Hutzpah
Randy Leonard
I am glad last week is finally history.
And believe it or not, dogs were not the worst of it.
The fun started with my conversation with the Oregonian's editorial board about the basis of my objection to the city paying more for the construction of the tram.
After reading their editorial the next day, I was left wondering why I was asked anything at all by the editorial writer.
Nothing I said changed the premise of the editorial; OHSU, victim, City of Portland, bad.
Now, I read in today’s Oregonian that OHSU decided to expand their hospital on the same spot as the original design for the tram’s upper terminus thus causing the construction costs to increase dramatically. The common thread in all of these meetings is none other than OHSU’s Steve Stadum.
This latest revelation, however, will not slow down OHSU’s false PR campaign to blame the city for the cost overruns while simultaneously asking the city to give them more money.
Unbelievably, the editorial board has targeted Commissioner Dan Saltzman as the council member most likely to be persuaded to change his mind (good luck). Why? Because he is the only council member (per the editorial board) with private sector experience.
As though negotiating toughly to protect taxpayers from paying one more cent for a tram that serves only OHSU is a bad thing.
Wow.
On a completely different subject,
after learning that Schumacher Furs in downtown Portland was the subject of weekly protests and that the Schumacher’s were complaining that the police were not helping them, I called them to ask if there was anything I could do to help.
After speaking with them, I asked that they put their concerns in an email to me. Within hours of that request I received a call from Jim Redden at the Portland Tribune saying that the Schumacher’s had called Phil Stanford (who notified Jim) that I was helping them get the police to do their job.
My nose began twitching. And I have to say, every time I smell a rat and don’t listen to my instinct, I grow to regret it.
I learned from the police bureau that the Schumachers, far from being innocent victims of protests, actually were taunting the protesters with signs such as the picture of this poster that adorned their business's front door. 
But my job is to fix problems. So, notwithstanding my growing sense that the Schumachers were actually adherents of the theory that “any press is good press”, I offered to facilitate a meeting between them and the police bureau to develop a strategy to stop the protests. The Schumacher's declined my offer.
This time, the editorial board was more respectful of my time. Without contacting me, they wrote an editorial slamming me for my failed attempt to help the Schumachers.
So today, after reading the tram story in the Oregonian, I began searching for the right word to describe my impression of OHSU, Schumacher Furs and the Oregonian editorial board.
Though Yiddish in origin, I have settled on the word “hutzpah”;
Hutzpah
n : (Yiddish) unbelievable gall; insolence; audacity
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Apr 2, '06
Randy,
Don't let the bastards get you down.
Apr 2, '06
Randy,
I don't always agree with you but this time you hit the nail on the head! Keep up the good work.
Apr 2, '06
Alternate spelling: chutzpah. It's the same as Randy Leonard ignoring the ongoing Disability Fund Fraud.
Apr 2, '06
Randy you left out the part about you suggesting that Schumacher leave town. That might have had something to do with the editorial.
6:34 p.m.
Apr 2, '06
That was Benson, Sasha. And it was at the tail of several things they were given as options to manage the situation.
That's the problem here: the Schumachers expected their issue resolved, rather than managed, as if their right to run a business exceeded others' right to protest their business on public right of ways. I mean, what else were they looking for? A no-protest zone to protect furriers of Portland?
It's a city. You live together with other people of all types, in relatively close proximity. That's how cities are. Like a crowded MAX at 5pm, you have to live with a little jostling and discomfort as you rub up against your fellow man. You manage it; you can't eliminate it.
Good work this week, Randy. Keep kicking against the pricks.
Apr 2, '06
Sorry Randy, though you get credit for doing your job and attempting a peaceful and civil resolution, no matter how crazy the store owners taunts at the protesters (they have 1st amendment right too)...NO city leader (you or the police) should EVER suggest that a business leave town. Perhaps a retraction and appology would be in order.
Apr 2, '06
Right on RL, stick to your guns.
Sasha, that’s what you get you rely on one source for your news – and it’s the Oregonian.
I can barely stomach reading the O anymore, particularly the editorials. Yeah, yeah, we get it already - Portland City Council: BAD; OHSU, PGE, and Schumachers: GOOD. What a crock.
