Category Archives: San Francisco Politics

Who Really “Hates” San Francisco? AKA Deconstructing the Guardian Rant-A-Torial of the Week

Usually, when I’m reading my stack of local newsweeklies, I can blast through the Bay Guardian in 15 minutes or less since I either a) know what they’re going to say in advance or b) already read the news they’re reporting elsewhere, earlier, sometimes you see something so ridiculous, you have to call BS on it.
Such was the case in this week’s rant-a-torial on the front page (supplemented with a repetitive blog posting) that starts out as a “hey I complain too much, I love owls, life in SF is lovely” piece, and concludes with a scathing “frak you” barb aimed at the SF Weekly, accusing the paper of “hating” San Francisco, because one piece by columnist Matt Smith a few weeks ago.
Oh, wait, let me correct that. In the print edition they wonder “do the folks at the SF Weekly even like San Francisco” whereas online they say that he hates San Francisco. All because some of his views are not completely 100% in lock step with the Guardian.
Ok, I get it. If you’re not with us, you’re against us. Kinda sounds like the line of logic pumped out by Mayor Newsom’s PR flacks at anyone that is not in 100% lock step with the Mayor. Which, I think is something they’ve been criticizing lately, no?
Blah, blah, blah. There’s just one hitch – many times it’s the Bay Guardian that has pumped out insult after poser hipster insult at parts of the city that are declared “not cool” by the BG staff. Westsiders apparently don’t vote the correct way so it’s ok to trash them. Sounds really pro-San Francisco to me.
That’s why you can read a long, sonorous pieces about some Burning Man thing affecting .02% of the population (almost 4000 words worth!) but you’d be hard pressed to see similar coverage on a consistent basis of an issue, such as the myriad of problems facing MUNI – something every San Franciscan is affected by.
Hell, even when a progressive Supervisor holds a really good, uncensored meeting of MUNI management with the public (a contrast with Jr. high school theater productions of late), there’s nothing in the paper about it. Who’s the SF hater now?
I complain a lot, I understand: I shouldn’t let the Guardian piss me off, I should relax and go chill out with the N-Owls. I guess I’m just sick of people on the left and the right in this town picking on various parts of Our Fair City. San Francisco, for all its flaws, is a nice place to live, and it’s big and strong enough to take more than one POV. At least, those of us from here know that.

Political Theater – Junior High Drama Dept. Style AKA “Question Time SF”

If you wanted to see “political theater” in action, Junior High School Drama Department style, all you had to do was watch the co-production between the Offfice of the Mayor, the San Francisco Party Party, the Bay Guardian, the SF People’s Organization, and the cast of city-paid extras. Unlike past Political Theater productions by such talented director/producers as say, Willie Brown or any of the Burtons, this was a strictly amateur production.
Watching the reaction of Mayor Newsom’s administration to what was easily one of the most unimportant referendums on the ballot last year was the basis for last week’s production. A strictly advisory measure asking the Mayor to respond to questions from the Board of Supervisors was passed by a slim majority of voters last year. Mind you, there is nothing in the law that forces the Mayor to actually do anything to comply with it.
Thus, if it is opinion of the Mayor, his esteemed staff, and allies that the referendum is bogus, then they should say so and ignore it. It’s not like the police are going to break down Mayor Newsom’s door and put him in jail for not answering questions, right? Instead, the Mayor’s team gave this wild idea credibility by trying to meet it halfway, and the media feeding frenzy that has followed hasn’t made anyone look very good.
Watching the defensive reaction to the appearance of a couple of goofballs in chicken costumes I began to wonder – is El Alcade so inept that he needs a staff 20 deep to “protect” him from a bunch of Burning Man doofuses?
Last time I checked, Mayor Newsom is an adult, he’s the Mayor, he’s a smart guy, and I would think a couple of silly protestors would be no big deal for him to handle should anything “happen.” And of course, nothing “happened” except the aforementioned goofs sitting in the audience, occasionally entertaining small children. (Oh, except for one shout out to the costumed critters by one of the Mayor’s panelists that raise a few minor hackles – but other than that, no one really gave a hoot, so to speak about said chickens).
Frankly, the Mayor and the fair citizens of Our City would have been better served if he’d taken a stroll down any major street and talked to people in various coffee shops along say, Clement Street, or at Irving and 9th, backed up by a staffer and a bodyguard. Not only would it have been cheaper to “produce,” it would probably have been more fun for all involved! Not to mention a lot easier to control.
The Mayor and his team weren’t the only ones co-producing this Political Junior High Drama Department production, however. The Bay Guardian inexplicably devoted a front page cover story (the kind usually reserved for investigative pieces on PG&E), and then added to the dogpile with an editorial, and a cutesy piece of cover art (which bore a suspiciously close resemblance to this little chestnut from the SF PartyParty.)
If that wasn’t enough, they also posted not one, but two blog postings to drive the point home. All over an advisory measure that has no force of law (or even a code that would indicate how such a “Question Time” would work.)
For a paper that supposedly does investigative reporting, uncovering the news the MSM does not, devoting this much space to a non-issue makes you begin to wonder just how credible the paper can claim to be on civic issues. At best, they seem more invested in the success of pranksters from the “SF PartyParty” (who were last seen devoting time and energy to the lost cause known as Alix Roenthal’s Supervisorial bid) than they are in devoting precious column inches to covering an issue of more direct importance to the City (crime, poverty, MUNI, someting I don’t know, etc.)
After a few hours of amateur hour, I took off. I posted some pictures at Flickr.com (you can also see them on the new Flickr Badge I have on this site in the right column as well).
All in all, the best minds of the city found a way to make a Himalayan mountain range out of a molehill. Judging by the endless coverage on blogs, newspapers, YouTube and elsewhere, I think that the Mayor’s folks and the progressive folks might wanna take a “time-out” before planning any more political theater productions, since this last one was such a bomb.

