Who’s responsible for the new San Francisco?

El 22 de febrero de 2014. Hola. After reading my article: What Happened to San Francisco? You haven’t heard?, a former San Franciscan e-mailed me with this:

“So sorry to hear this. I would never have imagined that happening to my “radical San Francisco.” I used to live there and loved it, because San Francisco was different than any other city. I was planning a visit to SF next year, but since the city I lived in is not there anymore, I’m not coming now as I would be disappointed by what I see. Can you tell me briefly, who is responsible for this? Thank you for reading my e-mail.”

My response: Hola y muchas gracias. Who’s responsible? First, what is responsible?

Class Warfare and the Politics of Corporate Greed are responsible. The accomplices are:

Picture 1268

1. The former alcalde/mayor
2. The current corporatist alcalde
3. Speculator’s Greed
4. Investor’s Greed
5. The Real Estate Industrial Complex, their Corrupt Liars and their Greed
6. The Tech-Surveillance State Industrial Complex (techies) and their Greed
7. Conservative Politician Cocks who works for his corporate interests (see Nos. 2-6 above)
8. The now conservative, corporatised so-called “gay community” which has done its best to abandon its radical past and to become as much like “straights” as possible. The gay populace call it “assimilation.” I call it becoming corporatised sheep, where they don’t care about anything but gadgeting, corporate sports teams (so they can act out their “jock” fantasies), and “partying” (getting drunk).

And I’ve probably left out something or someone (not intentionally), but that’s basically it. Here’s some more details about this mess/corruption:

The former alcalde/mayor is mainly responsible for where we are today along with the gullible so-called “progressives” on the Board of Supervisors who allowed themselves to be played/duped when the former mayor left office and causing the current alcalde to be installed initially as a “care taker mayor.” The former alcalde appointed the current alcalde (as a “care taker mayor” at that time) and I suspect he knew who and what he was choosing in this politician.

In some people’s mind (including mine) the former mayor changed as a person and became more conservative after he got married to a female and started having children. (What is it about that? Something about having babies seems to make a lot of people more conservative and turn a lot of people into prudes who were just the opposite before they became parents.) Before the former alcalde got married to his muchacha, he was having sex with his best friend’s muchacha. Here’s some information about that: Aide Says His Wife, Mayor Had Affair. And then there’s this: He also had an alcohol problem. Then the hateful sit-lie campaign began (Proposition L) after the former mayor said his niña saw someone shooting up drugs on Haight Street. Well, even if that story were true, intelligent people know that babies have no knowledge of drugs of any kind. And even if his niña saw someone sitting on the sidewalk on Haight Street and shooting up, she wouldn’t have any idea what was going on. She wouldn’t know what she was seeing, or even care at that early age! But the former alcalde chose to exploit that story/scene to launch hateful sit-lie (criminalizing homelessness). And by the way, conveniently the former alcalde no longer lives in San Francisco but we are stuck with his sit-lie law. Why didn’t he just leave the city in the first place and leave the homeless/street people alone? The former mayor turned into quite a piece of work from then on, but because he has a D next to his name (for Democrat), people here still gush over him. I’ve learned that devout partisans don’t let principles or standing for something get in their way.

Then the current mayor—a former city administrator no one here even knew anything about before he was appointed “care taker mayor”—was appointed by the former alcalde because he (the former alcalde/mayor) was unfortunately elected Lt. governor of California. The current alcalde said he didn’t want the job of alcalde/mayor and that he would be a “care taker mayor” (interim mayor) until a new mayor was elected. The current alcalde was appointed to that position largely because he had promised he would not seek a full four-year term. That turned out to be a big lie. A broken promise. By breaking his promise he was right on track from the beginning for being the usual corporatist politician. How unusual, huh? But his rabid conservative disciples gushed, “he changed his mind and people are entitled to change their mind, aren’t they?” Under him, the Conservatives’ Wet Dream is coming true: Turning San Francisco into a city for the wealthy—especially with the Tech Surveillance-State Industrial Complex—and moving the city to the right.

The current conservative piece of work alcalde (who pretends to be a “moderate” to disguise his conservative agenda) works for the following:

1. One of the former corrupt mayors
2. The head of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Chinatown—who was accused of running an illegal campaign to get her guy (the current alcalde) elected
3. A billionaire techie Silicon Valley venture capitalist
4. The Real Estate Industrial Complex and their Corrupt Liars
5. The Tech-Surveillance State Industrial Complex

As with other corporatist politicians, this alcalde does not work for The People, other than his rabid conservative supporters.

