Breed Accuses “Desperate” Olague Campaign of Posting Attack Bills in D5

Written by Luke Thomas. Posted in News, Politics

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Published on September 27, 2012 with 21 Comments

As many as 20 negative poster/bills have been posted in District 5 attacking candidate London Breed. Photo via Facebook.

By Luke Thomas

September 27, 2012

London Breed, a candidate running for the District 5 seat in November, today accused the campaign to elect appointed District 5 Supervisor Christina Olague of posting negative attack bills in the District.

“You can be sure, this is the first in what will be a series of escalating attacks from the clearly frightened and desperate Olague campaign,” Breed said in a press statement.

As many as 20 bills, which highlight colorful remarks made by Breed to Fog City Journal last month, remarks reprinted in the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Bay Guardian – have been posted on light poles and bus stop shelters “within a four block radius” of the Lower Haight area of the District, Breed told FCJ in a follow-up interview.

Breed said she is “absolutely sure” the Olague campaign is responsible for posting the attack bills.  “I wouldn’t say it if I wasn’t.”

“I know it is [the Olague campaign],” Breed added without providing specifics. “It is clear that the current supervisor is compromised. She’s not for the residents.  She’s for Willie Brown, Rose Pak and those who want to have complete control over this Board of Supervisors and the policy decisions of this city.  We need an independent supervisor.  Whether they vote for me or anyone else, it is critical that voters make their voices heard and they do not vote to put the current supervisor back in that seat.”

Olague was appointed to the D5 seat by Mayor Ed Lee following her co-chairship of the controversial ‘Run, Ed, Run’ campaign and former District 5 Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi’s election to Sheriff.

Enrique Pearce, a consultant working on the Olague campaign, refuted Breed’s claim.

“This is ridiculous,” Pearce said in an email response.  “The Olague campaign had nothing to do with this juvenile flyer. For months, our campaign has been the subject of unfair attacks.  We challenge each candidate to campaign on his or her own record of experience and vision for District 5. Everything else is just a distraction.”

“It’s sad that London Breed is using these flyers as a basis to level even more personal attacks against Christina Olague,” Pearce added.  “But I have to hand it to her, she’s quite an original.”

Luke Thomas

Luke Thomas is a former software developer and computer consultant who proudly hails from London, England. In 2001, Thomas took a yearlong sabbatical to travel and develop a photographic portfolio. Upon his return to the US, Thomas studied photojournalism to pursue a career in journalism. In 2004, Thomas worked for several neighborhood newspapers in San Francisco before accepting a partnership agreement with the, a news website formerly covering local, state and national politics. In September 2006, Thomas launched The BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News, New York Times, Der Spiegel, San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Magazine, 7x7, San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Weekly, among other publications and news outlets, have published his work. Thomas is a member of the Freelance Unit of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, TNG-CWA Local 39521 and is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:


Comments for Breed Accuses “Desperate” Olague Campaign of Posting Attack Bills in D5 are now closed.

  1. Daniele,

       A quote from my cousin, Mark Twain seems relevant …

    “Never argue with an idiot.

    They’ll quickly pull you down to their level.

    And beat you with their experience.”

    Go Giants!


  2. The suspects?  There are many.   It is impossible to know, or even suspect, which District 5 candidate did this.  

    There are seven possible suspects – competing candidates.  There are even more if you consider their supporters.  This could have been executed by an unauthorized and over zealous supporter.

    Regardless, it may backfire and actually gain London Breed more support than it costs her – for all of the same reasons that former two term supervisor Chris Daly enjoyed in his use of fine crafted and provocative language – talk so full of salt, spice and profanity.

    This race is getting more interesting.

    • “It is impossible to know, or even suspect, which District 5 candidate did this.”

      I wouldn’t limit this to any of them.  This could have been done by an already elected politician (or staff) with an agenda of changing the board of supervisors in the direction they want it to go.  It could have been anybody.

      It certainly gives London Breed free advertizement and in some cases politically, there’s no such thing as bad advertizement.  The name sticks in some people’s mind and shallow, uninformed people see that name on the ballot and say “hey, I think I’ll vote for her.  I saw her name on that pole awhile back.  She sounds hot. I liked what she had to say.”

  3. To Ms. Breed, I would only say this:  don’t dish it out, honey, if you can’t take it.  

  4. Red meat eaters,

        I thought it was a classy flyer and it cost me a bundle.    Octomom is in the next one with the caption … ‘I breed for London’.

    Crap, I leave town for a week and I come back to find usurper beetles pushing my pile of dung.

    Is there no integrity left amongst scum bags?

    Go Giants!

    Posey for MVP!


  5. I saw Breed live at a debate.  She was scolded for being vindictive.  She was so immature.  All she could do was trot out her “I grew up in the projects” excuse for why she should be elected.  Bottom of the list.  I find it hard to believe that the AB Toklas Gay Dem club endorsed her. 

    At the same debate, newcomer Thea Selby made the best showing.  She presented concise solutions rather than the same old bla bla “We need to build more housing!” as Julian Davis pointed out. Again.

    I think Thea will get my vote.  The others worth considering (I thought) were Olague and Hope Johnson.  Although Olague didn’t “show” well, I know she “gets” good planing and transportation.

  6. Go ahead District 5 residents. Vote for this, “foul-mouthed, hot headed” fraud if you want to, and you’ll have the pleasure of being taken back 10 years. This woman (London Breed) claims ” desperation” from the Olague campaign, yet she’s the one crying foul,against a tactic that she verbally used in a couple debates, so far. Someone needs to tell Ms. Breed, that this is politics, not who’s most popular on the 10th grade debate team. Grow up. Who cares who put up the flyers. STICK TO THE ISSUES…she can even articulate them. So 1990’s.

