Midgen's history of; district shopping, identity politics, comical driving exploits, Chris Daly like tantrums, fund raising in her office, tormenting her underlings, her huge campaign finance fines and attacks on campaign finance reform, etc... She is the perfect candidate for the Guardian, a total lack of standards.

add com at ^^^

http://calitics.^^^/diary/5357/

We should have long ago become inured to the Guardian's whining about corruption on the right when that same corruption (aka: Carole Migden) is absolutely OK with them when it comes from the left.

Poor failed, shit-canned, corrupt, serial politician Carole (does she even live in San Francisco anymore?) DCCC is a long fall from the big house in Sacramento but she's got to start somewhere. After all - it's not as if she can get a job in the private sector.

After years of purporting to be "For the People" and "Defender of the Neighborhoods", I find it odd to see three solid proxy votes of Willy (Mr. PG&E - Downtown) Brown in the SFBG-AD12 slate and another four proxy votes in the SFBG-AD13 Slate. I am a Candidate for DCCC in AD13. To me, the questionnaire process or what ever process the SFBG used to select their endorsements should have had the extra effort I have come to expect from Alternative Print Media. I am running for the DCCC in AD13 because I am sick and tired of the Democratic Party Pitching Democratic Programs and Delivering Republican Solutions.

This June 8th election, I suggest that all of San Francisco's Voters start to think for themselves regarding the DCCC Race. To me the DCCC race is about the integrity of the Local and State Democratic Party. The Machine(s) are ramping up big money contributions for a race where there are no campaign limits, and those of us who are elected receive no pay. The campaign funding limits that apply to the Supervisor Races do not apply to the DCCC contest. The DCCC Members we elect this June 8th will be critical in defending San Francisco District Elections for our Supervisors. Will the Burton/Brown proxy DCCC Candidates, which the SFBG endorsed protect our District Election of County Supervisors? Does San Francisco really want their DCCC Members to become a second Board of Supervisors?

Every DCCC in each of California's 58 Counties has three critical roles. First and foremost is to hold fast to Democratic Values. Based on that commitment, the DCCC is supposed to identify and recruit the best possible Democrats for all appointed and elected positions in Local Government in their respective Counties. The third mission of every Democratic Party County Central Committee is Party Building. These three roles are not Governance. These three roles are not Legislation of Public Policy. These three roles are for the good of the whole Local and State California Democratic Party, not this or that faction.

Our DCCC will also face a huge task to build a New California Democratic Party after the train-wreck coming our way in November of 2010. The San Francisco DCCC has a leadership responsibility to work with all the other 57 County DCCC's to build a New Democratic Party. Why? Because the Democratic Party sold Democratic Programs in 2008 and delivered Republican Solutions. Regardless of the Spin, The Obamacare Health Insurance Company Bail Out is the 1994 Mitt Romney Health Care Plan. That is a Republican Solution and NOT the Single Payer Solution that respects Health Care as a basic Right. Let's talk about the Elephant in the room. Willy Brown's Prop-16 Corporate Constitutional Bail Out for PG&E is a Republican Solution. Community Run Green Power competition to corporate monopoly is a Democratic Solution. The Bank Bail Outs (version one and now version two with the current Senator Dodd SB-3217) helped Wall Street on a temporary basis and now are proposed to replace the Democratic Solutions FDR put in place in 1933 and 1934. What Obama and Dodd propose (SB-3217) are permanent Bail Out's for Wall Street by establishment of the TARP and TALF as Statutory US Treasury Programs backed by American Taxpayers. This was the George Bush - Republican Solution. The Bush Wars escalate, not end. This is a Republican Solution. Countless Schools across California close and face closure next year, and those which remain open suffer huge degradation of quality due to lack of funding. This is a Republican Solution. There is a reason 50% of our Young Democrats (that 50% of our Party who are under 35) plan to sit out 2010. We lied to our kids. Imagine November 15th, 2010. We have to elect New Democrats to the two year terms on our County DCCC who are focused on the three functions of any Democratic Party County Central Committee, because the greater likelihood we face as a "Leadership County" will be the critical mission of building a New California Democratic Party. We need to elect Democrats who will not negotiate Democratic Solutions, rather will deliver Democratic Solutions.

