Steven T. Jones and Kid Beyond are driving to the Democratic National Convention in Denver, stopping by Burning Man on the way there and back, reporting on the intersection of the counterculture and the national political culture.

By Kid Beyond

For one week, Burning Man -- pop. 50,000 -- is one of the largest cities in Nevada.

It's a frontier town. Wagons circled, cut off from the outside world, its residents brave the elements together, relying on each other to survive. You get to know your neighbors. You sit on your front porch and greet passersby. You bring food to the folks across the way. A kindly soul fixes your bike, no charge. You smile and say hi to strangers on the street.

Small-town values. It's a conservative's wet dream – sort of.

Marry my daughter or else!

By Tim Redmond
I feel sorry for the kids.

Sarah Palin's daughter is 17. Her boyfriend is either 17 or 18, depending on which reports you read. The New York Post, bless it, has the scoop on the dad: According to his MySpace page, Levi Johnston

boasts, "I'm a f - - -in' redneck" who likes to snowboard and ride dirt bikes.

"But I live to play hockey. I like to go camping and hang out with the boys, do some fishing, shoot some s- - - and just f - - -in' chillin' I guess."

He also claims to be "in a relationship," but states, "I don't want kids."

Too late now, Levi. If you weren't screwing the daughter of a woman who wants to be vice president, perhaps there would be other choices. Abortion is legal in Alaska, whatever Gov. Palin thinks, and there are plenty of pregnant 17-year-olds who choose to give babies up for adoption. There might have been a chance for you to go to college, go on with your life.

But not now. These two kids will be forced to get married whether they want to or not, because that's what the Republican Party needs them to do.

You think that happy marriage is going to last? Family fucking values.

My brother, who runs a small construction company in Putnam Valley, New York, just called with his thoughts on the Palin nomination.

"It might not be that stupid after all," he told me. "She hunts, she fishes, she has a pregnant 17-year-old daughter, her husband has a DUI and her brother in law tasered his 11-year-old kid ... So she's got the redneck vote. And there are a lot of them."

That, of course, is what McCain was thinking -- solidify the base, and try to attract working-class people in heartland and southern states who have been badly hurt by Bush but might have trouble relating to a Harvard-educated African American.

There's really no secret about the strategy here: The GOP has used race-based and culture-based fearmongering for years.

By Tim Redmond

I think Randy Shaw is right that Dianne Feinstein won't run for governor. I don't think the prospect of her entering the race is having much of any impact on Gavin Newsom right now (except for the possibility that some donors will hold off to see if Feinstein, who they would fear snubbing, is a player or not).

But there's another element to this: As long as Feinstein is talking about the race, her presence will probably keep some other candiates, especially other women, on the sidelines. If Feinstein has a favorite -- her dear friend Rep. Ellen Tauscher?) -- she might be able to hold someone like Jackie Speier, who clearly is interested in the job, out of the race for a while.

So there are games aplenty here.

You know why some School Board members and top administrators are walking around with tote bags emblzoned with a pic of Jimi Hendrix?

School Sup. Carlo Garcia, it turns out, has a theory about the district's new Strategic Plan. As one person who received a bag told us, "He said reading the plan is like the first time you ever hear a Jimi Hendrix song -- you don't know whether you like it or not, but you realize it's something totally amazing. And after you hear it a few times, you really come to appreciate it."

Gentle Blythe, the district's spokesperson, confirmed that that was the theory behind the bags. "He's said it various different ways, but you have it basically right," she said.

If you try to think about Arlene Ackerman ever doing or saying something like that, you get a sense of how different (and how much more upbeat) the school administration is under Garcia.

Newt Gingrich, that great three-times-divorced defender of family values, has made a new ad for Prop. 8. I wonder who the Yes on 8 people think ol' Newt still appeals to.

by Amanda Witherell

After we ran an article on the remarkable coincidences between opponents of the Clean Energy Act and people who take money from PG&E, reader J.J. Hollingsworth sent the following anecdote. Has anyone else had a similar experience?

Hollingsworth wrote:

"Regarding Eric Jaye’s comment, “They’ve pledged enough to educate every voter in San Francisco.”

On August 19th, I received a call from Focus Point Marketing Group which promised to pay me $100 for two hours of my time provided I call back for an interview in order to be a part of a group seminar on August 21st which would address social issues.

I called the lady back and asked what the social issue was about.

She said it was about the administration of public utilities in San Francisco. We established a rapport and I said that the subject would interest me and I checked my schedule and indeed was available for the two-hour seminar at 450 Sansome on August 21st from 6-8 p.m. The pay at $50 per hour was intriguing.

I proceeded with the interview which was a question tree about if I’m registered to vote, how likely I am to vote in November, etc. When we got to the part about whether I consider myself conservative, moderate, or liberal. My answer was, “I guess I’m liberal.” She said something to the effect of, “Well, you are in San Francisco where people are liberal, but unfortunately I can’t sign you up.”

Still intrigued by the $100, I said something to the effect of “Well, let’s mark me down as ‘moderate’ because some people out here think I’m conservative on certain issues.” So we proceeded with the interview. The next question was “What political party are you affiliated with?” I told her that I registered with the Green Party over twenty years ago. (It’s not easy being green and my voting record does not always concur with the Green Party line.)

The sweet lady at the other end of the phone replied, “Ma’am, I can’t win for losin’ here.” And so we left it cordially, and with humor – I could not attend the August 23rd ‘party’ and go home with $100.

My main point here is that despite all the fundraising bravura, I believe PG&E considers at least some of the population here in San Francsico uneducable."

