Dennis already covered just about everything that needed to be covered, but there's a couple of corrections that should be made to your assertions.
First, in regards to your definition of slumlord, while Merriams is one of my favorites and defines "slumlord" as you did, both the American Heritage Dictionary and Dictionary.com defines it as: "An owner of slum property, especially one that overcharges tenants and allows the property to deteriorate." (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=slumlord) (http://www.bartleby.com/61/64/S0486400.html) In a majority rule situation, we'd have to go with that, and I think it is a bit more specific than Merriams in this case. However, to correct your logic, I would not need to know Johnson's income if we accept your definition, but r ather the appraised value of the property, the average or acceptable rental amount for that property and what he charges (if I'm focussed on profit solely as a cash asset and not as equity or other value), all of which I do. I stand by my statement. I think those of us dealing with Johnson and others are in a better position to judge what is and isn't appropriate for referential use. Finally I don't "justify" the use of the word "slumlord" because it isn't as bad as "nigger", in fact I don't need to justify the use of the word at all because it is a legitimate description of a particular type of property owner that follows a particular set of practices. I dare you or anyone else to delineate the same justification for the word "nigger". Keith, however, is the only one so far trying to equate the two. And there is no way to logically or reasonably do that. "Nigger" along with racism are both invented concepts to justify Slavery and other atrocities committed against African Americans. Mentioning them in them same sentence or trying to use one to justify dislike at the word slumlord is not only offensive but disingenous in it's effort. I've yet to see one person lynched, raped, whipped, castrated, murdered etc., because someone thought they were a slumlord or wanted to justify their treatment of said slumlord. All we did was picket his house. And yes he does recruit Sex Offenders, he sees it as giving them a second chance and has said so. He doesn't, however, recruit them to Elk River. The name calling, as you put it, is not the effort we have put out. We are not standing in the street talking to people trying to convince them to call him a slumlord. It is referential and descriptive, and it is accurate. To be clear, it is not a term bantered around lightly or used on anyone who displeases us. We have a lot of good property owners and we praise and support them. We have a number of struggling property owners who we work with both out front and behind the scenes to try and get them the help they need or to find a more viable option for them and the community. And then we have the Gregge Johnson's of the world. So while it may raise flags for you or Keith, it is truly a reference to someone who will not work with anyone and continues to allow property to deteriorate and the quality of life in the neighborhood to be destroyed, caring only about the profit they are making. Jonathan Palmer Victory REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
