People keep asking me if I have heard the latest gossip or rumor or corporate/governmental propaganda pretending to be a news story on a website that pretends to be a news source. I always respond "No. I don't read that, it's not a news source." The questioner always looks confused. Afterall, these blogs and websites SAY they are news sources.... If I said I was Elvis would you believe me?
SO for those too young, or in their youths too unconcerned to know, there is a difference between a news source and a propaganda outlet. Here are a few pointers:
1. A blog or gossip rag has a point of view, and people that are on it's side and people who are enemies. The friends get unqualified support, the enemies get ignored or derided when doing something good, and flamed beyond all reason at every opportunity to be claimed to be doing something bad. News sources are different. They may have friends and a viewpoint BUT, they cover both sides of the story, and attempt to treat those two, or three, or five sides, with equal fairness or suspicion. The Iconoclast knows of A local blog touting itself as a news source that when reached with evidence of a really juicy wrongdoing by one of the writers friends said "Well there are two sides to a story" and then buried it. A REAL NEWS OUTLET won't do that. A real news source will go get both sides of that story and COVER IT, even if, or actually, especially if, it will kill a friends career.
2. A real news source will out the editors best friend, his wife, his kids, anyone for a story. Real news sources are devoted to this long lost idea called journalism, getting to the bottom of societies underbelly and shining a big 500,000 candle power light on it and taking a photograph.
3. If you happen to be a public figure, before a real news source publishes a negative story about you, they will at least show you the decency to know they are doing a story, and allow you to respond to what they see as the facts. A gossip rag fake news source, like A blog, will not.
4. If you are a public figure and a reporter calls you and asks for a quote and you tell them what you think, the reporter doesn't say "Well Gee we wrote the story and thought you would say something else" and when you explain why you didn't say something else and why you don't believe something else, they put your actual words together with dots.....and turn your thought around 180 degrees, what you have is NOT a News source. Especially if you complain to the publisher and they promote that reporter to City Editor. Ever.
5. Real news sources have multiple reporters, editors, and people who do research. Of course some gossip rags have the same, but generally a totally ersatz imitation news source is one guy with a computer.
6. Real new sources have people working at them who went to real journalism schools or have real degrees in disciplines subjects like science, history, art, music, architecture, not squishy degrees like communications, theology, general humanities and political science.
7. If its a real news source on the internet it also has a hard copy printed, a radio or television version. If its net only, sorry not a news source.
For those who are confused, the Altadena Iconoclast is NOT a news source its a personal opinion/observation/memories blog. Also for those still confused, there are only four local news outlets:
The Pasadena Weekly
KPCC
Crown City News
the Pasadena Journal
Each of those way back in my public life published both favorable and unfavorable stories about me or things I was doing. Sometimes they even got it right.
Saturday, June 15, 2013
Thursday, June 13, 2013
"Those Liberals"
A friend (former) posted to Facebook a song from U Tube sung by Doris Day. I noted below in the comments "Doris Day always makes me want to run out of a room screaming." It was an innocent observation, not intended on my part to be anything else. Certainly not a declaration of war. The posting person is in her early forties, is a divorced working professional, very intelligent hard working woman. Not one would think the sort of person who would idolize the Doris Day public persona.Doris Day's public persona not only makes me want to scream, it makes me want to vomit.
It was foisted upon the American Public as the role model for American Womanhood. No wonder Bettie Freidan and Gloria Steinem rebelled. For those too young to remember, the Doris Day Public Persona (DDPP for the rest of this essay) was one of a well dressed woman who was in a professional world where in order to survive due to the fragile male egos she was surrounded by she pretended to be both dumb as a rock and submissive as a starving kitten. She desired marriage to wealthy powerful successful men, and fended off every advance from them until they were "bagged". She outwitted everyone through continual and deep deception. There was not an honest dimension to her, and if society was in the 1950's and 1960's as portrayed in her movies, there was not an honest moment in it, either. The movies, values and society they portray are revolting. I am very glad the world went through the sexual and women's liberation movements of the late 1960's every time I think of Doris Day, because I can not imagine the hell of being married to such a creature. I can't imagine the hell of a society where men and women are on every level absolutely dishonest with one another. The world we live in today is not perfect, but its a whole lot better than the Stepford Doris Day world
Anyhow, my well educated hard working now former friend took great umbrage to my dislike of the DDPP. She wrote me a nasty couple of notes about me attacking her. I was confused. I have never seen personal disagreement as an attack. I thought that was strange, since she is an unconventionally lovely woman who I had in the past ALWAYS complimented on both her beauty and her intelligence. Her response was way, way, way out of scale, cutting and totally unexpected. It told me I had completely misjudged her as a person. She was "one of those "Liberals."'
