Category Archives: San Francisco Politics

Lies, Damn Lies, and Campaign Mail from “No on G”-A Disinfo Rehab Session With the NJC!

bsflayertwu.jpgOver at my more popular blog, the N Judah Chronicles, I posted a rather lengthy disinfo rehab session about the shamelessly dishonest mail being pumped out by “progressive” political consultant Jim Stearns and the TWU Local 250 A. I’ve already been called a “Nazi” by some anonymous troll who used a fake email address, so Godwin’s Law was invoked literally minutes after posting. A new record.
Prop. G, as you may know, is the Fix Muni Now proposal put on the ballot by Sup. Elsbernd and a measure that I originally opposed, but changed my mind after spending a week or so reading every piece of paper about Muni employment rules, regulations, contracts, etc. when I co-wrote the Muni Death Sprial for the SF Weekly.
Anyway, go check it out. I have to say that among the many violations of the Geneva Convention this election has inflicted on us, the No on G campaign ranks up there with the blatant dishonesty that more well funded campaigns have been pulling this season. It’s even more ironic the consultant doing this also was the consultant on the 2007 Prop. A measure that was supposed to try and help Muni, but was butchered by organized labor before it even got on the ballot. The same consultant that works for all the “progressives.”
Just remember – what a “progressive” doesn’t know about Muni could fill every bus and train and storage facility in the system, and still have plenty left over to fill all those hot air balloons they generate at the Board of Supervisors.

And the Award for Epic “Green” Campaigning Goes To…

So there I was, a day before all that rain, walking home when I noticed something in the doorways of all the apartments on my street…piles of doorhangers. In the picture, note how this “grassroots” campaign covered the front gate with no less than 7 on the gate and a few more on the ground.

Guess what happened to them?

These went in to the recylcer and NO ON SAW THEM. The other ones made their way onto the street, and by the next day, when it rained, they were a papier mache mess.

Now, the candidate in question shouldn’t take all the piss on this one – just about every Big Campaign, especially the “No on B” campaign, did the same thing.

News flash: it is the second decade of the 21st Century. Sending a bunch of people in the last weeks of the campaign to put up expensive die-cut door hangers made of dead trees in piles around the city is NOT GRASSROOTS CAMPAIGNING.

(I guess no on listened when I said this before.)

For the same price as a pile of junk mail, these campaigns could have chosen a better way to get the message out. With online advertising being as cheap as it is, they could have spared the neighborhood some dead tree papier mache, and instead put the money into window signs and a hyper targeted mailer.

Just remember: In San Francisco, we force everyone to compost…but we never force politicians to be more Earth-friendly with their tax-funded campaigns.

Wait a minute….this may become a “thing.” What if candidates who took the public financing in SF were required to use only soy inks, super-recycled paper, vegan snacks and other tough regulations?

Hey, it could happen, especially with the so-called “progressives” in charge!

And the Award for Epic Design Fail For Campaign 2010 Goes to…

This campaign season has been one of the worst in history in terms of the sheer amount of bullsh*t heaped onto the public via the media, and not just from Her Megness and Carlyfornicated and Uncle Jerry and about a million ballot measures. Combine that with some of the worst design I’ve ever seen, and my eyes are ready to bleed.

So imagine the amount of eyeball blood spilled when I saw this ad in the Sunset Beacon. I’ve shown this to professional designers and we all agreed – if they’d submitted this work to a client, they’d have been fired, and rightfully so.

What kills me is that the people who paid for this thing had a ton of cash, and it’s not like you can’t find decent print or web designers in San Francisco who understand political advertising.

Anyway, more political razzies as events warrant.

Solving the Sit/Lie Problem Without A Sit/Lie Law: No, Really! Read On!