Image from SF Party Party

By Steven T. Jones

San Francisco's latest plan for Halloween, which falls on a Friday this year, is a ridiculously naive recipe for disaster. Even worse, mayoral flak Nate Ballard is still trying to peddle the ludicrous assertion that creating a police state and ending the Castro party early by turning water hoses on the costumed participants is sound civic policy, telling the Chronicle: "We're optimistic this strategy will deliver a peaceful Halloween for the second straight year."
I got news for you, Nate, Gavin Newsom, Bevan Dufty and the rest of the nervous nellies who are afraid to throw a decent party: occupation isn't the same as peace. And it's certainly counter to San Francisco's values and economic interests. These people earlier this year hired Laura Fraenza at a ridiculously high six-figure salary to come up with a plan for Halloween and all they could do is propose a no-name concert in the baseball stadium that will appeal to none of the people who are drawn to the Castro each year. Lame, lame, lame.
Between trying to cancel the plan to issue identification cards to city residents, including those without immigration documents (which Newsom has no authority to do under the charter given that the Board of Supervisors created the program on a veto-proof 10-1 vote) and his efforts to end San Francisco's Sanctuary City status, Newsom's flirtation with running for higher office has made him scared of his own civic shadow. Toughen up, Mr. Mayor, because we don't intent to sacrifice San Francisco's most laudable initiatives and best civic gatherings on the altar of your political ambitions.

By Steven T. Jones and Meghann Myers

San Francisco’s bars and clubs often live in a delicate balance with their neighbors, who can be quick to complain about noise and other nuisances. Bar managers and event promoters say that balance could either be upset or strengthened by legislation coming before the Board of Supervisors in coming weeks.

Groups such as the Entertainment Commission and Outdoor Events Coalition are working on legislation to write the right to party into the city charter (a previous plan to take it to the ballot has been jettisoned in favor of doing it legislatively later this month). But club owner and Entertainment Commission member Terrance Alan is equally worried about another well-intended measure that he fears could have disastrous impacts on nightlife.

The Board of Supervisors will tomorrow consider amending San Francisco's health code to further restrict smoking in public. If passed, the law would ban smoking in owner-operated bars and restaurants, prohibit smoking within 20 feet of entrances of commercial buildings, and prohibit patrons from smoking on outdoor patios of bars and restaurants.

The result, Alan tells us, could be to send chit-chatting smokers further from the clubs and closer to neighbors who already have the police on speed dial, just waiting for another reason to file complaints.

Folks in Sacramento are telling me that the state may be without a budget for another month or more. Of course, it's largely due to the fact that California requires a 2/3rds majority to raise taxes -- which means a handful of Republicans, who have signed pledges never to raise taxes, can hold the entire state hostage.

Robert at Calitics has a good line on the need for reform -- but there's no way a Constitutional amendment will happen before 2010. So until then, the Democrats are over a barrel, and eventually will probably have to agree to borrow money to cover the deficit -- with no new taxes.

The problem is that, whatever the columnists and critics say, the Republicans have no incentive at all to accept a budget that raises taxes -- and they have every incentive not to. Thanks in part to skillful Democratic gerrymanders, the GOP districts tend to be very conservative. And any Republican who breaks his or her pledge and agrees to raise taxes will be targeted for extinction.

It's an ugly situation, and even Schwarzenegger can't get the members of his party to move an inch.

How bad will it have to get before the public demands reform? Pretty bad.

By Sarah Phelan

So, maybe the pen IS mightier, after all? Palin's budget vetoes.

Forget about using Wikipedia to find out the truth about GOP VP nominee Sarah Palin.

As online reports have noted, a sockpuppet called “Young Trigg” scrubbed the entry for Alaska’s first female governor the day before McCain publicly announced his VP pick.

That story should be a wakeup call for those tempted to rely on doctored or poorly researched online articles, in trying to find out who Gov. Sarah Palin really is.

The good news? There are plenty of other online resources that provide valid insights into Palin’s political priorities.

Consider, for instance, Governor Palin’s vetoes of Alaska’s FY 08 and 09 capital budget.

This shows that Palin vetoed a $350,000 statewide school substance abuse education and prevention program.

She also vetoed funding for wireless access and laptops in Alaskan community schools, including those in the North Pole district. (Guess Santa can spring for those, right?.)

And she eliminated funding for several native community projects, including the Kluti Kaah community recreation and learning center in the Interior Villages, the Jilkaat Kwaan cultural heritage center and Bald Eagle observatory in the Southeast Islands, and the Ilisagvik College Workforce Development program in the Artic.

Palin also vetoed a snow fence in the Bering Straits, a Zamboni blade sharpener for the Homer Hockey Association, statewide boy scout camp upgrades.

Oh, and she vetoed the Anchorage Police Department’s $17. 5 million request to expand its headquarters, for the second year in a row, along with a number of fire department's requests for emergency safety equipment.

This summer, Alaskan lawmakers argued for a robust capital budget, which they said would help build the state and boost its economy. But Palin disagreed, saying she wanted to limit spending to public safety, health and infrastructure, and angering some representatives, by not giving them a chance to defend programs which either fell entirely victim to, or were halved, as Palin made $268 million worth of cuts, leaving Alaska with a $3.6 capital budget.

Here are Palin’s views on the line-item veto, taken from KTUU's site.

"Well, you know, that's the beauty of our system here -- is checks and balances, provide for that tool to be used, if they deem that necessary, those who hold the purse strings and that's the lawmakers if they want to override," Palin said.

In addition to vetoing a $100,000 KTOO Government Transparency Project, Palin also axed a $50,000 community development center’s video project that was to have been called, “Alaska Teen Talk Show.”

The project aimed to produce pilot talk shows written and produced by the students, with students advised to audition several prospective hosts, rating each one on poise, intelligence, personality and looks.

“You should ultimately base your choice on a host’s familiarity with your show’s theme," states the application." If you hire the most attractive but vapid interviewer to host a political talk show and they don’t know anything about the presidential race, viewers will know it and change the channel.”

Sadly, I'm not at all convinced that viewers do change channel, just because a good-looking host is vapid. And while I don’t know why this particular project didn't get funded, I can’t help imaging that whoever wrote this grant application must be wishing that they’d chosen some other example, when applying for this grant.

More or less, that is.

This is the best thing I've read today, I think (with the possible exception of the story on polyamorous speed dating).

By Steven T. Jones

The 2007 mayoral campaign of outsider arts impresario Chicken John Rinaldi is the target of a random audit by the San Francisco Ethics Commission, which last night voted unanimously to authorize issuing subpoenas against the campaign after the candidate failed to respond to initial inquiries.

