Lars Larson: Susan Sokol Blosser illegal worker backlash

Susan Sokol Blosser ilegal worker backlash
Lars Larson Morning commentary,

Susan Sokol Blosser, a candidate for Oregon’s House of Representatives, wants the courts to silence her republican opponent Jim Weidner. Her lawyer, Greg Kafoury, threatens a libel lawsuit against Jim Weidner for saying that Sokol Blosser hired illegal aliens and did it under the table. Well let’s consider what Ms Sokol Blosser wrote on page 66 of her book about the wine business

Susan Sokol Blosser quote:

“…we were lucky to have (Mexican farm workers). …most of the workers entered the country illegally… The whole situation existed under the table. Everyone knew about it; nobody talked about it.”

Sokol Blosser admits in print and in her own hand that she hired illegal workers under the table.

Now she drops a lawsuit threat less than a week before an election where she is struggling, asking the Oregon Courts to silence her opponent.

Is that really the kind of person you want writing the laws of the state of Oregon. Her family has become wealthy on the backs of illegal workers and at the expense of working folks in Oregon. There, I said it. So Susan, you gonna sue me too?

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 01:31 | Posted in Measure 37 | 47 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Snards

    I didnt know anyone had handwritten a book since Guttenberg’s time.

    • Anonymous



  • valley p

    “There, I said it. So Susan, you gonna sue me too?”

    Dare we hope?

    • Steve Plunk

      Well reasoned response. Of course she has no grounds to bring action since a reasonable mind would conclude from her book she employed illegal aliens.

      Is she really the kind of person we want elected to the legislature? She won’t stand behind her own words and threatens those who point them out. Lovely. Another one of “those” Democrats.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Imagine the hay liberals would be making of this if she were a Republican?

    Oh wait, we dont have to imagine it – they did just two years ago. Remember Gordon Smith? Remember how zany liberals got when he was accused of using illegals? It was all over They threw a fit, and I dont think Smith was ever accused of knowingly hiring illegals. Here Blosser admits to doing so knowingly.

    The point here is not about Blosser, the point here is about the left in general.

    They will not criticize Blosser. You will not see one liberal forthrightly condemn her. What you will see is excuses made for her. Watching a liberal do this is like watching a fish flop around in the bottom of the boat, it requires incredible energy and is utterly ppointless.

    “Oh its not the same as Smith, its apples and oranges”. “Oh come on, you can’t go dredging up the past”, “Oh this is ridiculous, Republicans never criticize their own so why should we”

    What needs to be kept in mind when all of this nonsense is spewed out by the Democrats it should key one into their absolute moral vacancy. Liberals love to claim the moral high ground but in reality they will only do so when it means criticizing others, Never one of their own. This is yet another example one can tee up and watch a liberal flap around and make excuses rather than saying the simple truth – “she was wrong, she knowingly violated the law and if we follow what we have said for year, she is guilty of exactly the kind of exploitation we have accused others of in the past.”

    From the crowd that was silent about Charlie Rangel, Time Geithner and Barney Frank we now have yet another cast in the rogues gallery of those that stand as testimony to the lefts moral pomposity.

    Does it mean we should sink to their level? No, of course not. Bush was criticized here roundly by more than a few while he was president. So were plenty of others, McCain, and Larry Craig come to mind as well.

    What it means is when you hear liberal sanctimony about moral high ground and righteousness, laugh in their face. Just mention a few names. They will never be able to criticize even the most obvious of cases. This is perhaps the single biggest reason why liberalism is totalitarian in nature and why left wing governments have the historical record they do. When inability to criticize leadership is built into the orthodoxy, you have the kind of disasters such governments are famous for.

    • valley p

      Maybe it means we should read her book and find out the whole story before passing judgment?

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Oh hey, thats a good excuse, I didnt predict that one.

        OK – so thats excuse number one.

        Any other liberals want to chime in with your excuse making?

        • valley p

          Wanting more knowledge before passing judgment is an excuse? That explains a lot about you Rupert.

          • Steve Plunk

            There comes a time when any reasonable person passes judgment based upon the information available. That time has passed since there is an election at stake and it’s her own book that indicts her. I guess we could wait until after the election but wouldn’t that be a disservice to the voters? Of course it would.

            Your reasoning fails.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            Actually it explains more about you, since you reached your conclusion on less facts than anyone else.

