A Few Last Endorsements Before Bedtime...

It's late Monday nite and I'm dog tired from work (some of us still have to), so I'll just rattle off a few thoughts and endorsements before hitting the hay...

Republicans for Attorney General: To be honest, I haven't been following this much, since I've been so consumed with fear and loathing over the prospect of Kamala Harris as AG. From the brief looks I've done, I kind of like John Eastman, though I'm not sure how he'll do against the other two (Steve Cooley and Tom Harman). But I'll leave this up to you. The Republican nominee is certainly important because they'll have to be able to win against Harris - which means that they will have to be tough, fearless, and dirty, and expose the bitch for who she is. Eastman looks to be the toughest.

Democrats for Attorney General: FOR GOD'S SAKE IF YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT AND HAVE ANY SELF-RESPECT AT ALL THEN DO NOT VOTE FOR KAMALA FUCKING HARRIS!

If you've read this blog at all, you know what I think about Harris. I'll briefly recap. She's a hard-left cultural Marxist who loves criminals, hates locking people up, and never met a criminal who didn't deserve an unlimited amount of second chances. She's as soft-on-crime as they come. Electing her would almost certainly mean the end of the death penalty in California (and the end of life-without-parole as a sentencing option), a re-working of "3 strikes" in favor of violent criminals, and a pro-illegal alien stance which would undermine any and all attempts at border security, deporting illegal alien criminals, or even co-operating with Federal Authorities in immigration matters. She will be an unprecedented fucking disaster.

But... there is some hope in the form of Chris Kelly. Yes, he is still a Democrat, and despite the fact that he's waaay more liberal than the most liberal of Republicans, he has a few decent ideas - including identifying and eliminating diversion programs that don't work (whereas "Diversion Program" is Kamala Harris' middle name).

He's not the best choice, but he's the best choice to beat Harris in the primary, which is job #1!

Statewide Propositions:

YES ON 13
NO ON ALL THE REST!

I could explain why but I'm too tired.

Be sure to vote tomorrow!

Bay Guardian Endorsements We'd Like to See

It's election season again, and busy and/or lazy liberals everywhere in this town will be grasping for the inevitable election endorsements from SF Bay Guardian - San Francisco's establishment/alternative weekly. Like the urine-soaked Panhandle after the Bay to Breakers, they have become a sad fixture of the City. Many years ago, they started printing a clip-out version - sparing people the pain of actually reading their endorsements.

The SF Weekly has done a nice parody of these annoying dirges... they'd be funny if they weren't so true... aw hell, they're funny anyway...

Can't remember what the Bay Guardian endorsed for next week's election? Neither can we, so for your convenience we're reprinting an abridged version of its voter guide.

Governor

Jerry Brown

We wish we knew which Jerry Brown we're voting for: the crazy young man who used to run California, or the crazy old man who just won't go away. Either way, we're in. There's only one thing we'd rather see Jerry Brown do than be California's next governor, and that's Jerry Brown going out of his way to run for every office Gavin Newsom wants from now on. That would be putting the public first.

Lieutenant Governor
Jerry Brown

Anybody who's thinking of voting for Gavin Newsom for lieutenant governor should write in "Jerry Brown" instead. Just to see the look on Newsom's face. Oh, like you really care who ends up as lieutenant governor.

Attorney General

Kamala Harris

Let's recap. Kamala Harris has a plummeting conviction rate, a drug lab whose staff are actually on drugs, and her office has neglected to inform defense attorneys about cops who have been convicted of crimes. So why are we endorsing her? Because one of our editors is a cutter, and this was the best way he could hurt himself. God, we feel so alive!

U.S. Senate
Barbara Boxer

Many people claim Boxer has been a terrible senator, but we had a late lunch that day and missed the whole thing. We asked them to repeat what they'd said, only slower this time, but it turns out we weren't going to listen anyway. Re-elect Barbara Boxer.

Congress, Eighth District
Nancy Pelosi

We honestly can't remember the name of the person running against her. Is it Cindy Sheehan again? Because that would be different: Sheehan would have won last time if we'd only endorsed her harder.

