How they're sitting - Page 5

44TH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE: The kids on Haight Street aren't exactly like the stereotype you've been told about

|
(182)
Haight Street travelers Smiley and Half Peach "spange" for drugs -- anti-nausea medicine for their carsick dog
PHOTO BY LUKE THOMAS/FOGCITYJOURNAL.COM

Smiley has a year-old behemoth black mutt with droopy eyes. He obliges her as she leans into him holding her spanging sign, which tells the world the pup needs Benadryl for an upcoming van ride to Southern California. "He's carsick," she tells me sheepishly. She admits that the dog can limit her mobility on public transportation, but his benefits outweigh his cost. He keeps her warm at night — and, more important for a young woman who is often on her own, he protects her. For a moment breaking out of tough girl mode, she tell me, "oh yeah, I don't have to worry about anything when he's around."

We talk about the perceived threat of dogs on Haight Street. "They want us to leash them, which I guess I understand — but look at that!" A well-dressed woman in her 40s has her Chihuahua off its leash and it has run into the busy street, with her in hot pursuit. "That dog's out of control," Smiley smiles.

PISS

Sitting against a mural on a wall where Haight meets Clayton, I watch Piss, an outgoing, gangly guy in his early 20s with a curly blonde mohawk in a growing-out stage. I ask him where he got his unusual moniker. "I like to get drunk and piss on things," he says.

Well. Originally from Billings, Mont., Piss has been traveling since his mid-teens. "Let's just say me and my family don't get along," he tells me.

His answers to my questions about why he's on the streets follow a path I see with many of the younger homeless youth: they insist that the lure of the open road was too hard to ignore, but eventually reveal that their parents kicked them out or were unable to care for them at a young age. Many, like Juju, another small-time weed dealer I met, bounced from family member to family member until frictions with them and their significant others left no recourse but the street.

Piss says he's been to every state in the country, plus Canada and Mexico. With so many years on the road, he is, as they say, letting his freak flag fly. Piss has a blue, vaguely tribal tattoo that curls around his right eye. He's wearing white tube socks on the dirty pavement. At first glance, he could be crazy — and maybe he is. Whatever his motivation for travel, it's not to blend in with the locals.

Piss is also actively spanging passersby in a manner that oscillates between off-putting and charming. "You got some money for some crack and ice cream?" he inquires of a passing trio of young women. They shake their head, but before they're gone completely he continues "I'm just kidding! I don't like ice cream! Hey miss, you have a nice ass ... day!"

Over the course of the hour that I watch him a stand up routine emerges. Beneath the grime, he's a charismatic kid with an enviable sense of comedic timing.

As he ranges up and down a 20-foot stretch of sidewalk, belly laughs are elicited from a few targets, dollars surfacing here and there. One man carrying an accordion and wearing an expensive-looking pair of leather Chaco sandals donates a handful of strawberries to Piss and to those of us acting as his entourage.

But Piss' play is a little rough — like a big puppy — and he's alienating the people who don't crack up over crack. A couple of people walk away quickly from his petitions shaking their heads over one of the zingers, their suspicions confirmed about those rowdy Haight Street kids.

He's not doing anything more than what young travelers do all over the world. Thousands of families bid see you later to young adults en route to Prague, Peru, and Perth each year, where they lug their dirty backpacks through the world's most wondrous towns.

Comments

People aren't living according to ideals of the 60s. They assert their progressive ideologies yet their lifestyles and patterns of consumption conform to the values of the dominant culture as much as those they profess to loathe.

Among no group is this more true than the aging hippies (or wanna-be hippies). They are no longer actively campaigning for social justice, no longer keeping informed of human rights violations around the world, no longer making careful choices in the marketplace.

The reason they no longer do these things (if they ever did them to begin with)? These things are HARD. It takes some effort to keep up with the issues and act accordingly.

This is why issues like Prop L are perfect. Bashing Prop L is EASY. They can look at these street kids with their era-appropriate props--their marijuana, their long hair, their clumsily played guitars--and imagine that by voting to let them stay on the sidewalk, somehow they are really being true to your progressive ideals. Bashing Prop L is the easiest way to assuage their liberal guilt.

Posted by guest on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 6:51 pm

Reprinting musician George Harrison's take on the haight:

"You know, I went to Haight-Ashbury, expecting it to be this brilliant place, and it was just full of horrible, spotty, dropout kids on drugs. It certainly showed me what was really happening in the drug culture. It wasn’t what was I thought of all these groovy people having spiritual awakenings and being artistic.
It was like the Bowery, it was like alcoholism, it was like any addiction."

Probably the smartest comment of all. There's quite a lot of difference between the uncivil, travelers, who literally crap on sidewalks (without the care as doing it on a newspaper and tossing it in the trash . . . and genuine street musicians).
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/06/guess_which_sf_hood_loves_si...

