Back to Home Page

Congressional District 1 Debate   Digg Congressional District 1 Debate Technorati Congressional District 1 Debate

by In the news    Saturday, March 6. 2010
At the CD-1 debate, Moderator Sen. Bruce Star's introductions were interrupted by someone calling for the inclusion of the candidate, Doug Keller, who was not invited to debate with John Kuzmanich and Rob Cornilles. He spent the time “tweeting” his own answers to the questions put to the candidates on the stage.
Both candidates seemed to agree philosophically. The only disagreements between candidates were on style. Cornilles focused on answering the issues while Kuzmanich split his time between discussing the issues and making personal attacks. Whether this approach will pay off is anybody’s guess.

Posted by In the news at 14:24 | Comments (11) | Print Entry | Top Exits (0)
Vote for articles fresher than 7 days!
Current karma: 2.67 of 5, 6 vote(s)


Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

It was a very interesting post thanks for writing it!
#1 CPA Offers on 2010-03-06 20:18 (Reply)
Two 'r's in Starr. But that was probably just a typo, right?

My question is, was there a straw poll and, if so, who won? If not, who does this poster, who seems to be attending Dorchester, think was the winner?
#2 Pajarita on 2010-03-07 16:05 (Reply)
(Comment removed)
#3 Brodhead For Congress on 2010-03-07 22:29
(Comment removed)
#3.1 Wendy Keller on 2010-03-08 15:00
I forgot that you were outside. Tradition would dictate that your husband would have come outside.
#3.1.1 Brodhead For Congress on 2010-03-12 00:30 (Reply)
Regarding your comment on the debate - Kuzmanich vs Cornilles - Cornilles came across as extremely polished, extremely composed, well rehearsed and prepared. He also parroted all his "talking points". Although I must say at the debate, for all who have NOT met the man, he came across the winner. However, this was as a result of a drama background, great preparation, and lots of experience. The two things I found lacking from Rob were passion and knowledge.

John Kuzmanich, in his very first debate of any kind, untrained, not as well polished, came across as an attack dog to those looking only for the negatives. If you were also looking for the positives, you saw passion and patriotism and a belief in DOING.

Rob is everything I detest about politics today - a slick package with nothing inside, for sale to the highest bidder (NRCC). I believe he is running for OR-1 because he wants to BE someone.

John is everything our founding fathers meant when they described congressmen - as the peoples house. Although John is not polished or sleek, he is knowledgeable - and when my congressman stands up for what he believes in, I expect him to stand up for it - not cave because the good old boys told him to. I believe John is running because he wants to DO something.

Voters - please do not make up your mind only on what you see in debates. Also listen - and READ what candidates say. Some say the "right" things, some say the honest things. I believe Kuzmanich is of the latter type.
#3.2 Sandy on 2010-03-09 08:23 (Reply)
I've never spent any significant time with John Kuzmanich but have only read and heard about him through the media, so I'm hardly qualified to pass judgment on his character. I have, however, spent nearly ten years working closely with Rob Cornilles as an employee at his business and I can say that Rob is as honest, patriotic, and passionate about his family, his community, and his country as anyone I know. He practices what he preaches and genuinely cares about those around him. As an example, when I informed him about my plans to take my family to Disneyland a few years ago, Rob insisted on taking care of our lodging during our stay as a way of saying thank you for my contributions to the company. It may not sound like a big deal but it was totally unexpected and that meant a lot to me and my family. And there are countless other examples I could share and I'm sure there are several my coworkers could share that I don't even know about. That's the kind of boss he's been and should he be elected, I'm confident that he will similarly go above and beyond the expectations to meet the needs of the people of OR-1. Rob has an outstanding reputation in a high profile industry and doesn't need to be a congressman to "be" somebody. He's well grounded and level headed (as evidenced by the debate) and is not in this race to be a career politician. And if being willing to subject yourself to unfounded personal attacks by others for trying to stand up for what you believe is not a sign of patriotism, then I don't know what is.
#3.2.1 Corey Kearsley on 2010-03-12 10:20 (Reply)
More info:
http://oregonteaparty.ning.com/profiles/blogs/dorchester-conference-outrage
#4 Dan on 2010-03-08 12:11 (Reply)
(Comment removed)
#5 Linebacker on 2010-03-09 14:02
I've organized too many debates to take these objections seriously. Candidates have to provide the details asked for, and get left out if they don't comply, or comply and don't meet the thresholds. Period.

Otherwise you end up with Pavel Goberman on stage, which is an utter waste of time.

To succeed in politics, newbies have to learn the rules and follow them, not strike a pose of entitlement as some comments here seem to suggest. (Doug has never come across that way to me, btw. He's a class act in his words and deeds.)

To recap: it is never the debate organizer's job to "do research" -- nor can I recall ever seeing a serious or large non-party-run debate where the only criteria for participating was being on the ballot. It does not work that way. It will never work that way. And whining about rules you don't know and don't follow makes you look childish.
#5.1 Tom Cox on 2010-03-11 12:11 (Reply)
One would think that with Oregon being pretty much a Solid D except for District 2, the entrenched party elite would approach any debate at this juncture with inclusive objectives. While most of the other districts have underfunded candidates, Dorchester decides to play musical chairs with the (3) candidates that applied. What makes it even more absurd is excluding a veteran when debating Iraq and Afghanistan..........hey I did not apply plain and simple. I am not bitching about anything at this point. Many good things did come about. It showed that Rob Cornilles has exceptional speaking skills and will not react to the scorn and adolescent attacks of a negative candidate. He showed that he is worthy and has the discipline to operate in a DC environment......................

I did not choose to attend, and I will take responsibility for my actions............I am done with this topic......
#5.1.1 Brodhead For Congress on 2010-03-12 01:00 (Reply)

Add Comment

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA
 
 
Back to Home Page

Petitions

Subscribe

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Quicksearch



Recent Catalyst Stories



Calendar

Back July '10 Forward
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Archives

Oregon Liberty Coalition News


OregonWatchdog
Press Release Center

Recent Press Releases

Blog Administration

Open login screen
 

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)