Reply With Quote
Do they sell furs?
Not long ago, Schumacker Fur's was run out of town with the help of the City. Liberals don't like people wearing dead animals. Now, Peterson's Morrison street location is being forced out by the city for no good reason. The reasons given are completely false, and the activities are because he is at the last stop of the public rail system downtown. Something else is going on. Someone in City Hall must have plans for his location.
Peterson's
Do they sell furs?
But Portland is a paradise, no?
??
Meh. A link to one side of the issue, and no background.
I should care because...?
Why is it that liberal cities like Portland and Austin consistantly end up on lists of "good places to live"?
Yet conservative places like Dallas and Houston, don't?
Any idea how many businesses fled PDX & Multnomah County during that fiasco of a County Income Tax a few years ago?
??The lists are put together by staffs that are predominately liberal??
I've also seen lists that show that Lubbock & Salt Lake City are in the top 10 places to live--seems they were in conservative publications
I'm suspecting we will continue to see this trend. The words we speak and write must not offend anyone or else get labled a hate monger and lose your job, or even worse go to jail.
lubbock
I don't know what's worse. The protesters at Schumacher Fur's or the "Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act". Looks like Protester = Terrorist these days?
D.C.
Philly
Baltimore
Detroit
tell me when to stop.
You can add northern NJ to the list...
I'm still curious -- what's "fascist" about what the local government is doing in Portland? It might be "socialist" or some other "ism," but this certainly wouldn't seem to fit the definition of "fascism," except to the extent that "fascist" is incorrectly used on an increasingly-frequent basis as a synonym for liberal.
Big Brother taking away your business because they don't like the way you look.
perhaps it's the kind of character that this establishment tends to attract. just cleaning up an eye sore.
big brother is an over-the-top label.
That might be authoritarian, but it's not fascist. All fascists are authoritarian, but not all authoritarian are fascists.
To use a Wild Cobra cliche, I suspect there's more to the story than we're getting and it's difficult to know precisely what the impetus is for the local government in seeking to run out an established business. But it's not as if Portland's is the only local government that has ever sought to close out businesses for the purpose of achieving some governmental end -- local governments are possessed of eminent domain power and can certainly condemn properties in certain cir stances in an effort to achieve public ends. Standing alone, the fact that the local authorities in Portland might wish to shut down a business from operating in a particular location is hardly indicative of a Big Brother mentality. Undoubtedly, if the place was a long-standing headshop or was a purveyor of pornography, there would be many who would laud the City's action.
Without belaboring that point, however, I'm just struck by the misuse of the term fascist. It's undoubtedly a highly-charged term, but to quote one of my favorite movies -- " You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
not going to say this is the greatest example of fascism, but who makes those moral decisions like "kind of character" or "eye sore". I'm in favor of the citizens voting, but not the politicians doing as they desire.
Ever look at who makes up these list? Question answered.
You want to live in Austin. I damn sure don't. The place sucks. Try driving there during rush hour. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Especillay on I-35.
apparently those in and outside of political circles.
this is the era of politicians doing whatever they desire. to clean it up, this time, you have to start at the top.I'm in favor of the citizens voting, but not the politicians doing as they desire.
the information reads that way.
the property doesn't have to be dondemned, it can just be seized.But it's not as if Portland's is the only local government that has ever sought to close out businesses for the purpose of achieving some governmental end -- local governments are possessed of eminent domain power and can certainly condemn properties in certain cir stances in an effort to achieve public ends.
agree, we need more info.Standing alone, the fact that the local authorities in Portland might wish to shut down a business from operating in a particular location is hardly indicative of a Big Brother mentality.
but the headshop would have the support of the ACLU in that case.Undoubtedly, if the place was a long-standing headshop or was a purveyor of pornography, there would be many who would laud the City's action.
from my point of view, liberalism is a religion that seeks authoritarian control.Without belaboring that point, however, I'm just struck by the misuse of the term fascist. It's undoubtedly a highly-charged term, but to quote one of my favorite movies -- " You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
What if the citizens of Portland are telling their politicians that they want this place closed?
Would you have the same quarrel if the politicians were acting to shut down a sexually-oriented business whose activities are perfectly legal but whose clientele bring an undesirable element to an area?
Not without providing compensation to the owner, which is the essence of condemnation -- a public taking of property justified by affording the owner just compensation.
What difference does that make? It's not as if there aren't those who support this business and wish to see it remain open -- see Wild Cobra's initial post.
But conservatism seeks no such thing, right?
Why the would a retired person drive anywhere during rush hour? That's just stupid.
Working nonstandard hours is the way to go.
If they vote it out, then that's ok in my eyes.
we're acting like we have complete information about this shop and we don't, so it's hard to say it's equivalent to a porn shop. I do agree with you 100% that fascism is inappropriate in this case from what I can see. I'm just extra sensitive to these types of cases now that the liberals will most certainly be in charge.Would you have the same quarrel if the politicians were acting to shut down a sexually-oriented business whose activities are perfectly legal but whose clientele bring an undesirable element to an area?
So, you think that government should call for a vote before it takes any action and ensure that the action it takes is approved by the majority of those who vote?
There's a reason that we elect representatives -- and there's a reason that those representatives are forced to run for re-election after relatively short terms.
My point is that the exact same "concerns" could exist if this was a porn shop and it was conservatives in charge. If you disfavor government acting to condemn businesses in an effort to ensure the public good, then I think it's disingenuous to suggest that the nature of the targeted business has some bearing on the propriety of the government's action.
the point is, you're fighting for a porn shop and I'm fighting for a convenience store that has done nothing wrong according to this article. Porn exploits women and contributes largely to rapes, violent crime, and child molestation.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