But after a long and frustrating battle with the Ethics bureaucracy to win public matching funds for his campaign, a quest that fell just short, Rinaldi said he has no intention of cooperating with the agency, which can levy daily fines for non-compliance.

"I'm not giving them a fucking thing. I'm not cooperating with those fuckers," Rinaldi told the Guardian this afternoon, blaming the Ethics Commission for arbitrarily denying him matching funds after making him spend valuable time and money jumping through their hoops. "At the very least, they're going to have to work for it."

The case is already catching the attention the growing cadre of critics of how Ethics operates (particularly with its tendency to audit campaigns that run against powerful incumbents and institutions), who see Rinaldi as the latest target. Rinaldi echoed many of their concerns. "They made damn sure I didn't get the matching funding," he said. "The Ethics Commission's sole purpose on the planet is to make sure nobody runs for office."

"Let 'em fine me," Rinaldi, who is currently living in New York City building junks boats that run on gasification technology, told us. "They're not going to get a penny out of me because I have nothing."

By Marke B.

Guess what? He's still running.

So. Triple-horned Republican mind-fuckery. Let's all panic!

"Oh shit, we're gonna lose this thing!" was my mantra for the past few days, until my bf snapped me out of it with a quick verbal slap to my dim wits. I know I am definitely not alone in this, and commenters in the "liberal blogosphere" from Jezebel to Slate to HuffPo and beyond have been jangling off the hook with similar jitters at the Palin and "Maverick" switcheroo the Rovians have, admittedly geniusly (although clumsily), just pulled on us.

"Shut the fuck up, Marke," my sweetie admonished. "Are you that ready to fall into despair?"

Hell, no, lover. But still, we've been thrust into Bizarro World, where suddenly we're the sexist, conservative, race-card-playing prigs. Um, and Washington is liberal, choice is a decision only the daughters of anti-abortionists can make, and a Bridge to Nowhere is bad -- but keeping the money for a road to a Bridge to Nowhere is "tearing down the establishment."

It's hella weird right now, and nervous tension is at a boil among us progressives who're voting for Obama. A fact, I suspect, that led well-meaning but often toothless NYTimes columnist Bob Herbert to pen his actually pretty bracing liberal pep talk in today's issue. Thanks, Bob!

"Any excuse not to vote for a black man!" is something I've said in my head a million times, especially as the fabulously unreliable polls have continued to tip in McCain's favor. But that's too easy, maybe. "She's 'red meat' to my relatives in the Midwest!" That's true to a point (and snobbish, yes) -- but when I've actually taken time to talk to my relatives and reflect on how much I know them, it's so much more complicated than that. And they resent being pigeonholed by anyone, from either party. And, come to think of it, if I can't remember their birthdays, how do I know who they're voting for?

So here's the thing.

Sifferman confirms that San Francisco will contact ICE about undocumented juveniles.

On the eve of the seventh anniversary of 9/11, San Francisco's Chief Probation Officer William P. Siffermann announced that it is now the policy of the City's Juvenile Probation Department, “to inform the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in every case where a person is in custody after being booked for the alleged commission of a felony and is suspected of violating the civil provisions of the immigration laws.”

Sifferman’s report on the City’s juvenile probation policy marks a pronounced rightward shift away from San Francisco’s original Sanctuary City policy. And while his report is dated August 26, immigration rights advocates confirm that the City has been cooperating with ICE since July, when Mayor Gavin Newsom announced that he was exploring a run for Governor.

But beyond appearing to make gubernatorial hopeful Newsom look tough on crime, this policy shift means that authority has been taken away from San Francisco's Juvenile Court system, without so much as please or thank you.

And then there's the unfortunate reality that this policy will likely make undocumented persons who witness, or are victims of crime, go deeper into the shadows, giving gangs like MS-13 even greater impunity.

If you don't believe me that this new policy raises some seriously red flags, consider the following extract from Siffermann's report:

“In determining whether there is reasonable suspicion [my italics] that a person is present in violation of the fedeal immigration laws, the On-Duty officer shall take into consideration a combination of objective factors including but not limited to…presence of undocumented persons in the same areas where arrested or involved in the same illegal activity, affiliation with a criminal street gang known to be comprised of undocumented persons, [my italics] and court or criminal history information showing a prior ICE hold or proceedings.”

Wow, that sounds pretty all-encompasssing.

Or how about this:

“Promptly after [my italics] notifying ICE, the assiged Probation Officer shall make reasonable attempts to inform the person’s parent, guardian or other responsible adult of the referral to ICE.”

So, even before guilt is established, and long before undocumented juveniles have a chance of having their alleged felony charges dropped or reduced, ICE will be alerted? Double Wow. Hardly the kind of situation that will make their undocumented mommas and papas want to visit them at Juvenile Hall any time soon.

Ron Stueckle of Sunset Youth Services perhaps summed it up best when he voiced his feeling that it was “morally wrong” for the San Francisco to be helping ICE in this way.

“I’m not talking about harboring felons and fugitives or letting terrorists hide in the caves of Twin Peaks,.“ Stueckle said. “I’m talking about youth who are trying desperately for survival.”

By Steven T. Jones

San Francisco's usable open space will increase significantly for a few hours this Sunday as dangerous, polluting automobiles give way to bicyclists, pedestrians, dancers, roller skaters, frolicking children, and all manner of people-powered people. Sunday Streets, a rare collaboration between Mayor Gavin Newsom and the city's carfree advocates, will close down the Embarcadero between Bayview and Chinatown from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. (an ending time that's way to early for late-rising San Franciscans, IMHO).
Newsom, who has lately been focused more on his political ambitions than improving San Francisco, deserves credit for pushing this idea past the expected business community and pro-car critics. The first event on Aug. 31 was a success and an even bigger turnout is expected this Sunday. But the question for Newsom and every other political leader in the city is: what's next? How can San Francisco build on this concept to encourage more carfree spaces in the city? It's something to ponder during this heated political season.

by Amanda Witherell

PG&E is so desperate to stave off any threat of public power they'll proffer a 100 percent renewable energy pilot program to Marin county. And all we get is a bunch of Asian kids paid off by PG&E to spread No on H propaganda. Where's the love?