One of "those Liberals"? you ask. Sadly, yes, "Those Liberals". Those liberals who listen to liberal talk radio and or go to events sponsored by some "enlightened" Church and can not, will not, tolerate anyone who disagrees with them on any issue. 'Those Liberals". You know the remarkably always in sync group thinkers who seem to have some chip implanted in their sub cortex that gets the latest talking points uploaded every morning from Palosi Central. You know, the ones who while they would be inflamed enough to shoot you, if they owned a gun, if you mentioned the remarkable similarity between them and Rush's Ditto Heads? "Those Liberals".
You know, the ones who have never disagreed with the Party Line of the moment, even if the party Line is 180 degrees opposite of what it was last year or last week? The ones who behave as if all politics and all philosophy are team sports, and if you are not 100% on MY team YOU are the ENEMY? you know, "Those Liberals" The intolerant of difference, while celebrating "diversity" ones? They make me feel nostalgia for my years spent with rabid Pentecostals.
They also make me feel very alone and very old. I suddenly remember my good friends of old...Hari Sihng Khalsa, a friend of many years with a absolutely razor sharp mind, wit and tongue. Hari and I worked tirelessly on the LaVina and water pumping at Devils Gate projects. We disagreed on many issues and perspectives, quite sharply. From what I understand, outside observers had no idea of either our humor, or friendship, and were both confounded and afraid of an outbreak of violence. We got each other and were free to express ourselves fully. Hari died of leukemia Thanksgiving Day 1995, as Veronica, his wife, and I held him. It was a deep loss.
I think of my childhood friend Larry Walton. Very similar story, except, sadly, Larry died alone some thirty years ago. I think of my friend Tim Berends. Tim and I volunteered together in Christian ministry and had the deepest of doctrinal disagreements, but we always pulled together for each other and the cause. I think of Max and Guy, two Republican lawyers who came to my rescue when Supervisor Antonovich arranged to have Art Snyder sue me. And Robin Salzer, also a Republican, also a friend, who at that time held fund raisers to pay Guy and many of my legal costs.
I think of Oscar Werner, who was a hard right Republican and on the Altadena Town Council in my early years. Oscar had heard the rumors I was a liberal and stayed quietly away, until he realized lable or not, I was about protecting Altadena as a specific place and culture. Then Oscar took me under his wing and we became fast friends, with fifty years of time between us. I also think of Altadenas leading "liberal" light of that time, Edna Smith, who decided any friend of Oscars was the enemy. She didn't speak to me until Oscar was long dead and about a year before she died. For her public life was a matter of a team sport, and one had to always be on HER side or the ENEMY.
Life is not a team sport. Life requires listening. Sometimes you totally agree with the people on the other side. Oscar and Edna never realized it, but they agreed 95% of the time. They never spoke to each other long enough or calmly enough to know that. Sadly, I am not going to advocate discussion.
I have learned much to my deep regret that some people, "those liberals" have their minds made up, even more, I find, than the " DittoHeads". Even worse, as much as any Christian or moslem Fundamentalist, even if they are a professed Atheist, they believe God is ALWAYS on their side. They don't seem to have taken the point from Abraham Lincoln that we must be on god;s side, not he on ours. They can not, and will not, hear you as you attempt to explain your position and embrace your commonalities. They are very like a religious Fundamentalist: Submit 100% to my viewpoint or be banned for all eternity. It's kind of comical but no longer entertaining, to observe them.
My former friend demanded retractions, the cessation of any FB disagreements, or she would defriend me. I defriended her, realizing she had never been my friend, and never would be.
I so miss Hari.
It was foisted upon the American Public as the role model for American Womanhood. No wonder Bettie Freidan and Gloria Steinem rebelled. For those too young to remember, the Doris Day Public Persona (DDPP for the rest of this essay) was one of a well dressed woman who was in a professional world where in order to survive due to the fragile male egos she was surrounded by she pretended to be both dumb as a rock and submissive as a starving kitten. She desired marriage to wealthy powerful successful men, and fended off every advance from them until they were "bagged". She outwitted everyone through continual and deep deception. There was not an honest dimension to her, and if society was in the 1950's and 1960's as portrayed in her movies, there was not an honest moment in it, either. The movies, values and society they portray are revolting. I am very glad the world went through the sexual and women's liberation movements of the late 1960's every time I think of Doris Day, because I can not imagine the hell of being married to such a creature. I can't imagine the hell of a society where men and women are on every level absolutely dishonest with one another. The world we live in today is not perfect, but its a whole lot better than the Stepford Doris Day world
Anyhow, my well educated hard working now former friend took great umbrage to my dislike of the DDPP. She wrote me a nasty couple of notes about me attacking her. I was confused. I have never seen personal disagreement as an attack. I thought that was strange, since she is an unconventionally lovely woman who I had in the past ALWAYS complimented on both her beauty and her intelligence. Her response was way, way, way out of scale, cutting and totally unexpected. It told me I had completely misjudged her as a person. She was "one of those "Liberals."'