Bay Area Whaa?

Happy 2007, everyone!
I thought I’d kick off the new year with a rather amusing email I received recently. Although I’d never heard of the “Bay Area Dems” (Dems as in Democrats) before, I got an email from the group’s organizer, Mr. Randlett.
You might remember him from such groups as SFSOS (whose emails I get all the time – wait maybe that’s how I’m on this other list!) and the many calm, polite and downright friendly emails his group sent out during the Daly/Black race.
Anyway, take a look at the graphic banner at the top of the email and see if you can’t find the mistake:

It’s one thing to make a typing mistake (I do it all the time!) but it is quite another to spend the time to make a graphical banner with such an obvious abuse of the pluralization rules regarding punctuation. Won’t someone please think about the children?

A Gift Idea for All You Chris Daly Haters

I’m breaking radio silence as I make plans for both my sites for 2007 to let all of you who are really mad that Supervisor Chris Daly won that there’s a present you can send each other – or to Supervisor Chris!
Bear in mind that in San Francisco all you have to do to rile people up is to use the words “Chris” and “Daly” in the same posting. As in “I went to Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse and had a steak, then went to Daly City to particpate in the cultural offerings thereof” to get yourself spammed and attacked by They Who Dare Not Say Their Name (AKA message board posters!)
Anyway, back to our story…
Whilst shopping around town for gifts for family and friends, I saw this display at Scandinavian Details in the Hayes Valley/Civic Center area of town.
pee_and_pooNo I am not making this up.
The Japanese have made plush toys out of Pee and Poo.
So there you have it. Why not send one to SF SOS, the nemesis of Mr. Daly? Or, buy a set for Mr. Daly himself? Or, if you’re really that worked up, why not send a set to Ruth’s Chris Steak House and Daly City just because, well, you’re mad that nefarous Chris Daly won!
See? Life’s good and just. And the Japanese have an easy, low cost way to make it all Good. Go for it!

When Reality and Rorschach Collide: Election Analysis Roundup

Every election season, once the ballots are counted, we the readers of the news, are treated to “election analysis.” Read any major paper, alt-weekly, or “the Internets” and you have all sorts of Big Experts talking about What It All Means.
What strikes me, having worked on campaigns for years, is just how little one finds out about what actually happened during the election season that gave us the results – instead these “analyses” function more like a political Rorschach Test, telling us more about the prognosticator than about what really happened or more importantly, how.
Let’s take a look at local election post-mortems. Most people locally tend to use pollster David Binder’s premiere post-election analysis as a starting point, which is primarily concerned with statistical information about turnout, who voted, polling info and the like – in other words, facts that are agreed upon to be verifiable with some interpretation by the knowledgeable Mr. Binder to translate these raw numbers into conversational English.
Fog City Journal ran a short analysis (which I was asked to write literally minutes before I walked in the door at SPUR, hence its lack of polish) , BeyondChron, and even the “blog” at the Bay Guardian used some form of Mr. Binder’s work to base conclusions and the like.
This is also where things get interesting. In the print edition of the Guardian, the results are trumpeted loudly as a rebirth of the local “progressive” movement, and at times one gets the impression that the authors are almost breathless in restating over and over “Things are OK. Don’t worry. We’re doing fine, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end.”
Which is fine, I suppose for people who want to hear that. But what I missed in the article most was the “why” and “how” – how did Chris Daly managed to win after a bruising campaign? Why did candidates like Supervisors Dufty and Alioto-Pier crush their opposition, if they had any at all?

