Friday, January 5, 2007
News / Clout City "Politics ain't beanbag"
Posted by Mick Dumke on Fri, Jan 5, 2007 at 6:44 PM
Dorothy Brown’s campaign has worked hard to present her as a symbol of civil rights and reform. So far, other black leaders haven’t given her much backup, but the good news for her campaign is that it’s getting easier to find people to contrast her with.
First, on the day he backed out of a mayoral campaign, Jesse Jackson Jr. refused to rule out endorsing Mayor Daley, even though he’d spent the previous two years blasting his leadership. A couple of weeks later, former Daley opponent Bobby Rush said he thought Daley had done a great job and deserved another term, and a pair of wealthy black businesswomen held a Daley fund-raiser. Yesterday, reverend and state senator James Meeks—who spent his summer ripping Daley’s educational leadership as racist—appeared with the mayor and dismissed the notion of backing anyone else in the February election. “I probably won’t be endorsing anyone who can’t win,” Meeks told reporters.
After each of the earlier developments, Brown’s campaign called press conferences in which she criticized the support for Daley, blaming him for corruption, educational inequality, and inadequate supervision of rogue police officers. Even in leveling protests, though, Brown emphasized her own credentials as an attorney and CPA, and she seemed to take pains to present herself as professional, conservative, and altogether collected.
As expected, Brown held another press conference today to respond to Meeks's remarks. But this time, whether she was overtaken by emotion or overtaken by a campaign plan to show some, it was a different Dorothy Brown talking to reporters.
“The comments by reverend and state senator James Meeks were disappointing and insulting, given my record of accomplishments and the kind of campaign I’m running,” she said. “I’m hurt and I’m incensed. The remarks disrespected me as a woman and as an African-American. I have worked hard—”
And then she stopped. At first some of us wondered if she had lost her place in the notes before her. Brown looked right at the camera, looked down, and looked up again. “Growing up poor, with uneducated parents—”
By this point, it was clear that she was crying.
“That’s OK, clerk,” said press secretary John Davis.
“All right, Dorothy,” said campaign manager Paul Davis. “Just take your time.”
Several long moments passed before Brown resumed. She was obviously feeling bad, but I for one couldn’t tell if it was prompted by the memory of her parents or the images of other black leaders holding photo-ops with Daley.
“I had parents who taught me the value of hard work and education, who taught me to stand up for the downtrodden—that’s why I’m in this race,” Brown said. Pointing out that she’s a countywide office-holder, just as Daley was when he was first elected mayor, Brown declared that she was perfectly qualified to run the city. Then she not-so-subtly questioned the civil rights credentials of her latest doubter. “For Reverend Meeks to make these statements says that you can’t enjoy the dream to be judged by the content of your character and not the color of your skin.”
The reporters in the room didn’t buy all that, but they didn’t exactly fire away at Brown, either. The first few questions were softballs. One reporter said he thought Meeks had spoken casually, offhandedly, and may not have meant any disrespect. Another pointed out that Meeks hadn’t actually said he was endorsing Daley. Others noted that it’s in many ways an old story—nobody wants to take the risk of alienating the incumbent mayor.
Just as, this afternoon at least, nobody seemed to have anything bad to say about Dorothy Brown—except that some people out there don’t believe she can win. In fact, the toughest question of the afternoon, posed by a veteran sitting on a table to the side, had nothing to do with Meeks or Daley: “You know, Harold Washington once said, ‘Politics ain’t beanbag.’ Do you think you have thick enough skin to do this?”
Brown gripped the podium and gazed back at him. Maybe she couldn’t get outraged—not on public display, at least—but she could show everyone that she was serious. “Yes,” she said. “I’m in this race to win it.”
Comments (6)
Showing 1-6 of 6
like
dislike
Dorothy Brown should understand that Meeks/Jackson Jr/Rush know what woman go threw in there daily lives. because all three are whores for Mayor Daley....Dorothy 65% of registered voters sit home everytime Daley runs, Your Job, get those voters out and you'll kick Daley's flat ass!
Meeks does not even live in Chicago, so he cannot even vote in the Mayor's race. Check the County Assessor's and the County Recorder of Deeds website and you will see he lives in South Holland.
