I don't see anyone critizing the City Union employeees, they pretty much do what they can in difficult curcumstances. But it is management, and the Board of Superviors that I blame for poor MUNI, failing schools, lack of services etc. It is this incomptance that I would not trust to supply power to my home.

With so much at stake can you tell me you trust the Board not to quibble over which friend/acquantance to employee to manage the various parts of the Public Utility.

The Guardian (a non union employer) seems to be saying that the unionized employees of PG and E are incompetent. That glass house is vulnerable to rocks - please be advised.

BTW, the term "house union" is at best a passively racist term. Criticize all you like, but refrain from white liberal epithets like "house union" and the right wing "big labor" epithet Progressive Chris Daly likes to use.

I've never said PG&E employees are incompetent. I've said some managers are, and I think the company's bankrutpcy speaks for itself on that front. But PG&E is a proft-making company, and the city government is a service provider. A service provider, other things being equal, will do a better job providing low-cost public service than a profit-making company. That's why public power is cheaper all over the country.

And a profit-making company has to answer to shareholders, not the the public. That's why a city-run utility would be much more likely to promote renewable energy, even if the short-term financial gain isn't a high.

Oh, and by the way: When Gavin Newsom goes along with messages saying the city can't run a power system, he's talking about people HE appointed. If he doesn't think the SFPUC can run a power system, it's his own fault for appointing bad commissioners.

I continue to have skepticism given that the TWU at MUNI continues to defend the worst of the worst and do nothing for the great majority of workers who do a good job.

Union labor means good workers who make great wages and have protection, it does not mean defend the worst of the worst and encourage bad behavior. How do you ensure that the public power intiative on the ballot does not result in a simliar situation?

You still don't acknowldege you call IBEW a "house union." That's offensive and while it's perfectly fine for one to disagree with a union, using a label like that is beneath the Guardian, which can do better in its rhetoric.

it's good to know Measure H is about public power, and not about renewable energy. It would be great if we could vote public power up or down and that'd be great. But wrapping up one issue in another is a bit much.

It is just like when we voted to "save" cable cars - by killing off a profitable system (i.e. the Jackson/Washington line and more!) to benefit Muni Bureaucrats and those that wanted to replace ALL cars with trolley buses.

Let's have an honest debate about public power. Let's have the public vote it up or down. Lying by wrapping things in a Gore-approved wrapper for something you don't want to admit is the ultimate goal is shady.

"If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth."...???

Interesting greg that you seem to be attempting to use Nazi PR man Goebbels' (and Gorge W. Bush's) favorite technique of repeating a lie over and over again until people believe it.

The trouble for you greg, is that San Francisco isn't Nazi Germany, and there are enough other people repeating the truth to your lie that you won't be recognized as a prodigy any time soon to then be hired as John McCain's top PR man. (Sorry to give you the bad news.)

I suppose I have to repeat the truth yet again...

Anyone who in fact reads Prop H's actual text

see:
http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/elections/candidates/Nov2008_LT_SFCleanEnergyAct2.pdf

will recognize immediately that it is primarily a clean energy measure which allows partial or even full community ownership and/or management of San Francisco's electrical system as possible options to reach its clean energy mandates.

As to the debate itself between you and Tim about whether such moves toward community oversight would be good or bad, let me just ask you to lay some facts on the table, rather than your continuous stream of vapid and vague hyperbolic rhetoric. Tell me:

1) How many of the more than 900 communities that replaced their private electricity provider with a full or partial municipal system, have either higher rates or poorer service as a result?

2) Do you, any associate or family member close to you, or any business or nonprofit that any of you run or are involved with, get payments, donations, payments for advertising, or any other substantial financial benefit from PG&E?

Those two questions should do the trick.

And by all means directly answer them with the truth, instead of continuing to Goebbelize...

I see Godwin's Law has made it here. Eric, for you to invoke nazi-ism here is just ridiculous and why I can't take anything you say seriously anymore. That missive is part of every course in propaganda today, and not always attributed to the person you invoke. I've taken more classes on advertising and detecting propaganda than I can count, and that's always been one of the many principles one learns.

But for you to talk about people who committed genocide means I won't be taking you very seriously and you can take your name calling and go to Hell. Calling me a Nazi just shows how tenuous your arguments are, and again, you're admitting this is a public power measure. Which is fine, lets' talk about public power. Just don't call it one thing when it does another. That's an SF tradition that sadly, tends to work very well in SF.

Interesting that you resorted to an irrelevant, and of course hyperbolic attack, rather than actually answering the two very pointed questions I asked you.

I can only assume this means that you would rather deflect attention than respond to the questions.

Clearly you have indeed studied the art of advertising and propaganda. Pretty clever greg, but why don't you just show some true debating spirit, and some integrity, and answer the questions.

Interesting that you resorted to an irrelevant, and of course hyperbolic attack, rather than actually answering the two very pointed questions I asked you.

I can only assume this means that you would rather deflect attention than respond to the questions.

Clearly you have indeed studied the art of advertising and propaganda. Pretty clever greg, but why don't you just show some true debating spirit, and some integrity, and answer the questions.

Eric

You're a douchebag. The fact you cannot acknowledge your allies call this a public power measure shows that. And the fact you called me a Nazi shows that too.

I will not acknowledge you any longer. You're an asshole. And if you continue to threaten me I'll happily take out a restraining order against you. Clearly you can't talk about what is on the ballot without resorting to threats and lies.

Please seek psychiatric help. I'm sure your buddy Chris Daly endorses violence and lies, but you really need some help. Maybe some meds would calm you down and allow you to talk rationally. Otherwise, I'll seek out a court order to ensure you do not threaten me or my family with your threats.

So, to translate what you just said into English, you're not going to answer the questions, because you know the answers won't be good for your position.

Oh, one more question. Threats? Where did that come from? What threats are you talking about?

Now you've got three questions to not answer...