Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: Poll: Plurality of Chicago voters favor casino, about half oppose Wrigley Field deal
Posted in:
* This week’s WVON mayoral debate appearance by Sen. James Meeks is something of a racially charged goldmine.
For instance, Meeks claimed during the debate that mayoral opponent Rahm Emanuel kept African-American leaders “out of the White House,” and said of Emanuel, “He’s never done anything for African-Americans.”
There’s more, so watch…
I asked the Meeks campaign twice yesterday to explain the White House allegation, but did not hear back.
* Also, early in the debate, WVON went to a commercial break and left the video microphones on. It’s a bit tough to hear at first, but Meeks privately explains to Carol Moseley Braun about how “When white people were in the [school] system, resources, you name them. Art, music, all of that stuff was going on. When black and brown people are just in the system, they took out everything.” Watch…
It’s not that he’s necessarily wrong. It’s just that the clip may show how much he sees things as a racial issue.
* And a day after saying that women, Asians and Hispanics are “not people who have been discriminated against,” and aren’t “people of color” and therefore should not receive affirmative action benefits, Rev. Sen. James Meeks tried to calm things down a bit yesterday. It didn’t really work.
His first attempt at backtracking was to say that only white women should be excluded from affirmative action programs. But his comment just fanned the flames…
Hedy Ratner, co-president of the Women’s Business Development Center, was already “furious” at Meeks. She argued Thursday that, if anything, the 5 percent set-aside for women “should be higher.”
“Is he saying that this should be an African-American city with policies only for African Americans? I’m surprised that a candidate for mayor who wants to represent the entire city would exclude a majority of its citizens,” she said.
Paul Cerpa, executive director of the Hispanic American Construction Industry Association (HACIA), said the federal government has made it clear that the “presumptive group” of those historically discriminated against includes blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans and “women, regardless of ethnicity.”
“To draw the line in the sand and say, ‘This is only mine — not yours’ doesn’t allow everyone to play in the sandbox,” Cerpa said.
* Meeks tried to backtrack again yesterday and didn’t really succeed…
In a somewhat ambiguous statement issued Thursday afternoon, he said “all minority- and women-owned businesses deserve their fair share of city contract opportunities.”
However, it immediately adds, “Chicago has a history of systemic corruption in its minority- and women-owned business program and (a history that) that African-American-owned businesses are the most underrepresented among city contractors.”
* Meeks then attempted an apology of sorts on ABC7…
“People are making much ado about nothing,” said Senator Meeks.
Meeks apologized for–as he put it–”a bad choice of words”. The point he says is that African Americans receive only 70 percent of city contracts and have been criminally shortchanged by minority front companies.
“The federal government has deemed that this program is a corrupt one and we need to fix this program,” said Sen. Meeks.
Whatever you think about affirmative action programs and the very real problems with fraud, you can’t argue with the fact that Sen. Meeks has done a terrible job of communicating.
A couple of years ago, Meeks and I sat down to talk after he’d said something or another about some racial thing. I scolded him pretty good, saying he’d been a black preacher for so long and a black legislator for so long that he apparently never bothered to learn how to talk to white people (and, I should’ve added, “everyone else”). I told him that he needed to learn some basic communication skills. Obviously, he never did.
* Zorn thinks the initial flap over affirmative action will force Meeks out of the race…
And that’ll about do it, folks, for the mayoral aspirations of Mr. Meeks, which were already a bit of a long-shot due to his social conservatism and the presence on the ballot of three other prominent African American candidates (two if you don’t count Roland Burris, which, come to think of it, you probably shouldn’t).
The question now is whether he’ll drop his increasingly unlikely bid before the election on Feb. 22 and try to gain some political leverage by offering his support to another candidate, or whether he’ll carry on to the bitter end.
My prediction is he’ll drop out.
On the other hand, Meeks could be hoping for a black backlash. We’ll see.
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 4:29 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: Poll: Plurality of Chicago voters favor casino, about half oppose Wrigley Field deal
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Blacklash
Comment by Anon Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 6:06 am
He’s done. Coming out with a racist statement, then trying to cover it up with a sexist statement really takes the cake. After his abrupt dismissal of gays, who’s left to offend?
