Jack Bogdanski probably can't help himself. He is a lawyer, and that takes a certain personality. And while not all lawyers are arrogant to the degree he is, it seems to be an occupational hazard of the job.

In this case, it's his speaking for a "we" he intends to mean the right-thinking people of Portland that troubles me. In his (typically) brief post, he uses "we" as if it's, well, everyone. Who he is really referring to, I think, since I doubt even he believes every single person in Portland agrees with him, is the "we" of those who agree with him. In his mind, as indicated by the tone of the post, there is a wrong way and a right way to think about the matter. For people like Jack Bog — and it's not just lawyers who hold the belief that what they think is Truth, although for lawyers it is often their job to convince others that their Truth is The Truth — the idea of "difference of opinion" is a sick old dog that needs to be put down, buried in a vacant lot and replace with a compliant lap dog. No matter how yippy.

Speaking of the passing of a man he accused of helping to change "Portland from a special place that we liked a lot to a fake New York that we don't like nearly as well," Bogdanski's use of "we" is the clear definition of arrogant. With no actual clarification of who is "we" is, the inference, of course, is that "we" are those who are correct in our thinking on such matters. That is, those who agree with Bogdanski.

I'm a native Oregonian, I've lived in Portland (off and on) since 1981, and I have seen the city improve so much over the years. Not in every way (TriMet seems determined to destroy bus service) but in many ways. The growth of light rail and trolleys, the East Side Esplanade, the growing inclusion of bicycles in "regular" transportation, the ability of neighborhoods (especially on the east side) to retain their character despite growth, the containment of growth (go visit Houston), the openness of the city to people of "otherness", the civility of our civic life — no, it's not perfect, but visit any other city in America of a similar or larger size, and it's hard (in my opinion) to imagine doing a lot better than Portland has done. Most cities, in fact, have done much worse. There is no comparison, in my opinion, of the livability between Portland and Seattle; we win that one hands down.

There will always be those who decry the loss of a place's charm and character — as they see it. This is a dangerous way to think. For every person who misses how more town-like Portland once felt, there's another who longs for the time when the queers kept quiet in their closets. Those of us who enjoy seeing the growth of diverse ethnicities in the city (and hope to see that reflected more in our governments) are matched by those who fear the loss of "real American values".

Using a word like "we" as indiscriminately as Bog does is never wise. Absolutism tends to cause problems, whether it's in deciding what a correct view of a city's character should be or who the right people to live in, or govern, that city should be. After all, the Founders used the same word — "We, the people..." — while excluding many of the people of the nation from sharing in the rights and liberties they were proclaiming.