Shocka! Latest Child 'Homelessness' Figures Grossly Exaggerated

As soon as I first heard this reported earlier in the week I knew it was bogus, considering the dubious track record of homeless advocates.

Well, sure enough, it's a crock.

I doubt the truth will be as widely reported as the fiction.

A well publicized report this week that an estimated 1.5 million American children experienced homelessness in 2005-06 did not use the federal definition of homelessness. Instead, it used a different definition that grossly inflated the actual number.

The report — released Tuesday by the National Center on Family Homelessness and reported by numerous news organizations, including FOXNews.com — estimated that one out of every 50 children in America experienced "homelessness" during that two-year span.

But rather than using the definition of homelessness established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Massachusetts-based organization used a standard adopted by the Department of Education that includes children who are "doubled up," or children who share housing with other persons due to economic hardship or similar reason.

The difference? About 1,170,000 children.

An estimated 330,000 sheltered and unsheltered homeless children were identified in HUD's July 2007 report to Congress as those who are "literally homeless," or those living in homeless facilities or in places not meant for human habitation, according to the report.

The remaining 1.17 million — those who are precariously housed or who may be doubled up with friends and relatives or paying extremely high proportions of their resources for rent — are not included in HUD's report.

Nobody is ever called to task for this nonsense and like clockwork, the next time a homeless group issues a press release, it'll be dutifully regurgitated by an unquestioning media.

Then the truth comes out and the story disappears.

San Francisco: The American Calcutta

Ralph Peters takes a look at the mess that is San Francisco.

ONE of the best ways to see a city's bones is to take a long jog in the hour before dawn. That's what I did in San Francisco this week.

The city reminded me of Calcutta.

By day, the camouflage of color and crowds makes the multitudes of homeless less apparent. At the chilly end of the night, though, they lie strewn on the sidewalks like plague victims, wrapped in filthy blankets and abandoned.

New Yorkers have no idea how bad a homeless crisis can be.

I didn't even run in the rougher sections, where old garbage fills the alleys and druggies prowl. My course ran from the slopes of Nob Hill, south of Union Square, down to the Embarcadero, up to North Beach and back. That's the better part of downtown.

My new symbol of San Francisco is a man with ulcerous calves exposed, head and torso thrust into a cardboard box in front of a Prada boutique.

What I saw as I sidestepped bodies wasn't just the failure of social policies, but a collective flight from responsibility. Shrugging our shoulders and declaiming The homeless deserve the right to make their own choices! just lets us all off the hook.

I refuse to romanticize the homeless - unlike those who live in San Francisco's multimillion-dollar Victorians and idealize the homeless from a distance, then cross the street to avoid giving a deranged beggar a quarter.

I haven't been in San Francisco in ten years now, but even back in 1998 I was appalled by the free reign the bums were given.

Read the rest of the piece, as Peters is spot on in his observations.

Just one thing, though. Imagine his reaction if he were to have seen this display?

Heartless Democrats to 'Hide' the Homeless

These hypocrites love to pretend they care about the homeless, using them as political mascots every opportunity they get.

But when it comes time to throw their lavish shindig in Denver next month, the last thing the limousine liberals want are any television cameras to see are bums wandering about ruining their carefully choreographed show for the television cameras.

Can you imagine if the Republicans tried something like this?

Heck, I can already see the Democrats busing in some homeless just to mess with the GOP when they go to Minneapolis.

The Democratic Party likes to boast that it's a big tent for all - except for the homeless at the upcoming national convention.

A highly unusual effort is planned in Denver, site of Barack Obama's nomination next month, to sweep the city's homeless out of view of convention-goers - by giving them free tickets to the movies, museums and the zoo!

A group that helps the city deal with homelessness says it intends to distribute as many as 500 movie tickets and passes to the Denver Zoo, Museum of Nature and Science and other city venues away from the convention center, with transportation provided, according to the Rocky Mountain News.

Right. As if the patrons of the zoo, museums and movie theaters want some human debris spoiling their time.

One homeless-rights advocate was fuming over the plan.

"It just sounds like another way to get rid of them," Kayne Coy, 17, who volunteers feeding the homeless twice a week, told the paper.

Denver's homeless also will be given the bum's rush to shelters normally designed to house them only during the winter.

Big-screen TVs are being donated to the shelters so the "patrons" can watch the convention and stay informed about the issues being discussed.

Sure. As if the homeless are going to sit around breathlessly awaiting some political speeches.

