PAGE A4, KEIZERTIMES, JANUARY 8, 2016
KeizerOpinion
KEIZERTIMES.COM
Oregon in the national news
Three months after the
nation’s media fl ooded
Roseburg after the Umpqa
Community
College
shooting, they are back for
another story that is getting
national attention: occupa-
tion of the Malheur Na-
tional Wildlife Refuge by
members of a self-proclaimed citizen
militia.
Bad news always leads the news,
that’s a given. For a state the size of
Oregon to have two major news sto-
ries within 100 days of each other is
rare.
We expect cool heads to prevail in
Malheur County and the occupation
to end without violence or destruc-
tion. It is unlikely that there will be
a Waco-like invasion by law enforce-
ment; the most probable outcome is
the militia members will slowly start
to return home, regardless of their
protestions that they’ll stay for months
or years.
Ammon Bundy (of the Ne-
vada Bundy family that perpetrated
a stand-off at their ranch in 2014)
came to Malheur County to support
Dwight Hammond and his son Steve
who were ordered back to
prison to serve a longer
term for a crime of which
they were convicted.
Bundy was followed
by others who came from
around the country (pri-
marily the west) citing
Constitutional issues and
federal government overreach in the
rangelands of eastern Oregon.
Americans would be forgiven if, af-
ter the past three months, they have a
jaundiced view of our state. Madmen
shooting up a classroom, an armed
group taking over a lonely outpost,
what is going on over there in Or-
egon?
Every protest has its valid points.
The militia in Harney County have
good points about public lands man-
aged by federal agenies and how they
develop plans that impede the public’s
use of those lands for their livelihoods.
Once a solution is fostered and this
is behind us, all of us should concen-
trate on the things that would result in
good news in the national media.
—LAZ
editorial
Optimistic for 2016
I hope this ar-
ticle fi nds you and
your loved ones
having had a won- from the
derful Christmas
capitol
and a Happy New
Year. In our house By BILL POST
we enjoyed the fact
that our son moved
home from Mis-
souri and we were thrilled to see him,
making Christmas very special this
year.
I look ahead to 2016 with a mix
of apprehension and hope. I am ap-
prehensive because Jan. 1 ushered in
many of the laws that my colleagues
passed during the session in 2015.
Many were passed with the best of
intentions, but I worry that the effect
will not be what the proponents had
hoped. Mandatory sick leave, forced
retirement accounts, and near dictato-
rial powers for the Bureau of Labor
and Industries will all, I fear, reduce
our ability to create the jobs that will
move our entire state forward. “Mo-
tor Voter” also concerns me with its
apparent lack of oversight on “non-
citizens” being able to automatically
register to vote when approved for an
ID card.
With this backdrop, however, I also
fi nd myself feeling hopeful as 2016
comes around. This will be a pivotal
year in Oregon and our nation. We
have the opportunity to impact not
only our lives, but the lives of our kids
and grandkids for years to come. We
have the power and ability to cast our
vote.
Some may feel like their vote
doesn’t matter. Having spent my fi rst
full year as an elected offi cial, I am
here to tell you
that your vote
does matter. And
not only your
vote, but your
participation in
the
discussions
that happen, not
only at the local
level, but all the
way up the chain. If I could ask for
one thing, it would be that as many
of you as possible register to vote and
also remind a friend or two—and then
make sure you and they fi ll out those
ballots. This is the only way we will
see positive change in our state and
nation.
I am also fi lled with anticipation
because of the quality of the Orego-
nians I have had the privilege of meet-
ing this past year. Last month I par-
ticipated in a hearing on how we can
prevent more tragic events like what
happened at Umpqua Community
College, and also how we can better
respond to the events that do occur.
All of the people who testifi ed be-
fore our committee expressed amaze-
ment at how strong of a response Or-
egonians gave to UCC, in fl ocking to
Roseburg, fundraising for victims and
sharing the support of their prayers. It
is this spirit that fi lls me with hope for
2016. We Keizerites are truly blessed
as well.
As always, I am here to serve you.
Please do not hesitate to contact my
offi ce at any time.
From my family to your family I
wish you a Happy New Year.
Politicizing
guns
have the right to own
guns.
Many do not belong to
the NRA for various rea-
sons. Some, because they
don’t want to be con-
stantly ridiculed by the
“politically correct” folks that choose
to paint the NRA as an evil force,
responsible for acts of criminals.
McIntyre also says the NRA wants
everyone armed. Truth is, the NRA
wants everyone to have the right to
be armed, if they so wish. There is a
big, big difference.
McIntyre fi nishes up with “The
NRA apparently wants everyone
armed. Under that scenario the
country moves ever closer to a na-
tion-wide shooting at the OK Corral
where everyone owns a gun and will
use it whenever it’s judged necessary.”
Guess that’s meant to be some sort of
dark humor?