Continue reading

Reading the Bay Guardian 40th Anniversary Edition So You Don’t Have To

Editor’s Note: Don’t forget to check out additions to the 2006 Political Mail Archive this week!
This week I read the Bay Guardian’s 40th Anniversary Edition. And, as a public service, I’m going to tell you all about it so you don’t have to slog through it yourself.
“If it’s so boring,” you ask, “why did you read it?” Well, oddly enough the Guardian’s 40th anniversary issue did more (albeit unintentionally) to reveal the paper’s current shortcomings and problems the paper has brought upon itself than they realize.
First off, aside from two pieces penned by Bruce Brugmann and editor Tim Redmond, there was little to distinguish this significant anniversary issue from any other. No articles or comments from SFBG alumni, no archival photos, nothing. I find it odd that with so many alumni now doing great things, not one was invited to pen a short story talking about their time at the Guardian.
This is baffling to me – when I attended the Guardian holiday party in 2000 I remember being surrounded with former and current employees who had nothing but good things to say about their time at the BG. When I attended the Best of the Bay in 2005, none of those people were to be found – neither were any of the City’s progressive politicians. WTF?
Even more revealing was the contrast between the Guardian’s history, which retold tales of extensive investigative reporting and “you heard it here first” news, and today’s paper, which does not feature much you can’t hear or read somewhere else. In fact it was ironic that in the Guardian’s Website of the Week feature, citizen journalist Daniela Kirshenbaum was featured for her contribution to Luke Thomas’ Fog City Journal investigating downtown advocacy group SFSOS.
Now, I dig Luke’s site, and Ms. Kirshenbaum’s piece did do some nice work bringing up facts many people did not know about SF SOS. That said, shouldn’t this have been something the Guardian broke first, it being the alleged local news powerhouse it was in the past? Come on, gang! I was told you’re better than this!

Continue reading

Disinfo Rehab Mail Archive – Fall 2006

Note: This entry will be updated as I get more mail. New mail is featured at the bottom of this entry! Today’s additions: Jane Kim, Marin Healthcare Board, and more!
As promised, here is the first installment of the Fall 2006 Disinfo Rehab Mail Archive. Unlike television ads, which bloggers and media folks can easily dissect because they’re on TV, YouTube, candidate websites, and the like, mail is a “below the radar” medium. You know it is out there, but unless you’re on the targeted mailing list, you won’t see it.
Which is why it makes for a great way to send distinct messages to distinct groups of people – and a great way to attack someone and get away with it. By the time anyone notices it, it’s too late to do much about it, and the press usually isn’t sent copies of hit pieces by candidates!
Since I personally do not live in a district with an angrily contested Supervisorial race, I’m interested in submissions from readers who might have something they’ve received in the mail in the Daly/Black/SF Republican Party brouhaha, and the mega-money festival that is the District 4 battle to replace Fiona Ma, now that she’s been elected to a 6 year term in the Assembly. Oh and if anyone has any “freaky” mail from way out in Distrct 8, send it over!
As always, if you submit a big pile o’ mail, I’ll buy you a drink/coffee/whatever once this nutty election is over. Email me and tell me what you have and I’ll make arrangements to pick it up, or you can simply scan them in yourself and send them in as JPEGs.
Please note that all pieces that appear on this page were sent to actual voters, who in turn gave the pieces to me for inclusion in this fall’s archive. (To protect their privacy from identity thieves, their names and addresses have been Photoshopped out)
A mail piece’s appearance here does not indicate I’m endorsing or not endorsing a particular candidate, and it does not indicate that campaign endorses this site, its views, or anything at all. Conspiracy theorists, please put down the crack pipe and find something else to worry about.
Update: A loyal reader tipped me off to a similar project being done by the East Bay Express, entitled Fun with Misleading Mailers. Short and to the point, the additional coverage of the myriad of pieces hitting the mailbox is great for voters
And now, for the fun, after the jump!