One of "those Liberals"? you ask. Sadly, yes, "Those Liberals". Those liberals who listen to liberal talk radio and or go to events sponsored by some "enlightened" Church and can not, will not, tolerate anyone who disagrees with them on any issue. 'Those Liberals". You know the remarkably always in sync group thinkers who seem to have some chip implanted in their sub cortex that gets the latest talking points uploaded every morning from Palosi Central. You know, the ones who while they would be inflamed enough to shoot you, if they owned a gun, if you mentioned the remarkable similarity between them and Rush's Ditto Heads? "Those Liberals".
You know, the ones who have never disagreed with the Party Line of the moment, even if the party Line is 180 degrees opposite of what it was last year or last week? The ones who behave as if all politics and all philosophy are team sports, and if you are not 100% on MY team YOU are the ENEMY? you know, "Those Liberals" The intolerant of difference, while celebrating "diversity" ones? They make me feel nostalgia for my years spent with rabid Pentecostals.
They also make me feel very alone and very old. I suddenly remember my good friends of old...Hari Sihng Khalsa, a friend of many years with a absolutely razor sharp mind, wit and tongue. Hari and I worked tirelessly on the LaVina and water pumping at Devils Gate projects. We disagreed on many issues and perspectives, quite sharply. From what I understand, outside observers had no idea of either our humor, or friendship, and were both confounded and afraid of an outbreak of violence. We got each other and were free to express ourselves fully. Hari died of leukemia Thanksgiving Day 1995, as Veronica, his wife, and I held him. It was a deep loss.
I think of my childhood friend Larry Walton. Very similar story, except, sadly, Larry died alone some thirty years ago. I think of my friend Tim Berends. Tim and I volunteered together in Christian ministry and had the deepest of doctrinal disagreements, but we always pulled together for each other and the cause. I think of Max and Guy, two Republican lawyers who came to my rescue when Supervisor Antonovich arranged to have Art Snyder sue me. And Robin Salzer, also a Republican, also a friend, who at that time held fund raisers to pay Guy and many of my legal costs.
I think of Oscar Werner, who was a hard right Republican and on the Altadena Town Council in my early years. Oscar had heard the rumors I was a liberal and stayed quietly away, until he realized lable or not, I was about protecting Altadena as a specific place and culture. Then Oscar took me under his wing and we became fast friends, with fifty years of time between us. I also think of Altadenas leading "liberal" light of that time, Edna Smith, who decided any friend of Oscars was the enemy. She didn't speak to me until Oscar was long dead and about a year before she died. For her public life was a matter of a team sport, and one had to always be on HER side or the ENEMY.
Life is not a team sport. Life requires listening. Sometimes you totally agree with the people on the other side. Oscar and Edna never realized it, but they agreed 95% of the time. They never spoke to each other long enough or calmly enough to know that. Sadly, I am not going to advocate discussion.
I have learned much to my deep regret that some people, "those liberals" have their minds made up, even more, I find, than the " DittoHeads". Even worse, as much as any Christian or moslem Fundamentalist, even if they are a professed Atheist, they believe God is ALWAYS on their side. They don't seem to have taken the point from Abraham Lincoln that we must be on god;s side, not he on ours. They can not, and will not, hear you as you attempt to explain your position and embrace your commonalities. They are very like a religious Fundamentalist: Submit 100% to my viewpoint or be banned for all eternity. It's kind of comical but no longer entertaining, to observe them.
My former friend demanded retractions, the cessation of any FB disagreements, or she would defriend me. I defriended her, realizing she had never been my friend, and never would be.
I so miss Hari.
Sunday, June 2, 2013
LACMA measurement issues,
The new director of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), Michael Govan has a huge desire to leave his mark, in terms of a major building, on the art, cultural and civic scene in Los Angeles. In the Not for profit and governmental circles, this is how one's genitalia are measured. The Gawd awful American wing that blocked William Pereira's early 1960's campus and defeated the museums openness to Wilshire was built almost three decades ago. It's been a long time since a LACMA Museum Director could claim huge genitalia, and while there was almost universal high regard for the hideous American Wing by the press and civic establishment when it was built, everyone almost instantly discovered that the emperor had no clothes and that the American Wing destroyed what grace of the Pereira campus was left.
