To the Editor:
Paul Hogarth’s column about Barack Obama going on Fox “News” repeatedly mentioned that Obama has not changed his positions in order to be electable, unlike Hillary Clinton. This is not true. Obama used to support the Palestinian cause, but he switched to supporting Israel once he seriously thought about running for president, because of the huge propaganda machine he would be up against if he continued to support the Palestinians.
This is not to say that Clinton did not switch positions more often or more blatantly. But please don’t attempt to delude readers into thinking that Obama is any more than a politician, because he’s not. To highlight another example, while Obama runs on his opposition to the Iraq war, the fact is that he will keep tens of thousands of troops in Iraq, will continue the immoral war against Afghanistan, wants to attack Pakistan, and wants to add 100,000 troops to the U.S. military, all instead of reigning in U.S. imperialism, which would be a real anti-war position.
I realize that Mr. Hogarth is an Obama supporter, but he should stick to the facts and tell the truth. It does progressive issues no good in the long run to ignore Obama’s deficiencies, even though he seems to be the least inimical to those issues.
To the Editor:
You forgot to mention Lt. Governor John Garamendi and Treasurer Bill Lockyer as potential candidates for Governor in 2010. Both are far more qualified than the Gavster.
I saw your article about Newsom’s possible run for Governor and his supposed ‘green’ record.
Unfortunately, the Mayor’s green image is a total illusion. Mayor Newsom has deep ties to PG&E, and nearly every one of those ‘environmental’ press announcements and events that you mention were tied to PG&E funding and/or direct involvement.
Sierra Club, Greenpeace and Our City had to gather thousands of hand written constituent letters to get Newsom to only reluctantly come on board to support the -real- clean energy program in San Francisco, the Community Choice renewable energy project. And on the day last June that the Board of Supervisors passed Community Choice, that morning the Mayor and PG&E held a joint press conference to announce a fake tidal power project that they knew would never happen. That press conference and its hi-tech animated video news release, completely stole the press that day from Community Choice. PG&E hates Community Choice and is actively working to kill it all over the state because it threatens to completely replace PG&E’s power monopoly with a truly green public power network.
On solar specifically, the Mayor has created an equally illusory program which, over the next decade, will replace less than 2% of San Francisco’s fossil fuel electricity with subsidized private solar installations, and which will gain the City no renewable energy revenues or savings whatsoever, all while costing taxpayers over 100 million dollars. (Community Choice will replace 50% of San Francisco’s fossil fuel electricity with renewables in that same decade, and at no added cost to either taxpayers or ratepayers.)
The sham group ‘Vote Solar’, which is the strongest promoter of the Mayor’s faux solar energy program, gets corporate donations from PG&E, Chevron, BP, and Edison.
San Francisco Green Party
Sustainability Working Group
You can submit letters to the editor by clicking on this link: email@example.com or by writing to:
126 Hyde Street
San Francisco, CA 94102