Just another case of the "in-depth" journalism the O has come to stand for.
Did you catch their quotes from PGE's Peggy Fowler in today's business section?
Q: Let's talk more about the city of Portland... How long do you think this could go on?
(Fowler) A: ...it wouldn't surprise me to see them continue to be a pesky little mosquito out there.
Later, she was quoted as saying:
...I wanted to go down to City Hall and put a tape out of the Eagles song that (Don) Henley and (Glenn) Frey sing about "Get over it." (Chorus: "Get over it/Get over it/All this whinin' and cryin' and pitchin' a fit/Get over it, get over it.")
Fowler’s smug and arrogant attitude is unbelievable. The fact that the Whoregonian would print such adolescent drivel is worse. What a classless rag.
Apr 2, '06
Sasha and Jtt- If you click here it will link you to actual email exchanges between the Schumachers and myself.
If you click here you will see my letter to the editor responding to the Oregonian's editorial.
I never said or implied the Schumachers should move from Portland.
9:16 p.m.
Apr 2, '06
Randy--
I don't know about others, but when I clicked on the two links they both gave me errors.
Just wanted to let you know.
Apr 2, '06
The links worked for me. Just a heads up, Jenni: the links, while not linking directly to the pdf file, do in fact open up pdf files.
10:11 p.m.
Apr 2, '06
Odd-- my Acorbat says they're damaged and can't be opened.
Guess it's another of those oddities that happen sometimes.
Apr 2, '06
Jenni- I did the links again. Hopefully, it should work now.
Apr 2, '06
Randy:
I've still got those chains in my truck... of course, now it looks like there's a new hospital in the way...
Apr 2, '06
No problem, Don. I have a feeling we'd have a traffic jam of trucks and chains if we put out the "all call".
Apr 2, '06
Don't worry about it Randy. The O is writing for Washington and Yamhill counties. They could give two shits about Portland. The real money is in poking fun at those nutty liberals.
Those dim bulbs on the editorial board just fail to recognize what fools they make themselves to anyone with a brain.
The Pulitzer goes to the WW, and the New York Times and Washington Post cover the real news in Oregon. The Oregonian is just a mouthpiece for a small group of turds who confuse inherited wealth and power with intelligence and heart.
Kick keeping their ass around the block. You might not bat 1.000, but no one does, and it's obvious that you're trying your best to do the right thing.
6:31 a.m.
Apr 3, '06
Randy, Randy, Randy. Don't you know better than to let the facts get in the way of a good story? You've been assigned the role of the insensitive, anti-business politician but for some reason you refuse to stay in character. If you are not careful, you can be replaced. The show must go on!
Apr 3, '06
Randy Leonard wrote:
Unbelievably, the editorial board has targeted Commissioner Dan Saltzman as the council member most likely to be persuaded to change his mind (good luck). Why? Because he is the only council member (per the editorial board) with private sector experience.
Since when does The Oregonian editorial board give a hoot about private sector experience for our government leaders? They're solidly backing Tim "vote me into my first real job, ever" Wheeler for Chair of the Multnomah County Comission.
6:11 p.m.
Apr 3, '06
Don't take it too personally, Randy. As a candidate for public office, I find people make uninformed comments all the time... ; )
Apr 3, '06
Mr Leonard, you did tell Schumacher to move. I know you find them offensive in their behavior, but at least they are staying in their own store. Trying to spin this as not being anti-business after these people have been harrassed since November is not really fair.
I have no idea why you have no intention of stopping the PETA people from following people down the street - I have seen it. Or at least be consistent and tell them to move.
I am sorry the Schumacher's behavior doesn't meet the high standards of good manners I am sure you always practice, but they have been in town and paying taxes for 100 years. If they are doing something illegal then arrest them instead of taking potshots.
Apr 3, '06
Well, Steve, sorry. Making up what you think the facts are does not make it so.
If you go to my links you will see the sum total of all of my interactions with the Schumachers after I called them and asked them to send me a written version of what they were alleging. I never said or implied they should move. I offered to meet with them and the police bureau to come up with a plan to deal with the protesters. They declined.
However, in the context of your various comments that I recall reading, It appears facts mean little to you...and all under the protective guise of anonymity. How edgy.