Posted by Guest on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 5:45 pm

>>>who literally crap on sidewalks<<<...........Yet another person who can't tell the difference between dog feces and human feces. I've lived here a long time and have never seen human feces on any sidewalk. I don't know where you people live who are dreaming up this fiction to try to make your right-wing point.
Also, the city's name is Berkeley. Berkeley. Berkeley. Either you don't know how to type or spell or you are simply repeating the right-wing's pejorative name for Berkeley. It's Berkeley. Berkeley. Berkeley.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 7:26 pm

From the article:
"Guess Which SF 'Hood Loves Sit-Lie the Most?'
"The douchey Marina District. "

Presumably the Tenderloin and Haight come in second and third in the rabid race to rape our civil rights due to the less dense population of douches. That's not to say that the douchiness of some of the individual sit lie pushers is not off the charts- we're talking Arthur Evans, Kent Uyehara, and Ted Loewenberg here!
Certainly a Triumvirate of Douches to be reckoned with.

Also, this article is four months old and gives no details regarding the actual numbers or methodology of this poll pulled from the collective ass of the SF Chamber of Commerce, who are known to be about as fair and balanced as Fox News.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 7:29 pm

You might want to re-think using a quote from George Harrison to support your efforts to criminalize sitting on the sidewalk.
First of all, he was high on LSD when he had the experience described in the partial quote you used.
Are you on LSD?
Maybe you are.
Secondly, Harrison returned to San Francisco in 1974 to do a concert with Ravi Shankar to benefit the Haight Ashbury Free Clinic.
They expanded their space and operation using money he donated to them.
So where he wanted to help people, you want to have them arrested and taken away to jail where you won't have to look at them.
Only a complete fucking idiot would find any similarity between your world view and your goals, and those of George Harrison.

http://www.drdave.org/Rock-n-Roll/George-Harrison-Photos.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=fLulFlbAJGgC&pg=PA206&lpg=PA206&dq=geor...

Posted by Guest on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 9:23 pm

I see that my three questions still remain unanswered by the right-wing supporters of sit-lie. They refuse to answer what they propose to do with the people who are rounded up under Prop L. They refuse to answer how they propose to pay for Prop L. It will require lots and lots of money and merchants & residents in the Haight-Ashbury have already said NO to additional cash for street services. Some of them want this revolting law, but they don't want to pay for it. They also refuse to answer the question as to whether it will be illegal to be homeless in the City & County of San Francisco upon the passage of Prop L. In their campaign to deceive the public, the supporters (including D8's Scott Wiener) also continue to repeat the same lies over and over about the police not having the necessary "tools" for dealing with people sitting on the sidewalks. The Law Firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP of San Francisco looked into this claim and their legal analysis revealed that the cops currently have the necessary "tools" they need (see What’s Wrong with the Sit/ Lie Campaign’s Story? published by the Bay Citizen). Sit-lie is not necessary. But of course the right-wing supporters don't care about facts. This is not about facts. This is about the wealthy "elite." They are what matter in their mind. They don't want to see poor people, homeless people and street people in the City. They want this City to be for the wealthy only. I see sit-lie as part of the attempted right-wing takeover.

NO on Prop L. Yes on Prop M. Don't fall for the lies being repeated by the supporters of this revolting law.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 6:40 pm

Paragraphs from the article "San Francisco's Sit/Lie Propositions Ultra Right Wing Roots"....

This same initiative was implemented in Los Ángeles and the results were disastrous; Over 1,400 arrests of poor african americans who now do not qualify for government housing as a result of committing the crime of sitting down. This happened when our current chief of police - Gascón - was second in command in Los Ángeles.

The roots of this proposition can be traced to big business, and the ultra right wing think tank Manhattan Institute.

The Seattle ordinance is nothing like the law proposed in Proposition L, and just can’t be honestly compared. The Seattle law only affects two city blocks. The San Francisco law would cover the entire city. The Seattle law is a civil offense, San Francisco’s law would be criminal. Seattle has a $50 maximum penalty while San Francisco would have 30-day jail stints and $500 fines. In addition, Seattle’s law took place in conjunction with the establishment of additional seating areas and an additional drop-in center for homeless people. San Francisco’s has none of that, and has actually eliminated shelter beds and drop-in centers in the past year. According to homeless advocates in Seattle, the sit/lie law there is not being enforced to any significant degree.

Palo Alto is barely worth talking about: Its law only applies to a small area (1/6th of a square mile) from 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. C.W. Nevius repeatedly brings up the case of a person who was prosecuted under the law, and calls him a “militant panhandler,” yet the only militancy of which this man ever stood accused was sitting down. Because of a disability, he was found not guilty.

