by Travis Mateer
Last week the Missoula Economic Partnership engaged in some homeless narrative control, and the Missoulian reported on it. If the Missoulian had stopped there I wouldn’t be writing this post with an image of Val Kilmer kicking things off, but the Missoulian had to go and CONGRATULATE ITSELF for helping MEP control the homeless narrative with their insufferable HUCKLEBERRY op-ed, which says this (emphasis NOT mine):
The claim that some places are too soft-hearted for their own good took a hard-nosed hit last week at a Missoula Economic Partnership gathering. National and local research show that homeless people aren’t shopping around for the best handouts and warmest shelter beds. About 90% of them are living rough where they last had a home, before an economic shock like a job loss or a chronic medical condition overwhelmed their ability to keep up. As economist Bryce Ward explained, the cost those people impose on the community pales before the burdens they bear themselves, in higher risk of dying, exposure to violent crime, and inability to get the care that would solve many of their bigger problems. It brings to mind the movie conversation between the evicted farmer begging the queen for mercy: “How shall I feed my family?” “You should have thought of that before you decided to be poor!” Missoula takes a lot of hits from its urban neighbors for publicly wrestling with homelessness. But as Ward’s research reveals, being clear-eyed about the roots of a problem leads to more huckleberry results than pretending the problem doesn’t exist.
I don’t even know where to start with this “huckleberry” commentary that throws out a big percentage, like 90%, then references some movie scene with a Queen and a farmer. Is this your work, Skiggy?
The original article doesn’t really offer much more insight, it just pivots from the 90% claim to some emotionally manipulative stats about mortality (emphasis mine):
“To put that in simpler terms, if you were a 40-year-old homeless person, your mortality risk is the same as if you were a 60-year-old housed person,” Ward said. “People who experience homelessness, 25% to 50% of them are subjected to violent crime during that episode of homelessness; 75% of them are suffering from some sort of mental health issues. You go down the list, it’s a very, very taxing experience.”
Yes, it is VERY TAXING to see stats like this thrown out by a newspaper arrogantly claiming its helping this community be more “clear-eyed” about how the violence people like Sean Stevenson were subjected to is a result of homelessness and not the LAWLESSNESS being created by the ENTIRE criminal justice system breaking down.
When you replace “criminal justice” with “narrative control” you have a more accurate depiction of what’s going on, but don’t tell that to “researchers” like Jim Smith, the William Ramsey apologist who inspired me to ask the question Is The Smiley Face Theory A Distraction To Protect A Sub-Culture?
Jim Smith is credited at the beginning of the Smiley Face Killer Documentary that William Ramsey made, a documentary I forced myself to watch last night because I might be a sadomasochist. Was it worth the pain? Yes, it was, because I was VERY interested to see the presence of Cyril Wecht in this obnoxious documentary that feels like maybe William had TOO MUCH fun including images of Miley Cyrus scantily clad by smiley faces in his “documentary”.
Does Miley get you more clicks, Billy, or is there something else going on?
Why does Cyril Wecht’s presence in this Smiley Face Theory bug me out a bit? Well, if you check out the two following posts, I think you’ll have a more CLEAR-EYED picture of where I’m swimming, and it’s NOT the shallow end of the narrative control pool.
Cyril Wecht, The Famous Pathologist Who Criticized The Warren Commission, Answered My Call Yesterday (September 26th, 2023)
Why WOULDN’T Narrative Control Include Controlling Counter-Narratives? (October 13th, 2023)
If you read up on Wecht you will discover he used the JFK assassination to make a name for himself, so it’s pretty interesting to me that I posted my article first piece on September 26th because that day, 60 years ago, is the same day JFK landed in Eastern Washington to wave a Uranium-tipped wand less than 2 months before the “magic bullet” took its magic path into history, where Wecht and so many others would made careers out of this emerging industry of conspiratorial speculation.
Learning about JFK’s actions in Richland was the highlight for me in attending what I could of the Big Sky Documentary Film Festival, which is wrapping up today. Here’s something I found online that givers a decent summary of that curious day. From the link:
Sixty years ago on Sept. 26 a helicopter landed in a remote part of the Hanford nuclear reservation and the 37,000 gathered in the scorching desert watched as President John F. Kennedy stepped out in a cloud of dust.
Eight weeks later he would be assassinated as he and the First Lady rode in a presidential motorcade in Dallas, Texas.
But on Sept. 26, 1963, he stood young, tanned and hatless on a speaker’s stand by the N Reactor.
He was at the Hanford site near Richland in Eastern Washington to lead the ceremonial groundbreaking for a project that would turn a reactor that produced weapons plutonium into the largest nuclear power plant in the world.
For 12 minutes Kennedy talked about natural resources and nuclear energy, bringing the 1,500 dignitaries who had reserved seats at the front of the crowd to their feet.
Then, in a bit of showmanship choreographed by the Washington Public Power Supply System, now called Energy Northwest, he waved an “atomic wand” over a Geiger counter.
The sound of the counter’s rapid clicking was broadcast over the crowd as the wand’s uranium tip set in motion a clamshell crane. The crane lifted the first shovelful of dirt to build the steam-power facility.
What does all this mean? I have some ideas, but it’s gonna take a longer-form approach to transmit what I’ve come across in the past 6 months of craziness, which now includes even MORE miles than the impressive numbers I put up last fall.
Yes, you do apparently learn a thing or two after driving over 10,000 miles around America in half a year, so I’m excited to start shaping that story into something that’s ready for wider transmission.
Some new donations have started trickling in and they couldn’t come at a better time, considering how COSTLY some of the lessons I’ve had to learn have been. If you are benefiting from my work and you have NOT yet made a donation, here’s your chance!
That’s all for now. Thanks for reading!