Monday, February 12, 2018

A song to burn feminists up

Liberal progressivism stinks, literally, and it’s building sanctuary cities

By Richard McCarty

In recent years, liberals have been advocating for a way to “help” the homeless deal with the lack of sufficient public toilets. And just what is this brilliant idea? Is it more public restrooms, or more homeless shelters? No, their radical idea is to decriminalize public urination and defecation. Think about that. As the developing world embraces modern hygiene practices and races to stamp out the bad habit of open defecation, urban liberals in the U.S. are pushing to return our cities to the Middle Ages.

In 2015, San Francisco judges stopped issuing bench warrants for the arrest of those who failed to appear in court for quality-of-life crimes, including urinating on the sidewalk. The following year, those judges discarded 66,000 outstanding bench warrants. The judges wanted police officers to suggest treatment programs to offenders rather than write citations for quality-of-life crimes.

In 2016, New York City passed legislation sharply downgrading the penalty for public urination and other antisocial behaviors. According to the champion of this legislation, the purpose was to keep people from getting criminal records. Last year, the Denver City Council unanimously voted to decriminalize public urination and defecation. Their reason: to protect illegal immigrants from deportation.

While no decent person wants to see impoverished or mentally ill people being unnecessarily harassed by the government, let’s not forget that ordinances criminalizing disgusting behavior can have positive effects. For example, jail time — or the threat of it — could cause a runaway to reconnect with estranged relatives; incarceration could help an addict or alcoholic to give up drugs or alcohol; and the threat of an extended jail sentence could push some homeless people to move to a shelter where they might find resources to break out of homelessness.

Public defecation is a severe threat to public health. Recently, California has experienced an outbreak of Hepatitis A, which is spread by fecal contamination. That outbreak has sickened hundreds and killed more than 20. Many of those affected have been homeless or drug users. Public urination may even be a safety hazard: several years ago, a San Francisco light pole fell over on a car after being corroded by urine. Fortunately, the driver of the car was not hit.

Decriminalizing public urination and defecation is a threat to the environment. If human waste remained where it’s deposited, it would be bad enough; but it doesn’t. Unless the waste is cleaned up, it may wind up being dumped into rivers or other bodies of water. This pollution can lead to algae blooms and harm fish, aquatic plants, and other sea life.

Decriminalization of public urination and defecation is also a threat to jobs, the economy, and property values. With brick and mortar stores under siege by online retailers, and with mom and pop businesses battling for survival against much larger competitors, a filthy, smelly street just might force a business to close or move to a cleaner suburb. And with the closing of urban stores, life grows more difficult for those living in poverty nearby. Also, raw sewage can force the closure of beaches and fishing areas endangering yet more jobs. Furthermore, dirty streets and sidewalks can depress real estate values by discouraging potential buyers, thereby trapping owners in upside-down mortgages.

Of course, maybe there wouldn’t be as many homeless people in need of toilets if liberal politicians didn’t fight to keep students in failing schools, didn’t pursue policies that discourage the construction of housing, didn’t create laws and regulations that hinder job creation — and did not pursue sanctuary city policies to attract illegal immigrants.

Anyone who genuinely cares about the less fortunate should seriously reconsider their support for decriminalizing public urination and defecation due to its detrimental impact on public health, the environment, jobs, and property values. Finally, the EPA should investigate to see whether or not these localities that are doing little to discourage such unsanitary behavior comply with the Clean Water Act.


Massachusetts: Democrat legislator proposes bill to categorize Asian-Americans

Sounds a lot like South Africa's old racial classification act under apartheid

A State House effort to categorize Asian-Americans into specific ethnic groups is clashing with a vocal and well-organized opposition that has likened the effort to racial profiling.

A bill by state Representative Tackey Chan urges “all state agencies, quasi-state agencies, entities created by state statute, and sub-divisions of state agencies” to identify Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, as defined in the US census, in all data they collect and report.

But critics say Chan’s efforts would “subdivide Asian-American ethnic groups” and likened it to a registry to track Asian-Americans.

Emotions were high during a packed State House hearing on the issue last week, when at least one opponent carried posters with an image of Chan wearing a Hitler moustache.

“It’s gotten out of hand,’’ said Karen Chen, executive director of the Chinese Progressive Association, which supports Chan’s bill.

The opposition’s language and tactics have confounded Chan, who is of Chinese descent, and befuddled Asian-American advocates who have been asking for such data for years to better serve their community.

“There are a lot of inaccuracies’’ out there, said Chan in an interview in his office. “They are using inaccurate facts. And they don’t speak for all of us.”

Tricia Liu, a critic of the bill, said the disadvantages outweigh the benefits, adding that even a bill with good intentions can be misused.

“The thing that bothers us the most is: Why is this [only] targeting Asian-Americans?,’’ asked Liu, who said she is a strategic adviser to a group called Asian Americans for Equal Rights, which has been fighting the data collection issue. “We feel that Americans should not be asked again and again ... where they are exactly from.”

She argued that such questions from the government insinuate that there are two sets of Americans: The “more real Americans” and the “less real Americans.”