  7. Hmmmm, I’m starting to wonder if London might have put them up herself. Just a thought.

  8. I am so disappointed in London Breed. Her campaign strategy has turned into a nasty mudslinging rant. Sorry honey, you lost my vote. Why couldn’t you just keep it clean and run on your own merrits instead of turning it into something that we are all so sick of! No class.

  9. Every one knows that Ace Washington did that flyer. Or a third grader did it.

  10. Who cares about the language? I didn’t care when Daly did it, and I don’t care now. But I guess some people do, so Breed shouldn’t be so shocked when one of her opponents exploits it and makes an issue of it. Maybe Breed and Olague will mutually self-destruct, and D5 will elect an independent progressive like John Rizzo or Julian Davis. 

    • Much as I respect Daly for what he stood for, language matters. If you hurt people while standing for justice, then you aren’t as effective a leader as you could be. That’s a simple fact. Use bad language, or “violent” language if you will at your own peril. Or as MLK once said, best not to be a “victim of violent intent”. If you deplore violence in others or the system, ie violence towards the poor for example in its many forms, then don’t inflict in on others with your words! Learn about this, and you will see that it’s actually a profound thing. If we really strive to influence people for good, and become more unified in the process, then bashing in any form is just more of the same–violence. And it just goes to show how prevalent violence is, when we see it in our leaders who profess to want to do good–even if it is on the language level. It tells me there is something they haven’t “groked”, so to speak.

      • I guess I’m concerned about the substance of one’s policy positions more than about the style of their language. I wouldn’t support Breed, but that’s because she’s not progressive and has been historically close to the Brown machine. But I guess that’s the heart of the matter. She desperately wants to convince people that she’s broken with that history. But she has nothing concrete to demonstrate that, so she thinks throwing out a few curse words will convince people. Sorry London, it doesn’t work that way.

    • “Who cares about the language?  I didn’t care when Daly did it, and I don’t care now.”

      I agree.  I liked the language Daly used.  That was one of the things I liked about him.  He told it like it was and we need more of that.  I’m specifically talking about the sexual language Daly used  (the sheeple call it “dirty words” or “foul language” LOL).  I thought we were all adults here and adults use sexual language when speaking and it can be extremely effective in getting one’s point across.  But of course some delicate people can’t bear to hear sexual words because it doesn’t meet their bourgeois elite standards of “decorum” (translation:  the candidate who uses sexual language doesn’t sound like the typical, stale, stagnant, bought-and-paid-for corporate-bot using cookie-cutter language that all the others use).

      • in the
        end, it’s all flash. what does it really prove? it’s not hard to know how to
        curse. i do it myself. but would i do it while running for office? i prefer


        i liked
        it too, don’t get me wrong, when daly “told it like it is”. i do draw
        the line though, at bashing people whom you have a disagreement with–even if
        you think that person is responsible for doing harm to other people. we live in
        a violent culture, and i think it’s ironic/telling/revealing when people who
        want to be about reducing violence go using it themselves…it doesn’t instill
        confidence in me. it shows they haven’t mastered something that i think is
        important: respect for all people (as in london breed “i don’t do what no
        motherfucking body tells me to do”), and respect for the truth (as in
        olague’s “At this
        point, I have 20 million other priorities. I don’t remember. It’s been too
        f—ing long. How many months has it been?”


        you don’t like Willy Brown’s policies, tell us why. If you’re annoyed about
        Debra Walker’s allegations, saying you “don’t  remember” and that “it’s been too f’’ing long”, in my book, it
        doesn’t look good (nor does saying “I should recuse myself” without an
        explanation as to why). Using the f word might be flashy, but it doesn’t
        convince me. Though I can understand why Olague might be in a tizzy. Tight
        spot. Whatever.

        Guess what I’m saying is you don’t get points for
        throwing a hissy fit. Just give us some truth.

        • “it shows they haven’t mastered something that i think is
          important: respect for all people”

          Well, “all people” don’t deserve respect.  Respect must be earned. 
          Why would someone respect a murderer or a war criminal, as two examples?  There are a lot of sleazy, corrupt, lying, despicable people out there
          and they don’t deserve respect.

          And many people don’t have any respect for the truth, especially corporatist Establishment politicians.  The truth often gets in their way and the same for their partisan supporters.

          • All I’m saying is that I’ve learned to focus on policy, not people. I’ll “attack” those, not the people who push them. I believe people can be ignorant, but I will never attack a person. You can never hope to win them over that way. 
            This is what I always felt was missing in politics: a more spiritual view. I find the “us and them” mentality to ultimately be the underlying problem. But it’s how many of us are conditioned to think. And in my view, it is what promotes violence. 
            I afford all people their dignity–even if they are responsible for policies that hurt, or even hurtful behavior. Not saying I condone hurtful behavior, I just don’t go being violent to a violent person–it’s just more of the same. If they are pushing these policies/behaving a certain hurtful way, I see it as ignorance, which can be overcome by speaking your truth, stating your case, working for peace—what have you.
            If you haven’t managed to convince them, change their views, then it’s you who needs to try harder….my opinion, you don’t have to agree.
            Violence only begets violence…

  11. Well, really: they both use foul language when being interviewed it seems, so isn’t it all a moot point? 
    To see Olague’s language, go here: I'm disappointed when I see this. I won’t even get into the politics surrounding their statements, because that’s irrelevant. It’s not cool to use language like during interviews of all places if you expect to be elected into high office. Hell, it’s not ever wise or cool or intelligent to use language like that if you were being interviewed for the most low-level job.As far as I’m concerned, both these individuals have shot themselves in the foot.

  12. How can you tell when Enrique Pearce is deceiving – watch his mouth move.

    • I think he was being honest: his payment for the posters probably came directly from Rose, not from the Olague campaign.

      •  When did he add that word to his vocabulary