?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Wrapped Up in the Flag

« previous entry | next entry »
Jan. 19th, 2008 | 05:23 pm

I dislike people who wrap themselves up in the flag to advance their personal agendas.  It's unseemly.  It cheapens the symbolic power of the flag. I consider self-serving calls to rally around the flag contemptible. 

I don't vote for politicians whose major ability seems their skill in draping themselves in red, white, and blue. I don't respect anyone who stands behind a symbol to get their own way.

This week's Bay Area Reporter shills for man whose dressing up his own self interest in the colors of the rainbow.  The article hypes "Neighbors oppose home addition near revered stairwell".  (Quick... without clicking on the article or reading further, can you name that "revered stairwell"?? I would never call this particular sidewalk with stairs on it "revered", "well-known", "important", or anything myself. )

The straight family above blurkerbear in the modest duplex on Douglass Street wants to improve the property by adding a story so that they can stay there with their two young children.  Another floor can be added, and the building will still be below the permitted height. Such renovation will improve the neighborhood.  Even with the additional height, it will be shorter than near-by buildings, too.

This project is being opposed by one of my tribe whose views from some of his three-level hillside building will be limited if the family is allowed to construct its addition across the street.  This man is trying to rally other neighbors and the city on the basis of the public views available on the historic steps.  The BAR dutifully reports that "Parts of the Castro, including the rainbow flag and the Castro Theatre, are visible from some of the steps."

Well, hogwash.

blurkerbear says he's lived in the neighborhood 15 years and has never seen tourists or neighbors using the stairs for its views.  
Of course, the complainer cannot fight the project because it blocks his view. That's not a legitimate reason to keep the city from okaying the construction.  So, he's taken the low route, using his PR talents and connections to whip up his gay neighbors into protecting his private enjoyment.

Disingenuous claims to be acting to protect the public good are immoral.

They make me angry.

What the City truly needs is more families and more children. 

The rainbow flag stands for diversity.  In the Castro the most underrepresented part of the rainbow may well be gay-supportive straight families with young children. It's a travesty to have "views of the flag" be used to trample the creation of the very diversity the flag stands for.

People who wrap themselves up in the flag -- any flag -- are scoundrels.

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {2}

(no subject)

from: fuzzygruf
date: Jan. 20th, 2008 02:02 am (UTC)
Link

Every time I use those steps, I stop and marvel at the view. I've blogged about it; but, I've never known the steps to be referred to as revered or historical. The proposed construction does look like it significantly obstructs the view.

So the family decided to live in a place not big enough for them? Sounds like poor family planning to me.

More families in my neighborhood this year has meant more screaming kids, making things worse, not better.

Reply | Thread

Immoral Disingenuous Claims

from: robinedgar
date: Jan. 20th, 2008 02:52 am (UTC)
Link

"Disingenuous claims to be acting to protect the public good are immoral."

That is just one of the reasons that one of my picket sign slogans says -

"CHURCH" OF THE IMMORAL MAJORITY

It does not get much more disingenuous than this -

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=fr&q=%22Diane+Rollert%22+restraining+order.+.+.&btnG=Rechercher&meta=

Gotta love this Totalitarian Unitarian "Citizens` Police Officer" though. ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xfxw1yZAS0M

What the Church truly needs is more justice and more equity.

Reply | Thread