Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 5, 2016)
Page 6A OPINION East Oregonian Tuesday, January 5, 2016 Founded October 16, 1875 KATHRYN B. BROWN DANIEL WATTENBURGER Publisher Managing Editor JENNINE PERKINSON TIM TRAINOR Advertising Director Opinion Page Editor OUR VIEW What’s in a name? The basics of the southeast Oregon standoff are becoming clear. A group of outsiders descended on the small city of Burns to stand up for local ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond, who were convicted RIDUVRQDQGH[SHFWHGWRUHSRUWWR federal prison on Monday to complete WKHLU¿YH\HDUVHQWHQFHV$VPDOO fraction of those involved in the protest then drove 30 miles south to a federally-operated wildlife refuge and are occupying the buildings there, LQFOXGLQJDZLOG¿UHZDWFKWRZHU They claimed as many as 150 people in their group, but only about 20 is occupying the refuge buildings. Ammon Bundy, one of the group’s leaders and son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy who had his own standoff with federal authorities in 2014, said the group’s goal is to “break up” the refuge land and redistribute it to local ranchers. Meanwhile, the Hammonds distanced themselves from the spectacle and reported to prison in California as promised. :KDWZLOOKDSSHQQH[WLVDQ\RQH¶V guess. The group claims it is willing to stay as long as it takes to accomplish the goal. But in the meantime, we QHHGWRGH¿QHZKDWZH¶OOFDOOWKH small group that has become a national news story overnight — and what we won’t call them. TERRORIST: The goal of a terrorist group is to promote fear, and this group isn’t that. While they certainly have Harney County on high alert, including the school district which canceled classes for the week, WHUURULVWDFWLRQVDUHGH¿QHGE\ERWK their intent and destruction. We’d argue the Hammonds aren’t terrorists either, though the federal crimes they were convicted of fall under that category in the eyes of the law. No doubt we are culturally quick to dub Middle Eastern men with guns terrorists and more likely to give ZKLWHPHQWKHEHQH¿WRIWKHGRXEW EXWLQWKLVFDVHWKHODEHOGRHVQ¶W¿W$W least yet. MILITIA: Just because a group of individuals carries guns and is opposed to government regulations doesn’t make it a militia. If that was the proof, this group would have at least hundreds if not thousands of supporters in southeastern Oregon. Initially, a militia referred to a civilian force trained to supplement a regular army if necessary. Or it can mean a group trained and prepared to oppose the army. Either way, the training and coordination needed to be called a militia is lacking in this case. It’s a simple and provocative title, but not accurate, even if this is what the group claims to be. OCCUPIERS: $QRYHUVLPSOL¿HG version of what this group stands for. The Occupy Wall Street movement of 2014 brought the term to the mainstream, but occupying a public place with signs and chants is different than occupying a public place with weapons. It’s also a clunky word that could be associated with any occupant, from an apartment tenant to the passenger in a vehicle. PROTESTERS: If a group protests anything from an environmental or human rights issue to the management of federal lands, we call them protesters. It’s simple and makes no judgment about their intent or purpose. If the group makes physical threats, whether spoken or insinuated, toward those around them, we need to reconsider. The megaload protesters in Umatilla two years ago come to mind. Their mission was to bring attention to tar sands drilling in Alberta, Canada and they accomplished this goal by standing in the path of PDVVLYHWUXFNVFDUU\LQJRLOUH¿QHU\ equipment. A couple of the protesters also attached themselves to the vehicle. The action was illegal, but the method was not threatening. ARMED ACTIVISTS: Until the story develops further, we’ll stick with armed activist or a variant thereof. The fact that they are armed LVVLJQL¿FDQWWRWKHUHSRUWLQJDQG in understanding the situation. We will continue to evaluate our representation of this group as the story develops. Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the East Oregonian editorial board of Publisher Kathryn Brown, Managing Editor Daniel Wattenburger, and Opinion Page Editor Tim Trainor. Other columns, letters and cartoons on this page express the opinions of the authors and not necessarily that of the East Oregonian. OTHER VIEWS 7KH&OLQWRQVVH[LVP DQGWKH2YDO2I¿FH The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 29 D onald Trump in December used some typically coarse language to describe Hillary Clinton, who responded by accusing Mr. Trump of VH[LVPZKLOHDQQRXQFLQJWKDWVKHLV unleashing Bill Clinton to campaign for her. This was too ripe an opening for Mr. Trump, who is now attacking Hillary for acquiescing in Bill’s predations against women. Mr. Trump is rude and crude, but in this case he is raising an issue that rightly bears on the 2016 election campaign and the prospect of a third Clinton term. Mrs. Clinton wants to use her gender both as a political sword and shield to win the White House. The purpose is to make male politicians less willing to take her on, while reinforcing her main and not-so-subtle campaign theme that it’s WLPHWRHOHFWWKH¿UVWZRPDQ3UHVLGHQW So she and her allies will try to spin DQ\FULWLFLVPDVVH[LVW(YHQSROLWLFDOO\ correct Bernie Sanders got this treatment after he said during a debate this autumn that “all the shouting in the world” wouldn’t keep guns out of the wrong hands. Mrs. Clinton later said that “I haven’t been shouting, but sometimes when a woman speaks out, some people think it’s shouting.” Against Republicans, she’ll play the “war on women” theme non-stop. Yet no one in American politics better SHUVRQL¿HVDZDURQZRPHQWKDQ0UV Clinton’s husband. For readers too young to recall the 1990s, we aren’t merely referring to Trumpian gibes about female looks or “Mad Men” condescension. Mr. &OLQWRQZDVDJHQXLQHVH[XDOKDUDVVHU LQWKHFODVVLFGH¿QLWLRQRIH[SORLWLQJKLV power as a workplace superior, and the Clinton entourage worked hard to smear and discredit his many women accusers. Start with “bimbo eruptions,” the phrase that Mr. Clinton’s Arkansas ¿[HU%HWVH\:ULJKWXVHGWRGHVFULEH the women who had affairs with Bill. Gennifer Flowers almost derailed his primary campaign in 1992, until Hillary stood by her man on CBS’s “60 Minutes” and the media portrayed Ms. Flowers as a golddigger. Many more would come forward, not least Paula Jones, an Arkansas state HPSOR\HHZKRWHVWL¿HGWKDWDVWDWH policeman working for then Governor Clinton invited her to Bill’s hotel room ZKHUHKHH[SRVHGKLPVHOIDQGVH[XDOO\ SURSRVLWLRQHGKHU0V-RQHV¿OHGD VH[XDOKDUDVVPHQWODZVXLWDQG0U Clinton lied under oath, resulting in his impeachment. Then there was Monica Lewinsky, the White House intern whose story the Clintons want everyone to dismiss DVDFDVHRIFRQVHQVXDOVH[DQG%LOO¶V runaway libido. But no CEO in America would survive in his job if he had a publicly known affair with a subordinate, much less a 22-year-old. Mrs. Clinton described Ms. Lewinsky as “a narcissistic loony toon,” according to the personal papers of Diane Blair, a close friend of Mrs. Clinton from Arkansas. This September Mrs. Clinton GHFODUHGWKDW³HYHU\VXUYLYRURIVH[XDO assault” has “the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed.” But when her own access to political power was at stake, she dismissed the women and defended her husband. We rehearse all this not merely to reinforce Mr. Trump’s claims of a Clinton double standard. The point relates to the standards that would prevail in another Clinton Presidency. No wonder that Ruth Marcus, the Washington Post columnist and no conservative, called Bill Clinton’s record with women a fair political issue. At the very least if Mrs. Clinton wants everyone to forget about Bill’s harassment of women, she