Comment by Wensicia Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 7:04 am
Meeks has just offended the entire non-black electorate and women across all races. He’s made a huge strategic error and is out of the running to win, but he’s pandering to his closest constituency. The purpose of that is to continue to influence a block of voters he will eventually deliver up to Rahm, for a price.
That’s all his candidacy has ever been. He played this same game with Rod.
Comment by Newsclown Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 7:22 am
He’s going to try and talk his way out of the corner he’s backed himself into and it isn’t going to work. He’s done.
Comment by Aldyth Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 7:52 am
I think he’s got enough ego to stay in, especially because all the candidates, except for Rahm, are going to remain pretty close together in polling
Comment by J Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 7:55 am
“I have a dream… that employees and contractors will be judged based on the color of their skin (or gender) and not on the quality of their work.” — Rev. James Meeks
Comment by Listen Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 8:37 am
The big question is did he lose any political capital he might have had in making a deal with another candidate? What candidate would want to have him associated with their campaign now?
I’d say he can kiss that CPS job good-bye.
Comment by CLJ Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 8:46 am
A part of Rev Meeks’ statements that is not being commented on much is that he said that the corrupt set aside program is “what keeps our members down”. That’s it? That is the reason why African Americans in Chicago are not reaping the benefits of the greatest nation on earth? Because of the failed set aside program?
It’s hard to tell if Meeks did this deliberately as a ploy to gather the flock and then deliver their votes to whomever Meeks thinks he can get the most from or if he thinks this is a strategy that can propel him into City Hall. He certainly did the former with RB. Trying to retract or reform the statements later seems to indicate a miscalculation on his part. Maybe he can still pull off the consolidation part of this but he sure has lost considerable political capital in the process.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:16 am
We should all just be reflectively grateful that Meeks’ issues are coming out now rather than later. It’s rather sad that seen through the lens of his recent comments and statements Meeks seems not to be doing either the “politician” part OR the “Reverend” part of his resume very well.
Comment by Responsa Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:18 am
He’s done. The “black backlash” is a non-starter when there are other semi-viable black candidates to support.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:23 am
Who got the number wrong - Meeks or the ABC? My bet is on ABC. Blacks simply do not get 70% of city contracts. I wonder if it was supposed to be 7%. Or maybe 17%.
Anyway, I think you should take that out of the portion you quote, since it’s inaccurate.
Comment by irv & ashland Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:23 am
It is uncomofortable to talk about race. This country struggles with it. One of the only places where there is a dialogue about race is in comedy clubs. How many comedians talk about race? A ton of them. When people say things that are controversial about race people just want them to go away. Zorn basically says he ought to drop out. Now, I am not defending what Meeks said and I think he is wrong but daggonit people we are going to have to deal with this issue of race and simply piling on someone and telling them to go away when they something controversial about race is not getting us anywhere.
Comment by bdogg Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:26 am
I think the right Reverand may have been shocked that people actually cared what he thought. Too me, he has forfeited his seat at any barganing table. Persona non-grata
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:50 am
As a CPS parent, I’d agree that he’s right about white kids and resources, although that’s often because white people in Chicago tend to be wealthier and will write bigger fundraising checks. If I had a dime every time I heard someone on the North Side say that the way to improve the schools is to get more “neighborhood” (i.e., white) children in them, I could afford to buy a smart board system for a school on the West Side that only had neighborhood children.
Comment by lakeview Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:50 am
bdogg,
Equal opportunities or pre-determined outcomes? This argument underlies the race discussions. We will never be able to eradicate people’s feelings; about one another, groups, ideas. There will always be racists, sexists, homophobes, fill in your favorite flavor here. Can’t stop it. Can’t legislate it. It’s always there.
The best government can do is make sure the opportunity is there. When government picks winners and losers, sets aside work, provides advantages by group, it does nothing other than facilitate racism in its various forms.
Look at the great peacemakers, King, Gandhi, etc. Their most compelling message was equal opportunity, not some outcome predetermined by a bureaucrat.