Marin Clean Energy, a plan for the county to go 100 percent renewable through Community Choice Aggregation, has slowly been making the rounds of the ten cities who would be part of the power-buying co-op. Marin County supervisors have already approved the plan and so has Fairfax, but the other cities like Ross, Mill Valley, etc. have to buy in to make it feasible.

The plan would allow the county to purchase and provide 100 percent renewable energy for customers, delivered through PG&E's lines. PG&E hates it because: 1. it makes them look not so green, and 2. it's the first step toward a publicly owned utility that puts PG&E out of business.

So, according to an article in the Marin Independent Journal, failed assembly candidate Joe Nation and current assemblymember Jared Huffman's ex-aide are now working for PG&E, talking up a 100 percent renewable pilot program. They've already got Sup. Charles McGlashan, who has been a leader on Marin Clean Energy, saying it might be a win-win. Sure, it may lead to an overall increase of renewable energy overall, but does anyone else find this incredibly cynical? Isn't it interesting that PG&E can't pony up any more renewables until a significant number of customers threaten to leave?

My nine-year-old son and I just finished reading Jack London's White Fang together, so I'm particularly vulnerable to stories about wolves, and this ad is especially grisly If you want to help Defenders of Wildlife air it in markets where it might help, there's a donation link included.

By the way, Robert Haaland has put together a nice set of links on Palin's record here.

The SF Weekly is usually against anything we're supporting (they love to bash the left over there, and particularly like to bash us), but to my astonishment, along with his typical snide comments, Benjamin Wachs actually has some intelligent comments on the Clean Energy Act:

The city has the right -even the duty- to plan responsibly for its future, and then follow-up. Prop H shouldn't even need to be on the ballot, it should be standard practice. Yes, let us evaluate our options and pick the best one. I wish the city would run its economy, law enforcement, and housing offices the same way. To be clear: anyone who is against Prop H isn't against public ownership of utilities - they're against planning.

Randy Shaw's on the case, too. He's a little dubious about the political hopes for Prop. H, since it doesn't fit his own rule of "Keep it Simple," and he suggests that the measure may get buried in the PG&E propaganda and the flood of other stuff on the ballot. The problem is, you can't make a serious clean-energy initiative simple; there's just too much policy involved. And if it were simpler, PG&E would call it "a simplistic solution."

We all knew from day one that PG&E had endless money and would spend whatever it thinks is necessary to defeat Prop. H. But Shaw acknowledges that

With Mark Leno, Susan Leal, and Bevan Dufty taking high-profile roles in backing Prop H, the initiative has a broader and more diverse base than its similar predecessors.

And the Yes on H campaign is only really starting.

If this wasn't going to be close, PG&E wouldn't already be pulling out all the stops.

Peter Camejo, one of the nation's leading progressive voices, died Saturday at the age of 68. We at the Guardian mourn this brilliant, compassionate man who we came to know well and admire during his runs for governor and president. Camejo was a truly unique leader, marrying a consistently progressive worldview that has changed little since his 1976 presidential run as a socialist with a proven record as a socially responsible investor who made millions and showed the pursuit of wealth needn't come at the expense of people or the planet. May we all long remember the lessons he taught us.

Editors note: This is something I have supported and written about in detail. Marc makes the case nicely -- T.R.

By Marc Salomon
San Francisco's future as a creative and diverse progressive beacon is at risk due to the Planning Department's Eastern Neighborhoods plan. The planning staff has decided the city's need for luxury housing is so significant that it has set the development bar too low, allowing big builders to cash in on market rate housing.

Planning staff has labored to produce an inelegant community benefits and affordability model that has so many unproven moving parts it might barely work for current conditions but cannot be counted upon to provide for changing circumstances in the future.

But there is an existing successful city policy, passed by the voters in 1986 to control office sprawl, that can serve as a model for harnessing the insatiable demand to build profitable luxury housing, both for the benefit of existing San Franciscans as well as those of the non-rich who would seek refuge here in the future as so many of us did in the past.

Proposition M imposed a 950,000 square foot annual limit on office space. When applications to build exceed that cap, developers may offer up additional sweeteners to increase the chances of their projects being permitted.

The Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task force broke off from Eastern Neighborhoods planning process in 2004, and is nearing completion on its democratic, participatory, community-based plan. One policy that has caused consternation among the development types, who expect to run planning processes unhindered, has been a proposal to replicate Prop M, but this time, applied to housing.

Photos and text by Sarah Phelan.

Unjust immigration laws destroy families and harm workplaces, said protesters at today's anti ICE rally at City Hall.

If you are part of San Francisco’s immigrant and/or transgendered community, chances are you’ve figured out that a three-pronged attack on the protections that this City offers is in full swing.

If you are not, then today’s rally at City Hall helped people connect the dots.

1. ICE raids have intensified. (On average, San Francisco has one a year, but there have already been two in 2008. The first was May 2 at El Balazo Taquerias. The second was September 11 at a residential residence.

2. The City’s Sanctuary Ordinance is under attack following a series of embarrassing leaks ( under investigation by the Public Defender’s Office) about how San Francisco has been handling undocumented juveniles felons.

3. Mayor Gavin Newsom says implementing the municipal ID legislation, which the Board of Supervisors has already approved, isn’t a priority.

My lovely and extremely talented significant other missed the Tina Fey as Sarah Palin tour de force this past weekend on Saturday Night Live. So she did what millions of other young Americans have done: she went to You Tube to check it out. But there was a problem, which she shared with me this morning. The first half dozen, maybe more clips on the ubiquitous video upload site are not full-length excerpts from Saturday Night Live. They are, instead , outtakes from a Fox News broadcast covering the story.

