San Francisco is “far-left?”

When I moved to San Francisco decades ago — I’m practically a native at this point; I’ve lived here longer than I have anywhere else in my life — the term “far-left” did not exist to my knowledge. It was not something I ever heard said about The City. The term “far-left” is relatively new historically speaking. I think it’s new and in reaction to the term “far-right” which is also relatively new. “Liberal” was the main term I remember hearing said over and over about San Francisco. When I lived in the District of Columbia, I was told by everyone who had visited San Francisco, “You belong there, you’ll love it. Anything goes there.” And there was something about “it’s so liberal.” I was feeling frustrated at the time with the conservative atmosphere and snotty people in the District. I didn’t find DC to be that friendly. As far as “anything goes,” about San Francisco, that was mostly true at that time. As I was telling a friend this morning, there were pockets in The City where that applied to. It did not apply to the whole City itself, such as The Financial District or what I today called Manhattan. But “anything goes” is not true now as The City has become more conservative and very conformist, the opposite of the way it was when I moved here. San Francisco is a very different City now, but unfortunately the conservatives and far-right — most of whom have never been here and probably couldn’t find San Francisco on a map — don’t know that. They just spew/regurgitate lies of what they’ve heard their fellow conservatives lie and say about The City, and probably none of them have been here either. I say that because why would a conservative deliberately spend the money to come to a City which they claim to despise and hate? Unless they’re insane. Even if they happened to come here for business reasons, they would likely only be around and see the business sectors, Financial District and not The City. People on business trips are usually not here long enough to actually see The City, and they’re also too busy with the business reasons they’re here for.

So, San Francisco has never been “far-left” as long as I’ve lived here. Again, anything that is not conservative, the conservatives/far-right call “far-left” or “Liberal Bastion” as if “far-left” and “liberal” are the same thing. They’re not. But one should not expect the conservatives to know that.

When I moved to San Francisco, conservative Dianne Feinstein was mayor. She’s hardly “Far-left?” or “Liberal.” She makes a superb Republican charading as a Democrat. Most of our mayors have sucked. None of them have been “far-left.”

Question: Would you expect an alleged “far-left” city or a “liberal bastion” to have a city-wide nudity ban? I would not. Would you expect an alleged “far-left” city or “liberal bastion” to have several anti-homeless laws? I would not. And I could give other examples.

San Francisco has all of the above yet the willfully-ignorant conservatives — including a certain Musky guy — are regurgitating that “far left” lie/script as they hate on The City, as they always have. The billionaire is not even from San Francisco, and seems to know nothing about San Francisco other than what he’s heard from other conservatives, which would be what a terrible city San Francisco is.

The conservatives live in a time-warp. The City they keep hating from a position of ignorance no longer exist, if it ever did. They don’t live here and never have so they know not of what they speak.

I read an article about Musky from a New York City publication and the comments were like going back 20 years or more in time. They were like a copy and paste of what I used to read on a local San Francisco site some 20 years ago from the conservatives who despised San Francisco. I thought to myself: They’re saying the exact same script they said 20 years ago, even though the San Francisco they’re talking about doesn’t exist now. They don’t know that the City has changed. They’re still stuck in their time warp.

It’s all relative really. San Francisco is more to the “left” on some issues than other major cities or towns. We are certainly more “left” than your average podunk hick town. Historically, West Hollywood has been more “left” than San Francisco. One example that comes to mind is that they have a ban on the selling of fur coats in West Hollywood. San Francisco would never have such a ban because it would be heavily protested by the wealthy, Dahling. They need their fur coats to show off at the op-rah, Dahling.

But San Francisco: a “far-left” or a “Liberal Bastion?” No. Not today. To my disgust, San Francisco shifted to the right some years ago — the conservatives don’t seem to be aware of that, although the conservatives in San Francisco should be very pleased now despite the sour look on their faces — around the time that the Tech Industrial Complex barged in and took over the City. The tech corporations were given tax breaks for doing business in the City. Is that what you would expect from a “far-left” City or “Liberal Bastion?” A “far-left” City or “Liberal Bastion” does not cater to corporations. The Tech Industrial Complex (TIC) was aided by the corrupt liars of the Real Estate Industrial Complex who helped evict the “Old City” residents as the seemingly lobotomised and phone-addicted techies flowed in, disrespecting our neighbourhoods and cultures by making fun of them. Where did these techies come from?

