San Francisco Bay Guardian endorses Dennis Kucinich

[WilliamPitt]

Endorsement: http://www.sfbg.com/38/21/cover_endorsements.html

[patmacsf]

1. Big Surprise From That Socialist Rag (n/p)

[Webster Green]

8. No sale....

If you had said communist, unpatriotic, traitorous, or un-American, I would have sent them money for a subscription.

[patmacsf]

10. Nope, just plain Socialist.

Why not call the paper and its editors what they are. The Democratic party here in San Francisco is more akin to the Socialist party than the Democratic party. Why a Democratic Underground board would consider an endoresemetn from the Socialist Party a good thing will never cease to amaze me.

[MSchreader]

12. Oh, please!

Just because SF is very liberal/left does not make it, or the SFBG, or the SF Area DP, socialist. Time for some folks to learn the difference, I think.

Martin

[patmacsf]

14. I'm well aware of what Socialist means ...

... thank you. Perhaps you could explain why a paper that endorsed the Green Party candidate over the Democratic candidate in the mayoral runoff last December, advocates for every social giveaway ballot initiative, opposes elected Democratic party officials in San Francisco and supports their green party/socialist party/libertarian party wolves in Democratic party clothing is not Socialist?

[MSchreader]

16. Because...

It also advocates liberal capitalism, eschews the idea of public ownership and workers' control of production, supports candidates of the pro-capitalist parties, and generally takes a sneering attitude toward working people in the region.

Socialist? Nope. Take it from an expert.

Martin

[patmacsf]

18. So their endorsement means what?

Thank you for making my point for me.... Why the endorsement from this schizophrenic bomb-throwing editorial board would be cause for celebration on the Democratic Underground discussion board will never cease to amaze me.

[MSchreader]

21. "Schizophrenic bomb-throwing editorial board"?!

Busted! Buh-bye!

Martin

[patmacsf]

24. "takes a sneering attitude toward working people in the region"??

And that would come from their vociferous support for the city minimum wage measures?!? Busted, you don't know what you're talking about ... Buh bye yourself.

[MSchreader]

28. Support for a minimum wage, or even a living wage,

Does not equal support for workers. You should really know better.

Martin

[patmacsf]

30. huh?!?

No, I don't know better ... since when does a $12/hr mandatory minimum wage not support the workers from the Democratic Party standpoint?? Perhaps for the Greens and Socialists in this city that makes sense. But, they will never be happy. They still bemoan the fact that lofts are being built in their sacred SOMA or that the homeless are not receiving their $356 checks on the first of every month, drug dealers and check cashing leeches be damned .... Wake up, you're on the DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND board!

[MSchreader]

31. "Drug dealers and check cashing leeches be damned"?!

When you were digging this hole, did you give any thought about how to keep the dirt from piling in on you? Obviously not. Again, buh-bye.

Martin

[patmacsf]

33. Apparently realistic debate escapes you

What part of forcing the city to put a check in the hand of every homeless person in this city instead of providing them stable institutions to provide assistance makes sense to you. A check in their hands on the first of every month as the Bay Guardian demands does nothing but increase the number of drug dealers at the U.N. Plaza at the beginning of the month and invite the growth of gouging check cashing services that steal 10 or 20% of their checks to turn it into cash for them.

A newspaper that will harm the homeless simply because of its bizarre bomb-throwing need to break up the evil "Brown-Burton cabal" (their term, not mine. See their endorsement page) is not worthy of recognition on the DU board. Period. Buh Bye!

[Hell Hath No Fury]

43. I think you're the one who...

needs to wake up.

As stated by DU, this is not solely a "Democratic" board, but a board for Democrats and other progressives. You know those folks, the ones who call themselves San Francisco Progressives and read the Bay Guardian?

You DID read that when you signed up for the board, yes?

As for lofts, being a working class, native San Franciscan, you bet I bemoaned those crap spaces being build. They are not affordable for most San Franciscans. They don't provide family housing, which my City desperately needs. And they can destroy existing communities.

[Vladimir]

35. pull the other one, its got bells on

Allow me to let you in on a little secret... socialism is not the root of all evil, and I know for a fact you ain't got anything like it in SF because if you did, American politics would look a whole lot different nation wide. Heck, Europe ain't got anything approaching socialism anywhere in it, and that incudes France, Britain, Germany, whatever.

Whenever you find yourself in fear of socialists, just turn on your TV. See, doesn't that feel better already...?

V

[patmacsf]

38. Yes and no ....

I would agree somewhat that Socialism as a political theory is not the demagogue-cousin of Communism with all the buzzword implications that the Republican party would have you believe. But, the reality is that this is the DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND board.