You can be sure while the Democrats are busy hiding them, they'll probably also be registering them to vote multiple times.

But shuffling the homeless away from the convention is not because Democrats don't want to encounter them, said B.J. Iacino, a spokeswoman for the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless.

"We are keen advocates of the homeless and want to protect their rights and give them options," she said.

Sure. SO if that's the case, why not just let them in to the Pepsi Center where they can enjoy all that great fat-free food at the convention?

Speaking of the homeless and hypocritical liberals, one wonders why they're treated so harshlay in a "a socially acknowledged, nature-loving town"?

Civil Liberties Horror: Berkeley Cracks Down on Homeless

You ever notice the practitioners of tolerance and diversity usually take a couple of decades to catch up with the rest of society?

Sure enough, the folks in Berkeley have now passed ordinances to help restore some semblance of sanity to their streets, and it's not just the homeless who are affected. Of course, the San Francisco Chronicle considers it controversial.

The Berkeley City Council approved a controversial plan Tuesday night to reduce unruly behavior in public places.

The new plan cracks down on yelling, littering, camping, drunkenness, smoking, urinating and sex on sidewalks and in parks.

The initiative, known as the Public Commons for Everyone Initiative, will provide more housing, benefits counseling and public toilets for the hundreds of homeless people in Berkeley. It also beefs up enforcement of laws against lying on the sidewalk and imposes a smoking ban in commercial areas.

What if you lie while you're on the sidewalk?

Under the plan, seniors or social workers would walk around monitoring street behavior and either direct homeless people to social services or call the police if necessary.

"There are people on the streets that we as a society are collectively responsible for," said City Councilman Laurie Capitelli. "I think sometimes people need help fixing their lives, and we collectively have to help people do that."

City staff began crafting the initiative earlier this year in response to regular complaints from visitors, merchants and residents that the city's public places were becoming increasingly inhospitable as a result of rowdy behavior.

The original plan, which the council passed in June, called for tougher enforcement of existing laws governing street behavior. Among the suggestions was a crackdown on sitting on the sidewalk, which enraged homeless people and their advocates who said it was overly punitive.

The revised initiative eliminates the sidewalk-sitting language but makes it easier for police to cite people for lying on the sidewalk. Enforcement would be a low priority between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. if no one complained.

Berkeley has had a mixed relationship with its homeless population for decades. Homeless people, the mentally ill, teenage runaways and others on society's fringe have long been drawn to the city for its plethora of social programs, good weather, progressive history and generally tolerant attitude.

But over the years, residents and merchants have developed a more complicated relationship with the city's street population as the city has become increasingly upper-middle-class as a result of soaring home prices, and the homeless population has mushroomed.

Welcome to the real world, you intolerant bastards.

Homeless Overrun Los Angeles

Anyone who lived or worked in New York City during the 1980s into the mid-1990s knows well about the homeless plague that severely damaged the quality of life.

The left misguidedly blamed the problem on Ronald Reagan without even addressing the pathologies that lead to a person winding up on the street.

Thankfully, Rudy Giuliani began addressing the problem with a crackdown on quality of life issues and things have steadily improved to date under Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

However, out west, cities such as San Francisco have now been totally overrun, and just now are realizing something has to be done.

However, down the coast in Los Angeles, the problem is getting worse and there's no hope in sight, apparently.

L.A. Falters Where N.Y.C. Got Smart

FOR years now, on any given evening, downtown Los Angeles has looked like a photo shoot from the Great Depression, with more than 5,000 homeless camped on sidewalks and streets. Some tents are tidy, well kept and seemingly well provisioned; others are filthy and decrepit. And some people are just sleeping on benches or concrete. All are living without bathrooms - or any running water except from hydrants.

This is a huge, dramatic version of the kinds of encampments (72 in all) that Mayor Bloomberg shut down all over New York last summer. It's also a vision of what might have hit this city if our leaders hadn't refused to take the politically correct course on street homelessness.

L.A.'s problems are about to get worse. Thanks to a recent agreement between the city government and the local American Civil Liberties Union branch, the mess will soon expand citywide. Homeless people in Los Angeles will be allowed to sleep on the streets and sidewalks of any neighborhood, from Skid Row to Bel-Air, from 9 p.m. until 6 a.m.

Call it a Bloomberg strategy in reverse.

