That house that is for sale, might be a tough sell.

So now it isn't just houses that have been taken over by a big bad bank, but just homes that happen to be for sale.

And the house next door is teeming with squatters but the police just say "carry on"?

So today what in the news isn't taken verbatim from a government (police) press release?

I suspect the government news story writers now outnumber those in private news media and most were hired by government agencies from private media because of their history in spinning news to favor the tax-money spenders.

What year was it when the O was no longer a "local" paper,
but owned by concerns elsewhere?
Remember the Journal?

The other side of the story says the duplex was built on a lot split off of a foreclosure. They are helping the homeowner resist the foreclosure. Maybe if they'd let the homeowner split off and sell the lot, she'd have been able to pay off the foreclosed loan?

Banks aren't motivated to re-structure these loans. They write off the amount of the outstanding loan, and then sell the property == double plus good for the 1%!

I suspect the government news story writers now outnumber those in private news media and most were hired by government agencies from private media because of their history in spinning news to favor the tax-money spenders.

Metro has at least three such critters, if I recall correctly. I've seen several "news stories" in the Pamplin papers written by one of them, and printed verbatim.

Apparently there's a house near this one that's being occupied by squatters. However, that house is in foreclosure, so the police can't/won't evict the squatters because they don't know who the real owner is.

It seems obvious to me that the squatters are not the real owners. Get them out of there!

Nights and weekends most the Oregonian on line is cut and paste from PPB flash releases.

But it's even worse than that, Jack.

Often, PPB's flash report includes a description of an "at large suspect" together with a request for the public to notify the police if the subject is seen.

But that description (which usually includes race) is intentionally edited out of the PPB report by the Oregonian making the request worthless.

Then editors at the Oregonian delete reader comments pointing out their selective editing of the PPB report.

SOME NEWSPAPER !

I find the whole story suspect. It said that the occupier recently showered? I find that hard to believe.

The squatters, occupiers, burning arrow organization or what ever they want to call themselves seem to be part of a generation the expects the government, the banks, the taxpayers or whomever owes them a living with free higher education, free room and board, free transportation etc. just for protesting. What a crock to the rest of the population; the 99 percent and above that actually works to earn a living and pay taxes for the government services received. Do any of these occupiers even have legitimate employment? Many of them, like those camped out on the sidewalk in front of City Hall, just lay around on their cushy sleeping bags and provide lip service while smoking cigarettes and playing on their cell phones, the latter two of which can not be obtained free unless obtained illegally. Likewise some have big dogs that need feeding.

There are those in the work force along with many seniors whom have retired from the work force that don’t have cell phones, and don’t have or waste money on smokes or have a large pet to feed. The fact these occupiers are for the most part nothing but moochers; therefore not part of the 99 percent who work and pay taxes, what gives any of them the right to represent anybody but themselves?

Breaking into houses no matter who else owns it is a crime. Therefore, any free (to them) room and board needs to be behind bars in jail, where they can likely lay around and do nothing but provide lip service.