comments. Yes, sir, those "damn beggers" are really a traffic hazard.....give me a break.. "We" all do, indeed, know that his ban is not in the interest of traffic safety. It's thrown in because it is intended to give some "safety concern" legitimacy to a law which is intended to discourage panhandling by eliminating those persons in cars as potential donors. To pretend it's about "traffic safety" is an insult to everyone's intelligence. BTW: speaking of traffic safety; do you know of anyone who has received a ticket for talking on their cell phone or texting while driving? On any given day of driving in Eugene I will see literally dozens of folks doing so. I'm guessing you know talking or texting while driving is as dangerous or more dangerous than drunk driving. I'm not sure having drivers or passengers hand spare change or a buck or two to a panhandler ranks up there with those hazards.	0.4	0	0.5	0	0.3	0.1
If that information also included demographics, and the types of 'assaults' and 'property crimes' we are talking about, that would be helpful as well. 'Property Crimes' range from identify theft to felony criminal mischief to burglary, with lots of stuff in between. 'Assault' could also include armed and unarmed robbery and all the way down to fairly minor assaults. Who are these women and what specifically are they doing? And why? If we know that, solutions can then be examined. This editorial only says "We have a problem; let's throw money at it."	0	0	0	0	0	0
If you want more bike lanes, more transit projects, more rezoning, more congestion, etc. vote for Vinis, Lucy Vinis will bring more of what we had had the last 12 years. Mike Clark will bring more reason and common sense to the city.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Not exactly. Most industrial climate change emissions are the result of nonenzymatic oxidation. A key feature of this form of oxidation is the formation of toxic compounds, from carbon monoxide to dioxane. A reduction in climate change emissions will help reduce the poisons in our air locally. I'll take that as a by-product any day.	0	0	0	0	0	0
I am thankful not everyone in this country wears a Kim Jong Um hair cut or needs to meet the North Korean unification drab dress code to be politically correct or accepted.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Yeah, they'll have to go back to their video games.	0	0	0	0	0	0
You might want to do some fact-checking. That cesspool of poverty and unemployment you refer to has had the highest rate of job growth of any state in recent years. It's amazing what happens when the Republicans are removed from office. Also, if our legislature had passed a law that violates the second amendment, that will be corrected by the courts.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Another step on the road to 2021.	0	0	0	0	0	0
The part I find amusing is that everyone is an expert on what the homeless "are" and what they "need." No one wants to actually see the face of mental illness or desperation or addiction on their street corner. They'll blame the panhandler as well as those who feel compelled to give them aid. Are they the same people who object to using civic money or expanding intervention or training programs?	0.166667	0	0	0	0	0.166667
This was solved quite a while back and the first form of the solution is now in use. When the sun is shining (and the wind is blowing) such that power production exceeds demand, water is pumped uphill into reservoirs. When the sun goes down (or the wind stops blowing) and demand exceeds power supply, this water is allowed to flow down through turbines to provide power. There are other storage options coming on line, such as the growing electric car market (currently confined almost exclusively to California, the state with the lowest energy use per capita). These car batteries can be used to buffer demand bumps. There are also other large scale battery systems coming on line, but none of them are as efficient as pumped water storage.	0	0	0	0	0	0
You can be thankful for whatever you like... but it has never even crossed my mind to be thankful that not everyone in the country wears a Kim Jong Un haircut! Maybe the secret to happiness is pick something with extremely low odds and then let yourself be thankful about it. Let's see, I'm thankful that we are all not forced to crochet little booties for squirrels as a hobby. Ahh... I feel better already!	0	0	0	0	0	0
Oregon having double the tax rate on Marijuana sales may greatly restrict the growth in sales, too.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Being "super-progressive" and "pro-union" should not go hand in hand.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Exactly. And already the republicans are 'digging in' and threatening Obama.	0.2	0	0	0.2	0	0
What decade is this? Oregon had its own major recession in the 1980's. I doubt that Oregon can compare to the Sunshine State. Yes, California has unemployment and crime. Oregon has its own share of both. California has Silicon Valley, the Golden Gate, Hollywood and an endless summer. And Yosemite. And Malibu. Oregon has Florence, Bend, Portland's Steel Bridge and meth. I doubt the Oregon will morph into California any time soon.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Let's get another thing clear. As an (I presume) American, you are welcome to believe whatever you prefer regarding homosexuality, environmental protection, the number of children you wish to have, and hunting, and are free to express those views. But when you presume to judge anyone else and call them selfish, irresponsible, and a terrible person because they disagree with your personal preferences, and most particularly when they are a recently deceased and highly esteemed Supreme Court Justice for three decades, then you have revealed yourself to be against the ideals of our Constitution and civil society, and have lost all credibility with me and probably others who believe in American ideals. A retraction and apology to Judge Scalia's family and the readers of this comment section are in order.	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0
Joshua, $15.00 wouldn't be enough to for a family of 4 to live on. It would however, be the make or break line for many small business. A friend told me today that the Chinese food restaurant she works at will close the dine-in business and lay off the waitresses if the minimum wage goes up. They will scale back to take-out only with the owners running the entire business.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Incoming freshmen are an interesting group to study. Nationally, only 43% of white and 21% of black freshmen will graduate from college. I wonder who in the administration is sharing that message with the incoming class? Know before you borrow.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Slumlords holding out for the pot of (taxpayer) gold?	0	0	0	0	0	0
It would've been nice to include a picture of the chopped-off front part of the building.	0	0	0	0	0	0
OK HHM, let's try to get to the truth of the matter. By history there have always been folk in need who had no sustainable income for various reasons - roaming "hobo's" , addiction, mental illness, etc. So here's the point, in the early days most of these same individuals would seek out odd " jobs" for pay. The "hobo" community had a network of private homes and businesses who hired by the job, day or project. An exchange of work for pay; honor, integrity and a general respect and appreciation for all involved. Fast forward to today. No longer seeking to trade work for cash...we now have panhandling - simply make a sign, stand on a corner and EXPECT people to give you money. It's really not about the unhoused or the addict needing treatment, those needs are already being worked on in almost every community, give money to those causes if inclined. Panhandling is asking/demanding/requesting your money -- without any exchange of effort or work, integrity no longer required.	0.3	0	0	0	0.2	0.1
If my understanding is correct, the president may not make a recess appointment for the SCOTUS, only for lower judicial positions.	0	0	0	0	0	0
If you love waste in government, you'll love this. Republicans wasting taxpayer dollars as our legislators sit and wait to vote.	0	0	0	0	0	0
When the Federal government treats an old rancher like he was a Mexican drug cartel kingpin by denying him bail, something has gone wrong with our system. He has never indicated any tendency to flee, nor has the government proved that he directed anyone to point any weapon at federal officials. This looks more like a government that is afraid of its own people and the power they wield when they come together to oppose coercive government behavior. Bundy has most likely broken Federal law, but he should be treated similarly to others according to the laws he has broken, not acccording to the wild accusations the prosecutors are making. This is just the government's way of sending a message to the people: don't cross us or you are going to jail for a long time, even before a trial. Welcome to the new USSR.	0	0	0	0	0	0
the little badge is given with each mug shot taken and identifies Mr. Bundy as having been arrested and lodged in Multnomah County. If he's a good boy while in custody, I think he will get a copy of that mug shot (little badge and all) to take home (or possibly to prison) with him.	0.2	0	0	0	0.2	0
Outsider, I'm amazed at how effectively the authors of our constitution understood, so long ago, that it would take division of powers and three branches to make a government effective. The court was not put into the constitution do deal with "factual constitutional content." That's easy. No, the court was brilliantly conceived to interpret the text to keep up with changes. And we could never have lasted more than 200 years without a court to interpret. Think about it. When it started, the constitution allowed slavery and only male property holders could vote. The changes – liberal, conservative, those you or I like and those we don't – are a vital part of a brilliant constitution. You can complain about them – we all have that right, and I hate some of the recent ones too – but let's not forget that our system needs courts, and interpretation, to survive. Hate specific decisions, yes. So do I (Citizens United, for example). But respect the constitution.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Okay. In our community brilliance, a $915 robbery was punished with $100,000 worth of police and court related costs followed by 5 years at about $100,000/year for a total cost to punish the dude of $600,000. Does anybody ever really think about how crazy that is and why we do it????	0	0	0	0	0	0
