Gavin Newsom Letters

Eventually Gavin Newsom swept in and scooped up the homeless issue that was left lying around by city progressives. Good for him. I supported him all the way, and he’s off to a brilliant start as Mayor of SF.

The Train Has Left the Station (in SF Chronicle, Dec. 7, 2002)
From: Rob Anderson
To: letters@sfchronicle.com
Sent: Dec. 6, 2002
Subject: The Main Problem
Editor:
So Matt Gonzalez, who showed little interest in the homeless issue in the 2000 campaign, wants Peter Keane to run for mayor against Gavin Newsom next year (Matier & Ross, Dec. 4). Keane will be a suitable candidate for the left, because he too thinks homelessness isn’t “the main problem facing the city.” Based on last month’s election results, a majority of city voters disagree.
Sorry boys, but you’re too late: The train has left the station, and Newsom is at the controls.

Gavin Newsom and “The Vision Thing”
From: Rob Anderson
To: letters@sfchronicle.com
Sent: Feb. 20, 2003
Subject: The Race for Mayor
Editor:
The problem liberals Tom Ammiano and Angela Alioto have in running for mayor is that leadership on the most important issue facing San Francisco---homelessness---has been seized by Gavin Newsom, a moderate. The city’s progressives have simply failed at “the vision thing.” Their tacit assumption seems to be that we just have to live with homelessness, which presumably is just another lifestyle in a city governed by liberals. The vote for Proposition N and the rejection of Ammiano’s alternative indicate that the city’s voters disagree.

Newsom Fills the Leadership Vacuum
From: Rob Anderson
To: letters@sfindependent.com
Sent: March 2, 2003
Subject: The Left is the Problem
Editor:
Samson Wong (Political Notebook, Feb. 25) dances all around the issue of the left and homelessness, but in the end he misses the mark. In dealing with homelessness, the left is a large part of the problem and actually seems uninterested in a solution. While obsessed with the Stalinoid notion of public power, the left stands idly by as homeless people die in our streets. The tacit assumption seems to be that homelessness is a legitimate lifestyle in our wicked capitalist system.
While the left looked the other way, Gavin Newsom moved boldly to fill the leadership vacuum. Hence, left-liberal candidates for mayor will have to either ignore the issue entirely (Ammiano) or play some version of me-tooism (Alioto) to Newsom’s leadership on the issue, not exactly an approach calculated to inspire SF voters.

Newsom Fills a Political Vacuum
From: Rob Anderson
To: dlazarus@sfchronicle
Sent: March 2, 2003
Subject: Homelessness
David:
You are of course right about the homeless situation in SF. How can it be that a city ruled by liberal Democrats and “progressives”---whatever the hell that means---allows the homeless problem to go unaddressed? More than 100 homeless people a year have been dying on our streets for more than 10 years. Why do we allow this to continue?
As a so-called progressive myself, these are the questions I asked when I returned to the city in 1995. My conclusion: the left is part of the problem and isn’t particularly interested in a solution. Why? It’s never made explicit, but I think the political left’s tacit assumption is that homelessness is just something we have to live with in our wicked capitalist system (in an exchange I had several years ago with a member of Food Not Bombs, this was actually made explicit). A corollary of this tacit assumption: homelessness is just another lifestyle and hence must be tolerated in our super-tolerant city.
I think this is bullshit. As a lefty myself, I find it embarrassing that the left is actually an obstacle to progress on this issue. While the leftist Bay Guardian obsesses on public power, people are dying on our streets. Where’s a sense of priorities?
The left is very uptight about Gavin Newsom even bringing up the issue, let alone winning at the ballot box. Yet Newsom only filled an obvious vacuum in political leadership, and good for him. Even though I’m a Green Party member and a lefty, I’m going to support his campaign for mayor in SF.

Newsom Eats the Left’s Lunch
To: Bay Guardian, letters@sfbg.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003
Subject: Care Not Cash
Editor:
Given its history of reporting---or lack thereof---on the issue of homelessness, the Guardian would be better off saying nothing rather than the drivel we got last week.
Tim Redmond asserted, citing no evidence, that Gavin Newsom “doesn’t really care about homeless people,” and that it’s time for the left to “step up” on the issue.
Actually, the left should have stepped up on this issue years ago, during Tom Ammiano’s timid, issue-free runoff campaign against Mayor Brown several years ago, if not sooner. Instead, progressives continued to go AWOL on homelessness, until Newsom swept in to eat their lunch on the issue.
Meanwhile, one can often go for weeks without encountering the word “homeless” in the Guardian.
Looks to me like Newsom cares more about the homeless than the city’s smug, self-righteous political left.

Taking the Bull By the Tail (SF Examiner, July 23, 2003)
From: Rob Anderson
To: letters@sfexaminer.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003
Subject: Lunch Time
Editor:
Gavin Newsom is young, handsome, successful, and has a beautiful wife. As if that wasn’t bad enough, he then swooped in and ate the left’s lunch on the homeless issue, which gives him a well-deserved leg up in the race for mayor.
City progressives need to take the bull by the tail and look facts in the face: they were guilty of political negligence on the homeless issue. Instead of carping and obstructionism, they should join with a clear majority of city voters to do something serious about homelessness.

Congratulations to Newsom
From: Rob Anderson
To: Gavin Newsom
Sent: December 18, 2003
Subject: The Progressive Opposition
Gavin:
Congratulations on your victory. You earned it with your precocious political maturity coupled with boldness on the homeless issue. If Gonzalez had entered the race with the announcement of a serious progressive alternative to Care Not Cash, he might have won. As it is, like most progressives, he still seems clueless on the issue.
You may be fortunate in your opposition, a smug collection of dim bulbs and the self-righteous. The birdbrains at the Guardian will soon be touting public power again, as if nothing has changed. And Chris Daly will continue to define what I call Punk Progressivism---Critical Mass, the pie throwers, "peace" demonstrators who trash the downtown area, etc.
And if Gonzalez continues to play gotcha as board president, he'll discredit himself as an obstructionist (why did he think voting on the airport deal would have been a tough call for you? Dumb.)
They seem to believe in their own propaganda, that you are a Willie Brown clone. I saw how uncomfortable Brown was when you gave your kickoff speech; he had a sullen look on his face when you implied what a failure his administration had been in several areas, especially homelessness.
Here's a suggestion: why not dust off Matt's capital transfer tax as a source of revenue? By doing so, you could eat the left's lunch yet again, thus driving them crazier and further isolating them. Nixon went to China; Newsom could raise taxes on the rich in SF!