We all have shortly over six weeks to re-focus. I suggest the DCCC race is probably the most important contest on our June 8th Ballot other than Prop 16. At the CDP in Los Angeles, John Burton called the vote of the Delegates for the endorsement of Insurance Commissioner before Hector de la Torre had arrived, and Dave Jones won by 17 votes. Marcy Winograd was told to sit down and be quiet, and then the floor fight was decided by the Chair not counting whole Assembly district and County Delegations. Our CDP endorsed the "Best Republican in the Democratic Party" to quote Jane "More War" Harmon, our Democratic Candidate for Congress in the CA 36th CD. The behavior of the Old Guard CDP Leadership from San Francisco was deplorable. This was what the New Democrats witnessed. Our Party is deeply divided. These same schisms appear in our Local DCCC Contest. There are five Candidates in both AD12 and AD13 that could easily make room for those of us who will bring vital depth as well as new vision into our DCCC.

In AD12 I suggest Borenstein, Kelly, Nutter, Marks, and Morrison be replaced with Jaynry Mak, Arlo Smith, Angelique Mahan, Tualatai Mamoe, and Mary Jung.

In AD13 I suggest Julian, Rosenthal, Maufas, and Migden be replaced with Hope Johnson, Tom Taylor, Stu Smith, and Paul Currier. I also note that the Editor missed David Chiu, who is in the Photo, but not on the list.

We all need to ask our selves two questions. What is the best we can do for San Francisco, and do we want and will we work to build a New Democratic Party? As far as I can effect, I am in this to support New Democrats. The Old Guard has had their day.

I always hope there are enough candidates on the ballot to take SFBG list, pick everybody NOT on it, and vote for them. Would hate to waste my vote on a single name SFBG recommends.

Thanks for publishing your slate - the best way to judge who NOT to vote for.

I always counted on the Guardian to provide smart progressive analysis, enough that if I was ever undecided on some issue by election time, I could usually count on reading the Guardian and finding a comprehensive analysis that would sway me in one direction or another.

Lately though, I don't know if you guys are getting lazy or just more willing to accommodate cops and firefighters when they come seeking goodies from the taxpayers, but some of that thorough analysis has been lacking on certain issues.

Take prop B for example. It's really unfortunate that the debate has been framed as earthquake safety vs. Chris Daly's concern about prisoners. And it's doubly unfortunate that the Guardian didn't move beyond that simplistic analysis.

When Sup. Chiu came to our San Francisco for Democracy meetup last month, I asked him two very simple questions. #1 -Why does earthquake safety cost $430 million for the cops, and only $7 million for the schools (Prop A)? He said that the city needed to redo all the water systems underground, etc., etc., and that costs a lot of money. OK, that seemed plausible enough. We don't want 100-year old pipes. So I asked him simple question #2 -how much is going to redo the pipes, and how much is going for that brand spanking new police command center that the cops want?

Well, turns out that only $50 million of the $430 million is going for the pipes, and "around $200 million" for the command center!

Thanks but no thanks. Come back and put $50 million for redoing the pipes, and I'll gladly vote for it. Till then, the sugar-to-shit ratio of this boondoggle is too far shifted toward the fecal direction.

These are the kinds of questions that I thought the Guardian would have asked.

It's really none of your business who's running for DCCC because you're (as you state here every time you post) not a Democrat. I, on the other hand, AM a Democrat so I'm allowed to vote on which candidates should sit on the DCCC.

And you keep stating people are "paid" to post here. Do you have factual evidence indicating that or is it another of your fevered fantasies? Because if you don't you need to stop making the accusation.

And quit referring to yourself in the third-person - it's a sign of megalomania.

I talked with someone on the Muni metro today. The guy had a few copies in his hand of some campaign stuff he had picked up about that Scott Weiner guy. Ugh. He tried to hand a copy to me and I said, "no thank you, I have no interest in that corporatist guy." The person said to me, "why?" I said, "well for starters, he's for sit-lie." The person responded by saying, "he is?....I didn't know that." I said, "yep, that's true."