Attention San Francisco! Listen up! I have a simple solution to all the bullsh*t going on right now! We can knock out several birds with one stone, and we don’t have to pass any new laws to do so! Read up!
So apparently because Haight Street has some criminal punks littering the sidewalks, we in the rest of the city have to vote on some stupid “Sit/Lie” law to appease a few people in one street in one neighborhood. We don’t need to do this though. (And really, do you want to get a pile of junk mail and epic yelling from all sides on this for the next 3 months? Hell no!)
So here’s what I, as someone who’s not a six-figure city employee, came up with in about 20 minutes:
-I was reading at the ever entertaining Uptown Almanac blog a raging debate about sweeps done by SFPD via motorcycle, crackin’ down on drinkin’, smokin’ and the like. But look, there’s like, 6+ members of the police on motorcycles. For one park! Even though there’s way worse crime going down in Golden Gate Park (tree murders! muggings! coyotes having sex! Whatever!) And it’s a bigger park!
-So then, I thought “But wait. The eastern edge of Golden Gate Park has way more problems, and it’s also where the bad and sad that is Haight Street begins. Perhaps it might be smart to redeploy these police officers there?” Think about it. If Haight Street is the epicenter of crap in San Francisco, perhaps a rapidly deployable police force in the area might help, yes?
-So here’s the deal – take 4 of the SFPD at Dolores Park. Move them over to Haight Street. Have a vigilant populace call in any criminal crap these kids pull (drugs, harassing people, threatening people with dogs, etc). Send in motorized police, have them arrested, and put in jail. Seize any and all illegal substances, and make sure everyone see this happen. Repeat as necessary until stupid trustafarians and kids from the suburbs get the message: it ain’t the f*cking 60s anymore, and you can’t bully and steal and do drugs on the streets.
There. Problem solved with existing laws (surely crack smoking is illegal, Mr. Mayor?!?), and we don’t have to listen to the epic whining on all sides about the “sit/lie” law. Problem solved.
PS: And if that doesn’t work? File ADA lawsuits for all the mean kids blocking the sidewalks. Because if there’s one thing we know that work’s like Thor’s hammer in SF, it’s an ADA lawsuit. I’m not kidding. I suggested the same to shut down the illegal prostitution in the Outer Sunset.

Big Corporation Spends Big Bucks for Right Wing Politician: This is News Because…..?

Oh Target. Everyone was atwitterin’ about how the chain store was finally opening one up in San Francisco. Yes, it’s a chain, blah blah blah, but if you’re buying household items and other said necessities, sometimes one doesn’t want to buy an artisan macrame frying pan, they just want to buy one that’s cheap, and not have to go to Colma. It didn’t hurt that Target had a great local PR team to boost its chances, either.
Then the “big news” started to trickle out about Target’s donation to a group backing some right wing guy in Minnesota (home base of Target) running for governor who thinks that all waiters make $100,000 a year, and dislikes gay people. What a surprise! A big company supports a right wing candidate based on their economic views? Shocking. Just shocking.
Naturally, this started a storm of fiery Internet critiques. Newspaper ads appeared, and trusty MoveOn.org launched Yet Another Email SPAM Blast begging for money and whatever else it is MoveOn.org begs from you, blasting away at the now Evil Target. Predictably, conservative bloggers and talkers rallied to Target’s defense, and engaged in their own brand of self promoting babble. Blah blah blah.
Finally, Target “apologized.” Their first foray in direct corporate funding for political camapigns ended in a bit of a standoff, with no one really “winning” (aside from all those lefty and righty groups, bloggers and whatnots who made a few pennies off the sh*tstorm).
Let’s take a breather from all the hot air, and let’s review a few facts:
– The Awl makes the very obvious-but-not-obvious point that Target’s corporate management and PACs have always supported very conservative candidates for office. That is their right, after all – the leadership of Target is free to support whomever they choose.
Yes, Target does some donations and other things that are GLBT-positive. But that’s not a moral decision – that was a business decision to appeal to the GLBT consumer. Target also makes political donations to conservative politicians – that was a business decision to benefit Target’s bottom line.
That’s perfectly logical to upper management – unfortunately that kind of “having it both ways” doesn’t always play well with the public. Hence the downside of engaging in politics – the Other Sides have the same right to engage in free speech too.
Target has made a priority of expanding into urban markets with smaller stores, similar to the ones proposed in San Francisco. Urban areas tend to have well-organized, vocal GLBT communities, and losing their support because of this latest kerfuffle could cost those urban locations. I’m sure that when whoever is in charge of Giving Target’s Corporate Cash Directly To Campaigns Department made the big donation to that PAC in Minnesota, they figured no one would care outside of MN. A logical assumption, but not necessarily the right one in the Age of The Internet and the Age of Angry Hyper-Partisanship.
Besides, despite all this support for anti-gay candidates, the Human Rights Campaign Fund gives Target (and allied retailer Best Buy) a sparkly 100% rating for being GLBT friendly. Remember that when they come begging for money from you on a street corner next time.
– I don’t know that this whole thing will make a bit of difference in Target’s plans for San Francisco. Despite the alleged liberalism of San Franciscans, they have shown a unique ability to abandon principles in favor of material goods. Target does provide cheap products from China and other necessities people seem to like, hence a lot of Target love in Liberal SF.
When they announced Target’s plans, it was very difficult to find the usual band of NIMBYs and lefties who go to protest rallies speaking out against this particular chain. Then again, San Francisco plants a wet one on Whole Foods every time it opens another store, despite being one of the most obnoxious and overpriced chains in the country, so again, big surprise. The Castro welcomed a Levi’s store (complete with sweatshop made clothes) with open arms, as well. The common thread being that chains that hire the best local PR people tend to get their way, because the local PR people know how to use the Politics of Feelings to keep the local hippies in check.
Target didn’t do anything criminal in donating directly to some right wing group. However, the donation had the net effect of slapping their logo onto a partisan cause for the far right, for all to see. This, at the same time it’s trying to have it both ways with all sorts of marketing to GLBT consumers. Given the bloodbath that is political discourse nowadays, it’s not hard to see why this ended up as a PR FAIL for Target.
People know the Target brand, and it’s easy to see why people might feel a bit put off when they see their favorite store supporting people that think they have no right to exist, at the same time the same company is running around saying it’s pro GLBT. It’s a bit of (oh God not an Orwell reference) doublethink in the classic sense of the word. Makes sense inside the office, but doesn’t play well outside.
As for Target’s plans in SF – bring it on. There’s nothing at the old Sears location on Geary right now anyway, and if moving Target in means keeping some sales tax dollars in SF instead of seeing it all go to Colma, fine. It’s not like some artisan hippie collective is going to be doing anything useful in the space.
If people really dislike Target’s politics, they don’t have to shop there. As for me, I’ve never had any delusions about what big corporate stores are and are not. They are not benevolent charities and paragons of goodliness and socialism, they are in business to make money for shareholders and themselves any way they can. I’ve never thought Target was the former – and I don’t see why anyone else would think so either.
PS: If some corporation decided to pony up the cash for some left wing candidate for Governor (unlikely but hey, this is America), you can bet that the conservatives would be throwing a temper tantrum worse than a spoiled child too. The shoutalot ideologues in our country who make a buck off of antagonism tend to operate in the same way, be they left or right.
UPDATE: It seem the shareholders aren’t too fond of all this hullaballoo. This is no surprise. Corporations are in the business of making money and serving the financial needs of their shareholders. If engaging in any politics (left or right) impedes this, then shareholders will not be pleased.

