Interim Supervisor (and So-Called Progressive) Christina Olague, Ed Lee, and Stop and Frisk – How Does This Make Sense?

All right, work with me here, people.

1. So-called Progressive Christina Olague worked hard on the RUN ED RUN campaign so that “Interim” Mayor Ed Lee, the San Francisco Republican Party’s choice, would beat actual Progressive John Avalos in the mayoral race last year. So that Ed Lee could try to … promote his stop and frisk approach to law enforcement. So how can Olague be a Progressive if she worked to elect the standing leader of the conservative faction of San Francisco politics?

2. And uh, doesn’t San Francisco already have a stop and frisk policy? I think so! Let’s go to the videotape HTML:

United States v. Hernandez, No. CR 08-0730 WHA (N.D. Calif. 1-6-2011)

San Francisco police officers observed three men whom they believed to be members of the MS-13 gang standing in front of a restaurant. A no-loitering sign was posted in the restaurant window. The officers watched the men for a few minutes, but observed no threatening or gang-related behavior. The officers approached the men to advise them about the no-loitering policy, and despite the lack of any threatening behavior, conducted a pat-down search of each one.”

Uh, doesn’t that sound like a recent instance of stop and frisk? It does to me! But this particular instance was ruled to be unconstitutional. 

So, we have a stop and frisk policy RIGHT NOW in San Francisco, but apparently the SFPD isn’t going far enough with it, in the eyes of Accidental Mayor Ed Lee, anyway, and yet the SFPD ALREADY goes too far with it, like right now.  So how does that make any sense?

All right, here’s your San Francisco stop and frisk answer key:

1. Christina Olague leans to the left in San Francisco politics but she partnered with the dominant political faction, the conservative one, in order to get appointed as Supervisor for District Five for nine years. Of course, that meant that she had to strongly favor the Republican choice over somebody like John Avalos, somebody who would never forward vague unconstitutional-sounding ambiguities as Mayor Ed Lee has recently done with the stop and the frisk. But if she hadn’t done that then there’d be no way she’d ever get elected Supe on her own, so that’s the decision she made.

2. I’m still at a loss on this one.  San Francisco already has a stop and frisk program that already pushes past the limits (at times, anyway, certainly) of what courts are going to allow and yet Ed Lee wants a stop and frisk program. I’m guessing that the murder rate ‘n stuff is way up recently so Ed Lee wants to be able to point to something that he attempted to do about it. IRL, this whole concept was an obvious non-starter from the get-go.  

Thus concludes Interim Supervisor (and So-Called Progressive) Christina Olague, Ed Lee, and Stop and Frisk – How Does This Make Sense?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Interim Supervisor (and So-Called Progressive) Christina Olague, Ed Lee, and Stop and Frisk – How Does This Make Sense?”

  1. maureen daggett says:

    not a mention of Sheriff Mirkarimi and the hearings resume next week.

  2. Rob Anderson says:

    Don’t forget that the people you call conservative are Democrats. Olague used to be a Green, but, with Mirkarimi, Rizzo, and Kim, dumped the Greens after Obama was elected and liberals took over the DCCC, which made being a Democrat fashionable again.

    Olague will have the same problem Juanita Owens had in 2000 against Matt Gonzalez. Recall that Owens was Mayor Brown’s hand-picked candidate against Gonzalez in the run-off, and she was decisively rejected by District 5 voters. Lee’s close embrace of Olague will have a similar outcome.