Govan, rather than choose an local LA Architect of merit such as Thom Mayne, Eric Owen Moss, Fred Fisher, Mike Rotundi, Dean Nota, Wallace Cunningham, Chris Carr, Louis Wiehle, Michael Pinto, Julia Strickland, Duncan Nicholson, Helana Arahuete, or Vaughn Trammell, or a American Architect of Merit outside of LA such as Ken Kellog, Anthony Puttnam, Josh Safdie, David E. Dodge or say Bart Prince, went way way FAAR away and chose a man who views America and LA as strange exotic places, the Swiss Architect Peter Zumthor.
As a fifth generation Southern Californian, I admire in a way, the provincialism of the civic leaders two generations ago who chose William Pereira as our art museum Architect. That generation understood that one defined LA as a art capital not only by its collection of works of the past and present, but by having a local society capable of producing and making thrive, architectural talent at least as good as the collection that was being housed. All of the LA Architects I listed above have superior talent, at least the equal of anyone worldwide, no matter their awards or press reputation.
Pereira's original campus was open to Wilshire, was inviting, did have welcoming exterior spaces and the buildings could be sensitively adapted by even a mediocre Architect, to have movable partitions. Our technology is better today, we could make the multiple water elements work, even on the tar pits, and certainly the buildings can be retrofitted to be more energy efficient. All of this can be done for far lower a cost than the new building, even including building another nearby expanded display space. The reason not to do this, of course, goes right back to Mr. Govan and his measurement issues.
As to the Zumthor proposal itself, Mr. Zumthor is noted and has won design awards for his tight vertical rectilinear buildings. Mr. Zumthor seems to realize that much of Los Angeles Architecture from the 1950's on made use of long horizontal amoeba shaped buildings or portions of buildings. here in his LACMA proposal he attempts to fool us into believing he has been seduced by LA into a Architectural form that seems at first to have evolved from John Lautner. This is both an illusion and a insult to Mr. Lautner. In the case of Mr. Lautner, every form did actually arise, and could be easily seen to related, directly to a FUNCTION. Unless trickery is a function, the Zumthor building's amoeba shapes do not arise from function. They mainly serve to tie groups of rectilinear structures together. The Ameba shape just hides the fact that Zumthor is giving us several really dull vertical rectilinear rooms as a museum. There really is no difference between this and Pereira's original campus EXCEPT that Pereira's was conceived honestly and as a complete artistic expression with integrated water, hardscape, and landscape elements. Zumthor has not yet worked out what will be under his amoeba shapes, he plans seven stairwells to both support this thing thirty feet off ground level and be his access points, yet he has not worked these out in any detail. So we are being shown a series of incomplete sketches for a three quarter of a billion dollar building. Zumthor has no idea what the underside of his building will be or what the landscape interface will be. Frankly, this project as shown would get a "F" as incomplete in any Architectural design class.
I would like to respectfully submit that Mr. Zumthor's contract be ended at this point, and that the LACMA board hire a local preservation firm to design a preservation alternative that restores the Pereira campus, makes it energy efficient, allows gallery walls to move and finds an annex space nearby for more exhibit space, and also hire any one of the GREAT local LA or California Architects I have listed, many of whom worked either with Frank Lloyd Wright, John Lautner, Bruce Goff or a combination of those three, to come up with a completely new design. LA is a mature enough arts community to have the talent to do a world class art museum and in fact, all of our local talent I have mentioned would turn out a much better museum plan than the present mediocre Zumthor sketch, that frankly it is embarrassing to see the press praise so highly, as they once praised the "American Wing".
As to Govan's measurement issue, he could attempt for a change to mount the kinds of world class exhibits LACMA had in the 1980's and 1990's, like the Soviet Constructivism exhibit, the Arts and Crafts in California exhibit, the Charles Rennie MacIntosh exhibit, the Clay army of the Chinese Emperor exhibit. Much as I love Architecture, the way I measure a museum is not primarily in its buildings, but in its exhibits, public outreach and programs. New building programs as the primary objective of any institution reflect a lack of imagination or commitment to core objectives, on the part of its board and executive director. That is the present measurement of LACMA.
Govan, rather than choose an local LA Architect of merit such as Thom Mayne, Eric Owen Moss, Fred Fisher, Mike Rotundi, Dean Nota, Wallace Cunningham, Chris Carr, Louis Wiehle, Michael Pinto, Julia Strickland, Duncan Nicholson, Helana Arahuete, or Vaughn Trammell, or a American Architect of Merit outside of LA such as Ken Kellog, Anthony Puttnam, Josh Safdie, David E. Dodge or say Bart Prince, went way way FAAR away and chose a man who views America and LA as strange exotic places, the Swiss Architect Peter Zumthor.
