Hillary Clinton called it a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” Conservatives call it “message discipline.” Others call it the “right-wing noise machine.” Here at we call it “crap.” And from time to time, we will bring their swill to you in our forum called…

The Flush Report

Jon Fleischman over at the FLASHREPORT whines today about the governor signing a bill that every Republican in the state legislature voted against. The title of his post is a bit contradictory “Bipartisan, party of one.”

You would think that a Republican Governor signing legislation that was supported by Democrats would be the model of bi-partisanship. If we were to apply Jon’s standard, the only legislation the Governor would be able to sign would be bills that receive significant bi-partisan support in the legislature. With the current crop of right-wing-nut-jobs in the Senate and Assembly, that just isn’t going to happen.

Yesterday, Governor Schwarzenegger decided that he would ‘stick it in the eye’ of legislative Republicans by signing a bill authored by liberal Democrat Carol Migden of San Francisco, SB 376.

We’ve spoken here before about Schwarzenegger’s “bi-partisan, party of one” and signing this bill is a great example — in the State Senate, EVERY Republican voted against is, and in the State Assembly EVERY Republican voted against is, as did one Democrat. That’s right, SB 376 arrived on Governor Schwarzenegger’s desk WITHOUT A SINGLE LEGISLATIVE REPUBLICAN VOTE.

What does the bill do? In essence it would give the authority to the City Attorney of the County and City of San Francisco to file “unfair competition actions” and “pursue recovery of a civil penalty therefor without authorization from the district attorney.”

Given that particular city’s unique ability to elect total left wing nuts to office, why would we want to give more power to a City Attorney, power that could be used to harass those few businesses still brave enough to operate there?

So Jon, let me get this straight. You oppose the right of voters in San Fransisco to elect who they want as their City Attorney because there are a majority of progressive and liberal minded prople in San Francisco.

Wow, I’ve got to remember that for the next time you and the rest of the right-wing-nuts bring up the will of the voters on such things as Marriage Equality. Apparently the will of the majority is only okay with you if you concur.

It must be Good To Be The King.

You can read the rest of Jon’s drivel HERE, however please FLUSH before you leave:



  1. So the funny part of this, is that the district attorney is elected by exactly the same people as the city attorney in San Francisco because SF is both a city and a county. So, Flash’s argument that SF elects “left wing nuts” isn’t really relevant, as we could elect one of those left wing nuts to DA just as easily as city attorney.

    Furthermore, under the current law, SF’s city attorney already has the power under the population rule (cities greater than 750K, SF’s population is 776733 per the 2000 census). This bill just allows the city attorney to avoid concerns about changing population totals in SF.

    So, this is just clearing up a technicality, and actually changes nothing. So, why is this a big deal, Flash?

  2. Because he is a moron? Because he just wants to slam the Governor as though he were a Liberal? Because he has nothing intelligent to say?

    Take your pick. afterall that is why we’ve established The FLUSHREPORT; so we can see their crap and then FLUSH it down the drain.

    Brian, you did remember to flush and wash your hands, right?

Comments are closed.