            As predicted, you would excuse this because she is a Democrat, where you would have condemned it if she were a Republican.

            That says more about you, not me.

            You followed the predictive behavior precisely because we all knew you would judge not based on any facts but based on party.

          • valley p

            Only I neither condemned it nor excused it. I said I would withhold judgment absent more information. you did not hear me condemn Meg Whitman over her alleged illegal housekeeper issue did you?

            I don’t judge based on selective facts presented by an obviously biased source. That’s my standard. It even applies to things I might hear about you.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            >Only I neither condemned it nor excused it.

            Read your words above, you made excuses for it. Its hard to see the context where “everyone knew about it” is going to change much when its a direct quote from her book.

            Fact is you wouldn’t be making those excuses if she was a Republican, we see it constantly from you. Larry Craig , you jumped on that one. Skip Gates? Yep, you jumped on that one and wouldn’t say thing one about Obama stepping in it. Then there is also the famous teacher with the “crashtheteaparty” website encouraging people to show up with racist signs – even that you couldnt condemn.

            Face it – you jumped to conclusions before anyone.

            If its a Democrat, exonerate, if its a Republican condemn. Simple stuff for a simple guy.

          • valley p

            You are a hoot. I “jumped on” Larry Craig? Aside from the grossness of the idea, I doubt I ever said a word about it one way or the other. Who cares about people playing footsie in a toilet stall? Not me. Live and let live.

            And Skip Gates? I jumped on that one by not saying anything about it? Interesting. In my defense, I also jumped on Cheney shooting that poor guy by not saying anything about that either. Come to think of it, there are a lot of events I jump on by choosing to not say anything about. That is actually my point, which you might have a chance of getting if you read what I wrote. I don’t go around jumping on people for what other people say about them on blogs. Its a waste of time and bad form.

            Beyond that, you really should get you memory checked. You remember a lot that never happened. Its like a reverse Alzheimers where you can’t remember what actually did happen.

      • Anonymous

        How many books by conservatives have you actually read? Have you actually read “Going Rogue”? I don’t think you should say anything negative about any conservative until you have read every page that conservative has ever written.

        • valley p

          “How many books by conservatives have you actually read?”

          I’d have to think about that. Not many I expect. But what does that have to do with my point about withholding judgment? Did I judge any conservative based on what a single liberal said about them? I don’t think so.

          “I don’t think you should say anything negative about any conservative until you have read every page that conservative has ever written. ”

          And I don’t think that is a reasonable standard. I don’t have the time or inclination to read every book by every politician, including the one by Ms Sokol-Blosser. I think one can take a position on a politician based on their accomplishments or lack thereof, their intelligence, and their presentation of themselves. I don’t think one should pass judgment on anyone based on a single blog post, whether by Lars Larsen or Rachel Maddow. You may feel otherwise.

    • Anonymous

      “Oh its not the same as Smith, its apples and oranges”

      I think you meant “it’s grapes and peas.”


  • Reper

    Voters may be turned off by this.

  • Scottie

    Lars the dimball can’t even spell Illegal correctly. His lack of education shows.

  • Anonymous

    How about in Spanish? It’s ilegal

    What an idiot. We don’t have to read the book to figure out what this means?

    “…we were lucky to have (Mexican farm workers). …most of the workers entered the country illegally… The whole situation existed under the table. Everyone knew about it; nobody talked about it.”
    It is what it is. So is she.
    A liberal would have to do so because they can’t fathom a liberal democrat doing something their boogiemen Republicans do.
    This is what happens when libs spend years concocting caricatures of everything.
    When they come across plain and simple contradictions to their ginned up world they can’t figure it out, so they presume there must be extenuating circumstances.

  • Rick Hickey

    Illegal immigration is not a big subject in politics or whether we get back to freedom or become serfs of Big Brother. Sharon Angle, Meg Whitman, Tom Tancredo, Jan Brewer, Joe Arapio & the TEA Party are all just silly for spending big bucks on ads on this issue. It is not one of the top reasons for massive increased Government spending & increased Socialist policies via entitlements and the crime and education costs and millions of Jobs Americans have always done, lost to 21st century slavery.

    We do not have Obama-Care because Millions of illegals do not pay their Dr. Bill and rates have not gone thru the roof to make up the loss of revenue. Over 4 Million Babies born to illegals in the last few years really was a Free service and with the the 14th Amnend. (written for illegals not African slaves) they all get everything for free, has not happened.

