San Francisco Values Infiltrate Congress

We San Franciscans are thrilled Rep. Nancy Pelosi will be Speaker of the House and, like all good politicians, we hope she slaps as much pork as possible on every bill so SF can benefit from many a wasted federal dollar. (Update: See SNL’s truly hilarious Nancy Pelosi – SF Values skit!)

In addition to pork, Pelosi promises to emphasize:

California and San Francisco will have a stronger voice in the Congress, not only to promote our issues but to bring an entrepreneurial spirit to the Congress, a disruptive spirit so that we can bring fresh eyes to the challenges that we face and in the spirit of the American West come up with solutions that look to the future and not to the past.

Bingo.

The most amusing aspect of Pelosi’s rise is the chatter about "liberal San Francisco values."

Republicans don’t think about San Francisco unless they have to, notes The SF Chronicle. Some are even parlaying anger over Pelosi’s status into celebration that the San Francisco 49ers football team will likely move to Santa Clara. One commenter on friend Tim Taylor’s blog remarks:

Your city sucks. It is not surprising that your lame-ass liberal/Democrat motherfuckers in charge have lost the 49ers. Fuck San Francisco, and fuck the NFL.

Management guru Tom Peters is tired of this criticism. He issues an impassioned defense of San Francisco while admitting, "I’m pretty typical of the lucky ones from that glorious area … pretty "liberal"-libertarian on many contentious social issues (stem cell research, working on the environment) and a pretty well-off Entrepreneurial American Capitalist Pig Small-Business Owner." And like all good bloggers, Tom concludes with a personal, emotional plea: "Just shut the hell up."

In the end, no matter how much the rest of the country likes to make fun of this fine, foggy city, we can always take comfort in this fact, as identified by Republican strategist Dan Schnur referring to the Texas hometown of former Republican leader Tom DeLay: "The biggest difference between Tom DeLay and Nancy Pelosi is that no one wants to vacation in Sugar Land, Texas.’

10 Responses to San Francisco Values Infiltrate Congress

  1. warren says:

    the problem with san francisco is that you really don’t care about the bill of rights. at all.

    mainly the 2nd amendment.

    don’t act like a bunch of self-righteous smartypants assholes when actually you completely ignore critical parts of the constitution. you have no moral high ground and don’t fool yourselves into thinking you do. christ, thank god for AIDS.

  2. As a blogger, I always think about what would it take for me to delete someone’s comment on my blog. I think the comment above answers my question.

  3. Toli G. says:

    I second Penelope’s motion.

  4. Lindsay says:

    haha, I lived in Sugar Land for two years. If you looked up “suburbia” in the dictionary, Sugar Land would be your definition.

    I much prefer San Francisco. and I much prefer a female Speaker of the House. :)

  5. JasonNYC86 says:

    “christ, thank god for AIDS”

    I wonder which republican this self-loathing douche bag is fucking…

  6. Dario says:

    Warren’s douchbagery has already been expressed, so I guess I don’t need to reiterate it… but how exactly have San Franciscans infringed on the right to bear arms?

  7. Blake says:

    Just because of one inflammatory comment (warren) doesn’t excuse the point. San Francisco is one of the most liberal towns in world. And Liberals have proven to by the most hypocritical people out there. Liberals have proven to be very open minded… as long as you share their same point of view:

    Liberal Agenda (SF Basecamp):
    1) Remove God from Society
    2) Increase Taxes
    3) Legalize Drugs
    4) Abolish Marriage
    5) Fight for Terrorist Rights
    6) Provide government subsidies for sex changes so George can be known as Georgina…

    Sounds great… where can I sign up?

  8. andy says:

    Here’s a quick response to those six points.

    1) “Remove God from society?” No. Try to stop religious beliefs from influencing our government’s policy-making? Yes. I think that we have seen enough examples to prove that religious fundamentalists in charge of a powerful organization can be dangerous. See Bin Laden, Osama.