Of course, in neither Seattle nor Palo Alto do they have a frothing at the mouth chief of police, ever eager to rid the streets of the downtrodden, as we have under Chief Gascón here in San Francisco. If we want to compare Proposition L with another city’s sit/lie law, we should really look to our tougher, rougher, bigger neighbor to the south: Los Ángeles.The enforcement program for the sit/lie law there was designed while out current chief of police Gascón was second in command. The San Francisco law looks and feels eerily familiar to the Los Ángeles one.

Link to the full article "San Francisco's Sit/Lie Propositions Ultra Right Wing Roots" on IndyBay....

http://tiny.cc/ca4tn

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 6:52 pm

I finally got an answer to one of the question I've been asking, but the answer did not come from one of the right-wing supporters. The voter information pamphlet says this (page 143):

Prop L would require police to warn offenders before citing them for violating the law.

Penalties for violating the law would be:

For the first offense, a fine of $50-$100 and/or community service. (How can someone who's homeless or a street person or poor afford that?)

For a repeat offense within 24 hours of a citation, a fine of $300-$500 and/or community service, and/or up to 10 days in jail.

For a repeat offense without 120 days of a conviction, a fine of $400-$500, and/or community service, and/or up to 30 days in jail.

(Question: Aren't our jails already full? How can a homeless person, street person or poor person afford ANY of these dollar amounts?)

Prop L will make it illegal to be homeless in San Francisco. Unconscionable.

Please vote NO on Prop L. Yes on Prop M.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 7:13 pm

You might want to re-think using a quote from George Harrison to support your efforts to criminalize sitting on the sidewalk.
First of all, he was high on LSD when he had the experience described in the partial quote you used.
Are you on LSD?
Maybe you are.
Secondly, Harrison returned to San Francisco in 1974 to do a concert with Ravi Shankar to benefit the Haight Ashbury Free Clinic.
They expanded their space and operation using money he donated to them.
So where he wanted to help people, you want to have them arrested and taken away to jail where you won't have to look at them.
Only a complete fucking idiot would find any similarity between your world view and your goals, and those of George Harrison.

http://www.drdave.org/Rock-n-Roll/George-Harrison-Photos.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=fLulFlbAJGgC&pg=PA206&lpg=PA206&dq=geor...

Posted by Guest on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 9:24 pm

From the article:
"Guess Which SF 'Hood Loves Sit-Lie the Most?'
"The douchey Marina District. "

Presumably the Tenderloin and Haight come in second and third in the rabid race to rape our civil rights due to the less dense population of douches. That's not to say that the douchiness of some of the individual sit lie pushers is not off the charts- we're talking Arthur Evans, Kent Uyehara, and Ted Loewenberg here!
Certainly a Triumvirate of Douches to be reckoned with.

Also, this article is four months old and gives no details regarding the actual numbers or methodology of this poll pulled from the collective ass of the SF Chamber of Commerce, who are known to be about as fair and balanced as Fox News.

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/06/guess_which_sf_hood_loves_si...

Posted by Guest on Oct. 23, 2010 @ 9:27 pm

Sit-lie law ruled unconstitutional
Panhandling - A homeless woman beats Portland's ordinance to clear sidewalks
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
AIMEE GREEN
The Oregonian Staff

A Multnomah County judge ruled Monday that Portland's sidewalk law is unconstitutional because it gives police the power to ticket people for simply sitting on the edge of the sidewalk.

Multnomah County Circuit Judge Stephen Bushong noted that the sit-lie ordinance was found unconstitutional by the Oregon Court of Appeals in 2005 and, although the city made changes, it is still unconstitutional. He also noted the ordinance conflicts with state law, which trumps city law.

The ordinance prohibits people from sitting or lying on the sidewalk between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. It also bars people from putting their possessions on the sidewalk unless they stay within 2 feet of the belongings.

Bushong noted that state lawmakers created a law -- disorderly conduct -- that cities can use to crack down on undesirable behavior on sidewalks, such as blocking passers-by with the intention of annoying or inconveniencing them.

At issue in Monday's case was Katherine Perkins, a 31-year-old homeless panhandler who was ticketed in August 2008 for sitting on a downtown sidewalk. Bushong threw out the ticket in his ruling.

Bushong's decision is timely: The sit-lie law, also known as the sidewalk obstructions ordinance, is scheduled to expire in October, and city commissioners have been debating whether to renew it.

City commissioners voted 4-1 in May to extend the law for five months.

Clayton Lance, Perkins' attorney, said the law targets homeless people because the city is worried about the impact homeless people have on business and tourism and, ultimately, the city's tax collections. Lance, who took on Perkins' case pro bono, celebrated Bushong's ruling.

"When will they start to listen -- that's the $10,000 question," said Lance, who believes city commissioners have little choice but to let the ordinance expire. "I think this ordinance is dead. They can tweak it all day long, and that won't make it constitutional. It does not pass the smell test."...

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1245725707...