Apr 3, '06
"...I find people make uninformed comments all the time... ; )"
Welcome to my world, Ted. Aint it fun?
10:50 p.m.
Apr 3, '06
If they are doing something illegal then arrest them instead of taking potshots.
Alas, we don't have a criminal stupidity statute.
Apr 3, '06
And Steve, PETA has nothing to do with the Schumacher protests. Those who don't take the time to find out the facts almost always seem to think PETA is behind any animal rights activism. I've been hearing it for years, and not just my years living in Oregon (moved here 8/2000), those darn PETA people. Come down and chat with us on a Saturday afternoon, we don't bite, we are friendly. We are older folks, we are students, we are working people. Yes, I've participated in the protests, and no I have not harassed anyone. We are passionate and we are exercising our right to free speech, we're still allowed in the good old USA. We are not protesting on private property. We are not preventing anyone from entering or leaving the store. I have to warn you, if you aren't aware, you'll likely hear some chanting. In the months since the protests started there have only been three arrests for minor incidents. With an increased police presence (I suspect at least partially due to the increase media attention last week) last Saturday, we had a peaceful protest. I expect the same next Saturday. I am not the spokesperson for the protests, just a citizen who believes all sentient beings have the right to live out their natural lives free from suffering and exploitation. I am not alone. Is that such a terrible thing? The Schumachers are merchants of misery and that's why we're there. For most of us our efforts to create a more peaceful world are not limited to Schumacher's.
12:05 a.m.
Apr 4, '06
"Tim" Wheeler.... Ha!!!
4:57 a.m.
Apr 4, '06
all sentient beings have the right to live out their natural lives free from suffering and exploitation. I am not alone. Is that such a terrible thing?
Not at all. What's troubling, though, is in a world full of suffering and exploitation, a relatively small --and vulnerable-- store owner is being singled out for continuing protests.
Where and what's the goal line here? Shutting down Schumacher? Forcing them to leave Portland for Tualatin? Will this end the suffering and exploitation you protest in any demonstrable way?
After a point, it feels like the street preachers who harangue you about going to hell for your sins, while you're waiting for the bus. It gets old, and annoying. Along with freedom of speech there's a concurrent freedom from speech...no one wants to have folks in their face all the time.
You can do that. But its worth evaluating whether you're accomplishing what you really want, or working against it.
Apr 4, '06
I'm still trying to figure this out. First the big O claimed Randy told the Schumachers to skip town. Now the Trib is claiming the same thing,
"Last week Commissioner Randy Leonard said the Schumachers should consider moving out of town if they are not willing to follow the suggestions of the police."
http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=34677
however, Randy has countered here:
"I never said or implied they should move." and went on to accuse an 'anonymous' poster here that, "It appears facts mean little to you...and all under the protective guise of anonymity" as if, Mr. Leonard, you couldn't click his name, send him an e-mail, and more appropriately determine the 'anonymity' of this person regardless of the handle they use while blogging.
It does appears that at the very least, Randy, you did 'imply' that moving should be one of their considerations. It was you that stated, in that same article,
“That’s one option they have to consider”
Randy we are not the ones "making up what you think the facts are" as the it is unclear what 'implied' reaaaaly means coming from you.
Mr. Wheeler, right now you have my vote. However, making comments like "I find people make uninformed comments all the time" isn't gonna score you points in this town especially when Randy has been at the very least inconsistent in his statements to the media and the blogs he frequents. Unless that is, this comment was directed to Randy?
"I never said or implied they should move"
“That’s one option they have to consider”
sounds like Randy has employed Karl Rove to spin this for him.
12:50 p.m.
Apr 4, '06
Shame on the Trib. It was the very first sentence of their initial article, that BENSON suggested they move. In the aftermath, that has morphed into Leonard saying it.
I don't think Randy disputes it was said, I don't think he disputes that it was part of the "option package" they gave the Schumachers, and truthfully, he has not disavowed or distanced himself from the logic behind the suggested.
But he wasn't the one who suggested it, and I think it's unfair for either media outlets or blog commenters to say he did.
