RESULT of ONE PARTY COMPASSION

Unemployment in San Francisco nears ten percent; yet our city supervisors have refused to schedule a hearing on a plan to stimulate jobs, but they will discuss a ban on feeding ducks in city parks. These officials did notinvade City Hall and seize power; they were elected by voters of the ONE PARTY that has controlled City Hall and has set public policy in San Francisco since 1964.

Members of this ONE PARTY extol "San Francisco values;" (fifty pot clubs in 49 sq miles, and bussing students to acheive racial diversity.) They exalt (incessantly) their “compassion” for the needy. AKA liberal guilt epidemic among San Francisco educators, religious leaders and women who envy Sarah Palin for giving birth to a child with Downs Syndrome. In January “SF WEEKLY” published a 4,700 word indictment of the members of this ONE PARTY for what they have done and suggested they take some responsibility:

"San Francisco is...arguably the worst-run big city in America. I never heard anyone say: If only [our city] could be run like San Francisco. Other liberal (cities) wouldn't put up with the dysfunction in San Francisco; says urbanologist, Joel Kotkin." (SF WEEKLY, Jan. 14, 2010, Benjamin Wachs, Joe Eskenaz.)

The voters in this ONE PARTY knowingly have "put up" with mismanagement, deficits and debt, and repeatedly elected candidates who support policies that border on criminality: Sanctuary policies that led to murder; social policies that foster homeless and crime; failed transit policies, and fiscal policies that include a $6.6 billion budget, 27,801 employees- 8,000 paid $100,000 plus benefits. These voters of the ONE PARTY are solely responsible for a $4 billion unfunded liability for retirement benefits that takes funds from needy children, the aged and disabled.

Einstein said: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting different results." In San Francisco the voters of this ONE PARTY continues to prove Einstein is right -liberalism is a mental disorder.

Health Care Reform

Editor,

The election of Scott Brown was not a rejection of health care reform. In

2008 both candidates called for reform, and America agreed. The message from Massachusetts to President Obama is to tell Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid to reach across the aisle and include patient centered options that preserve

choice: Vouchers, portability, group purchases, interstate sales, medical savings accounts and subsidies for pre-existing condition. A bi partisan plan also must include reform of the excessive mal practice lawsuits that add $200 million a year to costs.

America does not need a cradle to grave government take over of one sixth of the economy to make health insurance more affordable and available. Canada and the European Union have that, and very year thousands from these countries came to the US for treatment that is delayed, restricted and denied in these countries -especially to the aged and disabled.

Mike DeNunzio San Francisco

Massachusetts election not a rejection of health care

The election of Scott Brown was not a rejection of health care reform. In 2008 both candidates called for reform, and Americans agreed -the US needs to reform its health care. The message from the Massachusetts election for President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Senate Leader Reid is to reach across the aisle: A credible plan to make health care and insurance more affordable and available must consider patient centered options that preserve choice: They include vouchers, portability, group purchases, interstate sales, medical savings accounts, subsidies for pre-existing conditions, and rules to protect the unborn, the aged, disabled and terminally ill. Moreover, Americans do not want their intelligence insulted; any plan to reduce costs must reform the excessive mal practice lawsuits that force defensive medicine and add $200 million a year to health costs. America does not need or want intrusive bureaucratic government health care; Canadians and Europeans have that and every year thousands come to the US for health treatments that are delayed, restricted or denied in their countries.