Thursday, September 19, 2019

ELLIOT HANNON of Slate - scumbag of the day award.

Trump Thinks San Francisco Homelessness Is Polluting the Ocean, Threatens EPA Action.

"President Donald Trump, known lover of the environment, has some (more) environmental thoughts he’d like to share with you. Following a trip to San Francisco, Trump blamed the city’s homelessness problem for waste, specifically used needles, that he says is getting swept through the city’s storm drains and into the ocean. It’s unclear who told him this was the case—or a real problem—but it was clear Trump liked the idea of big city burn, so whether it’s true or relevant or not doesn’t really matter to the president of the United States."

I am getting really fed up with these enablers. I think they should be forced to live right next to a homeless encampment and then we will see what they say.

The are just dishonest to the maximum degree. In case this scumbag doesn't know - the homeless set up camps in creeks which then...... run to the ocean! Duh.

I believe there is not a Californian alive that understands why these people are allowed to pollute without consequences. As a productive member of society we would get fined into oblivion. Yet it's costing our cities millions of dollars to clean these camps up.

They steal from our cities by overwhelming our resources. In some cities like Walnut Creek 60% of calls made to law enforcement are for homeless issues. And Walnut Creek is the Palo Alto of the East Bay. In San Jose most of the fires they respond to are from homeless encampments. Sacramento has spent millions cleaning up their camps. Even in my town there has been a murder at an encampment that was in the creek.

And the cities purposely do not keep statistics on these issues. Google tries to squash results. I've written about it a few times and my stuff doesn't even show up on Google.

All the time now I see business talking about closing because the homeless are impacting their business. Update - there is a new story just TODAY. ‘Drug use has completely taken over my block’: Mr. Smith’s closes after 15 years in SF.

It's not right. It's not humane. And these enablers are the worst people alive.


  1. If I was Trump I would send the CDC to San Francisco and places where they leave the homeless in this situation. I also think the Damn homeless don't have to shit in the streets. They were taught better but they do it because they don't give a shit and it's also a way to get back at people.

    Thus creating a disease crisis....which brings me back to the CDC.

    As for you being in the dumps?

    Cheer up and have a nice day!

  2. Can I use your comment on this article and send it to the Union Democrat as an editorial comment?
    I don;t know how to attribute it to you though...
    Better yet...could you send what you just wrote to them?

    Here is the email address:

    the only thing required is that at the bottom you use a first name and the city below that.

    I think it would fit right in. The crap they print in their editorial section is disgusting and it would be refreshing to have something that actually is good.



  3. Also.. I'm probably going to delete this reply tomorrow because I don't want everyone doing that. Just so you know.

  4. What most people don't understand about "the media" involves how it continues to operate with such a low bar for quality ...

    It's simple: all that's required is that you attract >= X readers and keep them so that you can sell advertising at a profit.

    Any money they make from subscribers? Great! That just guarantees the reader numbers that are required for selling advertising.

    As a reader or as a subscriber, you're not really thought of as being anything other than a target for provocative bullshit, eyeball catchers, and if you're dealing with any of the legacy of the Hearst empire, a gnarly death or accident on the front page.

    They don't actually give a crap about a "good editorial page" as long as it gets you to notice them and that you keep coming back for servings of this recycled thin brown gruel and confinement loaf they serve.

    So what you've actually done is that you've given this journo scumbag free advertising ...

    Ever wondered why there came into being an old literary habit of obliquely referring to people in the public light? It's not just to avoid libel and slander allegations -- by doing this, you're denying them the right to exist in front of your own readers and people who are paying attention to you.

    If you're really clever about it, you don't even need to cite the work.

    You can lump the specific hit piece in with all of the other similarly worded hit pieces and deal with it via rhetoric. If you want to assign identities to all of the scumbags, I suppose you could give appropriate parody and satire names to the writers, and that's lots of fun.

    Just call this one E. Coli Ham Sandwich at The Slate.

    You know you want to. :-)

  5. I know, but it's enough for me that their name comes up in google from time to time with that in the subject line. I did this a few years ago with someone else and I still get people coming in for that article. I don't know who they are, but I assume it's someone googling that persons name and being like - what IS that about?

    Many people like me google themselves from time to time and I like that this person might get a gut check every now and then. No one feels great seeing that in Google. It's my passive aggressive way with dealing with people who have no morals.

  6. Covertly trying to control journalist narcissists?

    That's a new one.

    It won't work because every link and every page view builds up their status and presence on the Internet, and even bad publicity feeds their narcissism.

    Stop thinking of the Internet as a place where "open conversation" happens -- that only occurs in little rarefied pockets on a few occasions.

    Instead, think of the Internet today as a Skinner box on an international scale with a built-in surveillance factor that goes along with it.

    I don't do passive-aggressive stuff like this because it's actually going to work against the intended goals anyway.

    There's a reason to use something like, BTW -- it's great for making sure these scumbags don't get any additional clicks and page views.

    Use it and stop giving these people some of your attention!

  7. I use noscript and never allow certain things to run.
    Google and everything google is at the top of my list.