Despite your beliefs, San Francisco politics will never enter mainstream national, American, politics. For you to think so just points out the fact that the U.S. Socialist party (and yes, it does exist in this free country of ours) makes adjustments in order to operate under our socio-economic ways. Of course the U.S. socialist party has no dream that they will ever be of any influence in American politics, but they have targeted areas like San Francisco for their foothold. And they have successfully duped unsuspecting voters in this town by cloaking their candidates in Democratic party labels and recently in Green party labels.

Shall I continue or are we sufficiently off topic?

[Vladimir]

39. Never off topic enough...

Democracy and socialism are not incompatible. And besides, as someone currently living in a country with a president elected by judicial coup, I'm not so sure you should be that happy with the state of your 'democracy'.

As for SF, I don't care that I have never been there (only bits of the US I've ever had the pleasure of visiting were the North-East). All that your post proves is that the American political spectrum is shifted so far to the right that to voice moderately centre-left policies gets you equated with socialism. You wanna know why it would spread nation-wide? Because if the ghettoes in Florida or wherever saw that:

a) socialism could happen

b) socialism meant they weren't screwed ad infinitum any longer

the ruling class would be well and truly shafted. Or do you think the ruling class maintains such a grip on nearly all forms of mainstream broadcasting on a whim?

P.S. DU maintains in its 'About' section that it is a board for progressives. I think you can grant me that socialists are progressive?

[diamondsoul]

36. First, what definition of Socialist are you using-

and second why is any political philosophy automatically a slam? There are some very good platform policies in the Socialist party, thanks. There are even good platform issues in the Republican Party! Not a lot, but they are there.

Kucinich is a humanist, a poplist candidate which would naturally embrace some platform issues from almost every party. Get over it.

[bobthedrummer]

41. Milwaukee had two Socialist Mayors

I grew up there when Frank P. Ziedler was Mayor.

I would vote for him today!

on edit: I am an independent-I don't belong to any political party.

[RichM]

13. The Guardian is not communist, but easily qualifies as unpatriotic,

traitorous, and proudly un-American. Please consider subscribing.

[Tinoire]

11. SF Bay Guardian? Socialist? BwaaaHAHAHAH!

That is TOOOO funny! And people wonder why some of is want our state to just secede.

Democracy and socialism, by the god-damned way, are not incompatible terms. Just ask the French who helped us craft our constitution.

[patmacsf]

15. What deluded world are you living in?

Why not suggest to me then what political party you believe the Bay Guardian editorial board supports? It's clearly not the Democratic Party since the paper endorsed the Green party candidate over the Democratic party candidate in the mayoral runoff in December. The paper routinely opposes the elected Democratic party officials in this city in support of Green, Libertarian, and Socialist candidates.... Which one is it??

[MSchreader]

17. One question:

What "Socialist candidates"? Who? When?

Martin

[patmacsf]

22. And "Tom Ammiano" is a Democrat?!

Please, let's be realistic about San Francisco politics. This city's "Democrats" are for the most part anything but. They are much closer to Socialists than anything else. One stigma that thankfully still remains is that it's just much easier for a candidate to pretend to be a Democrat than a Socialist and get elected in this town. Let's not pretend that just because someone hasn't declared themselves as a Socialist party member that their politics have anything to do with Democratic party politics.

[MSchreader]

23. The only people who see liberal Democrats as socialists...

Are Republicans or brain-dead ex-leftists. Which of these two are you?

Martin

[patmacsf]

29. Take your pick

I'll be proud to wear whatever label you want as long as people know that Tom Ammiano and his ilk are not even liberal democrats. There is a large community in this city that is easily led around by the nose by a number of politicians who have made a career on being negative and opposing elected Democratic party officials. I am proud to say that I have been a life long Democrat and supported Democratic cadidates from local to national offices. I know a real Democrat when I see/read one.

[Tinoire]

27. Lol. Looking forward to your future posts with... great interest. n/t

[Tinoire]

19. My deluded world? San Francisco my dear & SF is FAR from Socialist

I know it may seem socialist to the Right & center but trust me as a person who had the absolute pleasure of living under a semblance of socialism, SF is not it nor is the Guardian its mouthpiece.

What dictionary are you using to define "socialist"? Definitely nothing I have in my extensive library.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

45. Maybe because they endorse the candidate...

and not the party?

Having read the Bay Guardian forever, I can tell you that they have indeed endoresed MANY Democrats in the past, including Democrats over Greens or other third party candidates in races.

When a Democrat is the best choice for an office and/or a strong Progressive, they will not hesitate to endorse that person.

