Wednesday, November 09, 2005


On Tuesday, San Francisco voted to ban military recruiters in city schools and voted against a state proposition regarding parental notification on abortions

The outcome of Tuesday's election was a good way of determining San Francisco's hostility towards families and the military. San Francisco County voted overwhelmingly against California's Proposition 73 which would have have required parental notification before a minor tried to obtain an abortion.

Here were the results of Prop. 73 in San Francisco Country

YES: 32,923 20.5
NO: 126,993 79.5

Here is how California voted state-wide:

YES: 3,130,062 47.4
NO: 3,465,629 52.6

What is curious is that lost in the shuffle are the media reports from a few months ago that detailed the appallingly low number of children in San Francisco. This article from the Associated Press is typical...

[AP:] SAN FRANCISCO—Anne Bakstad and Ed Cohen are starting to feel as if their family of four is an endangered species in San Francisco. Since the couple bought a house five years ago, more than a dozen families in their social circle have left the city for cheaper housing, better schools or both.

The goodbyes are so frequent that Carina, age 4 1/2, wants to know when she is going to move, too. Eric, 2 1/2, misses Gus, his playmate from across the street. “When we get to know people through our kids, we think to ourselves, `Are they renters or owners? Where do they work?’ You have to figure out how much time to invest in people,” Bakstad said. “It makes you feel like, `Where is everyone going? Stay with us!’”

A similar lament is being heard in San Francisco’s half-empty classrooms, in parks where parents are losing ground to dog owners, and in the corridors of City Hall. San Francisco has the smallest share of small-fry of any major U.S. city. Just 14.5 percent of the city’s population is 18 and under.

It is no mystery why U.S. cities are losing children. The promise of safer streets, better schools and more space has drawn young families away from cities for as long as America has had suburbs.

But kids are even more scarce in San Francisco than in expensive New York (24 percent) or in retirement havens such as Palm Beach, Fla., (19 percent), according to census estimates.

A vast swath of an urban community is indifferent or willfully ignorant of the concerns that parents have and the problems that families are facing. It's almost as if San Francisco is saying, "children are not welcome."

Another indication of the lack of San Francisco's lack of compassion for the young is the cynical ploy to keep military recruiters out of San Francisco schools and colleges.

Proposition I, dubbed "College Not Combat," would oppose the presence of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges. However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing federal funding.

Proposition I, "College Not Combat"

YES: 65,185 58% (in favor of ban)
NO: 47,275 42%

It smacks of a cynical ploy because these voters are projecting their own personal antipathy towards the military (and it's not Iraq, it's been there for at least 4 decades). However, the very kids they are trying to "protect" are being denied opportunities and the sacrosanct "choice" that liberals have worked so hard to protect in other areas (see: abortion). The funny part is how city run colleges are exempt lest they lose precious federal funding - talk about compromising your principles! As for denying job opportunities for San Francisco students, what's next? Are companies like ExxonMobil, WalMart and McDonald's going to be denied the opportunity to hire these San Francisco students?

The voters of San Francisco has sent a mesage loud and clear: Children should neither be seen nor heard.

1. May 25, 2005 SacUnion.com: Where Have San Francisco's Children Gone?

2. Nov 8, 2005 SF Gate.com: Early approval for San Francisco handgun, military recruiting bans

3. Nov 8, 2005 California State-wide results

4. Nov 8, 2005 San Francisco County Returns

Update, check out: Michelle Malkin on the San Fran gun ban.



In the November 14 issue of the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol's editorial is entitled, "Fight Back, Mr. President". Kristol wrote,

Bush has been in a similar position before. We forget how much trouble he seemed to be in early in 2004. Then Kerry was nominated, and the Bush team focused the country on the real choices before it. In the contrast, Bush did fine. Bush once again needs to fight for support for his policies and to draw a contrast between his policies and those of his opponents. If you do not defend yourself against your critics, your political standing is going to erode. Bush owes it to himself, to his supporters, to the soldiers fighting in Iraq, and to the country to fight back.

The Galvin Opinion gave the White House similar unsolicited advice one month ago. Here is what I wrote in an October 14 article, "The Vision Thing: Bush, Conservatims and Ennui...

Instead of big government "compassionate conservatism", President Bush must remind us that it's the other way around - conservatism is compassionate because it doesn't believe in big government
"The Bush presidency is at a low ebb, what to do? As Pope John Paul II said, "Do not be afraid!" Fight back! [Ed: emphasis added] Grab the keys and drive the car in a different direction, in the right direction - in a rightward direction. President Bush must no longer govern in a way that reflects his fears. He must no longer govern in a way that disappoints his base. He must no longer govern in a way that sells America short.
He should address the country from the Oval Office and lay out a bold, unapologetic conservative plan. What does he say to us from behind his desk? His Oval Office address demands that Congress tighten its belt or he will veto bills until he gets a spending bill that wouldn't make a fatted pig blush. He tells the country that there is a light at the end of the tunnel when it comes to Iraq and that the country should be proud of the job our soldiers have done. He reminds us that Afghanistan is a success story in the making when just four years ago it was the loneliest place on earth. He reminds us that the economy has been doing fantastic considering all that we have been up against since 9/11. He agrees with us that while America always welcomes new residents with open arms, immigration laws must be enforced. He assures us that a family is the most valuable of institutions and he knows how parents worry over and have ambitious dreams for their children. And in a charming way that reminds us of the sunny disposition of Ronald Reagan, President Bush tells us there are many reasons to believe we are headed in the right track and that our best days are ahead of us.

November 14, 2005: William Kristol: Fight Back, Mr. President

October 14, 2005: Thomas Galvin: The Vision Thing: Bush, Conservatims and Ennui

Update, other blogs commenting on Kristol are: The Monroe Doctrine, Jo's Cafe, Right Wing News, and The Logic Lifeline.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?