Apr 5, '06
MarkDaMan - I think "Tim" Wheeler was referring to Andrew C's comment. Andrew C might find it prudent to learn a bit more about Wheeler's employment history rather than to continue making uninformed statements, unless he prides himself on ignorance.
Apr 5, '06
Randy, If you want to double the current estimated cost vote on the 26th to stop work. Then after all the legal fighting is over the cost will soar to $110 million. Delays, changes to design always increase the construiction cost unless they are a value engineering change that is made because it will reduce cost.
Maybe the University should move to Hillsboro like they originally wanted to.
Before you vote be sure of the costs that the city will be liable for to terminate the construction.
Apr 5, '06
Interesting thing about the Schumachers' comments - Linda Schumacher said that the police did nothing about a protester who they filed a stalking order against when he appeared a couple weeks ago.
I represent that person in fighting the stalking order. It's interesting that the behavior that the person allegedly did doesn't qualify under the law for a stalking order. (I filed a memorandum of law with the court, and will be giving it to the judge at the hearing Friday.)
What Linda Schumacher isn't saying is that the police came out, measured the distance from the front door of Schumacher's to where he was standing, and found him to be more than 50 feet away. No violation of the stalking order, no harm done.
The "stalker" appeared again today, and I talked with him. We were on the southeast corner of the intersection, well over 50 feet away. Sure enough, Schumachers called the police again, they measured again, and he was over 50 feet away.
Hopefully, we'll get that stalking order swatted down Friday so the Schumachers won't use a legal process meant to protect people from violence to chill protected speech.
8:28 p.m.
Apr 5, '06
What Linda Schumacher isn't saying is that the police came out, measured the distance from the front door of Schumacher's to where he was standing, and found him to be more than 50 feet away. No violation of the stalking order, no harm done.
No harm done. OK. But there would be "harm done" at 49 feet? 51 feet is cool?
Years ago, I volunteered to be an escort for women going through the gauntlet of assholes waving pictures of bloody fetuses, and screaming "baby killer." Think you're passionate about people not killing animals for furs? Free speech?
Y'know...I walked with young girls, going through maybe one of the most traumatic experiences of their lives. Yeah...but it's all about "free speech".
Well...maybe sometimes it's about treating people we may disagree with --even strongly-- with some fundamental decency.
Apr 6, '06
Frank - the Schumachers are abusing the stalking order process to use it to keep people from protesting.
When protected speech is involved in a stalking order, the words and actions presented must be an unequivocal threat to the person seeking the stalking order.
And, according to the language of the order, 51 feet is OK, and 49 is forbidden.
The main case involving free speech and the stalking order Hanzo v. de Parrie does involve abortion protesters, but the only similarity is that both involve balancing of free speech and free access to a business. The biggest difference is that abortion clinics provide necessary medical services (not just abortions), while fur stores sell an unnecessary luxury product.
I would like to see the Schumachers claim that their product has the same utility as medical care. (Undoubtedly they will....their chutzpah knows no bounds...)
3:21 a.m.
Apr 6, '06
I would like to see the Schumachers claim that their product has the same utility as medical care. (Undoubtedly they will....their chutzpah knows no bounds...)
Not to play devil's advocate here --I'll really get the Tri-Met bus stop preacher screaming at me-- but...as passionate as anti-abotion demonstrators are, is their cause any more or less heartfelt to them --the killing of babies, in their minds-- than the anal electrocution of minks is to the anti-fur folks? (The wrong answer gets to sentenced to eternity, waiting at the #14 bus stop, endlesly berated as the spawn of Satan!)
The debate shouldn't be about the sincerity of people's beliefs, or the utility of what's protested. This is about civility on the street. Scream at me that I'm going to hell, and my wife is the Whore of Babylon...I would claim an equivalent right to tell you to go f**k off, and leave me alone. Is that what passes for "dialogue" in the marketplace of ideas? The new Socratic method?
Is screaming at each other really about "free speech?" I think the founding fathers had something a little bit more profound in mind. Free speech isn't about giving money to politicians, or stripping in nightclubs...is it? Maybe I need to get up to speed on this.
We should reframe what's happening on our streets. Screaming at strangers, in my opinion, sn't about "free speech," its about bullying and intimidating people. It's about making people feel uncomfortable. It's about driving a small business out of business... abortion clinic, fur shop, or gourmet grocery. Is this really Kosher?
