The common view

In his recent opinion piece, Greg Shaw backhandedly suggests that my mayoral campaign discounted gay rights and the gay community [5/25/05]. That is patently false.

Shaw specifically claims that I "made speeches suggesting good progressives don't think about gender." That's not true. One of the reasons I joined the Green Party, in 2000, was because of the party's position on gay rights and my dissatisfaction with the Democrats on gay marriage. I thought then, and think now, that gender and sexual orientation rights are key issues for our community and nation.

Shaw, like many queer progressives in the Milk Club, wanted Tom Ammiano to be elected mayor. Some went so far as to label homophobic anyone who questioned Tom's electability. But I've explained to Shaw and others that the reason I ran for mayor was because neither Ammiano nor Angela Alioto were articulating the progressive viewpoint effectively. It appeared to me and to others that Newsom would win in a landslide, and that progressives would be greatly weakened. My feeling in this regard had nothing to do with the fact that Ammiano is gay.

During the mayor's race, Shaw attacked me when I appeared at the Tenants Union, which came as a surprise as I believe my record on tenants rights was irrefutable.

After the mayor's race, Shaw asked me to support his effort to get elected to the Democratic County Central Committee. I agreed, even though I thought his attacks had been personal and counterproductive.

I felt as progressives that we have to keep the common view together rather than fall prey to our personal differences.

Matt Gonzalez
San Francisco

A word from Wade

What I've never understood about the Bay Guardian's "reporting" is why you insist on lying to your readers. Why the need to lie about SFSOS's position on taxes, ethics reform, school desegregation, and, well, everything we believe in ["Divide and Conquer," 5/25/05]?

Your flatly hysterical "reporting" of our third annual member meeting reveals the answer: like every loudmouthed, blustering school-yard bully, you just can't take it when someone finally stands up to you. In the name of treating your readers like educated adults, I challenge you to trust them for a change: Let's have Lincoln-Douglas debates, all on your turf. On homelessness, panhandling, jobs, taxes, home ownership, civil service reform, crime, ethics, and whatever else you want. You pick which subjects, how many words, in what order, on what timeline. You have your whole staff of "reporters" give your opinion about the right ideas. I'll do mine.

Of course, like all the punk Chris Daly school-yard bullies I've ever met, you'll come up with some B.S. excuse about why you can't fight. You'll just keep spouting off in your little locker room and keep treating your readers like narrow-minded lemmings who need to be led over your cliff of urban decay without ever reading an opposing point of view.

Wade Randlett Founder, SFSOS
San Francisco

Ackerman on desegregation

In the article "Divide and Conquer," it is unfortunate Steven T. Jones blatantly misrepresented the position of Superintendent Arlene Ackerman about a serious subject – desegregation.

In using the phrase "neighborhood schools," Jones took the superintendent's comments out of context to falsely suggest she used the "loaded term [neighborhood schools] ... [which] is essentially the opposite of desegregation."

Here is the exact transcript of the superintendent's comments, reflecting her commitment to make sure every school choice placed on an enrollment application by parents is a guaranteed quality school if that choice is granted, regardless if it is a neighborhood school or one across town:

"We have to make sure that every child in this school system has access to a quality education in their neighborhood. See, I'm not against choice. I just want to make sure that if parents choose their neighborhood schools, they can be guaranteed a good education, quality education for their children in their neighborhood. So we will continue to focus on making all schools great schools."

The above letter was sent to us by Lorna Ho of the San Francisco Unified School District Office of Public Engagement. She insisted that it be signed only by the office. Apparently, no individual in the school district was willing to put his or her name on the letter.

Steven T. Jones responds: I believe I accurately characterized Ackerman's speech. As the quote cited by Ho indicates, Ackerman told a group pushing for neighborhood schools that everyone should be able to choose his or her neighborhood schools, which would be at odds with the district's desegregation policies. Wade Randlett hasn't cited any statement from the article that is inaccurate, despite my requests of his group to do so. We stand by the stories.