Here is what the Texan Motel looked like in the 50's: http://www.amazon.com/Eugene-Oregon-Original-Vintage-Postcard/dp/B00P6RZNTU	0	0	0	0	0	0
They are all equally odious , not for the views they hold which many oppose on simple ethical grounds but because of the general stupidity of human talking monkeys. Holding desperately to dated societal structures and inequalities is the formula for a ruling class to ultimately fail. History is rife with examples. Of course the funniest is that inequality and racism are moronic from an evolutionary and biological standpoint purely.	0.75	0.016667	0.133333	0	0.716667	0.116667
Street Repair Proposals Ready For Public Polling Which of the following most closely resembles your views on how to resolve Portland’s street repair deficit problem? A. Prioritize Street Repair In General Fund Budget. B. A New Portland Gasoline Tax Of Ten Cents Per Gallon. Details, Explanations, Arguments Answer A. For more than thirty years the Portland city council has redirected and misappropriated budgeted funds for street repair to their pet projects. There is every reason to believe this practice will continue. ANY size Portland gas tax is a vote in favor of allowing political skulduggery without consequence. ANY size Portland gas tax is a vote against an essential value of a democracy which it to hold publicly elected officials accountable for their actions in office. 1 of 5	0.2	0	0	0	0.1	0
PBOT was shamed into revealing that Portland’s current FY 15/16 street repair budget of $11,400,000 is about 80% below what is necessary to maintain our Portland streets at the current 12% deficit, i.e. $55,000,000. That’s right, 80% below the status quo. Remarkable. It is a tribute to our “You don’t mess with my bureaus I won’t mess with yours” commission form of city government. The current FY 15/16 road repair budget is $11,400,000. That is 20%, that’s right, a pitiful 20% of what is required to simply maintain Portland’s current 12% street repair deficit. That’s astonishing. That means that over the last 30 years the Portland city council has siphoned off 80% of the available and necessary street maintenance budget for their own self-indulgent, politically self-promoting pet projects. What's remarkable is that they got away with it for so long. Unbelievable. Well done city auditors, Press, City Club of Portland and other civic “watchdogs." 2 of 5	0	0	0	0	0	0
To Maintain The Status Quo Of A 12% Road Repair Deficit Over The Next Five Years FY 16/17 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 17/18 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 18/19 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 19/20 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 20/21 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 Total over 5 years = $275,000,000 1. The Portland city council shall adopt a five year road repair budget agreement that uses funds already available in the general fund to maintain a 12% road repair deficit. 2. No new taxes or fees shall be imposed upon the citizens or businesses of Portland to pay for the increase in the five year road repair budget. 3 of 5	0	0	0	0	0	0
3. Any additional funds made available by the state or the federal government during this time period may be added to but may not be substituted for the agreed upon status quo 12% budget allocation. Regardless of how much money may be available from the state or the federal government the five year budget allocations from general fund revenues will remain in place. 4. After five years the council shall reevaluate the road repair status and proceed as it sees fit. Budget planning, even only five years out, is a very dubious enterprise. Nevertheless, it is a time frame the public and the press can easily monitor with the help of an annual city auditor’s report. If extra funds from Salem or Washington D.C. come our way so much the better. 4 of 5	0	0	0	0	0	0
Answer B. The new Portland gasoline tax proposal of ten cents per gallon raises only 14.5 million dollars per year. A new Portland gas tax of 30 cents per gallon would be required to match the amount needed just to maintain the status quo of a 12% road repair deficit. This proposal exacerbates the current 12% road repair deficit and places Portland businesses that sell gasoline at a distinct disadvantage. After many months of research these two competing ideas are the only two serious proposals on the public table. I encourage Media companies, groups and individuals to use this material as presented above. Attribution would be appropriate. Richard Ellmyer North Portland 5 of 5	0	0	0	0	0	0
I love pictures when I was young. But time catches up with us.	0	0	0	0	0	0
There are many reasons that I will not list here, I'm voting for Clark. The biggest reason is I believe he's not a left ring radical.	0	0	0	0	0	0
I'm tempted to agree JR, but wouldn't that make the appointment more political and not less? Why should the supreme courts justices to be subjected to campaigning for their jobs base on the next scheduled election? I'm not sure it should be an excutive branch pick. Why can't we have nomination by panel or committee? Constitutionally, it probably made sense (who's going to challenge the intgrity of Pres. Washington) - before the entire political realm was split between two political parties. We need to find ways to build more nuetrality into administrative positions that don't have specific partisan purposes.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Janice Stewart, hm. Just because someone owns a licensed gun does make him or her a threat to society. This federal judge is looking for a promotion and makeing an example out of a middle-aged white guy. Can I say this, I'll find out	0	0	0	0	0	0
Right on! And history shows supreme court justices have been nominated and confirmed during the last year or a presidential term six times since 1900.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Do you consider yourself populist Out? I've admired you unique and interesting perspective.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Civil comments isn't about judging the content of comments; civil doesn't mean right or wrong, true or false, or nice or mean. If you watch, you'll see some amazingly wrong, false, and mean comments still get through. The goal isn't content, or meaning. Just phrasing, and, particularly, weeding out the useless insults and name calling.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Carbon dioxide is a non-toxic material? That's an odd assertion given that it is toxic. OSHA sets the permissible exposure limit at 5,000 ppm and the CDC describes it as a potent respiratory stimulant and stimulant and depressant of the central nervous system in addition to being a simple asphyxiant. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/81-123/pdfs/0103.pdf	0	0	0	0	0	0
I totally agree. We'd all be better off. Somewhere along the way, sometime within the last 10 or 20 years, it became okay to confuse repetition with truth and hate speech with discussion. Everybody loses.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Those brilliant framers of the constitution did think to provide provision for the document to evolve. It was called the amendment process and was made available in multiple pathways. In earlier days, the people and the elected officials stood by the constitution and created amendments to allow the constitution to accept redefinition in certain areas. Several amendments fixed the slavery problem. Another amendment fixed the women's right to vote problem, and so on and so on. It was not the courts that allowed the nation to evolve, it was the amendment process and political respect for it. Amendments are only made by elected officials. It is only in recent decades that the courts have turned to legislation. I object not to specific decisions but the entire process of judicial legislation.	0	0	0	0	0	0
So, when he did that, was he right to do it? Did you approve? And, by the way, did the Democrats close ranks around that idea or circle their wagons? God help us all if past mistakes justify present ones. Think of the logic of that – thinking like that would send us into a steady descent in the level of what is publicly acceptable would go steadily down, relentlessly.	0	0	0	0	0	0
So you think the government's message is, "don't cross us" when they enforce the law? You may be right if the 'us' you're referencing is we the people given that the law enforcement officers are enforcing our laws that were passed by our elected officials. And no one would ever bet a dime on Bundy voluntarily showing up for a court date.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Thanks for clarifying that. By the way, what is a platform of wanting more "etc." Don't we have enough "etc." or do we need more? The other day I was enjoying my bike ride and saw other people riding the bus, but when I saw some "etc.", I wondered: Has this country become carried away with "etc."	0	0	0	0	0	0
Some of my friends are for sunny skies and some of my friends are against sunny skies. And I am for my friends.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Actually the new system isn't supposed to end arrogance; just uncivil arrogance. Uncivil isn't the ideas, free expression, disagreement, misunderstanding, lies, or meanness. It's useless toxic verbal sludge. The comment you object to may well have been arrogant, but it wasn't uncivil. And neither was yours. I'm just sayin'.	0.2	0	0	0	0.2	0
