In serving as the self-anointed standard bearer for progressivism, The San Francisco Bay Guardian does well to never exactly explain what progressivism is. In this way, progressivism merely becomes whatever the Guardian deems it to be. If progressivism is whatever the Guardian says it is, then it's easy for the Guardian to support all that's progressive.
Take, for example, the paper's serious call for Dennis Kucinich to move here and run against Nancy Pelosi. There are numerous reasons to laugh this one off (apart from Kucinich's eerie resemblance to the Keebler elf).
There's the Guardian's claim that Kucinich is the perfect
"ideological fit for San Francisco." Sure -- if grandstanding,
leftier-than-thou politics that accomplish nothing in the long run fit
that description (wait a minute...).
Also, it warrants mentioning that
the people of San Francisco keep electing and reelecting Pelosi by gaudy
margins. "Ideological fits" aside, that has to stand for something.
Finally, it warrants mentioning that carpetbagging was seen as disgraceful when it came to Jane Kim. But for Kucinich? Don't be ridiculous!
If you're not going to bother to define "progressivism," why define "consistency"?
Follow us on Twitter at @TheSnitchSF