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

It is interesting that there are those who claim to be environmentally sensitive are choosing to not have children but are choosing to have pet dogs.  How can one justify the tradeoff?  Dogs may have less environmental imact than a kid but there is still a significant impact.  It just seems like a contradiction to me.

posted 3 years, 7 months ago
view in context

Oregonians are deparate for work.  We have a water resource that we can use to sustain employment for people in our community.  There are some of those who are opposed who have a self-righteous and elitist attitude to those in our community who are without employment.  We have over 12% unemployment in this state?  What is the impact of poverty in this state on the environment and on people's lives?  Does keeping people in poverty promote a sustainability?   

posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context

Incredibly crass and tasteless comment by the host.  She should lay off her attempts at humor and focus more on a professional production.

posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context

What has been left out of the debate is the democratic form of the print version of the news.  It is very cheap and easily accessed by those people who can't afford internet access.  Also our older generations aren't comfortable with reading on-line.  It is sad that there are those who would so cavalierly do away with this form.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

Do newspapers need to change their business model?  Do they need to be beholden to Wall Street?  Why not go to a privately, employee owned model so they don't have to make the profit margins dictated by share holders?

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context