He brought his own badge. It was a prize found in a box of Count Chocula.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Regardless of the legitimacy, the preferred alternative to a ticket in all three cases -- be it for enabling panhandlers, talking on the phone or texting -- is the same: pull off to a safe place out of the flow of traffic to finish the task before proceeding. Consider the benefits of such a practice for the potential donor. He or she stops the vehicle and turns off the engine, so as not to contribute to climate change. He or she walks up to the potential panhandler, getting some valuable exercise. He or she makes eye contact and engages the potential panhandler in conversation, reaffirming both individuals' humanness. He or she is clearly observed by other motorists and pedestrians, and the perception of public acknowledgement/admiration so many crave washes over him or her. Instead of risking a $50 fine, he or she can put that money to good use a buck or two at a time. This is a good idea for everyone. I'm surprised Eugene's city council didn't think of it first.	0	0	0	0	0	0
So true. If the Mayor and majority of the County Board of Commissioners acted like any reasonable citizen, either homeowner or business owner, they would have planned an "annex" to the county building to provide _shared_ space for the two local governments. But, no -- each must have their "shrine' to their self-importance. In reality, their petty presences will be lost to history, while our children bear the burden of their self-aggrandizement. -- Paul	0	0	0	0	0	0
Barnhart has to submit his wishes as a bill, subject it to the will of the legislators and wait to see if it passes. It is called "majority rule". Same thing in the U.S. congress. Do you have a better system for Salem or Washington?	0	0	0	0	0	0
Voted in to office through a democratic election. Do you have a better system?	0	0	0	0	0	0
Nice observations! Scalia neither respected the Constitution nor precedence. He was a self-absorbed "poser" who should have been "shamed" out of the Supreme Court. Good bye, good riddance and may you roast in the fires of ... -- Paul	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0
I object to any of the thinking that treats "homeless" as one homogenous group. That's attractive for people who want to argue, but it's useless in actually dealing with real people. We need to divide these people into at least three groups: 1. Unable to take care of themselves because of things beyond their control, like mental illness, sickness, old age. That's a damn shame. We're the wealthiest society in the world. We used to take care of these people. That changed in the 1980s. 2. People unable to take care of themselves because of substance abuse. Other countries do way better than we do. Give them treatment. Demand that they get it. Treatment, work, or community service. 3. People who choose homeless as a lifestyle, a choice they make. Put them to work. Community service. Pay them fairly. Fund it by decriminalizing substance abuse, saving money on jails. And begging? Outlaw the behavior, not the people. Figure out which individual belongs to which group. Deal accordingly.	0.3	0	0.3	0	0.3	0
Ouch! When I had just taken up crocheting little booties for squirrels! Seriously, "Who let the dogs" out need to ask: "Who let his rational thinking take a smoke break?" -- Paul	0	0	0	0	0	0
The USA is a Republic, we vote. Armed militias do not rule the land. Yes, if anyone acts as Cliven did, they should go to jail for a long time. I see the case against Cliven to be just. No "wild accusations". Why would anyone defend the documented criminal actions this man, his sons and armed followers have committed. Draping themselves in the flag while they stab America in the back.	0.111111	0	0	0.111111	0	0.111111
garycrum is a regular in this forum, spewing his typical lies, arrogance, and hypocrisy, all of which is uncivil and not conducive to an adult conversation ... you call it toxic verbal sludge, and that's good, although I've always called it transcribed flatulence.	0.578125	0.03125	0.03125	0	0.546875	0
The system is fine the way it is, and according to the rules, this is a perfectly legitimate bit of political gamesmanship of the kind that's been practiced for centuries. After all, standing in the way of a perceived irresistible force isn't just for Tiananmen Square anymore. Mr. Barnhart will just have to make later dinner reservations. He won't go hungry for having to work past 5 p.m.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Oh, yeah. The War Hillary voted for because Bill Clinton's cruise missile attack in 1993 to destroy Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. https://youtu.be/6mpWa7wNr5M	0	0	0	0	0	0
Go Tim! I applaud your analysis 100% -- Paul	0	0	0	0	0	0
Not at all. I'm just reminding all of those who can do anything they want because they are currently the majority that they, too, may one day need the votes of some of the minority. Pelosi and Reid burnt all the bridges they possibly could and the Democrats in Congress are now reaping what they sowed on their behalf.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Only topped if the general election was Robot Bernie vs. Robot Hillary! Sigh, we all have dreams...	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0
This column should be required reading, in my opinion. I think the author highlights a real problem that seriously impedes government and threatens peace and stability in this country. I know he's identified with a point of view, which is a shame, because some people will dismiss his concern as more of the same bi-partisan divisiveness that he calls out. However, he is also the winner of a Nobel Prize for Economics (2008) and the Nobel Prize awards the quality of the work, not the politics.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Good point Outsider, and fairly made. But the practical reality is that words and phrases need interpretation, particularly as time passes. For example, “Full Faith and Credit,” “due process of law,” “cruel and unusual punishment,” and I could go on and on. Public humiliation in the stocks on the town square wasn’t considered cruel or unusual punishment when the constitution was written. And let’s not forget the disastrous conclusion of the 2000 election, in which one candidate won the popular vote while a different candidate won the electoral vote, and where we would have been if it weren’t for a supreme court decision. As long as we’re human, and we use words, people will disagree on what those words mean. Thank the authors of the constitution that we have a way – beyond force – to deal with interpretation.	0	0	0	0	0	0
While I recognize that an R-G editorial doesn't have enough space to present a complete, factual analysis, it does merit more than the pathetic, formulaic reactions of the Luddites below. As someone who pays a substantial tax, I support efforts to help young women find the true nature of womanhood, which I find so beautiful and inspiring. You old farts need to go back to your Pinochle and let the reasonable and compassionate world move on. -- Paul	0.6	0	0	0	0.6	0.1
I've posted more detailed comments under other op-ed pieces, but the summary is that Scalia was a "poser" -- toxic and unqualified. -- Paul	0	0	0	0	0	0
TimBerry, I think you've got a couple things wrong. "...the court was brilliantly conceived to interpret the text to keep up with changes," and "the constitution allowed slavery and only male property holders could vote." In both examples, the changes were effected via amendments; the 13th prohibited slavery and the 19th provided universal suffrage. No "interpretation" on the part of any court was needed. In my opinion, constitutional interpretation is a slippery slope. After all, anyone, including a judge, can interpret any constitutional clause any way he or she wants even if totally detached from logic and reality. (Perhaps we've seen this?) Rather, Judge Scalia's tenets of texturalism and originalism are what's needed; close adherence to the original meaning and intent of the Constitution. If it's clauses are no longer relevant and do not serve our nation, the proper and more difficult course is to amend the Constitution rather than take the less difficult path of interpretation.	0.166667	0	0	0.166667	0	0
A straight forward reading of the formation of this nation leads me to believe that the founders intended the Supreme Court to be an apolitical group that would be called on in rare occasion to decide whether of not legislation passed by the political branches of the government was consistent with the Constitution. Perhaps since Judges were not elected by popular vote, the assumption was that it would not become a political body. Obviously, not the case since the Court is seen by both major parties as a means to extend the political influence/philosophy of the party in control of the Administrative Branch, the President at the time of vacancies. Regardless of which political spectrum you align with, it should be cause for pause that 9 individuals, selected, not elected, and appointed for life wield so much power over course of the nation.	0	0	0	0	0	0
I'm not quite sure TimBerry was calling my comment "toxic verbal sludge." I believe his reference was to incivility. Perhaps you should re-read his post and then apologize to both him and me. You are certainly welcome to hold my comments in disdain, that's your right. You're certainly welcome to personally attack me if that, in your opinion, furthers "adult conversation." You're certainly welcome to use crass references such as "tanscribed flatulence", if that's your idea of civil discourse. However, in my opinion, crassness and ad hominem attacks are deterrents to constructive discourse. BTW: I've flagged your comment. In my opinion, it's the very thing I'd hope the new Civil Conversation format would avoid.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Actually, each and every one of Oregon's 10 full-time football coaches knows about those same risks from personal experience. Each one played high school and college football, and probably youth football, too; each was subjected to practices and standards that would be considered much more barbaric and dangerous from his playing days when compared to what occurs now. Each is a testament to the obvious, that not everyone who plays the game ends up damaged for life. In fact, rare is the football coach who did not play the game himself. In Oregon's case, each of these 10 individuals now earns, when incentives are factored in, more than the president of the United States. You can argue about misplaced priorities, but from a practical standpoint the average Oregon football player could do a lot worse during his post-playing career than to follow in the footsteps of his college coaches. Females suffer brain injuries playing sports, too. Have you noticed? Do you care?	0	0	0	0	0	0
