More proof Seattle is one:
Seattle has always had an identity conflict. Gay bathhouses are allowed, street protests are legendary, and marijuana is, by voter initiative, the police department's lowest enforcement priority. Each summer a two-day event called Hempfest draws some 150,000 people who openly smoke weed in a city park with the blessings of the cops and the local government, which regards the festival as protected speech.Yet Seattle has long had an unhealthy strain of nannyism as well. Washington was one of the first states to prohibit alcohol in the last century, and the city's restrictions on strip clubs and card rooms are legendary. In the last five years, the nanny impulse has gone into hyperdrive.
We're #34 on the list of cities ranked in the link above. That's not a good thing.
Cross-posted at the Examiner.
Posted by Eric Earling at July 23, 2008 06:45 PM | Email ThisMost people look the other way until the thing that gets banned means something to them. So I ask the liberals that fly through here, that advocate that plastic bags, bottled water, conservative radio and all manner of things they don't like, what's your ox to gore? Shorts that are to long? Beer made from non-local hops? Sandals without socks? Public affection? Driving a car that burns gasoline? The more you get the government in the banning or restricting business (like plastic or paper bags, bottled water) the sooner they'll get to what you like, love or rely on. Then what?
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Conservatives speak out because they really believe the words above. Banning and restrictions are just intolerance and liberals are very intolerant. Liberals around here always disguise their bans under the rubric of "the common good". So you have to ask, "common good" according to who? But I as long as it's the other guy's rights you are restricting its OK. Right?
Pretty damned sad folks.
chrissy, chrissy, chrissy! Tsk, tsk, tsk! As the cafeteria convenience "Catholic" you are, you should be capable of understanding the concept of SIN OF OMISSION... or would that be like your "Catholicism" in relation to your baby killing support: politically inconvenient?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 23, 2008 07:34 PMI would say, too, that public health is an important function of the government, and there are some actions that can be defended on that basis.
To your credit, though, you're right in that there IS inconsistency involved with the way that these regulations are imposed, and that should be corrected.
Posted by: demo kid on July 23, 2008 08:04 PMThis article puts the lie to the idea that Seattle is a tolerant city.
The liberal elites are only tolerant of activities of which they approve.
GJiggy @1 is right on target.
Real conservatives are for limited government and individual liberty. They know that the law must not create victimless crimes.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on July 23, 2008 09:52 PMAnd oh, by the way, the rain that falls on your property belongs to the state too.
Posted by: Palouse on July 24, 2008 08:53 AM