Oh, My God! Wendy's Killed Wilbur!

1) I don't think that he is doing either. He is more or less commenting on the sad state of affairs that allows a company to sell such a product and the idea that some people have actually purchased said product.
2) While I agree with what Morford is saying, I'm not sure that I understand what he is saying. He uses some VERY big words in his article. If I were reading this for myself, and not for an assignment, I might have stopped reading after the first paragraph.
3) I think that San Francisco, being a major city that it is, has more than its fair share of yuppies like Morford who would not touch a Baconator (what a terrible name for ANYTHING) with a 10-foot pole. That being said, I think that his style fits.
4) Morford's column would undoubtedly have mixed reactions if it were put in the SJ-R. I can imagine the comments posted in the online edition: people who agree with the idea behind the column, and those who, if only because they need SOMETHING to complain about, will say that if we were to do as Morford suggests and outlaw this type of product, we would be comprimising the very idea that our forefathers had in mind. Maybe they're right. Maybe good ole Ben Franklin was chowing down on an early version of the Baconator during the Constitutional Convention. You never know.
I don't think, for this column at least, that demographics play that big of a role. It could be broken down into those who agree with him; those may agree with the idea, but not with his pretentiousness; those who don't agree at all and think that the Baconator is the best thing since the fried Twinkie; and those who have no idea what he is saying. That being said, if I must choose which demo would work more with Morford's column, it would be the younger demo.