Tim: I agree with the points you've made here. There are many different causes of homelessness and poverty, and we, as a society, are not doing very well addressing any of them. Indeed, during the Reagan administration funding for mental illness treatment facilities and programs was drastically reduced and tens of thousands of mentally ill individuals were, quite literally, kicked out of treatment facilities. The VA is a nightmare, with tens of thousands of Vets on the streets waiting for care. Simply banning panhandling will do nothing to address the many issues the homeless and impoverished face. As you suggest.......we are the wealthiest nation in the world...can't we do just a little better... regards, Gary	0	0	0	0	0	0
BTW: several years ago an Op Ed piece of my was published in the RG addressing this very issue. If you might wish to read it, give me a call and I'll email it to you. I'd also enjoy visiting with you sometime and discussing this issue. thanks, Gary	0	0	0	0	0	0
"Every worker deserves a living wage". Not every worker is supporting a family - some not even themselves. Entry level jobs - the gas station, car wash, rolling burritos, are not intended to be careers. Those are the jobs that people take to get work experience. A starting point. A glowing recommendation as they move up the earning ladder. Someone without a decent work ethic is not entitled to, does not deserve $15 an hour. It has to be earned.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Are you going to apologize for lying? Among other things, I didn't use the "crass reference" you describe.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Actually, a recess appointment is legal. They were done by George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower who did three to the Court. hey are easily prevented by the Senate as was most recently done by Senator Reid when he was leader of the Senate. The Senate just doesn't adjourn for more than three (3) days. June 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court validated this practice in a 9–0 ruling of using pro forma sessions to block the president from using the recess appointment authority.	0	0	0	0	0	0
that's first cavalry division (AIRMOBILE)	0	0	0	0	0	0
I agree with the folks mentioned but still find them all pretty insufferable. At least Dawkins has a degree in something and he got a fair treatment by the South Park guys, but this has nothing to do with what folks believe, I'd just rather hear them do comedy. I don't look to entertainers for philosophy or metaphysics. Its no surprise that folks here wanted to make it about atheism but nowhere does the author say that they're wrong, just that they're a**holes (to paraphrase The Dude)	0.4	0.1	0.3	0	0.2	0
My response to the same point made by Outsider was "good point, and fairly made." I went on to add that interpretation is still needed, as in clauses like "due process of law," "cruel and unusual punishment," and "full faith and credit." Just to name three examples. Do you disagree with their interpretation? Me too, with some of them at least (Citizens United) ... but I understand that interpretation is necessary, and is one of the core concepts of the constitution.	0	0	0	0	0	0
Guess it's true only trash mocks someone when they’re laying in state or fresh in the grave.	0.6	0.2	0	0	0.7	0
Like your post, your legal analysis is incomplete. If you think Cliven is being held because he owns a gun and that is the extent of the reasons to hold him, then you are mistaken.	0.166667	0	0	0	0	0
I stand corrected. Thank you.	0	0	0	0	0	0
There have been interpretations with which I agreed and disagreed. However, I'm not a constitutional scholar; not even trained in the law so my opinions are pretty much just that: My opinions. In my opinion, interpretation is permissible only when the original intent of the clause is not discernable. Otherwise adherence to the original intent is required.	0	0	0	0	0	0
You posted this in another thread--"What can one say still feel like your left hanging? Change your name to chad and move to Florida, those people don’t know what they were talking either just look at the way they vote." Since you are claiming a strong grip on reality compared to the left, could you explain this comment in relation to the letter it is in response to?	0	0	0	0.166667	0	0
Love the AD allusion (allusions, MICHAEL...)!	0	0	0	0	0	0
It's also worth noting that the styles of pizzas are rather different. The crust at Pizza Jerk is thinner, the toppings lighter, the sauce zestier. The crust at Red Sauce is thicker, cheese heavier, and the sauce more tomatoey. I think more people will end up preferring Pizza Jerk, partially for its bolder flavors and partially for its hipster flavors, but that Red Sauce will have an appeal to a lot of people who grew up with homestyle pizzas and West Coast pizzeria pizzas that are breadier and cheesier.	0.166667	0.166667	0.166667	0	0.166667	0
It doesn't appear you can edit on the new system, but I just wanted to add that both make good pizza.	0	0	0	0	0	0
I really don't even know why I bothered reading Krugman's column. He has no credibility as a political commentator as he is strictly a liberal shill. Total waste of time and screen pixels.	0.3	0	0	0	0.3	0.1
I do applaud the Register Guard for taking this step. Over the long haul it might lead to a more relaxed and fun forum for discussion. For a long time I called for the same policy online as in the paper itself, make people use their real names, as anonymity seemed to foster bullying. But I came to understand that wouldn't allow a city employee to call out dumb behavior by government, without their getting fired. I do have some questions going forward, regarding just what is civil and what is not. I recognize bullying when I see it, as it strives to humiliate a fellow human. But if I call someone a nincompoop for tricking my country into a war, is that civil? How do I criticize dangerous behavior without going too far? Maybe a little more guidance as to what is considered civil would help. While civility is essential, so is honesty and clear language. Sometimes civility is just impossible. Would Michael Moore's movie, "Where to Invade Next", be seen as civil? Hugh Massengill, Eugene	0.2	0	0	0	0.2	0
TimBerry: “the Nobel Prize awards the quality of the work, not the politics.” Wow, Rip Van Winkle has obviously been asleep a long time. 	0	0	0	0	0	0
Does this mean the RG will stop printing editorials by Paul Krugman?	0	0	0	0	0	0
This confirms my long held suspicion that my neighbor's “The Last Supper” is a fake.	0	0	0	0	0	0
I so want to agree, and mostly do so. However, there really is a class war going on, and has for years. When no one is listening, when one is barely surviving, expecting one to engage in a "fruitful engage of ideas" is unrealistic and a little "Ivory Tower". It must be nice to have the kind of faith that the author seems to have, that the sides actually will come to a place of respect. I wonder how many of the workers at the United Technologies plant who were just fired can engage with respect? Example: Henry Kissinger conspired with the South Vietnamese government to keep that war going on by defeating the peace process. Thousands of Americans and many more tens of thousands of Vietnamese died. Can I engage in a civil discourse with that war criminal without losing an essential part of my being? Evil exists and there are those with secret personal agendas that cannot be seen as anything but inhuman. Hugh Massengill, Eugene	0	0	0	0	0	0
While I disagree with what I think you are saying, I think your comment is a great example of the right to free speech that doesn't bully. You get to say you think we of the left are dumb, and that Paul Krugman is uncivil. Hooray first amendment. Hugh Massengill, Eugene	0.4	0	0	0	0.4	0
I comfort myself with the understanding that most empires grow and die the same way. This is just America's way... the elitism that passes for patriotism, the smaller and smaller possessors of wealth and power, the need for perpetual wars to keep the poor distracted and taxes flowing into the pockets of those who profit from the wars. The rich have all the rights and delights, the poor have all the responsibilities of dying in foreign lands and living in squalor. Then, the leaders babble a lot as the country divides and the barbarians flow in. Talented people cower and power is held by those who see the very rich as the very important. We now live in a new country, I call it the International Corporation of America. It has no constitution and no need to abide by democratic concepts. It moves jobs to Mexico and despair to the suburbs. Martin Luther King Jr, was right when he said the American Constitution was meaningless without a economic bill of rights. Hugh Massengill, Eugene	0	0	0	0	0	0
How would you go about punishing a robbery?	0	0	0	0	0	0
Well done! I really wish this kind of technology for a long time. Can't wait to test it!	0	0	0	0	0	0
I just wish these Bundy folks were treated similarly to the way Ferguson. New York, Baltimore protesters and Occupy crowd were.	0	0	0	0	0	0
What a clarion example of a sociopathic mastrigate. Toss this elderly forgery artist into a locked cage, like a rat. That will protect society. That will show the elderly not to defraud. No matter what the waste of taxpayer money, incarcarate the old man. Yes, vengeance, sweet vengeance! USA, where our cruelty reigns supreme!	0.4875	0.0375	0.05	0.0625	0.4375	0.125