A good portion of these clips are taken up by Fox News commentators yacking about the show. (AKA: shoot me now, please.) They then switch to an extremely abridged version of the SNLsketch, about half a minute or so out of what I believe was a five minute bit. And as more cynical (or seasoned) observers might have already guessed, the part of the sketch Fox chose to feature makes our potential "Pitbull with Lipstick" Veep look downright reasonable. Meanwhile, Amy Poehler's Hillary Clinton gets all the laughs as she practically demolishes the podium out of pent-up jealousy.

In other words: if, like untold millions of people, you only saw the sketch via the Fox News upload on Youtube there's a damn good chance you came away thinking SNL was bashing Hillary instead of poking fun at Palin. Never mind that the other four a half, five minutes of the sketch savagely lampooned the Alaska Gov.

I know NBC won't let Youtube post any of its content. But still, how did Fox News' coverage come to dominate the search results like this? Anyone else detect the distinct odor of the McCain campaign here?

Here is one of the offending Fox uploads:

By Steven T. Jones

For the past few years, I and many other local progressive voices have been targeted by nasty online attacks from Greg Dewar (who runs a couple of local blogs and trolls the rest, usually commenting as just "greg"), who always pretends to care about progressive causes, the Bay Guardian's credibility, and whether due deference is being paid to SF natives like him.

But now, we finally know the source of some of his vitriol: Dewar is being paid for his positions, although he doesn't disclose that fact to his readers. Dewar is coordinating PG&E's "Don't Sign the Blank Check" campaign on Facebook. When I confronted him with that fact, he didn't deny being on PG&E's payroll (we'll find out how much he got for selling out next month when campaign finance statements are due), but continued to express concern for the Guardian: "I have been reading the Guardian for far longer than you have, and it once was a model I used for my own paper, ages ago."

Thanks, Greg, but I don't think the Guardian -- or anyone else in San Francisco -- should be heeding your advice anymore.

Did you know that Mormon religious groups are claiming to have donated a full 35 percent of the money to repeal same-sex marriage this November?

As Julia Rosen writes on Calitics:

Look, I don't have anything specific against Mormons. It's just that when a specific religious institution decides to play a large role in a political battle, it weirds me out. Separation of chuch and state....

I got a call from Paul Skilbeck, a local resident who is worried sick about the well being and the whereabouts of a 69-year-old homeless German woman called Elsie.

Elsie typically spends her day sweeping the streets. but Skilbeck tell me she was sounding suicidal, yesterday (September 17) morning, after someone took all her stuff, and she was left with nothing but her brush and pan.

And today, Elsie has disappeared from her usual spot, after getting extremely drunk last night. Oh dear.

Skilbeck reports that all of Elsie’s worldly possessions—her bedding, clothing, food, everything—got taken around 8 a.m., September 17, after she left them neatly stacked against the side of a building, opposite St. Luke’s Church, outside the old Kinko’s building on Clay Street, near Van Ness.

According to Skilbeck, Elsie, who is about 5’ 2”, has gray hair, which comes to her collar. She wears a gray fleece top and blue jeans. She has been homeless for about five years.

Elsie is well-known to local businesses and residents, says Skilbeck, who slips her money from time to time, because, as he puts it, “she’s a useful member of the community.”

“Elsie is very neat and tidy, she doesn’t smell, she cuts her own hair and she really has her stuff together,” says Skilbeck, who spoke to Elsie yesterday, after her stuff was taken, when she was leaning against the wall, on the corner where her stuff disappeared, visibly distraught.

The Hunter's Point Power Plant, which closed last year after many years of community organizing against Pacific Gas & Electric, was finally demolished this morning. Photographer Tim Daw was there to get this series of photos of the super-polluting smokestack coming down, ushering in a new era in which San Francisco could choose a cleaner energy future.

The new No on Prop. 8 commercial is here, and many are hoping that it will turn the tide against the heinous anti-marriage prop -- especially in terms of fundraising. Despite Brad Pitt and the Spielbergs (who each contributed 100k recently) the No on Prop 8ers haven't raised as much funds as the horrid clock-backwarders.

You can contribute to to keep this ad on the air here -- or if cash isn't at hand, you can get involved here. And please vote! I've heard people say that their vote doesn't count in San Francisco, citing the Presidential race. BUT THAT'S NOT TRUE! There are several crucial local and state props on the November ballot that need your voice.

I know same-sex marriage isn't at the top of many homo-radicals' agenda, and sure I'd rather see the money go toward universal healthcare and education (and the elimination of a penalty for being single), but this is a general rights issue now, I think ...

PS -- has anyone else been tickled by the wedding announcements in the Bay Area Reporter? Some of them are hilarious -- like the ones that describe what the couples' beloved dogs were wearing at the ceremony -- but also touching. I realize when reading them that we homos have so few descriptive windows onto other geigh peoples' lives: we mostly meet in (mostly, unfortunately) spaces of assimilation, bars and clubs and online and such, where the curious quotidian details of our existence get no airing ... perhaps this is why the obituaries have been so popular? Because they're actually about real gay homos' real lives, not just those who are promoting something? Of course, the thing with the obituaries is tied up with everyone's shared health issue fears (even the BAR ran a triumphant "No Obituaries!" headline when effective AIDS meds started to take hold), but still ... it's nice to find out more about people before they're dead!

PPS --oh hey, this just in: Lindsey Lohan's finally officially gay. Hey mama Dina -- when you gonna contribute to No. on 8?

Robert Reed, Public Relations Manager for the Golden Gate Disposal & Recycling Company emailed me this week, in response to my coverage of Elsie and her missing stuff.

"We share your concerns (posted on the SFBG blog last Friday) about Elsie losing her belongings and confirmed that we did not take her items," Reed wrote, after questions were raised as to who removed her worldly possessions from a street corner.

Reed further explained that, "Garbage and recycling collectors employed by Golden Gate Disposal & Recycling Company do NOT pick up uncontainerized items unless specifically instructed by the Department of Public Works, which oversees abandoned waste, and only then in the afternoons an on rare occasions. The incident in question reportedly took place in the morning near a vacant commercial building. We empty garbage and recycling containers at occupied buildings."

Reed also confirmed that his company received a call about Elsie's missing stuff from local resident Paul Skilbeck.