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:53 am
The lead African American candidate coming out of the primary will have to have solid crossover appeal with liberal whites. Perhaps Meeks is making a play to attract hard-core black primary votes by making these statements, but he has essentially taken himself out of the running in the General. Nothing like killing interest from north shore liberal women and gays. M-B’s past liabilities will surely bite her when the press turns to re-examining her record. Looks like Davis moves up a notch.
Comment by Chad Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 9:57 am
Chad, there is no primary and north shore women will not be voting for mayor of Chicago. Other than that….
Comment by Responsa Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:01 am
Meeks is actually a thoughtful guy. He’s just not ready for prime time.
Comment by Upstate Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:03 am
The irony is that a tax hike which he’s long-championed appears closer and closer to passage in Springfield, and he’s not even in the game.
If I were advising Meeks, I’d say look: there’s is no path for you to win the Mayor’s office, and if you’re going to drop out and try to gain something politically for it, the time to do that is now, because with every day that passes your position gets weaker. Undecided voters are breaking for the other candidates, not you, and your relative slice of the pie is shrinking, not growing.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:07 am
He should stay right where he is in the GA…the fifth floor of City Hall aint ready for him yet…or vice versa…stick a fork in him folks…
Comment by Loop Lady Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:07 am
While we all can recognize that it wasn’t the most prudent comment to make in the middle of a political campaign, Rev. Meeks does have a point.
Understand that the City’s minority setaside program has been abused in the past by the white Captains of Industry forming business entities that place ownership in spouses and daughters names. There has been a below average level of oversight in this program.
I would like to believe that fewer of these “shadow” companies exist today but the City’s program has not been as successful for African-Americans as hoped. Rev. Meeks
does have a legitimate concern with the program; however, his problem was very poorly articulated.
Comment by Jake from Elwood Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:13 am
Y’know, I’ve never particularly been impressed by Carol M-Braun, but observing how people talk when they believe they are off camera….or in a like-minded group is seeing the true person. Carol showed she is not the close-minded person Meeks is. If he were white, he’d probably be a grand dragon
Comment by flyonthewall Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:16 am
there is an outside chance this will help him become the dominant candidate among African American voters, which could actually get him to the runoff rather than Chico, but the goal here shouldn’t be getting to the runoff but rather winning the election. Friends of Rahm should start donating to Meeks - with Meeks’ attitude, he’d be trounced in a Meeks v Rahm runoff, whereas a Chico v Rahm runoff would be more interesting.
Comment by Robert Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:23 am
The issues Meeks raises are legitimate issues that have to be addressed. The problem is that he frames them in a “us vs. them” manner that prevents a reasonable discussion and a path to resolve the issues.
No doubt the minority set-aside program has been abused. But saying that the way to fix it is making it a program exclusively for African-Americans is not going to fix the abuses, and will actually drive down support for affirmative action.
There is a very real disparity in resources available to CPS schools with more white students. But putting the problem in the context of “they take programs away” when black students enroll is not exactly accurate, and certainly won’t fix the system.
And it is a legitimate question about who will Rahm represent if he becomes Mayor. Everything in his background indicates he will be a Giuliani or Bloomberg type mayor, catering to the elites and providing just enough scraps to minority communities to prevent political problems. But Meeks alienates so many people by the way he frames this issues that the issue of Emanuel’s commitment to neighborhoods and communities instead of to elites gets lost.
Comment by the Other Anonymous Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:29 am
Does Meeks not realize that it has not even been 100 years since women (of ANY color) were “allowed” to vote? How is THAT not discrimination?
Comment by Moving To Missouri (f/k/a Vote Quimby!) Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:47 am
Cincannutus,
The government is constantly picking winners and losers. Usually they pick corporations to win and the rest of us to lose.
Sorry, I do not agree Affirmative Action should be done away with. The fallacy in your argument is your belief that by simply getting “government” out of the way, we would all have equal opportunity. I am sorry I do not agree with that. Government is here to right wrongs and to protect people. Do they always do a good job of doing that? Heck no! Does government let me down constantly? Heck yes! But do I still believe in it and policies like affirmative action? Yes.
Comment by bdogg Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:55 am
I could have sworn there was a black leader that Rahm helped put in the White House…
Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 10:55 am
Government is not here to right wrongs an dprotect people. Government is here to keep itself in power. Poli Sci 101.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:03 am
Meeks knows what he’s doing. He’s all in playing the race card to make the runoff.