Hi there, Xavier...it's always a pleasure to read your comments. Yes, sir, those "damn beggers" are really a traffic hazard.....give me a break.. "We" all do, indeed, know that his ban is not in the interest of traffic safety. It's thrown in because it is intended to give some "safety concern" legitimacy to a law which is intended to discourage panhandling by eliminating those persons in cars as potential donors. To pretend it's about "traffic safety" is an insult to everyone's intelligence. BTW: speaking of traffic safety; do you know of anyone who has received a ticket for talking on their cell phone or texting while driving? On any given day of driving in Eugene I will see literally dozens of folks doing so. I'm guessing you know talking or texting while driving is as dangerous or more dangerous than drunk driving. I'm not sure having drivers or passengers hand spare change or a buck or two to a panhandler ranks up there with those hazards.

0.4

0

0.5

0

0.3

0.1

0

If that information also included demographics, and the types of 'assaults' and 'property crimes' we are talking about, that would be helpful as well. 'Property Crimes' range from identify theft to felony criminal mischief to burglary, with lots of stuff in between. 'Assault' could also include armed and unarmed robbery and all the way down to fairly minor assaults. Who are these women and what specifically are they doing? And why? If we know that, solutions can then be examined. This editorial only says "We have a problem; let's throw money at it."

0

If you want more bike lanes, more transit projects, more rezoning, more congestion, etc. vote for Vinis, Lucy Vinis will bring more of what we had had the last 12 years. Mike Clark will bring more reason and common sense to the city.

0

Not exactly. Most industrial climate change emissions are the result of nonenzymatic oxidation. A key feature of this form of oxidation is the formation of toxic compounds, from carbon monoxide to dioxane. A reduction in climate change emissions will help reduce the poisons in our air locally. I'll take that as a by-product any day.

0

I am thankful not everyone in this country wears a Kim Jong Um hair cut or needs to meet the North Korean unification drab dress code to be politically correct or accepted.

0

Yeah, they'll have to go back to their video games.

0

You might want to do some fact-checking. That cesspool of poverty and unemployment you refer to has had the highest rate of job growth of any state in recent years. It's amazing what happens when the Republicans are removed from office. Also, if our legislature had passed a law that violates the second amendment, that will be corrected by the courts.

0

Another step on the road to 2021.

0

The part I find amusing is that everyone is an expert on what the homeless "are" and what they "need." No one wants to actually see the face of mental illness or desperation or addiction on their street corner. They'll blame the panhandler as well as those who feel compelled to give them aid. Are they the same people who object to using civic money or expanding intervention or training programs?

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

This was solved quite a while back and the first form of the solution is now in use. When the sun is shining (and the wind is blowing) such that power production exceeds demand, water is pumped uphill into reservoirs. When the sun goes down (or the wind stops blowing) and demand exceeds power supply, this water is allowed to flow down through turbines to provide power. There are other storage options coming on line, such as the growing electric car market (currently confined almost exclusively to California, the state with the lowest energy use per capita). These car batteries can be used to buffer demand bumps. There are also other large scale battery systems coming on line, but none of them are as efficient as pumped water storage.

0

You can be thankful for whatever you like... but it has never even crossed my mind to be thankful that not everyone in the country wears a Kim Jong Un haircut! Maybe the secret to happiness is pick something with extremely low odds and then let yourself be thankful about it. Let's see, I'm thankful that we are all not forced to crochet little booties for squirrels as a hobby. Ahh... I feel better already!

0

Oregon having double the tax rate on Marijuana sales may greatly restrict the growth in sales, too.

0

Being "super-progressive" and "pro-union" should not go hand in hand.

0

Exactly. And already the republicans are 'digging in' and threatening Obama.

0.2

0

0.2

0

What decade is this? Oregon had its own major recession in the 1980's. I doubt that Oregon can compare to the Sunshine State. Yes, California has unemployment and crime. Oregon has its own share of both. California has Silicon Valley, the Golden Gate, Hollywood and an endless summer. And Yosemite. And Malibu. Oregon has Florence, Bend, Portland's Steel Bridge and meth. I doubt the Oregon will morph into California any time soon.

0

Let's get another thing clear. As an (I presume) American, you are welcome to believe whatever you prefer regarding homosexuality, environmental protection, the number of children you wish to have, and hunting, and are free to express those views. But when you presume to judge anyone else and call them selfish, irresponsible, and a terrible person because they disagree with your personal preferences, and most particularly when they are a recently deceased and highly esteemed Supreme Court Justice for three decades, then you have revealed yourself to be against the ideals of our Constitution and civil society, and have lost all credibility with me and probably others who believe in American ideals. A retraction and apology to Judge Scalia's family and the readers of this comment section are in order.

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

Joshua, $15.00 wouldn't be enough to for a family of 4 to live on. It would however, be the make or break line for many small business. A friend told me today that the Chinese food restaurant she works at will close the dine-in business and lay off the waitresses if the minimum wage goes up. They will scale back to take-out only with the owners running the entire business.

0

Incoming freshmen are an interesting group to study. Nationally, only 43% of white and 21% of black freshmen will graduate from college. I wonder who in the administration is sharing that message with the incoming class? Know before you borrow.

0

Slumlords holding out for the pot of (taxpayer) gold?

0

It would've been nice to include a picture of the chopped-off front part of the building.

0

OK HHM, let's try to get to the truth of the matter. By history there have always been folk in need who had no sustainable income for various reasons - roaming "hobo's" , addiction, mental illness, etc. So here's the point, in the early days most of these same individuals would seek out odd " jobs" for pay. The "hobo" community had a network of private homes and businesses who hired by the job, day or project. An exchange of work for pay; honor, integrity and a general respect and appreciation for all involved. Fast forward to today. No longer seeking to trade work for cash...we now have panhandling - simply make a sign, stand on a corner and EXPECT people to give you money. It's really not about the unhoused or the addict needing treatment, those needs are already being worked on in almost every community, give money to those causes if inclined. Panhandling is asking/demanding/requesting your money -- without any exchange of effort or work, integrity no longer required.

0.3

0

0.2

0.1

0

If my understanding is correct, the president may not make a recess appointment for the SCOTUS, only for lower judicial positions.

0

If you love waste in government, you'll love this. Republicans wasting taxpayer dollars as our legislators sit and wait to vote.

0

When the Federal government treats an old rancher like he was a Mexican drug cartel kingpin by denying him bail, something has gone wrong with our system. He has never indicated any tendency to flee, nor has the government proved that he directed anyone to point any weapon at federal officials. This looks more like a government that is afraid of its own people and the power they wield when they come together to oppose coercive government behavior. Bundy has most likely broken Federal law, but he should be treated similarly to others according to the laws he has broken, not acccording to the wild accusations the prosecutors are making. This is just the government's way of sending a message to the people: don't cross us or you are going to jail for a long time, even before a trial. Welcome to the new USSR.

0

the little badge is given with each mug shot taken and identifies Mr. Bundy as having been arrested and lodged in Multnomah County. If he's a good boy while in custody, I think he will get a copy of that mug shot (little badge and all) to take home (or possibly to prison) with him.

