It’s On! Chicoans Take to the Streets in Protest

by Jack

There are two narratives to explain the crime trouble in Chico.  I’m talking about the crime that comes from the flood of vagrants now walking our streets.   Narrative #1 says, being poor is not a crime.  When you take away people’s homes they have to sleep somewhere.  These poor people could be you or me, the only difference is they lost their jobs, their homes and sometimes their families.

When Ronald Reagan closed down the mental health hospitals it put the patients out on the street to fend for themselves this is cruel.  They need a helping hand, not hated and villainized for problems beyond their abilities to cope. CA has a housing shortage, is it any wonder people are left homeless?  They need homes and an opportunity to find work again. And this is a total crock!

Narrative #2 CA liberals have had 10 years to correct a growing problem with tramps flooding into the state along with illegals, but all their big ideas have failed and at the same time they’ve cost us billions.  They (CA lawmakers) still have no clue who they call homeless.  They still think these bums are simply good people, out of work and homeless.  They are in denial that many are deliberately living on the street as predators and cons that they are!

For the most part the transients in Chico came here from other places, even out of state.  We are a magnet for bums and junkies.  Over half the nations so-called homeless now live on the West Coast.  Why?  They are not here looking for work, that’s obvious.

With these new kind of bums and vagrants has come soaring shoplifting, thefts from vehicles, bicycle theft, assaults, stabbings, aggressive panhandling, homicides, burglary, arson, human filth in public places, vandalism, drugs, prostitution and tons of trash.  You should see the trash left behind at camp sites in Bidwell Park, our polluted waterways…. this is what has been forced on us by these unwelcome travelers.

Chico is now known as a good place for bums, but not for taxpaying citizens.  We have the rep as a soft touch thanks to local liberals.   So the bums come here for all the free S- – -, isn’t that just great?

Look, we have no problem with helping the poor or people out of work and struggling.  We have compassion for the mentally ill too, but our ability to help these truly needy people is limited and what we do have is being consumed by the predators, bums and junkies.   They are spreading their bad habits in our community and that includes drug and alcohol addictions.

Chico never had a heroin problem until these creeps arrived.  We’ve found needles  left behind by druggies in the kid’s playground and in several public parks.  Downtown businesses are suffering from shoplifting and because the downtown is no longer considered safe… but the liberals talk right past these realities.  They are not hearing us, they only want to try to convince us we are mean people because we won’t give these bums our tax money for more programs.  So many of us have had enough and it’s time to do something….today is the beginning.

UPDATE:  Just got back from the rally.  Well over 1500 people showed up.  They were angry and frustrated by the lack of action to protect this community, but I saw no violence.  They feel the liberals on the City Council are trying to deal with problems that only involve a small percentage of the so-called homeless.  The rest of it, the crime, the filth, the trash, etc., they have no answers, except for denial and trying to change the narrative to one that fits their agenda.

This entry was posted in Environment, Health and Medicine, Police, Crime, Security. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to It’s On! Chicoans Take to the Streets in Protest

  1. RHT447 says:

    From your Declaration of Grievances–

    “We, the People of Chico, therefore resolve that this Council shall heed this call to action…”

    Shall? Really? Or what? News flash: Those in power don’t give a rat’s rear end what you resolve.

    1500+ showed up. Again, really? In a town the size of Chico, it should have been 15,000 +. Maybe most of them don’t give a rat’s rear end either. Look who they voted for.

  2. J. Soden says:

    Used to live in Chico. No longer. Chico has been under the thumb of the Lefties as far back as I can remember. SO GLAD folks are finally waking up to the danger what Chico and Taxifornia has become.
    Will be watching and cheering for Chico First!!!!!

  3. cherokee jack says:

    The solution to homelessness has been right here in front of us all along. Don’t our progressive schools teach Russian history? The Bolsheviks had an easy solution. It was called Communal Apartments. They understood that no family needed more than one room for living. In communal apartments several families shared the same kitchen and bathroom. A pre-arranged schedule kept it orderly. For emergencies each family kept a chamber pot.
    I’m sure our state government would back such a plan, and from what I see of Chico from out here in the hills, the present city council would go for it.
    The only difference from Bolshevik Russia would be the definition of “family” for scheduling room sharing.