Before the hate mail begins, in no
way do I pretend to be a spokesper-
son for the NRA, or the Republican
Party. I’m a gun owner who is deeply
troubled by people who have access
to media, and choose to use horrifi c
tragedies to advance their political
agendas.
G.I. Wilson
Keizer
(Bill Post represents House District
25. He can be reached at 503-986-
1425 or via email at rep.billpost@
state.or.us.)
letters
To the Editor:
In a recent column (Keiz-
ertimes, Dec. 18), Gene Mc-
Intyre joined in lockstep with
the Obamas, Clintons and Schum-
ers in blaming the Republicans and
NRA for the lack of gun control.
Of course, this always follows re-
minders of all the horrifi c acts re-
cently committed by madmen.
One would have to be more than
a little naïve to not see who is the
intended target. McIntyre writes,
“Meanwhile, the National Rifl e As-
sociation, and those Republicans
who pledge their allegiance to the
NRA, has brought about no halt to
these folks getting guns.”
No one bothers asking, if it is
only the Republicans preventing
gun control from happening? Why
did it not happen during all those
years Democrats were in control of
both houses of Congress and the
presidency? They pushed through
all the other legislation they wanted,
including some that continues to be
hotly debated.
One answer is that millions of
law-abiding gun owners-—Repub-
licans and Democrats—believe they
Keizertimes
Wheatland Publishing Corp. • 142 Chemawa Road N. • Keizer, Oregon 97303
phone: 503.390.1051 • web: www.keizertimes.com • email: kt@keizertimes.com
Lyndon A. Zaitz, Editor & Publisher
SUBSCRIPTIONS
One year: $25 in Marion
County, $33 outside Marion
County, $45 outside Oregon
PUBLISHED EVERY FRIDAY
Publication No: USPS 679-430
POSTMASTER
Send address changes to:
Keizertimes Circulation
142 Chemawa Road N.
Keizer, OR 97303
Periodical postage paid at
Salem, Oregon
What if the worst happens?
By MICHAEL GERSON
What if the worst happens?
The worst does not mean the nom-
ination of Ted Cruz, in spite of justi-
fi ed fears of political disaster. Cruz is
an ideologue with a message perfectly
tuned for a relatively small minority of
the electorate. Uniquely in American
politics, he has made his reputation
by being roundly hated by his col-
leagues —apparently a prerequisite for
a certain kind of anti-establishment
conservative, but unpromising for an
image makeover at his convention.
Cruz’s nomination would represent
the victory of the hard right—reli-
gious right and tea party factions—
within the Republican coalition. Af-
ter he loses, the ideological struggles
within the GOP would go on.
No, the worst outcome for the par-
ty would be the nomination of Don-
ald Trump. It is impossible to predict
where the political contest between
Trump and Hillary Clinton would end
up. Clinton has manifestly poor politi-
cal skills and Trump possesses a serious
talent for the low blow. But Trump’s
nomination would not be the tem-
porary victory of one of the GOP’s
ideological factions. It would involve
the replacement of the humane ideal
at the center of the party and its his-
tory. If Trump were the nominee, the
GOP would cease to be.
Whatever your view of Republican
politicians, the aspiration, the self-con-
ception, of the party was set by Abra-
ham Lincoln: human dignity, honored
by human freedom and undergirded
by certain moral commitments, in-
cluding compassion and tolerance.
Lincoln described the “promise that
in due time the weights should be
lifted from the
shoulders of
all men, and
that all should
have an equal
chance.”
It is this
u n i ve r s a l i t y
that Trump at-
tacks. All of his angry resentment
against invading Hispanics and Mus-
lims adds up to a kind of ethno-na-
tionalism—an assertion that America
is being weakened and adulterated by
the other. This is consistent with Eu-
ropean, right-wing, anti-immigrant
populism. It is not consistent with
conservatism, which, at the very least,
involves respect for institutions and a
commitment to reasoned, incremental
change. And Trumpism is certainly not
consistent with the Republicanism of
Lincoln, who admitted no exceptions
to the promises of the Declaration of
Independence and was nominated, in
part, because he could appeal to anti-
slavery German immigrants.
Liberals who claim that Trumpism
is the natural outgrowth, or logical
conclusion, of conservatism or Re-
publicanism are simply wrong. Ed-
mund Burke is not the grandfather of
Nigel Farage. Lincoln is not even the
distant relative of Trump.
Trump, in some ways, is an odd
carrier of ethno-nationalist beliefs. He
held few of them, as far as I can tell, just
four years ago. But as a demagogue, he
has followed some of America’s worst
instincts wherever they have led, and
fed ethnic and religious prejudice in
the process. All presidential nominees,
to some extent, shape their parties
into their own image. Trump would
other
views
deface the GOP beyond recognition.
