Disinfo Rehab

Earlier this year, we had political theater, junior high style courtesy of our Mayor and the gang. Oh what fun times those were for "bloggers" and the like, what with silly sideshow acts and more, all to brighten up a dreary winter's day. Then things got boring, and observers, hangers-on, and the like were wondering who would fill the void.

Now, "progressives" (the definition of whom changes depending on who you talk to) are hastily staging their own paper-crown-and-homemade-costume drama this Saturday, June 2nd. Mere mention of said convention sets off bloggers on the left, the the other left, and even the SF Weekly takes a break fromnot covering city politics to post reliably cynical and inaccurate ramblings on said proceedings. If that's not enough, do a Google search and you'll have plenty to read.

So much, however, goes unsaid in all the chatter, not the least of which is that after years and years of gaming the system with electoral gimmicks, "progressives" spend more time running in circles like idiots than they do actually forming a viable alternative to Mayor Newsom. While I'm happy to see the progressives make swiss cheese out of their flawed "reforms," I'd rather have a viable local political system that forces incumbents and challengers work hard to earn our votes, instead.

Even after the creation of the much ballyhooed "SF People's Organization", which was supposedly going to do something, the group has done nothing but talk, and talk and talk. That's effective. Why not just make the biggest fingerpainting in the world to "blow people's minds" if you're going to go that route?

Then there's the behavior of "progressive" elected officials themselves. I give credit to Supervisor Chris Daly (who knows a little about running in tough races) for at least trying to remove the progressives' collective head out of the sand, but as usual when One Guy Tries To Do Something, The Other Guys Gotta Frak It Up.

Even after discounting the myriad of rumors, there's no denying that faded progressive star Matt Gonzalez has not been happy with the idea that Someone Else might be the top dog this time around, and will do what it takes to throw a wrench in the works. That's despite the fact he's shown no interest in being the Mayor of San Francisco, and a total unwillingness to do any of the hard work to attain office. If anything, his childish antics have at least made it clear that there are worse alternatives to the incumbent in office.

Part of me wants to go and watch the junior high school shenanigans for pure entertainment value, but then I start to wonder if it's really worth it. With so many egos, pointless conflicts and junior-high level antics, it might be best to ignore the whole thing and check out that Tezuka exhibit at the Asian Art Museum instead.

At least there, the drama and antics are confined to the printed page, and you don't have to listen to some political blowhard bitch and moan in person.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 5:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

h. brown (L) and Tony Hall (R)
.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 2:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Reading last week's cover story at Bay Guardian, I realized that I wasn't just reading an over-the-top PR piece for a wealthy downtown powerbroker -- I was also reading the epitaph for the once-proud Bay Guardian tradition of investigative reporting - and the whitewashing of local history in the process.

Seriously. Now, I am happy to see any semi-public feature get fair treatment, but reading this puff piece I was being asked to ignore years of Guardian investigative reporting that indicated Mr. Hellman (he of the Wells Fargo Fortune) was anything but a "friend to progressives". And yet, there it was, in all its multi-paged glory.

Apparently all it takes to change writer Steve Jones' mind about a wealthy conservative power player in San Francisco is a few friendly chats, a trip to freakin' Burning Man, a big payoff to the Bicycle Coalition (which paved the way, literally, for a big new garage in Golden Gate Park) and a general chumminess of his subject with his friends (Leah Shahum of the Bicycle Coalition and the SFMTA and her beau, Ted Strawser of the SF PartyParty and GavinWatch). Hmm.

Read any article about Hellman's actions in Golden Gate Park, any one of an assortment of articles the Guardian has published about Warren Hellman on campaign finance, local politics, Mayor Newsom, or even Jones' own pieces about the guy, and you'll see a different picture being painted.

The toughest Guardian coverage of Hellman, however, cannot be found online (the archive system is a mess over there). Go back to May, 1998, and you'll find a particularly damning article about the attempts by St. Hellman to privatize the entire public San Francisco Park System. This is a saint of "progressive" values? Puh-leeze.

Jones' defense seems to be that because of the many heart-to-hearts he's had with Mr. Hellman that somehow Mr. Hellman has "changed" - I'd argue that it's the Guardian that changed, instead.

