Click here to subscribe FREE to Ray Hanania's Columns
Right from the Middle: Continuation of the beginning of the end
The progressive Democrats’ San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin was recalled by an overwhelming vote of 60 percent. He was the poster-boy of the progressive Democrats, one of a number of district attorneys heavily funded by George Soros.
By William O. Lipinski
Several months ago in the most liberal city in the country, in the most liberal state in the union, progressive Democrats suffered a significant defeat.
Three progressive Democrats on the San Francisco school board were recalled overwhelmingly.
The campaign against them stated they were more interested in renaming schools than they were in getting students back into the classrooms.
There were 44 schools that they wanted to change the names. Among them were Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, Hoover, and Feinstein.
It sure is understandable why they were recalled. But then on May 31st, the progressive Democrats suffered a catastrophic defeat.
The progressive Democrats’ San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin was recalled by an overwhelming vote of 60 percent. He was the poster-boy of the progressive Democrats, one of a number of district attorneys heavily funded by George Soros.
Soros is the Hungarian born billionaire who funds extreme left wing progressive Democratic candidates for District Attorney.
His candidates have been successful in the following locations Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Dallas, Fairfax County Virginia, and at least 10 other locations. It is estimated that Soros has spent over $30 million funding Progressive Democrats for the offices of District Attorney in just the past couple of years.
Chesa Boudin was the icon for progressive Democrats for a number of reasons.
Here are a few of those reasons: he eliminated cash bail; he stopped prosecuting violent teenagers as adults; he brought nine criminal cases against police officers for misconduct, created a wrongful convictions unit in the district attorney’s office; and one case he filed charges against a police officer for striking a person with a baton.
He called the baton striking case the first ever use-of-force case against an on-duty police officer.
Boudin also announced that his office would no longer seek charges for contraband found during pre-textual traffic stops and would not charge status enhancements that increase jail sentences,
such as those imposed for gang membership.
And last, but by far not least, Boudin was viewed by many in the progressive democratic community as a champion for the oppressed and a severe critic of law enforcement.
Those that supported the recall listed some of their reasons as: he acted more like a a public defender then a public prosecutor; he released far too many suspects with a history of previous convictions who then went on to commit more crimes.
Boudin was criticized by a Superior Court Judge for having an office that was disorganized, inadvertent, and marred by constant turnover and managerial reorganization. And, he was criticized for his lack of prosecution of drug-related crimes.
Boudin justified his position on not arresting drug dealers, arguing that most of them were from Honduras and if convicted would have to be deported back to their country.
His office has also been criticized failing to present evidence on time in criminal cases, thereby allowing the alleged criminals to walk free.
And finally, his office has been criticized for intentionally hiding evidence, thereby once again allowing alleged criminals to walk free.
His office strongly denied this was done intentionally.
Objective, political journalists and commentators in California believed the following reasons were why the recall was successful.
Boudin lacked a mandate to implement such a radical program. And, the citizens of San Francisco believed his overall policies contributed very significantly to making San Francisco a more dangerous city.
Boudin’s image was that he was on the side of the criminals while the police he prosecuted and criticized were on the side of law abiding citizens.
Criminal activity had shifted away from touristy areas to residential areas. More and more people were getting their cars stolen, and more and more apartments and homes were broken into.
Citizens saw fewer and fewer prosecutions. Hate crimes against the city’s Asian residents had grown enormously.
And finally, the city’s small business community believed they were under attack from the city’s criminal element, and there was no prosecution of these individuals.
Democrats across our land of liberty have taken this as a wakeup call to try to reign in progressive elements of the Democratic Party.
They know now these progressives have gone too far to the Left. Even liberal San Francisco is rebelling.
I wish the Democratic Party well in this attempt to save the party, but it may be too late.
(William O. Lipinski served in Congress representing the 5th and 3rd Congressional District from 1982 until 2005. Email Bill at [email protected]. This column originally appeared in the Des Plaines Valley News newspaper group.)
Lipinski writes the "Right from the Middle" Column twice each month.
Born in Chicago, Cook County, Ill and graduated fromSt. Patrick High School, Chicago, Ill., 1956; attended Loras College, Dubuque, Iowa, 1956-1957; United States Army Reserves, 1961-1967.
Lipinski was elected alderman, Chicago, Ill., city council, 1975-1982; He was a delegate to: the Democratic National Midterm Convention, 1974; Democratic National Convention, 1976 and 1984; Illinois state Democratic convention, 1977.
He was elected as a Democrat to the Ninety-eighth and to the ten succeeding Congresses (January 3, 1983-January 3, 2005)
His email is [email protected]
- Right from the Middle: Real estate industry problems weaken Communist China - February 3, 2024
- Right from the Middle: Programs based on Diversity, Equity and Inclusiveness undermine merit in America - January 26, 2024
- Right from the Middle: Both candidates for President are lacking - December 27, 2023