==PROPOSAL FOR AN ELECTION EXPERIMENT== This may not be the proper forum for this, but I will state my 'idea'/'proposal' anyway, and see if anyone is intrigued by my reasoning. I hold the opinion that it has been a very, very long time since we, the citizens of these United States, have truly and honestly been represented by our so-called 'public servants'. While it can be said that a certain small percentage of any given area's population is well and generously served by their elected officials,(at the financial and social expense of the area's 'common', politically unconnected citizens),for the most part, our elected officials are motivated by three basic principles: get power, keep power and use that power to gain wealth, for themselves and for those of like mind. I assert that the vast majority of voters are poorly served by the 'powers that be', in all areas of their daily lives. It is obvious that many 'public servants' define themselves as being those individuals who are served BY the public. This sad state of affairs is the result of simple mathematics. If one determines, in any given area,(ie. city, county, state and federal),the total number of citizens who are qualified to cast a vote, one finds that perhaps 50%, more or less, of that number are actually registered to vote; further,in any given election, one finds that typically between 50% - 60% of those registered don't even bother to make the effort to actually cast their vote(s). Thus, all that is required to win a 2 person race is 51% of the votes actually cast, effectively meaning that a mere 26% of the total number of citizens qualified to vote are determining who is elected. In a race of more than 2 contestants, the percentage needed to win becomes even lower than 26%. It is a puzzling mystery why the 2 major political parties, the Dumbocrats and the Retardicans, continue to strongly resist the establishment of additional political parties, though one sees occasional use of 'shill' candidates by both major parties. So, I propose a little experiment, to be conducted in both the smallest, local level elections, (ie. town, city, county, township, village,etc.), as well as in the larger level elections, (ie. state and federal), an experiment which is designed to accomplish several goals and answer several questions,(besides the obvious one, of seeing if enough people/voters will get off their butts and choose to participate in this experiment!). Basically, my question is this: what would happen if enough voters choose, in every election, both primary and general, to cast their votes by adhering to the following rules, completely disregarding all factors commonly used by voters to make their decisions on who to vote for, and simply casting their vote(s) by applying these rules/formula: * 1) Determine which candidates are the INCUMBENTS and DO NOT vote for any of them. * 2) If there are only two candidates running for any given office, all that the voter MUST know is which one is the INCUMBENT, then vote for the CHALLENGER candidate. * 3) If there are MORE than two candidates vying for a given office, determine if the incumbent is listed FIRST, and IF THIS IS SO, then vote for the challenger candidate who is listed LAST. * 4) If the incumbent is NOT listed FIRST, then vote for the challenger candidate who IS listed FIRST. * 5) If no incumbent is running for office, always vote for the LAST candidate listed. Remember to COMPLETELY DISREGARD all impulses to concern yourself with the specific persons who you are voting for and/or the specific persons you are not voting for and/or the specific incumbents who will, should enough voters in any given election participate in this experiment, be losing their jobs. Remember,also,that the issues don't matter, policies don't matter, individual candidates' personal charm/attractiveness does not matter..................... nothing matters other than adhering to the 5 rules stated above. If enough voters in any given election participate in this experiment, the result should be that a whole lot of incumbents will be voted out of office. What reaction(s), on the part of politicians and their cronies, will this stimulate? If enough voters CONTINUE to participate in this experiment during the next several election cycles, thus keeping any specific person from holding office for more than a single term, will those non-politically connected individuals who would like to sincerely serve their fellow citizens by holding public office, but have determined that their chances of being elected are slim-to-none, now find that they have a reasonably decent chance of succeeding in holding public office? Will the 'professional politicians' eventually find other lines of work and abandon trying to gain and hold power over their fellow citizens, (since it's difficult to establish power,influence and control in just a single term in office)? Will the majority of those citizens who do gain public office now be honest, ethical, hard-working and intelligent individuals, who seek office to actually serve the electorate, (since the traditional motivations of power, influence and wealth will effectively no longer be available)? Will these new, honest candidates, now encouraged to run for office, alter the usual dynamics of 'campaigning'? And in what ways? As the reader may surmise, this experiment is designed to disrupt the decades-old flow of bullshit, which has passed for so long as democracy; bullshit both by the politicians and bullshit by the voting public's failure to effectively participate in their own governing. The above experiment should be conducted in all political contests; Administrative, Executive, Legislative and Judicial. The rule to remember is: WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT. The 5 rules above are designed to mathematically ensure that the maximum number of votes are cast in such a way as to be effective in denying all elected officials more than one term in office; to prove, by the only means those smugly in power ever understand, that the voters actually determine who holds public office, and that those presently holding said office(s) have, for way too long, held the vast majority of their constituents in contempt, evidenced not by their words, but by their deeds. Keep in mind that this experiment I am proposing is not meant to be a solution to our present social, economic and political disparities, but more as a catalyst for positive change in the attitudes of those who claim to represent ALL citizens' best interests, instead of the present predominance of their representing only the interests of the chosen few. To paraphrase one of our past presidents, who once said: * You may fool SOME of the people ALL of the time * You may fool ALL of the people SOME of the time * But you cannot fool ALL of the people, ALL of the time The sad reality is that you need only to fool just the right number of people, at just the right time, to attain power and control over the many.
Latest in Bleader
-
Blackhawks deep-sixed
The Blackhawks lose their sixth straight game
- Feb 9, 2012
-
Mart kills Art Chicago
Merchandise Mart cancels Art Chicago
- Feb 9, 2012
-
More I Saw Yous!
Missed connections from Reader readers
- Feb 9, 2012
- More »
Author Archives
-
Our first-ever awards for 'achievement' in local politics
Honoring the deeds and misdeeds of 2011 at the city, county, and state level
- Dec 29, 2011
-
When picking out gifts, don't do what Mo did
Reminder to self: Don't do what Mo did
- Dec 16, 2011
-
Aldermen examine new protest rules before doing what they're told
Somehow Mayor Emanuel gets his way again
- Jan 17, 2012
- More »