    Abraham Lincoln understood how “Cheap” Labor was dividing our Nation, as it is now.

    The Democrats know that these people and their large Families will always Vote for more free stuff.

    I wish more of our Leaders would get out from under their desk and fix this problem and the lack of Jobs & Socialism crap would quickly fade away. But illegal immigration has nothing to do with this as I’m an idiot writing to a brick wall.

    ps, and Mexico is not our #1 provider of cocaine, heroin and meth and their is no War on our southern border because of this silly claim.

  • thor

    unfortunately, the threat of a lawsuit is real…..Kafoury is a walking turd……just saying…

  • Britt Storkson

    That’s nothing. A state-sanctioned monopoly power company Wasco Electric Co-operative, has twice threatened to sue me, a candidate for their board of directors. See everything at

    Wasco Electric also used ratepayer money to send out a “hit piece” letter to all of the voters defaming and impugning me.

    Candidate challengers for the Wasco Electric board of directors cannot even get a list of the “registered voters” so they the can send out direct mailers.

    To top it off we do not even have the right to attend Wasco Electric board meetings or even to have free and fair board of directors elections. Tyranny when we should have liberty.

  • Marvin McConoughey

    The phrase “Mexican farm workers” is in parentheses in the article above, the quote marks here are my own. Are the parentheses an editorial addition, or did Ms. Blosser use both the words and the parentheses in her text. If she did not, what words did she use?

  • bbope

    Wow as I read the short excerpt I have to wonder again.. I am a Republican and if you look at the era when she wrote this and gather more from the text you will see she goes on to say… They had papers and showed papers required to work. However it was known the papers looked legit but there was a market for fake papers. (Please not that is not a quote, but my recollection of the basic content) The era and time people knew the papers were fake but did not have the laws, or capability of today to screen as heavy. Heck how many businesses today still hire the illegals because they provide a SS card and drivers license? I worked for companies that tightened down on paper work and were raided and still found illegals in the company…
    Look at the truth, time, era, and lifestyle back then… the times were different when she hired illegal’s but didn’t have more to go on. So I am proud to say I voted for Susan and dropped my ballot off. I think she would be fair in a functional immigration reform that works for all!

  • Rupert in Springfield

    >Wow as I read the short excerpt I have to wonder again.. I am a Republican and if you look at the era when she wrote this and gather more from the text you will see she goes on to say…

    Is there anyone keeping a running tally on how many here claim to be Republicans but are proud to vote Democrat?

    I would say the number making such a claim is approaching parity with those who claim to have attended Woodstock.

    I wish I could understand the charm to liberals of making this claim, it definitely comes from the Kool Aid half of the brain.

    • bbope

      If you had seen the post on my FB page following the casting of my ballot one would see that I voted a strict party line vote for all except for 2 people, and in this case one was Susan, because I feel she knows her stuff and flat out believe she would do more for the best interest of all the residents of Oregon.
      However my FB post said….”Personally I vote mostly by party line, and on this ballot I did except I voted for two people I feel just registered with the wrong party!”
      As for Susan’s book… Flat out… I would like to see anyone actually print the whole page 66. Instead we get Clips, and segments of text that twist words and imply wrongs but when read as a whole it shows no wrong doing or knowledge of wrong doing.
      Heck lets look at the bible. We can all argue it and take A verse and say it proves our point, but when we add the next verse and read them together it changes the whole context of the first verse….
      We need the whole context listed on this site….

      Lets look and see..> I believe in the Republican party, their stances but from time to time yes I must cast a vote in another direction because either 1. we have someone in office who has blown smoke up our rumps for his term, 2. does not do me proud as a republican, 3. or does not do the party proud… In this case… I think all 3 apply!

      • valley p

        Give it up bbope. Rupert knows what you really think. You voted for a Democrat, therefore you = Democrat = liberal = marxist = fascist. Its simple. No need to read whole pages of whole books. That just confuses people. Too much information is no good.

        If I were you I would just change parties and go all the way. You can never ever again be considered a true Republican. You violated the Cardinal principle. You engaged in independent thought.

        • Rupert in Springfield

          >You violated the Cardinal principle. You engaged in independent thought.

          This coming from the guy who can never criticize a Democrat.

