Bush Has Yet to Visit San Francisco

NewsMax ^ | 8/22/05 | NewsMax

[wagglebee]

Every U.S. president in the last 75 years has visited the city of San Francisco, with one exception: George W. Bush.

Now in the fifth year of his presidency, Bush has yet to set foot in San Francisco and has no plans to do so. He’s scheduled a visit to California in the near future, and the city is not on his itinerary, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. San Francisco is the only city among the nation’s 25 largest that Bush has not visited during his presidency. The last president to be a no-show in the City by the Bay was Calvin Coolidge.

The reason, according to the Chronicle: San Francisco is as politically, culturally and geographically distant from the president as anywhere in the U.S.

About 85 percent of the city’s voters cast ballots against Bush in both 2000 and 2004, and the city has voted Democratic in 12 straight presidential elections.

Said Gladys Hansen, curator of the Museum of the City of San Francisco: "He’d be crazy to come.”

[wagglebee]

This is something Bush should certainly be proud of!

[umgud]

Can't blame him. Right now I'd be more proud of France than SF.

[secret garden]

That's why I wouldn't go there either.

[peyton randolph]

He should send Lindsey Graham.

[jbwbubba]

He hasn't gone to Havanna, either.

[Brian328i]

Call me a homophobe--if you must--but I wouldn't go there either.

[South40]

Bush Has Yet to Visit San Francisco

Not true. He was there in 2003.

[Mulch]

Bush has yet to set foot in San Francisco and has no plans to do so.

That makes two of us.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"He should send Lindsey Graham."

---

Only if Lispy Lindsay promised not to return to the Senate (Governor Sanford would name Graham's replacement, and you can bet that it won't be McCain Lite).

[Mr. Mojo]

There are probably more capitalists in Havana than in SF.

[kinghorse]

have they started firing katyusha rockets from the SF suburbs at US Warships yet? I halfway expect this to be an item at some point in my life.

[SaveTheChief]

Where does it say in the Constitution that the President must visit [insert your favorite liberal city/organization here]?

[BunnySlippers]

San Francisco is a beautiful city. It's just the people I can't stand!

[petercooper]

Yes, Pres Bush should go to a place where there are thousands of people like this, begging for money and accosting every passerby.

[satchmodog9]

And I have not gotten my tongue pierced. To both, why would you want to. There is no benefit to either.

[SF Republican]

About 85 percent of the city’s voters cast ballots against Bush - I am very proud to be in that 15%

[longtermmemmory]

I don't want to go anywhere near SF, why would I want the president to visit?

Seems avoiding SF is a good thing.

[sionnsar]

At the link: In San Francisco, members of CODEPINK staged a one-hour protest INSIDE the hotel where Bush was holding his fundraiser. They wore pink ball gowns with sashes reading "Bush Lied", "Jobs and Education, Not War and Occupation" and "Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Investigate Now!"

[wagglebee]

Nope, they're a bunch of pinko freaks, they would probably burn insense and refuse to let the ships dock.

[clintonh8r]

I've been there a couple of times. I doubt I'll ever go back. I prefer not to be where communists, homosexuals, bums, drug addicts, America-haters and limousine liberals (or any combination thereof) are in the majority....