SF Weekly Forgets that We Live in a Democracy and SFBG Announces Its Endorsements for June (edit this)
The SF Weekly devoted its cover story to Nader/Gonzalez running as independents for the U.S. presidency.
The SF Weekly denounced that Nader and Gonzalez were running and using their platform to promote issues such as government reform, reining in corporate influence and ballot access. The SF Weekly should take a civic lesson. Under the U.S. Constitution, anyone who was born in the United States and is over the age of 35 can run for president (and vice president). And those who run for president/vp usually have issues that they believe in-and thus use those issues to create their platform.
The other weekly, San Francisco Bay Guardian announced its endorsements. The surprise was that they chose Mark Leno for State Senate #3. The current incumbent for that seat is Carole Midgen, which the Guardian has supported in the past. The Guardian noted that Leno has ties to Newsom. Currently, the polls show that Joe Nation, a former assemblymember from Marin (and who is now living in Sonoma County) is ahead. The State Senate District #3 includes the east part of the City, all of Marin and a portion of Sonoma County.
May 1st, 2008 at 3:43 am e
Kim?
The weekly merely suggested that running is a bad idea. In a democracy, that’s called sharing your opinion.
As for the Leno endorsement, a smart move by SFBG. Midgen has violated campaign finance laws, and she should have been imprisoned after her mad driving spree that resulted in the hospitalization of one of her victims.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:53 pm e
SF Weekly is the corporate-sponsored voice of do-nothing cynicism, so I thank Left in SF for this posting.
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:40 pm e
I didn’t get the sense that the SF Weakly reporter was necessarily bashing Nader/Gonzalez, rather, like so many media outlets (including The Guardian), instead of interjecting a new and refreshing spin on this campaign (good and bad), they took the lazy road and spent an enormous part of the article re-informing their readers of the repugnantly cliqued concerns of:
1.) Detractors believing that it is a detrimental and “Quixotic” campaign (I find it ironic that people use “Quixotic” as having a negative connotation because the novel was attempting to describe such efforts as good things)
2.) Detractors believing it is Nader’s fault that the universe has exploded
3.) Detractors believe that the universe might explode again due to a Nader/Gonzalez campaign
However, I do think that reminding readers of these things essentially stirs up the “open-minded and progressive” knee-jerk reactionaries to perpetuate their ignorance and do what they do best, thus, it is essentially just, as you put it, “denouncing” Nader/Gonzalez.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:37 am e
By your standard, Kim, denouncing a neo-Nazi rally would automatically mean denouncing the First Amendment.
May 3rd, 2008 at 8:20 am e
The good news is that the Nader/Gonzalez team got a front page story out of it. No doubt other candidates would have liked their faces on the cover of the SF Weekly.
Watsonville has been doing a lot of coverage of Gonzalez’s visit. He was speaking to high students who had registered hundreds of voters in Watsonville.
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:58 am e
“He was speaking to high students who had registered hundreds of voters…”
I hope these kids didn’t get high during the meeting. I know the Green Party favors legalization, but passing out joints to school kids during a rally is a bit much.
May 3rd, 2008 at 6:34 pm e
Nothing like what you allude to happened in Watsonville. Rather their government studies teacher arranged the appearance wth Gonzalez to meet with the students and the public in Watsonville’s community center. Press was there and elected officials were there. Press states that all liked Gonzalez’s speech.
Spreading unfounded rumors is unnecessary. Especially since the whole thing was covered by the press in Watsonville-and nothing like you alluded to happened during his appearance.