Update: El 20 de octubre de 2016:

1. The First Woman President Should Be Dra Jill Stein
2. The Lesser-Evil Card (pertaining to all US Presidential Selections regardless of the year)
3. Moving to the right. People enjoy repeating history don’t they?

Fuck the Bay Guardian. Considering what they turned into it’s just as well that they’re gone when they began endorsing conservative Democratic Party Establishment Trash. Chau.—el barrio rosa

————————–

Update: El 9 de octubre de 2014. Hola. ¿Qué tal? There’s got to be something in the water because it just gets worse. Someone left a comment below in the comment section about the Bay Guardian having endorsed corporatist conservative Politician Cocks. He is:

1. Pro Sit-Lie
2. Anti-Homeless (authored laws pertaining to Warner and Milk Plazas, removed benches from Milk Plaza)
3. A prude (City-wide Nudity Ban)
4. An elitist
5. Pro-Real Estate Industrial Complex and their Corrupt Liars
6. Pro-Techie Gentrification, and pro-Gentrification and Eviction Shuttles
7. Pro-Gentrification and “Luxury Designer Condos”(Dahling)
8. Pro-Closing the city parks at night (again anti-homeless)

and I could go on. Yes, the Bay Guardian endorsed that conservative piece of work for his re-election next month. Even though I had expected the BG to endorse him, it really is astounding that they’ve come this low. And it was maybe 6 months to a year ago when I was reading some of the articles on the BG site, I had sensed some ass-eating from them of Politician Cocks. One would hope that they would have endorsed one of the other candidates more closely aligned to their supposed “progressive” views. True progressives (the 3-4 remaining on the planet) would not endorse that piece of work Politician Cocks for anything. One wonders: Are they best of amigos with him now at the Bay Guardian? Wouldn’t surprise me. Just read the comments below, por favor, and that will fill you in on what I’m talking about. Gracias. Chau.—el barrio rosa

El 22 de junio de 2014. Hola, I received this e-mail the other day:
“I was stunned by the Bay Guardian’s endorsements for the June primary. They think their endorsements are progressive and alternative? Looks like they chose candidates that they thought most people would vote for anyway so they could say ‘everyone agreed with our endorsements.’ Considering that, do you think they will endorse the re-election in November of [Ed. Name removed, Politician Cocks] that incumbent in SF’s D8 who’s running unchallenged? That guy is scum.”
My response: Hola y gracias for your e-mail. Politician Cocks is not running unchallenged. There are 2-3 candidates that I know of who are running against him as a symbolic protest gesture. But with the corporate media—including the conservative pro-Oligarchy shill and hack major gay rag whose publisher is pro-Politician Cocks—those candidates will not likely get many votes. I would expect the Bay Guardian to endorse the re-election of Politician Cocks (also seen as The Second Coming and The Holy Trinity by his rabid conservative believers). They at the Bay Guardian don’t seem capable of typing the words, “No Endorsement” these days. And considering the basura they endorsed for June, I would expect them to keep on the same status-quo, pro-Establishment/Oligarchy conservative track. They go on about how they’re “fighting for the soul of San Francisco” and in the past they have written anti-techie gentrification articles, anti-eviction articles, anti-techie shuttle articles and the like. But elitist Politician Cocks is pro-techie gentrification, pro-evictions (despite sweet pabulum spoken to the contrary, since he’s a shill and hack for the Real Estate Industrial Complex and their Corrupt Liars and is being given a “Person of the Year” award by those hacks and shills). And I read recently on a credible site that one real estate company (beginning with the letter “Z”) advertises that they specialise in Ellis Act Evictions…disgusting!. And Politician Cocks is pro-Gentrification and Evictions Shuttles. I’ve heard from reliable sources that he genuflects to any Gentrification and Eviction shuttle that passes on the street, when he’s not glued to his stupidphone. Despite all of that and the *appearance* that the Bay Guardian disagree with him, they recently invited The Second Coming to be on a panel on one of their community forums (preparing him for a pre-endorsement interview in their offices?). As mi amiga asked me: Why would they want anything to do with that conservative piece of work or care what he thinks? I know that the Big Head—he’s a self-appointed authority on all matters (he was recently trying to tell the Fire Department Chief how to run her department)—thinks he’s the mayor or acts like he thinks he’s the mayor, rather than a politician who is supposed to be “representing” ALL PEOPLE (and not just his rabid, wealthy supporters) of a certain area of the city. But that shouldn’t merit an invitation on a forum from the Bay Guardian and Politician Cocks was the only politician from the city government listed who was invited for the panel, moderated by the current Editor of the Bay Guardian. The panel was described as “key experts and activists.” He’s certainly not an activists (for the average person; he’s an activists for Big Business), so when did he become an expert on “Bikes, Buses, and Budgets?” I’ve never seen him ride a bike. He doesn’t even ride a bike, except for show purposes on “Bike to Work” Day once a year. I suspect they at the Bay Guardian will do their usual jumping through all hoops and excuses of how, “we haven’t always agreed with him” and other bull shit, and then they will proceed to endorse him. I can’t see them endorsing one of the other candidates who likely have no chance of winning running against him. And their endorsement would be appropriate since we are most assuredly living through the most hypocritical days ever, where hypocrisy is “in.” Chau.—rosa barrio