If it works, the right reverend will talk a lot about how “we’re all God’s children” and that previous remarks were “taken out of context” or a “poor choice of words.”
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:06 am
Meeks seeking to draw partisans his way. will not drop out. Rahm hoping Meeks stays in. Chico hoping Meeks drops out.
Comment by amalia Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:10 am
bdogg,
Never said government should get out of the way. It should guarantee equal opportunity.
There is a big difference if someone is not awarded a contract because he’s black (fill in your favorite favored faction), and being awarded a contract because he’s black.
Often left out of the fairness equation is the generic taxpayer. If a set-aside does not go the the lowest qualified bidder, EVERY taxpayer, white, black, brown, yellow, or green, isn’t getting the bang for the buck he deserves.
How fair is that?
Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:17 am
Responsa: The February 22 date functions as a primary if nobody gets over 50%. In that case, there is a runoff on April 5. Not technically a primary and general, but functionally equal. As for “northshore”, many of us have long included north reaches of Chicago in that term. Other than that …
Comment by Chad Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:25 am
After reading this blog one would think that Affirmative Action as a policy has been largely successful. It has not! Just look at the CEOs’ and leaders of our great corporate institutions, if AA is a great evil then why are the vast majority of corporate head hanchos caucasian?
Remember, AA is not premised on equality, but on equity. The equality argument is the premise that fuled one of the greatest Supreme Court blunders history, i.e. Plessy v. Ferguson where the court announces its ill fated seperate but equal doctrine. Thankfully, Brown v. Board exemplified expansion of the Court’s consciousness in holding, “We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of “separate but equal” has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.”
So the question remains, does AA work and is it useful? I answer, no. We need something better, something stronger. There you go…
Comment by GetOverIt Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:27 am
Were a bunch of white ladies in Chicago going to vote for the Rev before he made this silly statement. No. Were a bunch of Hispanics. No and no. Apparently, his African American base has given him reason to believe that these kinds of statements will enhance his chances. This has nothing to do with affirmative action. It’s all about votes and money.
Comment by cassandra Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 11:50 am
This seems to be a reckless power play by Meeks to corral the black vote in February in order to advance to the run-off in April. Even if Meeks succeeds in the first round of voting, I do not see how Meeks will be able to disavow some of these statements and form a coalition to prevail in the run-off.
The Illinois Review posted a report that Emanuel was named to the 2010 list of the most corrupt politicians (drawn exclusively from the ranks of Beltway politicians and insiders), but that story is going to be ignored in Chicago. Meeks has been manufacturing so much bad press for himself, nobody needs to issue any press releases criticizing him.
A question: Is Meeks still considered a political ally of the Jacksons? When Meeks first entered politics, he was viewed as a Jackson ally who had been recruited to challenge the Shaw brothers. Is this still true or have Meeks and the Jacksons parted company?
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 12:05 pm
–The Illinois Review posted a report that Emanuel was named to the 2010 list of the most corrupt politicians (drawn exclusively from the ranks of Beltway politicians and insiders), but that story is going to be ignored in Chicago.–
I don’t think ignoring Illinois Review constitutes conspiracy — more likely common sense.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 12:34 pm
>It’s not that he’s necessarily wrong. It’s just that the clip may show how much he sees things as a racial issue.
This is one of those weird asymmetries of racial politics - that telling the truth about a racial issue would be a crippling flaw, because it “shows how much he sees things as a racial issue.”
Can anyone deny that public schools were the pride of every American community, something we saw as a distinctive American contribution to the modern world, right up till the moment when we were required to desegregate them? And that divestment began almost immediately after that?
I’d argue that even more important than monetary divestment was the divestment of emotional commitment on the part of a small but influential number of public employees who were too racist to believe black kids could learn, so they shrugged their shoulders and stopped caring. For three decades the system was in a self-reinforcing cycle of cynicism and burnout. It’s very hard to dig back out of that kind of a hole.
But to point out that that’s what happened is “seeing things as a racial issue.”
I’m not criticizing you Rich. It’s true that this is how this particular Meeks moment will be perceived, partly because of a stream of things he’s already said. But it’s just a weird, weird thing about American politics - where telling the truth can be so destabilizing that a big chunk of the electorate will dismiss you out of hand for saying it.
