Thursday, October 9, 2008

More Orrin Deliberate Misrepresentations

We like to give Dear Orrin the benefit of the doubt. His out of context quotes and bizarre assertions using snippets of secondary and tertiary sources create some truly wacky assertions and conclusions.

So, let's ignore Orrin's hardcore racism, let's ignore his maniacal obsession with responsible dog owner groups, let's ignore his ongoing close association with the flotsam and jetsam of the failed Off-leash Hours Rejectionist micro-ilk.

Let's just say that Orrin's suffers from poor reading comprehension, and only sees the world through his anti-dog and anti-dog owner lenses and his very wishful thinking that off-leash recreation will simply go away after the micro-ilk's failed jihad two years ago actually codified and strengthened the successful 20+ year policy (thanks Orrin! and please give your buddies in Queens again our thanks for spending all that money on their failed lawsuit).

Here's some choice examples from one of his latest CREDO posts at: http://credo-ny2.blogspot.com/2008/09/credo-doubles-its-membership.html

Orrin exhibits his sadness that a squirrel which entered a house in Long Island was euthanized after the rodent bit the family dog. What Dear Orrin doesn't say, and which is clearly mentioned in the article in the same sentence, was that the squirrel bit the family dog AND the family teen aged daughter. Dear Orrin couldn't have left out the bitten teenaged daughter on purpose! It must have been an oversight for Dear Orrin. Or maybe not.....

Now either Dear Orrin wants his readership to be intentionally misinformed about the entire truth of the squirrel incident, thereby trying to throw more mud against his anti-offleash agenda wall, or Dear Orrin simply is a poor reader and missed those few word in the article that he quoted that a girl was bit by a squirrel. We hope that Orrin wouldn't have volunteered to transport and return a squirrel that bit a human into Prospect Park. So he must have simply misread this secondary source (as he's wont to do). Or perhaps Orrin secretly fantasizes about squirrels attacking off-leash advocates in the Long Meadow.

Also in the same post, Dear Orrin misreads an article in a Boston newspaper about a local politician who recognizes that Boston has less than one handful of few dog runs and Designated Offleash Areas, which has led the explosion of dogs and their owners in Beantown to seek off-leash opportunities that are not legal.

Unfortunately, the people of Boston, one of the largest cities in the U.S. have a severe paucity of off-leash recreational venues. The politician quoted in the article specifically mentions this, and which the politician conjectures may be leading to dog owners allowing their dogs off-leash in non-designated areas. The politician wants to encourage responsible dog ownership, so he is proposing a multi-prong solution for all the people of Boston:


Linehan has called for a public hearing to open dialogue between the groups
and to discuss whether the city needs to toughen up penalties for violating
leash and pooper-scooper regulations, step up enforcement, and look at the
possibility of creating more dog-friendly areas so the pets and their owners have somewhere to go
.

That Orrin has chosen to discuss this story is interesting, and points the wrongheadedness
in his years old "baby with the bathwater" approach to dogs and
off-leash recreation.

Orrin and his micro-ilk fought tooth and nail (no pun intended) against
Off-leash recreation two years ago, and failed in their
jihad
.

What this article shows is that the Boston politician quoted realized there's
a need for Designated Off-leash Areas in Boston. That to foster a culture of
responsible dog ownership, legal off-leash recreation must be part of the
equation, in addition to enforcement. This is lost on Orrin and his
micro-ilk, who simply want the policy banned and hope that dogs and their owners
somehow go away.

Perhaps Dear Orrin could re-read his secondary sources to learn that less off-leash opportunites in an urban setting for dogs and their owners increases exactly what Orrin doesn't like to see, nor responsible dog owners like to see--which is off-leash dogs where they are not permitted.

Perhaps one day Dear Orrin will see the light and realize that his "baby with the bathwater" desires are counterproductive and instead he should work with responsible dog owners and their usergroups to encourage respectful park stewardship, enforcement of the rules, and sharing of the parks with all usergroups--including dog owners. Perhaps under an Obama administration Dear Orrin will come around.