That is what troubles me most -- the Bay Guardian I grew up with is no more. That was the paper that couldn't be bought off by corporate interests, and warned the left against cutting deals with the powerful (since the 'lefties" usually lose out in the end). This was a paper that didn't put the personal relationships ahead of reporting what was going on or mistake a powerful person's friendliness with honesty.

After reading this public relations victory for the rich and powerful last week, it seemed like the Guardian decided to go against this long and proud tradition to placate the likes of Ken Garcia, someone who's never been a friend to "progressives", and the City's power structure.

Sen. Feinstein had it all wrong these past 20+ years -- all she had to do was put a blue streak in her hair, go to Black Rock City, smile and play nice once in a while, and have years of backstory erased in a moment. Who knew it was that easy?

In an era when traditional print journalism is facing a serious threat from online entities, playing nice with the powerful isn't the solution to its problems. Blogs, Craigslist, and other online operations are succeeding because they're giving the public what it wants and likes.

The antidote to this threat is to go back to the core values and mission alternative papers have had for decades - challenge the powers that be with solid investigative reporting that people need - and can't get anywhere else.

Not only will it mean that papers like the Guardian will have a shot at saving the bottom line - they just might save their souls in the process. We, the readers, will be the ones that benefit most in the end.

Posted by Greg Dewar at 3:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It's May 1st, also known as May Day. For some this means a celebration of spring - to some self-styled urban revolutionaires it means a Day To Pretend We're In Solidarity With The Workers Who Make Our T Shirts. I thought it a perfect day to mark something else - the total failure of a small group of people to "game" the electoral system to change the results in San Francisco.

We've had to endure endless caterwauling about all sorts of gimmicks that were promised to "change" the results and thus make them more "fair." Let's go down the list, shall we?

We have needlessly complex and contradictory "campaign finance reform" laws with all sorts of Unintended Consequences. Enforcement's a joke at best, and unfair at worst.

Don't forget the joy that is "Ranked Choice Voting" or "Instan Runoff Voting" (or whatever the name is this week). Again, at best a total waste of time in Citywide elections, and at worst, nothing more than feel good legislation that's done nothing to change the results of any elections - except help incumbents stay in office. (For an example, see the electoral beating Alix Rosenthal took against incumbent Sup. Bevan Dufty.) Oh and making elections "more civil?" Go ask Sup. Daly how "civil" his opponents were in 2006

And finally, what round-up would be complete without the total failure that is public financing of Mayoral Elections. Reading the many promises made by self-styled advocates, and seeing the reality so far in this year's race, well, it's pretty clear that all those fantastic promises made by advocates simply haven't happened. Go look at the filings for the Mayoral candidates and see for yourself!

So here we are. It's May 1st. Our Mayor is a good guy, but he's had some Big Problems (and I'm not talking about You Know What). Problems like a MUNI Meltdown, a crime problem that's out of control, a disaster chief who was totally unqualified to do anything but suck up a government paycheck, and of course, raising all sorts of taxes and mandates on local business. Hey he's even trying to bankrupt MUNI with a call for "free" fares!

Surely someone reasonable "progressive" (or even a "moderate") would step up and offer him or herself as an alternative, and force a debate on these relevant issues for the benefit of You the Citizen, what with all these groovy laws passed by the Feel Good Crowd, right? Shouldn't the Mayor be worried?

[Insert sound of crickets chirping here]

Even after all those changes in the rules, "progressive activists" and their allies still can't get up the courage to put up a real candidate for Mayor. At this point, doing so is almost impossible - the election is in just a few short months.

So the next time you see Mayor Newsom with a big smile on his face no matter how bad the news is just remember - even with years of effort to game the results for Their Side, "progressive activists" still run around in circles gazing at their navels and praying at the altar of St. Matt. (News Flash: He ain't running and never planned to). Meanwhile the Mayor and his consultants can laugh all the way to the bank.

Happy May Day! Viva La Revolucion, or something. Didn't they have that on some $200 t-shirt in the Haight?

UPDATE: Oddly enough, someone in the Examiner echoed my sentiments (sort of)exactly 2 weeks later! Interesting!

Posted by Greg Dewar at 9:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)