Special rights for the homeless! They and their White Walker-like advocates are setting up tent encampments on our property, like Portland’s own Army of the Dead (“Why do Portland’s homeless get special rights?” July 31). Woe is us! More hallucinogenic sausage ground from the mind of John Balentine.
Having gone through what was probably an ugly divorce from reality, Balentine is fixated on problems like politicians turning deserving corporate lobbyists away from their doors while allowing the homeless and their advocates unfettered access to the inner sanctum. That’s got to be why corporate executives are having to part with beloved yachts while so many of the dispossessed can afford happy family tents and shiny new shopping carts. Ha! Possessions after all. How unfair that we must support these wastrels, especially the veterans.
He writes as though we share the anger he must feel while driving down the street, only to witness the heartbreak of some veteran arrogating the public sidewalk. How can he resist opening the window, shaking his fist and yelling, “So what if you got your brains scrambled in Iraq! What have you done for America lately, you slacker? The CARES Act gave you vagrants $4 billion for homeless assistance, but banks only got a measly $18 billion in fees for processing relief loans to small businesses. And those guys have to buy suits. You smell like you don’t even buy soap. The horror! The horror!”
Balentine’s world counts as fair the working homeless paying taxes while the Orange Abomination in the White House brags about how smart he is to avoid paying them. Who wrote those tax avoidance laws, homeless advocates? The Balentine reality crisis is a complicated one and I defend his right to share his disorientation with us. But I keep in mind that his logic and morality would justify his starting a fight with Peter Dinklage and escaping it by bleating, “Low blow, you bully.” You’ve got to give him credit for stamina, though; he never tires of punching down.
Ken Weston
Bath
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less