Random Thoughts on Today’s “Day of Protest” at Craigslist Worldwide HQ In the Inner Sunset…

smallversionoftwitpic.jpgEarlier today the Inner Sunset had something it normally does not: a loud angry protest gathered on the sidewalk, in this case in front of Craigslist Worldwide Headquarters on 9th Avenue. This is a drastic change from normal – usually the biggest thing we see are aggressive panhandlers activists raising money or gathering signatures on Irving and 9th. So I figured I’d use my lunch hour away from the home office to check it out.
Quite a bit of news media was represented from the major network affliates, and KPIX blogger Beth Spotswood was there, as was Jim of SF Citizen, Bay City News/SF Appeal, and a documentary film crew based in Hawaii.
Needless to say it was a bit of a circus, and the N Judah almost ran over a few people who were rubbernecking in their cars or who were spilling out of the sidewalk. I took some photos, which you can see here.
Here’s a few random thoughts on today’s events, in no particular order:
Jim at SF Citizen (who posted his post in record time, I might note) raises the question – why aren’t they protesting at the Bay Guardian or other print publications that also feature adult-oriented advertising. I asked this to one of the organizers, who basically said that Craigslist was a “multinational corporation” and the excuse that they couldn’t “fight in more places than one at a time.” I hear that – no one criticized Martin Luther KIng Jr. of only having the Bus Strike in one city and not more at the same time, but then again, this is the age of the Internet, and it’s foolish for anyone to ignore the fact that if one eliminated craigslist.org’s ads, they’d simply move to another site or back to print – but not be eliminated.
It is also foolish to ignore the fact that there are plenty of calls to attack craigslist coming from other entities that would eagerly take the cash for said ads. The fact that protesters had an online competitor of craigslist.org speaking there was a bit much. They might as well have invited eBay to jump in too. (Meg Whitman oversaw an expansion of eBay’s adult sales so I guess she couldn’t have shown up. That and the whole lawsuit thing.)
-I’ve met Craig Newmark and I think he means well. I’ve seen him take a lot of unneeded crap from people (Chronicle employee, you know who you are), and Craiglist did wonders for me personally when I needed to rent a place to live, or sell furniture online without it costing me a fortune. On the day I launched the N Judah Chronicles, he posted a cool post that helped generate initial interest, and the fact is if Craigslist wanted to, it could have been 100x as big as it is now and make literally billions, but chose another route.
That said, I think craigslist.org’s handling of the bad publicity, and the legitimate public policy questions raised by many has been poor. Like almost every other tech-based business, there seems to be the sense that because it’s not a traditional Industrial Age business, somehow it’s immune from those that would wish it to be burnt to the ground (both in the print world and elsewhere). It’s similar to the folks at Facebook.com and other tech companies that ignore those in power that have sway over little things like “antitrust laws,” “privacy” and the like.
If I was in the kind of trouble these guys are in (“Craigslist Killer?” Really? WTF??) I’d hire a company like Barbary Coast Consulting or Dezenhall Resources to better defend the company – not paint over the craiglist.org sign.

