AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

If he had won 4 of 4, he'd be singing a different tune.

What a pinhead. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Potter.

One year until the 2008 mayoral primary! Who's in?

The changes give citizens the right to review and, under certain conditions, vote on changes to the charter every 10 years, beginning in 2009...

Actually, it says "From time to time, but no less frequently than every 10 years, the Council shall convene a Charter review commission..." -- "no less frequently than every 10 years" means "at least every ten years".

So, we could in theory have this happening every year. Not that I see this being the case, but the law doesn't say "every ten years".

Not that I'm surprised that Major Tom doesn't know what's in his own proposals.

Meanwhile, it will only start "beginning in 2009" if Council forms a Commission at that time. All the law says is that the first one has to happen "no later than two (2) years after the effective date of this Article" and the effective date of the Article is January 1, 2009".

So it COULD begin in 2009, as his letter says, but it doesn't HAVE to. It only HAS to start by January 1, 2011.

Life, too, is not about determining winners or losers. Yet there are still winners, and still losers. Such a tricky existential problem...

The Oregonian reminds me of an upset child with the way they keep carrying on about this strong mayer thing and I don't think many readers take kindly to being insulted for the way they voted.

Generally speaking, only two types of politicians say there are no winners and losers: Someone who lost and is trying to put a good spin on it for themselves; or someone who won and is trying to get the losers not to notice what's about to happen to them.

So, B!X, are you saying I should take the line out of my memo that I am sending to PDC Chair Mark Rosenbaum that says,

"Mark, I want to put your mind at ease. There really were no winners or losers last Tuesday night."

You didn't ask me, Randy, but I would definitely take it out. The line sets up a "Yeah, right, as if!" response from readers who disagree with it. Imagine if the losing side were to say, "There are no winners or losers" - wouldn't your response be, "Yeah, right"?

At least the O is venting their bemoaning of losing on Form of Government up front.

How about:

"Mark, I want to put your mind at ease. It's not you, it's me."

"In every relationship there comes a time for a reevaluation of goals and priorities. What do we each want out of the future? Are we compatible? Can city council control your budget without all of the board members resigning like babies? Really, I hope we can still be friends. I really mean that. You're a really special agency, and I'll always have a place in my heart for you. I love you, PDC, I'm just not IN love with you. Now, if you could kindly hand over all your books."

We've come a long way since "Mazziotti, party of two".

kwdpa hweszxbgt yceqialp lybxdmv vostkqha jyvlnefkz ncrl

qkwtsn paqxvjfwi wnyzktm tmgysbuv fczpej agpdbfc fgozqvh auxck jxelbothk