As a fifth generation Southern Californian, I admire in a way, the provincialism of the civic leaders two generations ago who chose William Pereira as our art museum Architect. That generation understood that one defined LA as a art capital not only by its collection of works of the past and present, but by having a local society capable of producing and making thrive, architectural talent at least as good as the collection that was being housed. All of the LA Architects I listed above have superior talent, at least the equal of anyone worldwide, no matter their awards or press reputation.
Pereira's original campus was open to Wilshire, was inviting, did have welcoming exterior spaces and the buildings could be sensitively adapted by even a mediocre Architect, to have movable partitions. Our technology is better today, we could make the multiple water elements work, even on the tar pits, and certainly the buildings can be retrofitted to be more energy efficient. All of this can be done for far lower a cost than the new building, even including building another nearby expanded display space. The reason not to do this, of course, goes right back to Mr. Govan and his measurement issues.
As to the Zumthor proposal itself, Mr. Zumthor is noted and has won design awards for his tight vertical rectilinear buildings. Mr. Zumthor seems to realize that much of Los Angeles Architecture from the 1950's on made use of long horizontal amoeba shaped buildings or portions of buildings. here in his LACMA proposal he attempts to fool us into believing he has been seduced by LA into a Architectural form that seems at first to have evolved from John Lautner. This is both an illusion and a insult to Mr. Lautner. In the case of Mr. Lautner, every form did actually arise, and could be easily seen to related, directly to a FUNCTION. Unless trickery is a function, the Zumthor building's amoeba shapes do not arise from function. They mainly serve to tie groups of rectilinear structures together. The Ameba shape just hides the fact that Zumthor is giving us several really dull vertical rectilinear rooms as a museum. There really is no difference between this and Pereira's original campus EXCEPT that Pereira's was conceived honestly and as a complete artistic expression with integrated water, hardscape, and landscape elements. Zumthor has not yet worked out what will be under his amoeba shapes, he plans seven stairwells to both support this thing thirty feet off ground level and be his access points, yet he has not worked these out in any detail. So we are being shown a series of incomplete sketches for a three quarter of a billion dollar building. Zumthor has no idea what the underside of his building will be or what the landscape interface will be. Frankly, this project as shown would get a "F" as incomplete in any Architectural design class.
I would like to respectfully submit that Mr. Zumthor's contract be ended at this point, and that the LACMA board hire a local preservation firm to design a preservation alternative that restores the Pereira campus, makes it energy efficient, allows gallery walls to move and finds an annex space nearby for more exhibit space, and also hire any one of the GREAT local LA or California Architects I have listed, many of whom worked either with Frank Lloyd Wright, John Lautner, Bruce Goff or a combination of those three, to come up with a completely new design. LA is a mature enough arts community to have the talent to do a world class art museum and in fact, all of our local talent I have mentioned would turn out a much better museum plan than the present mediocre Zumthor sketch, that frankly it is embarrassing to see the press praise so highly, as they once praised the "American Wing".
As to Govan's measurement issue, he could attempt for a change to mount the kinds of world class exhibits LACMA had in the 1980's and 1990's, like the Soviet Constructivism exhibit, the Arts and Crafts in California exhibit, the Charles Rennie MacIntosh exhibit, the Clay army of the Chinese Emperor exhibit. Much as I love Architecture, the way I measure a museum is not primarily in its buildings, but in its exhibits, public outreach and programs. New building programs as the primary objective of any institution reflect a lack of imagination or commitment to core objectives, on the part of its board and executive director. That is the present measurement of LACMA.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Preach that on Faith Promise Sunday
So I am sitting with a lawyer friend (yes I do have those) who specializes in helping poor people. He has a client who is a single mom. She is behind on her mortgage and about to be foreclosed on. She owes a small amount of money back, is making enough to pay monthly, but was sick is self employed and cant get enough to make up the money she fell behind on.
SOOOOOoooooo I say to my lawyer friend," Hey I know Sister So and so, she's been a Church Member in good standing for twenty five years, lets go to her pastor and have the church raise the money." My lawyer friend looks at me as if I have dropped fifty tabs of acid, smoked some crack and consumed three fifths of Jack Daniels all in a second. Its a look of pity, revulsion and fear. He laughs and says "You're not serious?" 'Well yeah, that's one of the things churches are FOR, of Course I am serious." Now he looks at me with almost pure pity. Slowly he says, as if I were some stoned drug filled homeless person "S t e e e v e, Churches don't give money to poor people, they snatch it from them. They NEVER help anyone."
