Democrat for Gonzalez

Buried several paragraphs down in your recent editorial (11/12/03) endorsement of Matt Gonzalez is the one thing that gives me (and many San Francisco voters) pause. We are told that a Gonzalez win would be a "lasting statement about the viability of the Green Party – a statement that will resonate nationwide." That is not a statement I want to make.

If Gonzalez is going to win the race, he will need the support of a very large number of Democratic voters who have no desire to help out the Green Party, especially at the national level.

I am a Democrat, but I will vote for Gonzalez simply because he will be a far better mayor than Newsom. The last thing San Francisco needs is another term of patronage, money, and machine politics, which is what we will surely get under Newsom. It should be noted, however, that this is the same reasoning explicitly rejected by the Green Party in the past. The cry now is "anybody but Newsom," but will they heed the cry of "anybody but Bush" next year? Or will they spend their time and energy attacking the eventual Democratic candidate (much to the delight of Karl Rove and the Republican Party)?

If Gonzalez wins the mayoral race (and I hope he does), it will be in spite of, not because of, his affiliation with the Green Party.

Ty Bardi,
San Francisco

Is graffiti vandalism?

Thanks for your excellent article on graffiti ["Graffiti Gang Wars," 11/12/03]. I found it informative. The author showed his bias with his comment about criminal sentencing: "end up doing between 18 and 21 months ... for spray painting." He also stated that the California Penal Code's "criminal street gang" activity of felony vandalism (one of 25 activities) as "one of the least-threatening activities on the list, depending on your point of view." This issue goes far beyond mere spray painting – vandalism is not an insignificant problem.

One thing the author did not mention is the aesthetics of graffiti and how it impacts the people of San Francisco (and other cities). I think a good question to those who support graffiti vandalism is, "Would you invite one or more of these persons to 'throw up' (create a large graffiti work) – without any art direction – on the interior or exterior of your home?"

Harry J. Johnson,

San Francisco

Reform the DCCC – again

As a lifelong Democrat, and a member of several Democratic clubs, I was saddened and angered to see the San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee endorse Gavin Newsom – subject to pressure by the party's elite ["Dems Go with Newsom," 11/19/03].

Far more registered Democrats in the city voted for Matt Gonzalez (or Tom Ammiano or Angela Alioto) than voted for Newsom, and I fully expect that Gonzalez will get more Democratic votes than Newsom in the runoff. For the committee to endorse a reactionary, landlord-backed candidate demonstrates how they are out of touch with their constituents – and care more about partisan control than the principles that Democrats stand for.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. In March 2002 a slate of progressive candidates was elected to the DCCC – with support from the Harvey Milk Club, the San Francisco Tenants Union, and the Bay Guardian. Thanks to this successful collective effort, the DCCC should have more accurately reflected the views of San Francisco Democrats.

But despite some good people now serving on the committee, at least two members (Jeff Sheehy and Richard Ow) who were elected on this progressive slate voted to endorse Newsom.

Next year San Francisco progressives should work collectively to defeat any member of the DCCC who voted to endorse Newsom, and replace them with people who will listen to the rank and file. Slate politics can be effective at electing progressives, but once elected we need to hold them accountable.

Paul Hogarth,

Berkeley

Grifter Gavin

The day before Steven T. Jones's "Dissecting the Newsom Agenda" (11/19/03) came out, I had submitted an op-ed to the Chronicle citing in jest that unless the Gettys shift the focus of their philanthropy to filling the city's coffers, Newsom would make a horrible mayor because he never had to deal with limited cash flow. I was frightened to find out that what I thought in jest was more accurate than facetious. But then again, it's not hard to believe that Newsom truly thinks he can go begging for grants and fleece the public by calling it a viable economic plan.

After all, look at his "success" stories. His real estate investments? They wouldn't have gotten past the most junior of mortgage lenders without Gordon Getty's name on it. His restaurants and nightclubs? Same deal, coupled with the fact that some of his business ventures began after he was in a position of political power. His political career? His first office came by an appointment from Willie Brown, who undoubtedly heard of Newsom from Brown's own Rolodex of wealthy benefactors.

See the pattern? None of Newsom's "success" stories came about from the hardworking, self-made man that he proclaims himself to be. Rather, they came from begging. Which is ironic considering how his draconian Care Not Cash plan targets aggressive panhandlers, who really aren't so different from Newsom in their quest to use other people's money.