"Our route supervisor investigated the issue and verified we did not touch anyone’s personal items," Reed wrote. " Our supervisor then called Mr. Skilbeck and let him know that we looked into the issue thoroughly and we confirmed we did not take Elsie's belongings. "

Thanks for the update, Robert. Here's still hoping that someone will locate Elsie and her things.

ps. This just in from Elsie's neighbor, Paul SkilbecK:

"Elsie has reappeared one block away, on Van Ness/Washington...., but it is not good news. She has not eaten for days, she has not changed her clothes and smells, her ankles are swollen, which she says happens when she gets upset. And she is still refusing assistance. Recently she removed some rings from her fingers, and says she will give these away. It doesn't look as though she was able to overcome this setback."

--

By Steven T. Jones

Julie Lee, the one-time San Francisco housing commissioner and political power broker, was sentenced to a year in federal prison today on fraud and corruption charges. U. S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton ordered her to begin serving her sentence Nov. 4 and she faces even more prison time on state charges. The case, which involved laundering public funds into political contributions, also helped force the resignation of former SF-based legislator and then-Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, who received some of those contributions.
The fact that Lee is actually headed to the slammer should serve as a warning to other ambitious politicians and their benefactors, particularly in a city where the wealthy and powerful are always seeking creative ways to skirt strict campaign finance limits.

Hats off to Mike Sugarman over at CBS-5 for his story about the Berkeley Bowl's draconian sampling policies. In short, if you get caught sipping the soup du jour or nibbling on some dried fruit before you purchase said items, you're likely to get detained, hassled, and eventually ostracized from the East Bay grocery mecca.

I actually got a tip about this a few months ago, but got too busy to cover it. A lifetime Berkeley Bowl patron (not one of the people Sugarman profiled) called me up and told me that for years, he had tasted the Bowl's self-serve soup on offer near the deli counter to make sure he liked it before (usually) purchasing a bowl. Then one foul day, Bowl security swooped down on him mid-taste and frogmarched him into a little room, threatened him with arrest, took his picture, and - after a couple of hours - finally let him go with a warning that he never return.

I did make a trip across the bay to look into it and what I found was a bit shocking. In short, the general manager of the Bowl - I can't remember his name or find my notes on the conversation - told me that he could not recall the specific incident in question (which led me to wonder - how many times does this happen, every day? Week?) but that he believed that people who get banned from the Bowl definitely, no doubt about it deserve their fate. Beware, East Bay soup slurpers and serial bulk-bin pilferers. Don't let the tie dye fool you. The dude was serious. Berkeley Bowl will regulate ...

(image courtesy of dissonanced.wordpress.com)

by Amanda Witherell

Bill McKibben has sent us a message supporting Prop H. Watch for yourself, or here's the text:

"San Francisco voters: you have a real and exciting opportunity this election season. This proposition on renewable energy won't just make sure that you're able to insulate yourselves from the rise in electric prices that's going to mark this century. More to the point, for the rest of us in other places, it will provide real leadership for both the national and international transition to renewable energy.

"Our only hope of dealing with global warming is to make that transition fast. And, as usual SF has the opportunity to be in the lead, on the cutting edge, doing what needs to be done.

"Thank you so much for taking that lead."

No problem, Bill.

Incidentally, I've been depressed about city living lately and The Bill McKibben Reader has been my salve.

Read more about McKibben and Cake's renewable energy concert, after the jump...

The new Forbes 400 list of the richest Americans is out, and San Francisco seems to be doing just fine, thank you. This city -- which can't fund decent services for the homeless, which runs a structural budget deficit every year because it can't raise enough revenue to cover basic city functions -- has 14 billionaires.

They run from Larry Page (Google) at $15.8 billion to poor old Walter Shorenstein, who barely makes the cut at $1.3 billion.

And they are a reminder that this is a very rich city that can afford to do a lot better for its poorest people.

Here's the list:

Larry Page (Google)
Steven Roberts (leveraged buiyouts)
Riley Bechtel (Bechtel)
Steven Bechtel Jr.(Bechtel)
Ray Dolby (Dolby)
Gordon Getty (oil)
William Randolph Hearst III (Hearst)
John Pritzker (hotels)
John Fisher (Gap)
Robert Fisher (Gap)
Thomas Steyer (finance)
William FIsher (Gap)
Don Fisher (Gap)
Doris Fisher (Gap)
Walter Shorenstein (real estate)

Let's remember those names next time the mayor says the city doesn't have enough money.

McCain is right that the country is facing a historic economic crisis, but canceling his debate with Obama on Friday?
He says it's time for both parties to come together to solve the economic crisis, but it sounds like he has cold feet.

Don't know about you, but I was figuring that the debate would be a chance for the candidates to tell us more about their thoughts on the issue, at a time when the American public desperately needs insights and guidance.

Obama is reported to still want to hold the debate, and a statement is expected from his campaign shortly. Meanwhile, here's what Obama is saying about the financial meltdown:

"The era of greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has created a financial crisis as profound as any we have faced since the Great Depression.

Congress and the President are debating a bailout of our financial institutions with a price tag of $700 billion or more in taxpayer dollars. We cannot underestimate our responsibility in taking such an enormous step.

Whatever shape our recovery plan takes, it must be guided by core principles of fairness, balance, and responsibility to one another.

Please sign on to show your support for an economic recovery plan based on the following:

• No Golden Parachutes -- Taxpayer dollars should not be used to reward the irresponsible Wall Street executives who helmed this disaster.

• Main Street, Not Just Wall Street -- Any bailout plan must include a payback strategy for taxpayers who are footing the bill and aid to innocent homeowners who are facing foreclosure.

• Bipartisan Oversight -- The staggering amount of taxpayer money involved demands a bipartisan board to ensure accountability and oversight.

The failed economic policies and the same corrupt culture that led us into this mess will not help get us out of it. We need to get to work immediately on reforming the broken government -- and the broken politics -- that allowed this crisis to happen in the first place.