Now I know this is probably generally true. Its a heartbreak, really, that the general condition of the so called Church of Jesus Christ, the supposed representatives of the Kingdom of Jehovah here on Earth, is that they do not distribute, but take storehouses unto themselves. Seems they never have read where it is written:
"Will a man rob G_d"
You will say "How have we robbed you?"
"You have robbed me in that the storehouse for the poor is not distributed to them, but my house is made a gathering place for wealth for the priests, who oppress the poor. In this have you robbed me."
Preach that on Faith Promise Sunday!
Sadly, I reached out to my lawyers clients pastor. he was not interested in helping her. Another storehouse of iniquity and thievery. I( am not so sad for her though, but fort he pastor. For all the Pastors who can not condescend to help their own parishioners, who can not, who will not roll their sleeves up and lift one of the sheep up. These ravenous wolves will be lost at the end of time, standing at the Great White Throne Judgment, announcing their degrees, their so called good works, their preaching and some even miracles, and Jesus the Christ will look them straight in the eye and say "Depart from me you evil doers of iniquity, I know you not. When I was hungry you did not feed me. When naked you did not clothe me, when broken you did not bind me up, when in prison and alone you did not visit me."
They will say "When did we ever see YOU such?'
And he will say "As you saw the LEAST of these who are my brothers, so there was I."
Preach THAT on Faith Promise Sunday, you brood of vipers.
Can I hear an Amen?
SOOOOOoooooo I say to my lawyer friend," Hey I know Sister So and so, she's been a Church Member in good standing for twenty five years, lets go to her pastor and have the church raise the money." My lawyer friend looks at me as if I have dropped fifty tabs of acid, smoked some crack and consumed three fifths of Jack Daniels all in a second. Its a look of pity, revulsion and fear. He laughs and says "You're not serious?" 'Well yeah, that's one of the things churches are FOR, of Course I am serious." Now he looks at me with almost pure pity. Slowly he says, as if I were some stoned drug filled homeless person "S t e e e v e, Churches don't give money to poor people, they snatch it from them. They NEVER help anyone."
Now I know this is probably generally true. Its a heartbreak, really, that the general condition of the so called Church of Jesus Christ, the supposed representatives of the Kingdom of Jehovah here on Earth, is that they do not distribute, but take storehouses unto themselves. Seems they never have read where it is written:
"Will a man rob G_d"
You will say "How have we robbed you?"
"You have robbed me in that the storehouse for the poor is not distributed to them, but my house is made a gathering place for wealth for the priests, who oppress the poor. In this have you robbed me."
Preach that on Faith Promise Sunday!
Sadly, I reached out to my lawyers clients pastor. he was not interested in helping her. Another storehouse of iniquity and thievery. I( am not so sad for her though, but fort he pastor. For all the Pastors who can not condescend to help their own parishioners, who can not, who will not roll their sleeves up and lift one of the sheep up. These ravenous wolves will be lost at the end of time, standing at the Great White Throne Judgment, announcing their degrees, their so called good works, their preaching and some even miracles, and Jesus the Christ will look them straight in the eye and say "Depart from me you evil doers of iniquity, I know you not. When I was hungry you did not feed me. When naked you did not clothe me, when broken you did not bind me up, when in prison and alone you did not visit me."
They will say "When did we ever see YOU such?'
And he will say "As you saw the LEAST of these who are my brothers, so there was I."
Preach THAT on Faith Promise Sunday, you brood of vipers.
Can I hear an Amen?
Friday, May 24, 2013
Who would Jesus dispossess for a lousy buck?
Recently, I was having coffee with a young friend. My young friend was seeking both advice and connections. My friend was perplexed. He had spent some $8000 on lawyers, consultants and filing fees to start a Not for Profit and he didn't yet have enough donations for it to be "self sustaining".
So, I asked the young man "What's your Not for Profit about?" He said "Feeding homeless people." Soooo I asked, with a slight chuckle, "Well how many sandwiches can you make for eight grand?"
My young friend seemed confused. I explained to my young friend that decades ago I volunteered for a Not for Profit in Hollywood. We had a suicide prevention hot line, provided three meals a day and housing for at least sixty people every night, did free drug rehab, rescued hookers from pimps and got their lives turned around, and on Wednesday night we distributed several hundred sandwiches.
On Wednesday mornings Restaurants, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, local Churches and mostly private individuals dropped groceries off. On Wednesday afternoon the staff made as many sandwiches as we could with the groceries. On Wednesday night we distributed hundreds of those sandwiches on Hollywood and Santa Monica Boulevards to every hungry homeless and hooking person we could find. No paid Executive Director, no paid staff, no four color mailer, no paid fund raiser or grant writer. Just "What would Jesus do?" We used to talk about the fact that if every church, temple and synagogue in America made and distributed 100 sandwiches once a week, there would be no starving hungry people in America. Alas, I was not confused about my young friend. His interest was not in feeding homeless people, for him this was just a "hook".
