QUOTE(tessieca @ May 12 2005, 10:32 AM)
Please highlight even one statement where I have wished for their demise. Otherwise, knock it off with the unwarranted personal attacks. Put up or shut up.

Happened upon some of the initial propoganda for getting the city up in arms. Interesting enough in a past thread prior to the opening of the shop here is one of the instigators who helped the city to believe there was need for concern. Great way to stir up problems. I'm with Adamal. If you could apply your energy to positive community involvement, Folsom would be far better off.
QUOTE(tessieca @ Oct 14 2004, 04:07 PM )
Apparently, it is far more than a Frederick's with some toys. An X-rated shop might even be showing movies in the back.
The bars might be the only thing open in the evening on Sutter St. (although actually, the restaurants all are), but if they have fun stuff for the pub drunks to do after hours, I suppose the smut store will also stay open evenings. That'll give downtown a real "nice" air in the evenings. The Sutter Street Merchants might be concerned about scaring the families away. First, the bridge closes, then the council closes off all of the access to downtown, and now they're going to add smut. Snooks, Hacienda, the Museum, the Sutter Street Grill, My Brother Vinny's all will have to think about getting by with a few adult customers.
QUOTE(tessieca @ Oct 14 2004, 04:07 PM )
Forumreader has had some good questions that Sam and Misty don't seem to want to answer. That leads me to believe that the items they plan to sell really do require a back room. I wonder if the store is approved, who will be able to draw the lines about what is in the back room and what is in the front window. Once they're in, the owners' interpretation of porn is all that is necessary. I think the business owners on Sutter Street do have some real concerns. It's getting more and more difficult to spend time at those businesses, and this would just be one more reason to go elsewhere in Folsom.
I learned there there at 2 law firms on Ms Teaz's defense at a huge expense to the store. The one not spoken to in the article has a very strong reputation in civil defense. Interesting this was not spoken to in the article.
QUOTE(tessieca @ Oct 20 2004, 02:08 PM )
Too true. I guess some of us feel we have the right to stand up and say things just in case they're true, to avoid that worst case. Maybe call it playing the devil's advocate. Or wait, is that what the Dufours are doing?
"Devil's Advocate?"