Page One

To the Editor: 

We are blessed to live on an obscure, quiet little block that is not a battleground in the 2002 mayoral campaign. We watch baseball and eat dinner, uninterrupted by politicians or their earnest canvassers. Since we screen our calls, they're not going to get us that way, either.  

So to us, the mayoral campaign has been a battle of the brochure. Judging it on that basis, it's not been a very inspiring campaign, but it has run true to the personalities of the two candidates and to that dreary battle between liberal and left. 

Tom Bates sent us a big brochure of happy yellows and blues that included a list of all the problems he would solve and then added a card we could mail in, in case he had forgotten to mention anything. It was a very progressive “process,” catchall approach that rendered the thing almost meaningless. Recently we received an equally unforgettable flyer from him about, we think, education.  

He comes across as a moderate lefty, experienced and goodhearted. But it's all a little rote, and you wonder if maybe he lacks a real fire in the belly for this particular race and perhaps for the job itself.  

A recent mailing from incumbent Shirley Dean goes for the throat and doesn't let go. There are a couple of nice pictures of nice people who are supporting her. But they're lost in the spooky, blood-red lettering, the grey-patina pictures of dilapidated housing, and the dire warnings that Bates will return the city to the clutches of wild-eyed radicals, some of whose more flamboyant moments are mentioned – no matter how ancient or of dubious relevance.  

It's fear-mongering, something Dean has never been able to resist. And, once again, it overshadows her good works and her commendable urge to, at some point, just get things done. It also foolishly cedes the high ground to her opposition, some of whom can be just as nasty. 

James Day 

Berkeley