“We are proud of our heritage ... [but] where does it end?” for second and third generation Asian-Americans, she said.

Chen, the advocate, said the bill only targets Asian-Americans because Asian-American advocates, particularly in health care, asked for the data.

A House committee is still examining the more than 1,500 pages of testimony on the bill and will issue a report Wednesday.

The controversy playing out at the State House is putting a special focus on Asian-Americans, a fast-growing and diverse group in the state. Their ancestry has roots in a vast continent that has various ethnic groups who speak different languages and have different cultural norms.

The hubbub comes as the US Census Bureau is proposing to begin asking white respondents to write down their ethnic origins. In addition to checking the box that says “white,’’ respondents on the proposed 2020 Census would be asked to write down whether they are of German, Irish, English, Italian, Lebanese, or Egyptian origin, the census said.

Similarly, blacks would be prodded to note if they are African-American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Ethiopian, or Somali, the Census said.

Chan, a 44-year-old Quincy native and Democratic lawmaker, said he is simply following the census’ lead on a local level. The census has long asked Asian-Americans or Pacific Islanders to check off if they are Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Filipino, or Asian Indian.

Over the past 30 years, he said, Asian-American advocates and lawmakers in states like California, Michigan, and Rhode Island have been seeking such disaggregated data to advocate for better health care, educational opportunities, and cultural programming.

Now that effort is catching on in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, he said.

Under Chan’s bill, the five largest “Asian-American and Pacific Islander ethnic groups living in the Commonwealth shall have individually reported data as part of the total Asian American Pacific Islander reporting.’’

The ethnic information is voluntary. And any other racial group can also seek out similar information, Chan said.

The data would help organizations like Dorchester’s Asian American Resource Workshop advocate for appropriate funding, language access, and appropriate programing for Vietnamese youth, said Carolyn Chou, the executive director.

Chan added that the needs of the Cambodian population in Lowell are far different from those of the Chinese immigrants in Quincy.

Some Asian-American immigrants are refugees, with deep emotional wounds from which to heal.

“Every group has different issues, and [we need to have] different conversations about what the government can do for them,’’ he said.

“Asia is not a language,” Chan stressed. “Asia is not a culture. And Asia is not a food. It’s a continent. ... Why shouldn’t we all take pride in where we are from in our culture, our heritages and our languages?”

Paul Watanabe, director of the Institute for Asian American Studies at the University of Massachusetts Boston, described the opposition as primarily composed of a new Chinese immigrants who are largely conservative. They mostly voted for President Trump, he said, are distrustful of government, and are skeptical of the Census.

He noted that there is real fear among the opponents who may have relatives who can still recall the Cultural Revolution and data the Chinese government kept and used against its own people.

“But I think those particular fears are being preyed upon [by the opponents],’’ said Watanabe, a political science professor who has followed this issue closely.

Liu countered that she is of Chinese origin and is a US citizen. Her mother, who Liu said lives in Wellesley, is from Hong Kong and her father is from mainland China.

“According to this bill, I don’t even know which box I should fill out,’’ she said.


Atheists Complain About Gospel Music in MLK Day Celebration

The good people of Hobbs, New Mexico are under siege from a Wisconsin-based group of atheists, agnostics and free-thinkers who are angry that gospel songs were performed during a Martin Luther King, Jr. Day program.

“It is laudable that the city is celebrating Dr. King and promoting unity within the community,” Freedom From Religion Foundation legal fellow Christopher Line wrote in a letter to city leaders. “However, including gospel music and religious messages in the celebration is inappropriate.”

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a Wisconsin-based group of atheists, agnostics and free-thinkers that are on a mission to eradicate Christianity from the public square.

On Jan. 15 the city hosted an MLK Day march and program at Booker T. Washington Elementary School. The program was advertised as “an opportunity to display hope and faith.” Click here to watch the video.

FFRF said they were contacted by a “concerned resident” who discovered the celebration included “religious music performed by a gospel choir and numerous speakers that made reference to God and Jesus.”

“Officials are not permitted to lend credibility or prestige to religion by including religious messages in city events,” Line wrote in the letter to city leaders. “We urge you to cease including religious music and messages in official Hobbs events.”

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is apparently unaware that Dr. King was not just a Civil Rights leader – but he was also a renowned Baptist minister – a preacher of the Gospel.

It’s beyond ludicrous that anyone would take issue with religious overtones and gospel songs performed during a ceremony honoring a former Christian minister.

“This letter is a gross, intolerant display of anti-religious bigotry over the celebration of a man who dedicated his life to fighting injustice,” First Liberty Institute attorney Michael Berry told the Todd Starnes Radio Show.

First Liberty Institute, one of the nation’s most prominent religious liberty law firms, accused the atheists of being intolerant.

“No court has ever declared a ceremony observing Martin Luther King, Jr. Day unconstitutional because it featured a gospel choir and religious language similar to those of the civil rights leaders,” Berry said.

Based on the FFRF’s flawed argument, they would have also objected to Dr. King’s historic “I Have a Dream” speech delivered on the National Mall.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: