Progressive Dream – Free Booze To Homeless Helpless Alcoholics!

(PCC)Brilliant! Throwing more gas on the fire always puts out the blaze! Just like giving more booze to homeless alcoholics will always make them sober!  Governor Galvin Nuisance of California has come up with a dozy, the only problem is it will make the homeless alcoholic problem worst!

For only $ 5,000,000.00 the homeless alcoholics can have as much free booze as they want! What could go wrong? BTW – California is considering substantially increasing that $5 million budget!

San Francisco’s Bat $hit crazy $5 million-a-year program to give free alcohol to homeless individuals grappling with alcoholism has ignited intense debate and prompted significant concerns regarding its efficacy and ethical considerations.

Supporters claim  the program is intended to minimize harm by preventing chronic alcoholics from being on the streets and burdening emergency rooms. However, critics of the free booze program such as tech CEO Adam Nathan, are strongly criticizing the initiative as misguided and counterproductive.

Nathan, a prominent figure in media and community service, recently shared his concerns on social media about the sight of homeless individuals queuing up for their massive daily supply of alcohol. His observations highlight the concerning truth of a program that promotes addiction instead of providing a way to overcome it.

A program has been implemented to support homeless individuals. It involves providing delicious  doses of unrestricted vodka and free beer at specific times of the day, (aka Happy Hour) which are administered by ‘nurses’ in a Red-Light hotel.

Many Progressive volunteers see the free vodka and beer plan to be revolutionary, bold, and enlightened. Many Progressive leaders are rallying around this brilliant plan to manage the homeless problem!

“Giving free alcohol to homeless alcoholics will help those people become sober members of society!”

Although the goal may be to minimize harm and alleviate pressure on emergency services, the core issue lies in offering free alcohol to individuals grappling with addiction. This approach only perpetuates their dependency instead of tackling the underlying cause of their addiction.

Nathan’s critique of the program brings up significant concerns regarding its effectiveness and ethical ramifications. The author astutely highlights  offering complimentary alcohol to individuals struggling with alcohol use disorder fails to address the root causes  contribute to their addiction. Instead of providing effective assistance and resources for recovery, the program only facilitates ongoing substance abuse, trapping individuals in a cycle of dependency without a clear path to recovery.

So California is going to give free booze to homeless pregnant women as well! Furthermore, not only are Homeless people on drugs, infected with STD and have severe mental disorders but now the Progressive idea of cure is MORE of a dangerous substance!

In addition, the program’s annual cost of $5 million is causing concerns about how taxpayer funds are being allocated. Nathan raises valid concerns about the program’s approval and implementation process, emphasizing the importance of increased public scrutiny and accountability.

Although some may argue in favor of harm reduction programs for their potential to prevent overdoses and alleviate pressure on emergency services, the evidence indicates  their long-term effectiveness is questionable, at best. Nathan highlights the harm reduction approach of providing safe opioid supplies, which has generated varied outcomes and sparked considerable discussion.

As Nathan accurately points out, “Providing free drugs to drug addicts doesn’t effectively address their issues. It simply elongates them. We should prioritize the implementation of comprehensive addiction treatment and recovery programs to tackle the root causes of substance abuse and offer individuals the necessary support to overcome the cycle of addiction.

Unlike the approach taken in San Francisco, certain organizations, such as the Salvation Army, provide recovery programs  prioritize abstinence and offer comprehensive support to individuals striving to overcome addiction. By implementing effective strategies  focus on recovery and rehabilitation, rather than just managing addiction, cities can take significant steps towards tackling the underlying issues of homelessness and substance abuse.

It appears this is nothing more than Flawed Logic in action! Flawed logic is when something looks logical but is anything but! Example: Fish swim. Correct!   You swim.   Correct!  Then, you are a fish! WRONG!

Application: Alcoholics drink alcohol. Correct! Give an alcoholic free alcohol then he will become sober! WRONG!

Flawed Progressive logic in action:

They tax you into becoming wealthy!

They protect women’s reproduction rights by funding a reproductive killing act!

They give fairness to men so they can compete as women!

They give Illegal Aliens the right to vote so they can decide what is best for a country they don’t live in!

They give alcohol to alcoholics so they will become sober!

Final Word: I have a crazy idea which has worked millions of times and is a guarantee in cleaning up the streets, helps alcoholics recover, gets drug addicts clean and rebuilds families, but is whole-heartedly reject by Progressives!

So, what is Steve’s Bat $hit crazy idea which works every time? ……(wait for it)…..fill the streets with Bible banging evangelists preaching about how to get a new life! Within 2 years the streets will be empty and the churches will be full!

However, if you are a Progressive then your answer is to give free alcohol to helpless, homeless people to make them sober.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here