          I mean I totally predicted your behavior, you replied exactly as I predicted and now you are claiming it is Republicans who are incapable of independant thought?

          Give me a break – when one can predict how you will think about something before you do, you truly are incapable of any independent thought.

          • valley p

            Not to be picky….well ok…to be picky…you did not”predict” my behavior. You asserted a motive to my statement. And you were wrong about that motive.

            Now I’ll predict that you will still claim that I would not cut the same slack so to speak, for a Republican faced with an out of context assertion by a blowhard of the opposite political spectrum. And you will still be wrong.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Ok, Ill take your word for it. I was wrong. Sorry for thinking you were one of those who does pull this stunt – there are a million of them here and to be honest I probably jumped the gun in assuming you were one of those as I have not seen a post from you before. Apologies.

  • Dogless

    Let me preface by saying I know almost nothing about any of the candidates in the Oregon House race and most assuredly have no dog in this fight.
    To Anonymous:
    I am at something of a loss. A single quote with several ellipses and no real background should never be taken at face value. The idea of calling someone an idiot for suggesting that it should be is mind boggling. It’s entirely possible that the real explanation for the quote and the context from whence it comes is precisely that “her family has become wealthy on the backs of illegal workers and at the expense of working folks in Oregon.” However, recognizing the fact that it might not be what is alleged based on what is presented here is far from idiotic.
    To provide a very simple (and pretty improbable example) by filling in the ellipses:
    “…we were lucky to have (Mexican farm workers). Unlike other farms, where most of the workers entered the country illegally, we were one of the few who did not employ illegally present workers. The whole situation existed under the table. Everyone knew about it; nobody talked about it.”

    Though the example is unlikely, my point is still illustrated: questioning the fullness of a quote and the context in which it existed is never idiotic, especially in a circumstance like this.

  • mungfam

    Folks are forgetting something important, unless you ran this type of business. There were people that were Hispanic that were legal citizens (I just lost half of you) and could prove it with their Oregon I.D., social security cards, birth certificates, green cards, etc. The problem was, so could the illegal immigrant workers. How they did it was fake Oregon I.D.’s. Do you get it? All the other papers could be someone else’s and actually real. This was not complicated and easy enough at the time for the immigrant workforce to perpetrate, but somehow outside your intellect today.
    I don’t know how many more ways to explain it? It’s not sophisticated, ambiguous or even sexy. It’s pretty simple, you just have no clue what your talking about. But Susan Sokol-Blosser did then and now. Misguided, intellectually dishonest voter manipulation has no business in our politics. This concludes our workshop on this subject. Go invent the next delusion. I wish to avoid placing my head in the yoke on behalf of individual failings.

  • Marvin McConoughey

    I agree that false documentation is a problem. The magnitude is unknown, at least to me. I welcome any information on how prevalent the problem is. A large problem merits commensurate law enforcement action to target the principals involved. However, the fact that some false papers exist does not excuse a widespread failure to do what is possible to identify and return illegal immigrants to their nation of origin.

    Having grown up on a farm, milked cows by hand twice each day, picked potato bugs by hand, walked behind a horse-drawn plow, and loaded hay into hay wagons in 95-degree heat, I am amused by those who allege that illegal farm workers are “doing work than Americans won’t do.” The real message is “We don’t want to pay enough to attract help from the millions of unemployed Americans.”

  • Anonymous

    No surprise with SSB – she pontificates on women’s rights but is one of the nastiest woman to those women who have worked with and for her; she takes all the credit for Sokol Blosser Winery’s creation and success when her ex husband Bill Blosser was and is brilliantly smart and part of the success; she uses illegal workers and has the audacity to try to stop the free speech right of a citizen; she acts as if rules do not apply to her or she is so much smarter than anyone else. She is a complete hypocrite, regardless of party affiliation, and guess what, she lost. There is something called karma and it found Susan.

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback: Blue Coaster()

  • Pingback: watch free movies online()

  • Pingback: best vpn()

  • Pingback: Cable for business owners()

  • Pingback: parking()

  • Pingback: lan penge nu uden sikkerhed()

  • Pingback: fue()

  • Pingback: water ionizer()

  • Pingback: car parking()

  • Pingback: l grade electrician()

  • Pingback: plumbers wrench set()

  • Pingback: a plumbers resume()

Stay Tuned...

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

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)