[momtothree]

I saw the pictures... I think I just threw up a little. Personally, I’d rather live in a cave than that God forsaken heck hole.

[freedumb2003]

You can’t even buy a damn Happy Meal.

You can’t change your UNDERWEAR without Nanny State checking (and taxing) you.

And they wonder why people with the most to lose from these policies (those with kids) flee?

It ain’t housing, folks — it is liberal insanity.

[Bryan24]

When God gives America an enema, he’ll stick the hose in San Fransisco.

[Marie]

Those boobs (moobs?) make absolutely no anatomical sense.

[roadcat]

My family got out of SF in the early 1970s. It was because of busing. They wanted to bus my little sister across the city to a school in an almost all-black ghetto neighborhood. We went to neighborhood meetings with City officials and they wouldn't listen to the concerned parents. Our existing school was two blocks from our house in the Mission district, and was racially mixed. Made no sense to send my little sister across the city, so my family moved to the family-friendly suburbs.

In the sixth grade during the early 1960s I was bussed to a half-black school near a ghetto in SF. It sucked big-time, but I only had to do it for one year. I couldn't see my sister doing it from second grade. Unless you're rich, the city of SF is a hell-hole for children, and is getting worse because of evil liberal controls.

[Straight Vermonter]

Why wouldn't people not want to raise their kids in SF?

[pallis]

The whole thing seems a bit queer to me.

[bunkerhill7]

Lombard Street is not straight.

[KosmicKitty]

Adult men performing fellatio on each other on the street in broad daylight with others applauding the act.

Maybe, just maybe, that may be why no one wants to rise their kids in San Francisco!!

[Jeff Chandler]

San Francisco is becoming God’s waiting room for aging queens.

[ScottinVA]

Perhaps the Lord’s way of removing children from the effects of what’s coming to that liberal, fag-infested hellhole.

[Judges Gone Wild]

Besides the perv factor, SF is an expensive city in which to live. It’s not affordable for young families.

[Vision]

They don’t need more families, just ship in more homosexuals.

[bert]

The real reason is AIDS in elementary schools brought to school by kids with two daddies

[rogue yam]

San Francisco is expensive. It is crowded and dangerous. People smoke pot in public constantly. There are lots of criminals and crazy people hanging around. Many neighborhoods are quite dirty. The sodomy and fornication are very arrogant and public. The public schools are terrible. Public transportation is expensive, unreliable, dirty, and dangerous. It is not safe for kids to be anywhere in public without adult chaperones. San Francisco is a terrible place to raise kids.

[Lancey Howard]

Heh, I’ve always said that deliberately taking a child into San Fransicko constitutes child abuse.
The story says a lot about the parents who remain there.

[SuziQ]

Hmmm. Might also have something to do with the fact that homosexuals are moving in, and they don’t usually have kids. They are the ones who can afford the exorbitant housing costs in SF.

[raygun]

Gee, perhaps that San Francisco Considers Ban on Goldfish as Pets to Prevent Their 'Inhumane Suffering' Nah, that can't be it. Perhaps a clue can be found using a simple search phrase 'San Francisco bans' in a internet search engine yields the following:

• July 8, 2010: San Francisco Bans Sugary Soda from Vending Machines
• April 27, 2010: San Francisco bans city workers from most Arizona business travel
• May 6, 2009: San Francisco bans loitering in front of nightclubs
• January 7, 2009: San Francisco Bans Alcohol Ads
• July 29, 2008: San Francisco Bans Tobacco Sales At Pharmacies
• January 30, 2008: San Francisco Bans Trans Fats
• August 13, 2007:San Francisco Bans Plastic Bag use in Stores
• June 23, 2007: San Francisco Mayor Bans the Bottle
• June 6, 2007: To Keep Its Parakeets Wild, San Francisco Bans Handouts
• April 13, 2007: San Francisco Bans Styrofoam for To-Go Containers
• July 31, 2006: San Francisco Bans Bisphenol-A in Some Applications
• November 29, 2006: San Francisco Bans JROTC
• November 19, 2006: San Francisco prepares to ban certain chemicals in products for kids
• January 26, 2005: San Francisco bans smoking in public places
• April 27, 2004: San Francisco Bans Irradiated Food in Schools
• January 7, 2003: San Francisco bans Segways on sidewalks, bike paths
• October 2, 2001: San Francisco bans filters in libraries
• July 26, 2000: San Francisco Bans Weight-Based Discrimination

I cannot wait to see what San Francisco comes up with next. Maybe they'll ban sitting on the sidewalk between 11 P.M. & 7 A.M. No, wait, they've already done that. Will it ban eating with your mouth open? Will it criminalize jogging too slow (or perhaps too fast)? Will it require all males between 16 and 40 to grow their hair in the style of Tim Lincecum? Maybe it will ban earthquakes?

That's what's so wonderful about living in liberal utopia: liberty being guaranteed by a plethora of prohitions.

[citizen]

I LOVE seeing this article. It is very disingenuous, for sure. But the fact that they are exploring the reasons for families fleeing SF simply says what is happening: Families are indeed fleeing SF and for good, moral reasons. Who would want to raise their children at Ground Zero in the Land of Fruits and Nuts?? In Bathhouse Central?? With the pampered homeless defacating on the sidewalk or on your property??

Go ahead, Gavin. Make your ridiculous excuses that even you do not believe. SF: The Homeland of the Entitled Vagarant/Bum/Panhandler....the lazy dregs of life. Put that in your C of C brochures.

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

Google Zombie Folsum Street Fair: Warning - extremely graphic and definitely not safe for work.