A little more background: So the current alcalde decided to run for mayor (even though he promised he wouldn’t). He came in with 31% of the vote in the first round of rank choice voting in that election. It took this corporatist piece of work eleven rounds to get the job of mayor (61.2% of the vote was the final tally). His rabid believers who see him as a savior and the “end all” fail to understand that if he were so popular and the people loved him—as his cult-like conservative believers claim—he would have won the election outright with at least 51% of the vote in the first round regardless of the number of candidates in that election. After taking office, he and the corporatist Board of Supervisors came up with the idea of giving corporate welfare (tax breaks) to any company of the Tech-Surveillance State Industrial Complex that has their corporation in San Francisco. As a result of this, San Francisco is losing millions of dollars due to this corporate welfare scheme.

The Real Estate Industrial Complex and their Corrupt Liars are also responsible for catering to the new wealthy techies and using all sorts of tactics, including but not limited to Ellis Act evictions to evict longtime residents of San Francisco who were living in rent-control apartments. Gay Politician Cocks who only represents his conservative base/supporters as well as The Real Estate Industrial Complex is completely pro-gentrification, pro-wealthy, anti-poor, pro-sit-lie, and anti-homeless. He campaigned on sit-lie and authored two additional anti-homeless laws as well as having the benches removed at Harvey Milk Plaza so the homeless/street people couldn’t use them to sleep on. How kind and how humane! Politician Cocks is a piece of work.

WHO IS FUNDING POLITICIAN COCKS’S RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN?

The latest noticias/news as of this writing comes from mi amiga/my friend (I’ve never known her to be wrong with information she gives me). She said that it has been revealed that the main contributor to gay Politician Cocks’s re-election campaign for San Francisco District 8 is the Real Estate Industrial Complex and their Corrupt Liars. They have contributed $61,700.00 to his campaign. That’s the same industry causing evictions of GLBTQ people in San Francisco and in District 8, for example. The second largest contributor to his campaign is the Tech-Surveillance State Industrial Complex and their abogados/attorneys. They have contributed $14,250.00 to Politician Cocks’s campaign.

Also, even before it’s known who all the candidates will be for this November 2014 election and running for this position, the conservative, corporatist GLBTQ Alice B. Toklas Club have already early-endorsed their conservative Politician Cocks. That tells me all I need to know about them and their conservative-wealthy agenda for this city. So basically, a gay corporatist politician and a gay corporatist political club want GLBTQ people out of the city, if they are not wealthy. That’s the bottom line. I find that absolutely repugnant. Years ago, I never knew any Queers who were that despicable. What has happened to some GLBTQ people? (Corporate Greed where “the ends justify the means.”) Politician Cocks is originally from the Alice Club (and may still be a member). But again, this should tell one where the Alice Club stands. They too only want wealthy GLBTQ residents in San Francisco. They want all other longtime residents who are not wealthy out of the city, since that’s what’s happening now and has been happening for some time in San Francisco: A city for the wealthy is the goal, and Politician Cocks is an accomplice in that goal. The Harvey Milk GLBTQ Club is the only club to my knowledge fighting this corporatist/class warfare agenda and standing up against The Conservative Corporatist Class Warfare Machine. I’ve heard that attorney David Waggoner (of the Milk Club) may run against Politician Cocks. Good! Most of the residents in District 8 are renters. Politician Cocks (who lives in a condo) is supposed to represent all residents of District 8, not just his wealthy conservative base/supporters. So I’m wondering: will the renters of District 8 vote in their best interest or against their best interest in the November 2014 election? Will they be too busy partying and texting/addicted to their gadget to even pay attention to what’s going on? If they vote against their best interest, they will re-elect Politician Cocks. If they vote in their interest, they will vote for David Waggoner, should he run for the position. The local GLBTQ rag (the main one) will most likely once again endorse their savior Politician Cocks. That same publication also endorsed hateful sit-lie (which criminalizes homelessness). They—at that publication are conservative corporatists charading as “liberals and progressives.” They are neither. They serve as hacks and shills for D-Establishment corrupt political parasites, particularly in the District of Corruption (also known as the District of Columbia). Since divisive Politician Cocks is an incumbent and since the major GLBTQ publication will endorse him for re-election, and since the gay populace have become more conservative, I would expect the GLBTQ populace to vote against their best interest and vote for Politician Cocks. And then evictions will continue with many of the same people being evicted from their apartments. Then some of them will ask: How did this happen? (Did you vote for Politician Cocks? If so, why?)

That’s a brief explanation of who is responsible for the new Corporatist San Francisco. Hope this helps. Chau.—rosa barrio

Related:

What Happened to San Francisco? You haven’t heard?

Gay Community being forced out of San Francisco

All Cities Are Not Created Unequal: San Francisco has second highest inequality in US

One San Francisco Tech Company would rather pay taxes

San Francisco could lose $55 million from Twitter’s Corporate Welfare

Twitter and other tech companies get corporate welfare from San Francisco, but show little progress hiring locals