Trump is disqualifi ed for the presi-
dency by his erratic temperament, his
ignorance about public affairs and his
scary sympathy for authoritarianism.
But for me, and I suspect for many, the
largest problem is that Trump would
make the GOP the party of racial and
religious exclusion.
Many Republicans could not vote
for Trump, but would have a horri-
bly diffi cult time voting for Clinton.
The humane values of Republicanism
would need to fi nd a temporary home,
which would necessitate the creation
of a third party. This might help elect
Clinton, but it would preserve some-
thing of conservatism, held in trust, in
the hope of better days.
Ultimately, these political mat-
ters are quite personal. I have spent
25 years in the company of compas-
sionate conservatives, reform conser-
vatives, Sam’s Club conservatives, or
whatever they want to call themselves,
trying to advance an agenda of social
justice in America’s center-right party.
We have shared a belief that sound
public policy -- promoting opportu-
nity, along with the skills and values
necessary to grasp it -- can improve
the lives of our fellow citizens, and
thus make politics an honorable ad-
venture.
The nomination of Trump would
reduce Republican politics—at the
presidential level—to an enterprise of
squalid prejudice. And many Repub-
licans could not follow, precisely be-
cause they are Republicans. By seiz-
ing the GOP, Trump would break it
to pieces.
(Washington Post Writers Group)
Is war the only response to N. Korea?
North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un,
is just about as entertaining as our na-
tion’s lineup of presidential candidates.
Several of these guys on the American
stump want to go to war as soon as
they’re in the White House and that’s
what Kim’s saying, too. Does this
mean that if one of our “hawks” is
elected that we’ll be at war with North
Korea early next year? Stand by for de-
tails in 2017.
The war torch was lit again by
Kim on New Year’s day when he an-
nounced he is again ready for war.
That is, he’s ready for war if provoked
by “invasive” outsiders. While our
presidential contenders are foretell-
ing war as their fi rst order of business,
Kim’s been at his war blustering since
2011 when he took over after his ruth-
less papa, Kim Il Jung, passed. He has
all along wanted to increase “in every
way the political and military might”
of his small nation. The other day, his
raves and rants went on for a 30-min-
ute televised broadcast.
Kim has made many war threats.
In fact, just last October, in a speech
marking the 70-year founding of the
ruling Workers’ Party, Kim said he
was prepared if necessary to wage war
against the U.S. That’d be some war,
perhaps lasting an even shorter time
than the U.S. war when U.S. forces
kicked Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait.
Depending, of course, on whether
conventional or non-conventional
might is used, it’d be predictably short.
It would, nevertheless, provide a hawk
like several of the survivors on the
GOP debate stage a fi rst opportunity
to show his or her “strength” via the
delivery of American men and materi-
als overseas again.
Now, really, what sort of war would
a war between the U.S. and North Ko-
rea be? It’s surmised that if a couple of
those stored up H- or even A-bombs
were used, the few North Koreans who
lived through the holocaust would
look quickly for something to be used
as a white fl ag. If the U.S. sends a huge
squadron of B-52 bombers with 500-
1,000 pound
bombs,
the
likes of which
Mr.
Trump
says he’ll un-
load on certain
players in the
Middle East,
then a cry for a halt would most likely
come desperately soon.
However, North Korea’s trump card
is its big ally in the Republic of China.
And the Republic of China is no bowl
of rice to overcome as it was a num-
ber of decades ago, those years before
World War II got underway, when the
Empire of Japan invaded it. It is, now,
to the contrary, an even bigger foe than
it was when American forces under
Douglas MacArthur tried to subdue
invading communists from northern
Korea seeking to take over the entire
peninsula in the early 1950s. China
took North Korea’s side which ulti-
mately resulted in a stalemate lasting
to the present day, with no end in sight.
Kim’s a problem that won’t go
away. After all, aside from China, he
must rant and rave over his own peo-
gene h.
mcintyre
ple so they will continue with body
and soul to support him. As it turns
out, if every North Korean decided
to revolt and members of Kim’s mili-
tary sided with disenchanted millions,
calling for his hide, Kim wouldn’t last
long. He has got to sound and look
tough and thereby show to his people
that he’s in charge.
What would any one of these self-
proclaimed geniuses among the
GOP contenders going to do about
Kim? He’d be nothing if he stands
solo; yet, he carries so much trouble-
some baggage. Kim’s just one big
mouth who can’t be muzzled by Navy
SEALS and placed conveniently in
an unmarked grave at sea. Contend-
ers like Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Chris
Christie, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina,
Marco Rubio, and Donald Trump go
about wagging their unhinged tongues
to Americans who are looking for
simple solutions for which they be-
lieve another foreign war would solve
the Korean problem . . . or any other
problem in today’s troubled world.
(Gene H. McIntyre’s column ap-
pears weekly in the Keizertimes.)