Friday, March 23, 2012

No "progressive dilemma" on Mirkarimi

Michael Mator: SF Chronicle

The Examiner's Melissa Griffin on the Mirkarimi kerfuffle:
Progressive supervisors John Avalos, David Campos, David Chiu, Eric Mar and Christina Olague will each be defending their seats this November, and now they are in a pretty tough spot. Vote to oust Mirkarimi and anger fellow progressives who cling to theories about how their Golden Boy is the victim of a vast, right-wing conspiracy. Vote to keep Mirkarimi and become a piñata for one’s political opponents. 

Yesterday, local Democratic Party chairman Aaron Peskin called on Mirkarimi to resign and “mend his relationships and family.” And by that he meant, “Please don’t sacrifice other progressives at the altar of your own ego.”
There's a lot more at stake than Mirkarimi's ego. And exactly how would losing his job help him "mend his relationships and family"? 

There's no evidence that these supervisors would suffer if they voted to remove Mirkarimi from office. The opposite is the case, given all the media attention and the campaign by City Hall, aided and abetted by Griffin and C.W. Nevius, to get Mirkarimi to resign.

It will take more courage by these politicians to acquit Mirkarimi than to vote him out of office.

Nevius decries Monday's "media scrum" even though he was part of it!
Is the attention and drama over the top? Sure. On Monday, a media scrum of about 40 reporters swarmed Mirkarimi when he spoke after his sentencing, Afterward, I wandered into the courtroom next door, where the triple homicide trial of suspected MS-13 gang member Edwin Ramos was taking place. There were seven spectators.
By my count, Nevius has done seven columns---including the one today---on Mirkarimi's troubles, even as other important issues in SF go uncovered in any depth, like the big waterfront condo developments approved yesterday by the Planning Commission.

There's no evidence that ideology will make any difference if/when supervisors have to vote on whether to remove Mirkarimi from office. Why would a progressive supervisor, if convinced the charges against Mirkarimi are serious enough, be reluctant to oust someone who he/she thinks is an abusive husband/partner? After all the domestic violence folks---and women in general---are an important part of the progressive political base in San Francisco and everywhere else.

No, that argument is just designed to convince Mirkarimi to resign before the next stage of the process even begins. Mayor Lee is the one who's responsible for prolonging this process unnecessarily and forcing the rest of us, including the supervisors, to submit to weeks---perhaps months---more of this melodrama.

Instead of fighting to salvage what's left of his political career, Mirkarimi is supposed to fall on his sword to spare other politicians from a completely imaginary political problem.

Labels: , , , , ,


At 8:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Spoke to an individual who worked at the DA office at the same time as the supervisor. He suggested that one of the reasons for the plea was that he would still be allowed to carry his firearm.


Post a Comment

<< Home