Before this, police officers could remove anyone who violated L.A.'s overnight sleeping ban, which applied everywhere but downtown. Now, under the settlement, the city can't enforce the ban anywhere, even in residential neighborhoods, until it builds 1,250 units of "supportive housing" - which is at least three years into the future.

It's terrible public policy - a capitulation to the worst ideas of the 1960s and '70s, when street people roamed American cities while advocates and officials told irate citizens that nothing could or should be done.

It gets even more depressing.

Read it all.

Famously 'Tolerant' People No Longer Very Tolerant

Of course, they're only tolerant to a certain degree. If you're a Republican or a member of the military, they hate you with ever fiber of their being, so my sympathy meter just isn't registering on this one.

Of course, in reality, they're the most intolerant kind of people--leftwingers.

After years of using the homeless as mascots and pretending it was Ronald Reagan's fault rather than assorted pathologies that caused people to live out in the street, San Franciscans have grown tired of the homeless.

Wonder what took so long?

Last time I visited in 1998, certain parts of the city were virtual no-go zones, infested and overrun by every type of human debris imaginable.

Residents of a famously liberal city appear to be changing views

San Francisco - the liberal, left-coast city conservatives love to mock - could be undergoing a transformation when it comes to homeless people. Although the city would still be a poor choice for a pep rally for the war in Iraq, indications are that residents have had it with aggressive panhandlers, street squatters and drug users.

"Maybe there has been an epiphany," says David Latterman, president of Fall Line Analytics, a local market research firm. "People have realized they can hate George Bush but still not want people crapping in their doorway."

Nice attitude. The difference between you and George W. Bush is he'd like to help these people. You idiots would prefer using them as political pawns.

Such compassion.

Consider the case of David Kiely, who has lived in the South of Market area for 18 years. He bought a home when prices were low and now lives there with his wife, Jenny, and their three boys, ages 7, 4 and 1. Kiely insists "we're not some white, yuppie parents saying we can't take this." In fact, he says, they donate to programs for homeless people at Glide Memorial Methodist Church and the food bank at St. Anthony Dining Room. But he's finally saying "enough is enough."

"I don't expect it to be Cow Hollow or Pacific Heights," he says. "But the other day Jenny is bringing the kids back from the park, and some guy is standing on the corner throwing up on himself."

Hey man, that's just diversity in action? Who are you to judge. If a guy wants to puke on himself, who are you to say it's not his right?

Trent Rhorer, executive director of San Francisco's Human Services Agency, is at ground zero for homelessness concerns. He's heard it from local residents at meetings, he's read the polls, and he noted the huge response to Chronicle columns about the homeless people and intravenous drug users in Golden Gate park. Like others, he thinks there's been a change in the way San Franciscans think the homelessness problem should be approached.

"I don't think this is a conservative or liberal thing," he says. "This is quality of life for everyone. What research has shown and what we have seen from visits to cities like Philadelphia, Chicago, Portland and New York is that you need to combine good social outreach with law enforcement."

Tell that to the ACLU. I recall when former New York Mayor Ed Koch tried to help the degenerate Billie Boggs out and get her to stop sleeping on subway grates, before you knew it, the clowns from the ACLU had her delivering speeches at Harvard.

So, as usual, the liberals are about 25 years late in coming around to where sane people stand on the issues.

That means something more than an offer of help, which often is declined anyhow. (One city official estimated that nine out of 10 say they are not interested in a shelter or housing when approached.)

"Maybe," Rhorer says, "you just need a guy with a badge standing over them and saying, you can't stay there any more."

That's tough talk for a city that's been known as a friendly place for those down on their luck. And in previous years it would have been a political non-starter. When Mayor Frank Jordan tried to push homeless people off the street with his "Matrix" program, the crackdown got much of the blame for his failure to win a second term.

But this has the feel of a new day in San Francisco.

"Homelessness, and quality of life issues, are dividing the liberals and the progressives in this city," says David Binder, a statistical analyst and founder of David Binder Research. "The liberals will say we've got to get tough on the homeless and the progressives are more old-line liberal."

Have at it folks. You've brought this mess on yourselves.

Read the rest.My solution for the problem is every self-professed compassionate progressive out there volunteers to each take in a homeless person, fedd them, clothe them and help get them back on their feet.

C'mon folks, man up and show how much you really care. Otherwise, you'll prove what we've known all along.

You don't care about these people at all.

Via Hot Air. More from Jules Crittenden, Five Feet of Fury, Moonbattery.