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 1:45 am

How someone like Kent Uyehara, who makes a living from selling shirts and skateboards to some of the most hassled people on city sidewalks, could be pushing to restrict the use of public space even further is a little mind boggling.
If you don't like being hassled by cops, it's a good idea to never buy ANYTHING from this fascist in skater's clothing.
Americans who love freedom should take note of the merchants listed and pictured on the Civil Sidewalks Facebook Page and spend accordingly.

Watch for the Civil Sidewalks signs in windows. Tell them you won't be purchasing anything from them ever again, and why.

Support business owners who don't want to put you in jail for sitting on a sidewalk, and let the rest starve themselves out of business with their anti-social behavior.

Boycott FTC Skateboarding, SFO Snowboarding and Kent Uyehara.
Boycott all business owners who want to rob you of your civil rights and turn San Francisco into nothing more than a patrolled shopping mall.

http://civilsidewalks.com/supporters/

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=17629&id=118881101476559

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=21128&id=118881101476559

http://www.facebook.com/Civil.Sidewalks?v=app_2392950137

Posted by Guest on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 12:09 pm

As a supporter of Prop L - the civil-sidewalks law -, I'm delighted to see that Jennifer Friedenbach of the Coalition on Homelessness has emerged as the face of the opposition to the measure.

Hopefully, she will continue to get lots of media attention. If there's anything I can do to help her get more face time, I would be happy to help.

However, I'm disappointed in Chris Daly. He spoke out against the civil-sidewalks law at the supes' meeting on the subject but hasn't been very vocal since on the issue.

Chris, if you're reading this thread, please step up to the plate and make some fiery denunciations of Prop L. Your opposition to Care Not Cash was invaluable in helping it to pass.

So I hope you will follow your past example and continue with vocal opposition to Prop L. Please be sure to make liberal use of the word "fuck."

Go, Jennifer!

Go, Chris!

Who could ask for better foils?

Posted by Arthur Evans on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 2:07 pm

Instead of answering the three questions I've repeatedly asked Arthur Evans, I see that prudish, right-wing, smug, condescending and arrogant Arthur Evans felt the need to write about his continued obsession with Chris Daly. Chris Daly is not the topic but Arthur doesn't let that get in his way. I won't bother asking Arthur my three questions again because he's not going to answer them. I did learn the answer to one of my questions but the answer did not come from Arthur or any of the sit-lie pushers. It will be illegal to be homeless in this City should Prop L pass and I have cited the fines and/or jail time from the voter's pamphlet in a previous post for those who care. Arthur Evans and other sit-lie pushers refuse to answer how sit-lie will be funded and where do they propose to put the human beings rounded up under Prop L. Yes Arthur, they are human beings. I do get the strong sense that most people (the majority of voters) don't care about sit-lie (Prop L) or perhaps even know about it. I don't know if it will pass or not, but I won't be surprised if it does.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 4:01 pm

It's hard to do, because he's such a misanthropic little fuck, and he's clearly spent most of his energy and the better part of his miserable existence reveling in his ability to annoy and to spread his unhappiness.
But you have to face the fact that he loves this.
He is positively jizzing in his crusty old man shorts every time he gets attention here.
He will never consider anyone else's opinion, or feelings, or even their humanity, because he has none himself.
The worst thing that can happen to him is to be ignored, and it's not like his posting the 83rd comment on a five day old article will sway any voters one way or another.
He's only here for your attention, so deny him that.
Trust me, he'll miss it.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 5:41 pm

I agree with you, although I haven't been responding so much for him but rather to show to others what he really is. But I love the "jizzing in his crusty old man shorts" part. You got that right ! Thanks for your comment.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 6:44 pm

"he's such a misanthropic little fuck, and he's clearly spent most of his energy and the better part of his miserable existence reveling in his ability to annoy and to spread his unhappiness."

Posted by Arthur Evans on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 10:17 pm

Last night, I was awoken by cries of pain and a woman pleading for help. When I threw open my window, which overlooks the corner of Waller street & Cole just off of Haight street, I saw a "street kid" (he was in his late 20's at least but the SFBG says he's a "kid" so...) throw a homeless woman to the ground and begin kicking her while she begged him to stop. I yelled at the "kid" and hurried downstairs and outside to try and help the woman, but her assailant had already run off. I called the police and gave them a description of the suspect, but he got away.

Now, normally I wouldn't have any qualms about calling the cops on a man who beats women. But Caitlin Donohue's article in the Guardian has made me rethink all that. Was I jeopardizing the artistic future of my City by trying to have this guy arrested? After all, it's this guy's refusal to conform to the norms of society and his commitment to living outside the box which makes this city the kind of place that I want to be. And not only that, did this event even really happen? I mean, Caitlin Donohue came and hung out down in the Haight for a whole week and declared that there was no violence. So obviously my eyes were playing tricks on me.