    2) “Increase taxes.” Not going to argue with that. Some people want to increase taxes in certain tax brackets in order to accomplish other goals. I wouldn’t say that it is a fundamental goal of all liberals, however.

    3) “Legalize Drugs.” Again, not a major issue for most liberals in San Francisco. Medical marijuana is legal there, but it is certainly not something upon which the liberal party hinges. Anyway, I don’t see why morphine and other addictive painkillers should be legal for medical uses while cannabis, which is not chemically addictive but can still be effective as a painkiller, is not. But maybe that’s just me.

    4) “Abolish marriage.” Actually, a lot of liberal policy makers want to accomplish the opposite, and expand marriage. Really, most people are just interested in extending every couple the rights that marriage affords: tax breaks, property rights, etc.

    5) “Fight for terrorist rights.” This is where you really begin to expose yourself. You want to talk about hypocrisy? Hypocrisy is claiming that somehow liberals in San Francisco are fighting for terrorists rights while the de facto face of the conservatives, Mr. George Walker Bush, is fighting a war in Iraq that will recruit terrorists to the anti-American cause. His war does this by destroying property, displacing families, and not offering an outlet that young frustrated people can turn to. Do you think that terrorist groups might offer them such an opportunity? Whether or not the war is just is irrelevant, the fact is that certain Iraqis are going to blame America as a whole for their strife. They might turn to terrorism to get revenge. That sounds like “promoting terrorists” to me.

    But you’re probably talking about how liberals, especially in San Francisco, are attempting to protect the rights of Muslim-Americans. Maybe that’s because we already went done the wrong path in World War II, when we created Japanese internment camps and imprisoned countless innocent citizens. It’s important for us to do our best not to discriminate against any specific groups. But I guess you already proved that you don’t really care about that with your point #4.

    6) As far as your insensitive comment about sex changes, you should know that ellipses can’t mask what you’re trying to say. If you believe something, you should be willing to say it with out having to give a disclaimer that you have something more to say about the subject, so you are somehow impervious to criticism. It’s not a very effective form of argument. So you’ll understand why when I tell you that I’m not going to dignify that horse shit with a response.

    Sorry, you’re going to have to come up with a better indictment of San Francisco than that. Those are my old stomping grounds, after all.

  9. Jason says:

    I’m right there w/ Andy… “liberals” are not trying to “corrupt” American society at all. In fact, the main reason why I bitch and moan when I do is b/c of how much I love this country and am deeply concerned w/ the aftereffects of our government’s reckless policies abroad.

    I could care less about the pledge, public prayer, or any of that stuff–as long as its optional and not mandatory. If a kid doesn’t wanna do it? Fine. If another one does? That’s OK too.

    I think one of the bigget flaws the gay community has in gay marriage is using the word “marriage”. Like it or not that is rooted in Christiniaty, so I believe churches have the right to say no to “marrying” gay couples.

    However, I think any consenting adults living as one for a prolonged period of time should be entitled to the same rights, privliges and incentives as others. Hell, I may file for a “civil union” one day myself w/ another woman, just b/c it’s much easier. All the rights and benefits w/o all the hooplah. Sounds good to me.

    So I’m not quite sure what country you’re living in but maybe it’s time you took a look around. Things have gotten progressively worse since ol’Dubya got into office and I for one am f’n glad that things have changed [hopefully] for the better!

  10. Blake says:

    We can all just agree to disagree. The bottom line is that many conservatives are tired of begin casts as ‘stupid rednecks’ that don’t have a open mind. Many of us feel at our core that Liberals are trying to turn America into Europe (socialism and all that it implies).

    Yes, I agree things have gotten worse in general over the past few years. But one man is not to blame, our entire government is to blame (Republican AND Democrat). The thing that shocks me (less and less) is how short sighted liberals are. If we had this attitude in WWII we would all be speaking German.

    Proceed to dissect my ignorant comments with your elitist rhetoric. But please be kind enough to provide a translator so my small mind can understand (after all, I am a hillbilly by nature).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>