ought to stop playing the VH[LVPFDUGRUGURS%LOODVVXUURJDWHRU both. OTHER VIEWS Elections have consequences Y ou have to be seriously The point, of course, was not to JHHN\WRJHWH[FLWHGZKHQ punish the rich but to raise money the Internal Revenue Service for progressive priorities, and while releases a new batch of statistics. WKHWD[KLNHZDVQ¶WJLJDQWLFLW Well, I’m a big geek; like quite a few ZDVVLJQL¿FDQW7KRVHKLJKHUUDWHV other people who work on policy on the 1 percent correspond to about issues, I was eagerly awaiting the $70 billion a year in revenue. This ,56¶VWD[WDEOHVIRUZKLFKZHUH happens to be in the same ballpark as released last week. ERWKIRRGVWDPSVDQGEXGJHWRI¿FH Paul And what these tables show Krugman estimates of this year’s net outlays is that elections really do have on Obamacare. So we’re not talking Comment consequences. about something trivial. You might think that this is Speaking of Obamacare, that’s obvious. But on the left, in particular, there another thing Republicans would surely are some people who, disappointed by the have killed if 2012 had gone the other way. limits of what President Barack Obama has Instead, the program went into effect at the accomplished, minimize the differences beginning of 2014. And the effect on health EHWZHHQWKHSDUWLHV:KRHYHUWKHQH[W care has been huge: according to estimates president is, they assert — or at least, from the Centers for Disease Control whoever it is if it’s not Bernie Sanders — and Prevention, the number of uninsured things will remain pretty much the same, Americans fell 17 million between 2012 and with the wealthy continuing to dominate WKH¿UVWKDOIRIZLWKIXUWKHUGHFOLQHV the scene. And it’s true that if you were most likely ahead. H[SHFWLQJ2EDPDWRSUHVLGHRYHUDFRPSOHWH So the 2012 election had major transformation of America’s political and consequences. America would look very economic scene, what he’s actually achieved different today if it had gone the other way. can seem like a big letdown. Now, to be fair, some widely predicted But the truth is that Obama’s election in consequences of Obama’s re-election — 2008 and re-election in 2012 had some real, predicted by his opponents — didn’t happen. TXDQWL¿DEOHFRQVHTXHQFHV:KLFKEULQJVPH Gasoline prices didn’t soar. Stocks didn’t to those IRS tables. plunge. The economy didn’t collapse — in For one of the important consequences of fact, the U.S. economy has now added more the 2012 election was that Obama was able than twice as many private-sector jobs under WRJRWKURXJKZLWKDVLJQL¿FDQWULVHLQWD[HV Obama as it did over the same period of the on high incomes. Partly this was achieved by George W. Bush administration, and the DOORZLQJWKHXSSHUHQGRIWKH%XVKWD[FXWV unemployment rate is a full point lower than WRH[SLUHWKHUHZHUHDOVRQHZWD[HVRQKLJK the rate Romney promised to achieve by the incomes passed along with the Affordable end of 2016. Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare. In other words, the 2012 election didn’t If Mitt Romney had won, we can be sure just allow progressives to achieve some that Republicans would have found a way to important goals. It also gave them an SUHYHQWWKHVHWD[KLNHV$QGZHFDQQRZVHH opportunity to show that achieving these what happened because he didn’t. According goals is feasible. No, asking the rich to pay WRWKHQHZWDEOHVWKHDYHUDJHLQFRPHWD[UDWH VRPHZKDWPRUHLQWD[HVZKLOHKHOSLQJWKH for 99 percent of Americans barely changed less fortunate won’t destroy the economy. IURPWREXWWKHWD[UDWHIRUWKHWRS So now we’re heading for another 1 percent rose by more than four percentage presidential election. And once again the SRLQWV7KHWD[ULVHZDVHYHQELJJHUIRUYHU\ stakes are high. Whoever the Republicans high incomes: 6.5 percentage points for the nominate will be committed to destroying top 0.01 percent. 