Colin,
Thanks for the thought, but no worries. As it turned out, not only was I not considered for endorsement by the GOP, but I did not even get to speak to them. They voted not to hear from the two candidates (including myself) who had indicated in their questionnaire responses that they supported Prop. J, the local ballot measure to impeach Bush and Cheney. Of course I knew they wouldn't like that response, but the questionnaire asked my position on the measure, and I believe in being honest. So I just added an addendum noting:
"For what it's worth, I also supported impeaching President Clinton, and will in all likelihood support impeaching the next U.S. president as well, because all recent presidents have violated the Constitution right and left. I think that anyone who takes an honest look at the Constitution, and at the present state of the federal government for at least the past half century, has to admit this is true. As a candidate, I swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and I take that oath seriously."
Just when the event was getting going, the issue was raised that two candidates had said they support the ballot measure calling for impeachment. GOP Chair Mike DeNunzio and a couple other members of the committee made strong speeches against hearing from these two candidates, and the committee unanimously voted (without ever identifying us by name) not to let us speak to them. I'm not even sure that all the committee members had read entirely through their lengthy packets, since they had not received them until after midnight the previous night and endorsers sometimes wait to look at a candidate's responses until hearing from that candidate. So it's possible that some of them voted without any knowledge of the note above that accompanied my response.
Ironically, just a couple minutes before this matter came up DeNunzio gave a little speech implicitly dissing the Democrats by saying how the Republican Central Committee, unlike some others, is open to hearing from candidates of all parties, how this shows they are more open and respectful, yadda yadda.
To add insult to injury, my opponent, incumbent Supervisor Bevan Dufty -- who was not on the schedule and said he was not seeking the Republican Party's endorsement but showed up at the meeting anyway -- was invited to speak to the committee for a few minutes before any of the other candidates, because he apparently had a fundraiser to go to. (I don't know, but suspect they have not asked Dufty his position on impeachment -- DeNunzio didn't answer my question about this when I asked him later.) After Dufty spoke, a couple people on the committee, including DeNunzio, voiced their appreciation for the Democrat, with nary a critical note.
It's a pity that Dufty wasn't around later to hear DeNunzio's question in the form of a speech (it shot right through the committee's own rule limiting questions from members to 20 seconds) in which he berated District 6 candidates Rob Black and Matt Drake, asking at some length how they could be Democrats when the Democratic Party has been destroying San Francisco.
The bottom line is that despite the GOP chair's nice words of inclusiveness, it looks like they do have a litmus test of their own (unless perhaps you are an incumbent Supervisor). Whatever else one may say about the Democrats, at least they let you know about theirs in advance, before you go to the trouble of filling out their questionnaire and showing up to their meeting.
Love & liberty,
<<< starchild >>>
Candidate for Supervisor, District 8