In America there are millions of Churches and Not for Profit organizations that receive property tax, parsonage tax, income tax exemptions. Their donors receive income tax breaks. In 1937 the U.S. Supreme Court found that these tax exceptions are given for "good works" Churches and Not for Profits do in feeding hungry people, providing health care for the sick, sheltering homeless people, and ameliorating the effects of privation and poverty. Since the 1950's they have been technically not allowed to be directly involved in politics.
But Churches and Not for Profits are NOT doing these good works. They are busily building real estate and investment portfolios and building payrolls of people who mostly support the institution itself, rather than serve the needy.
My young friend was upset not because feeding hungry people was something he was being prevented from doing, but because he was not yet able to become a salaried Executive Director, consider lunching to be "work", have a staff , free car, and live a luxury lifestyle of ease and moral superiority, on the backs of poor people. Needless to say, he left our meeting with no new connections and the advice to go to Super King Market, buy a bag of groceries, and find some people to give them away to. He left very sad. The greedy motivation of my young friend, and the lavish life of many Not for Profit Executive Directors and staff, while achieving little, if any, of their mission, have become common in the Church and Not for Profit world.
One Pasadena Church is so dominant in political issues that last year when several Altadenan's called Unions asking for help in fighting the opening of a local Walmart, they were told that the Union organized ALL of there political efforts in the San Gabriel Valley though one Pasadena Church. Several Unions claimed they would not work with any activists who were not under the direction, influence, supervision and control of this particular Pasadena Church. This particular Pasadena Church recently purchased a Altadena not for profit facility that had for 100 years provided housing and healthcare for old indigent people form the Altadena area. That Altadena Not for Profit, run by godless humanist had adhered to the tenants of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, until the Pasadena Church took it over. The particular Pasadena Church tore down the buildings, left the land fallow for five years, and is about to build over 300 luxury retirement villas for wealthy people from all over America. Because ownership will be retained by the Church, no property tax will be paid. There will be no services provided for Pasadena's or Altadena's indigent poor people. I guess that Pasadena Church's Gospel goes something like "What old poor unhealthy people would Jesus dispossess to make a lousy buck?" This is not uncommon. Churches all over America are dishonoring the life and Gospel of Jesus Christ in this kind of greedy, despicable, Hypocritical, and may I say Satanic, salary serving careerist manner.
We need a change. tax breaks for Churches and Not for Profits must be DEEDS tested. The majority of funds raised must be expended directly on the mission of feeding, housing, clothing the poor, drug rehabilitation, real job training, re entering prisoners to society, tending the sick, ill and dying and relieving the conditions of poverty. Every Citizen and for profit corporation is being taxed more than they would be, more than their fair share, because religious institutions and Not for Profits are getting a free ride. That would be OK were they serving the functions they get the free ride for, but in the main, they are not, and we are all also being taxed to fulfill those functions through government. So we outside of the not for profit world are paying at least twice.
Oh that wonderful all volunteer Not for Profit I volunteered for in Hollywood? Our founder and Executive Director fell in love and got married. He needed a job and needed to hand off our not for profit to others. It was difficult for him, a very reserved person, to glad hand enough to raise our $50,000 a year budget, manage our staff, and actually do redemptive work himself. He was exhausted. We found a International Not for Profit that promised us the world in the funding they would bring to bear to accomplish the mission. They got our donor list, fired all the volunteer staff one afternoon, closed down all operations the next, and with four color glossy print materials raise millions of dollars a year on doing good works in Hollywood. They have no operations there, not a dime raised by them is feeding, clothing, housing a single homeless kid, rescuing a hooker, or preventing a suicide. they raised almost three million dollars through our old organizations name last year. Yes, that is painful to type. They are basically stealing 3 million dollars a year from poor people, and doing it with a name that used to serve them well.
The Not for Profit industry needs to become accountable and brought to heel. The gravy train of high salaries, and questionable, if any deeds, must come to an end.
So, I asked the young man "What's your Not for Profit about?" He said "Feeding homeless people." Soooo I asked, with a slight chuckle, "Well how many sandwiches can you make for eight grand?"
My young friend seemed confused. I explained to my young friend that decades ago I volunteered for a Not for Profit in Hollywood. We had a suicide prevention hot line, provided three meals a day and housing for at least sixty people every night, did free drug rehab, rescued hookers from pimps and got their lives turned around, and on Wednesday night we distributed several hundred sandwiches.