And we have to understand that a recovery package is just the beginning. We have a plan that will guarantee our long-term prosperity -- including tax cuts for 95 percent of families, an economic stimulus package that creates millions of new jobs and leads us towards energy independence, and health care that is affordable to every American.

It won't be easy. The kind of change we're looking for never is.

But if we work together and stand by these principles, we can get through this crisis and emerge a stronger nation."

By Steven T. Jones

The campaign backing SF's Prop. H, the Clean Energy Act, was always destined to be hopelessly outspent by Pacific Gas & Electric, which always dumps millions of your ratepayer dollars into fighting initiatives that could cut into the company's profits.

But thanks to the green streak of the popular band Cake, which is donating all of the proceeds from its Oct. 10 gig at the Independent to the Yes on H effort, the campaign just pocketed about 30 grand when the show sold out in the first hour tickets were on sale today.

The band, which just converted its Sacramento studio to solar energy, announced its pride in supporting a measure that would increase the renewable energy supply powering San Francisco. "Although there is little hope for the future of humans on the earth, this proposition adds mightily to our paltry supply [of renewable energy]," Cake's lead vocalist, John McCrea, said in a statement put out by the campaign.

BTW, here's a tip for Guardian readers: while the $50 regular tickets sold out, you can still buy VIP tickets (which includes the show and a pre-show meet-and-greet with the band at the Alamo Square home of Jim Siegel) here if you hurry.

Wondering what's going on with the much promised clean up of Hunters Point Shipyard? Read on.

Aerial photographs of the Hunters Point Shipyard of yore (see above) are super cool. But they aren't much help if you are trying to figure out where Parcel B is, or exactly when comments on the proposed clean up are due.

But here at last is an extremely handy link to a fact sheet on Parcel B of the Hunters Point Shipyard. It not only summarizes the draft amended Record of Decision (ROD) for Parcel B , but it also includes comments submitted by the public, the Navy's response to those comments, along with the analysis of an independent technical consultant.

Thanks to Kristine Enea, the current chair of the technical subcommittee of the Shipyard's Restoration Advisory Board, for sending this link. and for reminding us that tomorrow, Thursday, September 25, is the last chance for the public to submit comments on this draft amended Record of Decision.

Send comments to Keith S. Forman, U.S. Navy BRAC Environmental Coordinator,1455 Frazee Road, Suite 900, San Diego, CA 92108-4310. Or fax him at 619-532-0955. Or email him at keith.s.forman@navy.mil

I love how the beans outside City Hall obscure the surrounding buildings, if you get up close and personal.

The same can be said for corn.

Wake up, America!!!

By Steven T. Jones

Is John McCain – who has pulled out of Friday’s presidential debate, purportedly to deal with the financial crisis -- running scared? He should be, because this could be a moment of truth for conservative populism in the U.S., a time when the fantasies and outright lies behind its self-serving ideology are finally exposed.

Unfortunately, that isn’t happening yet. Sure, there’s lots of resistance to aspects of the Bush Administration’s $700 billion bailout proposal out there. And Barack Obama edges in on a progressive diagnosis with comments such as, “The era of greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has created a financial crisis as profound as any we have faced since the Great Depression.”

But the problem is more fundamental than that, as we at the Guardian are being reminded once again by the fiscal conservatives who have been seeking our endorsements this election season. Even here in socially liberal San Francisco, so-called “moderates” -- from Mayor Gavin Newsom to his Board of Supervisors appointees Carmen Chu and Sean Elsbernd to Chu opponent Ron Dudum and Dist. 1 candidate Sue Lee – still spew well-worn but discredited conservative platitudes celebrating the private sector and demonizing government.

Progressives should push back, call their bluff, and stop being afraid to be accused of fomenting class warfare. Because the rich and powerful have been raiding the public coffers for long enough -- waging top-down class warfare -- and now is the time for us to fight back.

September 26 and 27 should be eventful days at the San Mateo County Event Center. A place there called Fiesta Hall will probably be very loud, but not be very festive. Thousands of United Healthcare Workers (UHW) union members plan to protest hearings on whether to remove their leadership for allegedly misappropriating dues money.

People not involved with or knowledgeable of union activity might not think this is a big deal, but trust me - it is.

As I've reported here, here, and here - UHW's leader Sal Rosselli has been feuding with Andy Stern, head of UHW's parent union, the Service Employees International Union, over what he calls Stern's undemocratic regime. If Barack Obama is elected, he will definitely owe Andy Stern and SEIU a major debt. SEIU is putting almost $90 million into Obama's White House run. And if Stern is as autocratic as Rosselli and his supporters claim, the future of a Democratic majority in Washington might not be as progressive as many liberals hope - especially when it comes to lifting workers out of poverty by organizing them into unions like SEIU.

Rosselli says Stern suppresses dissent, sells out his members, and makes secret deals with corporate America. That kind of behavior in one of the Democrats' biggest benefactors won't help Obama bring the kind of "change we deserve." On the other hand, if unions like UHW illegally divert millions of dollars of their members' money into shadowy slush funds - as Stern and SEIU have charged -- that won't exactly help rejuvenate the left either.

Bottom line, even though a small percentage of workers are unionized these days, what goes on in San Mateo this weekend could have an big effect on the country's political landscape. Stay tuned.

PS: UHW sources called me this morning and said Stern had barred observers from the federal labor department from attending the hearing. They pointed to a letter, dated yesterday, from labor department officials that appeared to confirm this. However, I just got off the phone with the person at the department to whom the letter was sent. He said SEIU has changed its mind and decided to allow the officials in if they seek access.

UPDATE: An SEIU spokesperson called this morning and insisted that the international union never actively barred Department of Labor (DOL) officials from the hearings. According to SEIU's Michelle Ringuette, DOL made an inquiry directly to Ray Marshall, who is conducting the hearings. As soon as SEIU officials found out DOL wanted to attend, Ringuette went on, they agreed to let them in. "DOL is welcome," she told me.

Also, I made a goof in my "PS" section above. The Department of Labor official I spoke with yesterday, Dennis Eckert at the Office of Labor Management Standards, actually sent the letter to which I linked. (I wrote that he was the addressee. Apologies.)