0.2

0

0.2

0

Outsider, I'm amazed at how effectively the authors of our constitution understood, so long ago, that it would take division of powers and three branches to make a government effective. The court was not put into the constitution do deal with "factual constitutional content." That's easy. No, the court was brilliantly conceived to interpret the text to keep up with changes. And we could never have lasted more than 200 years without a court to interpret. Think about it. When it started, the constitution allowed slavery and only male property holders could vote. The changes – liberal, conservative, those you or I like and those we don't – are a vital part of a brilliant constitution. You can complain about them – we all have that right, and I hate some of the recent ones too – but let's not forget that our system needs courts, and interpretation, to survive. Hate specific decisions, yes. So do I (Citizens United, for example). But respect the constitution.

0

Okay. In our community brilliance, a $915 robbery was punished with $100,000 worth of police and court related costs followed by 5 years at about $100,000/year for a total cost to punish the dude of $600,000. Does anybody ever really think about how crazy that is and why we do it????

0

Here is what the Texan Motel looked like in the 50's: http://www.amazon.com/Eugene-Oregon-Original-Vintage-Postcard/dp/B00P6RZNTU

0

They are all equally odious , not for the views they hold which many oppose on simple ethical grounds but because of the general stupidity of human talking monkeys. Holding desperately to dated societal structures and inequalities is the formula for a ruling class to ultimately fail. History is rife with examples. Of course the funniest is that inequality and racism are moronic from an evolutionary and biological standpoint purely.

0.75

0.016667

0.133333

0

0.716667

0.116667

0

Street Repair Proposals Ready For Public Polling Which of the following most closely resembles your views on how to resolve Portland’s street repair deficit problem? A. Prioritize Street Repair In General Fund Budget. B. A New Portland Gasoline Tax Of Ten Cents Per Gallon. Details, Explanations, Arguments Answer A. For more than thirty years the Portland city council has redirected and misappropriated budgeted funds for street repair to their pet projects. There is every reason to believe this practice will continue. ANY size Portland gas tax is a vote in favor of allowing political skulduggery without consequence. ANY size Portland gas tax is a vote against an essential value of a democracy which it to hold publicly elected officials accountable for their actions in office. 1 of 5

0.2

0

0.1

0

PBOT was shamed into revealing that Portland’s current FY 15/16 street repair budget of $11,400,000 is about 80% below what is necessary to maintain our Portland streets at the current 12% deficit, i.e. $55,000,000. That’s right, 80% below the status quo. Remarkable. It is a tribute to our “You don’t mess with my bureaus I won’t mess with yours” commission form of city government. The current FY 15/16 road repair budget is $11,400,000. That is 20%, that’s right, a pitiful 20% of what is required to simply maintain Portland’s current 12% street repair deficit. That’s astonishing. That means that over the last 30 years the Portland city council has siphoned off 80% of the available and necessary street maintenance budget for their own self-indulgent, politically self-promoting pet projects. What's remarkable is that they got away with it for so long. Unbelievable. Well done city auditors, Press, City Club of Portland and other civic “watchdogs." 2 of 5

0

To Maintain The Status Quo Of A 12% Road Repair Deficit Over The Next Five Years FY 16/17 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 17/18 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 18/19 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 19/20 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 FY 20/21 = $11,400,000 + $43,600,000 = $55,00,000 Total over 5 years = $275,000,000 1. The Portland city council shall adopt a five year road repair budget agreement that uses funds already available in the general fund to maintain a 12% road repair deficit. 2. No new taxes or fees shall be imposed upon the citizens or businesses of Portland to pay for the increase in the five year road repair budget. 3 of 5

0

3. Any additional funds made available by the state or the federal government during this time period may be added to but may not be substituted for the agreed upon status quo 12% budget allocation. Regardless of how much money may be available from the state or the federal government the five year budget allocations from general fund revenues will remain in place. 4. After five years the council shall reevaluate the road repair status and proceed as it sees fit. Budget planning, even only five years out, is a very dubious enterprise. Nevertheless, it is a time frame the public and the press can easily monitor with the help of an annual city auditor’s report. If extra funds from Salem or Washington D.C. come our way so much the better. 4 of 5

0

Answer B. The new Portland gasoline tax proposal of ten cents per gallon raises only 14.5 million dollars per year. A new Portland gas tax of 30 cents per gallon would be required to match the amount needed just to maintain the status quo of a 12% road repair deficit. This proposal exacerbates the current 12% road repair deficit and places Portland businesses that sell gasoline at a distinct disadvantage. After many months of research these two competing ideas are the only two serious proposals on the public table. I encourage Media companies, groups and individuals to use this material as presented above. Attribution would be appropriate. Richard Ellmyer North Portland 5 of 5

0

I love pictures when I was young. But time catches up with us.

0

There are many reasons that I will not list here, I'm voting for Clark. The biggest reason is I believe he's not a left ring radical.

0

I'm tempted to agree JR, but wouldn't that make the appointment more political and not less? Why should the supreme courts justices to be subjected to campaigning for their jobs base on the next scheduled election? I'm not sure it should be an excutive branch pick. Why can't we have nomination by panel or committee? Constitutionally, it probably made sense (who's going to challenge the intgrity of Pres. Washington) - before the entire political realm was split between two political parties. We need to find ways to build more nuetrality into administrative positions that don't have specific partisan purposes.

0

Janice Stewart, hm. Just because someone owns a licensed gun does make him or her a threat to society. This federal judge is looking for a promotion and makeing an example out of a middle-aged white guy. Can I say this, I'll find out

0

Right on! And history shows supreme court justices have been nominated and confirmed during the last year or a presidential term six times since 1900.

0

Do you consider yourself populist Out? I've admired you unique and interesting perspective.

0

Civil comments isn't about judging the content of comments; civil doesn't mean right or wrong, true or false, or nice or mean. If you watch, you'll see some amazingly wrong, false, and mean comments still get through. The goal isn't content, or meaning. Just phrasing, and, particularly, weeding out the useless insults and name calling.

0

Carbon dioxide is a non-toxic material? That's an odd assertion given that it is toxic. OSHA sets the permissible exposure limit at 5,000 ppm and the CDC describes it as a potent respiratory stimulant and stimulant and depressant of the central nervous system in addition to being a simple asphyxiant. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/81-123/pdfs/0103.pdf

0

I totally agree. We'd all be better off. Somewhere along the way, sometime within the last 10 or 20 years, it became okay to confuse repetition with truth and hate speech with discussion. Everybody loses.

0

Those brilliant framers of the constitution did think to provide provision for the document to evolve. It was called the amendment process and was made available in multiple pathways. In earlier days, the people and the elected officials stood by the constitution and created amendments to allow the constitution to accept redefinition in certain areas. Several amendments fixed the slavery problem. Another amendment fixed the women's right to vote problem, and so on and so on. It was not the courts that allowed the nation to evolve, it was the amendment process and political respect for it. Amendments are only made by elected officials. It is only in recent decades that the courts have turned to legislation. I object not to specific decisions but the entire process of judicial legislation.

0

So, when he did that, was he right to do it? Did you approve? And, by the way, did the Democrats close ranks around that idea or circle their wagons? God help us all if past mistakes justify present ones. Think of the logic of that – thinking like that would send us into a steady descent in the level of what is publicly acceptable would go steadily down, relentlessly.

0

So you think the government's message is, "don't cross us" when they enforce the law? You may be right if the 'us' you're referencing is we the people given that the law enforcement officers are enforcing our laws that were passed by our elected officials. And no one would ever bet a dime on Bundy voluntarily showing up for a court date.

0

Thanks for clarifying that. By the way, what is a platform of wanting more "etc." Don't we have enough "etc." or do we need more? The other day I was enjoying my bike ride and saw other people riding the bus, but when I saw some "etc.", I wondered: Has this country become carried away with "etc."

0

Some of my friends are for sunny skies and some of my friends are against sunny skies. And I am for my friends.

0

Actually the new system isn't supposed to end arrogance; just uncivil arrogance. Uncivil isn't the ideas, free expression, disagreement, misunderstanding, lies, or meanness. It's useless toxic verbal sludge. The comment you object to may well have been arrogant, but it wasn't uncivil. And neither was yours. I'm just sayin'.

