Talk:Ted Kulongoski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ted Kulongoski article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Additional Information

Added more recent information about the 2006 Gubernatorial election, adding candidates Ron Saxton and Jim Hill. Rewrote sentences to flow a bit better with additional candidates. It could be necessary at some point to refigure the section, especially if more candidates are added. Davidpdx 11:52, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tag

There is someone watching this article as well as the others that are associated with the Oregon Gubernatorial Race. Please be advised, if I see PR edits being made I will revert them. Davidpdx 08:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conflict of Interest

I urge those who are part of a campaign not to edit on Wikipedia. This is a conflict of interest and against the NPOV guidelines of Wikipedia. Any POV edits will be reverted by myself or other editors. Davidpdx 21:31, March 21, 2006

[edit] April 30th edit by Humanbean

While I believe this edit was probably done to fix something, I believe this person may not understand the functional form of Wikipedia articles. Therefore, I reverted the changes back to before this particular edit. I urge you to read and study diffrent articles to better understand the structure. Davidpdx 18:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AIPAC

The section on AIPAC is an unimportant non-sequiter and should be deleted.--rtaycher1987 20:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, given the fact he is only a governor. I'll remove it. Davidpdx 04:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it should be inserted. I have reworded to a neutral form. Connections to special interest groups should not be hidden or concealed. --shirbil 04:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I disagree that the fact that Kulongoski is currently "only a governor" makes his position on national or international issues unimportant. After all, most recent Presidents were governors and governors obviously have an important influence on their state parties. Lobby groups attempt to influence governors on national and international issues for obvious reasons and all of this activity should be part of their public record. Peteskitoo 05:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I can live with it in there, but I will insist on a reference be added in terms of the both of the quotes. If this is done, I'll go along with it. However, if the references aren't added they should be removed.Also I'd recommend being specific on which Palastinan groups are being critical. I would venture a guess that there are many Palastinan groups.Davidpdx 11:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The original references to Kulongoski's speeches were restored and an Oregon human rights group (AUPHR) was specified. Peteskitoo 14:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's better. Now readers can at least understand the meaning behind the quotes. I can't believe he'd say such a thing. It seems pretty careless in my opinion. Davidpdx 01:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Westlund

The sentence on Ben Westlund needs to be edited or removed.

[edit] Deletion of term-end date

OMG, I'm raising my first objection. Thank goodness it's not one I feel passionately about, so here I go...

As a political activist, I find the listing of the full term to which an office holder has been elected to be useful information. The ending date was removed from a field clearly labelled "Term of Office," and indeed, the Governor was elected to a six year term with a specific ending date. It should be obvious that death in office, or resignation could result in his not serving that full term, but that does not in any way change the fact that it is the term.

This is obviously not the same as death dates, which are indeterminate. So, an inconsistency between the two styles should be irrelevant.

Since I'm an Oregonian, I happen to know that Oregon Governors have a four year term of office. I don't know whether that's universal, so it might be handy for others to have an "at a glance" view which includes end of term. I notice that some reference materials put such future dates in parentheses, presumably so that the reader will know that the author is not so stupid as to think that a future date has already happened.

And speaking of stupid, even though I know that U.S. Senators, for example, serve six year terms, it sometimes takes me a while to puzzle out when a particular rascal is going to be up for reelection. Math was never my strong suit. And sometimes the beginning date is from an off-year special election, utterly confusing me.

Bottom line... I'd like to see term ending dates included in the infoboxes of incumbent politicians. It makes the infobox more useful for me, and I think probably for others. However, I don't care so much about it that I am willing to get into a pie throwing contest over it... so, I'll just back away now slowly, if y'all don't mind. J-MJgilhousen 06:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I think it should be left in. --Liface 08:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Activism

Kulongoski is known for his activism about hunger in Oregon. He recently chose to take part in the Food stamp challenge. I want to add this to the article but am having trouble deciding where to put it or what to name the section. If someone can find a way to work this in, I'd be grateful. Katr67 00:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at what the food stamp challange is and I think I understand it. Can you post a source that talks about his involvement or statement about the food stamp challange? From there I think it might be a little easier to see what we could put together.
I'm kind of out of the loop in terms of what's going on in Oregon as I'm living abroad right now. I'll take a look also and see if I can find anything. Pete edits quite a few of the articles about Oregon and is pretty knowledgable as well. Maybe he'll chime in if he sees this discussion. Davidpdx 01:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Here is a link to the press release on the governor's website [1]. Davidpdx 01:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, the two refs in the food stamp challenge article talk about Ted's involvement. NPR had a story today about him having to buy cup o' noodles at 3 for a dollar instead of Progresso soup. Let me know if you think you need more sources. Katr67 02:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I found little value in his publicity attempt. Not to say that people on government subsidies live lavishly, but they certainly don't live on food stamps alone. People that poor usually are on welfare and medicaid, and if they have a job, they can still be on medicaid if they have less than a specified amount of money in savings. I can't think of any more government programs off the top of my head. Ronn

I saw an article on Yahoo News about that today. I think the place which the blurb was put about the food stamp challange is kind of odd. It really doesn't fit in there. Does anyone have an objection to starting a new section. Maybe it could be titled, "Social Justice Issues" or something to that end.
I kind of dozed off for a few days (I've been busy), but I'll try to keep checking back to see if anything has been said. Davidpdx 09:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

A section on "Social justice issues" sounds good, if it can be written in such a way that it isn't an ad for Ted. Another thing you might add is that he is very much into doing what he can to help veterans. That and the hunger issue are his two most visible public-relations type campaigns, I think. Katr67 16:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I was kind of on the fence about notability for the food stamp thing, but I just heard Ed Schultz go nuts about this on his national talk show out of North Dakota, and say he's going to have the Gov. on. So that settles it in my mind. As for sections, ANY section about something other than a specific election would be a long-overdue addition to this article. I don't think "social justice issues" top the list - an overview of his impact on the state would be more important - but I wouldn't stand in the way! -Pete 19:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not dead set on that being the title if we can come up with something more general it might be better anyway. Pete is right, the article is mostly centered around elections and Kulongoski's background and has little substance on anything else.
We can throw around some ideas about what the section would be titled. Here are a few idea:
  • Program Advocacy
  • Statewide Impact of Kulongoski's programs
Feel free to chime in with more ideas. I'd post more, but it's the end of the day and my brain isn't working well. Davidpdx 09:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Second term

At least as of May '08, the section opens with a paragraph about the George Taylor/State Climatologist controversy. I'm removing the Tucker Carlson bit that begins: Tucker Carlson of MSNBC reported "The Democratic governor of that state has announced that he will strip George Taylor of his title for daring to question the causes of global warming... I believe the point of its inclusion is to show that at least Carlson and perhaps many others felt that politics was incorrectly trampling on science and the academy. Regardless of his opinion, though, his summarization of the events isn't accurate. Moreover, it isn't clear how the passing remarks of a national cable news personality are germane to this episode: this was essentially a local Oregon story and Carlson had no role in it.

71.162.108.94 (talk) 06:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)