Murillo Says She’s Not a Homeless Advocate

Advocate, or adversary? Either you're with us, or against us? Isn't that the failed GOP drumbeat warcry? This is an issue why?

Whew, thought Cathy had gone over to dark side from your headline. She still supports Casa Esperanza and the people who need services there. I owe her thanks for encouraging me when I was living in my car. Maybe she can put the community back into the Milpas Community Association. Go Cat-dog!

After reading Sharon Byrne's most recent article about the Milpas Community Association in the Santa Barbara News Press I wouldn't take their side.

"But, she said recently, the issue has become too complex to take sides."

All sides have a legitimate grievance, the answer (like the answer to the gang problem) is found in looking back to what society was doing *before* homelessness became such a major issue.

The solution to each homeless person's circumstance is individual, there is no cookie cutter answer but a good first step is what Mr. Clausen suggested.

billclausen for council!

Here is the complete link to the full article:

http://www.homelessinsb.org/articles....

It is nice to have information trickle out about this refreshing and seemingly atypical candidate Cathy Murrillo.

But conservatives will aggressively bully and beat up on anyone with overt compassion, creativity or even moderate positions. You cannot be an overt anything except straight mission position marriage, car-only and fairly hateful, to be acceptable to this new brand of conservatism.

To conservatives, the homeless are only a tool, a political pawn, just like bulbouts because they are an easy target. Homeless humans are more easily scapegoat-able than environmentalists, feminists, justice or social activists. Conservatives can't win going after what they are really after, so they develop boogie man scapegoats. Dale Francisco has stated that he will be working to get "like minded" people elected. Remember conservatives are ruthless and they have deeper pockets. When the gloves come off this time it will be nastier than faster than you can say Von Wolfswinkel.

Chamber groups (MCA) and certain council members (Hotchkiss) seem to think that those on the streets are just going to get in their BMWs and travel from service to service. Mean council member Hotchkiss couldn't even consider allowing a trivial and available $10k request by a liberal social services non-profit to allow a warming center to open up this past winter. I don't know how he will ever be able to legitimately consider the expensive requests from the Milpas Community Association especially since the city still has not fully recovered from the Bush-Era conservative caused recession.

This discussion about dispersing services to various areas of the city to equalize the burden seems democratic enough but what is crazy about that is that we have spent the last several years corralling those on the streets to this one area to get services. So we don't want or can't have people living along the railroads, high-fire areas, parks and schools and near neighborhoods. Now we can't have them in the commercial district either. So I guess the internment camps are next.

there are homeless and bums , one wants to improve there life and the other wants to just live off the good people, they are not all homeless. I will help the homeless that need a hand to get back on there feet.

When you see the same homeless person day by day in the same place doing the same thing.... what is that? Is that by choice, or is what is being provided by the community helping or hindering? Is the help enabling a self and community destructive lifestyle? You tell me? Allowing the homeless to violate vagrancy laws, impose themselves visually in a community that survives off of tourist dollars is a bad thing for all of us including the homeless. Saying they have a right to be here is not correct either. Santa Barbara could make a bold move and build a center to actually rehabilitate people, out in the desert or someplace faraway from the drugs and alcohol that make this group of people homeless. All the rest, who by choice, are imposing their lifestyle on us in violation of laws that go back hundreds of years, they are the problem and need to be dealt with. I know this is a sound idea and anyone who opposes a common sense solution like this has an agenda to protect. I was in Newport Beach for three days this week, I saw one homeless person. While the solution in Newport could be seen as insensitive because obviously it is law enforcement based SB on the other hand could do something bold and revolutionary. That is pick up the homeless using vagrancy laws, send them to a rehab center away from the lifestyle that they are unable to manage and then begin to reintegrate into society the ones that actually want and can change their ways. All the rest are law breakers and need to be dealt with by law enforcement.

Some of you people are absolutely underdeveloped and sadistically medieval. Round em up, imprison em, work camps, electro-shock therapy; lashings and whippings?

Keep in mind that there are a lot of us here who have many homes, possessions and toys and who are reportedly sane and that are causing many many more problems than these people on the streets. We just accept certain idiotic behaviors as the norm because the masses are doing whatever it is.