I finally figured out what really bothers me so much about this whole Hilton/Fran O'Brien's thing. Sure, it irks me that Hilton Corp is coming off like lefty wingnuts that don't support the troops/war, but in the end ... that is their right by everything our nation stands for.

What bothers me the most is that they have made the private support of a group of people into something political. Whether they be wounded military or a wounded farmer, the people that are eating at Fran's on Friday nights are still people at their core. They are having a dinner out as a step toward a normal life again. Does that really need to be brought into the public political debate?

Instead, shouldn't we be encouraging members of society to follow in the footsteps of Fran O'Brien's, to take care of each other? Shouldn't those legitimately in need be able to turn to their community for support, regardless of what label they fall under? Doesn't that make everyone better off (without creating a new tax burden)?

But my point is, if Fran's were the place that abused children went for dinner once a week, would they be closing? What if it were battered women? Or mentally handicapped? If it were left as simple, private, donated community service of any other kind, would the lease debacle still be happening?

Answer for yourself, but my money's riding on "NO!"

Posted by: Princess Cat at 10:43 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 1 kb.