2EDPDFDUHDQGVODVKLQJWD[HVRQWKHZHDOWK\ These numbers aren’t enough to give us a ²LQIDFWWKHFXUUHQW*23WD[FXWSODQV IXOOSLFWXUHRIWD[HVDWWKHWRSZKLFKUHTXLUHV make the Bush cuts look puny. Whoever the WDNLQJDFFRXQWRIRWKHUWD[HVHVSHFLDOO\WD[HV 'HPRFUDWVQRPLQDWHZLOO¿UVWDQGIRUHPRVW RQFRUSRUDWHSUR¿WVWKDWLQGLUHFWO\DIIHFWWKH be committed to defending the achievements income of stockholders. But the available of the past seven years. numbers are consistent with Congressional The bottom line is that presidential %XGJHW2I¿FHSURMHFWLRQVRIWKHHIIHFWV elections matter, a lot, even if the people on RIWKHWD[LQFUHDVHV²SURMHFWLRQV WKHEDOORWDUHQ¶WDV¿HU\DV\RXPLJKWOLNH ZKLFKVDLGWKDWWKHHIIHFWLYHIHGHUDOWD[ Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. rate on the 1 percent would rise roughly Ŷ back to its pre-Reagan level. No, really: for Paul Krugman joined The New York Times top incomes, Obama has effectively rolled in 1999 as a columnist on the Op-Ed Page EDFNQRWMXVWWKH%XVKWD[FXWVEXW5RQDOG and continues as professor of Economics and Reagan’s as well. International Affairs at Princeton University. YOUR VIEWS In response to Ms. Sacco’s letter on Liberalism Carlin Sacco is a frequent contributor to this column, and I must answer her letter of Jan. 2. However, I feel kind of like David Huddleston in “Blazing Saddles” who gets up after Gabby Johnson’s speech at the town meeting and says “Who can argue with that?” pointing out that the speech was delivered in “authentic frontier gibberish.” Ms. Sacco decries liberalism and its effect on the state of Oregon. Her complaints are somewhat unfocused, but as a proud liberal I will attempt to respond. First, and foremost, I believe government should provide a safety net for our citizens who need help. Like Ms. Sacco, I’m concerned about the “nanny state” that has grown up around that safety net, but blaming all the problems on us liberals will QRW¿[WKHRYHUUHDFKRIVRPHJRYHUQPHQW DJHQFLHVDQGRI¿FLDOV Two of Ms. Sacco’s allegations must be addressed. Obamacare (thanks for the name) has improved health care and will only get better as the bugs are worked out. Thanks to ELSDUWLVDQDFWLRQWKHUHDUH¿QDQFLDOLQFHQWLYHV in place to discourage welfare dependency and they have been working for a long time. ,GRQ¶WH[SHFW0V6DFFRWRSD\PXFK attention to me because I am a former government employee with a law degree, EXWSHRSOHQHHGWRH[DPLQHFRPSODLQWV from angry old men on the right with care. 0V6DFFR¿QLVKHVE\UHIHUULQJWRKHUVHOI as “disadvantaged.” I can think of no group that has suffered more under the yoke of discrimination than old white people. Patrick J. Delaney Hermiston A tip of the hat to the Umatilla City Council Maybe the East Oregonian could give a “Tip of the Hat” to the Umatilla City Council in their consideration to purchase the old gas station property across from their city hall to build a new city park. The city of Umatilla reportedly owns property adjacent to the gas station and the whole area would be a green spot in the heart of downtown Umatilla. 3HQGOHWRQKDVPDQ\¿QHSDUNVEXWGRHV not have many downtown sites, although the green area at Hamley’s is a pleasant stopping place as well as the tree-shaded space at Heritage Station. It would be a bonus if the Umatilla City Council would consider erecting a monument in the park as the Umatilla Village/Old Town Site. The movement of that town was an historic event. Dr. Dorys C. Grover Pendleton LETTERS POLICY The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public issues and public policies for publication in the newspaper and on our website. The newspaper reserves the right to withhold letters that address concerns about individual services and products or letters that infringe on the rights of private citizens. Submitted letters must be signed by the author and include the city of residence and a daytime phone number. The phone number will not be published. Unsigned letters will not be published. Send letters to Managing Editor Daniel Wattenburger, 211 S.E. Byers Ave. Pendleton, OR 97801 or email editor@eastoregonian.com.