I just wish I'd had Caitlin's article to read four months ago when a "kid" tried to carjack my wife on Haight street because she didn't have any small bills on her to give to him. Yes, it's true that he did try to smash in the driver's side window after she locked her car door in a panic, but he was wearing a tie-dye shirt. And I think we can all agree that anyone who listens to the Grateful Dead can't possibly be capable of violence. Right, Caitlin?

In closing, I just want to say, "Thank God for the Guardian". Without you (and you especially, Caitlin Donohue) I might still consider the aggressive sexual remarks these people make to women walking by as harassing and repugnant instead of what they really are: charming witticisms delivered with "admirable comic timing". And I might never have gotten beyond my innate selfishness, prejudice, and "jealousy" when considering the "kids" of the Haight.

Posted by Calvary Kendrick on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 10:48 pm

What drugs are you on? Whatever they are, they are not working for you. But have you thought of working as a Hollywood script writer? I would imagine they always welcome fiction writers and those who can come up with any sort of fictional story imaginable to fit whatever agenda is desired.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 12:08 am

Every single word is the truth. Feel free to check with the SFPD (or ask Caitlin to do it) about my call to them Sunday morning, Oct 24th, about 3 AM. Two squad cars showed up very quickly. I realize that thinking I'm a liar must make it easier for you to reconcile my experiences with your own idealized fantasies about the Upper Haight and what goes on here. And that's fine, I really don't care what you think. My comment was directed at the writer of the article, Caitlin Donohue. Since the majority of her report was noticeably lacking in input from non-homeless residents of Haight street, I decided to provide her with two examples, among many, of violent behavior.

Posted by Calvary Kendrick on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 12:59 am

Last night, I was awoken by cries of pain and a woman pleading for help. When I threw open my window, which overlooks the corner of Waller street & Cole just off of Haight street, I saw a "street kid" (he was in his late 20's at least but the SFBG says he's a "kid" so...) throw a homeless woman to the ground and begin kicking her while she begged him to stop. I yelled at the "kid" and hurried downstairs and outside to try and help the woman, but her assailant had already run off. I called the police and gave them a description of the suspect, but he got away.

Now, normally I wouldn't have any qualms about calling the cops on a man who beats women. But Caitlin Donohue's article in the Guardian has made me rethink all that. Was I jeopardizing the artistic future of my City by trying to have this guy arrested? After all, it's this guy's refusal to conform to the norms of society and his commitment to living outside the box which makes this city the kind of place that I want to be. And not only that, did this event even really happen? I mean, Caitlin Donohue came and hung out down in the Haight for a whole week and declared that there was no violence. So obviously my eyes were playing tricks on me.

I just wish I'd had Caitlin's article to read four months ago when a "kid" tried to carjack my wife on Haight street because she didn't have any small bills on her to give to him. Yes, it's true that he did try to smash in the driver's side window after she locked her car door in a panic, but he was wearing a tie-dye shirt. And I think we can all agree that anyone who listens to the Grateful Dead can't possibly be capable of violence. Right, Caitlin?

In closing, I just want to say, "Thank God for the Guardian". Without you (and you especially, Caitlin Donohue) I might still consider the aggressive sexual remarks these people make to women walking by as harassing and repugnant instead of what they really are: charming witticisms delivered with "admirable comic timing". And I might never have gotten beyond my innate selfishness, prejudice, and "jealousy" when considering the "kids" of the Haight.

Posted by Calvary Kendrick on Oct. 24, 2010 @ 10:51 pm

Well I suppose there could be more than one Calvary Kendrick in the Haight although I would find that a little hard to believe since it's not the most common name. This site (link below) shows that a Christopher Calvary Kendrick and Gamin Isobel Circe live at 1006 Masonic Ave, which is not the address (of Waller and Cole) that you gave and they bought a 3-story house for $1,300,000 on Nov. 13, 2009. If this is the same Christopher Kendrick as yourself, this is another case of the wealthy not wanting to see homeless and street people here in the City.

http://tinyurl.com/27aln9h

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 1:30 am

Yep, that's me :)

Posted by Calvary Kendrick on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 2:28 am

I live a half a block away (cole and beulah) and I am actually not richand an artist that mangages to support herself ( not that it matters) , and yes Barbera, this SHIT happens on a regular basis. ( And yes I know the difference between human and dog. Or is a very large, unhealthy dog that sprays/ smears shit all over the side of my apartment building? )
Who are you defending anyway? Some dirtbag that beats people up?
Get a grip.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 1:32 pm