Continue reading

Wasting Time With IRV on the San Francisco Ballot

I got my mail ballot last week and sat down to slog through pages and pages of voter guides, local ballot measures, state ballot measures, and candidates. Voting this season is less about voting for people you’d actually want to serve in office, and more about keeping really bad eggs off the shelf. Same goes for the initatives.
The funniest part of my ballot, however, was San Francisco’s allegedly fair and democratic “Instant Runoff System” in action. Candidates for San Francisco College Board and School Board, all of whom run city-wide, are still elected under a “vote for 3 candidates out of a list” system that according to self-appointed reformers is the result of Satan’s handiwork.
Do remember under the Satan system, if you really want someone to win, you can cast one vote for one candidate and leave off the other two choices – it has the effect of helping them out more. So if you really like someone such as Jane Kim, you could cast one vote for her, and forget the rest. It’s weird how it works, but it does – hence the term “bullet voting.”
“Bullet voting” aside, unless you’re living somewhere with a competitive Supervisorial race, your only chance to use the magical unicorns and fairies super happy Instant Runoff Voting promises you is in the race for Assessor, or the race for Public Defender.
Here’s where it gets fun. At significant expense, the city printed up special little ballots so you can mark your “first second and third choices” for these offices. Problem is, both candidates are running unopposed. And yet, there are three choices for me to fill out, and feel like the Magical Man from Happyland.
So, to make everyone feel good, I wrote in all sorts of great choices for my special one and only IRV election. Here’s how it went:
For Assessor:
1. Gaius Baltar
2. Laura Roslin
3. Phil Ting
For Public Defender
1. Sharon Agathon
2. Kara Thrace
3. Jeff Adachi
I have no doubt the incumbents will win, despite my efforts. But, they seem like good guys, so I’m sure their political careers aren’t ruined based on my use of magical IRV. I don’t feel the good vibes or see the point in all of it, but I guess the secrets as to why some people push this thing are to be learned later, when an election of importance gets stolen with this system.
Yeah, those are pretty nerdy choices. So what? Isn’t that the point of IRV? So that every crank can use the public’s bucks to make their point?

Case Study: Campaign “Reform” and Unintended Consequences in San Francisco’s District 6

For those of you just joining us, there’s a rather contentious battle in San Francisco’s Supervisorial District 6, where incumbent Supervisor Daly is running for re-election. The campaign is already getting quite heated, as some people in Our Fair City are not fans of Mr. Daly and his effectiveness as a legislator getting laws passed based on the platform he clearly enuniciated as a candidate (with 83% of the vote) in 2000. Ultimately, it will be the voters who will decide if Mr. Daly should continue to serve in office.
The race also offers a case study in the Law of Unintended Consequences with regards to “political reform” that is peddled by incumbents and assorted hangers-on who try to “game” the system to get the results they like – and how such “gaming” ends up causing more problems for candidates and the voters who are being asked to decide who should represent them in office.
It was laughable to see the Bay Guardian’s complaint-atorial today, bemoaning the rise of independent expenditure committees which are being funded to oppose Mr. Daly’s re-election, citing in particular the fact he is limited by law to spending only $83,000 on his own race, while a host of independent committees (all of whom have the same name but are numbered 1-6 to maximize their effect) can spend what they like.
Why the comedy? Because it was the Bay Guardian that unequivocally supported the limits and laws that are now limiting Mr. Daly’s ability to respond to campaign attacks!
That’s the funny part. The not-so-funny part is when the Guardian asks the Board of Supervisors to immediately amend the law so that this “can’t happen.” Now it’s time to take a large Wait A Minute and Think pill, before more new laws (and more unintended consequences) result.
That’s because the folks who are opposing Mr. Daly aren’t really doing anything wrong per se. Super-nasty campaigns are never pleasant to watch, and to be sure, the folks who oppose Mr. Daly would seem to have a visceral hatred for the man, almost more than the leftiest lefty who hates Our President. That said, these folks took a look at the laws “as is” and have a smart attorney who found perfectly legal ways to operate within the system to do what it is they feel they need to do to get their message out.

Continue reading

Crime And Punishment (And Spin) in Baghdad-by-the-Bay

Yesterday it was announced that “Chemo”, a little puppy adopted by a cancer patient at UCSF Children’s Hospital was returned to its owner after being stolen by thugs last week. I was glad to hear the dog was returned – but the story served as Yet Another Reminder that San Francisco has become a more dangerous city to live in. If a kid with cancer can’t be assured his dog is safe at the hospital, you begin to wonder – just who the Hell is safe?
Last week, San Francisco had a parade of high profile incidents, starting with a record number of murders in one day, followed by a nutcase who managed to hit and run 14 people on City streets.
Once this happened, the Disinfo Spin Machine kicked in. The Media covered the “news” in detail. The Mayor made a point of comforting the victims of the hit and run guy on site (and on TV). And predictably, the coverage and the chatter turned away from hard questions and to politicking, spinning, and making sure people “felt better” after the latest Big Crime Wave.

Continue reading