-I dislike immensely the idea of human trafficking and I’ve read enough about how organized crime operates to know this is a problem. We have also had a serious problem with this in the Outer Sunset where cartel-run operations have busted for some time now. I don’t like the idea that the Outer Sunset, because of its relative calmness and “remoteness” (Remote? In a city of 49 square miles? Really?) is being targeted by cartels for the prostitution business and the drug businesses. The fact that people are being hurt and killed in these situations is sickening too.
That said, we have had tough laws on the books for years, and that hasn’t stopped anything – it just pushes things into the shadows, ironically giving organized crime even more power than it already has (drug war anyone?). California is likely to legalize marijuana this fall (!) and there have been suggestions that legalizing, regulating and taxing (and punishing like hell those that break said laws) it would have an effect on organized crime profits. (i.e. like the drug cartels growing marijuana out here).
Could something like this work and create a safer, regulated, less crime dominated situation for consenting adults? I’m nowhere near an expert on said matters, but outright bans, and big penalties for those who do this haven’t eliminated the problem. Is there some other way? Regulating personal behavior can go too far – watch the opening credits of Milk for an example.
People of the Internet, you tell me.
That’s all. I’m sure I’ve said plenty to irritate everyone on all sides of the issue. I’m happy to post constructive critques, but namecalling and insults will be deleted. Flame on.
PS: Debunking the Disinfo Here: This blogger claimed (or at least implied) that the Mercury Insurance sign at the location of Craiglist HQ was designed to “hide” Craigslist.
This is a mistake.
Craigslist.org has always only occupied the street level portion of this property. The upper stories have always been other businesses. There is in fact an actual Mercury Insurance agent at this location. Prior to that it was something else. Just sayin’!

“Meatless Monday” Resolution Doesn’t Go Far Enough – We Need “Do the Hustle” Tuesdays Too!

IMG_0965.JPGSo, in old news recycled, we’re being reminding in various web-spaces that the City of San Francisco did indeed pass a non-binding resolution declaring a weekly “Meatless Monday” in order to “encourage” (love that word) people to be more holy or something. The people for it think they’ve really made a difference or something. Plenty of outsiders have seized upon this as another billy club to beat on Our Fair City with, and out-of-state Gate commenters are literally so angry and screaming mad they’re going to need their blood pressure meds re-upped early.
Calm down, people and take a nice deep breath before you blow a blood vessel, let’s review for a moment, shall we?
-Like any emotion inducing non-binding resolution, the key word here is non-binding. That means it’s nothing more than a majority of supervisors expressing an opinion, albeit under the aegis of the City of San Francisco. Still, if a majority of Supervisors were sitting in a bar, and all agreed they liked Guinness, that would have about as much legal impact as a “non binding resolution.”
The twist is, however when these things are doing at City Hall, emotional proponents and their feisty opposition scream and yell, cry and moan about this like it means something. IT DOES NOT! I can go to McDonalds, buy a big bag of burgers, and stand out on the street giving them out to anyone I so choose and the Man can’t crack down on me.
Hell, I can even SIT DOWN ON THE SIDEWALK and hand out burgers and (for now) no one can stop me. If I want to eat NOTHING, not even VEGETABLES but simply go breatharian, I can do that too!! The point is, nothing is going to change, aside from some dead trees to print this thing up. Ooh, how “revolutionary!”
-I have no problem with Supervisors expressing their views on current events, by the way. I can respect other people’s points of view, and I’m sure this had good intentions. There is an irony here, however – the resolution’s main supporter, Sup. Sophie Maxwell, currently lives in a district with no real grocery stores. Try finding vegan anything or just some fresh produce on a regular basis, and you’d be hard pressed to do so. During a recent trip on the T Line I took the time to walk the neighborhood, and news flash, one has to get in a car or take a train to get any decent food. I certainly didn’t see anyone thinking “Gosh we should stop selling meat on Mondays to save the planet” – because of course wealthy liberal types aren’t going to go take the T Line to dialogue on these – they’re too busy parking a Prius or something.