You expect me to believe any of that? Artists don't act like rabid right-wingers because most artists are not far from being homeless themselves so they are not about to call a homeless person a "dirtbag" [sic]. It's the right-wing sit-lie pushers who need to get a grip. All during this campaign they have come on this site and the Chronicle's site especially and presented all kinds of stories (some that a seasoned and creative script writer couldn't even come up with) and presented their "testimonials" as fact. The sit-lie pushers will say anything to get this revolting law passed (which won't be funded by the way, so why pass it?). I don't believe anything they say because they are using fear tactics and lies to accomplish their goal. Using the fear card, deception and lies to get this draconian law passed. Writing some fictional story about throwing open a window in the middle of the night at the corner of Waller & Cole when one doesn't even live there!....Instead one lives over on Masonic but the person making that claim didn't think anyone would ever find that out. There's often one consistent theme in the right-wing sit-lie pusher's posts. They are so obsessed with bowel movement and urine. They love talking about shit and piss (their words) and do so in many of their posts. I think it's a sexual thing for many of them quite frankly, as much as they talk about it. To hear them tell it, every street corner in this City is piled high with bowel movement and urine is running freely in the streets down the storm drains (like during a heavy rain). That's the impression the right-wing like to give about this City. They need to get a grip. The difference between dog and human feces on the sidewalk is that human feces will most likely be accompanied by toilet paper because even homeless people have to wipe their ass. Dog feces will have no toilet paper with it. I guess the right-wing sit-lie pushers never thought about that when they come up with their fictional stories about having to spray down the sidewalks in front of their luxury homes. Lies, lies, lies, fear and deception are what the wealthy right-wing sit-lie pushers campaign is all about. The wealthy "elite" cannot stand to see people who are not just like them. They can't stand to see poor people, homeless people and street people. Well, one better get a grip because as this economy continues to crash one will see more poor, homeless and street people assuming one opens one's eyes. Today I read this article....put this title in your search engine....

Global Food Crisis Forecast as Prices Reach Record Highs
Cost of meat, sugar, rice, wheat and maize soars as World Bank predicts five years of price volatility

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 2:41 pm

"You expect me to believe any of that? Artists don't act like rabid right-wingers because most artists are not far from being homeless themselves so they are not about to call a homeless person a "dirtbag" [sic]."

lol

No, instead they just post a woman's home address on the internet as a way to try and encourage nut-jobs to target her.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 3:20 pm

>>>I live a half a block away (cole and beulah)<<<.............No woman's home address was posted. Re-read it. Just the general vicinity of where the person supposedly lives using cross streets. Many people live near Cole and Beulah of both genders so there's no way for anyone to target the person. And if the person was concerned about being targeted, why did they put that on here? But I suspect you are doing what they call trolling, so I'll just leave it there. LOL.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 3:54 pm

I live in the Haight and have witnessed the violence here firsthand. I have personally called the police when shopkeepers have been afraid to do it themselves. Afraid that saying something would make them a target for retaliation. When I have seen someone being harmed or hurt I cared enough to try to make a difference because that kind of violent behavior goes against everything that I love about this city.
I hate the feeling of living in fear. Whether it is a violent individual I encounter on the street or someone who hates me simply because I have a different opinion then them. I have worked hard over the last decade to build a life here. I have a right to be safe.

People like you are so fueled by hatred. You have such an overwhelming agenda that you refuse to listen to facts of everyday life in the Haight. Making accusations to try to demonize someone who has a different point of view. I first moved here because I wanted to be in a place where it was safe for me to come out as a young, lesbian woman. I needed a community around me that was supportive and allowed me to live openly and honestly as who I am, free from fear and intimidation. It is truly monstrous of you to post a woman's full name and address and incite violence against her.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 7:10 pm

>>>It is truly monstrous of you to post a woman's full name and address and incite violence against her. <<<.................LOL. Where did I do that? Please quote me. I have to ask you...What drugs are YOU on? Are you responding to the wrong person? Did you intend to respond to someone else? Please quote me where I have posted ANY of what you accuse me of. I have posted no one's full name or an address other than the address of Christopher Calvary Kendrick (which is public information from the real estate site I linked to where he bought that 3-story home for $1,300,000.00 on Masonic while pretending to live at Waller and Cole....lies, lies, lies). I have not threatened anyone with violence or with anything else. However, you are spreading monstrous lies about me. Your post is typical of the monstrous right-wing lies, fears and deceptions. Again, please quote me where I have said anything that you accuse me of. Lies, lies, lies and lies. Can't you rabid right-wing pushers of sit-lie ever tell the truth about anything? I hope the voters see you for who and what you are. Anyone who has to stoop this low to achieve their right-wing agenda has to be interested in something a lot more than people sitting on sidewalks. The Haight has long been what it is now. It really has not changed in the many years I've lived here. I see new people moving into neighborhoods and once they have arrived they try to change the neighborhood to fit their agenda. It doesn't work. This is San Francisco. Next time research where you're planning to move. And again, please quote me where I have posted a woman's full name and address and incited violence against her.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 7:51 pm