On Wednesday mornings Restaurants, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, local Churches and mostly private individuals dropped groceries off. On Wednesday afternoon the staff made as many sandwiches as we could with the groceries. On Wednesday night we distributed hundreds of those sandwiches on Hollywood and Santa Monica Boulevards to every hungry homeless and hooking person we could find. No paid Executive Director, no paid staff, no four color mailer, no paid fund raiser or grant writer. Just "What would Jesus do?" We used to talk about the fact that if every church, temple and synagogue in America made and distributed 100 sandwiches once a week, there would be no starving hungry people in America. Alas, I was not confused about my young friend. His interest was not in feeding homeless people, for him this was just a "hook".
In America there are millions of Churches and Not for Profit organizations that receive property tax, parsonage tax, income tax exemptions. Their donors receive income tax breaks. In 1937 the U.S. Supreme Court found that these tax exceptions are given for "good works" Churches and Not for Profits do in feeding hungry people, providing health care for the sick, sheltering homeless people, and ameliorating the effects of privation and poverty. Since the 1950's they have been technically not allowed to be directly involved in politics.
But Churches and Not for Profits are NOT doing these good works. They are busily building real estate and investment portfolios and building payrolls of people who mostly support the institution itself, rather than serve the needy.
My young friend was upset not because feeding hungry people was something he was being prevented from doing, but because he was not yet able to become a salaried Executive Director, consider lunching to be "work", have a staff , free car, and live a luxury lifestyle of ease and moral superiority, on the backs of poor people. Needless to say, he left our meeting with no new connections and the advice to go to Super King Market, buy a bag of groceries, and find some people to give them away to. He left very sad. The greedy motivation of my young friend, and the lavish life of many Not for Profit Executive Directors and staff, while achieving little, if any, of their mission, have become common in the Church and Not for Profit world.
One Pasadena Church is so dominant in political issues that last year when several Altadenan's called Unions asking for help in fighting the opening of a local Walmart, they were told that the Union organized ALL of there political efforts in the San Gabriel Valley though one Pasadena Church. Several Unions claimed they would not work with any activists who were not under the direction, influence, supervision and control of this particular Pasadena Church. This particular Pasadena Church recently purchased a Altadena not for profit facility that had for 100 years provided housing and healthcare for old indigent people form the Altadena area. That Altadena Not for Profit, run by godless humanist had adhered to the tenants of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, until the Pasadena Church took it over. The particular Pasadena Church tore down the buildings, left the land fallow for five years, and is about to build over 300 luxury retirement villas for wealthy people from all over America. Because ownership will be retained by the Church, no property tax will be paid. There will be no services provided for Pasadena's or Altadena's indigent poor people. I guess that Pasadena Church's Gospel goes something like "What old poor unhealthy people would Jesus dispossess to make a lousy buck?" This is not uncommon. Churches all over America are dishonoring the life and Gospel of Jesus Christ in this kind of greedy, despicable, Hypocritical, and may I say Satanic, salary serving careerist manner.
We need a change. tax breaks for Churches and Not for Profits must be DEEDS tested. The majority of funds raised must be expended directly on the mission of feeding, housing, clothing the poor, drug rehabilitation, real job training, re entering prisoners to society, tending the sick, ill and dying and relieving the conditions of poverty. Every Citizen and for profit corporation is being taxed more than they would be, more than their fair share, because religious institutions and Not for Profits are getting a free ride. That would be OK were they serving the functions they get the free ride for, but in the main, they are not, and we are all also being taxed to fulfill those functions through government. So we outside of the not for profit world are paying at least twice.
Oh that wonderful all volunteer Not for Profit I volunteered for in Hollywood? Our founder and Executive Director fell in love and got married. He needed a job and needed to hand off our not for profit to others. It was difficult for him, a very reserved person, to glad hand enough to raise our $50,000 a year budget, manage our staff, and actually do redemptive work himself. He was exhausted. We found a International Not for Profit that promised us the world in the funding they would bring to bear to accomplish the mission. They got our donor list, fired all the volunteer staff one afternoon, closed down all operations the next, and with four color glossy print materials raise millions of dollars a year on doing good works in Hollywood. They have no operations there, not a dime raised by them is feeding, clothing, housing a single homeless kid, rescuing a hooker, or preventing a suicide. they raised almost three million dollars through our old organizations name last year. Yes, that is painful to type. They are basically stealing 3 million dollars a year from poor people, and doing it with a name that used to serve them well.
The Not for Profit industry needs to become accountable and brought to heel. The gravy train of high salaries, and questionable, if any deeds, must come to an end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)