Comment by irv & ashland Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 12:53 pm
wordslinger, does throwing mud around before the first election and then leading a round of “Let there be Peace on Earth” really work in this age of youtube?
Comment by cermak_rd Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 1:02 pm
What I dislike about set-asides is something different. They haven’t incentivized skills nor created opportunities for large numbers of minority people.
Instead, the program is about creating (picking) an upper middle class of contractors. The theory was that this would inevitably lead to a managerial class of skilled minorities, and to equal opportunity at the lowest levels. And that it would be easier to do than to try to establish hiring goals for contractors and make them stick.
But the practice has shown that wasn’t true. It turns out it’s pretty easy to fake ownership, and in fact, it’s easier for white investors to gussy up a minority or female “owner” than for black contractors to obtain the skills needed to effectively compete. So cynicism rules. It would have been better to set hiring goals in the first place, and to police compliance through random spot checks at work sites.
We should’ve developed a base of black employees learning these trades and business practices, rather than trying to levitate a class of black owners at the top in the hope that the foundation could be solidified later.
Comment by irv & ashland Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 1:13 pm
–wordslinger, does throwing mud around before the first election and then leading a round of “Let there be Peace on Earth” really work in this age of youtube?–
In this instance, I don’t know. But it’s worked in the past. My guess is Meeks is shooting for the runoff and then he’ll take it from there.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 1:25 pm
Word is right. If he doesn’t get into the runoff, obviously, its over for him.
He had already blew it with gays, labor, and women and the hispanics have a couple candidates. Where else does he have to go? It kind of reminds me of the way Mark Kirk morphed into Barry Goldwater for the primary and then wussed back into his moderate wishy washy self for the general.
I bet the Rahminator is having a good giggle over this whole episode.
Comment by Bill Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 1:41 pm
James Meeks has already lost 90% of the gay & lesbian vote despite his recent protests that he and Jesus still love gay people in spite of they’re abominable life style. Then, he just lost 90% of the hispanic vote despite his assurance that “some of his best friends are hispanic”. He still can’t leave it alone (smooth talker and politician that he is). He manages to incite the white vote in Chicago by saying that what looks like a HUGE racial chip on his shoulder is really his way of protesting that only 70% of city contracts go to African-Americans instead of 100% of city contracts. Just in case some women voters might cast their vote for him, he decides to take a swipe at them whether they are black, white, or purple.
Reverend Meeks had to have been “a Hoot” in Divinity School for his teachers. Now I understand what he really means on Sunday in church when he preaches that “the Meeks shall inherit the world”.
Comment by Beowulf Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 1:42 pm
Lost in all this is that women and racial/ethnic minorities are NOT in competition in most of the set aside programs. There are separate goals for each, based in part on the numbers in the population. E.g., there may be a 10% setaside for women and 25% for racial/ethnic minorities. If you eliminate the women business set asides, the only “winner” is white men. You can’t just bump up the minorities numbers, because the court cases won’t support a higher number than 25% in Chicago. So Meeks point about women is particularly stupid and dissembling on his part. His REAL beef is within the 25% minority number, and his beef IS with Latinos and Asians competing for that same 25%; at least, until he figured out what a racist that made him look like.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 2:13 pm
I cannot see how Meeks gets any votes from the gay community. I think that he lost more than 90%
of their votes.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 2:20 pm
“Meeks claims Emanuel kept black leaders out of the White House” sounds like a headline from the Onion with a picture of Rahm slamming the door on the President.
Comment by paddyrollingstone Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 2:22 pm
If the situation was reversed and a mayoral candidate offended the African-American community then we’d see JJ Sr., Rev. Al, and a protest march through the streets. But since it’s Meeks, he just makes a couple of lame excuses and everybody allows it to slide.
Comment by Eagle Eye Friday, Dec 17, 10 @ 7:57 pm
===and everybody allows it to slide. ===
Apparently, you cannot read the post and comments in front of your face. Are you that blinded by racial bias? Is anyone letting him off the hook?
Moron.
Comment by Rich Miller Saturday, Dec 18, 10 @ 6:52 am