Continue reading

Why I Didn’t Do My Usual Scan and Critique of Mail…

For years I’ve often picked up pieces of political direct mail and scanned them in, with critiques, much like the way mainstream media does with political TV ads. I’d collected some for this season, but two things got in the way of doing so in advance of the election – technical difficulties (both with the blog software and my scanner) that took forever to fix, and a lack of material.
Normally I tend to get a lot of mail because I’m a mail ballot voter. But this year most of my mail was concerned with things like this zany Democratic Central Committee stuff (I mean really, do you even care who’s on this, much less remember ever hearing about it before this year?) which is lovely for those who produce it and for the people running. As I sat here trying to come up with something to write about the actual mail, it was hard write it in a way that people would actually read. I mean, it’s one thing if you’re writing about advertising for a big campaign for Governor or Mayor, but Central Committee? Really?
I suppose what surprised me the most, with all this money being spent, is how not one slate of candidates, or any of the various local organizations promoting their favored candidates, used any online advertising. When you consider that the typical mail piece costs $600 per 1000* voters mailed to, versus online advertising where you’re paying less than 10% of that**, you’d have thought that maybe allied candidates or whatever would have mixed in a little online advertising to reach voters, instead of relying exclusively on dead tree which end up in the recycle bin. And it’s not like their consultants wouldn’t have made money either – they just wouldn’t have had the overhead of paying designers, printers, mailhouses, postage and shipping, but would have still made their 15%.
Ah well. I’m kinda glad this boring primary is over. I’m really hoping the next few months we see something better out of our candidates for state office, and for city office. I know it’s asking for too much, but would it kill some of these people to avoid devolving debate into small smart-ass soundbites and instead demonstrate that they know something besides what some smart guy told them to say?

Is Critical Mass Getting Special Treatment at Ocean Beach? UPDATED

UPDATE: Our friends at SF Appeal did the responsible thing and picked up a phone, and here’s their report. Thanks for the link, SFA!
hankmoody.jpgSince it’s the last Friday of the month, that means your commute home, be it by bus, car or bike, will be interrupted by “Critical Mass,” San Francisco’s taxpayer-subsidized, police-escorted party time for the cool kids with their fixies and assorted cool looking bikes. What’s interesting is that unlike in the past, they’ve published their entire route on flyers at a website. This is strange because the claim has been that “no one” organized Critical Mass, that’s a spontaneous thing, blah blah blah.
Strangely enough, on their own website and flyers, they not only give out the route (which is nice in that you can avoid this temper tantrum in advance), but they also tell people that “wood and beer (are) welcome.” Wait, what?
A quick review of the rules at Ocean Beach clearly state that alcohol is forbidden, and that permits are required in advance for a group of 50 or more (and it’s clear there’s going to be more than 50 people participating in the ride.) So the question is this – will the sheer mass of people participating allow them to break the rules everyone else has to follow?

Continue reading

Why I Like Watching “Treme” But It Also Scares the Hell Out of Me

treme.pngIf you’ve not had a chance to see HBO’s latest show, “Treme”, by author/ex-journalist/blogger hater David Simon (he of “The Wire” fame), I strongly urge you to do so, by any means necessary. If you have HBO and OnDemand, it should be there, if not, well wait for the DVDs or explore (ahem) alternate means of content delivery or whatever, but you really need to see this.
The Short Recap: it’s a story about people from various parts of New Orleans in the immediate aftermath of Hurrcaine Katrina in 2005-2006. We all know what a supreme f*ck up FEMA and the feds were after this disaster, and we’ve all seen the pictures on TV. What Treme manages to do is to personalize those stories and do that expertly woven tapestry of lives and events that Simon pioneered in The Wire.
It’s both fascinating, and horrifying to see what can happen to an American city in the 21st century, and how “shock doctrine” ideologues, good old fashioned corruption and racism, and the economic realities of a debt-ridden nation of do-nothings can collide and create the mess that we still have to this day.
Now, while I enjoy the drama and a well written TV series, and so on, Treme still scares the Hell out of me every week I watch the show. That’s because I truly fear what is going to happen to San Francisco when the inevitable Big F*cking Earthquake hits us.
We are not prepared for what people will do to our city after the quake, and after years of rule by Prince Gavin Newsom and the Board of Supervisors, I genuinely believe that the only line of defense we have against a horrifying immediate aftermath is going to be the citizens of SF, and them alone, helping each other out. What’s scarier though, is how this corrupt city will no doubt use the disaster as a way to destroy neighborhoods and create “Suburbia By the Sea,” and historical anything be damned.

Continue reading