What is your opinion of Sen. Ron Wyden?

He is on C-SPAN explaining why he voted with Bush on his Medicare plan which is now being shown as a hoax and a lemon. His demeanor is soft-spoken and he is a Democrat that is quick to jump to "bi-partisanship" without deeper studies of the issue, it seems to me. Is he another Democrat, such as Lieberman, that needs a primary opponent in the next election?

He just won reelection quite handily here.

Save your fire for Gordon Smith, our ReThuglican Bush
asskisser Senator who's up for re-election in 2008. Smith
tromped his Dem opponent in 2002 by outspending him by
about 6-1. That's who we need help with, thank you.

His type of "politices" infiltrates and infects our Party to the point that no one has any balls. That's a big reason we are where we are today, in my opinion.

He won by an overwhelming margin.

So I guess we must all be viruses in Oregon
then, huh?

:puke:

Wyden was reelected not necessarily because Oregonians liked him, but because he was the incumbent. People knew his name, didn't know his opponents, and decided to vote him back in. The incumbent wins 84% (I'm not sure of this number...I'll try and find verification on that and provide a link or something) of the time in Oregon politics.

As for me personally? I'm an Oregonian, and I think he's a moron. He's a member of the "Bipartisanship" club (in other words, he believes in laying down and getting bulldozed over on the big issues), and that alone is enough to earn my distaste.

Of course, he's much better than Gordon Smith...but that's not saying much.

Who do you want? Instead of kvetching, why don't
you come up with a name of somebody who would be
better, and then focus that energy on getting old
Gordo out of office.

Then worry about the Democrat.

He was the D on the ticket and the incumbent. That's why he won. Most people have no clue what they're voting for, that has become abundently clear to me with DeFazio's wins. Wyden is slightly better than a canker sore. This is likely the only time you'll hear me say that because it does no good to trash Dems, and this is what we have and that's reality. But he could easily be knocked off by a charismatic Republican and a good campaign. I would love to have a stronger Dem representing the state. He's voted for way too many of these Bush bills and is too easily persuaded.

He's one of a very small number of Senators who always think about an issue first, and assess what's good and bad, then make his recommendations. I've watched him for years, and he always makes sense.

Today he was discussing the bankruptcy bill. It does need some changes made. I know this from past experiences when I was a Dir. of Accounting and attended several Bankruptcy hearings to represenet our company and what the filer owed us. In one instance, everyone was waiting in the hall for the judge to arrive, and I overheard the filer talking with his lawyer and a few friends. Someone had asked what he was going to do now that he lost his business? He laughed, and said "No problem. I already have a restaurant business lined up. I made a nice buck from this last business, and now that the debts will be gone, I'll make more with the restaurant. If it doesn't make as much as I want, I'll just file bankruptcy again and try something else."

I that what you really want our laws to support???? I sure don't.

Sen. Wyden said he was going to make sure that individuals who were forced into bankruptcy due to health care costs or some other reason beyond their control would still be permitted to get a fresh start. He also said he was going to support changes to the homestead portion of these laws, so that people couldn't put their millions into their home, and have it all shielded from the bankruptcy settlement.

Listen to him some time. He really is on the PEOPLE'S SIDE!

He is better than his Repub opponents but he ain't nothing to brag about, in my opinion.

He said "I voted for that bill because this issue had been agrued for years and years, and I felt getting something done was better than nothing. It's not the bill I would have sponsored, but the main problems should be able to be fixed in a bi-partisan way, rather quickly. Allow price negotiating on drug prices, clear up the confusion with the medicare cards," (there were two others that I've forgotten.)

On SS, he said he is recommending keeping SS in tact, make some minor adjustments to extend it's long term strength, and set up a program where all people could invest some $$ in accounts similar the the Thrift Savings Accounts that the Federal employees now have.

Why are you calling him nothing to brag about? The things he says make more sense to me than some other Dems who just say, it's Shrub's plan and I hate it!

You can elect whomever you want but, in my opinion, Ron Wyden and his low-key, bi-partisan methods have taken over the Democratic Party and weakened us to the point that now, we cannot even take advantage of the Repubs wanting to destroy Social Security.(They are not trying to "reform" it. They are trying to destroy it.) There was time the Repubs would never think of such a thing. Now, they not only think about it - they beleive they can do it. We need Democrats that raise their voices - not soft whispers in the face of such destruction.

on Saturday nigt that Wyden, Blanche Lincoln, Baucus and Conrad
are Democratic Senators to watch. According to Sen. Sununu Republican
these 4 Dems are working with Republicans to solve SS. My problem
is I thought SS was to be the issue on which all Dems would stand together. Working a deal with Republicans to keep Bush from looking like a loser on this issue is not exactly the way I expect Dems to stand up.

But part of his political persona is invested in his good relations with Oregon's other Senator, Gordon "Pondkiller" Smith, and the Oregonian runs a couple of stories every year about how well Wyden and Smith get along, and how their comity is good for Oregon.

Smith will occasionally cross the aisle to support a "Democratic" proposal, but it seems that Wyden is the one who reaches out more often. I have no explanation for his vote on the Medicare bill, but Wyden is not one of the towering intellects in Senate, and seems to be most comfortable gliding along in what he perceives as the mainstream. Sometimes he veers too close to the right bank for my liking, but in totality, he's not a bad sort. Certainly he doesn't have the kind of national reputation like Lieberman or Biden where an intemperate comment or a stupid vote get blown out of all proportion, and provide significant aid and comfort to our political adversaries.

The fact that he was being interviewed on a national program about voting for an ill-considered Medicare bill is indicative (to me) that there just wasn't a whole lot of Democratic support for the bill, and Wyden was the best they could come up with.

He was a fine congressman and is a fine senator. If he doesn't represent you, let his constituents worry about his competency.

Just my opinion. But it is his type of "compromise" politics that has our Party in its predicament today. We should not be compromising with fascists. His votes in the Senate affects us all - not just his constituency in Oregon, unfortunately.