Don't like abortions, don't have one. Don't like furs, don't wear one. Think force-feeding ducks and geese to fatten their livers is a bad idea...then don't do it and don't eat the products...and feel free to educate other folks to understand your point of view, and win them over. That's your exercise of free speech. Make me afraid to express my point of view, or have an abortion, or wear leather, or eat goose livers...we're slip-slidding over the line into intimidation and bullying, which goes well beyond the issue of free speech.
Which is fine...but don't wrap yourself in the flag of free speech when you're burning it. You might find its hard to put the fire out.
Apr 6, '06
Nicely said, Mr. Dufay.
Apr 7, '06
Don't like abortions, don't have one. Don't like furs, don't wear one. Think force-feeding ducks and geese to fatten their livers is a bad idea...then don't do it and don't eat the products
That sounds nice but there are victims, the animals who suffer at the hands of humans. Some of us care about that and we will continue to be their voice. The cruelty won't end by wishful thinking, by silenty hoping. Does the suffering of these animals matter to you? It seems not. I'm guessing it's because the victims aren't human. I'm guessing you've voiced your opinion and taken some action regarding the Iraq "war" and other injustices to humans. During the days of slavery would your perspective been 'if you don't like it, don't have one, but I don't have a problem with others owning and abusing our fellow humans'. I think the term to describe this is speciesist. Please tell me I'm wrong and how. No, we won't be silent.
Apr 7, '06
Hey Frank, intimidation is not our intent at the fur protests. It is to educate and raise awareness. Yes, some might feel uncomfortable entering the protest area, and maybe even the store but from my perspective that is a good thing. We don't prevent anyone from entering or leaving the store. Let's not forget the police are present during the protests. We of course want to discourage folks from buying fur from any store selling it. If the literature does it then good, if the video does it then good, and if the spirited chanting does it then good too. The choice is with the public and they will decide if stores like Schumacher's survive or not. I always attempt to have a calm rational discussion with the folks who approach me in disagreement. Frequently folks I meet on the street prefer to call me foul names, use profanity, and throw insults my way then run away. This is too common though I prefer peaceful dialogue. We do get the opportunity for peaceful discussions too, and I'm grateful for those opportunities. I think most people are compassionate and will make the kind choice in not buying fur.
3:48 a.m.
Apr 8, '06
The cruelty won't end by wishful thinking, by silenty hoping. Does the suffering of these animals matter to you? It seems not.
The issues is tactics. Do you care if your protest is effective or not? It seems not. You're losing the public relations battle.
What's your goal? Shutting down Schumacher Furs? Do you really think driving them out of downtown will save a single mink? More importantly, trying to drive a business out of business takes this issue beyond the boundaries of "free speech." You're no longer trying to convince people not to buy furs, you're saying they shouldn't be allowed to. It's for the animals. Well, I don't begrudge you your heartfelt feelings, but people react badly to being told what they can --or can't-- do, and what should be a consciousness-raising demonstration runs into something altogether different. Clssing down Schumacher Furs wouldn't send the message that cruelty to animals is bad. It sends the message that busineese in a vibrant downtown city aren't afforded the "protections" they would otherwise have in a mall.
Frequently folks I meet on the street prefer to call me foul names, use profanity, and throw insults my way then run away. This is too common...
Doesn't that suggest to you that you need to frame the conversation with the public differently? That the way the message is being delivered isn't reaching its intended audience, in the way that you want? Is generating sympathy for the fur industry the goal? Of course it isn't, but that's what's happening...because people sympathize with a small business, sympathize with people being made "uncomfortable" and intimidated.
Not to denigrate your cause at all, but there are many, many causes and issues out there. The guy who screams at me at the bus stop about how we're all sinners. Not that he gives you eye contact. Not that he has a coherent message. ("OK, if I don't get on the #14 bus will Jesus love me again?") I mean...what does he want to accomplish? What do you want to accomplish? Are you getting there, or is it just more noise, and people are no longer getting the message?
...Frequently folks I meet on the street prefer to call me foul names, use profanity, and throw insults my way then run away.
This is
Apr 9, '06