Congress, Seventh District
George Miller

It would be an exaggeration to say we picked his name out of a hat. It was more like a helmet. But it was a very good helmet. Made by a small local business. Quality headgear.

Secretary of State
Debra Bowen

Progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive! If that's more "progressives" than you have after your name, then you are morally obligated to vote for Bowen.

Controller
That one guy

You know, the guy who's running for the office? Unopposed ... we think? It'll come to us. We know this one, we really do. Man, are we really excited to endorse him, too. He's done, like, great ... controllery ... things for the past two (or maybe four) years. Really kept stuff under control for the people of California. Dignity: the word that comes to mind when we think of our state controller.

State Senate, District 8
Leland Yee for Mayor

Popular with his district and a powerful force in Sacramento, Leland Yee for Mayor is a shoo-in to return to the state Senate, where he will start the Leland Yee for Mayor for Mayor campaign. Sources say it will really be the kickoff to his eventual run for governor.

State Assembly, District 13
Tom Ammiano

When the history of progressive politics in San Francisco is written, it will prominently feature two things: 1. Steve Jones' bicycle and 2. Tom Ammiano. Together, they led a revolution in San Francisco politics that successfully alienated a broad coalition of voters. Ammiano continues that noble tradition in Sacramento. He deserves to be re-elected for that. But honestly? He had us at "Kiss my gay ass." We couldn't have said it any better, and we tried.

State Ballot Measures
Proposition 14 (Open primaries)

No!

Open primaries will make it easier for people to vote for the candidates they like, instead of the candidates who are best for them. Party hacks and political pamphlets will lose influence, and then what will you do? You need us! Admit it, and vote no.

Proposition 15 (Limited public financing of elections)
Yes! Yes! Maybe! Wait — yes!

Public financing in San Francisco has supported no underdog candidates, but has led to several costly lawsuits. Naturally, we want to see the same efficiency applied to every election you vote in.

Proposition 16 (Mandating a two-thirds vote on public power)
Rape, rape, rape!

Throughout all of history, there has never been an organization more oppressive than PG&E. Nazi Germany? Hah — PG&E has made twice as many Jews suffer by charging them too much for electricity. The Khmer Rouge? At least they reused every part of their victims. The Republican National Committee? It works for PG&E — at least, according to a diagram by our unpaid interns. Someday you'll see it; someday you'll thank us. History will absolve us. Vote no, or be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes.

Proposition 17 (Auto insurance law changes)
Nooooooo

As we understand it, this measure emerged out of a plane crash on a mysterious island inhabited by a smoke monster who kills some people and saves others 15 percent or more on their car insurance. But we might be getting it mixed up with something else that was ultimately disappointing.

San Francisco Ballot Measures

Proposition B (Earthquake safety and emergency response bonds)
Yeeeeeeeeeesssssss

This is a multimillion-dollar bond on a public project. And those always turn out so well. Just the thought of public money coursing through the system makes us shiver with delight. It doesn't matter what it's for, and it doesn't matter that the city won't really tell us. Vote yes: This measure's so bad it's good.

Proposition D (Retirement benefits)
Yes! Yes! Yes!

We've tried to explain to San Francisco's activists why Prop. D works, but they didn't like it because it doesn't mention global warming even once. So instead we'll say this: They would have voted for Prop. D in the '60s. Or, at least, the '60s as we remember them; the actual '60s got us into this pension mess in the first place. But that doesn't matter now.

Proposition E (Budget line item for police security)

Yes

Our only problem with this measure is that it doesn't go far enough. Not only do we need to know how much money was spent on Gavin Newsom's security detail — even though the police chief will tell us anyway — we also need to know who the officers assigned to it are, the names of their children, and a log of the officers' sexual activities that goes back at least five years. The citizens of San Francisco deserve to know whether their cops are sex-positive. Why? Because democracy requires access to information.

Proposition G (Transbay Transit Center)
Sure, why not?