The “Old City” — that the conservatives love to hate — was mostly evicted, kicked out when the TIC moved in. The “Old City” residents moved to Oakland across the Bay. The “Old City” no longer exists. But the conservatives don’t know that because they don’t live here and again, live in their time-warp.

The former gay mecca of San Francisco — which became very conservative about a decade ago — is today mostly heterosexual. The conservative Castro district (District 8) elected a conservative gay guy (Scott Penis, as he became known) for two terms. That guy authored the city-wide nudity ban and it was approved by the “far-left”/”Liberal Bastion” Board of Supervisors because of 2-3 nude guys on occasion in a small area of The Castro (which has a long history of public nudity), and the same guy also authored some anti-homeless laws. Would you expect a “far-left” or “Liberal Bastion” City to have an anti-homeless sit-lie law, as we do? Scott Penis was a real piece of conservative work and the conservative Castro supported him. Again, gave him two consecutive terms. Some of the older conservative male residents acted as if he were their new messiah figure. “How are you doing today, my boy?” But he charaded as a “moderate.” “Far-left?” “Liberal Bastion?”

The current mayor and city attorney are considered by some to be “mainstream liberals,” but I don’t necessarily agree with that either. Liberal is not “far left.” As one example, a “far-left” mayor would not do a complete reversal on COVID by abandoning all COVID pandemic protocols and take the approach of the conservatives which is “Learn to live with it.” Ms Hypocrite mayor went from closing the City at the beginning of the pandemic and being praised for that by many, to being seen in public gathering not wearing a face mask herself to no longer even talking about COVID as the pandemic continues. That’s the same behaviour we’ve seen from the conservatives.

Today, San Francisco is a rather conservative and conformist City. Is conformity “far-left?” No. I was harassed on the street in The Castro years ago for wearing a tie-dye shirt on one occasion because I wasn’t conforming by wearing all-black clothing like most others. On another occasion, my friend and I were verbally hated/harassed for our political poster — we had just come from a protest at City Hall — where we both felt physically-threatened on Castro Street. It was then that we knew things were changing in The Castro, if not the City. The Castro became very anti-protest and pro-status quo conservative. So much for the now-dead, “Anything goes in San Francisco” slogan. I no longer hear that slogan spoken here and haven’t heard it for years.

In many ways, San Francisco is nothing like it was when I moved here. Yet the conservatives and Musky think things are now just like they were back then. Willful-ignorance.

So I wish that the conservative trash who are living in their outdated time warp about San Francisco would update themselves. The conservatives who complain about The City would probably like San Francisco today should they be able to afford to live here, which is where a lot of their hate stems from, I think, because they’re jealous that they can’t afford to live here rather than in the podunk “shithole” where they do live. The last I read, San Francisco is the most expensive City in the US, and it has become a playground for the super-wealthy. Yet the conservatives continue to call it a “cesspool.” I’ve never known the super-wealthy to want to live in or deliberately move to “cesspools,” have you? Quite the contrary. The last I heard, the Bay Area is now known as “Billionaire Bay.”

The conservatives are rabidly supporting billionaire Musky — and relocating his most recent acquisition of companies to Texas or Miami — the billionaire with his enormous ego. They love supporting the wealthy even though they get nothing out of it. Two billionaires come to mind for me. They both think they are such special people, self-entitled, self-absorbed, immature and childish. And they think they can do anything they want, whether it’s legal or not. Trash best describes both of them.

So the next time you hear someone say, “If you visit San Francisco, wear a flower in your hair.” Tell them: Dear, that went out in the 1960s, during the Haight-Ashbury days. You’re about 50-60 years too late and behind the times, like your conservative crowd often is. And when they call The City a “cesspool” ask them: Well, wouldn’t you really like to live in that “cesspool” with other wealthy people and their over-priced multi-million dollar homes and expensive cars and the nice weather, considering the dreadful weather you have where you live?