    • Pie Guevara says:

      Stop it! Don’t be giving them any ideas. Before you know it the city council will be handing out chamber pots in the downtown park along with free needles and jumbo shopping carts.

  4. J. Soden says:

    Back at the start of the Demwit Debates, the criteria was how much $$ was raised in donation$ to qualify. Now the DNC has changed the rules to allow BloomingIdiotBerg to debate ’cause he won a poll he paid for.
    Off topic, but an excellent article if one is even considering voting for hm:

  5. Chris says:

    Off-topic: Julian Assange’s lawyers claim in court that Trump offered to pardon him in exchange for denial that Russia hacked the DNC

    Assange is a notoriously dishonest and bad person (whom the president has previously praised and who is now beloved by many Trump supporters), but I don’t know enough about his lawyers to draw a conclusion about their honesty or lack thereof. But if this is true, it is another example of Trump attempting to cover up Russia’s election meddling. While we will probably never know if Trump himself assisted in that meddling, we do know that he has denied Russian meddling happened at all on multiple occasions. And it would be a clear instance of bribery and an abuse of the pardon power, which is not supposed to be exchanged for political favors.

    But I guess the real question is: If this is proven, will anyone here care? Or will you defend it?

    • Chris says:

      Rohrabacher now says that he went to Assange without the president’s knowledge, but confirmed that he promised he would petition for a pardon if Assange would deny the fact that Russia hacked the DNC.

      Even if Trump had nothing to do with this, the question remains: why did Rohrabacher think Trump would be receptive to such an arrangement? And why have so many current and former Republican officials, including Trump, wholeheartedly embraced the Russian propaganda on this issue? Trump is currently firing national security officials simply for telling him the truth: that Putin is trying to interfere again to help Trump get elected.

      So what are you going to do about it?

  6. Chris says:

    The White House responds:

    “The President barely knows Dana Rohrabacher other than he’s an ex-congressman. He’s never spoken to him on this subject or almost any subject,” Grisham said. “It is is a complete fabrication and a total lie. This is probably another never ending hoax and total lie from the DNC.”

    So the administration thinks that Americans are stupid enough to believe that the DNC–whose e-mails were publicly released by Assange and Wikileaks–controls Assange’s lawyers and the claims they make in court.

    Are they right?

    • Chris says:

      Let’s take the biggest lie first: No, Hillary was not “instrumental in selling off uranium holdings in the U.S. to Russia.” There is no evidence she even voted for that deal, which was approved by nine separate agencies, and people involved have said that she wasn’t involved in the deal at all. It didn’t need her approval and no one thought it was a big issue in American or global politics. The only reason you care is because it’s a popular anti-Hillary conspiracy theory.

      Hillary did not break the law by deleting what she says were private e-mails–people do that all the time. The dossier was not “fake.” And I have no idea what you’re talking about with the numerology crack.

      Of course you won’t engage with the fact that a former Republican congressman promised a foreign hacker that he would petition the president to pardon him in exchange for pushing Russian propaganda and helping cover up a foreign attack on our country.

      • Chris says:

        I have proven over and over again that there is no evidence Clinton had anything to do with the Uranium One deal. Every fact-checker has confirmed this. You have not presented any evidence that she voted on the deal.

        As for the book you’re referring, I’ve done more research on the author and it appears I was wrong. I apologize for insulting him and his work.

        Your turn.

    • Chris says:

      Anyway, you didn’t answer the question. The White House thinks you are so stupid that you will believe that the DNC controls what Julian Assange’s lawyers say in court.

      Alternately, they believe that you are so supine that you will not voice the slightest ounce of opposition to such a ridiculous lie, even though you know it is in fact a lie.

      I’m not even going to ask if they’re right at this point, because your lack of an answer was, in itself, an answer. Instead, I’ll ask: which is it?

  7. Pie Guevara says:

    Spot on Jack. You nailed the ridiculous Rat narrative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.