Ending on a purely symbolic policy statement with no force of law or practical impact just feels so right. If only all our endorsements could be this good.

A Rare Opportunity to Vote for Common Sense in San Francisco: Vote Non-Communists Into The DCCC

There's an election this Tuesday, June 8th, and way down the ballot is an obscure but important race that - if it goes the right way - could begin to swing this town away from the suicidal hard-left path it's been going on for the last decade.

San Francisco is a one-party state - much like Mexico under the PRI - and for the most part people here have given up on the idea that San Francisco's government is anything resembling a democracy. There is only one game in town, and that is the Democratic Party.

Only Party Members can vote in this important race, so if you are a Democrat and still have a semblance of a brain and/or a soul left after 10+ years of the Progressive Stalinism of the Board of Supervisors, then please make a vote against anarchy and for common sense.

Here's CW Nevius with the scoop...

Tuesday's election features contests with big-name politicians and national issues. In San Francisco, it also includes an obscure race for a nonpaid position few people know exists.

That's the important one - for Democratic County Central Committee.

If there are moderate San Francisco voters who support the Democratic Party but are turned off by political fringe issues like legalizing prostitution, now is the time to show up. (I will suggest some moderate candidates at the end of the column.)

Who is elected to the DCCC will have a domino effect that starts with the November election and the Board of Supervisors, influences the appointment/election of the next mayor, and - if a clever, but sneaky change to the rules passes - extends years into the future.

If you are running for supervisor in San Francisco and have the DCCC endorsement, you're in. According to 25-year DCCC member Arlo Hale Smith, since 1990 the committee has endorsed 43 candidates. Forty were elected.

"In a one-party town," said Smith, "the endorsement of the Democratic Committee is the tiebreaker - particularly in local elections where people don't pay attention."

DCCC Chair Aaron Peskin, the former president of the Board of Supervisors and a shrewd political wheeler-dealer, scoffs at that.

"My next order of business," he said, "is to call my friends and remind them that I am running. Because I'll bet two-thirds of them don't even know there's an election."

But the facts say otherwise.

"In the old days nobody spent $100 on the (DCCC) campaign, much less $1,000," said John Burton, current chair of the state Democratic Party.

Today, candidates for supervisor are exploiting a loophole that says there is no limit on individual contributions for DCCC.

For example, Rafael Mandelman, a progressive candidate for supervisor in District Eight, spent $28,102.17 on his DCCC race through May 22. His opponent, moderate Scott Wiener, spent $58,402.85 over the same period. Mandelman and Wiener can't use the money for their supervisor's race, but until the DCCC election they can use it to get out ads to promote their names.

But the real reason these races are so hotly contested is that if the Chris Daly-Peskin progressives can gain seats in the DCCC, they can control issues. And finally, there is a proposal by Daly to realign the DCCC, which now has 12 seats in both District 12 and District 13. He wants to add seats to politically progressive District 13 to give the far left an advantage for years to come.

"Personally," said Peskin, "that's not on my list of things to do."

But Wiener, who lost a bitter battle for chair in 2008, sees serious problems.

"This proposed rule change is designed to accomplish one thing . . . moving the DCCC even further to the hard left," Wiener said. "When the Democratic Party starts representing only one line of thinking . . . that will be a huge loss."

So, if you're happy with the far-left agenda, check out the Bay Guardian. (Progs with name recognition like Peskin, David Campos, David Chiu, and John Avalos are probably shoo-ins. Daly is not running.)

For those who'd like to see a swing to families, kids, and civility on the streets, here are some suggestions:

District 12: Bill Fazio, Matthew Tuchow, Mike Sullivan, Arlo Smith, John Shanley, Meagan Levitan, Alex Volberding, Mary Jung, Dan Dunnigan, Ron Dudum, Andrew Clark and Tom Hsieh.

District 13: Keith Baraka, Catherine Stefani, Stuart Smith, Scott Wiener, Calvin Louie, Joe Alioto Veronese, Owen O'Donnell, Linda Richardson, Leslie Katz, Chuck Hornbrook.

Just don't forget to vote.