Another dumb "progressive" cause

Progressive freedom fighters in the Castro

City progressives are degenerating into self-parody. If they hadn't already demonstrated their intellectual shortcomings, we might be able to think they're putting us on, but that would be giving them too much credit. Examine in vain Andrew Resignato's defense of nudism in Fog City for any trace of irony. 

The sensible supervisors who voted to reject the creepy exhibitionists rightly mocked the ridiculous arguments (below in italics) made by prog supervisors in defense of the indefensible.

Let's update the political scorecard: 

Progressives botched the homeless issue ten years ago, when their response to the growing homeless squalor on city streets was Food Not Bombs and the Biotic Baking Brigade, the pie-throwers. This political negligence allowed Gavin Newsom to use the homeless issue to get himself elected mayor. Along with Care Not Cash---opposed of course by city progressives---he then implemented realistic programs to deal with homelessness: Homeward Bound, supportive housing, and Project Homeless Connect.

Progressives, led by the Bicycle Coalition, opposed building the parking garage under the Concourse in Golden Gate Park, even though it was a $55 million gift to the city from Warren Hellman and his rich pals. City voters rejected the prog opposition and voted to build the garage.

Progressives at the Bay Guardian and Matt Gonzalez insist that graffiti/tagging vandalism---which the city and property owners spend millions to deal with---is an art genre that the city should tolerate.

Progressives tried to dump the popular JROTC program from city schools, but were rebuked by city voters.

Progressives wanted to make prostitution legal in San Francisco, but were rebuked again by city voters.

Progressives have tried a dozen times to get the city to adopt "public power" in San Francisco that would involve taking our power system away from P.G.& E. City voters have rejected the idea every time it's been on the ballot. Why would they want City Hall, already bloated with more than 26,000 city workers, to take over our power system when it can't even operate our transit system efficiently?

Progressives opposed the sit-lie measure designed to deal with street punks who were dominating Haight Street, but city voters disagreed and approved the measure.

Progressives persuaded city voters to try Ranked Choice Voting, but people are increasingly unhappy with a system that unnecessarily complicates city elections. Now we learn that recounts of close elections under RCV are prohibitively expensive. If RCV gets on the ballot again, city voters will rebuke city progs again.

If Critical Mass, a monthly prog demo that makes it harder for people to get home from work, is ever on the ballot it too will be rejected by city voters.

And now city progs have seized another unpopular quality-of-life issue as their cause: allowing exhibitionist creeps to occupy city neighborhoods!

Several members of the Board of Supervisors were appalled during Tuesday's heated discussion about whether to ban nudity - and it wasn't by the nudists who stripped down in the audience.

It was by the five progressive supervisors who used some very threadbare logic in explaining their vote against Supervisor Scott Wiener's legislation. (Wiener prevailed 6-5.)

"Stunned is an appropriate word," said Supervisor Mark Farrell of his reaction to the debate. "The arguments were completely absurd. If this becomes a quote-unquote progressive cause, I think that says volumes about how far out of touch they are with most of San Francisco."

Among them, Supervisors John Avalos, David Campos, Eric Mar, Christina Olague and Jane Kim said approving a nudity ban would jeopardize the Police Department's ability to respond to gang violence, be akin to banning homeless people and lead down a slippery slope where it would be illegal to have yellow hair, piercings or tattoos. (All you blond Marina girls with earrings and tramp stamps, watch out!)

They also said that because nudity is a problem only in the Castro, it shouldn't be a city matter. (Voters did, though, approve a sit/lie ban citywide even though it was a problem only in the Haight, and City Hall has cracked down on massage parlors that are a front for sex work citywide even though they're a big problem only in Chinatown and the Sunset District.)

Perhaps the best, though, was Mar's assertion that the nudity ban was too trivial for the board. This from the supervisor who fought to ban free toys in Happy Meals and called on the Grammys to add 31 categories of music to their awards.

"I did choke a little on the water I was drinking when Eric Mar castigated us for focusing on petty issues," said Supervisor Sean Elsbernd. "Discussing the Grammy Awards? That was a highlight of my career at the Board of Supervisors, and Eric Mar brought that one to us."