I am a Democrat who has voted against a person running from my own party. If my choice is a Tony Hall or Frank Jordan Democrat or a solid progressive who is a Green, sorry, I'm voting for the Green.

[Tinoire]

25. Obviously you would prefer one of Murdoch's rags (Kerry article here)

Media chiefs back Kerry campaign

Owen Gibson
Tuesday February 10, 2004

As John Kerry's campaign to secure the Democrat nomination - and with it a crack at the White House - continues to gather pace, it has emerged that it is being bankrolled by key executives from News Corporation, MTV-owner Viacom and Sony.

<snip>

Unsurprisingly, the donation from News Corp's boardroom came not from chairman Rupert Murdoch, a committed Republican, but from the company's chief operating officer, Peter Chernin.

Mr Chernin, one of Mr Murdoch's most trusted lieutenants, is among several media chiefs who have pledged to raise between $50,000 and $100,000 to support the Vietnam war veteran's campaign for the White House.

Others who have pledged to raise more than $50,000 include the Viacom chief executive, Sumner Redstone, and Sony chairman Howard Stringer, whose name has recently been linked with the vacant chairmanships at ITV and the BBC.

<snip>

US political commentators have speculated that Mr Kerry has enjoyed the support of the media community in an effort to head off the challenge of Howard Dean, who has fallen back in the race despite being the frontrunner before the primaries began. Mr Dean made statements last year about wanting to break up media conglomerates.

<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0%2C13918%2C1144797%2C00.html

Wait a week or two though before writing to express your admiration. They've been very busy forecasting and writing premature obituaries.

[patmacsf]

34. No, just a Democratic editorial board endorsement though.

This is amazing ... have you even looked at the Guardian's endorsements in the link provided in the original post? This editorial board still bemoans some kind of "Brown-Burton cabal" that is controlling Democratic party politics in San Francisco and therefore endorses Green candidates or some kind of Green-Democratic hybrid candidate. Why people continue to delude themselves that somehow the Guardian endorsement of Kucinich is some kind of amazing news to post to the DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND message board is just ludicrous!

[corporatewhore]

51. yep that dreaded liberal media

[ShaneGR]

2. Good for him

Nice pick-up.

[bicentennial_baby]

3. Woot Woot for Dennis!

Hey Will, tell Dennis we want to see him out here in Western MA! This is Kucinich country!

[gottaB]

4. Bravo

That's a good endorsement.

[buddhamama]

5. excellent!

good for DK ! :toast:

[SerpentX]

6. If he put Tom Ammiano on the ticket

I could almost see myself on that bandwagon :)

[MuseRider]

7. Good!

Thanks, needed this.

[Robb]

9. Right on!

That was the only paper I ever read when I lived there. Of course, I was hopelessly poor, but still! :thumbsup:

[revcarol]

20. A newspaper not in the MEDIA CABAL?

Let me at it!!

Good job, Dennis.:yourock:

[Perky]

26. So what n/t

n/t

[goodhue]

32. most excellent!

[Freddie Stubbs]

37. Looks like they don't like that right-winger Tom Lantos

[GreenPartyVoter]

40. Glad for the endorsement, but don't like that pic *l*

[NV1962]

42. What, not LaRouche!?

That right-wing rag! Petty bourgeois degenerates!

:P

So, what's the rest of CA going to do?

[hedgetrimmer]

44. hi will.... GO KOOOCH!

[tmwat]

46. Great endorsement. They got most of it right.

I'd like to hear their logic behind the statement, "In 2004, against an incumbent Republican, Kucinich is absolutely unelectable."

[Freddie Stubbs]

47. Some endorsement--they say that he is unelectable against Bush

http://www.sfbg.com/38/21/cover_endorsements.html

Their message: Vote for Kucinich in the primary because there is no danger of him getting the nomination, but he would definitely lose to Bush if he did.

[IrateCitizen]

48. It's always telling what you leave out, Freddie...

A FULL excerpt from the article...

But Kerry runs the risk of moving to the right, not only during the campaign but also in office, becoming (politically, not personally) another Bill Clinton and alienating a large part of the Democratic constituency. He needs to remember that progressives are also part of the party – and that urban issues are key to its future. And the best way to send that message is by voting for Dennis Kucinich.

Kucinich isn't going to win the nomination, and if this were a really close race, we might not endorse him. In 2004, against an incumbent Republican, Kucinich is absolutely unelectable. But he's an inspirational candidate who is almost universally right on the issues, and he's put on the table concepts that none of the other Democrats want to talk about.

Context counts, Freddie. As much as you'd like to pretend otherwise, it still matters.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

49. Go DK!

TWL

[no name no slogan]

50. EXCELLENT!

Any media coverage is GOOD media coverage.

GO DK!!!