>>>It is truly monstrous of you to post a woman's full name and address and incite violence against her. <<<.................LOL. Where did I do that? Please quote me. I have to ask you...What drugs are YOU on? Are you responding to the wrong person? Did you intend to respond to someone else? Please quote me where I have posted ANY of what you accuse me of. I have posted no one's full name or an address other than the address of Christopher Calvary Kendrick (which is public information from the real estate site I linked to where he bought that 3-story home for $1,300,000.00 on Masonic while pretending to live at Waller and Cole....lies, lies, lies). I have not threatened anyone with violence or with anything else. However, you are spreading monstrous lies about me. Your post is typical of the monstrous right-wing lies, fears and deceptions. Again, please quote me where I have said anything that you accuse me of. Lies, lies, lies and lies. Can't you rabid right-wing pushers of sit-lie ever tell the truth about anything? I hope the voters see you for who and what you are. Anyone who has to stoop this low to achieve their right-wing agenda has to be interested in something a lot more than people sitting on sidewalks. The Haight has long been what it is now. It really has not changed in the many years I've lived here. I see new people moving into neighborhoods and once they have arrived they try to change the neighborhood to fit their agenda. It doesn't work. This is San Francisco. Next time research where you're planning to move. And again, please quote me where I have posted a woman's full name and address and incited violence against her.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 7:51 pm

"GAMIN ISOBEL CIRCE...AT 1006 MASONIC AVE"

Posted by Guest on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 8:29 pm

Oh that's what you're talking about. You can't be that dense, are you? That woman is Christopher Calvary Kendrick's wife/partner. She's listed on that real estate website I gave the link to because they bought that $1,300,000.00 house together at 1006 Masonic Avenue. It's PUBLIC INFORMATION. And I didn't threaten her or Christopher with anything. Do you get that yet? Do you comprehend what I write? Do you comprehend what you read? Or are you just an useless troll?

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 8:59 pm

Your the one who wants to put people in jail for simply sitting on a public sidewalk.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 7:56 pm

"Writing some fictional story about throwing open a window in the middle of the night at the corner of Waller & Cole when one doesn't even live there!....Instead one lives over on Masonic but the person making that claim didn't think anyone would ever find that out. "

Hey, Barbara Chelsai or whatever your real name is. I live EXACTY where I say I do. That link you provided Doesn't say I live on Masonic, only that I bought the property. You seem to have the same problem as Caitlin does. A severe inability to accurately interpret facts and data. In other words, you're a complete and total moron. Like I said before, every word I wrote is true. It's sad that you would rather defend some abusive junky rather than a battered woman. I guess that's just the kind of person you are though.

Posted by Calvary Kendrick on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 3:33 pm

@Christopher Calvary Kendrick.....I know that it says that you bought the property. It does not say that you live in that 3-story home but why would you (or anyone else for that matter) buy a one million three hundred thousand dollar home and not live in it? That doesn't make much sense to me unless one has a lot of money to throw away in this dismal economy especially with the housing market collapse. Are you living in a rent-controlled unit "overlooking the corner of Waller and Cole" while your $1,300,000.00 home sits over there on Masonic?

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 4:03 pm

Wow. So I did, for the record, vote agaist sit-lie. But what fucking ever.

Although it doesn't really seem to matter what I post because it instantly would be dismissed as "right wing propaganda".

Do you think that being right-wing and creative are mutually exclusive? What drugs are you on?

Also, the man who was beating this woman was called a 'dirtbag' because he was beating up a woman. NOT because he was homeless.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 26, 2010 @ 12:38 am

Because progressives don't care about anything but the agenda.

Your experiences should only reaffirm the way they think the world should work, anything else is is "right wing propaganda"

You will note that Sam/Barbara has an amazing skill of remaking your posts to fit his reality, better left not interacting with him, it justs feeds the paranoia.

Its better just to come here for the laughs, the intellectual backflips are always a comical event.

Posted by matlock on Oct. 26, 2010 @ 6:24 am

I come here for your fact free opinions and to watch you pour out rabid verbal foam at your enemies - THOSE PROGRESSIVES!

They are all exactly the same person, not individuals. This means that astute lapdogs like yourself can take examples of things said by two entirely different people, call them both "progressives" and then point out their "contradiction".
Presto. They done made an "intellectual backflip".
Apply derision and repeat ad infinitum.

Them progressives don't make sense, and they are always trying to steal away your rights.
Except in this case, where they are arguing against the destruction of civil rights.
But no matter.
Get 'em Lapdog Matlock! Get their ankles, and assault their ears with your mindless yipping!

Posted by Guest on Oct. 26, 2010 @ 8:21 am

Let's see, so according to this thread, if you don't blindly agree with what supposedly 'progressive' people are saying, you are 'the man'.
Never mind intelligent, rhetorical dialogue about a very complex problem.

There's another party that operates based on fear and ignores facts/voices of people they disagree with: The Tea Party.

All of us, rich or poor, are VERY LUCKY to live in SFO.