0.2

0

0.2

0

He brought his own badge. It was a prize found in a box of Count Chocula.

0

Regardless of the legitimacy, the preferred alternative to a ticket in all three cases -- be it for enabling panhandlers, talking on the phone or texting -- is the same: pull off to a safe place out of the flow of traffic to finish the task before proceeding. Consider the benefits of such a practice for the potential donor. He or she stops the vehicle and turns off the engine, so as not to contribute to climate change. He or she walks up to the potential panhandler, getting some valuable exercise. He or she makes eye contact and engages the potential panhandler in conversation, reaffirming both individuals' humanness. He or she is clearly observed by other motorists and pedestrians, and the perception of public acknowledgement/admiration so many crave washes over him or her. Instead of risking a $50 fine, he or she can put that money to good use a buck or two at a time. This is a good idea for everyone. I'm surprised Eugene's city council didn't think of it first.

0

So true. If the Mayor and majority of the County Board of Commissioners acted like any reasonable citizen, either homeowner or business owner, they would have planned an "annex" to the county building to provide _shared_ space for the two local governments. But, no -- each must have their "shrine' to their self-importance. In reality, their petty presences will be lost to history, while our children bear the burden of their self-aggrandizement. -- Paul

0

Barnhart has to submit his wishes as a bill, subject it to the will of the legislators and wait to see if it passes. It is called "majority rule". Same thing in the U.S. congress. Do you have a better system for Salem or Washington?

0

Voted in to office through a democratic election. Do you have a better system?

0

Nice observations! Scalia neither respected the Constitution nor precedence. He was a self-absorbed "poser" who should have been "shamed" out of the Supreme Court. Good bye, good riddance and may you roast in the fires of ... -- Paul

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

I object to any of the thinking that treats "homeless" as one homogenous group. That's attractive for people who want to argue, but it's useless in actually dealing with real people. We need to divide these people into at least three groups: 1. Unable to take care of themselves because of things beyond their control, like mental illness, sickness, old age. That's a damn shame. We're the wealthiest society in the world. We used to take care of these people. That changed in the 1980s. 2. People unable to take care of themselves because of substance abuse. Other countries do way better than we do. Give them treatment. Demand that they get it. Treatment, work, or community service. 3. People who choose homeless as a lifestyle, a choice they make. Put them to work. Community service. Pay them fairly. Fund it by decriminalizing substance abuse, saving money on jails. And begging? Outlaw the behavior, not the people. Figure out which individual belongs to which group. Deal accordingly.

0.3

0

0.3

0

0.3

0

Ouch! When I had just taken up crocheting little booties for squirrels! Seriously, "Who let the dogs" out need to ask: "Who let his rational thinking take a smoke break?" -- Paul

0

The USA is a Republic, we vote. Armed militias do not rule the land. Yes, if anyone acts as Cliven did, they should go to jail for a long time. I see the case against Cliven to be just. No "wild accusations". Why would anyone defend the documented criminal actions this man, his sons and armed followers have committed. Draping themselves in the flag while they stab America in the back.

0.111111

0

0.111111

0

0.111111

0

garycrum is a regular in this forum, spewing his typical lies, arrogance, and hypocrisy, all of which is uncivil and not conducive to an adult conversation ... you call it toxic verbal sludge, and that's good, although I've always called it transcribed flatulence.

0.578125

0.03125

0

0.546875

0

The system is fine the way it is, and according to the rules, this is a perfectly legitimate bit of political gamesmanship of the kind that's been practiced for centuries. After all, standing in the way of a perceived irresistible force isn't just for Tiananmen Square anymore. Mr. Barnhart will just have to make later dinner reservations. He won't go hungry for having to work past 5 p.m.

0

Oh, yeah. The War Hillary voted for because Bill Clinton's cruise missile attack in 1993 to destroy Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. https://youtu.be/6mpWa7wNr5M

0

Go Tim! I applaud your analysis 100% -- Paul

0

Not at all. I'm just reminding all of those who can do anything they want because they are currently the majority that they, too, may one day need the votes of some of the minority. Pelosi and Reid burnt all the bridges they possibly could and the Democrats in Congress are now reaping what they sowed on their behalf.

0

Only topped if the general election was Robot Bernie vs. Robot Hillary! Sigh, we all have dreams...

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

This column should be required reading, in my opinion. I think the author highlights a real problem that seriously impedes government and threatens peace and stability in this country. I know he's identified with a point of view, which is a shame, because some people will dismiss his concern as more of the same bi-partisan divisiveness that he calls out. However, he is also the winner of a Nobel Prize for Economics (2008) and the Nobel Prize awards the quality of the work, not the politics.

0

Good point Outsider, and fairly made. But the practical reality is that words and phrases need interpretation, particularly as time passes. For example, “Full Faith and Credit,” “due process of law,” “cruel and unusual punishment,” and I could go on and on. Public humiliation in the stocks on the town square wasn’t considered cruel or unusual punishment when the constitution was written. And let’s not forget the disastrous conclusion of the 2000 election, in which one candidate won the popular vote while a different candidate won the electoral vote, and where we would have been if it weren’t for a supreme court decision. As long as we’re human, and we use words, people will disagree on what those words mean. Thank the authors of the constitution that we have a way – beyond force – to deal with interpretation.

0

While I recognize that an R-G editorial doesn't have enough space to present a complete, factual analysis, it does merit more than the pathetic, formulaic reactions of the Luddites below. As someone who pays a substantial tax, I support efforts to help young women find the true nature of womanhood, which I find so beautiful and inspiring. You old farts need to go back to your Pinochle and let the reasonable and compassionate world move on. -- Paul

0.6

0

0.6

0.1

0

I've posted more detailed comments under other op-ed pieces, but the summary is that Scalia was a "poser" -- toxic and unqualified. -- Paul

0

TimBerry, I think you've got a couple things wrong. "...the court was brilliantly conceived to interpret the text to keep up with changes," and "the constitution allowed slavery and only male property holders could vote." In both examples, the changes were effected via amendments; the 13th prohibited slavery and the 19th provided universal suffrage. No "interpretation" on the part of any court was needed. In my opinion, constitutional interpretation is a slippery slope. After all, anyone, including a judge, can interpret any constitutional clause any way he or she wants even if totally detached from logic and reality. (Perhaps we've seen this?) Rather, Judge Scalia's tenets of texturalism and originalism are what's needed; close adherence to the original meaning and intent of the Constitution. If it's clauses are no longer relevant and do not serve our nation, the proper and more difficult course is to amend the Constitution rather than take the less difficult path of interpretation.

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

A straight forward reading of the formation of this nation leads me to believe that the founders intended the Supreme Court to be an apolitical group that would be called on in rare occasion to decide whether of not legislation passed by the political branches of the government was consistent with the Constitution. Perhaps since Judges were not elected by popular vote, the assumption was that it would not become a political body. Obviously, not the case since the Court is seen by both major parties as a means to extend the political influence/philosophy of the party in control of the Administrative Branch, the President at the time of vacancies. Regardless of which political spectrum you align with, it should be cause for pause that 9 individuals, selected, not elected, and appointed for life wield so much power over course of the nation.

0

I'm not quite sure TimBerry was calling my comment "toxic verbal sludge." I believe his reference was to incivility. Perhaps you should re-read his post and then apologize to both him and me. You are certainly welcome to hold my comments in disdain, that's your right. You're certainly welcome to personally attack me if that, in your opinion, furthers "adult conversation." You're certainly welcome to use crass references such as "tanscribed flatulence", if that's your idea of civil discourse. However, in my opinion, crassness and ad hominem attacks are deterrents to constructive discourse. BTW: I've flagged your comment. In my opinion, it's the very thing I'd hope the new Civil Conversation format would avoid.

