For the Palinistas

[Andy]

Without Government? not exactly. While the various homeless shelters that exist around the country are funded by a combination of private and government sources, usually private contributions dont cover the major costs.

Not exactly... The largest, most successful rescue mission in our nation today, is also completely independent of government.

Pacific Garden Mission located in Chicago.
They provide:

• Provides bed for over 850 people every night
• Provides 2300 meals on an average day
• They distribute 430,000 pounds of clothing a month
• Have a free medical and dental clinic
• Provide counseling support
• Have a career development and job placement ministry
• Have an English as a second language class
• Have a special jail ministry for those who are released
• Run Unshackled, a radio drama, now available on Podcast
• Have a free college level Bible and Career course

They recently opened a new facility still located in Chicago.

Keep in mind, not one penny from government. This is one of the charities I support myself.

Back to the point. The reason why private donations and corporate sponsors do not cover the whole cost of many homeless shelters, is because they don't have to. When government has it's hands out with OPM, why should they cover the full cost?

Reminds me of a story about a women in a large corporation who brought in a coffee maker. Pretty soon the all the people on the floor were drinking her coffee. Then people from other floors were drinking her coffee. Why? Because it was there and it was free. Why bring your own if someone else will do it? Within a month, she gathered up the coffee maker and took it back home. Everyone was outraged because they couldn't get anymore free coffee, even though they had to buy it themselves before she bought it in.

The point is, if homeless shelters had to be fully funded on their own, they'd find a way to do it, or find a way to cut costs to stay within their budget. PGM, decided to go a different route. Because government money has strings attached that are many times costly, they turned down money from the federal and state, and even the city. Instead rely completely on the giving of private citizens. Funny how they are the largest rescue mission in the nations, even over all those publicly funded shelters.

 

[Pandora]

Not exactly... The largest, most successful rescue mission in our nation today, is also completely independent of government.

Pacific Garden Mission located in Chicago.
They provide:

• Provides bed for over 850 people every night
• Provides 2300 meals on an average day
• They distribute 430,000 pounds of clothing a month
• Have a free medical and dental clinic
• Provide counseling support
• Have a career development and job placement ministry
• Have an English as a second language class
• Have a special jail ministry for those who are released
• Run Unshackled, a radio drama, now available on Podcast
• Have a free college level Bible and Career course

They recently opened a new facility still located in Chicago.

Keep in mind, not one penny from government. This is one of the charities I support myself.

Back to the point. The reason why private donations and corporate sponsors do not cover the whole cost of many homeless shelters, is because they don't have to. When government has it's hands out with OPM, why should they cover the full cost?

Reminds me of a story about a women in a large corporation who brought in a coffee maker. Pretty soon the all the people on the floor were drinking her coffee. Then people from other floors were drinking her coffee. Why? Because it was there and it was free. Why bring your own if someone else will do it? Within a month, she gathered up the coffee maker and took it back home. Everyone was outraged because they couldn't get anymore free coffee, even though they had to buy it themselves before she bought it in.

The point is, if homeless shelters had to be fully funded on their own, they'd find a way to do it, or find a way to cut costs to stay within their budget. PGM, decided to go a different route. Because government money has strings attached that are many times costly, they turned down money from the federal and state, and even the city. Instead rely completely on the giving of private citizens. Funny how they are the largest rescue mission in the nations, even over all those publicly funded shelters.

Oh I love Pacific Garden Mission, they do so many great things for so many people. They have helped turn so many lives around.

 

[Pandora]

I wonder if obama ever gave an earmark to them.......for all the crappy things he gave ear marks to some how I am betting he did not bother with this good group

 

[Pandora]

You will find most Alaskans quite friendly. Even me.

Yes, everyone was friendly to me, but the shop owners were not always so friendly to the guys passed out at their step… I understand why but it did not make it any less sad.

Without Government? not exactly. While the various homeless shelters that exist around the country are funded by a combination of private and government sources, usually private contributions dont cover the major costs.

Ugh! You sound like Obama…..the government is the only way……

There are groups that only have government help in that the donations are not taxable and they do so much great work. It can be done there too, all you need are people who know and believe the power of us is stronger than the power of government.

OK, sorry for the confusion. In Alaska we have a system when it comes to alchohol availability that is based on local option. As I said before there are three options. Wet, Damp, and Dry. Wet(like Juneau and most large communties) meaning the community is basically full service concerning alcohol. Meaning liquor stores, bars, and restaraunts that serve. Then there is damp, meaning that someone can bring in booze from elsewhere and drink it in thier home, but alcohol is otherwise banned from sale. Then of course there is dry, meaning any booze is illegal.

By chance are these rules based on the population of the Natives? Like where there are more white people its open drinking and where there are more natives its dry?

South Dakota had dry areas for the natives but not the whites. Once when I was in Umatilla Indian reservation (just outside of it) a white clerk refused to serve me because she thought I was from the Umatilla tribe, that stinks!

I do know natives (besides me of course) can not handle booze the same way whites can (except the Irish, I never met one yet that could handle booze) but I still don’t like rules like that. (Assuming that’s how your rules are)

So what often happens is that the folks from dry or even damp communities and they get a little wild in the wet towns. It is not the ideal situation, but the folks you saw were not likely actually homeless, but without a place to stay for the night for various reasons.

