“Peskin wins, Christensen concedes,” The City, Nov. 5
San Francisco’s soul isn’t for sale
In electing Aaron Peskin as District 3 Supervisor, San Franciscans spoke clearly and loudly: We will not sell our souls nor the future of our city to the disdainful and repulsive campaign waged by Peskin’s opponent and the mayor, Ed Lee, who appointed her, and whose campaign junk mails were disingenuous, distorted the legislative and community advocacy records of Peskin, and which even had the audacity to use the “race baiting card” strategy of employing a racist anti-Chinese graffiti, “No More Chinese,” and declaring, “Do You Want Justice?” in one of its junk mails.
Peskin’s opponent and Lee were deluded to think that this election and the soul of San Francisco were both for sale. They only insulted the intelligence of the people of the City of St. Francis. I and other San Franciscans look forward to Supervisor Peskin infusing new leadership at City Hall. The City needs Supervisor Peskin’s leadership, integrity and commitment to working for what is best for the people of San Francisco.
On Tuesday evening, Supervisor Peskin, his volunteers and supporters holding blue and yellow “Peskin for Supervisor” signs, and I stood on the corner of Columbus Avenue and Union Street, the heart of North Beach, while San Franciscans drove by honking their horns.
In our midst included Carl Nolte, highly respected journalist, Sen. Mark Leno, and former Supervisor Sophie Maxwell.
We celebrate Supervisor Peskin’s resounding victory and San Franciscans’ rejection of the attempted selling of the soul of our beloved city.
“Peskin restores City Hall balance,” Editorial, Nov. 5
Editorial misses mark
I’d like to translate some of the obsfucation of your editorial about Peskin restoring balance.
Regarding the surprisingly large defeat of Proposition F: You do realize your editorial just called for the negation of the election results “that run counter to civic reason.” Translation, let’s ignore the results, and a large majority at that, who voted down the very idea you are pushing again.
Regarding the civility that marks this board, in contrast to that when the progressives held the majority: You basically said, “Civility is fine, but we didn’t get our way so let’s put assholes like Peskin, and if we could, Chris Daly back on the Board. Sure, they’re flaming assholes, but they’re our assholes and civility is overrated.”
I really loved that part. Civility at the expense of forward-thinking policy? You want a return to the days when people were disgusted by the antics of Daly and Peskin, as long as it suits your agenda. You do realize how stupid that sounds, right?
I want to congratulate you on your respect for the electoral process. It’s too bad about your boy, Ross. What was that margin of victory anyways? Rhetorical question, you needn’t look down at the ground and kick at the dirt. Dang, if only there was something you could do to negate that result. The margin is so large, and the antipathy so great for the progressive darling for his criticized from all corners sanctuary policy. I’m surprised that didn’t make it into your editorial. Not a word. Not one word about Ross going down, literally in flames.
I mean it’s one thing to lose an election, but by that margin? One of your prime issues, defense of the sanctuary policy, shot down in flames by proxy. And nary a word in the editorial. At least “balance” was restored in the Sheriff’s Office.