If there was a rich douchebag on the street beating someone I would call the police on them too.

Part of the reason many young/homeless people flock to the haight is because it has been historically an accepting, tolerant environment. SFO is far from perfect, please name another American city that commits as many resources to helping the homeless as SFO.

Again, no on L, however it does not help anyone if you stick your head in sand and pretend things are not deteriorating and becoming much worse. The only way to accomplish a real solution is to acknowledge there are real problems.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 26, 2010 @ 12:30 pm

U.S. violent crime down to 1973 levels
http://tiny.cc/e54tc

Posted by Guest on Oct. 26, 2010 @ 10:42 pm

Self-awareness is the ability to perceive one's own existence, including one's own traits, feelings and behaviours. In an epistemological sense, self-awareness is a personal understanding of the very core of one's own identity. It is the basis for many other human traits, such as accountability and consciousness, and as such is often the subject of debate among philosophers. Self-awareness can be perceived as a trait that people possess to varying degrees beyond the most basic sentience that defines human awareness. This trait is one that is normally taken for granted, resulting in a general ignorance of one's self that manifests as odd contradictory behavior.

Posted by matlock on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 12:50 am

There is nothing contradictory about Matlock (also known as Aunt Bee’s Anus) plagiarizing someone else’s writing and using it without attribute in an effort to sound learned.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Self-awareness

Left out the last line, though:
“This ignorance of one's own self is viewed in existentialism and Zen buddhism as the source of much human suffering, as noted by the famous saying from Zen buddhism "we are each the source of our own suffering."

"we are each the source of our own suffering."
See?
It’s not the “progressives”.
It’s you.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 1:37 pm

AARRGGHHHH So far off topic... on both accounts. You can use your vague, Western interpretations of Buddism to justify anything.

The main problem with the left ( and yes, I am a member, bitches) is that they waste so much time argueing about semantics, while the right is building and supporting powerful lobbies.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 2:35 pm

There can't be that many immature, insecure and thin-skinned people out there, can there be? The pushers of sit-lie frequently write stuff about women supposedly receiving "aggressive sexual remarks" from people sitting on the sidewalk. Even if that were true, we are no longer in elementary school where being called a name (regardless of what the name is) bothers us, correct? Some people are called names every day in any city or town not just here but around the world. What does the person who is secure with him/herself and mature do when they hear someone call them a name or a pejorative? The secure and mature person IGNORES the person (or persons) calling him/her a name and just keeps going where they were going. But the immature and insecure person does not ignore the comment and then goes and tries to pick a fight with the person (who might be mentally ill to begin with) and may get beaten up. So what did that accomplish? The right-wing pushers of sit-lie are resorting to anything they can possibly come up with to support this right-wing law. Hopefully what they are about will be transparent to the voters.

Posted by Guest Bárbara Chelsai on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 12:52 am

Check out the Facebook site for SF Stands Against Sit-Lie. Big news: Marc Salomon has announced he has voted against Prop L.

This announcement will be as effective in winning over undecided middle voters as are the testosterone fits of Chris Daly and the claim of Jennifer Friendenbach that Prop L is the result of a right-wing conspiracy.

No city-wide race can be won without significant support from undecided middle voters. The opponents of civility are doing everything in their power to alienate this group.

Their behavior brings to mind the Judean Liberation Front in "The Life of Brian."

Posted by Arthur Evans on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 8:50 am

Of course we can ignore being called names by the street kids and walk by- I know I've done it for almost 20 years. However I don't think they are the "soul of the city" or great artists" because they do this or contributing to culture. I've know many artists, writers and musicians who have had some success in the city over the years and none of them came from sitting out on the street yelling at people everyday.

Posted by Oh Barbara on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 1:39 pm
Posted by Arthur Evans on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 8:12 pm

So let’s see here...
You claim to have witnessed a fight between two homeless people at Waller and Cole last night.
And some kid asked your wife for money, and after some exchange you decided not to describe, banged on your car window.
Oh, and sometimes people make remarks in public that you find offensive.
Does that about cover it, you 1.3 million dollar crybaby?

I would also love to hear how having police arrest someone for innocently sitting in front of their own home on the other side of town, solves any of the problems associated with you investing in real estate in a neighborhood you are not comfortable in.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 25, 2010 @ 8:40 pm

Hmmm... I suppose you think the woman being attacked is a crybaby too? As a woman, I find your misogynistic hatred and your desperate attempts to apologize for a batterer disgusting. Have you no decency at all?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 5:27 am

Related articles

  • On the margins

    44TH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE: At risk youth struggle to get by in a city that's tough on young people

  • The soul of the city

    44TH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE: The creative class — particularly the young people who are going to be the next generation of the creative class — needs space to grow

  • On the edge

    44TH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE: For foster youth, turning 18 means growing up fast

  • Also from this author