Now imagine the coverage if Rudolph Giuliani had implemented such a program. What if George W. Bush initiated a similar Federal program! One can almost hear the screams from the left.

According to The Liberal New York Times:

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg defended a city program to send homeless families out of New York on planes, trains and buses on Wednesday, saying it “saves the taxpayers of New York City an enormous amount of money.”

Speaking in the Blue Room in City Hall to announce a new finance commissioner, Mr. Bloomberg was asked if the program simply shifts the homelessness program to a different place, as some critics of the program have suggested.

“I don’t know, when they get to the other places, whether they find jobs,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “It may be an easier place for them. If we don’t — we either have two choices. We can do this program or pay an enormous amount of money daily to provide housing.”

It costs the city about $36,000 a year to provide shelter for a homeless family. The average stay in shelter is about nine months.

But Mr. Bloomberg appeared sensitive to the image of flying homeless families to far-flung places, as the program is set up to do. In the past two years, families have been provided one-way tickets to Haiti, Peru, Mexico City, St. Croix, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Santo Domingo and Casablanca. (The most popular destinations are Puerto Rico, Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas.)

“The average cost is trivial,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “Most go by bus. Very few go overseas, very few go long distances. Bus is the normal ways we pay for transportation, rather than air.”

In fact, the most common mode of travel for families in the program is air, not bus. Forty-eight percent travel by airplane; 37 percent by bus; and 15 percent by train, according to city data.

One of the issues that must be faced by the “right” is that verbal firebomb throwing may feel good, may excite some to “the cause”, but ultimately all it does is burn down your own house.

A well-known columnist recently wrote:

Working in a homeless shelter is widely regarded as “community service”-- as if aiding and abetting vagrancy is necessarily a service, rather than a disservice, to the community.

Is a community better off with more people not working, hanging out on the streets, aggressively panhandling people on the sidewalks, urinating in the street, leaving narcotics needles in the parks where children play?

Now his real point was on target:

In other words, people on the left want the right to impose their idea of what is good for society on others-- a right that they vehemently deny to those whose idea of what is good for society differs from their own.

But, by including the incendiary language on the homeless what do you think most people will remember?

Now obviously, my view of those in a homeless shelter is vastly different than this columnist’s view. 

First, helping those less fortunate is a Christian value and beyond that I would hope our society and government would have a level of “caring”. What the level should be can be debated.

Second, not all homeless are: “hanging out on the streets, aggressively panhandling people on the sidewalks, urinating in the street, leaving narcotics needles in the parks”.

Beyond that, such language reinforces the idea that Republicans, conservatives, “the right”, do not care about people.

Most Americans, even those who have had encounters with the type of homeless described, want to think of themselves as kind-hearted, caring people. When they read or hear someone on the right use such language Americans have an almost automatic negative response – feeling/thinking like that is not who they want to be.