0

Actually, each and every one of Oregon's 10 full-time football coaches knows about those same risks from personal experience. Each one played high school and college football, and probably youth football, too; each was subjected to practices and standards that would be considered much more barbaric and dangerous from his playing days when compared to what occurs now. Each is a testament to the obvious, that not everyone who plays the game ends up damaged for life. In fact, rare is the football coach who did not play the game himself. In Oregon's case, each of these 10 individuals now earns, when incentives are factored in, more than the president of the United States. You can argue about misplaced priorities, but from a practical standpoint the average Oregon football player could do a lot worse during his post-playing career than to follow in the footsteps of his college coaches. Females suffer brain injuries playing sports, too. Have you noticed? Do you care?

0

Tim: I agree with the points you've made here. There are many different causes of homelessness and poverty, and we, as a society, are not doing very well addressing any of them. Indeed, during the Reagan administration funding for mental illness treatment facilities and programs was drastically reduced and tens of thousands of mentally ill individuals were, quite literally, kicked out of treatment facilities. The VA is a nightmare, with tens of thousands of Vets on the streets waiting for care. Simply banning panhandling will do nothing to address the many issues the homeless and impoverished face. As you suggest.......we are the wealthiest nation in the world...can't we do just a little better... regards, Gary

0

BTW: several years ago an Op Ed piece of my was published in the RG addressing this very issue. If you might wish to read it, give me a call and I'll email it to you. I'd also enjoy visiting with you sometime and discussing this issue. thanks, Gary

0

"Every worker deserves a living wage". Not every worker is supporting a family - some not even themselves. Entry level jobs - the gas station, car wash, rolling burritos, are not intended to be careers. Those are the jobs that people take to get work experience. A starting point. A glowing recommendation as they move up the earning ladder. Someone without a decent work ethic is not entitled to, does not deserve $15 an hour. It has to be earned.

0

Are you going to apologize for lying? Among other things, I didn't use the "crass reference" you describe.

0

Actually, a recess appointment is legal. They were done by George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower who did three to the Court. hey are easily prevented by the Senate as was most recently done by Senator Reid when he was leader of the Senate. The Senate just doesn't adjourn for more than three (3) days. June 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court validated this practice in a 9–0 ruling of using pro forma sessions to block the president from using the recess appointment authority.

0

that's first cavalry division (AIRMOBILE)

0

I agree with the folks mentioned but still find them all pretty insufferable. At least Dawkins has a degree in something and he got a fair treatment by the South Park guys, but this has nothing to do with what folks believe, I'd just rather hear them do comedy. I don't look to entertainers for philosophy or metaphysics. Its no surprise that folks here wanted to make it about atheism but nowhere does the author say that they're wrong, just that they're a**holes (to paraphrase The Dude)

0.4

0.1

0.3

0

0.2

0

My response to the same point made by Outsider was "good point, and fairly made." I went on to add that interpretation is still needed, as in clauses like "due process of law," "cruel and unusual punishment," and "full faith and credit." Just to name three examples. Do you disagree with their interpretation? Me too, with some of them at least (Citizens United) ... but I understand that interpretation is necessary, and is one of the core concepts of the constitution.

0

Guess it's true only trash mocks someone when they’re laying in state or fresh in the grave.

0.6

0.2

0

0.7

0

Like your post, your legal analysis is incomplete. If you think Cliven is being held because he owns a gun and that is the extent of the reasons to hold him, then you are mistaken.

0.166667

0

I stand corrected. Thank you.

0

There have been interpretations with which I agreed and disagreed. However, I'm not a constitutional scholar; not even trained in the law so my opinions are pretty much just that: My opinions. In my opinion, interpretation is permissible only when the original intent of the clause is not discernable. Otherwise adherence to the original intent is required.

0

You posted this in another thread--"What can one say still feel like your left hanging? Change your name to chad and move to Florida, those people don’t know what they were talking either just look at the way they vote." Since you are claiming a strong grip on reality compared to the left, could you explain this comment in relation to the letter it is in response to?

0

0.166667

0

Love the AD allusion (allusions, MICHAEL...)!

0

It's also worth noting that the styles of pizzas are rather different. The crust at Pizza Jerk is thinner, the toppings lighter, the sauce zestier. The crust at Red Sauce is thicker, cheese heavier, and the sauce more tomatoey. I think more people will end up preferring Pizza Jerk, partially for its bolder flavors and partially for its hipster flavors, but that Red Sauce will have an appeal to a lot of people who grew up with homestyle pizzas and West Coast pizzeria pizzas that are breadier and cheesier.

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

It doesn't appear you can edit on the new system, but I just wanted to add that both make good pizza.

0

I really don't even know why I bothered reading Krugman's column. He has no credibility as a political commentator as he is strictly a liberal shill. Total waste of time and screen pixels.

0.3

0

0.3

0.1

0

I do applaud the Register Guard for taking this step. Over the long haul it might lead to a more relaxed and fun forum for discussion. For a long time I called for the same policy online as in the paper itself, make people use their real names, as anonymity seemed to foster bullying. But I came to understand that wouldn't allow a city employee to call out dumb behavior by government, without their getting fired. I do have some questions going forward, regarding just what is civil and what is not. I recognize bullying when I see it, as it strives to humiliate a fellow human. But if I call someone a nincompoop for tricking my country into a war, is that civil? How do I criticize dangerous behavior without going too far? Maybe a little more guidance as to what is considered civil would help. While civility is essential, so is honesty and clear language. Sometimes civility is just impossible. Would Michael Moore's movie, "Where to Invade Next", be seen as civil? Hugh Massengill, Eugene

0.2

0

0.2

0

TimBerry: “the Nobel Prize awards the quality of the work, not the politics.” Wow, Rip Van Winkle has obviously been asleep a long time. 

0

Does this mean the RG will stop printing editorials by Paul Krugman?

0

This confirms my long held suspicion that my neighbor's “The Last Supper” is a fake.

0

I so want to agree, and mostly do so. However, there really is a class war going on, and has for years. When no one is listening, when one is barely surviving, expecting one to engage in a "fruitful engage of ideas" is unrealistic and a little "Ivory Tower". It must be nice to have the kind of faith that the author seems to have, that the sides actually will come to a place of respect. I wonder how many of the workers at the United Technologies plant who were just fired can engage with respect? Example: Henry Kissinger conspired with the South Vietnamese government to keep that war going on by defeating the peace process. Thousands of Americans and many more tens of thousands of Vietnamese died. Can I engage in a civil discourse with that war criminal without losing an essential part of my being? Evil exists and there are those with secret personal agendas that cannot be seen as anything but inhuman. Hugh Massengill, Eugene

0

While I disagree with what I think you are saying, I think your comment is a great example of the right to free speech that doesn't bully. You get to say you think we of the left are dumb, and that Paul Krugman is uncivil. Hooray first amendment. Hugh Massengill, Eugene

0.4

0

0.4

0

I comfort myself with the understanding that most empires grow and die the same way. This is just America's way... the elitism that passes for patriotism, the smaller and smaller possessors of wealth and power, the need for perpetual wars to keep the poor distracted and taxes flowing into the pockets of those who profit from the wars. The rich have all the rights and delights, the poor have all the responsibilities of dying in foreign lands and living in squalor. Then, the leaders babble a lot as the country divides and the barbarians flow in. Talented people cower and power is held by those who see the very rich as the very important. We now live in a new country, I call it the International Corporation of America. It has no constitution and no need to abide by democratic concepts. It moves jobs to Mexico and despair to the suburbs. Martin Luther King Jr, was right when he said the American Constitution was meaningless without a economic bill of rights. Hugh Massengill, Eugene

0

How would you go about punishing a robbery?

0

Well done! I really wish this kind of technology for a long time. Can't wait to test it!

0

I just wish these Bundy folks were treated similarly to the way Ferguson. New York, Baltimore protesters and Occupy crowd were.

0

What a clarion example of a sociopathic mastrigate. Toss this elderly forgery artist into a locked cage, like a rat. That will protect society. That will show the elderly not to defraud. No matter what the waste of taxpayer money, incarcarate the old man. Yes, vengeance, sweet vengeance! USA, where our cruelty reigns supreme!

0.4875

0.0375

0.05

0.0625

0.4375

0.125

0