Get your Friday funnies on with Monty Python's Michael Palin clip about why McCain chose the wrong Palin.

Barack Obama says 95% of Americans will get a tax cut if he's elected. McCain says ... well, whatever he's saying that day or week. But what does it all mean for you? Under a McCain or Obama regime, how much of your hard-earned booty will the IRS demand for such indispensable national priorities as, say, endless wars of choice and making sure Wall Street billionaires don't have to sell their second ski lodges? Now you can find out at this handy new website.

I entered a few different incomes into the calculator, starting low and adding a couple-ten thousand each time. And, if this magical contraption of the netwebs and intertubes is to be believed, it does appear that Obama's tax plan will save people making under $125,000 a few hundred bucks a year. Note: I did not enter deductions, investments, assets, etc. - just straight income.

... so maybe you should visit your grandparents in Florida. Would it kill you to give Nana some quality time? And maybe convince her to vote for Obama in the next election while you're there? Get on board with thegreatschelp.com and make sure we don't all end up sitting alone in the (metaphorical, Republican) dark for the next four years.

The Great Schlep from The Great Schlep on Vimeo.

With all the sound and fury around the failure of the Bush bailout bill and the stock market collapse, I see very little talk of the alternatives that are out there.

For example, two Bay Area representatives, Barbara Lee of Oakland and Lynn Woolsey of Petaluma, have their own bailout bill, supported by the Progressive Caucus. There's a good discussion of it at Calitics. The Lee-Woolsey bill includes a transaction tax on risky financial instruments and mortgage reform.

I wonder if the House will take that up next.

By Steven T. Jones

I'm not putting too much stock in Republicans blaming the failure of the bailout bill on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's floor speech today. "Somebody hurt my feelings; I'm going to punish the country," was how Rep. Barney Frank correctly sized up that excuse.

But watch the speech and you'll see how Pelosi blew an opportunity to help pass a bill she supports (although it was hard to tell from her speech that she supports it). Between her ill-timed partisan broadside and her repeated emphasis on the "Seven...hundred...billion...dollar" bailout package (even though, as the Post notes, the government is likely to recoup much of that outlay), this wasn't a speech that was going to win anybody over.

Bottom line: there are many different ways to deal with this financial crisis, but if you've concluded that this bill is the way to go, Madame Speaker, it's your job to sell it. Otherwise, we're all in for a helluva ride.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has decided in favor of the city's healthcare access ordinance.
The Golden Gate Restaurant Association, which was the group that filed suit against San Francisco over the City's trailblazing plan, could still appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, a move that would cost beaucoup bucks all round.
Here's my favorite part of this recent ruling, written in delicious legalese:

"There may be better ways to provide healthcare that to require employers in the City of San Francisco to foot the bill. But our task is a narrow one and it is beyond our province to evaluate the wisdon ofthe Ordinance before us. We are asked only to decide whether Section 514 (a) of ERISA preempts the employer spending requirement of the Ordinance. We hold that it does not. The spending requirements do not establish an ERISA plan; nor do they have an impermissible connection with employers' ERISA plan,or make an impermissible reference to such plan. We therefore reverse the judgment of the district court and remand with instructions to enter summary judgement in favor of the City and Intervenors."

By Steven T. Jones

Former U.S. Attorney Kevin Ryan -- who now heads Mayor Gavin Newsom's Office of Criminal Justice and has steered the mayor toward more conservative positions on issues ranging from police accountability to the city's sanctuary policy and plan to issue resident identification cards -- was the subject of scathing criticism in a new Justice Department report that examined the Bush Administration's controversial firing of several U.S. attorneys.

Unlike other attorneys who were fired for political reasons, Ryan was a Bush loyalist and self-described Republican "company man" fired for being "retaliatory, explosive, noncommunicative, and paranoid," the report said. That was no surprise to us at the Guardian, who have written critically about Ryan before and fail to understand why Newsom hired him, particularly given what an incompetent toadie for a discredited administration he was.

Everyone but Newsom and those in his bunker seem to understand how disgraceful it is for San Francisco to be harboring a right-wing political fugitive like Ryan, let alone giving him a position of great influence. Newsom flak Nate Ballard amazingly told the Chronicle Ryan was "a man of unimpeachable integrity," all evidence to the contrary.

"What is Nathan Ballard thinking, saying he's a man of integrity and everything. Well, Hitler could paint," Sup. Tom Ammiano, who has had to wrestle with Newsom's Ryan-inspired policy flips on issues important to the Mission District, told us. Yet Ammiano noted that both the Chronicle and even the more conservative Examiner are highlighting the report blasting Ryan as the one U.S. attorney who deserved to be fired.

"In the long run, hopefully dissatisfaction with Ryan will grow," Ammiano said. "He could become a liability for [Newsom], and only then Newsom fire him because that's how he operates."

Dennis Kucinch, who voted against the bailout, has a remarkable basic lesson on how the bailout would have worked. In a letter to his supporters, he writes:

Here is a very quick explanation of the $700 billion bailout within the context of the mechanics of our monetary and banking system:

The taxpayers loan money to the banks. But the taxpayers do not have the money. So we have to borrow it from the banks to give it back to the banks. But the banks do not have the money to loan to the government. So they create it into existence (through a mechanism called fractional reserve) and then loan it to us, at interest, so we can then give it back to them.

Confused?

This is the system. This is the standard mechanism used to expand the money supply on a daily basis not a special one designed only for the "$700 billion" transaction. People will explain this to you in many different ways, but this is what it comes down to.

The banks needed Congress' approval. Of course in this topsy turvy world, it is the banks which set the terms of the money they are borrowing from the taxpayers. And what do we get for this transaction? Long term debt enslavement of our country. We get to pay back to the banks trillions of dollars ($700 billion with compounded interest) and the banks give us their bad debt which they cull from everywhere in the world.

Who could turn down a deal like this? I did.

Actually, Kucinich is pretty close. The point he misses is that much of the money won't be borrowed from banks but from other countries, primarily China, that have a surplus of cash and want to invest in the U.S. But the sentiment is right.