El 17 de junio de 2014. Hola, I received this e-mail from a reader:
“just wondering if you knew that the bay guardian had a community forum last week about ‘bikes, buses and budgets’ and they invited that guy you call politician cocks to be on their guest panel. i was appalled. why would they invite that conservative sack of shit to be on their panel or want anything to do with him? he’s helping to ruin the city that they write about.”
My response: Hola y gracias. Well that’s disgusting. Sigh. Perhaps they invited Politician Cocks/The Holy Trinity because he’s a self-appointed authority on all matters. Also, perhaps they’re trying to snuggle up to him—and this was the prelude to that—to get him to come to their office for an endorsement interview later in the year, and they will endorse him (as you say) while he’s helping to ruin the city that they write about. That’s what faux-progressives do. As we saw with most of the Bay Guardian’s pro-Oligarchy endorsements that I spoke about down the page. Faux-progressives endorse and vote for conservative corporate parasites of The Establishment, The Oligarchy, the Corporatocracy who have a “D” behind their name. The “D” behind the candidate’s name is the only requirement with faux-progressives. Gracias for the info. Chau.—rosa barrio

El 10 de mayo de 2014. Hola, I received this e-mail earlier this week and even though the topic of Sam’s e-mail is the June 2014 election in California, Sam’s e-mail really applies to all election endorsements—that I’ve observed—by the San Francisco Bay Guardian in recent years including their endorsement of messiah. I remember being thoroughly disgusted over that re-election endorsement in particular from supposed “progressives.” From what I’ve observed, they (at the SFBG) have consistently endorsed the misnamed “Democratic” party Establishment Status Quo corporatist parasites while those at the SFBG charade as “progressives.” They are really just shills and hacks for the “Democratic” party (even if one or more of them at the SFBG are registered as an independent, meaning no party affiliation). Here’s Sam’s email:

I read your article about the Bay Guardian helping Google. Did you see the Bay Guardian’s endorsements for the June election? Their endorsements are unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I thought I was on the wrong website!!!!! I thought I had been redirected to a conservative website. I was going to comment on their site, but felt too outraged to and asked myself: why bother!? I’ve commented in the past on their site about their Democratic Party endorsements, and what do they continue doing? They keep endorsing the same career politicians election after election. The Bay Guardian is constantly using the word “progressive” in their articles and they wear that label themselves. Then when election time comes around they painfully maneuver through all sorts of calisthenics to endorse Democratic establishment politicians. That is not progressive by any measure. Based on these endorsements—excluding David Campos—the Bay Guardian staff are void of principles. I couldn’t believe their Jerry Brown endorsement. Then their Newsom endorsement topped that, followed by one of the worse of them all, Pelosi. If Obama could run again, in their “awe-shucks” style they would get down in the gutter and pull up reasons why everyone should vote for him again. There’s nothing “alternative” about their endorsements. I would expect their endorsement from a conservative corporate rag, not one that presents itself as “progressive.” I read some of the comments on their forums and there are other people who couldn’t believe the endorsements either and wrote some good responses. There is another possibility that no one has thought of which could explain these awful endorsements. The Bay Guardian is on very shaky ground as a business and publication, and something happened this week regarding that (one of the current owners wants out). Their staff have got to know, whether they want to admit it or not, that their days are numbered. After the Bay Guardian is no longer, their staff can apply as a staff person for these Democratic politicians they’ve eaten the ass of with endorsements and when filing their application as a staff person, they can say, “I’d like to remind you that we at the Bay Guardian endorsed you, Your Worship, in the 2014 and other elections.” The Bay Guardian staff may simply be preparing for the future demise of their paper.—Sam

Póster
Las Flores Rojas
by
DeanJohnsonFineArt

My response: Sam, gracias for your e-mail and as you can see I’ve made it an article. Mi amigo told me in anger about their endorsements earlier in the week. He couldn’t believe them either. He asked me what the fuck is going on over there in their office. PELOSI?! NEWSOM?! (He screamed). One shouldn’t be surprised. I didn’t go to their site as I no longer go there but I suspect each endorsement started out the way they usually did when I went to their site, which went something like this: We haven’t always agreed with this politician and we have many, many problems with them. S/he has been good on this and that, but overwhelming bad on so many other things but we’re endorsing him/her with enthusiasm anyway (and the unspoken part: because the politician has D next to their name). That’s what this is all about in my opinion and has been for years. The Bay Guardian is merely just a “front” so to speak for the misnamed “Democratic” party. As memory serves, I don’t think that the BG has endorsed any non-Establishment D-candidate since Newsom first ran for alcalde/mayor. They are part of the problem and when I was on their site way-back-when someone told them just that but it didn’t make any difference to them, if they even read it. I can understand why you didn’t comment there, aside from the fact that their forum is a fucking cesspool of conservative trolls or at least it was when I was on there and I doubt that it’s changed. The BG staff seemed to like it that way. The Bay Guardian staff call themselves “progressives.” They are progressive in name only. There’s a lot more to being a progressive than riding a bicycle to work or being somewhat “green” and using the word “progressive” once in every paragraph. That doesn’t make one a progressive. And that’s why I’ve said repeatedly that the word progressive doesn’t mean anything anymore for most people who label themselves as such. I no longer use the word because it’s become so meaningless (for example, the so-called “progressives” who support messiah when he’s worse than GW Bush ever was yet the same “progressives” despised Bush). One has to actually be a progressive by one’s actions and behaviour versus merely calling oneself a progressive because it sounds cool to some people. But to the Bay Guardian staff and many other people, you don’t actually have to be a “progressive” just because you call yourself one. This all reminds me of Hyacinth Bucket (pronounced “Bouquet”) of “Keeping Up Appearances” where in one episode the Caradines had skis on top of their car. Well as soon as Hyacinth saw that, she decided she must have skis on top of their car too. As she put it to Richard who questioned their going skiing just because they would have skis on top of their car, she said: You don’t have to actually ski just because you have skis on top of your car. You just give the appearance that you ski by having skis on top of one’s car.

Yes, throughout the year, the San Francisco Bay Guardian staff try to give the appearance of being “progressives” and then at election time they come out with this caca/shit. There’s nothing progressive about the Bay Guardian’s endorsements at all. Overall, they have endorsed D-Establishment corporatist parasites who are thoroughly entrenched members of the corrupt Corporatocracy/Oligarchy.  Chau.—rosa barrio