This guy on the metro moments later told me he was a Democrat. I said, "well, that's your problem. You can go into rehab for that. I don't know why anyone would be a Democrat or Republican at this point in time considering the dismal record of the pro-Republican Democratic Party and the dismal record of the Republican Party." He said, "well I have to agree with you there," which I didn't expect him to say. He said, "I'm more about taking the party over from within." I said, "oh here we go with THAT!...well with respect, you're delusional because the corporations who run/own the Democratic Party (same as with the Republican Party) have no interest in being taken over nor do the corporatist politicians who run the thing...so when I hear people talk about "taking the party over from within," it's nothing but delusional, wishful-thinking. Ain't going to happen. Period. Any new members elected to congress, for example, either work for the corporations/military industrial complex et al or you're OUT (meaning minimized, ignored and considered a nut). One recent example of that: Al Franken. He came out swinging to some degree and now he's been completely muffled. Kucinich is another one although now he's pretty much aligned with the corporatists. He has also been given his orders to sit down and shut up. So much for that "taking the party over from within" BS). The guy on the metro responded: I hadn't thought of it like that. Hmmm.

And to think, I've been hearing this drivel about "taking the party over from within" since the Clinton days---if not before---and you can see that the only people who have taken the party over from within have been the corporations who own it and who then send their corporate D and R paid trolls out to talk about how great their party is and to vote for them. But all one has to say is, "no thank you." Just treat it like dog shit that you step in....get it off as quickly as possible. The stink reeks of D and R corporate fascism. I don't want anything to do with either one of them.

Vote for independent true progressives, when they appear on the ballot.

The Guardian writes about Pelosi:

"And, at a time when the Republicans are trying to derail the Obama presidency, she's become a pretty effective partner for the president. Her fate as speaker (and her future in this seat) probably depends on how the Democrats fare in the midterm Congressional elections this fall. "

---------------------------

Yes, Bush-accomplice Pelosi has become a pretty effective partner for the president (Bush3)...and he's continuing the Cheney/Bush neocon agenda and even adding to it (the Guardian failed to say THAT part).

Non-representative Pelosi also took impeachment of Bush/Cheney "off her table," if one will recall, despite an oath she took to the US Constitution. The woman is pro-war (she has a history of voting for pro-war measures and supporting pro-war candidates), she's pro-corporate, and is a non-representative for the people she is elected to represent. The US Constitution continues to be shred under Obama/Pelosi and the Dems and Repugs. (The D and R rut, in other words...which has gotten us to where we are today).

I just wanted to point out that she's the same non-representative Pelosi that the Guardian refused to endorse two years ago. And NOW they are endorsing her (go figure!) with timid, mealy-mouthed language.

And why would they praise her for giving away $$$$$$$$$$$$ to the mangled health "care" industry? What non-representative Pelosi did was to ram through a corporate giveaway, a welfare program for the wealthy.

Yet when she shows up here in San Francisco, some Dem kool-aid drinkers are fawning all over her. Why? (They would likely answer: "Because she's so close to the president.") Well what different does THAT make when HE (the president/Bush3) is continuing the Cheney/Bush agenda or have these Dem kool-aid drinkers/Obamabots not been paying close attention to what this guy has been doing since he took office to notice that?

Actually, many of them do not have a clue what he's doing because I've talked with them. It's as if they fell for his empty marketing slogans ("Hope" and "Change we can believe in."), voted for him and then they went to sleep until 2012 when they will likely mindlessly vote for him again. He has a D behind his name and that's all that matters to them and because he calls himself a Democrat "everything will be all right", when Obama is really a neocon Republican. Fortunately, some people---even a few devout Obama believers---are coming out of their Denial and waking up and realizing who and what this guy really is and is about. When will this City do the same thing when it comes to non-representative Pelosi? (Answer: Probably never). I think she has her job as long as she wants it.

I was very pleased to see that the Milk Club refused to endorse Republican (charading as a Dem) Pelosi. They also refused to endorse anyone for governor or Lt. governor. Right-on! Too bad the Guardian can't stop consuming the Dem koolaid and do the same as the Milk Club. Why can't they (The Guardian) understand that both of these useless parties are corporate scum and neither give a fuk about the US Constitution or We The People. Their concern is the corporations they work for and the corporation's bottom line. For example, here's a headline for you:

Quote: Obama to reopen waters for shallow water drilling. End Quote

Who in their right mind would do that considering the disaster in the Gulf? Duh. Yeah, that's what you get from your precious Dems. "Gotta get Dems in!" WHY? And every single day there are headlines like this. I get impression that some people at The Guardian don't pay that close of attention to what is happening at the national level.

The Milk Club did endorse Pelosi in the last election (although many of its members wanted to endorse Cindy Sheehan instead). It would seem that more members of the Milk Club have learned and seen what Pelosi (R) is and is about since the last election. Good.