That even makes helping them simpler, don’t you have a mission there for someone to stay the night rather than sleep in the snow? If they have homes, jobs and lives but they just get too drunk to go home why not change the dry areas? Then you don’t have people sleeping and dying in the snow.

Without Government? not exactly.

You know, it seems to me that if the problem is these people can not go back to where they live in “dry areas” after drinking and are stuck freezing on shop steps
that government again is the problem not the solution

 

[Andy]

I wonder if obama ever gave an earmark to them.......for all the crappy things he gave ear marks to some how I am betting he did not bother with this good group

Of course not. Democrats are all about making people more dependent on themselves. Giving funds to a fully self supporting mission, would be a waste of stolen tax money, from a democrat prespective.

They are far more interested in giving money to political activist groups, or groups that would be dependent, and therefore politically active in favor of those supporting the hand out.

In short, only groups that can return the favor with either cash donations, or a wide voting audience, will ever get earmarks.

That said, I pointed out this group, as being an example of one of the many thousands of missions and rescue shelters, that operate without a penny from Washington vote-for-money machines. Even the local Columbus faith mission, doesn't take a dime of public money from what I understand.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

But again, my point is the hate filled stuff directed at the Palin’s is so much worse than the stuff directed even at the bush daughter.

Try puttin' the Bush-BIMBOS "a heart-beat away from the Presidency" and see what happens.

​

 

[PLC1]

There are places in America where alcohol is served to whites, but not to native Americans?

I can see the rationale behind it, as the incidence of alcoholism tends to be greater in the native American communities, but how is it legal to discriminate based on race?

I thought that sort of thing was outlawed during the civil rights era.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

There are places in America where alcohol is served to whites, but not to native Americans?

I can see the rationale behind it, as the incidence of alcoholism tends to be greater in the native American communities, but how is it legal to discriminate based on race?

I thought that sort of thing was outlawed during the civil rights era.

Thats like saying no booze for the Irish...of course we know that would lead to the overthrow of goverment and mass killing by angry Irish.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

​

"We are going to seek and we are going to destroy this candidacy of Sarah Palin’s because of what it is that she represents,’" the former vice presidential candidate described as the attitude members of the press adopted."

Gee....how odd.....Hillary Clinton managed to survive the same.....since 1993!!!!!!!!!!

At least Sarah finally made it to the Silver Screen.

​

 

[Bunz]

I only have a few minutes right now, but just to eliminate any confusion, the areas in Alaska that are dry, are dry to everyone. There is no discrimination based on ethnicity.

I have a few more posts to make, but I will do that later tonight, I need to go trap shooting now.

 

[Pandora]

I only have a few minutes right now, but just to eliminate any confusion, the areas in Alaska that are dry, are dry to everyone. There is no discrimination based on ethnicity.

I have a few more posts to make, but I will do that later tonight, I need to go trap shooting now.

Question:


The dry areas you speak of

Is it mostly whites who live there or mostly natives?

and are they mostly rich or mostly poor?

I am betting its a high population of poor natives in these dry areas.

When I was there, every single drunk man laying on the sidewalk or in the snow was a Native, I never saw one white man.

I have seen it in other states too

 

[Pandora]

There are places in America where alcohol is served to whites, but not to native Americans?

I can see the rationale behind it, as the incidence of alcoholism tends to be greater in the native American communities, but how is it legal to discriminate based on race?

I thought that sort of thing was outlawed during the civil rights era.

There have been many places that refused Natives "spirits" long after Rosa parks refused to stand up on the bus. While the black population was gaining rights and respect the natives were mostly forgotten.

It was only 8-10 years ago I was refused service because the white clerk thought I was a Umatilla Indian, and that could easily happen again. I might just see next time I go to Umatilla.


It was years after MLK marched and blacks could vote that there were still signs in yards in places like Colorado saying Mexicans and dogs keep off the grass.

We have always celebrated the rights of African Americans (RIGHTFULLY SO TOO) but we often forget other minorities who still have a hard time in (some) places.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

There is no discrimination based on ethnicity.

That's what "They say...", huh?


​

“So Sambo beat the b!tch!”

According to Lucille, the waitress serving her table at the time and who asked that her last name not be used, Gov. Palin was eating lunch with five or six people when the subject of the Democrat’s primary battle came up. The governor, seemingly not caring that people at nearby tables would likely hear her, uttered the slur and then laughed loudly as her meal mates joined in appreciatively.

“It was kind of disgusting,” Lucille, who is part Aboriginal, said in a phone interview after admitting that she is frightened of being discovered telling folks in the “lower 48” about life near the North Pole.

Then, almost with a sigh, she added, “But that’s just Alaska.”

“Juneau is a small town; everybody knows everyone else,” he adds. “These stories about what she calls blacks and Eskimos, well, anyone not white and good looking actually, were around long before she became a glint in John McCain’s rheumy eyes. Why do I know they’re true? Because everyone who isn’t aboriginal or Indian in Alaska talks that way.”

 

[PLC1]

That's what "They say...", huh?


​

If that story is even a little bit credible, how is it that it didn't surface during the campaign?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

If that story is even a little bit credible, how is it that it didn't surface during the campaign?

I don't know, its not really much of a story with out more backing.
Then again we are still waiting for gay sex proof and the Whitey tape the McCain nuts promised would come out for the election...