« Salem newspaper poised to publish gutless Measure 49 editorial | Main | Salem’s newspaper gets an “F” in journalism ethics »

October 21, 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This is good journalism, Brian. Too bad the paper doesn't hold to your standards. I'd like to ad a comment I posted to the SJ respecting today's article. In the paper, Dave H compares 49's fix to a Kevorkian fix. Analogies are cute, but they are tricky. I posted this in response:

Dave Hunnicut compares Measure 49's fix of 37 as comparable to Dr. Kevorkian's fix for sick people. I agree with Dave. 49 does just that. I commend Dave for his honesty; but, let's examine his analogy.

If, as Dave says, 49 Kevorkians 37, what then is it that 37 did to Oregon's land-use policy? For 49 to kill 37 (in Analogy Dave's eyes), what is it he finds fatal? Development limited solely by market conditions predicated on the date the property owner obtained the land (and limited by federal law, and public health, but only to the extent that Patti Milne and Sam Brentano feel threatened).

Think, good reader. "Development limited solely by market conditions" is as surely a gutting of Oregon's land-use as is Analogy Dave's comparison of 49 to 37. In reasoning, as in math, consistency and reason requires doing to one side of an argument what you do to the other.

Good old Dave just reversed the logo of the anti-49 advocates. He tells you, as obliquely and as disingenuously as possible, that 37 is in fact a wolf in the disguise of a sheep.

i have not heard how this is polling, have you? I lost my faith in the good sense of the Oregon voter when they put banning gay marriage into the constitution. That wasn't the Oregon I once knew, where I was born and have lived most of my life. The values that used to be important here seem to have been stolen by a group I had no idea was so powerful. The distortions in the No on 49 are just catch phrases to get people to vote, once again, against their own best interests as zoning benefits us all as we live closer and closer. Wonder how the Statesman editorialist would like it if some of his neighbors decided a WalMart on their land was in their best interests. Zoning protects us all and this economics first crowd, don't really want no zoning. I wish we could go back to before 37 but we can't. Now we have a measure that supposedly protects the right of farmers to let their kids live on their land, that loosens up restrictions but it was never the real goal. The real goal is to let the dollar trump quality lifestyle because today people seem to think there is nothing that matters more...

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Strange Up Salem

Welcome to HinesSight


  • Welcome to HinesSight. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • Church of the Churchless
    Visit my other weblog, Church of the Churchless, where the gospel of spiritual independence is preached.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
Blog powered by Typepad
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...